Top 16

[Vowelguy]

Just not seeing a 9 NET spot jump over the team that won their conference in regular season. Could it happen? And no, I don’t see them jumping Iowa even if they do jump all their PAC 12 mates

They won the regular season bc they play 6 games against the top half of the conference, while USC played 9.

And I think NET matters a WHOLE lot less than you are suggesting.

 

[Vowelguy]

No way Stan higher than USC. Trojans won at Maples and then yesterday. A day after beating UCLA.
If USC isn’t 2 overall, I don’t know what the committee is doing

FWIW, Creme disagrees with me and has Stan 3, usc 4

 

[mred]

And I think NET matters a WHOLE lot less than you are suggesting.

From all I've heard, NET is used almost entirely for rating a team's opponents, not rating the teams themselves.

 

[Vowelguy]

From all I've heard, NET is used almost entirely for rating a team's opponents, not rating the teams themselves.

That’s what I assumed too. It’s a grouping tool, so you can say team X is 8-2 against NET top 25 while team Y is only 4-5.

 

[TheFarmFan]

That’s what I assumed too. It’s a grouping tool, so you can say team X is 8-2 against NET top 25 while team Y is only 4-5.

On that metric Stanford (12-5 vs. NET top 50) and U$C (13-5) are nearly identical. I'd give U$C the boost because they beat Stanford both times, including at home, and they're definitely peaking just in time to be dangerous in March.

All that said, until Gottlieb proves me wrong, I feel about U$C the way I've long felt about fUCLA - there's a limit on how far talent alone can take you in the post-season if your coach is only so-so on the Xs and Os.

 

[Plebe]

On that metric Stanford (12-5 vs. NET top 50) and U$C (13-5) are nearly identical. I'd give U$C the boost because they beat Stanford both times, including at home, and they're definitely peaking just in time to be dangerous in March.

It's very close but I think USC has the edge on Stanford in terms of resume even before factoring in H2H. USC has 8 wins vs. the NET top 25 compared to Stanford's 7. USC's strength of schedule (both overall and nonconference) is also higher, and they got the better OOC win (Ohio State on a neutral court). Not really sure why Creme thinks Stanford would be ahead of USC at this point.

 

[Vowelguy]

Oklshoma loses to Iowa at so they are out of the running to host

Likely coming down to colorado or Kan st

 

[Plebe]

FWIW, Creme disagrees with me and has Stan 3, usc 4

I also disagree with his projection of Iowa ahead of Stanford and USC. Their resume of good wins just isn't as strong. One might argue that Iowa's worst loss (Nebraska) isn't as bad as Stanford's and USC's (Arizona/Washington) but to me that's a very minor difference.

 

[hoopsnloops32]

On that metric Stanford (12-5 vs. NET top 50) and U$C (13-5) are nearly identical. I'd give U$C the boost because they beat Stanford both times, including at home, and they're definitely peaking just in time to be dangerous in March.

All that said, until Gottlieb proves me wrong, I feel about U$C the way I've long felt about fUCLA - there's a limit on how far talent alone can take you in the post-season if your coach is only so-so on the Xs and Os.

I think PG play is the bigger concern to me about USC. I can’t remember the last final four team that didn’t have an elite guard in the backcourt. I know Juju is technically s SG but she doesn’t have the handle or passing ability for me to confided her anything other than a small forward.

Kayla Williams seems more promising to me in that area than Padilla but she hasn’t gotten consistent minutes.

Otherwise I think they are a very strong contender this year with their combination of size, experience, and skill. I do have questions about Gotllieb as well but she’s better than Close imo.

 

[LoTrader]

eh USC’s net is 10. Behind both Stanford and Iowa. I don’t see their case for #2 overall though certainly for a one seed.

I’m curious to see the Pac 12s performance in the tournament, I have a feeling they might underwhelm as a conference. I don’t know that Stanford has the guard play to make it to the final four nor do i think UCLA has the coaching to make it that far.

USC seems well positioned to make it far though but I’m curious about their depth if their bigs get in foul trouble which is guaranteed to happen at least once during the tournament.

Utah and Colorado could surprise people but I could also see them flaming out.

I find Oregon St. a little Sus tbh but would love to proven wrong because I like them a lot.

I too am looking forward to seeing how the PAC-12 performs in the NCAA Tournament? Is the PAC-12 as strong as ranked all season? Is PAC-12 as strong or stronger than ranked all season? That is one of the reasons I would prefer to have Oregon State not play Stanford, USC, or UCLA until the Final 4. Seems like these are the only teams Oregon State has played for the past month.

 

[LoTrader]

I think PG play is the bigger concern to me about USC. I can’t remember the last final four team that didn’t have an elite guard in the backcourt. I know Juju is technically s SG but she doesn’t have the handle or passing ability for me to confided her anything other than a small forward.

Kayla Williams seems more promising to me in that area than Padilla but she hasn’t gotten consistent minutes.

Otherwise I think they are a very strong contender this year with their combination of size, experience, and skill. I do have questions about Gotllieb as well but she’s better than Close imo.

Padilla is an excellent PG. Just not flashy

 

[hoopsnloops32]

Padilla is an excellent PG. Just not flashy

I don’t see it with her. Her handle is suspect as is her passing. Great shooter though.

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

On that metric Stanford (12-5 vs. NET top 50) and U$C (13-5) are nearly identical. I'd give U$C the boost because they beat Stanford both times, including at home, and they're definitely peaking just in time to be dangerous in March.

All that said, until Gottlieb proves me wrong, I feel about U$C the way I've long felt about fUCLA - there's a limit on how far talent alone can take you in the post-season if your coach is only so-so on the Xs and Os.

I absolutely love your subtle digs at UCLA and Southern Cal.

 

[TheFarmFan]

I absolutely love your subtle digs at UCLA and Southern Cal.

Let's just say I've had decades of practice with U$C, and fUCLA has been making up for lost time the past couple of years...

 

[Plebe]

I absolutely love your subtle digs at UCLA and Southern Cal.

About as subtle as playing heavy metal at a funeral.

 

[DaBball]

I don’t see it with her. Her handle is suspect as is her passing. Great shooter though.

Watkins has, I believe, the highest usage rate in the country. She has the ball in her hands a ton.

IMO Padilla plays her role pretty perfectly. She hits 44.2% of her threes, her A/TO is 3.1, and she averages 0.8 turnovers per game. Not a lot is asked of her, but she rarely makes mistakes and is a pretty consistent shooter.

 

[southie]

So, Creme now has Colorado as one of his Top 16 overall seeds. That means one of the regions will have two PAC schools among the Top 4 seeds; most likely with UCLA or Oregon State.

Women's Bracketology: First look at 2026 has familiar teams on top line

South Carolina, UConn, UCLA and Texas are the No. 1 seeds in our first projection of the 2026 bracket.

www.espn.com

 

[Matthew1589]

I see it like this for the #1 seeds... South Carolina, Iowa, USC, Texas/Stanford (If UT wins the B12, it's theirs). There is so much parity this season which is great and makes it fun. Of the 4, I'd bet South Carolina reaches the F4, but wouldn't bet on any of the others.

 

[southie]

I see it like this for the #1 seeds... South Carolina, Iowa, USC, Texas/Stanford (If UT wins the B12, it's theirs). There is so much parity this season which is great and makes it fun. Of the 4, I'd bet South Carolina reaches the F4, but wouldn't bet on any of the others.

Even if Texas wins tonight, I don't expect to receive a #1 seed. Just not enough wins against Top 10 opponents; non-conference schedule was weak other than home game against UConn. And, no other Big 12 teams among the expected Top 16 national seeds.

 

[Plebe]

I see it like this for the #1 seeds... South Carolina, Iowa, USC, Texas/Stanford (If UT wins the B12, it's theirs). There is so much parity this season which is great and makes it fun. Of the 4, I'd bet South Carolina reaches the F4, but wouldn't bet on any of the others.

I don't think Texas can overtake Stanford or USC or Iowa for a 1 seed. A win over Iowa State today doesn't enhance their resume enough to overcome that gap.

 

[undersized]

I'm still not convinced Indiana isn't going to be bumped. Not ending the conference season on a high note is one thing -- but Indiana's meltdown in the Big Ten tournament was a whole different level of choking.

 

[jdote33]

Even if Texas wins tonight, I don't expect to receive a #1 seed. Just not enough wins against Top 10 opponents; non-conference schedule was weak other than home game against UConn. And, no other Big 12 teams among the expected Top 16 national seeds.

I think the big 12 is kinda underrated. I think they'll have like 4 teams in the sweet 16 as long as the seeding is fair. Texas is really good. They have star role players. Shaylee Gonzalez was a star. Taylor Jones is really good, and depending on the matchup can go off. Aaliyah Moore looks better and better coming off injury. Shay Holle is a senior but a great role player. Their kryptonite is like Booker having a super off 6-21 game which could definitely happen. And sometimes they don't make enough 3s. But I like their odds to make a solid run. I know they kinda were trying to get over the elite 8 hump so id hate for that to be the mark of success.

 

[Plebe]

I'm still not convinced Indiana isn't going to be bumped. Not ending the conference season on a high note is one thing -- but Indiana's meltdown in the Big Ten tournament was a whole different level of choking.

But who would bump them? Every other team that might have taken that spot from them has also lost.

 

[undersized]

But who would bump them? Every other team that might have taken that spot from them has also lost.

That's the thing IDK, just saying I won't be surprised if the committee pulls some chicanery us. It would be a shame if we don't be get host because it will 100% be a sold out crowd. 17000.

 

[Plebe]

That's the thing IDK, just saying I won't be surprised if the committee pulls some chicanery us. It would be a shame if we don't be get host because it will 100% be a sold out crowd. 17000.

Well, it's nice to see that UConn fans aren't the only ones who think the committee is out to get them