USA Coaches Poll 2017-18

[willtalk]

Are you referring to Lydia Giomi? She should be a RS Fr. I think. Folks in Seattle were pretty hopeful she would stay close to home for college, but no such luck. I think she's gonna be buried on the depth chart at UO. She's definitely behind Hebard and McGwire, and probably Campisano and Gildon as well. I'm not sure if Sabally is being viewed as more of a wing or a post player. Lots of front court players on the roster, Giomi has her work cut out for her trying to get minutes.

Yes I was. The coach seems to like her though. I think she just needs to work on her offensive game a bit. Mid range shots to be exact. What she brings is a defensive presence. The coach said they might be using more traps this season which portends using a larger rotation. They will just wear teams out with their depth. The could run platoons at the other teams. McGwire is more a typical center so if the begin to run a lot Giomi might be a better fit because of her athleticism.

Although Sabally can play any position I suspect with their roster they will play her at the wing and even the off guard position to create mismatches. Lydia did redshirt her freshman year. Man they will have a solid and young team. I don't for see them getting any more recruits for a few years. They are just loaded with young players.

 

[Gus Mahler]

Exactly. 20-12, 22-14.

Are you saying that you are what your record says you are? I say you're on to something.

 

[CocoHusky]

I remember the discussion. I don't remember if I participated. But the idea that the champion one season should be preseason No. 1 the following season is one of the more absurd things I've ever heard in sports (or any place else for that matter). It is devoid of logic.
These polls are prospective, not retrospective. It's never been clear to me whether a preseason poll should represent where the pollster thinks a team is now, or where he/she thinks the team will end up. Either way, the past is largely irrelevant. I concede that traditional powers might get the benefit of the doubt in a close call, but I'm unable to fathom how last year's finish should be reflected in this year's polls.

I did participate in those discussions and the most remarkable part of it was the insistence that this logic should only apply to UCONN championship teams.

 

[oldude]

I did participate in those discussions and the most remarkable part of it was the insistence that this logic should only apply to UCONN championship teams.

While I don’t necessarily agree with the concept that “you’re #1 until someone beats you,” in retrospect, the folks that made the argument last year in support of the Huskies proved to be absolutely correct, up until the MS St game.

 

[CocoHusky]

While I don’t necessarily agree with the concept that “you’re #1 until someone beats you,” in retrospect, the folks that made the argument last year in support of the Huskies proved to be absolutely correct, up until the MS St game.

Reductio ad absurdum.
If we did everything "retrospectively" then there would be no need for preseason polls or predictions.
To be consistent with this logic, both Missi St and South Carolina should start the 2017-18 season ranked ahead of UCONN then right?

 

[Zanzman]

Reductio ad absurdum.
If we did everything "retrospectively" then there would be no need for preseason polls or predictions.
To be consistent with this logic, both Missi St and South Carolina should start the 2017-18 season ranked ahead of UCONN then right?

 

[Zanzman]

I think so only poll that matters is the final on in april the rest is for the fans and the media . I mean look at the rankings so many are not going to end up any where near they are projected to.

 

[eebmg]

I think so only poll that matters is the final on in april the rest is for the fans and the media . I mean look at the rankings so many are not going to end up any where near they are projected to.

Good thing we are fans.

 

[meyers7]

Are you saying that you are what your record says you are? I say you're on to something.

Scoreboard doesn't lie.

 

[Carnac]

While I don’t necessarily agree with the concept that “you’re #1 until someone beats you,” in retrospect, the folks that made the argument last year in support of the Huskies proved to be absolutely correct, up until the MS St game.

Oldude, this IS NOT directed at you, I understand and respect your position. However you may address this query if you wish. This post is for general consumption and debate. Allow me to play the devil's advocate for a moment - I may be wrong about the concept of a "preseason" poll, here's why - I've always thought that the rankings were just for the beginning of the season, subject to realignment/repositioning as the season progresses. It was not intended to be a prediction of the final order of the ranked team's finish AFTER the final four. Maybe for the first month of the season, but not the whole year. Teams usually don't drop in the rankings unless they lose. Most top ranked teams play a soft OOC schedule to begin the season, so the probability of them losing early on is almost nil. For them, the real competition doesn't begin until after the Christmas break. To me, the preseason polls reflect who we think the best teams are to begin the season only.

This is why I can understand (not necessarily agree with) those who subscribe to the theory that the winner of the NC only a few months ago should retain their #1 ranking until they lose, or another team over takes them in the standings, given that no games have been played since they won the NC. I understand that transfers in both directions along with player graduation and injury are taken into account in the perception of a team's ability to compete.

I also understand the logic that resides on the other side of the argument as well. Sometimes that logic can be inerrant. It was last year when UConn was ranked 4th to begin the season, but quickly rose to #1 after beating #2 Baylor and #1 Notre Dame 2 weeks into the season. No one saw UConn's potential in October. Mississippi State was not ranked in the top 10 to begin the season, why not? Speculation and perception. South Carolina was not the odds-on favorite in Las Vegas (or any other poll) to win it all. If you're wrong about those two teams, why can't you be wrong about the defending NC beginning the next season at #1?

These polls are speculative at best based on the rater's perspective which as we know can vary greatly from person to person. Baylor and Notre Dame were deemed to be final four locks the last two years by WCBB "experts" and officials, but both failed to make it to the final weekend. Someone "perceived" at the beginning of the season that they would be there come March. Everyone is "perceiving" that UConn will be the team to beat, and win the NC this year, yet they haven't played a game yet. No team has ever won a championship on paper. I wonder just how sure anyone would be that their preseason picks/rankings are accurate to the point of betting their home and life savings on them. If you're almost positive, then it's not gambling, it's an investment on a return you're almost guaranteed you will receive.

So how can anyone suggest that one person's picks are better or worse than the next guy? When we discuss preseason polls, all we're really talking about is perception in anticipation of events that are yet to be. Kinda like playing the horses. They all look good BEFORE the race begins. After all, they're ALL thoroughbreds aren't they? In short, I say that preseason polls are good for nothing more than fodder for debate.

 

[Golden Husky]

I remember the discussion. I don't remember if I participated. But the idea that the champion one season should be preseason No. 1 the following season is one of the more absurd things I've ever heard in sports (or any place else for that matter). It is devoid of logic.

These polls are prospective, not retrospective. It's never been clear to me whether a preseason poll should represent where the pollster thinks a team is now, or where he/she thinks the team will end up. Either way, the past is largely irrelevant. I concede that traditional powers might get the benefit of the doubt in a close call, but I'm unable to fathom how last year's finish should be reflected in this year's polls.

As someone who had a vote in an Associated Press poll for many years (not women's basketball) I can tell you that the criteria is to list the best teams at the time you vote. Neither the previous season's results nor where you think a team might ultimately finish should be factors. I assure you that most journalists don't take a poll of coaches too seriously. (Coaches are too consumed with their own teams to watch teams that aren't on their schedule play). That said, I doubt the coaches have much respect for what a bunch of ink-stained keyboard punchers think, either.

 

[oldude]

Reductio ad absurdum.
If we did everything "retrospectively" then there would be no need for preseason polls or predictions.
To be consistent with this logic, both Missi St and South Carolina should start the 2017-18 season ranked ahead of UCONN then right?

Oldude, this IS NOT directed at you, I understand and respect your position. However you may address this query if you wish. This post is for general consumption and debate, which I expect to get a lot of responses to. Allow me to play the devil's (the small d in "devil" was on purpose) advocate for a moment - I may be wrong about the concept of a "preseason" poll, here's why - I've always thought that the rankings were just for the beginning of the season, subject to realignment/repositioning as the season progresses. It was not intended to be a prediction of the final order of the ranked team's finish AFTER the final four. Maybe for the first month of the season, but not the whole year. Teams usually don't drop in the rankings unless they lose. Most top ranked teams play a soft OOC schedule to begin the season, so the probability of them losing early on is almost nil. For them, the real competition doesn't begin until after the Christmas break. To me, the preseason polls reflect who we think the best teams are to begin the season only.

This is why I can understand (not necessarily agree with) those who subscribe to the theory that the winner of the NC only a few months ago should retain their #1 ranking until they lose, or another team over takes them in the standings, given that no games have been played since they won the NC. I understand that transfers in both directions along with player graduation and injury are taken into account in the perception of a team's ability to compete.

I also understand the logic that resides on the other side of the argument as well. Sometimes that logic can be inerrant. It was last year when UConn was ranked 4th to begin the season, but quickly rose to #1 after beating #2 Baylor and #1 Notre Dame 2 weeks into the season. No one saw UConn's potential in October. Mississippi State was not ranked in the top 10 to begin the season, why not? Speculation and perception. South Carolina was not the odds-on favorite in Las Vegas (or any other poll) to win it all. If you're wrong about those two teams, why can't you be wrong about the defending NC beginning the next season at #1?

These polls are speculative at best based on the rater's perspective which as we know can vary greatly from person to person. Baylor and Notre Dame were deemed to be final four locks the last two years by WCBB "experts" and officials, but both failed to make it to the final weekend. Someone "perceived" at the beginning of the season that they would be there come March. Everyone is "perceiving" that UConn will be the team to beat, and win the NC this year, yet they haven't played a game yet. No team has ever won a championship on paper. I wonder just how sure anyone would be that their preseason picks/rankings are accurate to the point of betting their home and life savings on them. If you're almost positive, then it's not gambling, it's an investment on a return you're almost guaranteed you will receive.

So how can anyone suggest that one person's picks are better or worse than the next guy? When we discuss preseason polls, all we're really talking about is perception in anticipation of events that are yet to be. Kinda like playing the horses. They all look good BEFORE the race begins. ALL of them are thoroughbreds. In short, I say that preseason polls are good for nothing more than debate fodder. Someone please explain this. To all you WCBB experts: Who is going to be in this year's final four. Not who is going to win, what 4 teams will play the final weekend in April, and why?. We already know who's going to win. No excuses if you're wrong. I think I'm missing something regarding these preseason WCBB polls. Help me out here.

Guys, I think you’re over analyzing my post. I was simply saying that the folks that said at the beginning of last season that UConn should remain #1, of which I was not one, had their view supported by the Huskies play on the court.

There are fans of other teams all around the country whose hopes and dreams are routinely dashed by their underachieving teams. Last season think TN, Baylor & MD.

Husky fans can wish for the moon
and stars and, despite all evidence to the contrary, Geno and the team deliver year after year. We are an incredibly fortunate fan base.

 

[CocoHusky]

This is why I can understand (not necessarily agree with) those who subscribe to the theory that the winner of the NC only a few months ago should retain their #1 ranking until they lose, or another team over takes them in the standings, given that no games have been played since they won the NC. I understand that transfers in both directions along with player graduation and injury are taken into account in the perception of a team's ability to compete.
So how can anyone suggest that one person's picks are better or worse than the next guy?

Easily. When the graduating class includes Stewie, Morgan, and Moriah=equal 4 consecutive championship, 3 time NPOY, defensive POY, 2 X Liberman award winner .... and "one man" doesn't factor that into his picks for preseason #1 I have no problem saying my picks are better than "the next guy's" because I did factor it in.

 

[USFMB]

Jose is a good coach and he has a lot of international talent.

The feeling at USF THIS year in WBB is that it will field its BEST team.

We are 100% healthy (knock on wood), and we should be much better than last year.

Hopefully, we beat LSU (RV's) to start off the season on the right foot.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

I think there are 7 coaches I'd like to make a bet with.

 

[Plebe]

The feeling at USF THIS year in WBB is that it will field its BEST team.

We are 100% healthy (knock on wood), and we should be much better than last year.

Hopefully, we beat LSU (RV's) to start off the season on the right foot.

I really like USF's schedule this year. It includes three winnable games against quality nonconference opponents: LSU, Washington State, Oklahoma. And if they get past Washington State in the first round of the Gulf Coast Showcase, they'd almost certainly play Notre Dame in the semifinals. They also get a shot at Ohio State in a home game in February.

 

[USFMB]

I really like USF's schedule this year. It includes three winnable games against quality nonconference opponents: LSU, Washington State, Oklahoma. And if they get past Washington State in the first round of the Gulf Coast Showcase, they'd almost certainly play Notre Dame in the semifinals. They also get a shot at Ohio State in a home game in February.

Too bad, Baylor cancelled our game with them. That might have been a signature win for our program.

Laura Ferreira, who missed almost all of last year, seems to be fully recovered. I just hope she doesn't have a relapse.

I'm most eager to see how our big transfer, Alyssa Rader, does. I think she will make an immediate impact.

 

[Plebe]

Too bad, Baylor cancelled our game with them. That might have been a signature win for our program.

Laura Ferreira, who missed almost all of last year, seems to be fully recovered. I just hope she doesn't have a relapse.

I'm most eager to see how our big transfer, Alyssa Rader, does. I think she will make an immediate impact.

I didn't even know they were supposed to play Baylor? Do we know why they canceled it?

 

[USFMB]

I didn't even know they were supposed to play Baylor? Do we know why they canceled it?

There was a thread on it here about a month ago. I don't believe she gave a reason. I presume, you can find it by searching this site.

 

[USFMB]

I didn't even know they were supposed to play Baylor? Do we know why they canceled it?

Here is a story about it.

Baylor Women’s Basketball Cowers In Fear, Cancels Game With USF

 

[BigBird]

Scoreboard doesn't lie.

You’re right, Meyers. But I did get myself into a “pier six brawl” on another board, having dared to suggest that if team A defeats team B (in softball in this case), one really can’t advance as fact the idea that B is still the better team. Two teams compete to determine which is the better team. I just don’t get how someone can persuasively argue that the final score isn’t definative.

 

[CocoHusky]

Here is a story about it.

Baylor Women’s Basketball Cowers In Fear, Cancels Game With USF

That's very funny.

 

[UConnCat]

AP preseason poll will be released tomorrow morning. The ranking discussion can then start all over again.

 

[CocoHusky]

AP preseason poll will be released tomorrow morning. The ranking discussion can then start all over again.

Should we start a separate thread or just recycle this one?

 

[UConnCat]

Should we start a separate thread or just recycle this one?

LOL. I'll tune in tomorrow night to find out. I predict a separate thread will be started and it'll be deja vu all over again.