We can all cite facts and stats to back personal perceptions, and the ones we choose always skew the argument. Two years ago I checked on all of the drekky "factoids" that the neanderthal columnists were spewing about the WCBB and found that in recent years the WCBB tournament by most measures had actually been more competitive than the MCBB tournament --- after the first round.
The fact is, the WCBB's #15 and #16 seeds are very weak in comparison to the MCBB's, and the matchups between the #1-#2 and #15-#16 seeds in the first round are invitations for the 99-34 blowouts such as UTenn pasted on Stetson last year, while on the men's side the margin for even the #1 and #16 matchups was at least under 30 points. The article cites the big 18.6 first round margin for women's games vs the 12.9 for men, and that is big. But throw out the extreme #1-#16 and #2-#15 games and the core of the games show that the rest of the women's games were far more competitive at a 11.3 margin, though still 1.4 wider than the guys' 9.9. Still, a 1.4 difference in middle game matchups is nothing to blow a gasket over. And, of course, as said two years ago, there are still five rounds left when the teams get down to work a play for the championship, and that's where the women shine, often at more competitive levels than the guys.
So yeah, there's about 8 Cinderellas who are 3 feet - 2 inches tall going up against teams of 5 Griner girls in the first round, but after that things even out.
