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

Tournament Teams

 
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
PickledGinger



Joined: 04 Oct 2013
Posts: 1362



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/14/14 5:20 pm    ::: Tournament Teams Reply Reply with quote

Outside of the Big East with DePaul and St. John's, which I now consider a Mid-Major, I cannot see any small conferences getting an at-large birth into the tournament this year. I can't even see UConn's RPI being strong enough to get another American team in. On the other hand, the ACC, B1G, Pac-12 and SEC are collectively the deepest they have ever been and are all loaded with competitive teams. I'll give the Mid-Majors and extra spot for equity's sake, but that still leaves 30 at-large bids to go around for the 5 power conferences, which is an average of 7 total bids per.

Here's how I see it working out:

ACC - 6-8 Births
Duke, Louisville, Florida State, North Carolina, Notre Dame
1-3 of Miami, Virginia, Syracuse, Wake Forest

Big 12 - 5-6 Births
Baylor, Texas, West Virginia
2-3 of Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

B1G - 7-8 Births
Iowa, Maryland, Michigan State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Rutgers
1-2 of Michigan, Northwestern, Penn State, Purdue

Pac-12 - 6-8 Births
California, Oregon State, Stanford, UCLA, Washington
1-3 of Arizona State, Oregon, USC, Washington State

SEC - 7-8 Births
Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas A&M
3-4 of Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, LSU, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt

Of course there will be teams that surprise, good or bad, but on paper I think these are the most likely teams to make tournament runs this season. It's looking like a great year to be a fan of one of the power conferences. They're all going to be very competitive.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/14/14 5:34 pm    ::: Re: Tournament Teams Reply Reply with quote

Syracuse will be in. I don't know why you would assume Minn or Rutgers or Wash are locks.

I'll be surprised Ark, Kansas, LSU, Florida, UVA, Wake get in.

The A10 will get more than one.


PickledGinger



Joined: 04 Oct 2013
Posts: 1362



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/14/14 9:31 pm    ::: Re: Tournament Teams Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
Syracuse will be in. I don't know why you would assume Minn or Rutgers or Wash are locks.

I'll be surprised Ark, Kansas, LSU, Florida, UVA, Wake get in.

The A10 will get more than one.


Syracuse is far from a lock for me until Sykes is 100% healthy, and I've heard she's not; where as Minnesota has the best player in the Big Ten. If the new coach is ANY good (which Borton wasn't the last 5 seasons), Banham and Zahui will get them to the Dance.

Rutgers has it's most talented team since Prince left, I think they'll make it back. I don't necessarily think Washington is a lock, but the Pac-12 is deep enough to get 7 teams in, I have a hard time not seeing the Huskies as one of them. As for Kansas and Wake, in particular, they've got senior star power. Particularly in the relatively weak Big 12, that should win them some games people expect them to lose. Arkansas is actually pretty talented this year. I personally agree about Florida and LSU, but they were getting love in the preseason polls so I decided to throw them in there.


beknighted



Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 11050
Location: Lost in D.C.


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/15/14 4:23 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

After the UCLA/JMU game yesterday, some adjustment to the level of certainty about mid-majors not getting bids might be warranted.


Phil



Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Posts: 1273



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/16/14 8:04 pm    ::: Re: Tournament Teams Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:

The A10 will get more than one.


Maybe. Dayton isn't making the voters look good.


shadowboxer



Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 2126



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/17/14 10:11 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

How often were midmajors awarded an invitation, and not just the auto-bid, based on the midm's tournament outcome, anyway?

That would be an interesting stat to look at, for say the past ten yrs-and the Atlantic 10 doesn't count as they did not have the costs of a midmajor football program every year consuming resources.


beknighted



Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 11050
Location: Lost in D.C.


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/17/14 10:25 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

shadowboxer wrote:
How often were midmajors awarded an invitation, and not just the auto-bid, based on the midm's tournament outcome, anyway?

That would be an interesting stat to look at, for say the past ten yrs-and the Atlantic 10 doesn't count as they did not have the costs of a midmajor football program every year consuming resources.


I'm not sure why not playing football would be a reason to leave out the A-10. And A-10 teams do play football - Fordham and UMass both come to mind as examples.

Without doing the actual research (which I may do if I get a chance), I can say that there usually is at least one non-major conference, non-A-10 at large bid, and I seem to remember years with as many as 3 or 4. (One year the CAA got 2, IIRC.)


shadowboxer



Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 2126



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/17/14 11:33 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Would be interested in those stat results, should you check them out.


When schools don't have a football team, they are not continually raising $$$ from boosters, etc...to develop state of art training facilities, keep up or build new stadium, $$ spent on recruiting, $$$ spent on transportation for any distant games, $$ spent on all the various communication outlets, and now, possibly stipends.The layout for spending that $$ for both football and basketball seems cost prohibitive.

FYI-UMass came into the MAC in attempt to raise their level of football competition.

These same schools, however, would be totally appalled if asked to fold their football program and instead concentrate on developing a top shelf basketball program and/or other athletic progams due to the traditions and history they feel the game of football defines.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/17/14 11:47 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

shadowboxer wrote:
Would be interested in those stat results, should you check them out.


When schools don't have a football team, they are not continually raising $$$ from boosters, etc...to develop state of art training facilities, keep up or build new stadium, $$ spent on recruiting, $$$ spent on transportation for any distant games, $$ spent on all the various communication outlets, and now, possibly stipends.The layout for spending that $$ for both football and basketball seems cost prohibitive.

FYI-UMass came into the MAC in attempt to raise their level of football competition.

These same schools, however, would be totally appalled if asked to fold their football program and instead concentrate on developing a top shelf basketball program and/or other athletic progams due to the traditions and history they feel the game of football defines.


I'd just point out in terms of money that the BE has a higher $$$ TV contract without FBS (and for most schools even FCS) football than a bunch of FBS football conferences like the AAC, CUSA, MAC, MW, and SunBelt whose TV contracts include football. They raise money from boosters based on their strong traditional basketball programs.

And because the BE schools generally sponsor far fewer sports, the stipends will be far less expensive it they choose to match them. None of them have close to the 500+ scholarships that a Texas or Ohio St are providing each year. While Providence and SHU have been far behind in spending for years, I'd be very surprised if Georgetown, Villanova, SJU, Xavier, Marquette or Creighton, for example, are going to allow themselves to fall far behind.

Indeed, in terms of priorities, Villanova's decision NOT to upgrade football to FBS (despite considerable pressure from the Old Big East) and the New Big East's decision to split away from the football schools, reflect the very choice to "concentrate on developing a top shelf basketball program and/or other athletic programs" you mention.




Last edited by ArtBest23 on 11/17/14 12:07 pm; edited 1 time in total
shadowboxer



Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 2126



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/17/14 11:56 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

You will note I am not arguing against your conclusions.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/17/14 12:15 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I'm just saying that the choice that UMass made, or that Temple made to kill off a bunch of non-revenue sports in order to pour the money into football, is not universal. Some schools have made a conscious choice to concentrate on basketball as their primary sport.


beknighted



Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 11050
Location: Lost in D.C.


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/17/14 12:32 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

shadowboxer wrote:
Would be interested in those stat results, should you check them out.


One of my long-term projects on my RPI v. seeding spreadsheet has been to identify the auto bids and the at large bids, which I've done sometimes but not for every year. I really should finish it, and then I could answer your question pretty easily, going back 15 years.


Stephen Shirley



Joined: 18 Dec 2006
Posts: 787



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/17/14 1:15 pm    ::: Mid-Major At-Large Reply Reply with quote

I think C-USA has a good shot at getting two teams in. MT and W. Ky should both do well enough in conference play and can make noise in OOC play. Though the Lady Raiders missed an opportunity by losing at Arizona St Friday night.


FollowtheCardinalRule



Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Posts: 5153
Location: Denver


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/24/14 8:29 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

With Tulane beating NCState, they have two good wins as they beat LSU. Tulane is my bet at the moment for a two bid American. not that it makes sense for tulane to be in the american.....


FollowtheCardinalRule



Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Posts: 5153
Location: Denver


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/24/14 8:32 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

With Tulane beating NCState, they have two good wins as they beat LSU. Tulane is my bet at the moment for a two bid American. not that it makes sense for tulane to be in the american.....


ripleydc



Joined: 17 Nov 2004
Posts: 4778
Location: Washington, DC


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/25/14 8:22 am    ::: Re: Tournament Teams Reply Reply with quote

PickledGinger wrote:
Outside of the Big East with DePaul and St. John's, which I now consider a Mid-Major, I cannot see any small conferences getting an at-large birth into the tournament this year. I can't even see UConn's RPI being strong enough to get another American team in. On the other hand, the ACC, B1G, Pac-12 and SEC are collectively the deepest they have ever been and are all loaded with competitive teams. I'll give the Mid-Majors and extra spot for equity's sake, but that still leaves 30 at-large bids to go around for the 5 power conferences, which is an average of 7 total bids per.

Here's how I see it working out:

ACC - 6-8 Births
Duke, Louisville, Florida State, North Carolina, Notre Dame
1-3 of Miami, Virginia, Syracuse, Wake Forest

Big 12 - 5-6 Births
Baylor, Texas, West Virginia
2-3 of Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

B1G - 7-8 Births
Iowa, Maryland, Michigan State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Rutgers
1-2 of Michigan, Northwestern, Penn State, Purdue

Pac-12 - 6-8 Births
California, Oregon State, Stanford, UCLA, Washington
1-3 of Arizona State, Oregon, USC, Washington State

SEC - 7-8 Births
Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas A&M
3-4 of Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, LSU, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt

Of course there will be teams that surprise, good or bad, but on paper I think these are the most likely teams to make tournament runs this season. It's looking like a great year to be a fan of one of the power conferences. They're all going to be very competitive.

If there really are so many teams impacted by maternity leave this season, that certainly could impact the Tournament!!! Wink


loneycafe



Joined: 17 Oct 2009
Posts: 248



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/25/14 8:53 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

FollowtheCardinalRule wrote:
With Tulane beating NCState, they have two good wins as they beat LSU. Tulane is my bet at the moment for a two bid American. not that it makes sense for tulane to be in the american.....


I posted this is in the other thread, but I wouldn't put too much stock in Tulane beating NC State. NC State isn't a good team this season -- at this point in the season, anyway. (It could change if our 6-5 center gets cleared by the NCAA to play.)


purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/25/14 10:58 am    ::: Re: Tournament Teams Reply Reply with quote

ripleydc wrote:
PickledGinger wrote:
Outside of the Big East with DePaul and St. John's, which I now consider a Mid-Major, I cannot see any small conferences getting an at-large birth into the tournament this year. I can't even see UConn's RPI being strong enough to get another American team in. On the other hand, the ACC, B1G, Pac-12 and SEC are collectively the deepest they have ever been and are all loaded with competitive teams. I'll give the Mid-Majors and extra spot for equity's sake, but that still leaves 30 at-large bids to go around for the 5 power conferences, which is an average of 7 total bids per.

Here's how I see it working out:

ACC - 6-8 Births
Duke, Louisville, Florida State, North Carolina, Notre Dame
1-3 of Miami, Virginia, Syracuse, Wake Forest

Big 12 - 5-6 Births
Baylor, Texas, West Virginia
2-3 of Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

B1G - 7-8 Births
Iowa, Maryland, Michigan State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Rutgers
1-2 of Michigan, Northwestern, Penn State, Purdue

Pac-12 - 6-8 Births
California, Oregon State, Stanford, UCLA, Washington
1-3 of Arizona State, Oregon, USC, Washington State

SEC - 7-8 Births
Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas A&M
3-4 of Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, LSU, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt

Of course there will be teams that surprise, good or bad, but on paper I think these are the most likely teams to make tournament runs this season. It's looking like a great year to be a fan of one of the power conferences. They're all going to be very competitive.

If there really are so many teams impacted by maternity leave this season, that certainly could impact the Tournament!!! Wink


LOL...awesome! I think I have become almost numb to people misusing birth/berth that I completely missed it when I read it first. I must admit I am still laughing at this.

Thank you.


beknighted



Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 11050
Location: Lost in D.C.


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/25/14 11:02 am    ::: Re: Tournament Teams Reply Reply with quote

purduefanatic wrote:
ripleydc wrote:
PickledGinger wrote:
Outside of the Big East with DePaul and St. John's, which I now consider a Mid-Major, I cannot see any small conferences getting an at-large birth into the tournament this year. I can't even see UConn's RPI being strong enough to get another American team in. On the other hand, the ACC, B1G, Pac-12 and SEC are collectively the deepest they have ever been and are all loaded with competitive teams. I'll give the Mid-Majors and extra spot for equity's sake, but that still leaves 30 at-large bids to go around for the 5 power conferences, which is an average of 7 total bids per.

Here's how I see it working out:

ACC - 6-8 Births
Duke, Louisville, Florida State, North Carolina, Notre Dame
1-3 of Miami, Virginia, Syracuse, Wake Forest

Big 12 - 5-6 Births
Baylor, Texas, West Virginia
2-3 of Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

B1G - 7-8 Births
Iowa, Maryland, Michigan State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Rutgers
1-2 of Michigan, Northwestern, Penn State, Purdue

Pac-12 - 6-8 Births
California, Oregon State, Stanford, UCLA, Washington
1-3 of Arizona State, Oregon, USC, Washington State

SEC - 7-8 Births
Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas A&M
3-4 of Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, LSU, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt

Of course there will be teams that surprise, good or bad, but on paper I think these are the most likely teams to make tournament runs this season. It's looking like a great year to be a fan of one of the power conferences. They're all going to be very competitive.

If there really are so many teams impacted by maternity leave this season, that certainly could impact the Tournament!!! Wink


LOL...awesome! I think I have become almost numb to people misusing birth/berth that I completely missed it when I read it first. I must admit I am still laughing at this.

Thank you.


So all those "ACLs" actually are something else? Wink


bballjunkie



Joined: 12 Aug 2014
Posts: 785



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/25/14 1:07 pm    ::: Re: Tournament Teams Reply Reply with quote

[quote="PickledGinger"]Outside of the Big East with DePaul and St. John's, which I now consider a Mid-Major, I cannot see any small conferences getting an at-large birth into the tournament this year. I can't even see UConn's RPI being strong enough to get another American team in. On the other hand, the ACC, B1G, Pac-12 and SEC are collectively the deepest they have ever been and are all loaded with competitive teams. I'll give the Mid-Majors and extra spot for equity's sake, but that still leaves 30 at-large bids to go around for the 5 power conferences, which is an average of 7 total bids per.

Here's how I see it working out:

[b]ACC - 6-8 Births[/b]
Duke, Louisville, Florida State, North Carolina, Notre Dame
1-3 of Miami, Virginia, Syracuse, Wake Forest

[b]Big 12 - 5-6 Births[/b]
Baylor, Texas, West Virginia
2-3 of Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

[b]B1G - 7-8 Births[/b]
Iowa, Maryland, Michigan State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Rutgers
1-2 of Michigan, Northwestern, Penn State, Purdue

[b]Pac-12 - 6-8 Births[/b]
California, Oregon State, Stanford, UCLA, Washington
1-3 of Arizona State, Oregon, USC, Washington State

[b]SEC - 7-8 Births[/b]
Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas A&M
3-4 of Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, LSU, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt

Of course there will be teams that surprise, good or bad, but on paper I think these are the most likely teams to make tournament runs this season. It's looking like a great year to be a fan of one of the power conferences. They're all going to be very competitive.[/quote]

I really like Lang for Texas, I hear the talk about McGee being out but Lang has a better touch.


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
Page 1 of 1

 
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