Non-Lady Vol Basketball News 2024-25

#21,226
#21,226
volman128 said:
It sounds similar to us in 2005. They didn't send us to Chattanooga because it would've supposedly been a slap in the face to the #1 overall seed that year, LSU. So LSU got Chattanooga and we got Philadelphia. Similarly, SC, the #1 overall seed, got sent to Greensboro. I guess it makes sense. The #1 overall seed should get the regional site that's closest to them.

Funny how UConn always gets a home regional regardless of seeding, though. No matter what seed they were, they would've been in Bridgeport. In that regard, what I've always been told is it's about travel cost, etc. Funny how that's never the case with any other team.
Click to expand...
Once you place the number 1 seeds in their respective regionals, you then try to place the number two teams in reverse order….meaning the overall one seed should get the overall fourth ranked number two seed and so on. There are other considerations to be sure, but that is the goal.

Final AP poll top 8, should have been SC-Iowa, check. Stanford-Baylor, no check. NCSU- Texas, no check. Louisville-Uconn, no check.

SC
Stanford
NCSU
LVille
uconn
texas
baylor
Iowa
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Smallvol#1
#21,228
#21,228
LadyOrange said:
Because these parents are friends. Even though their daughters go to different colleges, they played AAU, etc. and remain friends as do their parents.

Also, it’s up to the university to begin an investigation. The police would not have been notified.
Click to expand...
Lmao you believe the university has the jurisdiction to investigate “death threats” from random people on Twitter? Jesus
 
  • Like
Reactions: texas_vol2
#21,231
#21,231
Rooster1 said:
Once you place the number 1 seeds in their respective regionals, you then try to place the number two teams in reverse order….meaning the overall one seed should get the overall fourth ranked number two seed and so on. There are other considerations to be sure, but that is the goal.

Final AP poll top 8, should have been SC-Iowa, check. Stanford-Baylor, no check. NCSU- Texas, no check. Louisville-Uconn, no check.

SC
Stanford
NCSU
LVille
uconn
texas
baylor
Iowa
Click to expand...
There's no correlation between the AP poll and how the selection committee ranks teams. The selection committee had Baylor ahead of UConn, which is why they had the strongest #2 playing the lowest #1 Louisville. UConn was #6 and that's why they were paired up with NCST. Texas and Iowa moved into the #2 line because they finished the season strongly, but there's no way either of them should have been ahead of UConn. Baylor also had a very good season so that they should have finished ahead of UConn even though they lost the B12 final to Texas.
 
  • Like
Reactions: meyers7, texas_vol2 and Rooster1
#21,232
#21,232
Amb3096 said:
There's no correlation between the AP poll and how the selection committee ranks teams. The selection committee had Baylor ahead of UConn, which is why they had the strongest #2 playing the lowest #1 Louisville. UConn was #6 and that's why they were paired up with NCST. Texas and Iowa moved into the #2 line because they finished the season strongly, but there's no way either of them should have been ahead of UConn. Baylor also had a very good season so they should have finished ahead of UConn even though they lost the B12 final to Texas.
Click to expand...
I agree, based on how Baylor did in the tournament, they may have been rank too high though. If folks want to keep it fair, then the first few rounds should not be at some colleges and no one seed should be in their region. Perhaps one location for all games, but then a school would have an advantage if they are close to that location. My thoughts are all the excuses people use are excuses of losers. Refs, Conferences, schedules, home advantages are all excuses. Winners have no excuses because they play through all the hype and are not mentally challenged by the situation but adjust to the conditions and just win.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KJLRN and brassie
#21,233
#21,233
ocoandasoc said:
It's hard to argue with geography, though. Nearly every year the NCAA puts one of the Regionals in a northeastern city.
Click to expand...

Do you actually think that it’s not by design that there is a regional in the northeast now? Prior to the 2010s it was rare to have a regional in the northeast, let alone in New England. It happened but wasn’t common. And when it did it was usually Philadelphia.

I mean, it’s supposed to be east, mid east , mid west and west regionals. This year there were regionals in Bridgeport and Greensboro. North Carolina isn’t “mid east” by any stretch. Historically when Greensboro has been a regional it’s been the East site, and understandably so.
 
#21,236
#21,236
Amb3096 said:
There's no correlation between the AP poll and how the selection committee ranks teams. The selection committee had Baylor ahead of UConn, which is why they had the strongest #2 playing the lowest #1 Louisville. UConn was #6 and that's why they were paired up with NCST. Texas and Iowa moved into the #2 line because they finished the season strongly, but there's no way either of them should have been ahead of UConn. Baylor also had a very good season so that they should have finished ahead of UConn even though they lost the B12 final to Texas.
Click to expand...
Good points, but the selection committee had no business ranking Baylor over Uconn IMO. This of course is also why Uconn ended up in Bridgeport, so Uconn fans loved it, but they should have been in the regional with Louisville. That would have matched up NCSU and Baylor in same regional which would have been the correct move and the final AP poll of the top 8 would have matched perfectly btw.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Smallvol#1
#21,238
#21,238
Rooster1 said:
Good points, but the selection committee had no business ranking Baylor over Uconn IMO. This of course is also why Uconn ended up in Bridgeport, so Uconn fans loved it, but they should have been in the regional with Louisville. That would have matched up NCSU and Baylor in same regional which would have been the correct move and the final AP poll of the top 8 would have matched perfectly btw.
Click to expand...
Why don't you think Baylor should have been ahead of UConn? They were contending for a #1 until they lost to Texas in the B12 final. They had a better season and were firmly at #5. UConn, Texas, Iowa, Michigan, Indiana and LSU were the ones fighting for spots #6-8.
 
#21,239
#21,239
charlie_1 said:
I agree, based on how Baylor did in the tournament, they may have been rank too high though. If folks want to keep it fair, then the first few rounds should not be at some colleges and no one seed should be in their region. Perhaps one location for all games, but then a school would have an advantage if they are close to that location. My thoughts are all the excuses people use are excuses of losers. Refs, Conferences, schedules, home advantages are all excuses. Winners have no excuses because they play through all the hype and are not mentally challenged by the situation but adjust to the conditions and just win.
Click to expand...
Hindsight is 20-20. The same could be said about Iowa and LSU being overseeded as well. Baylor may not have been the 5th best team, but they had the record to earn it.

I agree with you that schools shouldn't host. I think it shows how much less fanfare there is for WCBB vs. MCBB because fans won't show up for games if their team isn't playing. For regionals, there's probably a sense of picking geographies that have shown support for women's basketball. Until they expand their fanbase from "team fans" to "WCBB fans", then this type of placement headaches will just continue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jonson
#21,240
#21,240
Amb3096 said:
Why don't you think Baylor should have been ahead of UConn? They were contending for a #1 until they lost to Texas in the B12 final. They had a better season and were firmly at #5. UConn, Texas, Iowa, Michigan, Indiana and LSU were the ones fighting for spots #6-8.
Click to expand...
Again, the AP had Uconn over Baylor and I agreed with that. I believe the tourney has brought that picture into full light. Baylor losing big to SD not withstanding, they were not better than a fully healthy Uconn team at any point, and the AP got that right but the selection committee missed on it. Btw , the Big Easy conference showed out well in the tourney if that was missed on anyone. The B12, not so much.
 
Last edited:
#21,241
#21,241
Rooster1 said:
Again, the AP had Uconn over Baylor and I agreed with that. I believe the tourney has brought that picture into full light. Baylor losing big to SD not withstanding, they were not better than a fully healthy Uconn team at any point, and the AP got that right but the selection committee missed on it. Btw , the Big Easy conference showed out well in the tourney if that was missed on anyone. The B12, not so much.
Click to expand...
The best solution was to make UConn the 4th #1. I don't disagree that a healthy UConn was better than Baylor. The same is also true for Louisville. That would have kept them out of Bridgeport, but would have also been a leap in logic for the selection committee for how they address injuries.
 
  • Like
Reactions: olddog, glv98 and Rooster1
#21,242
#21,242
FPHpoKIXIAc9Sei
Joanne Allen-Taylor
 
  • Like
Reactions: LadyVols_WBK
#21,243
#21,243
I just read an article in the Washington Post today that said that women's basketball was the surprise winner in NIL. It is bigger than any sport except football, including men's basketball. They said that some men have large followings to, but companies like star athletes who have high engagement with social media, which is more often the women. While I have mixed feelings about NIL, I am excited of the relative success of women basketball players given the huge disparity in the other direction pertaining to pro sports.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/03/30/womens-college-basketball-endorsements-nil/
 
  • Like
Reactions: VOLSanon, mcannon1, ATLVOLFAN01 and 1 other person
#21,244
#21,244
Amb3096 said:
Hindsight is 20-20. The same could be said about Iowa and LSU being overseeded as well. Baylor may not have been the 5th best team, but they had the record to earn it.

I agree with you that schools shouldn't host. I think it shows how much less fanfare there is for WCBB vs. MCBB because fans won't show up for games if their team isn't playing. For regionals, there's probably a sense of picking geographies that have shown support for women's basketball. Until they expand their fanbase from "team fans" to "WCBB fans", then this type of placement headaches will just continue.
Click to expand...

Next year they will go to 2 regional sites instead of 4. You all will love this….it’s in Greenville, sc or Seattle, Wash.:cool:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smokey19rt
#21,245
#21,245
tchristensen22 said:
Next year they will go to 2 regional sites instead of 4. You all will love this….it’s in Greenville, sc or Seattle, Wash.:cool:
Click to expand...
That's just for the regional sites though. I was talking more about the top 16 teams hosting 1st/2nd round matchups.

SC will be very happy next season though. They won't need to leave the state in their quest for the title.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smokey19rt and tchristensen22
#21,246
#21,246
Next year with two regional sites, I can't see the attendance going up. Yes, huge crowds will be for the SC games as it would if it were still in a separate region but the other side of the bracket in that region will have much less attendance. For the Seattle bracket, not enough fans will travel to a location so far. The madness (experience IMO) is in the students cheering like crazy and it seems students will have to find funds to make a trip and stay somewhat far from their schools. People are screaming for fairness but most will now watch on TV, I wonder if that is the way the athletes prefer it too? If so, then perhaps all the games should be played in locations as far as possible from the schools in every round.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top