UConn to Bridgeport ?

[Charliebball]

Not saying there is any significant motivation, but what was the motivation the press was giving Geno for UCONN players picked for the Olympic team which he wasn't even coaching?

Didn't Geno tell a story last year that Paige came into his office one day early during her frosh year and told Geno she was amazed how many people really hate UCONN?

That kind of fan hate just like the hate for the Yankees, the Dallas Cowboys, etc comes from a high level of success over the years but typically doesn't infect the ruling body that makes money from such hate in terms of additional attendance and tv ratinngs.....

 

[HuskyNan]

Did Fudd get hurt in the previous game before SC? Her foot looked fine when she scored about 20 points the day before SC. Her problem in the SC game, was defending and getting open looks.

She came to UConn with a lingering injury. Azzi wore a boot during most of the summer, most famously when the high school All Star three point competition featured two opponents, see below. BTW, those who are also fans of the men’s team might enjoy a really young looking Jordan Hawkins who’s shown for the first minute or so

 

[southie]

Then the NCAA shouldn't say anything about injuries. But they do. You are making a rule up that the NCAA doesn't have ("injuries are part of the game") just so it fits your narrative. If the NCAA has it for review then it is part of the game.

IMO at least some/many of us are interpreting the NCAA should take an existing rule into account to a higher degree. Your comment suggests/implies to basically throw away the injury rule.

And while you talk about Duke vs the other team-- I recall years ago Duke found out they were in UCONN's region and I read somewhere the Duke's klds hearts sank. Because that was one of the year's UCONN was amazing.

So in this case putting UCONN in a region so they knock off some other teams that would have had a better shot if the NCAA just used common sense- that's bad too. Those teams that UCONN would knock off in the lower rounds "deserve better" too.

I did NOT make up a rule. I clearly stated that was MY belief regarding injuries.

 

[hoophuskee]

I did NOT make up a rule. I clearly stated that was MY belief regarding injuries.

But your other posts indicate how the committee can look at things.

On this thread you have made suggestions "if you were the committee/ how can the committee look at injuries in your point of view" type of posts just as you said below as an example: Many of your posts your are implying how the committee should look at injuries, isn't it?

One point it seems like you were trying to make is that the committee can't use injuries. You are arguing/implying there is no way they can use them and be fair, correct? So you justify this by then claiming "injuries are part of the game," too, correct?


"If the committee is going to take player injuries, illness, and COVID protocol absences from games into consideration for one team, then they have to do it for all teams. I just don't see how they can manage that as it was so widespread this season. While some player absences were more publicized than others, they are all created equal, IMO."

"So, you think the committee should take the time to evaluate every teams' losses, who the opponent was, which players were absent, and then speculate that the outcome of the game would have been different? What if player got injured during the game? Should the loss not count either?"

"The point I was trying to make (perhaps not very well) was that where does the committee draw the line when taking player injuries/illnesses into consideration? Only look at the teams jockeying for Top 16 seeds? What about those teams on the bubble? Should Duke get more consideration because Celeste Taylor missed several games? Should those losses not count and Duke be given the invitation of an at-large team who did not have the same type of player injuries?"

"Is there an actual published metric confirming that? Or, is that just an opinion? Who decides "key" absences versus "non-key"?

 

[Charliebball]

But your other posts indicate how the committee can look at things.

On this thread you have made suggestions "if you were the committee/ how can the committee look at injuries in your point of view" type of posts just as you said below as an example: Many of your posts your are implying how the committee should look at injuries, isn't it?

One point it seems like you were trying to make is that the committee can't use injuries. You are arguing/implying there is no way they can use them and be fair, correct? So you justify this by then claiming "injuries are part of the game," too, correct?


"If the committee is going to take player injuries, illness, and COVID protocol absences from games into consideration for one team, then they have to do it for all teams. I just don't see how they can manage that as it was so widespread this season. While some player absences were more publicized than others, they are all created equal, IMO."

"So, you think the committee should take the time to evaluate every teams' losses, who the opponent was, which players were absent, and then speculate that the outcome of the game would have been different? What if player got injured during the game? Should the loss not count either?"

"The point I was trying to make (perhaps not very well) was that where does the committee draw the line when taking player injuries/illnesses into consideration? Only look at the teams jockeying for Top 16 seeds? What about those teams on the bubble? Should Duke get more consideration because Celeste Taylor missed several games? Should those losses not count and Duke be given the invitation of an at-large team who did not have the same type of player injuries?"

"Is there an actual published metric confirming that? Or, is that just an opinion? Who decides "key" absences versus "non-key"?

Imagine if NC State lost Cunane, South Carolina lost Boston, Iowa lost Clark or Stanford lost Jones for ten plus games during the season and those teams lost a few games............I would think the powers that be know that there are injuries and then there are INJURIES!!

 

[Monte]

The Committee is pretty ignorant if they don't know that "the Player of the Year," Paige, missed several games, and now is back.
The Committee should approach their seedings as IF they were going to WAGER on the games. I'm sure they would more serious about their selections!

 

[southie]

But your other posts indicate how the committee can look at things.

On this thread you have made suggestions "if you were the committee/ how can the committee look at injuries in your point of view" type of posts just as you said below as an example: Many of your posts your are implying how the committee should look at injuries, isn't it?

One point it seems like you were trying to make is that the committee can't use injuries. You are arguing/implying there is no way they can use them and be fair, correct? So you justify this by then claiming "injuries are part of the game," too, correct?


"If the committee is going to take player injuries, illness, and COVID protocol absences from games into consideration for one team, then they have to do it for all teams. I just don't see how they can manage that as it was so widespread this season. While some player absences were more publicized than others, they are all created equal, IMO."

"So, you think the committee should take the time to evaluate every teams' losses, who the opponent was, which players were absent, and then speculate that the outcome of the game would have been different? What if player got injured during the game? Should the loss not count either?"

"The point I was trying to make (perhaps not very well) was that where does the committee draw the line when taking player injuries/illnesses into consideration? Only look at the teams jockeying for Top 16 seeds? What about those teams on the bubble? Should Duke get more consideration because Celeste Taylor missed several games? Should those losses not count and Duke be given the invitation of an at-large team who did not have the same type of player injuries?"

"Is there an actual published metric confirming that? Or, is that just an opinion? Who decides "key" absences versus "non-key"?

Well, it would have helped had you quoted the relevant post.

Again, none of us are making new rules as we don't have that authority. Most of us are trying to understand the rules as best we can. Sometimes, there are rules/guidelines the committee uses which not all of us are aware exist. Providing examples is one way of trying to compare different/similar situations.

Obviously, injuries are a huge topic. And, players returning from injuries during the season not only impact the Top 16 national seeds, but also teams on the bubble. Will the committee end up telling everyone which teams were truly impacted (positively or negatively) as to their seeds, or receiving / not receiving an at-large bid at all? I'd be surprised if they do. We'll be left to discuss this (again) come Monday evening after the bracket is released.

 

[MSGRET]

Well, it would have helped had you quoted the relevant post.

Again, none of us are making new rules as we don't have that authority. Most of us are trying to understand the rules as best we can. Sometimes, there are rules/guidelines the committee uses which not all of us are aware exist. Providing examples is one way of trying to compare different/similar situations.

Obviously, injuries are a huge topic. And, players returning from injuries during the season not only impact the Top 16 national seeds, but also teams on the bubble. Will the committee end up telling everyone which teams were truly impacted (positively or negatively) as to their seeds, or receiving / not receiving an at-large bid at all? I'd be surprised if they do. We'll be left to discuss this (again) come Monday evening after the bracket is released.

You would be a day late and a dollar short if you wait until Monday evening. The brackets are going to be released on Sunday evening.

 

[CL82]

Who's complaining, we don't have football here.

Well, then they are paying this guy and his staff a whole lot money for what exactly?

For what it’s worth there’s a whole lot of excitement surrounding Jim mora and the UConn football program. We did well in the portal and are getting good commitments, especially from Connecticut kids, which hasn’t happened in a while. In the end the proof of the pudding is in the eating in the proof of a football program is in the wins and losses. We shall see, but I am relatively hopeful.

 

[Monte]

"It ain't over til it's over!"

 

[Old Geezer]

I may be cynical, but if UConn isn’t in the Bridgeport regional, is anyone going to go to those games? If they are, then I would expect that the arena will be sold out with screaming fans. What looks/sounds better for television? The ncaa is all about raising the visibility, of women basketball and making money

 

[oldude]

I may be cynical, but if UConn isn’t in the Bridgeport regional, is anyone going to go to those games? If they are, then I would expect that the arena will be sold out with screaming fans. What looks/sounds better for television? The ncaa is all about raising the visibility, of women basketball and making money

I have 4 overpriced tickets that I will only use if the Huskies end up in Bridgeport. Otherwise I’ll probably take a loss selling them on the secondary market.

 

[DefenseBB]

If the argument is that UConn should be in Bridgeport because of enhanced ratings, then do not complain when a non-P5 team is left out of the BCS football championship series because of..................ratings.

Wait, what? BCS is 4 measly teams whereas we are talking 68 teams. Attendance absolutely has a huge factor in what the NCAA does in all sports but CFB or MCBB. The NCAA will not skew the seedings to ensure a favorable matchup for the final but may tweak the various regions for interesting competition within an S curve slot or two, but the committee is usually logical though not in all peoples eyes.

Last I would say, Charlie Crème tries to simulate what he thinks the committee will do and the committee tries every year to be more transparent but there are still “crazy Ivan’s” that occur with a team getting in that no one thought wood or one left out that some thought were locks.
I also found it interesting that Geno went hard on the stump box for Villanova after the game and voila, Charlie has them in the field!

 

[Monte]

I may be cynical, but if UConn isn’t in the Bridgeport regional, is anyone going to go to those games? If they are, then I would expect that the arena will be sold out with screaming fans. What looks/sounds better for television? The ncaa is all about raising the visibility, of women basketball and making money

I would guess about 60% of the fans would still go; with not much noise.

 

[jchusky]

I may be cynical, but if UConn isn’t in the Bridgeport regional, is anyone going to go to those games? If they are, then I would expect that the arena will be sold out with screaming fans. What looks/sounds better for television? The ncaa is all about raising the visibility, of women basketball and making money

only 10k arena, let's not act like it's a huge one.

 

[oldude]

only 10k arena, let's not act like it's a huge one.

Yes, but it’s a single-tier arena, the fans are loud, right on top of the court and it is an intimidating place to play for anyone not named UConn.

 

[CONN78SEJ]

Yes, but it’s a single-tier arena, the fans are loud, right on top of the court and it is an intimidating place to play for anyone not named UConn.

By far, the loudest arena I have ever been in.

 

[oldude]

By far, the loudest arena I have ever been in.

It is very loud, and you can pretty much count on the fact that, outside of the NCAA’s meager ticket allocation to the other 3 regional teams, if UConn ends up in Bridgeport, every seat in the arena will be occupied by a passionate UConn fan.

 

[letsgogirls]

I'm curious, what percentage would you say that Creme's brackets resemble the committee's? Going off of past brackets?

 

[triaddukefan]

I may be cynical, but if UConn isn’t in the Bridgeport regional, is anyone going to go to those games?

Hopefully fans of wbb would show up. True fans.

 

[oldude]

I'm curious, what percentage would you say that Creme's brackets resemble the committee's? Going off of past brackets?

Creme is essentially trying to predict what the committee does based on his considerable understanding of the process, as well as prior bracket selections by the committee. He tends to be better with the top seed lines (1-4) than the lower seed lines (5-16). There have been some past occasions when he was just about spot on.

In past years, WBB bracketology was much easier to predict than MBB. This year, with all the late season upsets, as well as teams like UConn that have dealt with a substantial level of injuries and illness, predicting the bracket is a much tougher challenge.

 

[Mdoggie]

Hopefully fans of wbb would show up. True fans.

Not all “true fans” have the finances to show up.

 

[hoopsfan22]

I may be cynical, but if UConn isn’t in the Bridgeport regional, is anyone going to go to those games? If they are, then I would expect that the arena will be sold out with screaming fans. What looks/sounds better for television? The ncaa is all about raising the visibility, of women basketball and making money

The NCAA already has its money for this tourney as the tickets are mostly sold before the brackets are released. It's nearly irrelevant which team goes where. Bridgeport would certainly care because that's less secondary revenue for them at concession stands and local restaurants, but from the NCAA's perspective, they've already been paid.

 

[oldude]

The NCAA already has its money for this tourney as the tickets are mostly sold before the brackets are released. It's nearly irrelevant which team goes where. Bridgeport would certainly care because that's less secondary revenue for them at concession stands and local restaurants, but from the NCAA's perspective, they've already been paid.

By the same token, Bridgeport & Albany have been dependable venues for the women’s regional for years, due in large measure to the fact that UConn usually finds their way to those venues. The last thing the NCAA wants is for a venue to decide it doesn’t want or need a future regional because attendance and secondary revenue fell substantially below projections and/or break even.