SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

[jackdaniel]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

Can anyone explain to me ,if the Summit is so weak it affects our seeding (rpi too,I'd assume) so much, how come our RPI actually stays about the same, and actually improves during the conference season, unless we lose of course, which we shouldn't anyway? I watch our rpi every year, and the fact is the Summit doesn't factor into our RPI all that much, it pretty much stay's constant from end of OOC schedule or improves with more wins added to our record.Can anyone explain this please?
This is one reason why I keep saying seeds are handed out in accordance to how well each individual team performs throughout the year, some power 5 schools don't rate as high of SOS as the more ambitious mid-majors do, in fact ,a lot of them don't schedule hard games because they may lose too many games early, and their conference schedule won't be enough to save them. They play it safe. Lame.Conference affiliation should not be ,and I believe it isn't , enough to carry any slacker scheduling team who wants a free ride into the NCAA Tournament, when everyone else has to prove their worth. My biggest pet peeve in the selection process.

[zooropa]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

why it's actually easier (i.e. only nearly impossible) for a mid-major to "break through" on the men's basketball side than it is on the women's side

TV. Media coverage. Awareness. You'd have a lot more angry writers if the NCAA continued to pat the Butler men on the head and then sit them at the little kids table.

If your starting assumption is that the NCAA selection committees and are utterly clueless about their bias, and that no one with money is going to press the issue, well, then it all makes so much sense.

[mitchellrabbit]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

Can anyone explain to me ,if the Summit is so weak it affects our seeding (rpi too,I'd assume) so much, how come our RPI actually stays about the same, and actually improves during the conference season, unless we lose of course, which we shouldn't anyway? I watch our rpi every year, and the fact is the Summit doesn't factor into our RPI all that much, it pretty much stay's constant from end of OOC schedule or improves with more wins added to our record.Can anyone explain this?
This is one reason why I keep saying seeds are handed out in accordance to how well each individual team performs throughout the year, some power 5 schools don't rate as high of SOS as the more ambitious mid-majors do, in fact ,a lot of them don't schedule hard games because they may lose too many games early, and their conference schedule won't be enough to save them. They play it safe. Lame.Conference affiliation should not be ,and I believe it isn't , enough to carry any slacker scheduling team who wants a free ride into the NCAA Tournament, when everyone else has to prove their worth. My biggest pet peeve in the selection process.

Apparently RPI means nothing when seeding teams. I was just looking at some of the RPI's of teams that were seeded 13. We had an RPI of 47. Liberty 63, Cal Northridge 81 and Albany 77. Those 3 teams were 13 seeds. Beat Green Bay and Creighton in Frost and who knows where they would have put us.

[jackdaniel]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

Apparently RPI means nothing when seeding teams. I was just looking at some of the RPI's of teams that were seeded 13. We had an RPI of 47. Liberty 63, Cal Northridge 81 and Albany 77. Those 3 teams were 13 seeds. Beat Green Bay and Creighton in Frost and who knows where they would have put us.

Ahh but, the NCAA would say RPI is not the sole determining factor when deciding who merits what seed, no, people could then see through the façade they created by making the selection process some deep ,complicated mysterious process that has no real rhyme nor reason. We are stuck with this archaic system until it gets so ludicrous that people will just start laughing at them.....oh,that might have happened already,oops.

[jackdaniel]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

Something else, the NCAA upped their bias against lower seeded teams (mid-majors)in a big way this year by taking away the neutral court aspect and giving the already supposedly better teams the added advantage of hosting the first two rounds on their home courts. Yet they proudly proclaim how they listened to everyone this year and are going back to making the regionals "neutral"sites. I don't think there will be any Cinderella's (mid-majors) left to gain anything from this magnanimous move on their part, ensureing that all the higher seeds get an honest and fair shot....wow!!! This is a new level of bias ,even for the NCAA ,that runs so counter intuitive to providing a tournament platform that provides for fair and equal opportunities for all teams.Unbelieveable arrogance to show that much bias,and expect everyone to thank them too.....just wow!!!


i'll be watching this Tournament with much interest to see how many mid-majors can survive the first two rounds this year. I'd probably guess none that can run the gauntlet of home court advantage being given to poor ole UConn and the rest.Make the visitors all travel 1600 miles too, why you're at it.Frankly,there's probably two top 4 seeds who'd probably be going home, had they not had home court advantage,Duke and Iowa,they can thank UNCAA they're still playing.

[bigticket1]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

Something else, the NCAA upped their bias against lower seeded teams (mid-majors)in a big way this year by taking away the neutral court aspect and giving the already supposedly better teams the added advantage of hosting the first two rounds on their home courts. Yet they proudly proclaim how they listened to everyone this year and are going back to making the regionals "neutral"sites. I don't think there will be any Cinderella's (mid-majors) left to gain anything from this magnanimous move on their part, ensureing that all the higher seeds get an honest and fair shot....wow!!! This is a new level of bias ,even for the NCAA ,that runs so counter intuitive to providing a tournament platform that provides for fair and equal opportunities for all teams.Unbelieveable arrogance to show that much bias,and expect everyone to thank them too.....just wow!!!


i'll be watching this Tournament with much interest to see how many mid-majors can survive the first two rounds this year. I'd probably guess none that can run the gauntlet of home court advantage being given to poor ole UConn and the rest.Make the visitors all travel 1600 miles too, why you're at it.Frankly,there's probably two top 4 seeds who'd probably be going home, had they not had home court advantage,Duke and Iowa,they can thank UNCAA they're still playing.

I don't think you would see many Cinderellas in the women's tournaments regardless of where the games are played. After the first two years when the Jacks almost beat Baylor and hung tough with Oklahoma , I would say that those Xavier,Purdue , South Carolina and Oregon State teams would have beat the Jacks most of the time no matter where the games were played. There is more parity in the men's game where after the top 4 or 5 teams , there are probably 20 teams that have a legit shot at the Final Four . You almost always see a couple of 3-7 seeds that make the Final Four. In the women's game , you seem to have 12-15 of the same teams every year that dominate the tournament. It is very seldom that the Final Four isn't made up of 1 or 2 seeds. I don't know if there is more depth of talent in the men's game or what the reasons are , but there seems to be more parity there than with the women.

[jackdaniel]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

I don't think you would see many Cinderellas in the women's tournaments regardless of where the games are played. After the first two years when the Jacks almost beat Baylor and hung tough with Oklahoma , I would say that those Xavier,Purdue , South Carolina and Oregon State teams would have beat the Jacks most of the time no matter where the games were played. There is more parity in the men's game where after the top 4 or 5 teams , there are probably 20 teams that have a legit shot at the Final Four . You almost always see a couple of 3-7 seeds that make the Final Four. In the women's game , you seem to have 12-15 of the same teams every year that dominate the tournament. It is very seldom that the Final Four isn't made up of 1 or 2 seeds. I don't know if there is more depth of talent in the men's game or what the reasons are , but there seems to be more parity there than with the women.

You're right,it makes no sense to give these teams an added advantage, unless you think UConn needs them to stay competitive. To me it smacks of elitism, where they demand special privilages and are catered to and pampered. Geno probably doesn't want to travel, that's so beneath him. My gripes with the policy makers, who keep pampering these elitists and practically give them everything they want, and keep kicking the mid-majors out of the way to do it. Did you watch the Duke vs Albany game? The way Mighty Duke played, on a neutral court ,their season would be over. One Cinderella gone, mission accomplished. Upset averted. What used to drive the Tournament was the Cinderella story and the chance for upsets. The NCAA is killing the very thing most people enjoyed about the Tournament, upsets. Let them gripe about attendance, it is they who are doing everything they possibly can to make the Tournament as boring as they possibly can.

You mentioned Baylor, a team we were dominating until Mulkey started throwing her jacket around and was making life as a ref unbearable in that game. How quickly it all changed, that one game could have advanced our program tremendously, given how far Baylor(#2 seed) advanced after that. You don't think elitism is present in sports, wish I still did .I used to think that too. Now I'm much more cynical, but probably more realistic over all I believe.

[OldHare]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

First round attendance for the first round is not too bad for some locations. Some locations not so great. Corvalis reports 3728, Notre Dame had 6198, Baylor had 4775, Iowa had 4429, South Carolina had 10,644, North Carolina had 3113, Arizona St. had 2588, Florida St. had 5536, Cal had 2079, Kentucky had 3223, Maryland had 7948, Duke had 2712, and Tennessee had 6439. If the NCAA was intending to have large crowds for the higher seeds, it appears it is not that successful overall. Louisville is the only 1-4 seed that did not host and I did not find those attendance figures from Tampa yet or the Stanford or UConn numbers. It will be much like the Summit tourney in that the NCAA is looking for the biggest bang for the buck. It would be hard for them to have games that would be located where the attendance would be less. Some of the lower drawing teams may have trouble keeping the criteria of the year for landing that 1-4 seed. #13 Princeton was a "bubble" team for hosting the opening round games, but they slid to an 8 seed. The average attendance is 1131 for the 11 home games at Princeton this year. Could this attendance also be driving some of the seeding?

[bigticket1]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

First round attendance for the first round is not too bad for some locations. Some locations not so great. Corvalis reports 3728, Notre Dame had 6198, Baylor had 4775, Iowa had 4429, South Carolina had 10,644, North Carolina had 3113, Arizona St. had 2588, Florida St. had 5536, Cal had 2079, Kentucky had 3223, Maryland had 7948, Duke had 2712, and Tennessee had 6439. If the NCAA was intending to have large crowds for the higher seeds, it appears it is not that successful overall. Louisville is the only 1-4 seed that did not host and I did not find those attendance figures from Tampa yet or the Stanford or UConn numbers. It will be much like the Summit tourney in that the NCAA is looking for the biggest bang for the buck. It would be hard for them to have games that would be located where the attendance would be less. Some of the lower drawing teams may have trouble keeping the criteria of the year for landing that 1-4 seed. #13 Princeton was a "bubble" team for hosting the opening round games, but they slid to an 8 seed. The average attendance is 1131 for the 11 home games at Princeton this year. Could this attendance also be driving some of the seeding?

It would have been interesting to see what that Iowa City number would have been if they would have sent the Jacks there.

[OldHare]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

It would have been interesting to see what that Iowa City number would have been if they would have sent the Jacks there.

Another 1000 would have been in the reality of numbers.

[Jacks-02]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

In a 14 vs 3 match-up, under the revised 1st/2nd round hosting that 1 to 4 seeds host a pod, Jacks will be playing on the home court either 1st or 2nd round. NCAA made that change due to bad attendence when a host arena didn't have a team in, ala when SDSU won in 2009, Texas Tech didn't qualify, and attendence was poor. Looking at UNDEFEATED Princeton, who is an 8 seed, UNTIL SUMMIT LEAGUE reaches a WCC or A-10 quality top to bottom, Jacks will NOT host.

OSU was a winnable game. But it required an outstanding performance by the Jacks, and a sub-par performance by OSU. OSU was average in 1st half, adjusted well at half, and had a 50%+ shooting in the 2nd half. OSU did well not fouling. In general, OSU was a taller, just as quick, and just as 3's deadly as the Jacks. Likewise, the Beavers prefer a strong defensive game. Jacks had NO WAY to stop those easy put-back buckets by Hamblin, not after appropriately challenging the initial runner.

We played the right OOC. Our bad losses were in the Summit. However, we can lose that conference road games, but only if those teams are in the top 120. The loss at USD didn't hurt much. The NDSU, Denver, and IUPUI losses tho.... The IUPUI, especially as a game less than 24 hours after IPFW and difficult travel is a surprise. We had good wins. Other than DePaul and Marist, there were no blow-out losses.

Believe this was the 2nd best of the NCAA D-I eligible teams to date. I'm pumped about the future teams. And a large THANK YOU to the senior leaders and players this year.

Take those three losses away and we are likely sitting with a 12 seed and an opening round win. You just can't lose games like that and expect to get higher than a 14 seed coming out of the Summit League. I realize its difficult to get up for every game on your schedule, but we need to have the mentality that every game, even the ones in December and January, are playoff games, because they can end up being the difference between a winnable game in the NCAA or just another first round exit to a top 15 team.

[bigticket1]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

Take those three losses away and we are likely sitting with a 12 seed and an opening round win. You just can't lose games like that and expect to get higher than a 14 seed coming out of the Summit League. I realize its difficult to get up for every game on your schedule, but we need to have the mentality that every game, even the ones in December and January, are playoff games, because they can end up being the difference between a winnable game in the NCAA or just another first round exit to a top 15 team.

I don't think 3 more conference wins against teams with losing records raises the Jacks 2 seeding spots. It would have taken those three plus winning one,if not two of the losses to Green Bay,Creighton and Marist to get to an 11 or 12. And being a 12 doesn't guarantee beating a 5. Miss. State and Ohio State are really good teams and Texas and Oklahoma aren't bad either - definitely a better chance though than beating a 3 on their home floor.

[jackdaniel]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

UALR WAS A #11 SEED,JUST BEAT #6 SEED Texas A&M for a first rd victory 69-60.Higher seeds get you greater success than what we've been experiencing.By the way, the closer the seeds are to one another, the closer the games are too,#5 Texas barely escapes # 12 W. kENYUCKY 66-64.FGCU A 7 SEED,a fist rd victory over 10 seed, sounds familiar.On the other hand, #14 BYU got hammered by # 3 Louisville.We've got to get more wins per season and quit accepting losses if we want to escape the cycle of getting such low seeds our chances for success in the NCAA tournament are practically nil.Our players work so hard,we want them to enjoy the NCAA experience a little better.

[jackdaniel]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

I watched the replay on ESPN3 and thought we played pretty good, except we lost the ball about 15 times w/out even getting a shot at the basket.Can't do that quite that much. We knocked some rebounds away from each other again.Finally, we rushed some 3 pt shots that we had the time to get the feet set and square up to the basket for a much better shot attempt. Very uncharacteristic of the Jacks. Oregon State started getting a few more shots to fall and got their double digit lead and maintained that advantage. Never seen Chloe play so hard, she was like possessed,in a good way ,of course. Had we of had just a little lesser opponent (higher seed),I think this team, with our seniors, could have achieved a first round victory maybe more, especially the way we played the first half with only 4 TO's I believe and were much better moving and choosing the right time to attack the basket.

The second half we got a little flat, let some TO's fluster us some. We had some really good shots that just about fell in, had they of fallen, might have taken some steam away from the Beavers when they were pushing the lead.Oregon gained confidence when we started experiencing difficulties, that's how good teams respond. Oregon State can go a ways if they continue to play well, after Gonzaga, they're on the neutral court, no home court advantage. I'm still up in the air how far they'll make it into the later rounds.

We have nothing to hang our head down with this game, we played hard and pretty well, except for minor things that can, and will, I assume, be pointed out after watching post game video .The future looks bright, and much thanks to our seniors who devoted,shared with us, a part of their lives, providing us Jack fans with many hrs of pleasure watching them play and develop. Doesn't get any better than that.

[krak-r-jacks]

Re: SDSU WBB 2015 NCAA Tourney

this "run" that many of us discuss? won't drag this out. it's just going to be awful difficult to do it without a post presence that has the athletic, 6'4"-6'6" to match up.

btw, not stated in critical tone. just the way the tourney is.