NATIONAL COLLEGE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION MEDIA CONFERENCE

March 14, 2004

Cheryl Marra

CHERYL MARRA: I think obviously, injuries that have happened during the season were significant injuries, and if they might come back is a secondary consideration. We consider for my teams that are in that particular situation. So we know that Lindsay may be back, that is something that we could consider but we feel that they -- believe that they received the seed that they deserved.

CHERYL MARRA: I'll take the first question. When you were referring to Maryland, I can tell you that there were several teams that were on the board in terms of bubbles. We were looking at Maryland there are there were a lot of different factors looking at those bubble teams to determine who was going to get those slots and we had the ability to provide for the at-large teams. Maryland played a very tough conference questioned. They certainly positioned themselves toward the end of the season with the last two or three weeks as they were running through the ACC schedule. Once they got into the tournament, they were able to obviously play Duke very, very well in the semifinals. And they were one of those bubble teams that we did consider and earned their spot into the NCAA tournament. In terms of the No. 1 seed you asked specifically about Texas. While Texas did lose in a conference tournament, they did tie for the regular season championship with the Big 12. And one thing about Texas is they were the only team that played three of the other -- the other three No. 1 seeds. They beat Duke and they lost to Penn State. So clearly the body of work that they had provided throughout the entire season positioned them to be the fourth No. 1 team in there.

CHERYL MARRA: As I indicated earlier, they are one of the two teams that played all of the other three No. 1s that were selected and they were 2-1 against them. In terms of Purdue, they had been beaten twice, by Penn State, which was the other No. 1. And when we looked at that particular institution, clearly, Penn State had also been beaten by Duke. So when we were looking at all of the various schools that were under consideration for a No. 1, we looked at the entire body of Texas against the regular season for the Big 12. They had beat two of the 3 No. 1s that had already been established. And we that provided them the opportunity to be the fourth No. 1.

CHERYL MARRA: It might be easiest at this point in time if I go through the procedure when we were putting the bracket together. That might help explain why Penn State would be playing at Virginia Tech. The first thing is what institutions go into the bracket. Second, we look at who beat the institutions. The third process is to put each of the schools with a particular site, looking at geography, of course, at that point in time. So when Penn State was a No. 1 seed in the regional and Virginia Tech was the eighth seed in that particular regional, that matched those two up. Virginia Tech was hosting Penn State.

CHERYL MARRA: Once we go to predetermined sites, there is always the chance that that may, in fact, happen. Clearly, Penn State is the No. 1 seed. They have been able to play on other people's courts throughout the year and be able to get the job done, and we anticipate that they will in this particular situation, as well. They have earned the No. 1 seed. They are playing against the No. 8 at this point in time. If they get past the first round, even though it is on the home court, we were able to protect the integrity of the bracketing.

CHERYL MARRA: Penn State was the third No. 1. This year was extremely difficult with the number of schools that we had to consider, probably from like 6,7,8,9, 10, so when we do the bracketing and we do the selection proceeding, it was just a matter of where we believed Virginia Tech fell, given the wins that they have had this year, what they have done in their particular conference and the overall body of work we looked at with them. So there's nothing specific any more than being considered with the other institutions that were very similar to them.

CHERYL MARRA: I think one of the things that was clear this year and one of the things that was difficult was the parity that we had. It's something we've been excited about, obviously, in the women's tournament. But it makes it much more challenging. So when we took a look -- if you take a look at the institutions, Stanford in our particular bracket , who their wins were against, what their strength of schedule was, week-in, week-out, that's where we believe that they ought to be seeded.

CHERYL MARRA: Well, one of the things that we took a look at, there are two safety nets we looked at trying to protect, and one is not to travel more than two time zones. So we were trying to protect the seeds that everybody had and also try to position them geographically as much as possible. Stanford was higher-seeded than Arizona. And we wanted to remain true to our seed and gave them Tempe and allowed them to not go more than the two time zones; we were trying to protect.

CHERYL MARRA: That's correct.

CHERYL MARRA: Well, again, one thing that's very important to do, and we try very hard to do in our top six teams is to keep them as true to their seed as possible. If you put Purdue and Vanderbilt, you switch them, Purdue now goes from the No. 1 No. 2 to the No. 4 No. 2. That's pretty substantial. It's not something that the committee felt was fair to do. So in protecting the first six teams, your first four lines, that's not a switch we're going to make.

CHERYL MARRA: Great question. It was exciting this year because we had more teams to be considered for No. 1. It's the first time we've had a larger pool, and that's always great for the game. But you're right, it made it extremely difficult, because we were trying to make that decision who would ultimately secure those four No. 1 spots. Also, only one of those four No. 1s won their conference championship. However, Texas, Penn State and Tennessee won the regular season with their particular conference, so they had come into that with an awful lot of information behind them. In terms of bubble teams, no doubt, this was the most difficult year that I've been on the committee with the number of teams that we were considering for bubbles. There's an awful lot of parity out there. Again, it's a great place to be for the women's game, but it makes it more difficult and a lot more disappointment out there.

CHERYL MARRA: I think when you take a look at L.A. tech, you have to look at the breadth of their scheduling, as well. While they did a great job this year, week-in and week-out, they are not playing the same type of schedule as some of our other institutions are that are seeded above them. If you look at who they are playing in the Top-50, you're not going to see a whole lot of games in there. That makes it somewhat difficult to be to be able to compare them with some of those institutions that have played in some cases 15 games against the Top-50.

CHERYL MARRA: You know, it would be impossible to be able to know that because you have to look at all of the other schools that are around them again. So I think that there's a lot of teams that would like to do the "what if" and they would like to have some of those back. But we have to work with what they have provided to us, and L.A. tech has had a great season.

CHERYL MARRA: Absolutely, we do try to avoid that, but in order to avoid that and use the safety net, we go with the seed. So if all of the seeds hold, then there would not be that matchup. And we go into it with the assumption that all of the seeds would hold. It would be impossible for us to do, guessing that there might be an upset, because then we would have all kind of options that could be problems down the road. So assuming everybody holds their seed, they will not matchup in that second round.

CHERYL MARRA: This will be the last year we do 16 predetermined sites. When those are determined -- they were determined last year. It was a variety of factors that go into that. Obviously there's regional representation. You want to make sure that you have all areas of the country that are covered. You take a look at those institutions that have got a good administration and have good hotel situations, just a lot of different factors, airplanes, flights being able to go in and out. Once those factors are determines, the decision is made what institution we are going to once we have the bracket together. So in most cases, it's more of a product of how you are seeded and who you might be matched up with that determines where you're going, not relative to your seed itself. Also, it might be important to know that if you are one of the hosts and you are in the tournament, you will play at home. In four cases this year that cannot happen. We have four neutral sites.

CHERYL MARRA: The one thing that was very, very important to us, and that was to protect the integrity of the bracket. As we went across the top, all of the No. 1s -- Tennessee, obviously we put them closest. Then Duke, Penn State was third and we put them with the closest destination we potentially could. As far as Tennessee, it was really wherever that they fell in the seed they, had how they matched up. So it was important for us to protect the seeds as opposed to putting them in a geographical distribution that might be more favorable.

CHERYL MARRA: One thing you have to consider is obviously it's difficult for us, the more teams from the same conference that get into the Championship, the more difficult it's going to make it for them not to have a matchup at some point in time. Particularly, if they are high-seeded teams. If you notice, they are not meeting in the region final. So if you have two teams that are that good, and you place them in the bracket, specifically as it's been dealt in the s-curve, with the No. 1 No. 1 seed being placed where they are and Vanderbilt the No. 4 No. 2 seed, at some point in time for those conferences that have several teams that are that good, you're going to have a match-up.

CHERYL MARRA: To be honest with you, not only was it the bracket integrity but there were several other safety nets that we had to look at. As we were trying to make sure that they didn't meet in the first round with certain conference opponents or they had not met up with the same team they had played the year before in the first round. There are seven or eight safety nets that we try to impose as we are going down through, and sometimes that will move some teams across one particular line. But again, we try to protect the top six teams without having that movement.

CHERYL MARRA: You know, I wouldn't say that it was an extra emphasis. I can certainly say that was one of the things that was considered. Not only how well you did against the Top-50, how well you might have done against the Top-25, but also, what you might have done against the lower 100. Obviously, there are a lot of different criteria. Your strength of schedule was very, very important. How you performed during that particular strength of schedule which would go toward how well you did against the Top-50. But clearly, as a lot of these institutions are beginning to prepare to play a tougher schedule, you also have to take a look at what do they do within that scheduling. Clearly that was one of the criteria. I can't say that it always carries more weight than another.

CHERYL MARRA: Again, if I can just explain, when we were looking at the No. 1s, we don't necessarily go Penn State versus Connecticut or Texas versus Connecticut. We take a look at all of those institutions that have the potential.

CHERYL MARRA: Okay. That's fair. I can answer it that way. Clearly what Penn State did is they won the Big-10 regular season. They beat Purdue twice during the year, lost to them in the finals of their particular championship. They beat Texas. They beat Kansas State which is a No. 2. They beat LSU. And so overall, a full body of work, they had done what they needed to in order to earn that No. 1 seed.

CHERYL MARRA: Again, I don't know if what they didn't do. It's that Tennessee, Duke, Penn State and Texas, at that point in time, we felt had done more this particular year. I can tell you what Connecticut did do; they lost to Duke. They lost obviously in their tournament at the end of the year. They lost to Notre Dame. They lost to Villanova and they lost to Boston College this year. And so taking a look at their full body of work, as well, and when we put it off to the other schools that were being considered, the other four I believe had a better overall performance this year.

CHERYL MARRA: I guess I'll take your first question. In terms of Houston's seed, again, for many of the places where we have these Top-16 seeds positioned, it's not so much what they didn't do. But if you look at those institutions that are positioned ahead of them, we believe that they had achieved more throughout the season than Houston did. We believe Houston had a great, great year and they were rewarded with such with those three seeds. They lost to Purdue who was seeded ahead of them. They lost to Louisville during the year. Overall while they have had a great year, we believe those that were positioned ahead of them had done that much more.

CHERYL MARRA: Louisville and Memphis, as far as not being brought into the tournament?

CHERYL MARRA: Well, I will tell you, this was an extremely difficult year as we were looking at all of those bubble teams. Both of those institutions were somewhat -- were considered throughout the process. It was a lot of different factors that went into play as we were considering those last teams that we were putting into the bracket. Louisville this year head-to-head was beat by DePaul and Marquette, two teams that did get into the tournament. There were just several factors that we used as we were looking at those bubble teams. What they did against the Top-25, Top 50. We took a look at what they did relative to their strength of schedule, what their loss might have been throughout the season, as well. It's also the types of factors that we looked at as we set several teams up to have a look at all of those bubble teams.

CHERYL MARRA: Let's start with the Big East. What was pretty much stood out to the committee this year was the Big East had seven teams in the Top-30 -- less than 30 RPI and that was pretty significant. So as we are going into the selection, 30 of their teams were under us -- or seven of their teams were under a 30 RPI. Clearly they had done what they needed to do to position themselves coming into this, and just made a great run throughout the year. In terms of Connecticut and Penn State, one thing that I think is important to point out, is that Connecticut is not hosting. It's Bridgeport that is the host. So Connecticut is not technically playing at their home site. Again, if you went across the bracket, once we placed Tennessee and in Tallahassee which was the closest for them, because they were not hosting, Duke going to Durham, Penn State going to Blacksburg and Texas, who was hosting going to Austin, the next one that needed to be considered to stay closest to home would have been Purdue. As we made that decision, closest for them was going to be Ames. Then when we went over to Connecticut who deserved the next opportunity to be closest to home, Bridgeport was still available. So it really had to do with who was hosting, who the top seed were and making sure that we protected each of them along the way.

CHERYL MARRA: I can only tell you what I know having been in the committee meeting and that's only been four years. But I will say this, as a result of the increased parity, which is what we've all been excited to have happen, it made it probably more difficult in a long time to determine the No. 1 seeds. It made it extremely difficult in the middle of the bracket, as well. Far more parity from top to bottom, more parity at the top, a lot more parity in the middle. That was what made it extremely difficult. And also, I have to say the bubble teams, we probably have more teams up on the board for true bubbles than we've had in play quite a while.

CHERYL MARRA: Well, it could only come into consideration if the seed would play out. Again one of the things we looked at was looking at protecting the Top-16 and not moving them because they had earned those seeds. So in the case of Oklahoma, obviously they were hosting. So they were going to go there. In terms of Ames, in terms of the seeds, there wasn't a place that we could send them neutral in order to help that situation.

CHERYL MARRA: We do look at that. We do look at where we are going to send our fans. But Purdue had the first opportunity to take one of neutral sites before Kansas State. And Ames was going to be closer for Purdue to give them that opportunity. And so, those are one of the things we looked at to be fair to those people that were put in there as they were seeded, as opposed to just take a look at the fan base.

CHERYL MARRA: Purdue was the first No. 2, Connecticut was the second No. 2, Kansas State was the third No. 2 and Vanderbilt the fourth No. 2.

CHERYL MARRA: If you take a look at West Virginia, which would be the eighth Big East school, they had two wins against Top-25. They had two additional wins against 25-50. To come out with four wins against the top 50 and you're put up on the board with all of the teams we were looking at for those last spots was quite significant. That, I think, probably, was certainly a great advantage for West Virginia.

CHERYL MARRA: I'll answer the first question. As far as Northwestern State playing Duke, again, they are one of the lowest-rated teams in the lowest conferences. So we're protecting the seeds across. Sometimes there are matchups that we can avoid and sometimes there are somewhat we cannot. We do look at those as one of the safety nets. But obviously, we were not going to be able to move Duke out of their No. 2 spot in the No. 1. As we were looking across to those that they have the opportunity to play, we tried once again to keep them as much to the natural seeds as we could.

CHERYL MARRA: What I'm saying is they were the 16th line. We wanted to take a look geographically if we potentially could if we were looking at some of those seeds as well.

CHERYL MARRA: Well, all I can tell you is when the committee takes a look at the 15th line, the 16th line, they get the same look as we do with every other institution. And we don't just look at two schools. We are looking probably at those particular lines and probably six, eight schools as well. Once those are put into the bracket, we try and stay as close as possible to where they landed. Could you repeat your second question?

CHERYL MARRA: Well, that's not the RPI that we use. That may be some of the differences that are out there. We have the most up-to-date RPI that we use as we take a look at these institutions. Matter of fact, the last one came in late last night. So it may be that the RPI you're looking at and the RPI we are using are two different standards.

CHERYL MARRA: I appreciate that that's not what we could look at. We look at each institution as we are putting them in the bracket and are concerned with all of the rest that are around them and where they might be seeded, and it was our opinion that this particular year, that Northwestern state was the 16th.

CHERYL MARRA: Again, we do take into consideration the student athlete experience. There's a lot of factors that you look at when you're doing that. However, the fact of the matter is, we can't protect everybody. And it's almost impossible for all of these schools, we didn't look at it, and you know, we certainly wish Northwestern State the best and hope they have a great student athlete experience.

CHERYL MARRA: Again, all I can tell you is when we were putting the brackets together, that's where they fell out.

CHERYL MARRA: We did factor in the student athlete experience for all of the 64 teams that are in the bracket.

CHERYL MARRA: Probably parity more than anything else has allowed any of many bubble teams to slip in. We looked at them with a group of several others up on the board. Missouri played an extremely difficult schedule. The Big 12 does a great job week-in and week-out going against some very difficult oppositions. They had a win over Oklahoma. They had a win over Iowa. They positioned themselves very well in the second half of the season. I think Missouri did a pretty good job of while they started out very well and slipped maybe in the middle, they were able to come back and put themselves in position to be able to be considered for a bracket. At that point, then they are compared with all of the others that are being looked at for the at-large positions.

CHERYL MARRA: As we are moving to eight sites next year, that's something that the committee, this summer and at the summer meeting, is going to take a hard look at exactly how we are going to put those eight sites together. A pod system is a possibility. At this point in time, there will be a variety of things that will be discussed. Certainly the men have the system that they have utilized. We can take a look at that to see how well it's worked for them and what might be the best direction for us to go to, as well. That is something that we'll give serious consideration to. In terms of Tennessee going to the Midwest regional, again, we're not going to just look at one at a time as we are trying to assign the regionals. There's a couple of safety nets we look at there, as well. We are not going to send the same institutions out of their particular region a couple of years in a row. We look at time zones, as well. So we looked at the entire No. 1 as we were assigning those and we felt at this point in time that Tennessee going to Norman, Duke going to Norfolk, Penn State to Hartford and Texas to Seattle was probably going to be in the best interests of the total bracket.

CHERYL MARRA: Well, first of all, it's important to know they are not hosting. While Bridgeport is accessible to Connecticut, it's not the host institution. That's important to recall.

CHERYL MARRA: They would, but it would not be until the regionals. It's important to understand that Connecticut is not hosting. As I explained earlier, and you might not have been on the phone at that point in time, as you go across the four No. 1 seeds, we positioned them to be the most favorable depending on when they got into the bracket. So Tennessee will be in Tallahassee, Duke will be at Durham, Penn State at Blacksburg, Texas who is hosting won't be at home. So we want to cross the s-curve going the opposite way, Purdue is at Ames. They were next to be positioned and Connecticut was at Bridgeport was the next. It was somewhat coincidental because Connecticut was the No. 2, No. 2; that that's what they have the opportunity to be afforded. We were not going to penalize them, partly because they are not hosting, and that's important for everybody to understand. Hartford is not their home.

CHERYL MARRA: Are you talking about the four that are seeded above them?

CHERYL MARRA: If you look at the 3s, Oklahoma won their conference tournament. Boston College won their conference tournament. Houston won their conference tournament and Georgia was in the finals of theirs. I think all of those things certainly show what they are able to do at the end of the season. Not to take anything away from LSU, but again we are looking at the whole body of what they do throughout the year, and we believe that's where LSU has earned their seed.

CHERYL MARRA: I think when we were looking at Rutgers, they had -- while they have some significant wins, I think it's also fair to say, they had up and down losses, as well. Again, when you're looking at exactly what they did, the whole body of work, we try to take a look and compare that to those that were above them relative to their consistency and how we were applying the criteria. And also, again, they were going head-to-head with those people that are above them and they had some significant losses, as well as some significant wins.

CHERYL MARRA: I can tell you there were several teams this year that had some significant injuries. No doubt we have the opportunity to look at those relative to what they report to us on an injury. With several institutions, injuries were a part of the discussions.

CHERYL MARRA: Once again, Iowa, as well as several others, were considered with a wide variety of institutions. They again had a real mix within their schedule this year and they played a very difficult schedule. They had a good win against Michigan State. They had a win over Minnesota. They beat market. They beat several institutions that were already in the tournament, and I think that helped Iowa clearly. Parity is probably what allowed them to be in the tournament. Probably had more significant things to add and others, we needed to look a little deeper for.

CHERYL MARRA: Well, I don't think you're going to be able to protect every single thing. As you're going through the bracket, when we take a look at who will be hosting, those institutions that afford to have the opportunity to host and the criteria we take a look at, you deserve your seed. And what we've done is we've provided these people throughout the year, what they have done, the seeds that they have deserved. In fact, you have to consider that at some point in time they are going to meet some circumstances, they are going to make it a challenge, absolutely. But they still have to play the game and they have to be able to afford Kansas State and Penn State, we believe they will be able to get the job done with the seeds with which we have placed them.

CHERYL MARRA: I would turn that question around and say, would it have been fair to take that away from Connecticut as we went across the bracket and we assigned them based on where their position was. Those are things we had to consider and we believed we needed to be true to the process and true to those people where we have them seeded.

CHERYL MARRA: Absolutely.

CHERYL MARRA: We were not going to move Connecticut from their No. 2, No. 2 seed. However, had Purdue not been where they were, somebody else might have gotten the chance to go to Bridgeport, absolutely. We went straight across the bracket and put these institutions to the closest geographical position we could, and it just so happens that Purdue took Ames; they were closer to there; and Connecticut took Bridgeport.

CHERYL MARRA: There's no way we could ever consider that as we're looking at our deliberations. I think what we do is we take a look at what each institution has done and reward them for the body of work they have done over time. So whoever happens to be the four No. 1 seeds has earned that throughout the year. It's really not relative to what they have done the year before, or who ended up in the Final Four the year before. I would have to say this year more than ever we have some unbelievable match-ups that are going to make it very difficult as people are going through this championship. Can we protect at this point in time who that is going to be? Absolutely not. Any more than we could have predicted who the four No. 1 seeds are at the beginning of the season. I believe there's a lot more parity and we're just excited whoever advances to the Final Four makes sure we put on a great championship for those student athletes and coaches.