RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

Expand NCAA women's basketball tournament to 68 teams?
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66772
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/14/21 8:03 pm    ::: Expand NCAA women's basketball tournament to 68 teams? Reply Reply with quote

https://www.espn.in/womens-college-basketball/story/_/id/32402032

Quote:
The Division I Women's Basketball Committee and the Division I Women's Basketball Oversight Committee both voted unanimously for the expansion. Now the proposal goes up for consideration by governance committees, with the final decision expected in mid-November.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
undersized_post



Joined: 01 Mar 2021
Posts: 2862



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/14/21 11:44 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Good to have it the same as the men's I guess, but I'm not a fan of the play-in games. Seems too gimmicky. I'll take an even 2^n teams any day. Ahh, the symmetry. Very Happy

But, that media $$$.



_________________
RebKell's 2021-2022 NCAA Fantasy League Regular Season Champion 🏆
PUmatty



Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 16346
Location: Chicago


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/15/21 10:56 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Hate. Hate. Hate.

Dubious teams already make the bottom of the at-large bids every year. I get that coaches want this because it helps job security on the margins, but I hate it.

If they do decide to do, at least make the play-in games be the lowest seeded at-large teams. Don't force small school 16 seeds to fight each other for the change to actually be in the tournament.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66772
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/15/21 11:11 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I understand the reasoning behind expanding the tournament. The number of D-I teams has increased 22% since the tournament went to 64 teams (from 292 in 1994 to 355 last season). Expanding the tournament seems natural.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32326



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/15/21 12:17 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I would vote to reduce it to 32.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66772
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/15/21 12:22 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

myrtle wrote:
I would vote to reduce it to 32.


And have no at-large teams?



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/15/21 12:47 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

myrtle wrote:
I would vote to reduce it to 32.


Can you imagine the outcry (on here) if the NCAA announced they were examining that as an option?? I mean, we would hear about "anything to avoid spending money on women" and a bunch of other things along those lines.


summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7745
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/15/21 1:10 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

myrtle wrote:
I would vote to reduce it to 32.


Nope We were there once. Didn't like it.



_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32326



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/15/21 3:58 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

sorry. just feeling grouchy.


PUmatty



Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 16346
Location: Chicago


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/15/21 4:11 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

myrtle wrote:
I would vote to reduce it to 32.


I wouldn't mind that if it was just automatic qualifiers from 32 conferences (Are there 32 conferences? I don't know). There is some appeal to a set-up where every conference has a conference tournament and those winners make up the final tournament. If you aren't the best team in your conference, why should you be in line to be considered the best team in the country?


undersized_post



Joined: 01 Mar 2021
Posts: 2862



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/15/21 4:49 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

PUmatty wrote:
If they do decide to do, at least make the play-in games be the lowest seeded at-large teams. Don't force small school 16 seeds to fight each other for the change to actually be in the tournament.


I wonder how coaches/players/fans of teams in less prominent conferences feel about this. As a 16 seed, would you rather face off against a similarly talented squad for the chance to actually win a game, or would you rather get destroyed by UConn (or South Carolina, Stanford, etc) in the first round?

On a different note, any thoughts on the proposed locations for the games? It said that, pending approval, for this season the play-in games would take place at the host schools (aka the #1-4 seeds) for the part of the bracket you would enter should you win your game. But starting the season after, the four play-in games would take place at a neutral site. Could you imagine winning a play-in game on Tuesday evening, traveling Wednesday, then having to play in the first round proper on Thursday or Friday morning?



_________________
RebKell's 2021-2022 NCAA Fantasy League Regular Season Champion 🏆
summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7745
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/15/21 4:56 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

PUmatty wrote:
myrtle wrote:
I would vote to reduce it to 32.


I wouldn't mind that if it was just automatic qualifiers from 32 conferences (Are there 32 conferences? I don't know). There is some appeal to a set-up where every conference has a conference tournament and those winners make up the final tournament. If you aren't the best team in your conference, why should you be in line to be considered the best team in the country?


Because conference tournament winners aren't always the best teams in the conference. You're forgetting the upsets. I hate conference tournaments.



_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15690
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/15/21 7:06 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

summertime blues wrote:
PUmatty wrote:
myrtle wrote:
I would vote to reduce it to 32.


I wouldn't mind that if it was just automatic qualifiers from 32 conferences (Are there 32 conferences? I don't know). There is some appeal to a set-up where every conference has a conference tournament and those winners make up the final tournament. If you aren't the best team in your conference, why should you be in line to be considered the best team in the country?


Because conference tournament winners aren't always the best teams in the conference. You're forgetting the upsets. I hate conference tournaments.


Also (and this is a biggie, imo) the #4 team in the Pac 12 or Big Ten is probably a better quality, more deserving team than the winner of OVC, American East, etc.

Frankly, I don't think it's a great idea. After all, might not these extra 4 teams be in the wnit, with a far better chance of progressing further?



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/15/21 7:40 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

undersized_post wrote:
Could you imagine winning a play-in game on Tuesday evening, traveling Wednesday, then having to play in the first round proper on Thursday or Friday morning?


You do realize this is what happens in the men's tourney right? Those games are played every year in Dayton, OH. Are you implying that men can handle this "outrageous" situation but women can't?


purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/15/21 7:48 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

PUmatty wrote:
If you aren't the best team in your conference, why should you be in line to be considered the best team in the country?


Some conferences don't have balanced schedules. It is very possible that the top finisher in a league had a weaker schedule and thus finished ahead of a team or 2 that might actually be better. Let's face it, if someone finished first in the Big Ten and had played home & home with Purdue, Illinois, Wisconsin and Penn State while the second place team only got them each once while playing teams that finished 1st, 3rd, 4th and 5th in home/home, there is a good chance that the 2nd place finisher, that played a much tougher schedule, was actually the better team.


Ex-Ref



Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 8833



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/15/21 7:55 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

purduefanatic wrote:
undersized_post wrote:
Could you imagine winning a play-in game on Tuesday evening, traveling Wednesday, then having to play in the first round proper on Thursday or Friday morning?


You do realize this is what happens in the men's tourney right? Those games are played every year in Dayton, OH. Are you implying that men can handle this "outrageous" situation but women can't?


How many men's teams travel charter vs the women? I have no idea, but if the guys get a charter out of Dayton and the women have to wait for a commercial flight out of wherever they are, or bus to a larger city to catch a flight, it would make a big difference.



_________________
"Women are judged on their success, men on their potential. It’s time we started believing in the potential of women." —Muffet McGraw

“Thank you for showing the fellas that you've got more balls than them,” Haley said, to cheers from the crowd.
purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/15/21 8:28 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Ex-Ref wrote:
purduefanatic wrote:
undersized_post wrote:
Could you imagine winning a play-in game on Tuesday evening, traveling Wednesday, then having to play in the first round proper on Thursday or Friday morning?


You do realize this is what happens in the men's tourney right? Those games are played every year in Dayton, OH. Are you implying that men can handle this "outrageous" situation but women can't?


How many men's teams travel charter vs the women? I have no idea, but if the guys get a charter out of Dayton and the women have to wait for a commercial flight out of wherever they are, or bus to a larger city to catch a flight, it would make a big difference.


The NCAA provides charter flights for the NCAA Tournament. That is not even an issue at all. And yes, they do for both men's and women's tournament teams.


undersized_post



Joined: 01 Mar 2021
Posts: 2862



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/15/21 8:34 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

purduefanatic wrote:
undersized_post wrote:
Could you imagine winning a play-in game on Tuesday evening, traveling Wednesday, then having to play in the first round proper on Thursday or Friday morning?


You do realize this is what happens in the men's tourney right? Those games are played every year in Dayton, OH. Are you implying that men can handle this "outrageous" situation but women can't?


I didn't realize this so thx for bringing me up to speed. I don't think it's ideal for men or women. Your attempts in this thread to look for reverse sexism or some sh*t are pretty desparate tho Wink



_________________
RebKell's 2021-2022 NCAA Fantasy League Regular Season Champion 🏆
purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/16/21 11:28 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

undersized_post wrote:
purduefanatic wrote:
undersized_post wrote:
Could you imagine winning a play-in game on Tuesday evening, traveling Wednesday, then having to play in the first round proper on Thursday or Friday morning?


You do realize this is what happens in the men's tourney right? Those games are played every year in Dayton, OH. Are you implying that men can handle this "outrageous" situation but women can't?


I didn't realize this so thx for bringing me up to speed. I don't think it's ideal for men or women. Your attempts in this thread to look for reverse sexism or some sh*t are pretty desparate tho Wink


Good deal. Happy to help. It really isn't that bad. I mean, the Ivy League plays back to back nights on Friday/Saturday and teams have to travel after their Friday game to play the next day. Other leagues will play Th/Sat or Fri/Sun with teams traveling on the day between. At least in the NCAA Tournament, those teams will charter out either that night after their game or first thing the next day. It really isn't a hardship or much of an issue.

And also happy to point out how ridiculous many of the comments in several of these threads are. I mean, no matter what the NCAA is looking into, decides to do, etc it will never make many in here happy. They look into someone's suggestion to play the Final Fours together and whoa, some flip their shit in here. They look into adding teams to the NCAA Tournament (I mean, giving more women postseason opportunities AND giving women what the men have) and some are like this is BS. Then someone even suggests giving LESS opportunities for the women by going down to 32 teams. Can you imagine for a second if the NCAA had put out a release that they were examining that as an option? I think twitter would explode, not to mention this site. I also remember comments regarding shooting %'s if they move the 3-pt line, if they go with the men's ball size instead of the smaller one they currently use, going back to halves instead of quarters, etc.

I get it. Many of you in here are so anti-NCAA that there isn't a thing they can do that will make you happy.

I think going to 68 teams is great. It is time the tournament expanded given how many more DI teams there are today. Playing both Final Fours in the same city, I don't know. There are some positives and negatives. BUT AT LEAST THE NCAA IS EXPLORING WAYS TO PUSH THE ADVANCEMENT OF WOMEN'S BASKETBALL! Isn't that what every person in this forum wants? I'm glad everyone has opinions as life would be super boring if we were all clones, but sometimes the negative pushback on every little thing gets tiresome.

And finally, yesterday was a long and crappy day so the sarcasm that came out of the keyboard was quite strong and probably not needed.


purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/16/21 11:42 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
Frankly, I don't think it's a great idea. After all, might not these extra 4 teams be in the wnit, with a far better chance of progressing further?


What are the 2 goals of pretty much every team in the nation every season? 1. To win their conference and 2. earn a bid to the NCAA Tournament. I would bet it would be near unanimous that every basketball player would choose the NCAA Tournament over the NIT. After all, NIT stands for "Not In Tournament".


Queenie



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 18013
Location: Queens


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/16/21 10:23 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The First Four is stupid for the men and would be stupid for the women.



_________________
All your Rebecca are belong to the Liberty.

(now with spelling variations)
Ex-Ref



Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 8833



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/17/21 8:26 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Queenie wrote:
The First Four is stupid for the men and would be stupid for the women.


I agree. Soon they be choosing the next four, and then the next-next four and the next-next-next four. Either keep it at 64 or bring everybody in.

One thought that I had about the First Four teams would be to set the 64 team bracket and then put the First Four up against the 16 seeds for the right to meet the 1 seed. That might make the 1v16 game a little better. It might even influence the 1v8/9 game. The one seed would have to plan for two teams in the same time that every one else is planning for just one team.

I think that part of the reason that the 1 seeds are so dominant in the tourney is because they can devote very little time to planning for the 16 seeded team. They can move on the to 8/9 game and even be looking a little ahead at the next games coming up. Especially if the winner of their next game has already been decided.

If the 1 seeded team has the potential of facing what might be a legit 13 or 12 seeded team if the conference winners weren't automatically in, it would force them to do a little more work and maybe bring them back to the pack a little.



_________________
"Women are judged on their success, men on their potential. It’s time we started believing in the potential of women." —Muffet McGraw

“Thank you for showing the fellas that you've got more balls than them,” Haley said, to cheers from the crowd.
purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/17/21 1:07 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Ex-Ref wrote:
Queenie wrote:
The First Four is stupid for the men and would be stupid for the women.


I agree. Soon they be choosing the next four, and then the next-next four and the next-next-next four. Either keep it at 64 or bring everybody in.

One thought that I had about the First Four teams would be to set the 64 team bracket and then put the First Four up against the 16 seeds for the right to meet the 1 seed. That might make the 1v16 game a little better. It might even influence the 1v8/9 game. The one seed would have to plan for two teams in the same time that every one else is planning for just one team.

I think that part of the reason that the 1 seeds are so dominant in the tourney is because they can devote very little time to planning for the 16 seeded team. They can move on the to 8/9 game and even be looking a little ahead at the next games coming up. Especially if the winner of their next game has already been decided.

If the 1 seeded team has the potential of facing what might be a legit 13 or 12 seeded team if the conference winners weren't automatically in, it would force them to do a little more work and maybe bring them back to the pack a little.


So the current format for the men's tourney is that the 4 lowest seeded automatic qualifiers square off in 2 of the matchups while the last 4 at-large teams (usually 11 seeds) meet in the other 2 matchups. Thus, 2 of the #1 seeds already don't know who they are playing while 2 of the #6 seeds don't know their opponent either.

But, here's a question...why shouldn't Gonzaga (undefeated regular season last year) be the overall #1 seed and have a slightly easier path to the Final Four than other teams? And their 2nd round opponent will be either an 8 or 9 seed, which should equate to a top 35 team.

I mean, in your scenario above, you are suggesting that the #1 seeds should have a tougher game than the 2 seeds, the 3 seeds and the 4 seeds. I don't understand that logic in the least. After all, those #1 seeds have earned the right to be at the top of their bracket.

In the 10 years the men have had this going, there have been 2 teams to make it to the Final 4 (VCU in 2011 & UCLA in 2021) with 3 others making it to the Sweet 16.

Anyway, I know someone in here is a big fan of Mercer. Let's say Mercer wins the Southern Conference's bid to the women's NCAA Tournament. They didn't have a great year but got hot at the end to win the conference tourney, thus they are one of the last 4 seeded teams. This means they will be in the First Four. Let's say they are taking on Jackson State, champions of the SWAC. Mercer continues their hot streak and defeats the Tigers but lose 2 nights later to the #1 seed South Carolina Gamecocks. So, sucks to lose, but here's the good part:

the NCAA distributes NCAA Tournament money in units and a unit is awarded for every game played. Thus, Mercer has now gotten 2 units for the Southern Conference instead of 1. While that may not be a lot of money for the women's tournament, that is a pretty big chunk of change on the men's side. I don't know how the Southern Conference divides NCAA Tournament money (some leagues split it evenly across the whole league, some give more to the school that went to the dance, etc). I know some of the smaller leagues will split the first unit evenly amongst all league members and if there is an additional unit, the school responsible for that extra unit will get a much bigger chunk or maybe even the whole thing.

At any rate, my point in all this rambling is that with the First Four on the men's side, in addition to all the extra publicity by being the only game on TV, many of the smaller leagues have gotten multiple units/year thanks to getting an extra NCAA Tournament game that they didn't have in the past. On the women's side, it would mean some increased exposure (no whiparound coverage for those games!) and potentially some extra money for the league/school.


FrozenLVFan



Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 3510



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/18/21 4:26 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

purduefanatic wrote:
undersized_post wrote:
purduefanatic wrote:
undersized_post wrote:
Could you imagine winning a play-in game on Tuesday evening, traveling Wednesday, then having to play in the first round proper on Thursday or Friday morning?


You do realize this is what happens in the men's tourney right? Those games are played every year in Dayton, OH. Are you implying that men can handle this "outrageous" situation but women can't?


I didn't realize this so thx for bringing me up to speed. I don't think it's ideal for men or women. Your attempts in this thread to look for reverse sexism or some sh*t are pretty desparate tho Wink


Good deal. Happy to help. It really isn't that bad. I mean, the Ivy League plays back to back nights on Friday/Saturday and teams have to travel after their Friday game to play the next day. Other leagues will play Th/Sat or Fri/Sun with teams traveling on the day between. At least in the NCAA Tournament, those teams will charter out either that night after their game or first thing the next day. It really isn't a hardship or much of an issue.

And also happy to point out how ridiculous many of the comments in several of these threads are. I mean, no matter what the NCAA is looking into, decides to do, etc it will never make many in here happy. They look into someone's suggestion to play the Final Fours together and whoa, some flip their shit in here. They look into adding teams to the NCAA Tournament (I mean, giving more women postseason opportunities AND giving women what the men have) and some are like this is BS. Then someone even suggests giving LESS opportunities for the women by going down to 32 teams. Can you imagine for a second if the NCAA had put out a release that they were examining that as an option? I think twitter would explode, not to mention this site. I also remember comments regarding shooting %'s if they move the 3-pt line, if they go with the men's ball size instead of the smaller one they currently use, going back to halves instead of quarters, etc.

I get it. Many of you in here are so anti-NCAA that there isn't a thing they can do that will make you happy.

I think going to 68 teams is great. It is time the tournament expanded given how many more DI teams there are today. Playing both Final Fours in the same city, I don't know. There are some positives and negatives. BUT AT LEAST THE NCAA IS EXPLORING WAYS TO PUSH THE ADVANCEMENT OF WOMEN'S BASKETBALL! Isn't that what every person in this forum wants? I'm glad everyone has opinions as life would be super boring if we were all clones, but sometimes the negative pushback on every little thing gets tiresome.

And finally, yesterday was a long and crappy day so the sarcasm that came out of the keyboard was quite strong and probably not needed.


FYI, the Ivy has eliminated most of their Fri-Sat games. Each team now does a max of 2 weekends per year, and the opponents are paired up to minimize travel time.


lynxmania



Joined: 18 Feb 2011
Posts: 10697
Location: Minnesota


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/18/21 4:44 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I'm fine with them syncing the number of teams in the mens and women's tournaments to the same number. Just gives a few more teams the "honor" of being in the tourney.

Plus I would assume they wouldn't do it in a single location like the men at Dayton. I assume they would just be doing it at the site where they would be playing next. But maybe they covered this in the article but I didn't read it.

But also...

Queenie wrote:
The First Four is stupid for the men and would be stupid for the women.


This 100%



_________________
"stormeo don't miss"
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin