I guess it's never too early for these. Charlie Creme just released his first bracket since the season ended. He has us hosting as the 3 seed in one of the Sacramento regionals, with Texas as our #1 seed. Surprisingly, at least to me, is the wolpfack is the highest ACC seed, getting a 2 seed. He has 13 Big Ten, 11 ACC and 9 SEC teams in the field, with UNC, dook, ND, Louisville and wolpfack all hosting.
Bracketology
- Thread starter UNC76
- Start date
Why is it surprising that the wuffies are ranked highly? They seem like they may be the team to beat in the ACC this season, as much as I hate to say it. They really reloaded with Pierre
Last edited:
Pierre is indeed great, but much like us, they lose probably their 3 best players. Definitely 3 of their best 4.
NCSU finished last year ranked 15th by RPI, but 9th in the AP Poll despite a mild upset in the round of 16. That top 10 finish seemed high. Yet Creme has NCSU moving up to a top being a top 8 team as a 2 seed. Is Pierre that good?
Of course you can make the same arguments about UNC: the 3 seed seems high considering our losses.
We are seeing the attrition across the NCAA associated with the last COVID year class graduating at the same time as the first post-COVID 4th year seniors, so maybe our attrition and NCSU's attrition, looks like everyone else's attrition too? I am not tracking these top 25 team rosters to see how much everyone else is also losing.
That is the only explanation I can see.
Look folks, do not get caught up in the Pre-seasoning predictions. They games will have to be played on the court. If we go out there and take care of business than they stuff won't matter. CB said it best, we have to win all of our games and take one game at a time. If we do that than who knows where this team will be seated when tournament time comes.
ESPN's Preseason rankings just came out:
www.espn.com
Women's college basketball Preseason Top 25 for 2025-26
The reigning champ and runner-up are 1-2. Which teams round out the rest, and which transfer highlights each roster?
www.espn.com
- UConn
- UofSC
- UCLA
- TX
- LSU
- OK
- TN
- NCSU
- dook
- MD
- UNC
- Miss
- IA St
- ND
- MI
- 'ville
- USC
- Baylor
- Richmond
- IA
- TCU
- OK St
- MI St
- Vandy
- WA
Dook returns more than anyone in the ACC: a 1st team ACC, a 2nd team ACC, and a defensive teamer, plus the highest ranked recruit. They won the ACCT, knocked us out of the NCAAT, and played UofSc pretty tight in the elite 8.
NCSU and UNC both lost 3 of their 4 best players but both retain a 2nd teamer and on paper have added more quality than anyone. Basically a toss up. NCSU probably grabbed the best transfer. UNC has a much better recruiting class. I would argue UNC has more upside and more depth, but NCSU probably got the nod simply by doing just a little bit more last season By winning the ACC regular season, knocking us out of the ACCT, and earning a 2 seed.
that Is probably the extent of what a national media pollster sees.
NCSU and UNC both lost 3 of their 4 best players but both retain a 2nd teamer and on paper have added more quality than anyone. Basically a toss up. NCSU probably grabbed the best transfer. UNC has a much better recruiting class. I would argue UNC has more upside and more depth, but NCSU probably got the nod simply by doing just a little bit more last season By winning the ACC regular season, knocking us out of the ACCT, and earning a 2 seed.
that Is probably the extent of what a national media pollster sees.
Last edited:
One thing I'd look for with Dook... they return Jackson and Fournier as their big two. Thomas is an avg big. Donovan is an avg player with zero range- great athlete. Mair is an avg player, not going to beat you offensively. They add Skinner. But what does the depth look like? They return 2 ACLs that haven't played in over a year- highly ranked out of HS. Did not add anyone of any importance via portal.
Lose All-ACC Richardson and a 1,000 pt scorer
Lose arguably their best do-it-all player in Okwana, best defender
Lose back-up PG VDJ
If those two returning from injury do not go back to pre-form (one has never stepped on the college court and RS as a FR), then there is literally zero depth. They will struggle offensively again and will have a ton of "rock fights" each night.
I definitely agree that UNC easily wins the depth argument against any ACC contender, barring injuries.
With that said, dook and NCSU have entered most of the last 3 seasons with depth and "who will step up?" concerns, and almost always they have found the way to compete at the top level. So I am not going to bet against them again, even though it is clear that their margin for error is slim.
These are all good points. I am cool with the standings for now. We will just have to go out there and beat those two. This year is going to be fun and exciting. I also like that the top ACC teams being ranked are from NC and they are representing the triangle area. Go Heels!
The Triangle is the true epicenter of NCAA Women's Basketball once again.
Map of the top 20 schools in pink:
updated Bracketology as of yesterday- yes it is very early but still fun to look at. The ACC with just one host... us.
Carolina- 3 seed
Notre Dame- 5 seed
Louisville- 6 seed
Small gym- 7 seed
Stanford- 8 seed
Miami- 10 seed; last 4 byes
Syracuse- 11 seed; last 4 in
UVA- 11 seed; last 4 in
Duke is not on the board or the first 8 out.
Louisville is ranked a little low for me. With a Top 15 NET and Top 25 ranking; they should be a 4/5 IMO.
Carolina- 3 seed
Notre Dame- 5 seed
Louisville- 6 seed
Small gym- 7 seed
Stanford- 8 seed
Miami- 10 seed; last 4 byes
Syracuse- 11 seed; last 4 in
UVA- 11 seed; last 4 in
Duke is not on the board or the first 8 out.
Louisville is ranked a little low for me. With a Top 15 NET and Top 25 ranking; they should be a 4/5 IMO.
Women's Bracketology: Five contenders -- and everyone else
UConn, Texas, South Carolina and UCLA remain 1-seeds -- and LSU is the only real challenger behind them.
www.espn.com
Will UNC76, looking at the bracket right now does mean a blank right now. If we do not start to beat or get a Quad 1 win then this team is going to be like the men's team was last year. There are two many similarities between the women's teams this year and the men's teams of last year. Here are some stats to indicate what I just said. The men's team went 2-14 in the SEC / ACC challenge last year. The men's team did not have too many teams in the conference to help out with Quad 1 wins since the men's team had a down year as a whole. The women's teams this year went 3-13 in the SEC / ACC challenge. The women's teams does not have too many teams in the conference this year to help out with Quad 1 wins since our women's teams are down this year as a whole. Our men's team did not have any Quad 1 wins last year and right now our women's team does not have any Quad 1 wins as of today. I think you get the picture now. If we continue this trend and we do not get any Quad 1 wins when facing the few teams in our conference that will hep out with Quad 1 wins then this team might not make it to the tournament. So like I said, we cannot worry about what Charlie Creme is putting out until this team can prove that it can win against Quad 1 teams.
I started the Quad 1 conversation so obviously I mostly agree with you. We will have few opportunities for Quad 1 wins and all the ones left will likely be road games.
But you can't compare the men's and women's game; they do not use the same quad system. If you used the Men's quad system we would actually have 2 quad 1 wins already right now and significantly more available in ACC play later.
And we are talking about the men's ability to get off the bubble at all last season versus the women getting a home court series. We currently slate as a 5 seed at worst. The men's team did not ever get off the bubble and were a bit controversial to make the tourney at all getting the last spot in the First Four play-in round as an 11 seed.
Not the same thing.
I was comparing what happen last you with the men's teams in the ACC and this years' women's teams as far the entire conference is concerned. I think you misunderstood me. Last year for the men's teams there were very few men's teams that was considered to be Quad 1 wins for the conference as a whole. I think it was like four that the committee considered to be Quad 1 wins. This is why a lot of people felt like our men's team should not have made it in the tournament because they did not have any Quad 1 wins. Last night as you watched the game against UNCW, they stated the same thing. There are only four Quad 1 wins to be earned as a conference. The four teams that we have not played yet which are considered to be Quad 1 wins will be against Stanford, VA, ND, and NC State. This is very similar to what happened on the men's side last year. That is the point that I was talking about. This is why we have to win those four games. As of today, our women's team does not have any Quad 1 wins.
For those that don't realize the significant difference in the quad criteria for MBB vs WBB:
And a couple more stats:
Women: just 29 teams in WBB have a Q1 win and it is Christmas. As we break that down even more 23/29 teams have just 1 Q1 win. The only teams with more? Texas and UCLA with 4 each, UCONN with 3, and Maryland, South Carolina, and Fairfield (yes, that Fairfield team from Cancun) with 2 each.
Men: 49 total teams have a Q1 win; 20 teams have greater than 2 Q1 wins (more than 3x WBB)
There are tremendous more opportunities in the men's game. Many WBB coaches have issued complaints to the NCAA for reasoning behind that dramatic of a shift in quad criteria from last year.
- Quadrant 1 (Best Wins/Losses):
- Home: NET Ranks 1-25 Women; 1-30 Men
- Neutral: NET Ranks 1-35 Women; 1-50 Men
- Away: NET Ranks 1-45 Women; 1-75 Men
- Quadrant 2:
- Home: NET Ranks 26-55 Women; 31-75 Men
- Neutral: NET Ranks 36-55 Women; 51-100 Men
- Away: NET Ranks 46-80 Women; 76-135 Men
- Quadrant 3:
- Home: NET Ranks 56-90 Women; 76-160 Men
- Neutral: NET Ranks 66-105 Women; 101-200 Men
- Away: NET Ranks 81-130 Women; 136-240 Men
- Quadrant 4 (Worst Wins/Losses):
- Home: NET Ranks 91+ Women; 161-353+ Men
- Neutral: NET Ranks 106 Women; 201-353+ Men
- Away: NET Ranks 131+ Women; 241-353+ Men
And a couple more stats:
Women: just 29 teams in WBB have a Q1 win and it is Christmas. As we break that down even more 23/29 teams have just 1 Q1 win. The only teams with more? Texas and UCLA with 4 each, UCONN with 3, and Maryland, South Carolina, and Fairfield (yes, that Fairfield team from Cancun) with 2 each.
Men: 49 total teams have a Q1 win; 20 teams have greater than 2 Q1 wins (more than 3x WBB)
There are tremendous more opportunities in the men's game. Many WBB coaches have issued complaints to the NCAA for reasoning behind that dramatic of a shift in quad criteria from last year.
Everything that you said I agree with; therefore, because the men's teams have more opportunities for Quad 1 wins than the women's teams, it is crucial that we win these games. The Louisville game is going to hurt. We only have 4 more chances now moving forward to get a Quad 1 win. That is why making layups, making FT's, and not making careless turnovers are going to be crucial as we had into ACC play. Also, we cannot let one of the bottom teams in the Conference beat us, then we could be a bubble team. We have to beat BC bottom line. A lost to them will definitely hurt. I think we all remember the last time we went up there and go beat in their gym. This cannot happened.