|
|||
|
|||
|
 |
|
|
NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION MEDIA CONFERENCEMarch 15, 2010Jane MeyerRICK NIXON: This is Rick Nixon with the NCAA Division I Women's Basketball Championship. Thank you for joining us for this evening's post-bracket conference with NCAA Division I Women's Basketball Committee Chair, Jane Meyer. Jane is the Senior Associate, Director of athletics at the University of Iowa. After meeting in Indianapolis for the past four days, the committee announced earlier this evening the 64-team field for the 2010 NCAA Division I Women's Basketball Championship. 31 conference teams earned automatic qualification into the championship, while 33 additional teams were selected at-large. Championship play begins this week, culminating at the Women's Final Four to be played in San Antonio on April 4th and 6th. We'll ask Jane for some opening comments. JANE MEYER: Good evening, everyone. I'm glad to be with you this evening. It would be fair to say that we have had an intense four days here in Indianapolis. The Division I Women's Basketball Committee knows that the selection, seeding and bracketing process for the tournament is the single-most important responsibility that we have. We had a big job to do, and I believe the committee put together an excellent bracket for the 2010 championship. We worked long and hard, considered every factor for every team. Engaged in extensive discussion, disagreed and agreed often, and collectively as a group of ten put together a tournament field that we believe will be a great championship experience for our student-athletes, coaches and fans. We dealt with a great number of teams who had very similar resumés, which complicated to some degree the bracketing piece of our job and the placing of the teams into the bracket. I would like to thank our committee members for the many hours they put in this season and this weekend. Combined, we watched over 1,500 games this season in preparation for selection. As a committee, we brought into the process our knowledge gained through watching games, seeking input from various groups, including the coaches ranking, and reviewing extensive team data. This group worked extraordinarily well together to ensure that good decisions were made in regard to the championship. There was a great deal of basketball and committee experience at the table, and that served the committee well as we engaged in dialogue and made some really tough decisions. We believe we have put together a bracket that will result in a very exciting 2010 NCAA Division I Women's Basketball Championship that will begin this weekend and continue until we crown a national champion on April 6th in San Antonio at the 2010 Women's Final four. Rick, let's get started. RICK NIXON: Questions. Q. Can you talk a little bit about the selection for Michigan State? Having seen them, obviously being in Iowa and the way they played down the stretch, and what type of factors came into play with them getting a No. 5 seed and where they went to Louisville? JANE MEYER: Well, Michigan State had a 22-9 overall record. They were 12-6 in the conference. They had a very good nonconference schedule, 9 and 2. They played Notre Dame. They beat Oklahoma State. They beat Xavier. They beat North Carolina. They split with Ohio State, and they were 10 and 2 in their last 12 games coming down the stretch. So Michigan State brought to the table a very good resumé. And as we selected them into the process, and then, of course, had the deliberations to figure out where to seed them as we went through the selection process. Q. I wanted to ask about a group of -- your choice between North Carolina and Maryland, two teams in the ACC that seemed to be fairly equally positioned, one 8th, one 9th in their conference, who split in their regular season meeting. Yet, North Carolina was admitted and Maryland didn't get a bid. Could you talk about that process? JANE MEYER: First of all, it's important for people to know that it's not a decision of Maryland or North Carolina getting in the tournament. There's a pool of teams that the committee looks at. And as they are evaluating each and every team against a group of other teams, it's a matter of what might that deciding factor be. North Carolina brought to the table, as you say, very similar overall records. And North Carolina had two wins in the top 25, and they had some losses to Connecticut, Duke, Florida State, Michigan State, and had a couple of bad losses. They did have a little bit better record down the stretch than Maryland. As the committee goes through and evaluates the teams, it's just a very fine line that might separate them. And as the committee deliberated, it's not Maryland versus North Carolina, but it's a matter of North Carolina differentiating themselves from the pool of other teams that we were evaluating. Q. Having spent some time in that session I shouldn't have asked it that way, I'm sorry. Let me see if I can bounce back with a different question about your philosophy. From my count, there seemed to be seven teams, seven at-large bids given to teams at conferences outside what we would call the Big 6 or the BCS conference teams, could you talk about that philosophy? JANE MEYER: I don't know if it's so much a philosophy. I believe it is a matter of what those teams did to differentiate themselves, because we treat every institution as an independent. There's 322 of them that we evaluate their resumé individually. So we're not necessarily concerned about conferences, and we simply say what are they doing to differentiate themselves from the rest of the group, and we evaluate teams, not conferences. Q. I guess I want to shift the focus to a team that didn't make it. Can you talk a little bit about how you guys discussed Syracuse and I guess how close they were, maybe, to getting into the field? JANE MEYER: Well, Syracuse, again, was one of the many that we talked about in the room. And as the committee evaluated Syracuse's team sheet, one of their keys is their strength of schedule. Their non-conference strength of schedule was a 340, and they had some bad losses against South Florida, Villanova and Cincinnati. As they were being evaluated with this group of other institutions, the decision was that of those factors those were some of them that we discussed why they were not one of those 33 best at-large teams. Q. Just as a follow-up, it goes a little bit along with what the last question was. And what was the thought process of including teams like Arkansas, Little Rock, and Green Bay, who had those kind of weak strength of schedules, and then not including a team like Syracuse, I guess? JANE MEYER: When the committee deliberated about all of the teams in the group, they took care -- these two particular ones, as they were being evaluated, took care of their conference business. And then as they scheduled out of conference, they had some very good wins. Green Bay, they were 5-0 in the top 100. Wins over Wisconsin, DePaul, Marquette and Butler. They were 4-1 against teams in the NCAA Tournament. Arkansas Little Rock, they won their division in the Sunbelt Conference, and they lost to middle -- excuse me, they beat Middle Tennessee State in the regular season and only lost to them in their conference championship game. So as the committee deliberated, they felt that they took very good care of what they could control within their conference, and then had the opportunity to schedule accordingly in their nonconference and did reasonably well in that area. Q. Iowa playing Rutgers, you must have thought when you bracketed that this would be a pretty good draw. I mean, could you tell us from the committee standpoint what they thought of that matchup? JANE MEYER: To be quite honest, Dan, that does not come into play when the committee brackets. We have principles and procedures we must follow by placing teams into the bracket. And anything that comes from that, we hope, is a great basketball game and that people will watch it. Q. But at the same time, yeah, you're not going to adjust things like you have like the maximum you can go up or down, but if you have an equal matchup, and you guys don't notice that? JANE MEYER: We've got a lot of great stories, Dan. And so when that is all happening in the room, it's a matter that we are following our principles and our procedures and trying to ensure that we are not having conference opponents meet up prior to the regional final and making sure that we're placing them in seed order into the bracket. So I think these are some great stories, and we hope that there's more stories throughout the tournament with not only the teams but the student-athletes that are involved as well. Q. Could you also talk about the Iowa State bracket? You have Iowa State against Lehigh and Virginia against Green Bay, just anything, when you guys made that selection, how that came about, what you guys thought about, how it matched up? JANE MEYER: Again, Dan, we go through the process of selecting the 33 at-large best teams. And then we seed them 1 through 64. And then we place them into the bracket in seed order. So, again, any story that comes out is really a development of our bracketing principles and procedures. So as we sit and look, Iowa State being a host site, they have four great institutions that will have the opportunity to compete in the NCAA championship, with the matchup of Virginia and Green Bay and Ohio State and Lehigh. Q. Alison Lacey, she missed a few of games for Iowa State because she was sick. They're hoping to have her back for the first game. Did her health play any role as you guys were debating how to seed Iowa State? JANE MEYER: We have access to the information of when a player is available or if they're injured or unavailable. And those institutions are required to provide that information to the NCAA. And so we select and seed teams based on how they played throughout the entire season and evaluate their entire body of work, including injuries, or with Lacey, of when she didn't play. And then it's up to each of our committee members to decide what they see in the team, with or without those particular players. But keep in mind, these aren't easy things for us to make decisions about. There's great deliberation. And we were aware of Lacy's unavailability in the Big 12 championship. We talked about it, and then they earned the seed that they received as a No. 4 seed in the championship. Q. The information on the decision of putting Tennessee as the fourth No. 1 seed and having Nebraska and Stanford as being the 2 and 3 among the No. 1 seeds, what went into that and was there anything in particular that kept Nebraska ahead of Tennessee? JANE MEYER: When the committee took the time to deliberate the order of the No. 1 seeds, there was much discussion, and we were deliberating this as the Big 12 championship was going on, because the committee met on Friday. And has continued to meet throughout the weekend. When Nebraska lost, then the discussion was: What was their resumé? And it was a matter of it's one game. They have a stellar resumé. They lost one game. And so sort of the thing where we slid the paper between them and Stanford of the second -- the number two No. 1 spot and the number three No. 1 spot, is that Stanford then became the Pac-10 tournament and regular season champion, and Nebraska was the regular season Big 12 champion of the most difficult conference in the RPI, with their conference RPI. Tennessee, as the number four No. 1 did have two losses, as they went through, even though they were the SEC regular season and tournament champion, and played also a very competitive schedule. But there's very small margins that the committee has to evaluate, and that is how each team earned the No. 1 seed and in that particular order. Q. As a follow-up, related to the principles of putting teams on the bracket, I'm curious how much time and changes had to be made to separate the Big 12 teams and with so many of the Big 12 teams hosting, how much of that -- how much work went into making them fit into the principles? JANE MEYER: Well, according to our principles, conference teams may not meet prior to the regional final. In order to follow that -- unless there's nine teams in the conference, which was not part of the factor we were using -- we were allowed to move teams along a seed line and up and down a seed line in order to ensure that this principle is followed. And we were able to do that even though we had a great deal of compression with the Big 12 teams and other conferences in those top five lines or six lines. Q. And was it any difficulty in that you had an Iowa State, a Texas, an Oklahoma all hosting? JANE MEYER: It's one of those issues, but it's not a significant one. We're thrilled that we have some great host sites in the first and second round. I just think it's important that you remember that we're evaluating each individual team. And as we place them into the bracket then we separate them. I'm not so sure we had any more difficulty this year with the first and second round sites, though, than we did with simply dealing with the compression of those teams from multiple conferences. Q. Can you give me a sense of how long you discussed UConn in the committee room, whether it was minutes, seconds, want to get a sense of how much conversation you had about them? JANE MEYER: Richard, I think it's important that everyone understand that UConn is treated no differently than all the other teams that were discussed in the room. And so it's important that we have that. We believe that the excellence that UConn has demonstrated throughout this season is great for the game of women's basketball. We commend them. And in addition, they've been the story the last two years, but there's some other great stories of women's basketball that has gotten us to this point based on the wonderful history of our game. And we want all teams to aspire to that particular level so we have more of those stories. Q. So just so I can follow up, I recognize and understand that they're treated no differently. But in terms of the duration of time spent on them, are you telling me that the duration of time spent on them is the same as other people? JANE MEYER: Richard, it really depends on where we are in the process. We talk about them. They were an automatic qualifier by winning the Big East, so we didn't spend a lot of time talking about them whether they were in the tournament, because they were in. When it comes to the seeding, we have the opportunity to list the eight teams that we believe are the first eight in the tournament. The committee ranks them. There's discussion. And so that's how we go through the process. So there is discussion. It's a matter of how quickly the committee can get there based on where we are within the process. But is there as much time as a No. 8 seed, probably not. Q. You guys ended up with some late weekend situations with maybe conference tournament winners that weren't conference regular season winners, and some of them in the mid-major conferences. I'm curious the process, because there may be some schools, Boston College, USC, there's a list of schools who thought they might have been getting in and wonder if some of those situations might have bumped a few people off the map? JANE MEYER: Well, there's a whole group of schools that we were discussing, Michelle, throughout the process. And on Saturday we did have to stop and start multiple times to wait for outcomes of games for us to move along in the selection and the seeding process. And so once we had some of those outcomes we could come back to the room and get a little more work done. Then we'd stop again. So that entire process, as you're well aware, of going through it, was more stopping and starting on Saturday than I've been involved with yet. And then we have to ensure that we have the really good conversations about each team once we knew some of those outcomes. Q. As a quick follow-up then, to you, what it ends up, you know, effectively is so the WAC ends up with as many teams in the tournament field as the Pac-10 or it could be there could be a couple of examples of taking the second team from the mid-major conference, when they didn't win their conference tournament. And I don't know what my question is, how is there a sense of how that plays? Do you weigh a major conference versus a mid-major in terms of how many bids when you're in that situation? JANE MEYER: You went through the mock selection process. Q. I know. But I have to get you to say it. JANE MEYER: As you know, we evaluate teams, not conferences. And so what we did is we really broke down those resumés from the body of work of each institution individually and tried to get the merit of every team and what they brought to the table. And that's exactly what we did through that process of just really drilling down into their team sheet and their body of work and said: Are they one of the 33 at-large teams and what did they do to differentiate themselves? And this is where the committee came out. Q. Curious as far as West Virginia goes and Pittsburgh hosting, was there a point where you discussed bringing West Virginia to Pittsburgh or did that not fit in in terms of the principles and the seeding and the way it works? JANE MEYER: Could you clarify your question, please? Q. Was there discussion on maybe sending West Virginia to Pittsburgh because of how close they are and it being an easy drive and maybe a little bit more of a draw, did that come up at all, or was that never part of the plan just because of the way things worked out with the seeding lines and everything? JANE MEYER: As we place teams in the bracket, they are placed -- they're placed in the bracket in seed order. And so really we don't have a whole lot of control because we were, first of all, placing them closest to their regional, their closest geographical region, and then we drop in the first and second round sites when that first and second round host site comes into play. And then, depending on whether they would potentially meet with a conference opponent prior to the regional final, we may have to move teams along a seed line or up and down a seed line to ensure that we're following our principles and procedures. Q. I was curious about the committee's feeling in regard to how the first and second round site process is working now? And I believe you have sites selected for next year, but do you expect this format to continue long term or are there other things you would like to consider before 2012? JANE MEYER: Right now it's the committee's decision to remain at 16 sites. We continue to evolve and grow as the game of women's basketball continues to evolve and grow. And we continue to feel that the 16 first and second round sites provide our student-athletes the best possible championship experience. And what's the future of that? I think the committee will continue to consider all the different formats so that the championship is conducted in the best possible format so we can enhance, continue to enhance that student-athlete's experience, and we need to allow it to grow in its current format and then continue to evaluate it on an annual basis as we continue to evaluate everything that the committee does on an annual basis. Q. How much time, if any, is spent debating where you have a case where a lower seeded or where a higher seeded team is having to play at a lower seeded team? And I don't have the bracket in front of me so I can't give you a specific example at this point. But obviously somebody's going to feel like, doggone it, why couldn't we have been sent to the neutral site as opposed to an enemy court. How much time is spent in those deliberations? JANE MEYER: Well, again, we only have one of those situations as a possibility this year, and it might occur in a second round game. But, again, I'm not here to speculate on outcomes of games. But that is the only possibility we may have with a higher seed potentially playing on a lower seed's team. So we are aware of that possibility. Again, I would writ straight that we believe this current format is in the best interests of our games. We are trying to increase attendance at these sites, and we truly believe that we'll have some great first and second round sites with some great fan base and it will be great for our TV audience as well. Q. Do you know when the 2012 sites will be determined? JANE MEYER: We will start that process later this year, when we send out bid documents to institutions to determine who might be interested in hosting. Q. To follow up on that question, Jane, as I'm looking at the bracket, there appear to be seven sites, correct me if I'm wrong, but there are seven sites where there will be no host institution at that site. I'm wondering if you are concerned about the potential for attendance problems at those seven sites, and also if in bracketing -- I was not at the session. I left the second day of the session, so I'm not sure if this issue came up about where teams are placed in sites relative to attendance. Were teams, once you bracketed the teams, did you take into consideration where they might go and whether they might bring crowds with them? JANE MEYER: Well, to answer your first question, you are correct, there are seven sites without a host institution. And as we place teams in the bracket, we attempt to place them to their closest regional geographic location first, and then we drop in the first round sites when there is a host. So in those seven cases, without host, then we go back up and attempt to place the teams in seed order to their closest geographic first and second round site. So those sites are chosen in advance based on their past support of the game of women's basketball. We're confident that the coaches and the fans in those seven areas will come out and support the four teams that have been assigned to that site, because they believe that that's good for our game. And they've also supported women's basketball in the past. Q. I guess as another follow-up, the Pittsburgh reporter asked about West Virginia. As you look at that site, the decision, I guess, to place Ohio State in Pittsburgh as opposed to West Virginia, I guess can you talk a little bit about that? JANE MEYER: Well, one of the additional considerations that the committee tries to do, but is not always able to do, is to avoid conference matchups in a potential regional final. Now, we can't always do that, because we do have those potentials. And so it might also be moving along a seed line to ensure that they are not -- that they are not going to compete prior to the regional final. That usually happens when there's compression of a large number of teams from numerous conferences of how we have to move them across the seed line or up and down a seed line to ensure we don't have those matchups prior to the regional finals. RICK NIXON: Thank you. End of FastScripts |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
About ASAP Sports •
FastScripts Archive •
Recent Interviews •
Captioning •
Upcoming Events •
Contact Us
FastScripts | Events Covered | Our Clients | Other Services | ASAP in the News | Site Map | Job Opportunities | Links |
|
ASAP Sports, Inc. | T: 1.212 385 0297
|