Who should be #1 this coming week? (UConn vs Texas)

[LwrcasefaN]

I guess this ranking stuff eventually impacts tournament seeding or provides “bragging” rights of some sort. Even with more parity in WCBB the cream consistently rises to the top and this all gets sorted out come tournament time. UCONN didn’t spend a lot of weeks at #1 last year and hoisted the trophy. I spose it’s a nice exercise, but with limitations. There are a lot of teams this year in the top 25 that on any given night could beat any team ranked above 5 and I would not see it as an “upset”. I mean some teams are an injury away from being out of the top 25. And others are significantly dependent on youth keeping them relevant. So to separate from the field THIS YEAR…you HAVE TO have elite defense…AND a SOLID bench…not just bodies. Texas and UCONN are both elite defensively, but I think UCONN has more defensive depth.

 

[BRS24]

A view from herhoopstats

Poll Ponderings: Should UConn or Texas be No.1?

In this week's column, we break down how game results have affected the rankings, then dive into the UConn vs Texas debate.

herhoopstats.substack.com

What are the requirements for being the No. 1 team in the country? Is there a list of things you need to check off to get that No.1 spot?​

​

Well, with a system that relies on votes, the answer is no. There is no formula, no criteria on who gets that top spot. It’s all up to the voters to determine, based on their individual criteria. This has led to a debate as to whether UConn or Texas should be the No. 1 team.​

 

[JellyBean]

UConn. Until they are beaten, they are the defending Champs and worthy of that honor.

 

[DefenseBB]

UConn. Until they are beaten, they are the defending Champs and worthy of that honor.

I never understood that logic. Every year, player rosters change, team chemistry changes and the opponent level changes, so should the evaluation of the rankings should also change. Saying an individual champion is the defending champ like in Boxing, Tennis, mixed martial arts is one thing but in team sports from year to year with all the changes, not so logical

 

[Bone Dog]

I never understood that logic. Every year, player rosters change, team chemistry changes and the opponent level changes, so should the evaluation of the rankings should also change. Saying an individual champion is the defending champ like in Boxing, Tennis, mixed martial arts is one thing but in team sports from year to year with all the changes, not so logical

Me neither. I suspect this thinking mainly stems from confusing what should happen with what tends to happen. And maybe it's an understandable error, at least for the first week or two. Until there's real evidence of what teams are capable of, lots of folks are dazzled by how the previous season ended. But that error should disappear once teams show what they are capable of.

 

[visitingcock]

I never understood that logic. Every year, player rosters change, team chemistry changes and the opponent level changes, so should the evaluation of the rankings should also change. Saying an individual champion is the defending champ like in Boxing, Tennis, mixed martial arts is one thing but in team sports from year to year with all the changes, not so logical

Here is the simple logic. If nobody beats them they will repeat. If somebody beats them thy won’t.

Until somebody beats the champ it’s just speculation and algorithms

 

[JellyBean]

I never understood that logic. Every year, player rosters change, team chemistry changes and the opponent level changes, so should the evaluation of the rankings should also change. Saying an individual champion is the defending champ like in Boxing, Tennis, mixed martial arts is one thing but in team sports from year to year with all the changes, not so logical

Me either, but it has been that way for as long as there have been rankings. Some teams always got the benefit of the doubt over a lesser-known team. Some teams could lose 4-6 games and still be ranked over a team that has 1-2 losses. It would all depend on those "quality of wins" or "quality of losses", much like we saw in the College Football Playoff/BCS conversation over the last 20 plus years.

 

[BRS24]

Next discourse will be before the Jan 5 AP poll.