You have got to be kidding me

[rvwsleep]

"No trait is more justified than revenge in the right time and place." Meir Kahane

The Time: March 31, 2019

The Place: Albany, New York.

You couldn't come up with a quote from someone else ?

 

[FanFromMaine]

I'm fine with this

for a NC, most likely they'll have to beat the 2 teams they lost to and ND

That's the way is should be.

Also IMO, Louisville carrying a 1 tag puts more pressure on them, and in a building that will be as close to a Husky home crowd as you get in any other venue this year.

I disagree with most of the matchup worries posted here regarding the bigs with the exception of Baylor, I still think Cox is a problem.

My matchup concerns are with teams with the guards who can break the defense, and our own perimeter defense.

As far as SOS goes, its a crap shoot when you make out the schedule, you're making these schedules years in advance. This was a rebuild year for SC, USF should have been stronger, and who they heck knows whats going on with Cal and Okla.

Plus we always have the "homecoming" road games for the seniors, which I think is overall for the good -- I mean when does St. Louis get a gate like they got.

We don't duck anyone ever, go out of our way to get the highest SOS we can, and spread the "wealth" with teams that draw no one. --- so no bitching from me on SOS, it is what it is and generally on average YoY its fine.

Just beat the team that's in front of you.

Without any hard evidence, my sense is that the committee took KLS’s injury into account in their ranking. But as NS said, this is where UConn is.

And I don’t share the worries about teams with size. UConn’s offense at Baylor was very ragged; the defense played adequately. Watching Miss St lately indicates that they are vulnerable too. AEH helps their offense but diminishes their defense.

And UConn’s offense has become better as Crystal has taken charge. And Liv and Mikayla have given the defense more options.

So the question seems to be can KLS contribute in the tournament? Her physical condition is obviously uncertain but, even if she is healthy, can she manage her emotions?

At this point in her career, Stevie knew that hacking her was part of the game. With KLS, it often proves an effective tool to discomfort her. And her frame is less able to take what Stevie took.

So, to me, if KLS plays adequately, UConn wins the tournament.

 

[southofnorth]

I’m okay with a #2 seed for UConn. I’d be okay with a #16 seed for UConn. Geno has always been firm about being willing and wanting to play any team at any place at any time. It shouldn’t matter regardless. I’m a firm believer in if you can’t beat the best team in the first round, what makes you think you can beat them in the finals?

In other news, Mississippi State got sent out West so Louisville, Notre Dame, and UConn could all stay close to home. Let’s just keep rooting for UConn and watch how the tournament plays out.

 

[bbsamjj]

Has anyone seen a final ranking from the selection committee of where they put every team?

We know with the one seeds it went:

1. Baylor (goes closest to home, so SC)
2. ND (next closest, so Chicago)
3. Louisville (next closest, so Albany)
4. Miss St (next closest, so Portland)
(and then)
5. UConn
6. Oregon (?)
7. Stanford (?)
8. Iowa

I think the argument is not over whether UConn or Louisville should have been a #1 seed, but whether Miss St or UConn should have been a #1 seed. I think Baylor/ND/Louisville ahead of UConn was never going to change, and I think for all three of them that's justifiable (all have higher RPIs than UConn and better SOS, and two of them have wins over UConn).

I actually think UConn has a much better resume than Miss St, but that would mean UConn is sent out west, with Oregon almost certainly as their #2 in Portland. So here are the most likely options for the team:

Albany: #2 seed, with #1 Louisville
Portland: #1 seed, with #2 Oregon

I'm not a UConn fan, but not sure one seems that much better than the other.

 

[DaBball]

There are many SF/NY Giants fans that are upset that Bobby Richardson had Stretch McCovey so perfectly defended for the final out of the 1962 World Series. If he plays McCovey straightaway, the Giants win.

Even Lobo said it was a great no call. That’s how you know.

 

[DaBball]

It is interesting that we were bumped down, but for the sake of travelling, I’m happy with a two in Albany.

 

[Jmsdawg]

Has anyone seen a final ranking from the selection committee of where they put every team?

We know with the one seeds it went:

1. Baylor (goes closest to home, so SC)
2. ND (next closest, so Chicago)
3. Louisville (next closest, so Albany)
4. Miss St (next closest, so Portland)
(and then)
5. UConn
6. Oregon (?)
7. Stanford (?)
8. Iowa

I think the argument is not over whether UConn or Louisville should have been a #1 seed, but whether Miss St or UConn should have been a #1 seed. I think Baylor/ND/Louisville ahead of UConn was never going to change, and I think for all three of them that's justifiable (all have higher RPIs than UConn and better SOS, and two of them have wins over UConn).

I actually think UConn has a much better resume than Miss St, but that would mean UConn is sent out west, with Oregon almost certainly as their #2 in Portland. So here are the most likely options for the team:

Albany: #2 seed, with #1 Louisville
Portland: #1 seed, with #2 Oregon

I'm not a UConn fan, but not sure one seems that much better than the other.

I am a UConn fan so long as they are not playing MSST and I think playing in Albany against Louisville is much better than playing Oregon at Portland. Of the number one seeds, I see Louisville getting the worst draw, MSST the 2nd worst draw, ND the 3rd worst draw, and Baylor the best draw, however I believe the best draw overall is UConn. IMHO, UConn is the favorite for the NC!

 

[hussybulldog]

Nope, you are indeed wrong. UConn's overall SOS is 12. That includes the weak AAC games so their nonconference SOS is even higher. And that matters even less than how many Top 10 teams they played and where they played them. You are more than wrong.
But the real issue isn't the seed. The real issue is that we have to face ND in the semis again. Get ready to be shafted by the refs again! But the "good" sportsmanlike UConn fans will just say that we had a bad game again. Funny how that always coincides with ND not getting called for fouls. Yep, the fouls won't get called and our girls will stop driving and UConn superfans will get the chicken and egg reversed again.

Being on the same side with ND is better than with Baylor!

 

[Jmsdawg]

Being on the same side with ND is better than with Baylor!

Hopefully, we can derail Baylor in the FF and have the dream game for the NC, UConn vs MSST! Oh, got to get by Oregon first,no small task!

 

[Golden Husky]

Shouldn't Louisville and UConn, the No. 4 and No. 5 overall seeds, respectively, be on the same side of the bracket as Baylor, the No. 1 overall seed?

 

[DaBball]

Shouldn't Louisville and UConn, the No. 4 and No. 5 overall seeds, respectively, be on the same side of the bracket as Baylor, the No. 1 overall seed?

Mississippi State and Oregon were the 4 and 5. Louisville and UConn were 3 and 6.

 

[PacoBlaze]

All the things that determine the data used by the Committee are "made up" by the NCAA.
For example, the RPI and SOS are all based on the teams ranking and record within their conference throughout the season. And they are determined by the various polls.
So at the beginning of the season, all the pundits and voters select teams from the major conferences just because everyone knows that these teams are the best in the country. Just because. Even if the conference actually only have 2 or 3 teams that are actually good. But as long as the other 10 win some conference games they get votes and are ranked, thus increasing their RPI and SOS ranks, even when they suck.

 

[PacoBlaze]

Mississippi State and Oregon were the 4 and 5. Louisville and UConn were 3 and 6.

Which just shows the bias of this year's Committee, UConn ended up #2 in the AP Poll.
I guess that the AP voters have no clue on how to vote.

 

[Golden Husky]

Mississippi State and Oregon were the 4 and 5. Louisville and UConn were 3 and 6.

Okay, thanks. So UConn slipped from No. 4 in the penultimate reveal to No. 6, despite roiling through its conference tournament. Hmm.

 

[Plebe]

All the things that determine the data used by the Committee are "made up" by the NCAA.
For example, the RPI and SOS are all based on the teams ranking and record within their conference throughout the season. And they are determined by the various polls.
So at the beginning of the season, all the pundits and voters select teams from the major conferences just because everyone knows that these teams are the best in the country. Just because. Even if the conference actually only have 2 or 3 teams that are actually good. But as long as the other 10 win some conference games they get votes and are ranked, thus increasing their RPI and SOS ranks, even when they suck.

Yikes, this isn't true at all.

The RPI and SOS are just numbers that get crunched through a formula. They are not determined by the polls and they don't see the name on the jersey.

 

[Plebe]

Mississippi State and Oregon were the 4 and 5. Louisville and UConn were 3 and 6.

No, this is not true. Louisville was the 3, UConn the 5. The committee chair explicitly said that UConn was the top #2 seed. The committee can and does deviate from the S-curve for geography reasons. In this case, that allowed UConn to stay in Albany rather than going to Portland.

 

[ABCDFE]

I agree, there are inconsistencies with how the Committee described their logic and to some degree their was a lack of respect for the AAC and what CT accomplished. But to be honest, if you start to break down the bracket, we are in position, if we play well, to make it to the FF. I like our opponents in the first 2 rounds and then I'd rather play maryland than oregon state. Louisville I think is the best matchup we could have gotten in the EE game so for all of us fans, we should take a deep breath (its ok to act mad though ).

I know that we always say motivation at this point shouldn't be required, but I do believe the coaching staff will put a chip on the team's shoulder and we all know that when you get to tough points in the game, mentally is where the game is most likely won.

I like our chances at the FF. And if then one game at a time, we can hope that the team is hitting on all cylinders and the 2 off the bench can provide valuable contributions.

 

[PacoBlaze]

Yikes, this isn't true at all.

The RPI and SOS are just numbers that get crunched through a formula. They are not determined by the polls and they don't see the name on the jersey.

So if a team in the MAC is 29-2 and a team in the SEC is 29-2, then they should be rated the same but they are not because the formula has already determined that the SEC is a tougher conference, for whatever reason.
All formulas and programs are given specific parameters.

 

[CTBballfan243]

I cant believe it but looking back I guess I can expect it. UConn lost the past two seasons in the NCAA's. Saniya driving the lane get knocked and no call and if she had gone to the line for 2 and made one the game is pretty much over. Then last season UConn outscores ND from the field and looses when ND goes to the line 20 times more and wins in OT. No w this. You have got to be kidding me. To top it off Tenn makes the tourney with a loosing record in their conference and they dug up all kinds of excuses to put them in????????? Give somebody else a chance. You can tell Im pissed. Please excuse the language. This is a slap in the face for the team that has put the new WCBB on the map. Just like a few years ago when Penn St was a one seed and DT and UConn blew them out we are sucker punched again. I am not happy at all. This is a disgrace to a team and a coaching staff that has set the bar at another level. With 3 AA's playing and two top HS POY and with only 2 losses and with a better SOS then one other 1 seed UConn of all teams is ranked 2. I need to be put on the NCAA selection committee. Not only me but we need to get some other people on there. UConn of all teams deserves and has earned a one seed. You know what it wont matter. UConn barring injuries and foul trouble will win the regionals . I would like to say barring foul trouble on both sides meaning to many fouls called on UConn and no calls on their opponents. I saw it last season and its become a novelty against ND over the years. Lets have a level playing field. Ive said enough for today. I am not happy when my team gets slapped in the face. Be Fair.

The NCAA tournament (men's and women's) is about making money for the Power Conferences. The P5 will eventually split from the NCAA and have their own tournament. UConn will eventually go the way of Old Dominion and LaTech.

 

[JordyG]

"No trait is more justified than revenge in the right time and place." Meir Kahane

The Time: March 31, 2019

The Place: Albany, New York.

I've never been an adherent of the phrase, "Revenge is a meal best served cold". Frankly, to me revenge is a great meal when it's served. The temperature or the condition(s) of vittles to me are irrelevant.

 

[Plebe]

So if a team in the MAC is 29-2 and a team in the SEC is 29-2, then they should be rated the same but they are not because the formula has already determined that the SEC is a tougher conference, for whatever reason.
All formulas and programs are given specific parameters.

Not true. It's entirely possible for a MAC team to have a higher overall SOS than a SEC team.

Buffalo has a SOS rank of #48. Auburn's is #71. If Buffalo and Auburn had finished with identical win/loss records, Buffalo's RPI would be higher (factoring out any differential due to home vs. away games). In fact, both teams finished with 9 losses; Buffalo was 23-9 while Auburn was 21-9. But Buffalo's RPI rank was significantly higher (#25 vs. #50).

Another illustrative SEC/MAC comparison: Georgia vs. Kent State. Both teams finished 18-12. Georgia's SOS ranking was #97, while Kent State's was #86. And Kent State's RPI ranking was accordingly higher (#83 vs. #112).

 

[JordyG]

Anyone who’s fine with UConn’s seeding just is not paying attention.

The message today is that if UConn wants to be comfortable that they’re a one seed, they need to go undefeated.

It took a while for the selection committees to feel comfortable relegating UConn because of the American, but now that the seal is broken, it’ll be the rule.

Nonsense. If UConn had beaten Baylor or Louisville they'd be a number one seed. And yeah, UConn is in the AAC through no real fault of their own, but why punish Louisville or MSS. for being in far more difficult conferences? And I don't really give two spits. How does this seeding hurt UConn? They'd still have to beat Louisville to make the FF. Keep circling people, there's a dead principle down there somewhere.

 

[Golden Husky]

No, this is not true. Louisville was the 3, UConn the 5. The committee chair explicitly said that UConn was the top #2 seed. The committee can and does deviate from the S-curve for geography reasons. In this case, that allowed UConn to stay in Albany rather than going to Portland.

So, the Committee sets up the regional matchups (which region meets which region) before it selects the teams? It seems to me it would be more equitable to match the regions after the teams are placed, thus allowing for No. 1 overall seed to be on the same side of the bracket as the No. 4 overall seed and overall seeds 2 and 3 to be on the other side.

 

[Plebe]

So, the Committee sets up the regional matchups (which region meets which region) before it selects the teams? It seems to me it would be more equitable to match the regions after the teams are placed, thus allowing for No. 1 overall seed to be on the same side of the bracket as the No. 4 overall seed and overall seeds 2 and 3 to be on the other side.

No. The way you describe it is the way it happens. Seeding comes before placement. The overall #1 is always on the same half as overall #4 (this year that’s Baylor and Miss St), with #2 and #3 on the other half (ND and Louisville).

 

[biobioprof]

Has anyone seen a final ranking from the selection committee of where they put every team?

We know with the one seeds it went:

1. Baylor (goes closest to home, so SC)
2. ND (next closest, so Chicago)
3. Louisville (next closest, so Albany)
4. Miss St (next closest, so Portland)
(and then)
5. UConn
6. Oregon (?)
7. Stanford (?)
8. Iowa

I think the argument is not over whether UConn or Louisville should have been a #1 seed, but whether Miss St or UConn should have been a #1 seed. I think Baylor/ND/Louisville ahead of UConn was never going to change, and I think for all three of them that's justifiable (all have higher RPIs than UConn and better SOS, and two of them have wins over UConn).

I actually think UConn has a much better resume than Miss St, but that would mean UConn is sent out west, with Oregon almost certainly as their #2 in Portland. So here are the most likely options for the team:

Albany: #2 seed, with #1 Louisville
Portland: #1 seed, with #2 Oregon

I'm not a UConn fan, but not sure one seems that much better than the other.

I believe the geography deviation from the S curve is based on a 350 mile cutoff, not just ranking the distances. The 1 and 2 seeds within that distance of a regional, I believe are:
Albany - UConn
Chicago - ND, Louisville, Iowa
Portland - Oregon

This is why the discussion even before yesterday had UConn in Albany and Oregon in Portland as either 1 or 2 seeds. Being within 350 is an all or none thing, so in the discussion of ND and Louisville after the second reveal, they both had an equal case for Chicago even though South Bend is a lot closer.

Baylor, Stanford, and Miss State aren't within 350 of any of the sites. I don't know if the committee considered flipping the regionals for Stanford and Iowa or if some other constraint prevented that.

 

[PacoBlaze]

Not true. It's entirely possible for a MAC team to have a higher overall SOS than a SEC team.

Buffalo has a SOS rank of #48. Auburn's is #71. If Buffalo and Auburn had finished with identical win/loss records, Buffalo's RPI would be higher (factoring out any differential due to home vs. away games). In fact, both teams finished with 9 losses; Buffalo was 23-9 while Auburn was 21-9. But Buffalo's RPI rank was significantly higher (#25 vs. #50).

Another illustrative SEC/MAC comparison: Georgia vs. Kent State. Both teams finished 18-12. Georgia's SOS ranking was #97, while Kent State's was #86. And Kent State's RPI ranking was accordingly higher (#83 vs. #112).

And you are completely missing my point...these things that are used by the Committee, the pundits and you are something that were created for the purpose of selecting and placing the 64 teams in the Tournament.
However it is my belief that the original creators of these formulas were basing their criteria using the P5 Conferences as their benchmarks.
You can bet that if suddenly the mid-major leagues started to dominate multiple and NCs, the selection criteria would be changed.

 

[uconnfan68]

No, I am not wrong. I have my facts correct, and you do not.

You not only got your facts wrong but you then disregarded the correction. Again, you failed to account for UConn's games vs. Seton Hall and Saint Louis. So please, whatever else you continue to say, do not repeat the objective falsehood that UConn only played "one single team" not from a power conference.

But that is beside the larger point, which is that opponents' conference affiliation per se is irrelevant to schedule strength. I repeat: Vanderbilt, Ole Miss and Oklahoma were not good teams this year, by any measure. To pretend that they represent an asset to UConn's schedule is delusional.

The Saint Louis game was a senior’s homecoming game... because no one will schedule UConn. And you can’t determine how your OOC schedule will be years in advance.

 

[uconnfan68]

And you are completely missing my point...these things that are used by the Committee, the pundits and you are something that were created for the purpose of selecting and placing the 64 teams in the Tournament.
However it is my belief that the original creators of these formulas were basing their criteria using the P5 Conferences as their benchmarks.
You can bet that if suddenly the mid-major leagues started to dominate multiple and NCs, the selection criteria would be changed.

A mid-major does have 3 of the last 5 NCs.

 

[IWearShoes]

Gee, there sure is a lot of angst here. In summary...

Baylor, the clear #1 overall seed got sent as close as they could be to home and gets a Regional Final, if seeds hold, vs the clear weakest 2 seed in Iowa.

ND, the pretty clear overall #2, gets sent to the obvious and desireable Chicago regional to play the mostly clear 2nd weakest 2 seed in Stanford, if seeds hold.

Louisville, Mississippi State, UConn & Oregon, the #3-#6 overall seeds to most unbiased eyes (although not necessarily in that order), get distributed so the 1 seeds are traveling, but getting the advantage of playing a 4 seed in the SS. The 2 seeds, UConn and Oregon, are playing 3 seeds in the SS, but they're both close to home, giving them some advantage.

Seems to me the committee did an outstanding job.

 

[MainefanSC]

Seems to me the committee did an outstanding job.[/QUOTE]

Well that's one of you.