USC up big early on Stanford

[Vowelguy]

31-13 with 8 to go in 1st half

 

[jennyo70]

I realize there is a lot of game left to be played, however, a loss to another unranked team surely would drop them out of a 1 seed. Yes?

 

[ScarlettB]

I realize there is a lot of game left to be played, however, a loss to another unranked team surely would drop them out of a 1 seed. Yes?

One would think so, but it will depend on how other teams fare as well.

 

[Vowelguy]

I realize there is a lot of game left to be played, however, a loss to another unranked team surely would drop them out of a 1 seed. Yes?

Dunno. It's all relative; depends on what the other teams do.

 

[Vowelguy]

37-30 at half

 

[Vowelguy]

47-43 cardinal (34-12 run)

 

[ASweet3781]

The closer we get to March the angrier I get about the committee rewarding home courts to such top programs.

Maples Pavilion hosting a regional is the best thing going right now for this Stanford team. They play very ugly basketball. They'd be toast on a neutral court against quite a few potential 2, 3, and 4 seeds.

I think we could see 2 teams making the Final 4 this year solely due to the home court factor.

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

Southern Cal isn't particularly good. A Stanford loss would have been a killer to their chance for a 1 seed.

 

[ThisJustIn]

The closer we get to March the angrier I get about the committee rewarding home courts to such top programs..

I agree. Programs who don't want to host should be forced to....

 

[ASweet3781]

I agree. Programs who don't want to host should be forced to....

No neutral sites wanted to host? Find that hard to believe.

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

3 point game with 18 seconds left.

 

[MilfordHusky]

Stanford wins by 5. Struggling against USC, aka Mater Dei North, is not impressive.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

No neutral sites wanted to host? Find that hard to believe.

This was a one year decision by the NCAA powers to give the regionals to campus sites to (hopefully) drive attendance. Next year it returns to essentially neutral regional sites, although teams will continue to be sent to the closest regional site (unlike the men). Of course, next year the first 2 rounds will be on the top seeds home floors, which does make some sense.

As to Stanford playing ugly basketball - are you watching the same Stanford team I usually watch? While they can have off games (and of course are handicapped by playing PAC12 style), I have never heard their style of play criticized. Everyone (well, except UConn and maybe ND) have bad days. It happens. And USC (and UCLA) are "dangerous" teams that can take advantage if you drop your guard. If anything about Stanford's season is a worry it is their conference loss. Not the close game against USC.

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

This was a one year decision by the NCAA powers to give the regionals to campus sites to (hopefully) drive attendance. Next year it returns to essentially neutral regional sites, although teams will continue to be sent to the closest regional site (unlike the men). Of course, next year the first 2 rounds will be on the top seeds home floors, which does make some sense.

As to Stanford playing ugly basketball - are you watching the same Stanford team I usually watch? While they can have off games (and of course are handicapped by playing PAC12 style), I have never heard their style of play criticized. Everyone (well, except UConn and maybe ND) have bad days. It happens. And USC (and UCLA) are "dangerous" teams that can take advantage if you drop your guard. If anything about Stanford's season is a worry it is their conference loss. Not the close game against USC.

The NCAA has more money than they know how to spend. I'm more concerned with the NCAA having all games on neutral sites. It can be said that top seeds "earn" the ability to play host in the first 2 rounds, but I think the best tournaments are played entirely in neutral sites. It's worked pretty well for the men's tournament.

 

[Vowelguy]

The NCAA has more money than they know how to spend. I'm more concerned with the NCAA having all games on neutral sites. It can be said that top seeds "earn" the ability to play host in the first 2 rounds, but I think the best tournaments are played entirely in neutral sites. It's worked pretty well for the men's tournament.

Every other NCAA tournament has home sites, and those have worked out pretty well too.

And note that UConn probably would not have won its 1995 title if the regional were not in Storrs that year.

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

Every other NCAA tournament has home sites, and those have worked out pretty well too.

And note that UConn probably would not have won its 1995 title if the regional were not in Storrs that year.

The Men's NCAA Basketball Tournament is played at neutral sites, but baseball and softball are played at home sites. Unfortunately, football doesn't have a playoff in the highest division.

 

[Vowelguy]

The Men's NCAA Basketball Tournament is played at neutral sites, but baseball and softball are played at home sites. Unfortunately, football doesn't have a playoff in the highest division.

Soccer, field hockey, lacrosse also at home sites.

 

[Jim]

I'm OK with home sites as long as it is at the higher ranked team's home site. If you win a lot of games during the regular season, rewarding a top ranked team with home court advantage seems right. I think it is unfair for high seed team to have to win on a non-neutral site in order to advance. I know that if Louisville ends up as a #2 seed and UCONN has to play there, I will be pissed.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

I'm OK with home sites as long as it is at the higher ranked team's home site. If you win a lot of games during the regular season, rewarding a top ranked team with home court advantage seems right. I think it is unfair for high seed team to have to win on a non-neutral site in order to advance. I know that if Louisville ends up as a #2 seed and UCONN has to play there, I will be pissed.

I'm certainly ok with home sites for the first 2 rounds (as opposed to the current situations where top 4 seeds are "some home, some away and some neutral").

I would like true, non-local neutral sites for the Regionals, but I recognize that women's attendance doesn't support it. So you will get Oklahoma in OKC, UConn at Bridgeport, Maryland perhaps in a DC venue, and anyone else with a nearby "neutral" site there.

 

[boontonbomber]

I'm OK with home sites as long as it is at the higher ranked team's home site. If you win a lot of games during the regular season, rewarding a top ranked team with home court advantage seems right. I think it is unfair for high seed team to have to win on a non-neutral site in order to advance. I know that if Louisville ends up as a #2 seed and UCONN has to play there, I will be pissed.

not as po'd, i expect, as louisville would be.

 

[Phil]

not as po'd, i expect, as louisville would be.

That was my first impression. However, a friend persuaded me that if Walz wants an NC (which is a sure bet) and thinks he will have to beat UConn (a safe, thought not certain bet), his best chance is to play UConn on his home turf.

It may be, a la Baylor, that his best path involves someone else knocking of UConn, but if he thinks he will need to beat UConn, would he rather face them in Louisville or Nashville. I think a case can be made he might outwardly complain if CT is in his region, but inwardly cheer.

 

[Jackalope]

That was my first impression. However, a friend persuaded me that if Walz wants an NC (which is a sure bet) and thinks he will have to beat UConn (a safe, thought not certain bet), his best chance is to play UConn on his home turf.

It may be, a la Baylor, that his best path involves someone else knocking of UConn, but if he thinks he will need to beat UConn, would he rather face them in Louisville or Nashville. I think a case can be made he might outwardly complain if CT is in his region, but inwardly cheer.

Which do you think the selection committee is more likely to do:

1. Have Uconn to play Louisville at Louisville with all that implies.

or

2. Give a possibly undeserving Louisville a #1 seed to avoid #1. This is kinda like promoting someone to avoid a situation in a business.


I think this may be why Louisville gets a #1 seed. Walz can't complain and it solves a potentially embarrassing problem. There will be lots of complaining about both situations, but much less so if Louisville gets a #1.