What message is being sent to non Power 5 teams???????

[Tonyc]

The evidence is in the polling. Both polls have UConn number 2 because they are the better team. More evidence is used SOS and RPI so Strongly as it helps the Power 5 who have the power conferences and that includes UNC and Tenn making the tourney as both were questionable. What does that mean to other conferences???? Whats that telling other conferences if teams on the bubble in Power 5 conferences make it and teams in lesser conference with better records dont???? I dont like it one bit. If UConn is a 2 seed with 2 losses how does a team in a lesser conference with 2 losses make the tourney. Chance are some wont but a power 5 team with a loosing conference record has a better chance and it will help their recruiting because of it.

 

[hoopsfan22]

If UConn didn't win the AAC tourney and had a few more losses, does it mean they'd be left out?

 

[MainefanSC]

What you NEED to understand is that the NCAA is all about the $$$$$$$$. I remember a song in the not too distant past, that best sums up their (NCAA) concerns. "It's all about the money" In reality, it matters not to the committee who is in nor who is out. They want the teams that will pull in the most revenue. Hence, UT is in. Once again, I have maintained all along that UT would be there. 1) they put butts in seats 2) PS Legacy 3) P5. If the NCAA could have gotten away with it, UT would be hosting these first 2 games. The P5 schools are such due to football. Football rules because football is major $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for the NCAA.
So, stop agonizing and just enjoy the ride our women provide. Rest assured, the NCAA knows they are a #1 seed, it took many committee hours to rationalize making them a 2 seed. Until UConn gets a decent football program we will not be a P5 program. So, support our athletes without reservation. Let them know that we know they are #1.

 

[HuskylnSC]

What you NEED to understand is that the NCAA is all about the $$$$$$$$. I remember a song in the not too distant past, that best sums up their (NCAA) concerns. "It's all about the money" In reality, it matters not to the committee who is in nor who is out. They want the teams that will pull in the most revenue. Hence, UT is in. Once again, I have maintained all along that UT would be there. 1) they put butts in seats 2) PS Legacy 3) P5. If the NCAA could have gotten away with it, UT would be hosting these first 2 games. The P5 schools are such due to football. Football rules because football is major $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for the NCAA.
So, stop agonizing and just enjoy the ride our women provide. Rest assured, the NCAA knows they are a #1 seed, it took many committee hours to rationalize making them a 2 seed. Until UConn gets a decent football program we will not be a P5 program. So, support our athletes without reservation. Let them know that we know they are #1.

All true, also making UConn #2 was sure to get some headlines at a time when the men's side was ruling the sports pages.

 

[oldude]

Again here’s my theory in a nutshell. Making UConn a #2 seed vs #1 Louisville gives the Huskies a better chance to not only make it to the FF, but also advance to the championship. If UConn was the 4th #1 seed, Louisville heads to Portland to face Oregon, the Huskies get a much tougher matchup vs MS St, and, assuming they get by the Bulldogs, then they face Baylor in the semifinals.

 

[MainefanSC]

Again here’s my theory in a nutshell. Making UConn a #2 seed vs #1 Louisville gives the Huskies a better chance to not only make it to the FF, but also advance to the championship. If UConn was the 4th #1 seed, Louisville heads to Portland to face Oregon, the Huskies get a much tougher matchup vs MS St, and, assuming they get by the Bulldogs, then they face Baylor in the semifinals.

I do agree that it worked in our favor. My comment has to do with the NCAA not caring what our opinion may be. They want to maximize the revenue potential. I also agree that of the four teams that could be in our bracket, Louisville is our best chance to get to the FF. I also agree that us being a 2 seed does nothing to us as far as win/loss potential. It's strictly a slap in the face to the program and the NCAA couldn't care any less.

 

[DefenseBB]

I do think the committee needs to stop awarding bids to any team that has a .500 or worse conference record as that indicates a mediocre team regardless of the strength the conference.
Even worse in the SEC case, they were clearly the worst of the P5 schools to begin with and award a 7-9 Tenn team? Add in Cal 9-9, NCheat 8-8, Mich State 9-9 all who finished middle of the pack of their own conference and had a chance to be worthy but couldn’t earn it.
I really like what the WNIT did by rewarding teams on their conference records 1st. The Big Dance should be about rewarding teams who had a great season AND DID WELL IN THEIR CONFERENCE.
This philosophy also works for the Men’s bracket as well and put a stronger focus on conference play.
It’s too logical for the NCAA to apply...

 

[Tonyc]

If UConn didn't win the AAC tourney and had a few more losses, does it mean they'd be left out?

I would agree with that but how bout a team from another conference. Maybe we see it differently. I see a team with a conference look at teams with loosing records in their conference making the tournament and teams in lesser conferences not making the tournament with 20+ wins. Now imo how does a team recruit top players if they arent making the tournament? Thats an advantage to the power 5 and Im not sure its a fair advantage. If your gonna have just what a committee thinks are the top teams thats not fine with me. Example UConn ranked 2 in both polls and not getting a 1 seed and Miss St with a lower RPI SOS which ever does. Thats showing preferential treatment to the P5. Do we open the NCAAs to more teams? We need to level the playing field. Do we limit the number of teams in the P5 conferences that can make the NCAA's for example only 4 teams or 5 teams and not 7 or more? We need imo to give more teams a chance. JMO folks.

 

[SVCBeercats]

Spot on! I agree. Question: Does the NCAA actually make a profit on the women's tourney?

What you NEED to understand is that the NCAA is all about the $$$$$$$$. I remember a song in the not too distant past, that best sums up their (NCAA) concerns. "It's all about the money" In reality, it matters not to the committee who is in nor who is out. They want the teams that will pull in the most revenue. Hence, UT is in. Once again, I have maintained all along that UT would be there. 1) they put butts in seats 2) PS Legacy 3) P5. If the NCAA could have gotten away with it, UT would be hosting these first 2 games. The P5 schools are such due to football. Football rules because football is major $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for the NCAA.
So, stop agonizing and just enjoy the ride our women provide. Rest assured, the NCAA knows they are a #1 seed, it took many committee hours to rationalize making them a 2 seed. Until UConn gets a decent football program we will not be a P5 program. So, support our athletes without reservation. Let them know that we know they are #1.

 

[CocoHusky]

Q: What message is being sent to non Power 5 teams?
A: I don't see any "messages" being sent to non P5 schools-besides UCONN.

 

[Tonyc]

If UConn didn't win the AAC tourney and had a few more losses, does it mean they'd be left out?

Please come on. really. I hope not.

 

[j66kicker]

What you NEED to understand is that the NCAA is all about the $$$$$$$$....

The P5 schools are such due to football. Football rules because football is major $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for the NCAA.
So, stop agonizing and just enjoy the ride our women provide. Rest assured, the NCAA knows they are a #1 seed, it took many committee hours to rationalize making them a 2 seed. Until UConn gets a decent football program we will not be a P5 program. So, support our athletes without reservation. Let them know that we know they are #1.

1) The NCAA IS all about the money, but there is no “$$$$$$” in WBB. The men’s tournament is over 90% of the NCAA’s total revenue, and the women’s tournament losses are subsidized by that.

2) The P5 schools ARE such due to football, but the NCAA doesn’t get one penny of that money. Football money goes directly to the schools and the conferences, who basically threatened to leave the NCAA and start their own league unless they could negotiate their own TV deals and be in control of their own revenue.

 

[PacoBlaze]

The evidence is in the polling. Both polls have UConn number 2 because they are the better team. More evidence is used SOS and RPI so Strongly as it helps the Power 5 who have the power conferences and that includes UNC and Tenn making the tourney as both were questionable. What does that mean to other conferences???? Whats that telling other conferences if teams on the bubble in Power 5 conferences make it and teams in lesser conference with better records dont???? I dont like it one bit.

A couple of days ago I made the same statement and then got the wrath of a few BYers and was basically called a d*mba**. They cited all these "facts" to demonstrate that the correct (P5???) schools were in (specifically TN, so...).
But my basic question was what exactly made certain conferences result in teams having higher RPIs, SOSs, etc. and it was basically because of who the conferences are.
And yes, I am now opening the door to be publicly shamed again. Oh well.

 

[veryolddog]

What you are really seeing is the backlash to UConn's dominance in the Women's Basketball sport over the last 10 to 20 years. You folks do not understand the resentment and hate that exists in the competitive universities all these years that is now being directed at UConn. This is and was the beginning of their chance to subordinate UConn for years of excellence. Given any chance to screw UConn and the other AAC and non power conference teams will be the norm. If UConn suffers 7 or 8 losses next year the result will be even more dramatic. It almost is an effort to destroy the UConn Women's program so that only Power 5 teams will win the championships. Get real folks, and read between the lines. Look at all of the money, TV, and news attention the other teams will get if UConn is moved away from the winning status and just becomes an ordinary team in a non power 5 conference.

 

[Orangutan]

The NCAA heavily prioritizes strength of schedule and quality wins. Year after year. Last year it was 1-loss Baylor who didn't get a #1 while 3-loss ND did because ND had more quality wins and played a tougher schedule.

Unfortunately, the AAC is not strong generally and is having a down year outside of UConn. So UConn has to have a brutal non-conference SOS to be able to build the resume the NCAA wants out of a #1 seed. Normally, they do. But this year their non-conference SOS was #23. Good but not as strong as ND, Baylor, and Louisville. So their #1 seed credentials really depended on their performance against those 3 teams in the head-to-head matchups. And the NCAA apparently felt 1-2 wasn't good enough.

UConn's strength of schedule was better than Miss. St's and the win over ND is better than any Miss. St. win, so I felt they should have got the #1 seed. But I guess the committee went for Miss. St. having one more top-50 win (and several more top-100 wins). It probably didn't help that 3 of UConn's top-50 team were over UCF, a bubble team because they only had 1 top-50 win.

In my eyes, the committee got it wrong, but seeding UConn #2 is broadly consistent with their past actions.

The unfortunate truth is that UConn has to schedule a top-5 non-conference schedule to make up for the AAC, which is hard to guarantee given the lag time between scheduling games and playing games.

 

[npignatjr]

There might have a lot of twisted logic by the "committee" to put 2 coaches they have issues with in the same bracket, assures one doesn't make the final 4 .

 

[CocoHusky]

What you are really seeing is the backlash to UConn's dominance in the Women's Basketball sport over the last 10 to 20 years.

That backlash has also been extended to the individual POY and AA awards. Specifically the exclusion of KLS Samuelson from the ESPN AA selection and Napheesa Collier not being even a finalist for this year Naismith award. This is some shameful trash!

 

[ABCDFE]

The only thing to do now is to wind the whole dang thing!

 

[dogged1]

A couple of days ago I made the same statement and then got the wrath of a few BYers and was basically called a d*mba**. They cited all these "facts" to demonstrate that the correct (P5???) schools were in (specifically TN, so...).
But my basic question was what exactly made certain conferences result in teams having higher RPIs, SOSs, etc. and it was basically because of who the conferences are.
And yes, I am now opening the door to be publicly shamed again. Oh well.

Sometimes life's less painful as a pessimist. You know the old saying.....

 

[Tenspro2002]

What you are really seeing is the backlash to UConn's dominance in the Women's Basketball sport over the last 10 to 20 years. You folks do not understand the resentment and hate that exists in the competitive universities all these years that is now being directed at UConn. This is and was the beginning of their chance to subordinate UConn for years of excellence. Given any chance to screw UConn and the other AAC and non power conference teams will be the norm. If UConn suffers 7 or 8 losses next year the result will be even more dramatic. It almost is an effort to destroy the UConn Women's program so that only Power 5 teams will win the championships. Get real folks, and read between the lines. Look at all of the money, TV, and news attention the other teams will get if UConn is moved away from the winning status and just becomes an ordinary team in a non power 5 conference.

There are a number of powerful interests who would love nothing more than to see UConn reduced to another mid-major has-been in women's college basketball. Remember Louisiana Tech? Old Dominion?

The tactics are subtle now, but expect them to become more overt later. They've already "broken the seal" on downgrading UConn on account of the conference, it's not going to get better.

 

['nuff sed]

ODU, who I remember well, and La Tech is the model of what could happen.

The difference is Geno and CD and the program. When they go, it can go quickly. After that you're like everybody else.

But that said, in WBB the best programs are really centered around the coaches (Rueck, Staley, Walz etc), not the conferences themselves. WBB still lacks depth. When the bottom dwellers in the P5's start crushing the mid major leaders then its over.

Is the gap between the AAC and C-USA bigger than the gap between the AAC and the P5's ?

And what does the NCAA seeding committee give us :

Rice vs Marquette and Quinnipiac vs SDSU right off the bat in the 1st round.

The message to the mid majors from the seeding committee has always been to play strong OOC --- and then they let Tennessee in ---- total BS

When it comes to a team like Tennessee they look for reasons to include--- when its a mid major they look for reasons to exclude. And all decisions are defend-able in some argument.

The priority is NOT to grow this game - its about putting on a good TV show while keeping the current P5 power structure in place for better and better TV contracts.

 

[BleedBlue72]

As long as Geno is coaching he will
Continue to bring in top recruits .. recruits don’t base there sole decision on playing in a particular conference rather by coaching staff, program history and accemecics which UCONN is in top of everything basketball offers and education as well. May not be Stanford education but still a good education. UCONN is the highest revenue in women’s basketball period.. UCONN isn’t going anywhere. Everyone needs to chill out. We all know phee should have been on the national player of the year list but she didn’t.. awards are nothing more then talking points and hoopla. UCONN wins on doing things the right way. The AAC could end up being a top conference just like it took a long time to get the big east as the top conference... the old big east. Times are changing parity is now here UCONN isn’t the top dog anymore ... more players going to more schools ... it’s part of life. But UCONN will continue to be consistent and be in the national title hunt year in and year out. The AAC is what it is can’t do anything about it .. maybe things will change in the years to come and UCONN will be back in a power 5 but until now let’s just enjoy this years team and worry about the future of UCONN basketball another time. We are spoiled fans and have been the last 10-20 years .. it’s not going to happen every year..

 

[Sven23]

Maybe the non P5's, besides UConn need to send a message. Mercer is up by 1 start of 4th vs Iowa(2 seed). Turned on the game with 4 minutes left in the 3rd and Mercer seems quicker than IA. IA is Gustafson and that's it . Mercer got like 5 offensive rebounds in the last 4 mins, just out hustling IA

 

[McFly]

The NCAA's rationalizing of not giving a one seed to the no. 2 team in the country brings to mind the old Yankee saying: she was only a farmer's daughter, but all the horsemen knew 'er.

 

[Scrutineer]

The NCAA heavily prioritizes strength of schedule and quality wins. Year after year. Last year it was 1-loss Baylor who didn't get a #1 while 3-loss ND did because ND had more quality wins and played a tougher schedule.

Unfortunately, the AAC is not strong generally and is having a down year outside of UConn. So UConn has to have a brutal non-conference SOS to be able to build the resume the NCAA wants out of a #1 seed. Normally, they do. But this year their non-conference SOS was #23. Good but not as strong as ND, Baylor, and Louisville. So their #1 seed credentials really depended on their performance against those 3 teams in the head-to-head matchups. And the NCAA apparently felt 1-2 wasn't good enough.

UConn's strength of schedule was better than Miss. St's and the win over ND is better than any Miss. St. win, so I felt they should have got the #1 seed. But I guess the committee went for Miss. St. having one more top-50 win (and several more top-100 wins). It probably didn't help that 3 of UConn's top-50 team were over UCF, a bubble team because they only had 1 top-50 win.

In my eyes, the committee got it wrong, but seeding UConn #2 is broadly consistent with their past actions.

The unfortunate truth is that UConn has to schedule a top-5 non-conference schedule to make up for the AAC, which is hard to guarantee given the lag time between scheduling games and playing games.

Good points, but the lag time for basketball scheduling is pretty much year to year other than the two and three year contracts with a couple teams. It's not 7 to 10 years out like football.

 

[Scrutineer]

What you are really seeing is the backlash to UConn's dominance in the Women's Basketball sport over the last 10 to 20 years. You folks do not understand the resentment and hate that exists in the competitive universities all these years that is now being directed at UConn. This is and was the beginning of their chance to subordinate UConn for years of excellence. Given any chance to screw UConn and the other AAC and non power conference teams will be the norm. If UConn suffers 7 or 8 losses next year the result will be even more dramatic. It almost is an effort to destroy the UConn Women's program so that only Power 5 teams will win the championships. Get real folks, and read between the lines. Look at all of the money, TV, and news attention the other teams will get if UConn is moved away from the winning status and just becomes an ordinary team in a non power 5 conference.

As a lifelong Yankee fan, there's a lesson the NCAA could learn from how attendance and interest in baseball lagged when the Yankees were awful for about 20 years from the early 70's to the mid-90's.

If they destroy UConn, they destroy a major magnet for fans in a sport that doesn't have an overwhelming national interest. Nobody has the star power and draw of Geno and the Huskies and that affects ratings and thus the money advertisers are willing to pay. Look how well SNY has done. I wonder if anyone knows how the ratings of UConn's national games this year compared to those of Baylor, ND, Louisville, MS St and Oregon that did not include UConn as the opponent?

 

[southofnorth]

The issue isn’t and should never be about what seed a team gets. So UConn as a #2 seed should NOT phase anyone that actually believes in the UConn WBB program. The seeding really only effects who you play (which shouldn’t matter since this is a TOURNAMENT to decide the BEST team) and where you play them. If you can’t play and beat the best anywhere, then you probably won’t beat them when you have a higher seed or more people rooting for you in the stands. What is concerning is that teams are being left out because they can’t get into a P5 conference and some of the P5 teams choose to play the weakest teams rather than face some quality mid-major opponents. I don’t know how scheduling goes in WCBB, but I can’t imagine teams like Ohio and Central Michigan are avoiding teams like Notre Dame, Baylor, or UConn. I get that mid-majors are harder to predict as far as how good they will be, but when you play a team that hasn’t had a winning season in a decade [exaggeration obviously] year in and year out, it speaks more to the fear some of these P5 schools have in facing some of the regularly tough mid-major programs.

 

[Scrutineer]

There might have a lot of twisted logic by the "committee" to put 2 coaches they have issues with in the same bracket, assures one doesn't make the final 4 .

What's even more shocking is Vic Schaefer isn't on the same side of the bracket for the national semi-final (as I understand the brackets). Putting him, Geno and Walz on the same side would have assured gender equality for the championship game.

Before all the PC police get on me, here's a reminder about past tournaments and what appeared to be some level of manipulation of brackets. There was one year, in the early 2000's if I recall correctly, when the brackets had Geno, Andy Landers and Jim Foster (all with good teams) in one region, thus assuring only one would get to the Final Four. Geno, in his usual shy and engaging manner commented on it at the time.

Then there's women's volleyball where only male coaches have won the national championships and there was an undercurrent of unrest for a couple decades. Volleyball Magazine even did a feature on "the elephant in the room". Eventually the high level of angst subsided and the schools concentrated on winning regardless of who the coaches were.

 

[HopJim]

The NCAA heavily prioritizes strength of schedule and quality wins. Year after year. Last year it was 1-loss Baylor who didn't get a #1 while 3-loss ND did because ND had more quality wins and played a tougher schedule.

Unfortunately, the AAC is not strong generally and is having a down year outside of UConn. So UConn has to have a brutal non-conference SOS to be able to build the resume the NCAA wants out of a #1 seed. Normally, they do. But this year their non-conference SOS was #23. Good but not as strong as ND, Baylor, and Louisville. So their #1 seed credentials really depended on their performance against those 3 teams in the head-to-head matchups. And the NCAA apparently felt 1-2 wasn't good enough.

UConn's strength of schedule was better than Miss. St's and the win over ND is better than any Miss. St. win, so I felt they should have got the #1 seed. But I guess the committee went for Miss. St. having one more top-50 win (and several more top-100 wins). It probably didn't help that 3 of UConn's top-50 team were over UCF, a bubble team because they only had 1 top-50 win.

In my eyes, the committee got it wrong, but seeding UConn #2 is broadly consistent with their past actions.

The unfortunate truth is that UConn has to schedule a top-5 non-conference schedule to make up for the AAC, which is hard to guarantee given the lag time between scheduling games and playing games.

Listened to the Chair of the Women's Selection Committee review the criteria for the #1 seeds and you net out her comments. While she didn't specifically say this, normally AAC has 3-4 teams in or near Top20. With some many teams having down years, we shouldn't be surprised at selections. I'll file this under "who cares" since I like our bracket.

 

[CocoHusky]

As a lifelong Yankee fan, there's a lesson the NCAA could learn from how attendance and interest in baseball lagged when the Yankees were awful for about 20 years from the early 70's to the mid-90's.

If they destroy UConn, they destroy a major magnet for fans in a sport that doesn't have an overwhelming national interest. Nobody has the star power and draw of Geno and the Huskies and that affects ratings and thus the money advertisers are willing to pay. Look how well SNY has done. I wonder if anyone knows how the ratings of UConn's national games this year compared to those of Baylor, ND, Louisville, MS St and Oregon that did not include UConn as the opponent?

The numbers are inconclusive and appear to be highly dependent on UCONN opponent. UCONN vs Syracuse 2016 & UCONN vs Louisville 2009 were two of the lowest draws ever recorded.
Women’s Final Four Ratings Hub