I would not surprise me if we are not able to host. Truth be told, I hope that I am wrong, but the way things have been going for us so far, I would not be shocked. Remember the All Conference teams for the ACCT. We did not have any one on our team to make either team. Duke's starting five make one of those teams. It is just a crying shame. Based on this fact, a person can only wonder and think this is how they really feel about our team.
Bracketology
- Thread starter UNC76
- Start date
Something I’ve been wondering: would we prefer to be a 6 seed to a 5 if we’re not chosen to host?
Probably a silly hypothetical but I think with how much the top 4-5 teams have separated themselves we’d much rather play a 6 then a 2 instead of a 4/5 followed by a 1.
Thoughts?
Probably a silly hypothetical but I think with how much the top 4-5 teams have separated themselves we’d much rather play a 6 then a 2 instead of a 4/5 followed by a 1.
Thoughts?
3/6 Bracketlogists have Carolina as a 4 seed with Maryland the 5; 2 of the remaining 3 have Carolina the 5 at Maryland- the other the 5 at Minnesota.
If you're looking for match-up wise... if we are a 4/5 ceiling is probably a S16. 6 would be E8.... but a tougher game 2 if you win and a tougher 1st rd game likely.
I would usually prefer being a 6th seed, for the goal of having a decent chance at advancing beyond the S16. I think we have drawn UofSC as a 1 seed three times in the last decade, IIRC.
With that said, our ONLY two upsets in the NCAAT in the last 30 years has been us as a 5 seed beating a 4 seed. We have been upset in that span multiple times, but we have basically never punched above our weight. Before that, our title year we were a 3 seed and upset 3 teams on the way to the title.
So maybe we are overthinking it a bit...
I will say it a couple of times every year: UNC needs to schedule less games against teams ranked below 200. It is easy to beat teams in the 100 -200 range, almost zero chance of upset.
But when you play:
#316 NCCU
#211 Elon
#260 NC A&T
#277 UNCG
#285 Boston U
#329 UNCW
#331 Charleston So
(plus #245 BC, #222 SMU, #265 Pitt in your own conference)
that is 10 games against bottom feeders. It kills your SOS and there is no score we can beat them at where out NET does not take a hit. Making matters worse, we as a program value playing depth and focus on defense which makes running up the score less of a skill we have than other top teams.
Playing 10 of these negates any benefit gained by winning a solid Cancun challenge convincingly and taking our licks against #3 TX and #2 UCLA
I firmly believe that if we played, hypothetically, 5 of:
#103 College of Charleston
#112 ECU
#142 High Point
#145 Coastal Car
#153 Liberty
#162 Charlotte
#192 App State
Instead of 5 bottom dwellers we did play, we would be higher in the NET right now due to SoS and thus more squarely on the 4 seed line. same thing in 2022. And no, we are not losing any of these if UNC is a top 25 team . UVA and BC were sub 100 three years ago when they upset us on the road. That was the year we ran out of guards and ended up an 8 seed. Those are our only sub 100 losses in the last 5 years.
How much was dook harmed by playing one of the toughest OOC schedules in the country and getting waxed repeatedly? I am not saying we should do that, just be smarter on the weaklings we play.
But when you play:
#316 NCCU
#211 Elon
#260 NC A&T
#277 UNCG
#285 Boston U
#329 UNCW
#331 Charleston So
(plus #245 BC, #222 SMU, #265 Pitt in your own conference)
that is 10 games against bottom feeders. It kills your SOS and there is no score we can beat them at where out NET does not take a hit. Making matters worse, we as a program value playing depth and focus on defense which makes running up the score less of a skill we have than other top teams.
Playing 10 of these negates any benefit gained by winning a solid Cancun challenge convincingly and taking our licks against #3 TX and #2 UCLA
I firmly believe that if we played, hypothetically, 5 of:
#103 College of Charleston
#112 ECU
#142 High Point
#145 Coastal Car
#153 Liberty
#162 Charlotte
#192 App State
Instead of 5 bottom dwellers we did play, we would be higher in the NET right now due to SoS and thus more squarely on the 4 seed line. same thing in 2022. And no, we are not losing any of these if UNC is a top 25 team . UVA and BC were sub 100 three years ago when they upset us on the road. That was the year we ran out of guards and ended up an 8 seed. Those are our only sub 100 losses in the last 5 years.
How much was dook harmed by playing one of the toughest OOC schedules in the country and getting waxed repeatedly? I am not saying we should do that, just be smarter on the weaklings we play.
UNC ended up being a 6 seed not an 8 the season BC and UVA beat them.
Have you seen Maryland’s, Michigan State’s , Kentucky’s, Minnesota’s, etc. non-conf schedules? Much weaker than ours.
I would think a higher chance of being in UCONN's or UCLA's if there is a true s-curve. They are the likely overall #1 seeds. Essentially all bracketologists have us being the 16 or 17 overall seed. 1 seed should have the "weakest 4" and highest 5.
Yes, those four teams have pretty laughable non-conference SOS. But we already know they would have that luxury to a certain extent because they play in the two strongest conferences. Of course you could argue that the whole reason that some of these teams are on the hosting bubble like us is precisely because their non-conference SOS is needlessly anemic. Lets take Maryland as an example:
non-conference SOS: #259 (easily the worst among top 25 teams)
Overall SOS: #53
They played 6 sub 200 teams OOC. Continuing my argument further, if they had bothered to play a remotely respectable OOC schedule they actually would not be on the bubble right now. They would be a high 4 seed to low 3 seed just by scheduling better.
Compare UNC to ACC peers in OOC SOS:
- dook #1 (1 team below 200, #229 specifically)
- NCSU #10 (2 teams below 200) (208 & 214)
- Louisville #48 (4 teams below 200) (317, 247, 362, 276)
- ND #49 (3 teams below 200) (346, 291, 362)
- UNC #80 (7 teams below 200, 3 of which were below 300)
You raise a very good point about the schedule and the effect on seeding. This year’s team was very young so you might could argue that playing a softer schedule was a good thing to allow them time to jell. Next year that will not be the case and I would like to see some changes but it seems we have fallen into a pattern of playing some of the weaker in State schools each year so I would not be surprised if the schedule is similar.
I have been whining about this for 4 years now. It is an ongoing trend. To be clear, I don't necessarily have issue with a soft schedule. I think building a schedule around playing top 5 teams (almost guaranteed losses) and bottom 100 teams (fully negates any SOS gains from playing those top 5 teams) is not strategically smart. You can build a schedule with just as many easy wins that fares better in the metrics and provides a decent chance of winning every game.
I think this year, truth be told, was a down year for our conference as a whole for women's basketball. I think the general perception is from a media and analyst stand point that our teams are not as strong as a whole as they have been in the past. This rationale is probably based on how our teams perform against the SEC during the challenge as well as the number of teams from our conference that has been ranked. During the SEC challenge, I think the disparity between wins and loses was like 13 to 3. The SEC teams won 13 games where as the ACC only won 3. Since these games were televised and the whole world was able to see them, it made our conference appear to be weak to those who were able to watch. Also, having only 2 to 4 teams ranked throughout the whole season did not help as well. IMO this is the perception that is all there and this is why I think we are having a hard time getting more teams hosting. Duke should clearly be a number 2 seed by winning the ACCT and the ACC conference. There is no way them and Louisville should be seeded the same. We should be hosting as a 4 seed. Based on the information presented above, there is no way Minnesota and Maryland should be ahead of us. We shall see Sunday how the vote comes out. I hope I am wrong and we do get a 4 seed. This is my two cents worth.
So this has probably been hashed and rehashed before on this message board or the previous one and apologies if I just missed it, but I wonder if as the flagship public university in the UNC system is there an expectation/understanding that we will host/schedule a certain number of UNC system schools in WBB?
To get exposure you have to play in these mini early season game events like we did this year against UCLA. We also have the SEC/ACC challenge where we are going to get a top 10 team every year.
Women's hoops have budget issues. Local mid majors want to play close to home. We also probably pay them to come. But, I agree. We should be playing higher ranked local mid majors instead of NC A&T, NC Central, etc.
Women's hoops have budget issues. Local mid majors want to play close to home. We also probably pay them to come. But, I agree. We should be playing higher ranked local mid majors instead of NC A&T, NC Central, etc.
A portion of SOS is luck of the draw. It's almost impossible to know what teams will look like from one year to the next. Two obvious examples are UNCG and NC A&T. They were 143 and 152 in the NET last year vs 297 and 255 this year. While they aren't part of the OOC schedule. BC is another example... 142 vs 272. OTOH, there is really no reason to be scheduling teams like Boston University or Charleston Southern.
Good point. I am indeed applying a good amount of hindsight bias here.
I totally agree but I have to remember what happened to FSU in football two years ago. How they got screwed for the college playoffs although they were the only undefeated team and two SEC teams leap frogged over them. This is a prime example on how little the committe respects the ACC. If we do not host, I will not be surprised or upset because I expect this bias against our school.
More hoops at home!! Let's go fill up Carmichael!
Wowie!!!! Way to go team!!!
Such a huge accomplishment. Now get in the gym and zero in your shots from your favorite spots
on the court and lets show everyone how good we can be !!!
Go Tar Heel WBB !
Such a huge accomplishment. Now get in the gym and zero in your shots from your favorite spots
on the court and lets show everyone how good we can be !!!
Go Tar Heel WBB !
So we will get Kentucky, Maryland, or Mich St. Surprised Minn is hosting.
The standard has been raised. Credit to CB, staff and players. Now it's our turn to make this a game changing home atmosphere for our Heels.
Boy the rest of the WBB world is mad about the Heels getting a top 16 spot https://www.reddit.com/r/NCAAW/s/1WoPZKXWcQ
The heck with the rest of the basketball world. Lol. Go Heels !
We got there the old fashion way/ We earned it!
We got there the old fashion way/ We earned it!
They just confirm what we already knew. There are a lot of UNC haters out there no matter what sport it is. Oh well, that is their problem. As the old saying goes, you cannot please everybody. I am just glad that we did not get screwed. Lastly, Maryland and Kentucky both lost early in their tournament. We lost in the semi-rounds. That is the difference.