Well...if Stanford is going to lose it just might be in the P10 tourney

[RaiderPower1]

One of the Cardinal's best players Lindsey Yamasaki is out after having her appendix removed. She will be out for the entire Pac 10 tourney but should return for the NCAA tournament. We'll see how Stanford will do without one of their best. http://hoopscoop.net/ubb/confused.gif
http://gostanford.fansonly.com/sports/w-baskbl/spec-rel/022602aac.html

[swok34]

2 weeks seems awfully quick recovery time, ah, the new marvels of modern medicine.........by the same token, what a bad time for any player to suffer any illness or injury.

I think the PAC-10 tourney is @ Oregon and if I remember correctly, Stanford had a few problems getting past Oregon.

[This message has been edited by swok34 (edited 02-26-2002).]

[YCN]

They might lose in the conference tourney, or they might not. They won't get to the Final Four because their record has been built against nobody. I realize that Tennessee is tough, but they did beat Stanford at their place.

Of course a certain Big 12 team, not in the running for the conference championship, beat Tennessee at their house.

Not that I am complaining (which I am) but if you compare apples to oranges, and the apple is rotten, and the orange not sweet, how do you figure out what is right?

By using common sense. The voters in the polls might be very respectable names in women's basketball, but their voting is ignorant all the way.

And BTW, did anyone notice the fact that Duke lost to Toledo? And I see where the team that was second in the Big East, Notre Dame, lost to a mighty Big East foe.

I'm tired of all the politics, because there are teams out there that don't deserve the undying adulation that is being dished at them.

Our conference is about to take care of some of them, if the referees will allow fairness in the games. For all I know, having seen the polls, fairness may not be part of the equation.

[two cents]

I have mixed feelings about Stanford. I wouldn't mind seeing them lose their shot at a #1 seed. And yet, I really don't want the PAC10 to get more than one bid this year. If Stanford loses, somebody else is going.

[YCN]

Haven't you heard, twocents? The Pac-10 is going to get two bids, whether they deserve it or not (sarcasm intentional).

I would be "unseemly" to have a top-6 (just not this year) conference not get at least two bids to the dance, because the NCAA believes in the golden rule - thou shall not bite the hand that feeds you.

I could talk about something interesting and topical, such as the current political climate on Pitcairn Island, but expediency dictates that proper protocol take precedence.

And Stanford certainly fits the bill. They are going to the dance, along with one other Pac-10 team.

[two cents]

I am afraid you are right, YCN. It is probably politically necessary for the PAC10 to get two bids. In recent years, when seeding the tournament for fun, I've been able to come quite close to the committee's final results. This year I almost feel clueless. Will they follow the analytical precedents that have been established in previous years, or will they let political decisions dictate the brackets. I think I'm going to construct two versions: committee courageous and committee cowardly. After Selection Sunday, I'll compare to see which course was followed.

[YCN]

We both dream of a perfect world, don't we?

I really wish it could happen. (going to bed now, no more posts tonight)

[dem]

Look on the bright side. If Stanford gets a #1 seed, that might make it slightly easier for one of the Big 12 teams to make it to the Elite Eight, by knocking off Stanford instead of a potentially tougher team that got dropped to a #2. It's a possibility, anyway.


Most important games tonight from standpoint of Big 12 teams hosting:

Miami Fla 60
Boston College 57

Villanova 48
Notre Dame 45
[ends Notre Dame's 51-game home win streak]

BC and ND were on the list of the eight teams most likely to steal a host seed from a Big 12 team. Tonight's games are a significant blow to the likelihood of that happening. Still need to keep an eye on: La Tech, North Carolina, Old Dominion, Florida, Colorado State, and Minnesota (and possibly unranked Florida International). Unfortunately, I am rooting for Minnesota so I'm just hoping they won't displace a Big 12 team.

Debbie Antonelli, TV commentator on Fox, brought up the possibility of seven Big 12 teams hosting during the Baylor-OSU game. Seems very unlikely, sure, but if you go by the stats and the "quality wins" criteria, it's an absolutely defendable option.

Wins against top-20 RPI:

Florida: 2
Minnesota: 1
Colorado State: 1
North Carolina: 1
Old Dominion: 0
La Tech: 0

Highest RPI of these six teams: 15 (Minnesota)
Highest poll rank of these six teams: 9 (La Tech), 16 (ODU and CSU)


Wins against top-20 RPI:

Oklahoma: 7
Texas: 5
Kansas State: 5
Baylor: 4
Texas Tech: 4
Colorado: 3
Iowa State: 3

Lowest RPI of these seven teams: 16 (Colorado)
Lowest poll rank of these seven teams: 15 (Texas Tech)

After tonight's win, Colorado may jump ahead of Minnesota in RPI.


[This message has been edited by dem (edited 02-27-2002).]

[This message has been edited by dem (edited 02-27-2002).]

[This message has been edited by dem (edited 02-27-2002).]

[schooner2]

I don't know why it never dawned on me till now, but the selection committee does look very seriously at the status of injured players when seeding teams. Yamasaki is Stanford's leading scorer. If she is not ready to come back for the NCAA Tourney, this could cost them seeding wise. Is it enough to pull them all the way from a 1 to a 2? Don't know about that. Does it strengthen OU's chance at a #1 seed? Hmmmm........

[two cents]

I was proud of Antonelli for stepping up and stating that point of view so forcefully. As you say, dem, it is a defensible proposition. In fact, it will occur if the committee adheres to its principles. In principle, each team is evaluated on its own merit. Its conference provides a context for evaluation but teams are not to be hindered or helped by the evaluation of other teams within the same conference. That is to say, there is no minimum (other than automatic qualifier) or maximum number of teams that can be selected from a particular conference, nor are teams to be restricted in seeding by conference affiliation. In theory, there should be no limit to the number of subregionals granted to the teams of any particular conference if a thorough evaluation suggests that they have individually earned them.

Evidently, the SEC coaches in their conference call this week collectively insisted that their conference should receive 9 NCAA bids. I believe, having been spurred by Antonelli, the Big12 coaches should collectively insist that their conference receive 7 subregionals. I think Alabama's RPI right now is pretty iffy, but it's fine with me if the SEC gets 9 teams in provided the Big12 gets 7 host sites. Neither of the two power conferences would be in a position to complain. It would be a hot potato for the committee with the rest of the country, but 16 coaches would be satisfied!

[This message has been edited by two cents (edited 02-27-2002).]