I mean, maybe--but doesn't UCONN seem even more removed from the other teams now than in years past?
Certainly, but I don't know if that is indicative of a growing depth of talent. I'll preface this by saying that I don't know/pay attention very much to the women's game, but it seems to me that while UCONN manages to assemble the deepest team every year, but that seems more circumstantial to me. Often times the best player in the country plays for another school, and while UCONN has had players like Dianna Tarausi, Maya Moore and Breanna Stewart, over the years there have been some top players playing at all different schools (Brittany Griner at Baylor, Kelsey Plum at Washington, Seimone Augustas at LSU, Lindsay Harding at Duke, Skyler Diggins at Notre Dame, Ellena Della Donne at Delaware, Candace Parker at Tennessee, etc.) Eventually, maybe when Geno retires you would see that UCONN system broken up and the players that make up that great depth will be more evenly dispersed.
However, that is a micro issue. The larger problem is that there seems to be an enormous gap between the top 20 or so teams and everyone else. Part of the reason I think is that the NCAA has way too many teams in D-1. With over 350 teams and two dozen conferences, you are going to have big gaps in quality, even if you are pinning the conference champion of one small conference against the seventh best team in a Power 5 conference. There is always going to be a gap because there is never going to be that much talent available, but the men's game has closed the gap between the mid-majors and the power conferences for a couple different reasons.
1. The three pointer has become a great equalizer. A less-talented team can stay close with a giant if they have a couple players get hot and make up for a gap in size and athleticism. This I suppose could take place in the women's game, although I don't know if they shoot three pointers at the right percentages to make as much of a difference as it does in the men's game.
2. International players, at all schools, has increased the amount of talent available. Guys like Ben Simmons, Domantis Sabonis and Lauri Markakenn have come over to play college ball and been top players. Even the small schools in the tournament sometimes have international players, and programs like Gonzaga and St. Mary's have become national power teams because of their commitment to recruiting outside the US. The women's game is still developing overseas, and while Title IX and everything has been great at developing female athletes in the US, only a handful of other countries (Australia, Canada, Germany, etc.) have really matched their commitment to female athletes. For instance, the Baltic countries love basketball, but to my knowledge women's college basketball isn't being flooded with Serbian and Croatian players.
3. Perhaps the biggest reason is that to my knowledge, there are not many if any at all, one-and-done women's players. Part of the reason the Men's tournament has been so competitive is that the traditional powerful programs rely on one-and-done players so much that they can struggle in the tournament against less-heralded programs because they often have veteran players (see Duke vs SC last night). I suppose if you look at the recruiting quality of UCONN's women and compared it to Kentucky's men, they probably look kind of similar, but Kentucky hasn't dominated college basketball because they are almost always starting 3-4 freshmen while UCONN has all those great players for the duration of their college careers.