White Paper Summitt Results

[hoopfan515]

http://www.ctpost.com/uconn/article/Progress-made-on-changes-to-women-s-basketball-4837456.php


Super Regionals should make the tournament more exciting and interesting.

 

[winlots]

God bless 'em for # 7 and, especially, #10!!!! (I don't understand the wording of #5.....any help on what that one means?)

 

[ed4ourgirls]

. . . (I don't understand the wording of #5.....any help on what that one means?)

The Super Regionals would be hosted at the same locations (i.e. more than one) on a rotating basis.
Likewise for the Final Four. (but at different locations than the Super Regionals)

 

[UcMiami]

God bless 'em for # 7 and, especially, #10!!!! (I don't understand the wording of #5.....any help on what that one means?)

I believe they mean chose three locations for three years in a row but the FF would rotate from city to city among the three.

 

[Wbbfan1]

How does #9 increase Parity. Reducing scholarships to 13 would increase parity as it spreads the talent to more schools.

 

[rocky rococo]

One "t" please. Thank you.

 

[Wally East]

One "t" please. Thank you.

t.

 

[ThisJustIn]

 

[Phil]

How does #9 increase Parity. Reducing scholarships to 13 would increase parity as it spreads the talent to more schools.

Could have been better worded. The proposal was to reduce scolly's to 13 to increase parity. The report notes that the proposal did not pass.

 

[meyers7]

How does #9 increase Parity. Reducing scholarships to 13 would increase parity as it spreads the talent to more schools.

My thoughts exactly.

Remain at 15 scholarships per team -- not dropping to 13 -- in an effort to enhance parity

Seems just the opposite. Allows the big teams to stockpile talent that would go someplace else.

 

[Icebear]

There is a manner in which staying at 15 does help to maintain parity. It gives potentially competitive teams better protection against injury. At 12 or 13 a couple of central injuries can completely derail a team. We have seen this many times. Often players at the elite schools down the bench are significantly less gifted and it can even be tough to fill those spots with elite players (see positions 12-15 at UCONN) but at many schools those players are very capable of competing for playing time and when an injury occurs they can help fill a gap quite well.

 

[meyers7]

There is a manner in which staying at 15 does help to maintain parity. It gives potentially competitive teams better protection against injury. At 12 or 13 a couple of central injuries can completely derail a team. We have seen this many times. Often players at the elite schools down the bench are significantly less gifted and it can even be tough to fill those spots with elite players (see positions 12-15 at UCONN) but at many schools those players are very capable of competing for playing time and when an injury occurs they can help fill a gap quite well.

Nah, don't think so. 12-15 at the elite schools are 6-10 (at least) at lower level schools. 12-15 at any school are not near 1-5's, or else they wouldn't be 12-15.

 

[Icebear]

Nah, don't think so. 12-15 at the elite schools are 6-10 (at least) at lower level schools. 12-15 at any school are not near 1-5's, or else they wouldn't be 12-15.

If that is true then lowering it to 12-13 makes no difference either.

 

[Joobie]

UCONN is using only 9 of the available scholarships. Is that Geno's contribution to maintaining parity?

 

[stwainfan]

http://espn.go.com/womens-college-b...ummit-makes-recommendation-growing-women-game
The ESPN site has comments from different coaches.

 

[meyers7]

If that is true then lowering it to 12-13 makes no difference either.

Sure it does. Those 13-15 players could be the 6-10 on lesser schools, giving them more/better depth.

 

[meyers7]

UCONN is using only 9 of the available scholarships. Is that Geno's contribution to maintaining parity?

Yes, he feels sorry for the other schools having to go up against Dolson, Hartley, KML, Stewart, Jefferson, Tuck, Banks, Stokes and Chong.

The biggest down side is those 5 or 6 players who don't get to be coached by Geno. Gotta feel sorry for them.

 

[Icebear]

Sure it does. Those 13-15 players could be the 6-10 on lesser schools, giving them more/better depth.

Can't have it both ways.

 

[meyers7]

Can't have it both ways.

What do you mean??? I don't think you are following.

 

[Icebear]

Among elite athletes most aren't going to schools to sit deep down the bench. They are already seeking opportunities at other schools. The players 12-15, generally, are good ball players not elites. Those players can add depth to the next flight schools keeping them from being devastated by and injury that tends to take a player closer to their own skill level out of the season thus allowing those teams a better opportunity to continue to compete. If an elite program is relying on those players, 12-15, to fill in for injuries it does not help them to maintain the same quality of athleticism since those players are not typically top 50 athletes because those players already sought opportunities elsewhere.

 

[Kibitzer]

This discussion seems to be focusing on maintaining parity.

Seriously, just what parity are we trying to maintain?

 

[meyers7]

Among elite athletes most aren't going to schools to sit deep down the bench. They are already seeking opportunities at other schools. The players 12-15, generally, are good ball players not elites. Those players can add depth to the next flight schools keeping them from being devastated by and injury that tends to take a player closer to their own skill level out of the season thus allowing those teams a better opportunity to continue to compete. If an elite program is relying on those players, 12-15, to fill in for injuries it does not help them to maintain the same quality of athleticism since those players are not typically top 50 athletes because those players already sought opportunities elsewhere.

Yea, you missed it. An elite program is not relying on those players. Hence why if they played at a lesser school, they would help the lesser schools. For instance Engeln and Johnson will probably get some decent playing time at their lesser schools. Hence the lesser schools have more, better players. Hence towards more parity. What if Buck had played at Hartford??

12-15 at UCONN are pretty much gonna be top 100, maybe 125 players. Those players at other schools who may only have a couple top 100 players would have the opportunity for more better players.

Granted with UCONN going with 11/11/11/9 scholarships the last few years, going from 15 to 13 or even 12, won't really affect the top end of WBB. But it would improve probably the next level down, and even more the level below that.

Keeping it at 15 won't help parity, but it will help more girls get scholarships. More girls who are not as good.

 

[meyers7]

This discussion seems to be focusing on maintaining parity.

Seriously, just what parity are we trying to maintain?

Good point. And why reducing the numbers would spread out the talent more and move WBB towards a little more parity. Still won't be much though.

 

[Icebear]

Yea, you missed it. An elite program is not relying on those players. Hence why if they played at a lesser school, they would help the lesser schools. For instance Engeln and Johnson will probably get some decent playing time at their lesser schools. Hence the lesser schools have more, better players. Hence towards more parity. What if Buck had played at Hartford??

12-15 at UCONN are pretty much gonna be top 100, maybe 125 players. Those players at other schools who may only have a couple top 100 players would have the opportunity for more better players.

Granted with UCONN going with 11/11/11/9 scholarships the last few years, going from 15 to 13 or even 12, won't really affect the top end of WBB. But it would improve probably the next level down, and even more the level below that.

Keeping it at 15 won't help parity, but it will help more girls get scholarships. More girls who are not as good.

Spreading the talent you are speaking of to other schools will not likely raise those schools. It simply denies the schools at the next level protection from falling dramatically when injuries occur. When the talent is spread out too much with smaller rosters It increases the advantage of those with the best talent within those limited rosters.

 

[UcMiami]

It would be interesting to look what would happen with top level teams that do use all 15 spots - do they become more selective each year in who they offer and accept? Example - UNC which had at one point 16 or 17 commits until they 'adjusted' (hmm!) If you only have 13 scholarships and have 10 committed, you better really like the next couple because they might make it impossible to accept a really high ranked player later or in future years.