I think they will if they beat ISU at Austin. That's an extremely important game for both. Rooting for ISU all the way in that one.pruritus_ani said:
CowU doesn't make the top 16. Won't be hosting if that holds.
The Reveal... from the Committee
11,079 Views |
76 Replies |
Last: 5 yr ago by slimecap
If you want to go to the Final Four and win a NC, you have to beat top teams . . . period. That's something we have not been able to do since our last NC in Denver. We got no gripe coming. In 2005, we had to beat the other three regional #1 seeds to win our first NC. In 2012, we had to beat Tennessee in the regional final. The Final Four teams were the four regional #1 seeds. There is no easy path, nor should there ever be. You want another NC? Then, go beat the best.
We had opportunity to beat three 1 seeds in 2005 because we were a 2 seed. A 1 seed can't do that.
The NCAA Committee released a 1-16 ranking. Baylor was overall #1.bearbone11 said:
Did they ever release the 1-16 ranking, or just the regions? From that it looks like they have Louisville and Oregon above us.
Using the S curve, #8 North Carolina State would have been slotted as the 2 seed in overall #1 Baylor's regional,
Instead, #6 Notre Dame was slotted as the 2 seed in overall #1 Baylor's regional.
I don't know which team id like to have in our bracket
Charlie does not really seem interested in helping us! I like the brackets. Don't want UConn and don't want to play close to the Irish fan base. Charlie is trying to set us up for a bad situation, and we do not need his help, which he has NEVER given before.
Charlie has nothing to do with it. Until the committee decides, he is just having his usual fun of "bracketology". It will change each time these reveals are posted.
Why No. 1 seed Baylor should have issue with the NCAA selection committee's top 16 reveal https://es.pn/2WXiWlR
Assuming BU remains a 1 seed, I suppose that we now should root for ND to beat Louisville in the ACC tournament? It might bump ND up to a #1 seed......but then we probably get MSU.
Usually there is no conspiracy when one wants to see one, but making Baylor's path the most difficult seems to be an overriding priority with the selection committee for some time now.
Usually there is no conspiracy when one wants to see one, but making Baylor's path the most difficult seems to be an overriding priority with the selection committee for some time now.
No argument.....but you would like to see the regions more fairly apportioned. This reveal (and it will most likely change going forward) appears to be nothing close to that. It makes a tremendous difference in program, fan, media, and public (those who care about WBB) sentiment to make a FF versus not, because you played a FF team in the regional.....especially if you are considered the overall #1 seed. The parity is starting to make getting there more difficult. Regionals should be balanced to give all as equal a chance as possible.highplains said:
If you want to go to the Final Four and win a NC, you have to beat top teams . . . period. That's something we have not been able to do since our last NC in Denver. We got no gripe coming. In 2005, we had to beat the other three regional #1 seeds to win our first NC. In 2012, we had to beat Tennessee in the regional final. The Final Four teams were the four regional #1 seeds. There is no easy path, nor should there ever be. You want another NC? Then, go beat the best.
I have to disagree on Shepard. I think she is a super talent.WacoKelly83 said:
I, for one, would not mind having ND in our region. They have a great backcourt but we would have a big advantage over Turner and Shepherd. IMHO. Their bigs don't have much range so Cox and Brown wouldn't have to move too far away from the basket on d. Just one way to look at it.
I agree , both Turner and Shepard are very good and should not be overlooked. I'm gonna just pray someone takes them out before we get to them. Im pretty sure they are saying the same thing about us.
Turner does not offer much offense outside of 10 feet but she offers a lot in terms of agility and rebounding. They are a formidable tandem and could negate some of our strengths down low. ND scares me because of their guard play (Arike O, Mabry, Young).
I agree, their guards are fantastic and all shoot 3's.
I don't care how the seedings fall. The cream always rises to the top, especially in women's basketball. The NCAA is going to NCAA and there is still a lot of basketball to be played before the tournament starts.
If you can't beat a 2 seed or worse in the final 8 game you don't deserve to go to the final 4.
This team is great and a nightmare matchup for anyone. The mantra should be "bring it on, we don't care who we play"
If you can't beat a 2 seed or worse in the final 8 game you don't deserve to go to the final 4.
This team is great and a nightmare matchup for anyone. The mantra should be "bring it on, we don't care who we play"
WNIT in '23
This has been the story in every Elite Eight game since we've been in the Final Four. Team gets hot from outside, and we don't adjust. That was textbook Oregon State when we lost to them.whitetrash said:
So we run the risk of encountering a hot-shooting opponent from behind the 3 line, and it has cost us in the past (most notably MissSt in 2017, and Lville to some extent in 2013), and still both games came down to the final possession in regulation.
This is one of the very, very few criticisms I can lob at CKM. She has a fast hook to make a change when someone makes a bonehead play, like forcing the ball through a closed passing lane or not catching up to a loafing post after a missed quick-trigger shot in transition. But, it takes about 5 or 6 made 3-pointers before she has any urgency to adjust the perimeter defense. First World problems for sure, but hey, how are we gonna get to complain more about how we didn't beat another team bad enough, or how many minutes our freshman don't get to play if we keep losing a couple of games every year.EvilTroyAndAbed said:This has been the story in every Elite Eight game since we've been in the Final Four. Team gets hot from outside, and we don't adjust. That was textbook Oregon State when we lost to them.whitetrash said:
So we run the risk of encountering a hot-shooting opponent from behind the 3 line, and it has cost us in the past (most notably MissSt in 2017, and Lville to some extent in 2013), and still both games came down to the final possession in regulation.
Impossible to predict UT this year. They would say youth, I dunno.geewago said:I think they will if they beat ISU at Austin. That's an extremely important game for both. Rooting for ISU all the way in that one.pruritus_ani said:
CowU doesn't make the top 16. Won't be hosting if that holds.
Kim Mulkey on bracket: "I'm going to give you the good and the bad, which one you want first? The bad? That was a bad bracket. That bracket was not fair, that bracket was not balanced. If we're the overall No. 1 seed, we got the benefit of neither geography nor the S-curve."
Whatever eventually happens with our bracket, I hope KM doesn't make the same mistake she made about 8 years ago when we were a one seed and a very good aggettes team (whom we'd already played and beaten 3 times) was the 2 seed in our bracket. She complained openly about how wrong and unfair that was and IMO in the process unwittingly psyched her own team into doubting they could beat a team they'd already beaten 3 times. We went on to lose to them in the regional championship and Blair's team went on to win the NC that season. If we get similarly screwed again with our bracket, I hope instead of howling about it she just bows her neck and resolves that it doesn't matter because we're the best team - period - and we're just going to use the circumstance as extra motivation to get the job done and get to the Final Four, while communicating as much to the team.bowdedg said:
Kim Mulkey on bracket: "I'm going to give you the good and the bad, which one you want first? The bad? That was a bad bracket. That bracket was not fair, that bracket was not balanced. If we're the overall No. 1 seed, we got the benefit of neither geography nor the S-curve."
Well I agree there is a fine line...but if she says nothing then she gets blasted for not sticking up for her program...if she goes to far then she is seen to be a whiner...danged if she does danged if she doesn't.Johnny Bear said:Whatever eventually happens with our bracket, I hope KM doesn't make the same mistake she made about 8 years ago when we were a one seed and a very good aggettes team (whom we'd already played and beaten 3 times) was the 2 seed in our bracket. She complained openly about how wrong and unfair that was and IMO in the process unwittingly psyched her own team into doubting they could beat a team they'd already beaten 3 times. We went on to lose to them in the regional championship and Blair's team went on to win the NC that season. If we get similarly screwed again with our bracket, I hope instead of howling about it she just bows her neck and resolves that it doesn't matter because we're the best team - period - and we're just going to use the circumstance as extra motivation to get the job done and get to the Final Four, while communicating as much to the team.bowdedg said:
Kim Mulkey on bracket: "I'm going to give you the good and the bad, which one you want first? The bad? That was a bad bracket. That bracket was not fair, that bracket was not balanced. If we're the overall No. 1 seed, we got the benefit of neither geography nor the S-curve."
Of course she speaks the truth and what most commentators have said it was not a balanced bracket. The committee says we are #1 and then they proceed to give us the hardest on paper region...that is just not how it is supposed to work...
Obviously, the two best teams in the Country the year the Aggie's won it were us and them...we beat them three times...but all of the games allowed them to figure us out and become less and less scared of us. No question as good as they were they had an advantage over any other team is seeing us and not being scared to play us... because it was the fourth time...I think it was unreasonable to put them in our region...if we had met for the championship or semi's hey that is great but not in the regional s.
When strictly listed at 1 -16, we are #1 or at least that is how I read it. When they discussed it last night. The belief is that it is mostly based on geography and having Baylor and South Carolina in that region means more fans. ???? Who knows, but I can bet you money is the first motivator!!! Why ND? Drives me nuts. It will be interesting to see what happens in the ACC tourney if Louisville and ND make it to the championship game.Baylor Dad in Va. said:
It is a ridiculous seeding committee that is completely prejudiced against Baylor!! To put Baylor, the defending national champion Notre Dame, and the probably champion of the Big10 all in the same bracket is absurd.
I am livid with anger!
It better change when the final bracket comes out because this is not fair.
So many games to be played. I think the committee is taking note of all the various criticism of the first reveal, and, will adjust accordingly. Future PAC-12 & ACC wins/losses are going to alter what was in the 1st reveal considerably. I wouldn't pay to much attention to the 1st reveal, other than Baylor controls its own destiny.
I would like to see more switching on defense when guarding the perimeter. It seems to me that good 3 point shooting teams can get off a pretty good shot when we are trying to fight over or around a screen. Our guards are good enough to handle a bigger player if Cox has to switch in order to shut down a shooter on a screen. Some of these shooters don't need much space and a good screen will give them the space if we don't switch. Drives me nuts when we give up so many 3s.
Oh yeah............turn down the noise during the games! It is too loud when my chest is vibrating from it and I can't hear the person next to me.
Oh yeah............turn down the noise during the games! It is too loud when my chest is vibrating from it and I can't hear the person next to me.
Every freakin' Spring these past many years two things happen like clockworkBaylor Dad in Va. said:
It is a ridiculous seeding committee that is completely prejudiced against Baylor!! To put Baylor, the defending national champion Notre Dame, and the probably champion of the Big10 all in the same bracket is absurd.
I am livid with anger!
It better change when the final bracket comes out because this is not fair.
Baylor fans and coaches gripe about the bracket we are placed in
We lose before we get to the Final 4
It started the year we got placed against Texas AM and totally psyched ourselves out.
Let's just beat whomever, whenever.
We are good enough this year to beat anyone.
I would play ND in the 1-16 matchup if that it what the committee draws up.
I couldn't agree more - I just think openly complaining about it at best doesn't help anything and at worst can be harmful to your own team.Eball said:Well I agree there is a fine line...but if she says nothing then she gets blasted for not sticking up for her program...if she goes to far then she is seen to be a whiner...danged if she does danged if she doesn't.Johnny Bear said:Whatever eventually happens with our bracket, I hope KM doesn't make the same mistake she made about 8 years ago when we were a one seed and a very good aggettes team (whom we'd already played and beaten 3 times) was the 2 seed in our bracket. She complained openly about how wrong and unfair that was and IMO in the process unwittingly psyched her own team into doubting they could beat a team they'd already beaten 3 times. We went on to lose to them in the regional championship and Blair's team went on to win the NC that season. If we get similarly screwed again with our bracket, I hope instead of howling about it she just bows her neck and resolves that it doesn't matter because we're the best team - period - and we're just going to use the circumstance as extra motivation to get the job done and get to the Final Four, while communicating as much to the team.bowdedg said:
Kim Mulkey on bracket: "I'm going to give you the good and the bad, which one you want first? The bad? That was a bad bracket. That bracket was not fair, that bracket was not balanced. If we're the overall No. 1 seed, we got the benefit of neither geography nor the S-curve."
Of course she speaks the truth and what most commentators have said it was not a balanced bracket. The committee says we are #1 and then they proceed to give us the hardest on paper region...that is just not how it is supposed to work...
Obviously, the two best teams in the Country the year the Aggie's won it were us and them...we beat them three times...but all of the games allowed them to figure us out and become less and less scared of us. No question as good as they were they had an advantage over any other team is seeing us and not being scared to play us... because it was the fourth time...I think it was unreasonable to put them in our region...if we had met for the championship or semi's hey that is great but not in the regional s.
I have no problem with her complaining about this bracket reveal, because now is the time that something can actually be done about it. Given the backlash from the media and from the teams, there is little chance that the committee will put out a bracket like that, even if the status quo holds. It was a bad bracket and it needed to be said. I wouldn't be surprised if the ADs and conference leadership were making complaints in the background as well.
The key is not to do the same thing once the real bracket comes out. At that point, the team has to be confident and have the "beat anyone that show up" attitude. Save the arguments for the offseason. Seeding can make a huge difference in a team's fortunes, but nothing can be done once the bracket comes out. I am fine with campaigning for our team, but most of all we just need to win the games.
I do wonder why the committee even bothered releasing the regions at this early date. They should have just released the top 16 and let us talk about that. Instead they took the route that makes them look like morons, which I suppose is par for the course with the NCAA. Maybe when they do the 2nd reveal in a couple weeks they could do the full seeding, but at this point we are too far out and the seedings are meaningless. All they did was show off their own bias, and give us something to yell about between games.
The key is not to do the same thing once the real bracket comes out. At that point, the team has to be confident and have the "beat anyone that show up" attitude. Save the arguments for the offseason. Seeding can make a huge difference in a team's fortunes, but nothing can be done once the bracket comes out. I am fine with campaigning for our team, but most of all we just need to win the games.
I do wonder why the committee even bothered releasing the regions at this early date. They should have just released the top 16 and let us talk about that. Instead they took the route that makes them look like morons, which I suppose is par for the course with the NCAA. Maybe when they do the 2nd reveal in a couple weeks they could do the full seeding, but at this point we are too far out and the seedings are meaningless. All they did was show off their own bias, and give us something to yell about between games.
R11
https://highposthoops.com/2019/02/11/womens-basketball-top-16-reveal-mississippi-state-1-seed/
Greensboro is the toughest region, featuring Baylor (1), Notre Dame (6), Maryland (11), and South Carolina (13). Those seeds add up to 31. Albany is the easiest region, where Mississippi State (4) is paired with UConn (5), Oregon State (12), and Miami (16). Those add up to 37. For reference, the committee would like each region's true seed total to be within about five of each other. On the top four seed lines, that should narrow even a little more.
There are two reasons why this happened: The first is that geography seems to trump balance. That's why Iowa State, for instance, is sent to Chicago rather than Portland, which would have balanced the regions a little more. The second is that the committee has to walk a tightrope with four ACC teams and three Pac-12 teams in the top 16. Unless absolutely necessary, teams from the same conference cannot be placed in the same region if they are in the top four seed lines. That limited their options. It meant Notre Dame was sent to Greensboro to accommodate Louisville going to Chicago. Louisville was sent to Chicago because Baylor got first pick at a region, and Greensboro is closer to Waco. (EDIT: I'M NOT OWNED)
Odd explanation in that last sentence. Waco is closer to Chicago by less than a hundred miles over Greensboro.
Greensboro is the toughest region, featuring Baylor (1), Notre Dame (6), Maryland (11), and South Carolina (13). Those seeds add up to 31. Albany is the easiest region, where Mississippi State (4) is paired with UConn (5), Oregon State (12), and Miami (16). Those add up to 37. For reference, the committee would like each region's true seed total to be within about five of each other. On the top four seed lines, that should narrow even a little more.
There are two reasons why this happened: The first is that geography seems to trump balance. That's why Iowa State, for instance, is sent to Chicago rather than Portland, which would have balanced the regions a little more. The second is that the committee has to walk a tightrope with four ACC teams and three Pac-12 teams in the top 16. Unless absolutely necessary, teams from the same conference cannot be placed in the same region if they are in the top four seed lines. That limited their options. It meant Notre Dame was sent to Greensboro to accommodate Louisville going to Chicago. Louisville was sent to Chicago because Baylor got first pick at a region, and Greensboro is closer to Waco. (EDIT: I'M NOT OWNED)
Odd explanation in that last sentence. Waco is closer to Chicago by less than a hundred miles over Greensboro.
Waco to Chicago: 1061 milesWacoKelly83 said:
https://highposthoops.com/2019/02/11/womens-basketball-top-16-reveal-mississippi-state-1-seed/
Greensboro is the toughest region, featuring Baylor (1), Notre Dame (6), Maryland (11), and South Carolina (13). Those seeds add up to 31. Albany is the easiest region, where Mississippi State (4) is paired with UConn (5), Oregon State (12), and Miami (16). Those add up to 37. For reference, the committee would like each region's true seed total to be within about five of each other. On the top four seed lines, that should narrow even a little more.
There are two reasons why this happened: The first is that geography seems to trump balance. That's why Iowa State, for instance, is sent to Chicago rather than Portland, which would have balanced the regions a little more. The second is that the committee has to walk a tightrope with four ACC teams and three Pac-12 teams in the top 16. Unless absolutely necessary, teams from the same conference cannot be placed in the same region if they are in the top four seed lines. That limited their options. It meant Notre Dame was sent to Greensboro to accommodate Louisville going to Chicago. Louisville was sent to Chicago because Baylor got first pick at a region, and Greensboro is closer to Waco. (EDIT: I'M NOT OWNED)
Odd explanation in that last sentence. BTW, Waco is closer to Chicago by less than a hundred miles over Greensboro.
Waco to Greensboro: 1158 miles
"Louisville was sent to Chicago because Baylor got first pick at a region, and Greensboro is closer to Waco."
I didn't know that Baylor got to pick anything. Lol
I didn't know that Baylor got to pick anything. Lol
It seems to me that a top 4 team from the southwest had the deck stacked against them for seeding before the season ever began. When the "close" locations for us are Chicago and Greensboro, it looks almost inevitable that our choice will be between playing a better team than the S-curve would have selected, or playing a slightly lesser team very near their own turf.
I don't know how the regionals are chosen. The true fix, I think, is ensuring that the 4 locations extend further across the map than these do.
Does anyone know who has a voice in choosing the regions? I might guess that the major conference commissioners have some involvement. Of course, our commissioner is utterly useless, so that would not help us anyway.
I don't know how the regionals are chosen. The true fix, I think, is ensuring that the 4 locations extend further across the map than these do.
Does anyone know who has a voice in choosing the regions? I might guess that the major conference commissioners have some involvement. Of course, our commissioner is utterly useless, so that would not help us anyway.
Cities bid for the regionals and the NCAA decides which ones to use. If no cities near us bid, then we won't get a local regional. I assume that the NCAA gives some effort to evenly distribute them geographically, but it doesn't always work out. The reason UConn always gets a home regional is because they are the only school that can pretty much guarantee a sell out. The next 2 seasons we have a local regional, and we need to show up so they stay in our area.
R11
Bone Squad said:
I don't know how the regionals are chosen.
Does anyone know who has a voice in choosing the regions? I might guess that the major conference commissioners have some involvement.
2021 REGIONAL ROUND HOSTS
18 July 2018
"The NCAA Division I Women's Basketball Committee has awarded regional-round hosting duties for the 2021 championships.
Selected to host regionals in 2021 are
.. Albany NY Times Union Center
.. Austin TX area H-E-B Center in Cedar Park
.. Cincinnati OH Cintas Center
.. Spokane Spokane Veterans Memorial Arena
with play taking place March 26-29.
Austin, which has hosted an NCAA championship-record 18 regional games at the Frank Erwin Center, will host in 2021 at the H-E-B Center.
Link for entire article
https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-women/article/2018-07-18/regional-sites-named-2021-and-2022-di-womens-basketball
In 2020, a Regional will be held at SMU in Dallas.bearbone11 said:
The next 2 seasons we have a local regional, and we need to show up so they stay in our area.
Featured Stories
See All
In-Depth Preview: Baylor set to host key offensive line transfers
by Grayson Grundhoefer
8:35
15h ago
399
Tweety Carter: Former Baylor Star Is the Next to Join Scott Drew's Staff
by SicEm365 Radio
Analyzing the Commitments: Baylor goes 3-for-3 during big OV weekend
by Grayson Grundhoefer
Can Matt Jones Settle in at Inside Linebacker in His 6th Year?
by Travis Roeder