UConn Moves Up In The AP Poll [merged] | Page 2 | The Boneyard

UConn Moves Up In The AP Poll [merged]

wingsfan055 said:
If we win out, with our SOS, I cant see a scenario where we are not one of the #1 seeds. I just dont want to see Stanford in our bracket to get to the FF!
Expand ...
I think Lsu will be kicked out of the one seed sweepstakes fairly soon. Once they lose to South Carolina next week the wheels will come off. I also thing Iowa will probably drop a couple leaving room for Stanford (if they win out) a chance to snag a one seed regardless
 
Interesting how the votes divvy up. UConn actually has fewer votes than last week (611 this week versus 623 last week) but still moved up. I think they’ll enter as the #2 overall seed
 
I am shocked... pleasantly shocked that we moved up and did not stay where we were or go down. I am even more shocked that did not put LSU at 2 to create that 1 vs 2 hype that they want. Just shocked by that.
 
.-.
meyers7 said:
Well to be fair the NCAA Committee and the AP/Coaches pollsters are not the same. We haven't heard yet what the NCAA Committee is thinking.
Expand ...
True! But we can guess that they will place LSU as a #1 seed since eveery other polling has them in the top 3.
 
oldude said:
I commented after yesterday’s loss to SC and Stanford’s loss to Washington that you could make a strong case for UConn as the 2nd best team in the nation. Massey currently ranks UConn 2nd.

Assuming that LSU loses twice, either to SC both times, or to SC and some other SEC opponent, and IN loses a couple times as it faces a gauntlet of ranked teams (Iowa twice, tOSU & Mich), then UConn just needs to take care of business in the NBE and the Huskies will be the #2 overall seed imo.
Expand ...
Agree
 
Jim said:
The problem is that the Duke, Iowa, and Texas wins came with Azzi on the court, and the concern is that the selection committee might take that into account.
Expand ...
Not if Azzi is back for the tournament, then all those concerns are moot.
 
maple said:
Disagree. Our goal should be a 1 seed, which should be doable if we win out. We have the #1 SOS, a NET ranking of #2, are #1 in our conference, have only lost to top 10 AP teams.
Expand ...
My original message said #2 or #3 overall seed. Those are both 1 seeds.
 
darrell said:
UConn is #4 (+1) in the AP Ranking this week.

In other news:
  • We unfortunately won’t be getting our 1 vs. 2 matchup this week, Indiana is #2 and LSU is #3.
  • Stanford drops out of the Top 5 and is replaced by Iowa (as I predicted), who is trending upwards.
  • Duke is now Top 10 after a great week. Congrats, @triaddukefan!

Full AP Poll here.
Expand ...
Agree but it plays out to our advantage if we keep winning
Indiana had Iowa twice, Ohio state and Michigan and will lose to one of those
and SC should beat LSU and if we keep winning that would put us number 2 where we belong
 
JBK said:
Agree but it plays out to our advantage if we keep winning
Indiana had Iowa twice, Ohio state and Michigan and will lose to one of those
and SC should beat LSU and if we keep winning that would put us number 2 where we belong
Expand ...
has Iowa twice
 
.-.
jaydee602 said:
I have no problem with these rankings. But let's keep in mind that UCONN still has the #1 strength of schedule (combined & non- conference) while Indiana's SOS is #27.
LOL....then again, LSU's SOS is #112. Their non- conferense SOS is actually #310!!
Expand ...
Indiana will not finish the season with less than 3 losses. LSU will find out where they are on Sunday. I might actually go to that game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JBK
jaydee602 said:
Every season, we hear some committee mouthpiece explain that a team received a low seeding or missed the tournament because of their weak out of conference schedule. But LSU's 310th non conference SOS is totally ignored as they move up the polls. Even after playing their SEC schedule, their combined SOS is still an anemic #112.
Expand ...
The committee that decides tournament seeding does not rely on the AP poll. They use the NET where LSU is currently #3 behind us. The notion that LSU is overrated in the polls has been pretty well digested by every possible member of every possible committee. This means the only possible direction for LSU if the committee decides to look for guidance outside of NET is down. The only question now, assuming SC defeats them decisively (twice) and we win out, as does Stanford and Iowa, is how far down LSU will fall. My guess is to a #3 seed behind ND Iowa Duke Utah and maybe even Texas.
 
Last edited:
Rowdy831 said:
Indiana will not finish the season with less than 3 losses. LSU will find out where they are on Sunday. I might actually go to that game.
Expand ...
I'm not sure of that. They (Indiana) are a very good basketball team with no glaring weakness. I'd prefer that UConn is in another bracket.
 
Bone Dog said:
The committee that decides tournament seeding does not rely on the AP poll. They use the NET where LSU is currently #3 behind us. The notion that LSU is overrated in the polls has been pretty well digested by every possible member of every possible committee. This means the only possible direction for LSU if the committee decides to look for guidance outside of NET is down. The only question now, assuming SC defeats them decisively (twice) and we win out, as does Stanford and Iowa, is how far down LSU will fall. My guess is to a #3 seed behind ND Iowa Duke Utah and maybe even Texas.
Expand ...
They don’t only use the NET to determine seeding. They do “look” for guidance outside of the NET so LSU could definitely move direction. Criteria considered for seeding includes

  • Availability of talent (injured or unavailable players)
  • Bad losses
  • Common opponents
  • Competitive in losses
  • Conference record
  • Early competition versus late competition
  • Head-to-head outcomes
  • NET ranking
  • Non-conference record
  • Overall record
  • Regional Advisory Committee region rankings
  • Significant wins
  • Strength of conference
  • Strength of schedule
 
SLY63 said:
My original message said #2 or #3 overall seed. Those are both 1 seeds.
Expand ...
I know, I apologized on the first page when someone pointed out my error. I misread your original post. :oops:
 
.-.
Heytherego said:
They don’t only use the NET to determine seeding. They do “look” for guidance outside of the NET so LSU could definitely move direction. Criteria considered for seeding includes

  • Availability of talent (injured or unavailable players)
  • Bad losses
  • Common opponents
  • Competitive in losses
  • Conference record
  • Early competition versus late competition
  • Head-to-head outcomes
  • NET ranking
  • Non-conference record
  • Overall record
  • Regional Advisory Committee region rankings
  • Significant wins
  • Strength of conference
  • Strength of schedule
Expand ...
Thank you for reprinting this. All of this material has been gone over many times in the BY. Yes, they can use stuff outside the NET, but they are likely to want to stick as close to it as they can. Still, there are reasons they will be forced to modify the NET rankings — geography, conference diversity, etc. The more they depart from the NET, the more criticism and accusations of favoritism they come in for. So, all things being equal, there is lots of motivation for them to push LSU down.
 
HuskyNan said:
Expand ...



Seven Top 25 NET wins is impressive, with a chance to add at least two more if they were to beat Nova again and in the BE Tourney Championship.

Teri Moren is my pick if Indiana can keep playing at this rate, but Geno is without a doubt on my shortlist for Coach of the Year.
 
The other interesting lack of data is while there are only 2 regional sites this year and they haven’t listed the regioal matchups (East vs. West;South vs. Midwest as examples) with my point being we are not sure if a seeding in the Greenville region with SC would mean we are matched in the Final Four round or for the Title game. My gut feeling is by having only 2 regions will give the committee flexibility to put both overall 1 and 2 seeds and the 3/4 seed in that same regional without being committed to those matchups. In other words, UConn can be put in Greenville for their fans to see them as either the #2 or #3 overall seed without committing UConn to have to play SC in the FF. Then Stanford and Indiana/Iowa could all go to Seattle also without preordaining that matchup. This type of flexible bracket allowed for better regional attendance for all 4 #1 seeds and not just the overall #1 seed.
When they do announce the locations, they obviously will also have to announce the matchups and seedings for transparency.
 
UCONN played 4 of the top 10 teams in the country and lost to 3 of the top 10 teams in the country. Looking at it now, even loosing to Maryland don't seem so bad.
 
.-.
I just hope we are the second 1 seed so we can avoid SC till the final (assuming both teams make it that far) and i'm sure Dawn feels the same :)
 
Bone Dog said:
Thank you for reprinting this. All of this material has been gone over many times in the BY. Yes, they can use stuff outside the NET, but they are likely to want to stick as close to it as they can. Still, there are reasons they will be forced to modify the NET rankings — geography, conference diversity, etc. The more they depart from the NET, the more criticism and accusations of favoritism they come in for. So, all things being equal, there is lots of motivation for them to push LSU down.
Expand ...
I’ll be interested to see how the committee handles LSU for sure
 
maple said:
Disagree. Our goal should be a 1 seed, which should be doable if we win out. We have the #1 SOS, a NET ranking of #2, are #1 in our conference, have only lost to top 10 AP teams.
Expand ...
I think you misunderstood the post, an overall 2 or 3 seed is a No.1 seed, just the second or third best No. 1 seed.
 
PJCLaw said:
I think you misunderstood the post, an overall 2 or 3 seed is a No.1 seed, just the second or third best No. 1 seed.
Expand ...
Yes, as I already commented a few times now, I misread the original post. :p:eek:
 
More that we held our own while Stanford fell out of the top five.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,259
Messages
4,560,173
Members
10,448
Latest member
MillerLitEd


Top Bottom