So first round in the books and it is completely chalk except for Louisville's loss. Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch. Still, even for the women's tourney, that's not a very madness oriented first round.

i saw a post recently that said the Men's Tournament is wild the first weekend but the women's is great for the last two. Even in the round of 32 the women have some crazy matchups.

Women should get interesting starting tomorrow. The parity is still within the top 30-40 teams. There is a sizable difference that still exists with the mid majors. Hopefully a few big upsets over the next 48 hours.

It's typically like this. While there's definitely some parity (more than 10 or so years ago) the amount in the woman's game is greatly exaggerated and these results are proof. Will end up with a F4 with teams all seeded 3 or higher. That's not parity imo. Heck I doubt we see a single team seeded higher than 7th in the S16

Seeded higher or lower?

Lower, apparently I can't type late at night haha

First game of the second round and we have an upset.

bawitdaball said:

---

First game of the second round and we have an upset.

---

Wow, Ohio State fell asleep at the wheel! Duke goes 10 minutes without scoring, then goes on a big run.

BUVA said:

---

bawitdaball said:

---

First game of the second round and we have an upset.

---

Wow, Ohio State fell asleep at the wheel! Duke goes 10 minutes without scoring, then goes on a big run.

---

OhioSt has a long history of underachieving in the tournament. They were the last 1 seed to lose in the 2nd round (way back in 2006).

whitetrash said:

---

BUVA said:

---

bawitdaball said:

---

First game of the second round and we have an upset.

---

Wow, Ohio State fell asleep at the wheel! Duke goes 10 minutes without scoring, then goes on a big run.

---

OhioSt has a long history of underachieving in the tournament. They were the last 1 seed to lose in the 2nd round (way back in 2006).

---

Didn't Stanford lose in the second round last year?

bawitdaball said:

---

whitetrash said:

---

BUVA said:

---

bawitdaball said:

---

First game of the second round and we have an upset.

---

Wow, Ohio State fell asleep at the wheel! Duke goes 10 minutes without scoring, then goes on a big run.

---

OhioSt has a long history of underachieving in the tournament. They were the last 1 seed to lose in the 2nd round (way back in 2006).

---

Didn't Stanford lose in the second round last year?

---

You're right. I thought they lost in the sweet 16. But they were the first since OhioSt lost to Utah in 2006.

IowaBear said:

---

It's typically like this. While there's definitely some parity (more than 10 or so years ago) the amount in the woman's game is greatly exaggerated and these results are proof. Will end up with a F4 with teams all seeded 3 or higher. That's not parity imo. Heck I doubt we see a single team seeded higher than 7th in the S16

---

With the first two rounds being played on the home courts of the 1-4 seeds, that factors into the tournament mostly following chalk the first weekend.

WBB has more teams that are capable of winning at a high level...it used to be 3-4, then 6-8, then 10-12 now it is 16-20....so we are progressing, but it is pretty easy to see that the top 16 seeds are going to be very successful especially with home CRT advantages so not really surprising as to the sweet 16 we have.

Caitlin Bickle says the women's tournament has reached the point that it would still be financially successful if the first weekend were held at neutral sites.




Agree or disagree? I don't feel strongly enough for a firm disagreement, but will leave it at saying "I doubt it."

Bone Squad said:

---

Caitlin Bickle says the women's tournament has reached the point that it would still be financially successful if the first weekend were held at neutral sites.



Agree or disagree? I don't feel strongly enough for a firm disagreement, but will leave it at saying "I doubt it."

---

That's the perpetual dream of the women's tourney, but I'd go with you on the "I doubt it" category. I suspect we'll see some of that in the next round. Iowa and LSU will draw a crowd, but I'm not sure the other regionals will be that strong.

Ultimately, it still looks more like an "our girls" league. People show up to watch their team, but the crowds aren't there for most of the other schools. I've watched wbb still 1979, but I still have very little interest if LaTech or Baylor isn't playing, and the Techsters are hard to get excited about any more.

Bone Squad said:

---

Caitlin Bickle says the women's tournament has reached the point that it would still be financially successful if the first weekend were held at neutral sites.




Agree or disagree? I don't feel strongly enough for a firm disagreement, but will leave it at saying "I doubt it."

---

Veey much disagree. Like TechDawg said, there are certain teams with certain players that will draw crowds anywhere, but it's not as popular to go to an NCAAW game just for fun. A good thermometer for that is thanksgiving and non con tournament attendance. By bet is it is way higher for the men's side.

franke said:

---

Bone Squad said:

---

Caitlin Bickle says the women's tournament has reached the point that it would still be financially successful if the first weekend were held at neutral sites.




Agree or disagree? I don't feel strongly enough for a firm disagreement, but will leave it at saying "I doubt it."

---

Veey much disagree. Like TechDawg said, there are certain teams with certain players that will draw crowds anywhere, but it's not as popular to go to an NCAAW game just for fun. A good thermometer for that is thanksgiving and non con tournament attendance. By bet is it is way higher for the men's side.

---

Perhaps I'm the exception, but if it isn't Baylor playing I'm not going to go, regardless of who is on the court, men or women.