I'm done with the NCAA - They screw the little guy - I mean woman - yet again!!

Are you crying in a corner now? They lost. Got destroyed in the 2nd half. Which shows just like everyone said, that their perfect record was due to poor quality of competition. The seed was appropriate.

Bumpskies

I heard the "little guy" didn't do so hot!!!!!

As someone who went to a small school we got stomped in the Men's tourney by a middle of the road big 10 team. 9 times out of 10 the big conference schools are better. You have to recruit bigger athletes just to take the floor in the Big 10, so even if the 3 point shooting or passing / assists are a lot worse they don't matchup well. Those guys usually have more upside.

If Princeton women were so "good" and underseeded they why did they barely put up a fight against a good, but not great Maryland team?

On the men's side Nova lost (they are a big school and a 1 seed), so did Kansas (2) and UVA (2). Big schools lose all the time in the tournament, Princeton women just weren't that good and ivy women's basketball was historically bad.

I don't understand a team with an RPI of 12 being seeded 8th, but it does appear their RPI was likely inflated relative to true ranking (it's a metric, but not a perfect one).

I struggle to get as interested in the women's tournament. It is exciting, but the lack of parity in women's basketball makes it a lot less enjoyable. I know the FiveThirtyEight.com stats are just their opinion, but they are generally consistent with other estimates I've seen for the men's bracket. In a year with the most dominant team in recent years, they showed a 72% chance for Kentucky to make the Final Four and a 41% chance to win. For the women, UCONN is 96% to make the Final Four and 74% to win.

The % chances of the four 1 seeds to make the Final Four/Win for the women are

96/74

58/9

67/10

37/2

For the men it is

72/41

45/11

32/16

33/15

UConn should be at 94% chance to win it all. 6% chance of a couple players going down with injury or their plane blowing up or something like that...

I can see your frustration. The way things are going there will be no stakeholders for "the balance" of institutions.

The sad...or funny...thing is--most of the institutions that bully/dictate the NCAA are acting from a position of inferiority (exception Stanford? a few others Mich, N'strn, Duke, UVA...ND). Take the total endowment of all SEC schools... it doesn't even come close to H, Y or P. Schools like Alabama, Florida, Ole Miss, Ohio State...they're swinging their dicks around to see who can piss the farthest and shaking up their respective institutions to grab a few athletic dollars. In comparison, athletic income is a marginal line item for an institutions income. I'm not one that would argue to ban intercollegiate sports...i'm not that guy. I realize they engender good will and interest for alumni. But do institutions really want to press for greater autonomy in giving benefits to student athletes?

I was an athlete at a fairly visible power 6 conf. school. However, i'm upset at the lack of academic reputation my alma mater has. I would give whatever titles they had for a solid academic reputation.

Ah yes, NCAA women's basketball, what interesting subject matter.