Division I Elite League is needed | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Division I Elite League is needed

Charliebball said:
I don't think it's possible to totally over turn the competitive edge of the perennially strong WBB schools but if you were to cut the number of scholarships from 15 to 12 you would be able to redistribute a number of very good players to more teams....I think "lesser" teams would love to have the chance to recruit players that otherwise would be playing for top twenty teams.....the competitive balance might be effected enough to add at least a few wins a year for certain well coached but formerly under talented middle tier schools and who knows what upsets might happen.
Expand ...
I like the idea of 12 scholarships. Anything within reason that can help spread out players I’m for.
 
I'll have to think about this, but my first reaction is that it's a bad idea.

I mean, it's a great idea for a wonderful WCBB program that for a variety of reasons (some the fault of local politicians and the hubris of its administrators at the time) finds itself in a league far below its own level. Oh, would that be UCONN? It would put UCONN in a league with the best, so there's no question it's good for that school, and the others that also are chosen.

But beyond the chosen few? No good, never mind great, player will ever again consider a second tier university (Perhaps we should call them Division II. Wait. What?) Not many of those players go to schools beyond that top 30 now, but this will seal the deal, and consign all the rest -- USF, Georgia, Green Bay, DePaul --to the Division II trash heap.

The more I think about it, this is a concept designed by someone who feels bad about UConn's situation and, in the process of making things better for UConn, radically changes things for every other top WCBB school in the Top 30 and measurably worse for the rest. Something tell me the rst of the world won't go for it.
 
Charliebball said:
Our high school has had five players six feet two or taller in the past four years.....four out of the five played volleyball only...most of the best athletes today specialize in one sport and frankly they tell me it's easier to get a volleyball scholarship then a basketball scholarship right now..women's lacrosse has also taken some of the best athletes from basketball
Expand ...
Thanks for that! So girls are choosing other sports. I'll take your word for it.
So, kids play sports so they can get scholarships? I thought it was because sports are fun and competitive. Seems like no one is going to get a scholarship unless one is passionate about the sport. At the least, kids play basketball as conditioning for the spring sports- softball and lacrosse. What do these kids do in the winter to "focus" on softball or lacrosse? What a joke. Do they report to a private program to hit in a cage, etc? Give me a break. Jordan Spieth played HS baseball and basketball. Tiger Woods played HS sports.
Something's seriously wrong! Basketball players are playing volleyball, softball, and lacrosse? I don't believe it. What about urban America? What about international players?
Where are these players? North Carolina not good in basketball?
 
.-.
RockyMTblue2 said:
In decline. Why Is Girls Basketball Participation Declining?

Volleyball is on the rise.

The Ackerman Report (7): The decline of girls' high school basketball?
Expand ...
Thanks for the articles. I'm getting my questions answered.
Could these trends self-correct, when the alternate sports become more competitive. Then, kids will return to the sport that is the most fun. Could communities establish competitive leagues for young players who don't want to play AAU or are not at the time good enough to play AAU. Basketball is not an expensive sport, except for paying for buses.
 
The NCAA doesn't have enough stones to even think about messing with the P5.... Unfortunately football will continue to be the driving force as long as the $$$$$ are there...
 
SVCBeercats said:
The NCAA needs to create a Division I Elite/Select women's basketball league consisting of the teams which have demonstrated consistent excellence in level of play over time. Maybe with a stretch there will be 20 teams. They just play each other. Maybe there are two conferences. The level of play and competition might be such that new fans will be attracted to the women's game ... well ... at least the Elite/Select league. There needs to be a consistently higher level of play and competition for the women's game to become interesting enough for new fans and new money. The NCAA tourney can still exist and can be used to identify candidate schools to be added to the Elite/Select league. Also to determine if an Elite/Select teams needs to be demoted. There is not enough talented women players for all 300 some teams to make the women's game interesting and popular. The talent pool is too small. UCONN is basically in high school caliber league. Yeah, I know UCONN is great but really the vast majority of the AAC teams are terrible.
Expand ...
This is a great idea. And they could structure it as they do in some of the premiere soccer (futbol) leagues. That is, the bottom two teams each season are dropped from the elite league, and replaced by two up and coming teams. It could be 4 or even 6. This provides incentive for the " almost made it " teams to improve, and for the strong teams to remain strong. It will never happen, but it is brilliant.
 
Rocket009 said:
So isn't that what the P5 is?While it doesn't have a women's basketball focus, essentially they are segmenting themselves from the other conferences.
No. It is a few good teams and the rest are barely mediocre. I want the cream of the P5 and the other really good teams so every game has a chance to be competitive.

I really don't see this as a positive thing. It's just a way to maintain the status quo - making it harder for outsiders to break into the old boy/girls club.
If status quo results in interesting competition, so be it. It beats what the WCB is today. Has WCB had any appreciable growth in new fans?

As long as the old girl club is achieving its goal so what? Besides it is possible to set up a quantitative way to add teams and delete teams, However, since the talent of the women's basketball player pool is so shallow, I don't see this as a problem. Competition is the only answer. It will never be athleticism; that is the men's game. Where are all the women who want equality? Why aren't they supporting the WCB? Seriously! Think about it.

Level the playing field and let the best teams rise to the top.

Yeah, that has worked well for the last 30 years.:rolleyes: Two teams rose to the top Tenn and UCONN. Maybe it will work when Geno retires and UCONN slides back to the rest. I agree with you. "Let the best rise to the top" and put them in one competitive league which will draw new fans. Face it; other than UCONN FANATICS even their "beautiful game" loses its luster against so many high school teams pretending to be college teams. San Antonio's beautiful game remains beautiful when it beats the best, not the rest. When it faces real competition. Same with UCONN. :D:rolleyes:

The other shallow pool is the coaches' pool. More demanding coaching talent is needed with ADs backing them up. And no one should care if they are men or women, just that they are the best. They need to be smart enough to teach more than just plays. They need to teach as Geno and Chris and their staffs over the years. The taught the players to understand the game. They taught them "why" a player does something a given way. To see a defense, know it weaknesses, and why their next moves will work. Too many coaches just run plays with no real understanding.
Expand ...
 
Longtime fan said:
This is a great idea. And they could structure it as they do in some of the premiere soccer (futbol) leagues. That is, the bottom two teams each season are dropped from the elite league, and replaced by two up and coming teams. It could be 4 or even 6. This provides incentive for the " almost made it " teams to improve, and for the strong teams to remain strong. It will never happen, but it is brilliant.
Expand ...

Thanks for the futbol example. I did not know that. So the idea actually exists and it functions quite well? How long have these elite leagues existed? I know about succor, but not about soccer.:rolleyes:;)
 
shizam said:
I like the idea of 12 scholarships. Anything within reason that can help spread out players I’m for.
Expand ...

This would create a Title IX problem. You would either have to add more scholarships in another women's sport, or take scholarships away from a men's sport.
 
.-.
nwhoopfan said:
This would create a Title IX problem. You would either have to add more scholarships in another women's sport, or take scholarships away from a men's sport.
Expand ...

Why? Please explain. So limit members of the select league to 12 scholarships.
 
SVCBeercats said:
Why?
Expand ...

My understanding is that there is a requirement to have an equal number of scholarships for men's and women's sports. If you reduce scholarships in women's hoops, have to balance it out one way or another.
 
tomcat said:
But beyond the chosen few? No good, never mind great, player will ever again consider a second tier university (Perhaps we should call them Division II. Wait. What?) Not many of those players go to schools beyond that top 30 now, but this will seal the deal, and consign all the rest -- USF, Georgia, Green Bay, DePaul --to the Division II trash heap. You answered your own objection. It is happening now so try something different. One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. So reduce the scholarships of the elite league members to 12 each.

The more I think about it, this is a concept designed by someone who feels bad about UConn's situation and, in the process of making things better for UConn, radically changes things for every other top WCBB school in the Top 30 and measurably worse for the rest. Something tell me the rest of the world won't go for it. No, it is created by a person who is a WCB fan. Who only watches replays of WCB games with a hint of competitiveness. Generally I don't care who wins (sans UCONN) but how the game was competed. I must admit I have watched few UCONN games passed halftime. Games with Notre Dame and Texas I have watched 2-3 times.
Expand ...
 
Last edited:
nwhoopfan said:
My understanding is that there is a requirement to have an equal number of scholarships for men's and women's sports. If you reduce scholarships in women's hoops, have to balance it out one way or another.
Expand ...
How does having teams in an elite league change the number of scholarships?
 
SVCBeercats said:
How does having teams in an elite league change the number of scholarships?
Expand ...

Maybe I'm misunderstanding. I thought there was a proposal in this thread to limit scholarships to 12 to "redistribute the wealth" so to speak. Currently 15 scholies for women's hoops. If you took away 3 scholarships per women's hoops team, you'd have to balance that out somehow.

If there's no change in scholarship limits, then of course this creation of select league would have no effect as far as Title IX goes.
 
nwhoopfan said:
My understanding is that there is a requirement to have an equal number of scholarships for men's and women's sports. If you reduce scholarships in women's hoops, have to balance it out one way or another.
Expand ...
15 for women and 13 for men and they should cut the womens scholarships.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,409
Messages
4,571,804
Members
10,477
Latest member
Goose91


Top Bottom