I think Indiana will get the last #4 seed (overall #16) for the reason you state, Assembly Hall will be sold out. I think their seeding will also depend on what Teri Moren informs the committee on MacKenzie Holmes status, she was put in a tough situation in their QF loss but didn't look ready.
I still think if Texas wins, they get the #1 (#4 overall)(SC #1, Iowa #2, USC #3) seed. They took 2 of 3 from a very good Kansas State team that I wouldn't want to see in my bracket in the first two rounds. They lost a couple games within 2 weeks of losing their AA guard Rori Harmon while figuring it all out, will the committee take that into consideration? This year, outside of South Carolina I don't think there is much of a difference between the overall #2-#7 seeds which should make for a great tournament.
I believe, per Charlie Creme, the women’s basketball committee does not use the quadrant ranking system. They instead look at NET 1-25, NET 26-50, NET 51-100, and NET 101+.
I believe, per Charlie Creme, the women’s basketball committee does not use the quadrant ranking system. They instead look at NET 1-25, NET 26-50, NET 51-100, and NET 101+.
NCAA Statistics
stats.ncaa.org
Yes, and even more so when you look beyond the raw numbers to see which teams each beat.
They just got some help with Gonzaga falling in the WCC final.
I thought the committee's first reveal, where they were #7, was too harsh on them. They moved up to #4 in the next reveal, but that was as much because of others' losses as UCLA's wins. Their loss to Washington State was without Betts, which the committee is supposed to consider. I would grade their resume as ahead of Texas', but for sure no lower than #6 at this point.
If I'm not mistaken, my Gamecocks are playing at UCLA and Stanford next season. If so, I'm there. I have a great niece and great nephew in Irvine I haven't met yet. I still can't wrap my head around my nephew and niece in law moving from Santa Monica to Irvine.
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...
USC was a founding member of the ACC so those rivalries are still fierce. It's really our natural home, moreso than the SEC.
Nothing natural or home about Tobacco Road!
Speaking as a Bay Area local Stanford alum who enjoyed 80 degree days in February during undergrad, and who will be watching his team travel for a "conference" away game to Syracuse, NY next winter, "natural home" doesn't seem to count for as much as it used to...
Sigh; and it's to the detriment of rivalries. At least Cal (do you have a fun nickname for them?) is moving with you.
If they do, I'd love to hear it. I would be surprised if they didn't.
Between us (shhh), I'm also a Cal alum (for my Ph.D.), and I absolutely admire the institution, even though I never formed an attachment to its sports teams. So although our fanboard calls them the "Weenies," I can't get on board with that, even though I also don't actively root for them. (And honestly, Stanford is blessed with so many more resources and so much less bureacuacy than Cal is, that I find it almost kind of indecent to root against them.)
I assumed the nickname that Stanford alums have for Cal alums is “poor.”
I wouldn’t care if UConn got a 7 seed this year tbh. No expectations for this group and really match ups are more important than anything elss this year more than ever.Not sure why, but Creme moved UConn out of Albany this morning . . .
Women's Bracketology: No. 1 seeds remain the same -- for now
The country's top teams have faced few challenges. That changes this weekend with Notre Dame-USC and South Carolina-UCLA on tap.www.espn.com
I’m from SC. I can’t cast that stone.