The stacked deck

[Plebe]

Here we go again..Really? Show me stats that prove I'm wrong, not supposition. How many teams outside of the top 8 have won a women's NC in the last 30 years? Contending is nice. How many have won, not get to the FF, won?? You seldom get any recognition or credit (trophies/nets) for "contending". Perhaps I should have substituted the word WIN for contending.

The statement to which I was responding was that "if a recruit wants a chance of contending for a NC, they MUST join a program that is contently [sic] in the top 4 to even have a realistic chance" (I assume "contently" was a typo for "consistently").

I just gave you three examples of programs that in the past two years have either won the national championship or reached the title game even though they were most decidedly not in the top 4 at the time when their star players committed as recruits. I could have given more.

Your verbiage was "a chance of contending for a national championship." If you're now moving the goalposts to "winning," then UConn's dominance skews that standard beyond usefulness. But let's look at the last three non-UConn teams to win the NC, and where they were four years before winning the title:

• South Carolina (2017) finished the 2013 season ranked #17/14.
• Baylor (2012) finished the 2008 season ranked #15/15.
  
• Texas A&M (2011) finished the 2007 season #14/14.

And if we go back further to the Baylor and Maryland championship teams of 2005 and 2006, both were completely unheralded at the time when their players committed as recruits. The same can be said, I'm sure, of Notre Dame's 2001 championship team.

Is that enough counterexamples?

 

[Wally East]

Here we go again..Really? Show me stats that prove I'm wrong, not supposition. How many teams outside of the top 8 have won a women's NC in the last 30 years? Contending is nice. How many have won, not get to the FF, won?? You seldom get any recognition or credit (trophies/nets) for "contending". Perhaps I should have substituted the word WIN for contending.

What do you mean by top 8 though? 30 years ago, 1987, UConn wasn't in the top 8. Do you mean top 8 annually? Because that changes. Teams rise, teams fall. Where is Purdue now? Where was South Carolina 10 years ago? Where is Texas A&M now? Where were they 20 years ago? La Tech? Even Tennessee, they're not top 8 NOW.

The top 8 in the last AP poll: UConn, South Carolina, Notre Dame, Baylor, Maryland, Stanford, Mississippi State, and Oregon State.

Compare that to 5 years ago: Baylor, Stanford, UConn, ND, Maryland, Duke, Delaware, Miami

10 years ago: Duke, UConn, North Carolina, Tennessee, Ohio State, Stanford, Maryland, Arizona State

14 years ago (ESPN's archive only goes back to 02-03 and I don't feel like digging more than that): UConn, Duke, LSU, Tennessee, Texas, La Tech, Kansas State, Texas Tech.

But, here's the list of schools that have won titles in the last 30 years:

UConn, Tennessee, Stanford, Purdue, Notre Dame, Maryland, Baylor, Texas Tech, Texas, Texas A&M, South Carolina, La Tech, North Carolina.

Anyway, my point: what do you mean by "top 8"?

 

[Puppy Love]

I think there are two separate ideas. One is that kids pick programs because of (maybe false) promises. Some kids, though, pick because they want to win or because they want the best chance at a pro career. If they choose based on promises, then they either adapt to reality or transfer. If they choose for the second reason, then they are limited to the available pool of top notch coaches. The kids in the second group are the ones you want on your team. Parity is getting closer in terms of student athletic skill, but the coaching ranks have not caught up yet. Schaeffer, Walz (maybe) and a few others are examples of what can be. Those coaches are just a recruit or two away from breaking through. At one point I thought Sherri Coale but the magic hasn't happened.

 

[nwhoopfan]

Carnac, can you list the top 8 programs? I'm going to assume several of those have not won a Championship any time recently. Notre Dame must be one of those 8, correct? They haven't cut down the nets since '01. Is Tennessee in the top 8? Haven't been to a Final 4 in about a decade. Stanford? Gets to the Final 4 more often than anybody other than UConn, but no Championship since '92! Baylor? Can't even get to the Final 4 recently, last Title was in '12. Maryland? Keep losing earlier than expected and have only one Title in their history, more than 10 years ago.

If you want to all but GUARANTEE yourself a Championship, the list of schools to consider is less than 8. CONTENDING gets into gray area, but if getting to a Final 4 isn't considered contending for a Championship, I don't know what is. And recent years are showing many more teams capable of getting to the last weekend of the season than the top 8, whoever those 8 might be. It kind of seems like you blow apart your own theory about having to pick a top 8 team if you really look at those teams and what they've done over however many years.

 

[Carnac]

I could go into great detail in responding to each of your retorts. But the last time I did so, I was deemed the aggressor in starting an argument.
As always, I stand by my posts. If you don't agree, fine. I have learned that it is pointless to go back and forth in an attempt to change a poster's mind, or posture try to get them to see something from your perspective. I stated an opinion. It has not changed. I'll leave it there.

 

[Carnac]

What do you mean by top 8 though? 30 years ago, 1987, UConn wasn't in the top 8. Do you mean top 8 annually? Because that changes. Teams rise, teams fall. Where is Purdue now? Where was South Carolina 10 years ago? Where is Texas A&M now? Where were they 20 years ago? La Tech? Even Tennessee, they're not top 8 NOW.

The top 8 in the last AP poll: UConn, South Carolina, Notre Dame, Baylor, Maryland, Stanford, Mississippi State, and Oregon State.

Compare that to 5 years ago: Baylor, Stanford, UConn, ND, Maryland, Duke, Delaware, Miami

10 years ago: Duke, UConn, North Carolina, Tennessee, Ohio State, Stanford, Maryland, Arizona State

14 years ago (ESPN's archive only goes back to 02-03 and I don't feel like digging more than that): UConn, Duke, LSU, Tennessee, Texas, La Tech, Kansas State, Texas Tech.

But, here's the list of schools that have won titles in the last 30 years:

UConn, Tennessee, Stanford, Purdue, Notre Dame, Maryland, Baylor, Texas Tech, Texas, Texas A&M, South Carolina, La Tech, North Carolina.

Anyway, my point: what do you mean by "top 8"?

Ranked in the top 8 at the beginning of the season, any given season. Most of the time (there have been a few exceptions) The team that wins the NC, is ranked in the top 8 at the beginning of the season. My point was teams that win the NC, don't all of a sudden come out of nowhere. They begin the season in the top 8-10.

The statement: "if a recruit wants a chance of contending for a NC, they MUST join a program that is contently in the top 4 to even have a realistic chance", was made in reference to today 2017-2018.

 

[GoingPostal]

What had UConn done when Rebecca Lobo committed?

To answer your question a few things. Kerry Bascom was in her senior year and had led UConn to its first final 4 the year before Rebecca commited. Gampel Pavilion was newly constructed which was a huge improvement from the old field house. And most important, there were two young charismatic coaches in place to recruit players like Rebecca Lobo.

 

[Wally East]

Ranked in the top 8 at the beginning of the season, any given season. Most of the time (there have been a few exceptions) The team that wins the NC, is ranked in the top 8 at the beginning of the season. My point was teams that win the NC, don't all of a sudden come out of nowhere. They begin the season in the top 8-10.

The statement: "if a recruit wants a chance of contending for a NC, they MUST join a program that is contently in the top 4 to even have a realistic chance", was made in reference to today 2017-2018.

Okay, fair.

Texas A&M was ranked 8 in the preseason when they won. Baylor was 8. Michigan State was 10. UNC was ranked 9 when they won. Texas Tech was 15.

Unfortunately, that doesn't make exactly the point that you seem to want to make. Recruits commit much earlier than a pre-season poll.

If a player signs in the early signing period, that's the start of her senior year, so a full year before a pre-season poll. If she verbals as a junior, it's even earlier. By the time she's a senior in college, a lot could've changed.

When Rebecca committed, UConn hadn't been to a Final Four. When A'ja Wilsom committed, South Carolina had just been knocked out in the Sweet 16, which was their best finish. When Danielle Adams went from junior college to Texas A&M, A&M had finished the season at 9. When Crystal Langhorne signed with Maryland, they were nothing and they weren't any better the next year when Marissa Coleman signed with them. When Ruth Riley signed with ND, they hadn't been to a Final Four yet.

Even Maya Moore signed with a UConn team coming off of finishes in the Sweet 16 and the Elite 8. Was it taking much of a risk to sign with a 5-time national champion? Maybe, because they'd suffered through two really rough (by UConn standards) seasons. They could've been on their way out and if Maya hadn't signed, that might've been true.

There's nothing wrong with signing a top school. I mean, I'm a UConn fan, of course I think that Hats off to players who want to work hard for Geno.

But. There's also nothing with thinking you can work to elevate a non-UConn school to a place where they can win a title. So, hats off to players who want to work hard to beat Geno.

I mean, what if Rebecca decided to sign with Stanford because that was the obvious choice if she wanted to win a title?

 

[Wally East]

To answer your question a few things. Kerry Bascom was in her senior year and had led UConn to its first final 4 the year before Rebecca commited. Gampel Pavilion was newly constructed which was a huge improvement from the old field house. And most important, there were two young charismatic coaches in place to recruit players like Rebecca Lobo.

Rebecca Lobo signed a letter of intent her senior year of high school in the early signing period -- November 1990. UConn went to the Final Four in March 1991.

So, UConn had lost to Clemson in the second round of the tournament and was a competitive Big East power along with rival Providence.

 

[Carnac]

Ranked in the top 8 at the beginning of the season, any given season. Most of the time (there have been a few exceptions) The team that wins the NC, is ranked in the top 8 at the beginning of the season. My point was teams that win the NC, don't all of a sudden come out of nowhere. They begin the season in the top 8-10.

The statement: "if a recruit wants a chance of contending for a NC, they MUST join a program that is contently in the top 4 to even have a realistic chance", was made in reference to today 2017-2018.

Here is a link that goes back to 2003 that lists the pre-season rankings of D1 WCBB teams through 2016. Every team that won the national championship for any given year since then, was ranked in the top 8 in the pre-season. Most were in the top 4. I know I said I was going to leave it alone, but this bugged me.

2003 Women's College Basketball Rankings and Polls for Week 1 - ESPN

 

[Wally East]

Here is a link that goes back to 2006 that lists the pre-season rankings of D1 WCBB teams through 2016. Every team that won the national championship for any given year since then, was ranked in the top 8 in the pre-season. Most were in the top 4. I know I said I was going to leave it alone, but this bugged me.

2010 Women's College Basketball Rankings and Polls for Week 1 - ESPN

Maryland, 2006, champions, preseason #14.

(I accidentally cited Michigan State above. For the life of me, I can never remember that Maryland won a title )

Also, UNC (9) and Texas Tech (15) were not in the top 8. Those were a while ago but you did say last 30 years earlier

This poll archive goes all the way back

 

[Carnac]

Maryland, 2006, champions, preseason #14.

(I accidentally cited Michigan State above. For the life of me, I can never remember that Maryland won a title )

Also, UNC (9) and Texas Tech (15) were not in the top 8. Those were a while ago but you did say last 30 years earlier

This poll archive goes all the way back

My "since then" comment refers to the ESPN poll I provided. Since 2003. I also hedged my original comment by saying MOST of the teams that ultimately won, were in the top 8 to begin the season. I asked the question "How many" not in the top 8 at the beginning, won it all in he last 30 years? I figured there had to be a few, not not many. Without looking it up, I'm guessing that 80% of teams that won it all were in the top 8 since 1982.

 

[Plebe]

Here is a link that goes back to 2003 that lists the pre-season rankings of D1 WCBB teams through 2016. Every team that won the national championship for any given year since then, was ranked in the top 8 in the pre-season. Most were in the top 4. I know I said I was going to leave it alone, but this bugged me.

2003 Women's College Basketball Rankings and Polls for Week 1 - ESPN

But there's a temporal inconsistency between this assertion and the original one I responded to. Your original assertion was about recruits who wanted to contend for (later changed to "win") a national championship.

Just because a team isn't in the top 8 when a recruit commits to a college program in her junior or senior year of high school, doesn't mean they won't be top 8 in the preseason rankings for at least one of the four years during which said recruit will presumably be on the team.

 

[msf22b]

I think the question becomes
How does a team join the elite rank?
The National Championship model/requirement is too steep a climb
Especially as UConn has won a significant plurality of titles of late.

I think we can all agree that coaching (and usually charisma) go hand in hand with recruiting, university support, and the building of a consistent fan base are probably the main pillars of a successful program and of course; winning.

With some programs (I'm thinking of Tennessee) holding to elite or sub-elite status on with what can only be labeled as tradition.

We're used to seeing teams led by McGraw, Tara, Pat (in the old days), Sylvia (not any more) Brenda
and of course Geno, contend regularly. And now Dawn is on the list.

It appears that a second wave is coming, led by Vic, perhaps Jody, even Quentin? (posters may supply their fav candidates for inclusion).

And so a coordinated effort by a University, facilities, resources, good hiring, a marketing whiz, some good luck and a lot of patience (because nothing happens overnight) are the required ingredients for a major program...

Amazing, how many fall short in one respect or another

 

[pacific 44]

If you are a junior or a senior in high school there are around 300 d-1 colleges that you know has next to no chance of being the national champs during your four years there.The national champs will more than likely be from the other 30 or so suspects.In these 30 or so Uconn and Tennessee have won almost half of them since the 70's.That has left perhaps a dozen or so to pick up the remaining ones. Carnac is right in almost every instance with just two teams and right almost every other year as well since way way back.

 

[GoingPostal]

Rebecca Lobo signed a letter of intent her senior year of high school in the early signing period -- November 1990. UConn went to the Final Four in March 1991.

So, UConn had lost to Clemson in the second round of the tournament and was a competitive Big East power along with rival Providence.

She signed her letter of intent 5 months before UConn went to the final four. Granted. However, the upward trajectory of UConn basketball was clearly evident in Nov. 1990. This wasn't the pre Geno UConn BB team. The fact she could stay close to home and play for a coach she obviously admired was what made the decision easier.

 

[Wally East]

She signed her letter of intent 5 months before UConn went to the final four. Granted. However, the upward trajectory of UConn basketball was clearly evident in Nov. 1990. This wasn't the pre Geno UConn BB team. The fact she could stay close to home and play for a coach she obviously admired was what made the decision easier.

It was trending upward, no doubt. But, and this is the point, signing with UConn was not the optimal choice for Rebecca if she wanted to win a national championship. It was a risk in terms being a national contender. Which is the whole point.

Rebecca Lobo took a risk when she signed with UConn AND IT WORKED OUT.

She could've signed with Stanford and won a title there (Stanford w/ Rebecca in '95 definitely wins a title, we will not argue about this).

Sometimes signing with the choice that isn't the logical choice works out. Programs rise and programs fall and an individual recruit can be part of that.

'90-91 preseaon ranking for UConn when Rebecca signed: #24.

Just as an additional bit of info:

'05-'06 preseason ranking for UConn when Maya Moore signed: #9

'96-97 preseason ranking for ND when Ruth Riley signed: #20.

All three players signed with the non-obvious choice and benefited. They signed with teams that weren't in the top 8 at the time but they put their teams into the top 8.

Sorry, I know I'm just yelling into the wind at this point

 

[Carnac]

It's beginning to appear like I can't have or share an OPINION here. We all have opinions, different has they may be. Not necessarily agreed with, but welcomed. I'm not going to debate this, it's pointless.

I'll only share my thinking when I wrote it. I originally said: "If a recruit wants a chance of contending for a NC, they MUST join a program that is consistently in the top 4 to even have a realistic chance. Teams outside of the top 8, have no chance". I was referring to teams RANKED outside of the top eight at the beginning of the season. Perhaps I should have softened it and said they should join a program that is consistently in the top 4 to even have a realistic chance, as other programs have a very slight/slim chance. Very slim. I'll correct that verbiage. I guess realistic and consistently have a different connotation to different people. I understand these words are subjective as well.

Keep in mind, this is my mindset, not necessarily yours.............I'm an 18 year old recruit in one of the next 3 classes (2017-2019). The most important thing to me during my 4 years in college is to win a NC. Keep this in mind as you read the rest of this narrative. I don't care who I have to play for, or where I have to go. I don't care about playing with friends. I don't want to transfer after a year or two because things didn't work out, or I'm not happy there. I'm going to get a decent education wherever I go. I plan on going to the W from there. I'm a 5 star recruit. I have offers from all of the top 25 nationally ranked programs. Who do I choose to sign with, and what criteria do I use to make my final decision?

Do I limit my choices to schools that were in the top 5 nationally for the past 3 years (2014-present)? Do I look at any of the bottom 5 schools (6-10)?
Are there any 6-10 schools that have a better chance of winning a NC than any of the top 5? I understand that this is always a fluid dynamic, as programs are subject to change because of any number of variables - Coaches leaving for better positions (getting fired), players transferring out, injuries to key players (Brianna Turner/Notre Dame...may miss the entire season next year), I get all of that.

IMO, teams ranked 1-5 have a better chance of competing and winning a NC than teams ranked 6-10 and higher. Here's why: You are what your record (and recent past history) says you are. If you're ranked #7 for example, that theoretically means there are 6 other teams that are better than you are. So those 6 teams are deemed (based on the rating system) to have a better chance, or higher probability than you, to have a better record over the season, get a higher tournament seed, and possibly win the NC.

IMO, any team ranked in the top 15 has a chance to win a NC. The team ranked 4th, has a much better chance and probability of finishing with a better record, and winning a NC than the team ranked 15, but that 15th ranked team does have a chance. If you're 15th, that means you got to beat at least 4-5 teams in the tournament that are ranked higher than you. That is a very tall order. As a recruit, THIS is what I'm looking at. I want to go to a team that is going to give me the best chance to win a natty before I leave. I don't care about what happened 5-10-24 years ago. I'm looking at a team's recent history of success, and MY potential for success. This is about ME!!!

The old adage: "A good predictor of future behavior is past behavior" still holds true. That's one of the criteria I'm using to make my decision.
I want to go to a team that is talented, and is either winning, or poised to win NOW!!! I'm not interested in helping to build a program from the ground up in 3-4 years. I'm a millennial, I want to win now (in the next 4 years).

So back to my original statement: What teams give me the most realistic chance of competing and winning a NC? This is a mindset, MY opinion, it's not a fact. In my opinion teams that finished ranked 1-5 in the past 3 years, will probably have the best chances of winning a NC over the next 3-4 years. You have to go back to Texas A&M (#8) in 2011 to find a recent (because I'm talking about TODAY, not 15-20 years ago) winner that was ranked out of the top 5 to begin the season.

Are there exceptions to this theory, of course. Nothing is absolute. There are ALWAYS dark horses in every tournament. Upsets happen from time to time like it did this year. The fact that A&M did it shows that it can be done. Sometimes #1 seeds pee in the bed, and don't make it to the FF (Notre Dame & Baylor the last two years). I suggested that most teams that won the NC, were ranked in the top 8 at the beginning of the season. To go a step further (I'm guessing, I did not check), they were probably ranked in the top 8 the year or two before that as well. Being ranked in the top 5 is by no means a guarantee of success in post season play, but it does suggest the probability because the best teams are ranked the highest.

It is a barometer of possible things to come. Fact: If you are a #1 seed, and all of the other 1 seeds make the final four, you will have to beat 2 of the other 1 seeds to win the tournament. If you are ranked #9 (a 2-3 seed) going in the the tournament, you're going to have to beat at least 4 teams ranked above you to win the tournament. It's hard to beat two teams ranked above you, let alone 4-5. Oregon came close this year.

Nothing is guaranteed, but the chances of teams ranked in the top 4-5 the last 2-3 years, IMO, have a better chance of competing, and winning a NC than teams ranked outside of the top 5. I realize there are always exceptions, but that is how I would look at it, and what I was thinking when I made that comment. Top 5 teams usually don't lose more than 2-3 games all year, thus they seldom fall out of the top 6 at any time during the season.

In order for a 6-10 team to move up, somebody has to fall out of the top 5. Look at the last two years. Most of the teams that were in the top 5-6 at the beginning of the season were there at the end of the season. Those are the teams I would be looking at. They're stable and steady. They are the same teams that are ranked in the top 5-6 for 2018 as well.

I'm looking at perennial top ranked teams like Baylor, Notre Dame, South Carolina, Maryland, UConn, Mississippi State (a team on the come), and Florida State and Texas. I think next year's NC will come from this group. Oregon, Stanford, Oregon State, Washington, UCLA, Duke, Syracuse, and Louisville are on the outside looking in, and IMO, will not pose a serious threat to win it all in the next 2-3 years. I understand I could be wrong, but I don't think so.

I would emulate Sabrina Ionescu with respect to the way she made her final decision of what program to commit to. I'd wait until the last minute exactly like she did. Wait until all the dust settled, all of the transfers were announced, and all of the coaches and their staff had settled in. Wait until ALL the of chess pieces are on the board, then there are no surprises. Things can change when you commit early.

This was my mindset when I wrote that comment. I was thinking like an 18 year old who wants to win a chip. I did not articulate that (didn't think it necessary) when I made that comment.

 

[nwhoopfan]

Thanks for taking the time to explain Carnac. I'd say even among the top 8 in the initial poll in any given year, several of those teams have very little reasonable chance of winning a Championship. If you go by recent history, if you don't choose UConn the odds of winning a Title some time during your 4 years of college aren't very good.