confused - please help

[trb123]

I read here and elsewhere that SEC is a weak WCBB conference. How did 8 SEC teams make the tournament?

 

[Vowelguy]

SEC has been weak over past few years. Many of the comments were from that. But the conference was better this year.

Also, it didn't have as many great teams but a bunch of decent teams, thus leading to 8 invitations.

 

[Biff]

I read here and elsewhere that SEC is a weak WCBB conference. How did 8 SEC teams make the tournament?

It's a down year in WCBB....;-)

 

[RockyMTblue2]

It's a down year in WCBB....;-)

I would argue Biff that the statement did not need the wink. It has been a down year in WCBB. We have seen some truly ridiculous stuff transpire and Geno has said as much and pointed to a change, in general, in this generation of WCBBers that is not flattering.

 

[Vowelguy]

It has been a down year in WCBB.

?

 

[RockyMTblue2]

?

O'Kay, it's been an up year in WCBB. I'm too tired to defend my statement, save in the most general terms. I'm a fan of WCBB, yet I have turned off more games this year out of their painful unwatchability than I ever have before. Some of these match ups, flogged admireably by the game game announcers fiercely clutching their mikes and ernestly announcing the desparate struggle you are about to witness, have looked more like intramural soccer among 9 year olds. I am not talking about games in the top 10-20, but the layer beneath. It's a thick layer I wish was getting thinner, but I don't think it is.

 

[ThisJustIn]

Parity sucks. The fact that traditionally "power" teams get upset simply show that the women's game hasn't grown. It's not as interesting as the men's game, where everyone knows who's going to win. That level of comfort and security adds to the overall excitement of the fanbase.

This year in women's basketball has stunk. I mean, all those dang upsets. Ridiculous. And those mid-majors? Who do they think they are, horning in with the big guys.

I can't wait until next year when women's basketball is up and none of this stuff is happening any more. Much more interesting. That's why I read the end of mysteries first.

***
Oh, and Dawn made an interesting comment on the Debbie and Beth podcast - she said a couple of Committee folks had come down and called them out on their weak out of conference schedule. Ya, you beat up on yourselves, but you've got to boost your out of conf sched or you ain't getting teams in.

Someone would have to look at last year v. this year to assess the impact.

 

[alexrgct]

I'd argue that this has been a down year for WCBB. Stanford cruised to a #1 seed despite not being as good as it's been the past couple of years. UConn was upset by SJU...but that said more about UConn this year than SJU. When UConn played within the remote vicinity of its game, it obliterated SJU. It's not like SJU beat Maya Moore and Tina Charles. Notre Dame? Maybe marginally better than last year, really. Tennessee and Duke? Worse. Miami? About the same? Green Bay? Slightly worse. Marist? Worse. DePaul? Worse. UNC? Worse. Much worse. A&M and OU? Worse. UCLA? Worse. So, who's better? Maryland, definitely. Delaware. And a bunch of SEC teams- Kentucky, LSU, South Carolina, Vandy, and Arkansas are all somewhat improved over last year. Florida might be as well (don't remember a thing about their 2010-11 season, this season's been memorable for a bunch of painful close losses). But other than Kentucky, Delaware, and Maryland, they haven't improved to "top 10" kind of teams, and even the UK/UD/MD trio hasn't replaced what we had last year with the sextet of UConn, Baylor, Tennessee, Stanford, A&M, and ND.

Baylor has stepped up, and has a very real chance of going 40-0, but absolutely nothing about how they'd have gone about it reminds me of UConn 2002, 2009, or 2010. Just not as consistent or dominant.

Personally, I think parity does suck. I loved the NBA in the 1980s, where 2/3 of the league was pretty miserable and the top was really special. Football? Again, who will remember a contemporary NFL team like people remember the 1985 Bears or the 1989 49ers? Baseball? Does anyone really think the Cardinals were close to the best team in MLB last year?

I believe the last thing WCBB needs is parity. People loved to ask the "Is UConn bad for the sport?" question during the 90 game win streak. Ratings and level of mainstream news coverage answered that question definitively to the negative. Ask the NBA how ratings have been since Jordan left the Bulls in 1998. During the Bulls' run, people asked if their dominance was bad for the NBA. You might have loved the Yankees of the late 1990s, or you may have loved to hate them, but you certainly had an opinion if you followed baseball at all. Tiger? Great for golf when he was winning.

People follow sports for a number of reasons, and certainly the suspense of a close game is one of them. But even stronger an impulse is an affinity to pure, measurable, perceptible, tantalizingly almost tangible, greatness. Greatness is something in short supply in this world, but greatness captures the imagination, creates communities to be built around it, makes us appreciate that we're witnessing something unique and special.

This year in WCBB has not been one with a ton of greatness. Whether you consider the resulting relative parity indicative of a good year or a bad one is obviously an inidividual opinion. In my estimation, however, it's bunk. I look forward to UConn steamrolling the field in 2014, and it won't just be because I'm a fan. I'm rooting for that group of girls to evoke memories of Maya and Tina and Diana and Sue and Svet and Rebecca...and maybe even show a jaded and entitled communit of UConn supporters something they've never seen before.

 

[stwainfan]

I follow the SEC! The SEC has 7 teams this year with 20 wins. There were some teams like Arkansas, LSU and South Carolina that got better. Over all it's a better confrence.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

I'd argue that this has been a down year for WCBB. Stanford cruised to a #1 seed despite not being as good as it's been the past couple of years. UConn was upset by SJU...but that said more about UConn this year than SJU. When UConn played within the remote vicinity of its game, it obliterated SJU. It's not like SJU beat Maya Moore and Tina Charles. Notre Dame? Maybe marginally better than last year, really. Tennessee and Duke? Worse. Miami? About the same? Green Bay? Slightly worse. Marist? Worse. DePaul? Worse. UNC? Worse. Much worse. A&M and OU? Worse. UCLA? Worse. So, who's better? Maryland, definitely. Delaware. And a bunch of SEC teams- Kentucky, LSU, South Carolina, Vandy, and Arkansas are all somewhat improved over last year. Florida might be as well (don't remember a thing about their 2010-11 season, this season's been memorable for a bunch of painful close losses). But other than Kentucky, Delaware, and Maryland, they haven't improved to "top 10" kind of teams, and even the UK/UD/MD trio hasn't replaced what we had last year with the sextet of UConn, Baylor, Tennessee, Stanford, A&M, and ND.

Baylor has stepped up, and has a very real chance of going 40-0, but absolutely nothing about how they'd have gone about it reminds me of UConn 2002, 2009, or 2010. Just not as consistent or dominant.

Personally, I think parity does suck. I loved the NBA in the 1980s, where 2/3 of the league was pretty miserable and the top was really special. Football? Again, who will remember a contemporary NFL team like people remember the 1985 Bears or the 1989 49ers? Baseball? Does anyone really think the Cardinals were close to the best team in MLB last year? Ditto.

I believe the last thing WCBB needs is parity. People loved to ask the "Is UConn bad for the sport?" question during the 90 game win streak. Ratings and level of mainstream news coverage answered that question definitively to the negative. Ask the NBA how ratings have been since Jordan left the Bulls in 1998. During the Bulls' run, people asked if their dominance was bad for the NBA. You might have loved the Yankees of the late 1990s, or you may have loved to hate them, but you certainly had an opinion if you followed baseball at all. Tiger? Great for golf when he was winning. Ditto

People follow sports for a number of reasons, and certainly the suspense of a close game is one of them. But even stronger an impulse is an affinity to pure, measurable, perceptible, tantalizingly almost tangible, greatness. Greatness is something in short supply in this world, but greatness captures the imagination, creates communities to be built around it, makes us appreciate that we're witnessing something unique and special. Ditto

This year in WCBB has not been one with a ton of greatness. Whether you consider the resulting relative parity indicative of a good year or a bad one is obviously an inidividual opinion. In my estimation, however, it's bunk. I look forward to UConn steamrolling the field in 2014, and it won't just be because I'm a fan. I'm rooting for that group of girls to evoke memories of Maya and Tina and Diana and Sue and Svet and Rebecca...and maybe even show a jaded and entitled communit of UConn supporters something they've never seen before.

Ditto

Pulitizer Prize here folks! Rock on alex, rock on.

 

[ThisJustIn]

If you're going to look at Stanford rolling as an indication of the year overall, I can't help you - the Pac 10+2 is pffft.

Baylor hasn't been great? (there's no parity. how many times was it said "there's UConn an then there's everyone else. Others say that now and UConn fans get their knickers in a twist) EDD hasn't been great? (Sure, no one's seen her, but no one saw Jackie either.)

I appreciate you wanting UConn to steamroll. Most UConn fans want that.

But, I get cranky when folks dismiss all the great stories and strides that have made up this season. I've paid attention to a lot of them, and it's been great! Setting up, I hope, the next stage of evolution for the women's game, where everyone raises the bar.

Hmmm... sounds familiar.... Challenging other coaches to raise the bar. Sounds like something an Italian should say.

 

[DaddyChoc]

If you're going to look at Stanford rolling as an indication of the year overall, I can't help you - the Pac 10+2 is pffft.

Baylor hasn't been great? (there's no parity. how many times was it said "there's UConn an then there's everyone else. Others say that now and UConn fans get their knickers in a twist) EDD hasn't been great? (Sure, no one's seen her, but no one saw Jackie either.)

I appreciate you wanting UConn to steamroll. Most UConn fans want that.

But, I get cranky when folks dismiss all the great stories and strides that have made up this season. I've paid attention to a lot of them, and it's been great! Setting up, I hope, the next stage of evolution for the women's game, where everyone raises the bar.

Hmmm... sounds familiar.... Challenging other coaches to raise the bar. Sounds like something an Italian should say.

well said... Pulitzer Prize winner here!

 

[HuskyNan]

I'd argue that this has been a down year for WCBB. Stanford cruised to a #1 seed despite not being as good as it's been the past couple of years. UConn was upset by SJU...but that said more about UConn this year than SJU. When UConn played within the remote vicinity of its game, it obliterated SJU. It's not like SJU beat Maya Moore and Tina Charles.

I've got to disagree with you here but let me give you my definition of parity before I go on - it means that any team can win on any given night. It doesn't mean that SJU has suddenly become a major power overnight, but it does mean that the Johnnies have gotten better as a team to the point where they can beat anyone if they play as well as they can and the other team (if a Baylor, UConn, ND, etc) doesn't play their A game. SJU gave Baylor a scare for a half - without Da'Shena Stevens. When UConn played its B game against the Johnnies, it got beat. That's because St. John's parity has made it a team that demands the other program's best effort.

True parity, to me, means that the top teams can't just show up and go through the motions any more. They've got to work to win games now. This is how it is in the men's game. The UConn guys are really good and when they play their best they can beat anyone but when they don't, they lose. That's parity.

Some UConn's women's fans may dislike that our team doesn't just blow out all the opponents these days but I think it's great. Closer, more exciting games - or at least games that are in doubt for a half - make for more interesting viewing, IMO.

 

[RadyLady]

well said... Pulitzer Prize winner here!

I agree - and I like TJI's first post, too !!! Do they give Pulitzer's for satire?

 

[DaddyChoc]

Some UConn's women's fans may dislike that our team doesn't just blow out all the opponents these days but I think it's great. Closer, more exciting games - or at least games that are in doubt for a half - make for more interesting viewing, IMO.

very interesting viewing, atleast for me

 

[Sonny44]

I'd argue that this has been a down year for WCBB. Stanford cruised to a #1 seed despite not being as good as it's been the past couple of years. UConn was upset by SJU...but that said more about UConn this year than SJU. When UConn played within the remote vicinity of its game, it obliterated SJU. It's not like SJU beat Maya Moore and Tina Charles. Notre Dame? Maybe marginally better than last year, really. Tennessee and Duke? Worse. Miami? About the same? Green Bay? Slightly worse. Marist? Worse. DePaul? Worse. UNC? Worse. Much worse. A&M and OU? Worse. UCLA? Worse. So, who's better? Maryland, definitely. Delaware. And a bunch of SEC teams- Kentucky, LSU, South Carolina, Vandy, and Arkansas are all somewhat improved over last year. Florida might be as well (don't remember a thing about their 2010-11 season, this season's been memorable for a bunch of painful close losses). But other than Kentucky, Delaware, and Maryland, they haven't improved to "top 10" kind of teams, and even the UK/UD/MD trio hasn't replaced what we had last year with the sextet of UConn, Baylor, Tennessee, Stanford, A&M, and ND.

Baylor has stepped up, and has a very real chance of going 40-0, but absolutely nothing about how they'd have gone about it reminds me of UConn 2002, 2009, or 2010. Just not as consistent or dominant.

Personally, I think parity does suck. I loved the NBA in the 1980s, where 2/3 of the league was pretty miserable and the top was really special. Football? Again, who will remember a contemporary NFL team like people remember the 1985 Bears or the 1989 49ers? Baseball? Does anyone really think the Cardinals were close to the best team in MLB last year?

I believe the last thing WCBB needs is parity. People loved to ask the "Is UConn bad for the sport?" question during the 90 game win streak. Ratings and level of mainstream news coverage answered that question definitively to the negative. Ask the NBA how ratings have been since Jordan left the Bulls in 1998. During the Bulls' run, people asked if their dominance was bad for the NBA. You might have loved the Yankees of the late 1990s, or you may have loved to hate them, but you certainly had an opinion if you followed baseball at all. Tiger? Great for golf when he was winning.

People follow sports for a number of reasons, and certainly the suspense of a close game is one of them. But even stronger an impulse is an affinity to pure, measurable, perceptible, tantalizingly almost tangible, greatness. Greatness is something in short supply in this world, but greatness captures the imagination, creates communities to be built around it, makes us appreciate that we're witnessing something unique and special.

This year in WCBB has not been one with a ton of greatness. Whether you consider the resulting relative parity indicative of a good year or a bad one is obviously an inidividual opinion. In my estimation, however, it's bunk. I look forward to UConn steamrolling the field in 2014, and it won't just be because I'm a fan. I'm rooting for that group of girls to evoke memories of Maya and Tina and Diana and Sue and Svet and Rebecca...and maybe even show a jaded and entitled communit of UConn supporters something they've never seen before.

But greatness isn't necessarily great when week in and week out you're beating a different bunch of ragamuffins by 40 points. Greatness to me means overcoming struggles and adversity. And it must be sustainable, not just a flash in the pan like TAMU last year.
An analogy might be who had the greater dynasty, Pat or Geno? One could argue that Pat accomplished her's earlier when there was less emphasis on women in college sports, whereas in the middle of Geno's dynasty there are plenty of programs that are concentrating on WCBB. This may not be the best example. Wooden at UCLA is similar. Others in football, the early great Army and ND teams. This is not to say that Pat and John were not great coaches; they played the best around and beat them. What would Ali have been without Frasier?
In other words, to be considered great you need great competition. That's why we should appreciate ND, Stanford and Baylor and help build other programs as well. If we don't beat them we'll not be considered great.

 

[DobbsRover2]

There is a huge amount of relativity swirling around the "in the eye of the beholder" view of the WCBB. That the SEC was a little stronger overall than last year can affect a perception of the WCBB just as much as that the PAC is arguably at its weakest ever overall or that for the first time a team enters the tourney at 34-0. When you ask the question of whether it is an up year or down year in the WCBB, it realistically has to done by looking at the performance of more than 300 teams over the course of a long season, and there is no stat or any spectator who has the capability to have viewed 5000 games and can offer an expert analysis of what she saw (well okay, maybe we could give Lobo a crack). Does the fact that UConn has so many steals this year mean that their play is up, the ball-handling of opponents is bad, or that UConn has changed its defensive strategy a little?

Although Geno is god, I would not give him full credence about the state of WCBB play partially because he sees only a small portion of the games and also that the Huskies' own less dominating performance this year may have given him a few exasperated knocks to the head, like another god who may sometimes flub the catch on his returning hammer and get a beaner bonking. For what it's worth, when I was doing a quick comparison of the stats for the 2004 team vs the 2012 team, I was amazed how much better this year's team comes out. Maybe the UConn opposition was better back in 2004, but I just don't remember it that way.

 

[easttexastrash]

I will have to say that when I watched the UCONN vs Stanford game early in the year that my first thought was "these are the number 2 and 3 ranked teams in the nation?" It was a fairly painful game to watch, and these were the top teams playing. Obviously, it was early in the year but it was one of those games that the average fan would have turned off.

I watched another game recently that had some fairly high ranked teams (can't even remember which ones) and the offense was so pathetic that I actually did turn the game off. I just couldn't watch it. Sometimes I just can't believe that there are Div I players who cannot shoot the ball better than they do, even on some of the top-ranked teams.

I think this year is a bit down, talent-wise. There are a few REALLY good players and then a group of so-so players. I doubt that the WNBA is salivating over this year's crop. This is another reason that I think UCONN's incoming class next year will have such a huge impact. They could probably step in for any team and put that team in the top 4 in the nation.

 

[DobbsRover2]

I will have to say that when I watched the UCONN vs Stanford game early in the year that my first thought was "these are the number 2 and 3 ranked teams in the nation?" It was a fairly painful game to watch, and these were the top teams playing. Obviously, it was early in the year but it was one of those games that the average fan would have turned off.

I watched another game recently that had some fairly high ranked teams (can't even remember which ones) and the offense was so pathetic that I actually did turn the game off. I just couldn't watch it. Sometimes I just can't believe that there are Div I players who cannot shoot the ball better than they do, even on some of the top-ranked teams.

I think this year is a bit down, talent-wise. There are a few REALLY good players and then a group of so-so players. I doubt that the WNBA is salivating over this year's crop. This is another reason that I think UCONN's incoming class next year will have such a huge impact. They could probably step in for any team and put that team in the top 4 in the nation.

Not saying you are wrong, but you are going on a small set of examples from those cited. The 2010 NC game had many here on the BY saying that WCBB's image had been crushed because of the performances of the two top defensive teams in the country. Both scoring and FG% seem to be down for WCBB this year by about 1 ppg per team and 0.5% per team from last year, but is that also related to teams becoming better defensively. UConn and Baylor are examples of teams that have stepped their defense way up this year. That's not a stat to be disparaged, considering how much grief teams like MD have gotten over the years for powder-puffy D.

Maybe it's true that lower-level coaches are beginning to ruin the next generation of players by ordering HSers to play 4-corner offenses for single-digit scores or having 5 3rd-graders swarm the girl with the ball so that nobody learns any fundamentals, but until I see significantly valid data, I'm skeptical. There's too many good players in the WCBB to make me think that just because Maya graduated, all we out on the court is chopped liver.

 

[easttexastrash]

Not saying you are wrong, but you are going on a small set of examples from those cited. The 2010 NC game had many here on the BY saying that WCBB's image had been crushed because of the performances of the two top defensive teams in the country. Both scoring FG% seem to be down for WCBB this year by about 1 ppg per team and 0.5% per team from last year, but is that also related to teams becoming better defensively. UConn and Baylor are examples of teams that have stepped their defense way up this year. That's not a stat to be disparaged, considering how much grief teams like MD have gotten over the years for powder-puffy D.

Maybe it's true that lower-level coaches are beginning to ruin the next generation of players by ordering HSers to play 4-corner offenses for single-digit scores or having 5 3rd-graders swarm the girl with the ball so that nobody learns any fundamentals, but until I see significantly valid data, I'm skeptical. There's too many good players in the WCBB to make me think that just because Maya graduated, all we out on the court is chopped liver.

I've watched a LOT of games, and I can say that the shooting by some of the players is embarrassing and I think "yep, this is why most male fans of the men's game will not watch women's games." UCONN made ND feel rushed in that last game, but ND looked pathetic on offense, missing wide open shots and layups, repeatedly.

 

[magic]

I've got to disagree with you here but let me give you my definition of parity before I go on - it means that any team can win on any given night. It doesn't mean that SJU has suddenly become a major power overnight, but it does mean that the Johnnies have gotten better as a team to the point where they can beat anyone if they play as well as they can and the other team (if a Baylor, UConn, ND, etc) doesn't play their A game. SJU gave Baylor a scare for a half - without Da'Shena Stevens. When UConn played its B game against the Johnnies, it got beat. That's because St. John's parity has made it a team that demands the other program's best effort.

True parity, to me, means that the top teams can't just show up and go through the motions any more. They've got to work to win games now. This is how it is in the men's game. The UConn guys are really good and when they play their best they can beat anyone but when they don't, they lose. That's parity.

Some UConn's women's fans may dislike that our team doesn't just blow out all the opponents these days but I think it's great. Closer, more exciting games - or at least games that are in doubt for a half - make for more interesting viewing, IMO.

I have to agree with everything you said Nan. I think my problem with WCBB this year is it has failed my eye test. Star power is way down . Yes, more teams are capable of winning on a given night than in the past, but only because even the best teams are not as strong as in the past. This will be a relatively weak all american group, except for a couple of names. There have also been a lot of injuries , that will hurt some teams. St.john's a good example. Of course that is part of the game every year. I can't tell you how many games I've started watching this year, and just turned off due to poor play by both teams. I also believe moving the 3pt. line back has hurt the women's game this year. I would have rather seen the 3pt.line remain the same, and force a ten second rule over half court.

 

[DobbsRover2]

I've watched a LOT of games, and I can say that the shooting by some of the players is embarrassing and I think "yep, this is why most male fans of the men's game will not watch women's games." UCONN made ND feel rushed in that last game, but ND looked pathetic on offense, missing wide open shots and layups, repeatedly.

But again, the examples you are giving are like the ones I have been reading about here for the last umpteen years, when a number of posters have said the WCBB games are boring and aren't worth watching because no one can drop the ball through a 10-foot diameter rim. And for UConn fans, it's been kind of a given that we see a lot of horrendous shooting, though it usually seems to be exhibited much more by Husky opponents for some reason. Is this year hugely different from what's gone on in the past, when major (big backside) sports columnists ridiculed WCBB action as unwatchable? And as a fan, it also boils down to my team's performance, and without Maya, UConn is down 0.4 ppg in scoring (and opponents are down by 4.4 ppg). I can live very happily with that.

 

[easttexastrash]

But again, the examples you are giving are like the ones I have been reading about here for the last umpteen years, when a number of posters have said the WCBB games are boring and aren't worth watching because no one can drop the ball through a 10-foot diameter rim. And for UConn fans, it's been kind of a given that we see a lot of horrendous shooting, though it usually seems to be exhibited much more by Husky opponents for some reason. Is this year hugely different from what's gone on in the past, when major (big backside) sports columnists ridiculed WCBB action as unwatchable? And as a fan, it also boils down to my team's performance, and without Maya, UConn is down 0.4 ppg in scoring (and opponents are down by 4.4 ppg). I can live very happily with that.

I am a HUGE women's basketball fan...always have been. But as big a fan as I am, I can see why the average basketball fan would have little interest in the women's game this year, with the exception of a few stellar players. I could site many more examples, but what's the point? I am just saying that MY impression this year is that there is a real lack of offensive skill in the women's game. Is it worst that before? Maybe not. But that is why players like BG, EDD and Nneka seem so far ahead of the pack, because so few others have the skill on offense to garner a lot of attention. A lot of games have been hard to watch.

 

[DobbsRover2]

Will agree that there are some games where the offensive pyrotechnics just aren't there in the WCBB.

Looks like it's catching on in the MCBB. The VA guys just put up 45 points for the game in today's action. Cavs and Gators combined to go 7-41 from 3 pt land. Just can't watch this stuff.