Reduce women’s b-ball scholarships to 13

[mtdew_fever]

The difference in female athletics is seen at every level. The tiers between average to good to very good has a much wider range than in mens athletics.

The high level female regardless of sport are so much better than the rest. There arent many of those female athletes. In mens athletics there are a lot more that can play at a high level....or closer to it.

The comment that the best female basketball players also stay 4 years, which os a huge contributor as well.

I dont buy the idea of decreasing scholarships from 15-13. Title IX will keep it there unless they are willing to add them to another sport. Plus if those females in those last two spots are really that good.....they will ultimately transfer out of they want minutes.

 

[Run&Blade]

Nobody cares about any women’s sport professional or amateur.

Tweaking scholarships to try and get things more competitive will not matter.

I am surprised cheerleaders are not on scholarship to help with title ix. Hell of a lot cheaper than rowing or field hockey.

 

[cidhawkeye]

This thread was pretty entertaining. There was a theory posted, quickly debunked by facts yet still presented again....and again... because it worked in football. Completely ignoring the fallacy of the analogy. Why am I picturing Demi Moore doing the ‘but I strenuously object’ bit.

 

[DodgerHawki]

The difference in female athletics is seen at every level. The tiers between average to good to very good has a much wider range than in mens athletics.

The high level female regardless of sport are so much better than the rest. There arent many of those female athletes. In mens athletics there are a lot more that can play at a high level....or closer to it.

The comment that the best female basketball players also stay 4 years, which os a huge contributor as well.

I dont buy the idea of decreasing scholarships from 15-13. Title IX will keep it there unless they are willing to add them to another sport. Plus if those females in those last two spots are really that good.....they will ultimately transfer out of they want minutes.

This is the issue. There just isn't the depth in talent in the women's game as there is in the men's side. Yes, the Tennessee men's was physically better than Iowa (Tennessee was ranked No. 1 for several weeks this year). But the difference between Tennessee and Iowa was not so great that Iowa couldn't take one of the best teams in the country to OT. The depth in the women's game is better than it was 10-15 years ago, in another 10-15 years hopefully the gap between the very best talent and "good" talent will continue to shrink.

 

[hawk-i bob]

looks like they had released Alexia Morris at the beginning of the year. had five 5 star recruits coming in, showing 13 on their roster now. Natalie Chou transfered from Baylor.

according to their own site ...they have 12 not 13. Morris & Chou did indeed transfer...reducing their roster down to 12....they do indeed have a strong freshman class & have only 'one' commit..as of now it looks likes a roster of 11 is possible.

Looking at their previous seasons' it does not appear they have suited up 15 scholarship players...
10 in 2018
10 in 2017
13 in 2016
13 in 2015
12 in 2014
thats' an avg of less than 12 roster players...its pretty clear they are not stockpiling 15 players.

 

[dekhawk]

This thread was pretty entertaining. There was a theory posted, quickly debunked by facts yet still presented again....and again... because it worked in football. Completely ignoring the fallacy of the analogy. Why am I picturing Demi Moore doing the ‘but I strenuously object’ bit.

An ncaa women’s basketball study suggested reducing the number of scholarships but I guess you know better.

 

[fezzador]

The difference in female athletics is seen at every level. The tiers between average to good to very good has a much wider range than in mens athletics.

The high level female regardless of sport are so much better than the rest. There arent many of those female athletes. In mens athletics there are a lot more that can play at a high level....or closer to it.

The comment that the best female basketball players also stay 4 years, which os a huge contributor as well.

I dont buy the idea of decreasing scholarships from 15-13. Title IX will keep it there unless they are willing to add them to another sport. Plus if those females in those last two spots are really that good.....they will ultimately transfer out of they want minutes.

QFT.

There's a huge difference between a Duke v. Kenesaw State blowout in MBB and a UConn v. Kenesaw State blowout on the ladies' side. A blowout for the Blue Devils' men would be like 91-60. A blowout for the lady Huskies would be like 91-32.

 

[cidhawkeye]

An ncaa women’s basketball study suggested reducing the number of scholarships but I guess you know better.

The NCAA hired a consultant to do this report. Not quite an NCAA study. The report is 6 years old. Perhaps you should go back and see how much of that report has been implemented. In the mean time feel free to peruse the rosters of the power schools and measure the impact by the change......... wait, people on this board did the work for you. You choose to ignore it which is your prerogative. In summary, 6 year old suggestion with no action taken, facts show it would have little to no impact. Now if you want to discuss how the football scholarship reductions are similar to your contention than feel free.

 

[dekhawk]

The NCAA hired a consultant to do this report. Not quite an NCAA study. The report is 6 years old. Perhaps you should go back and see how much of that report has been implemented. In the mean time feel free to peruse the rosters of the power schools and measure the impact by the change......... wait, people on this board did the work for you. You choose to ignore it which is your prerogative. In summary, 6 year old suggestion with no action taken, facts show it would have little to no impact. Now if you want to discuss how the football scholarship reductions are similar to your contention than feel free.

So the Nebraska men’s b-ball team had 7 scholarship players at year end. Was that on purpose or possibly some issues occurred to get them to 7? Posters have posted about the year end scholarship level at 2 or 3 women’s schools. We don’t know why they aren’t at the limit , is if possible they had some issues like Nebraska? Are they banking some because of better options next year ?

You’re hypothesizeing as I am. If you have a better option to fix women’s basketball let’s hear it.

 

[BraydonRoberts5]

So the Nebraska men’s b-ball team had 7 scholarship players at year end. Was that on purpose or possibly some issues occurred to get them to 7? Posters have posted about the year end scholarship level at 2 or 3 women’s schools. We don’t know why they aren’t at the limit , is if possible they had some issues like Nebraska? Are they banking some because of better options next year ?

You’re hypothesizeing as I am. If you have a better option to fix women’s basketball let’s hear it.

If you want an example closer to home, Iowa WBB hasn't had more than 13 scholarship athletes since I've been following them. It's occasionally gotten lower than that due to transfers, but not higher. Coach Bluder believes taking on more players would make players upset due to a lack of playing time, which could impact team chemistry.

Reducing scholarships could increase parity in women's basketball, but I think it'd need to be reduced down to 10 or 11, not 13. There are, of course, plenty of other compelling reasons not to reduce scholarship numbers by that much.

 

[LinusPF]

It would be nice to have some more variety at the Final Four, but it certainly doesn't stop me from enjoying the sport! You still have conference championships to win. You still have rivalries. You still root for your team to improve from year to year.

Lack of parity is mostly due to entrenched coaches. Kids mostly choose a coach. Not a school. Look at Tennessee. Once Geno, Moffit, Mulkey, VanDerveer etc move on we'll see some new names at the top.

 

[cidhawkeye]

So the Nebraska men’s b-ball team had 7 scholarship players at year end. Was that on purpose or possibly some issues occurred to get them to 7? Posters have posted about the year end scholarship level at 2 or 3 women’s schools. We don’t know why they aren’t at the limit , is if possible they had some issues like Nebraska? Are they banking some because of better options next year ?

You’re hypothesizeing as I am. If you have a better option to fix women’s basketball let’s hear it.

So now we are bringing mens basketball into the equation? We can get into the statistics of the process but I have a strong feeling that won't matter and the horse will get another whip whether it is dead or not. I have not presented a fix for womens basketball.I really don't have a strong feeling about it. I have thought that Bluder should use more of her scholarships due to injuries, transfers etc. but realized that very few teams use 15 scholarships. Then you came along and kept throwing out old information and refusing to acknowledge that limiting the power schools to 13 scholarships would have little to no influence.

 

[dekhawk]

So now we are bringing mens basketball into the equation? We can get into the statistics of the process but I have a strong feeling that won't matter and the horse will get another whip whether it is dead or not. I have not presented a fix for womens basketball.I really don't have a strong feeling about it. I have thought that Bluder should use more of her scholarships due to injuries, transfers etc. but realized that very few teams use 15 scholarships. Then you came along and kept throwing out old information and refusing to acknowledge that limiting the power schools to 13 scholarships would have little to no influence.

We really don’t know if 13 would have an impact without trying it now do we ?

 

[milehighhawkeye24]

Dropping 2 scholarships for woman drops 2 from men sport

 

[BraydonRoberts5]

We really don’t know if 13 would have an impact without trying it now do we ?

Someone could do a more expansive study of the rosters of top teams. If it shows that most, or even all, of the top teams don't use more than 13 scholarships, then we would have conclusive proof going to 13 wouldn't impact parity levels. Efforts in this thread already point towards the possibility that top teams don't use more than 13, and sometimes even less.

 

[cidhawkeye]

Someone could do a more expansive study of the rosters of top teams. If it shows that most, or even all, of the top teams don't use more than 13 scholarships, then we would have conclusive proof going to 13 wouldn't impact parity levels. Efforts in this thread already point towards the possibility that top teams don't use more than 13, and sometimes even less.

I made it through the top ten, zero teams have used 15. Game changer I say.

 

[cidhawkeye]

We really don’t know if 13 would have an impact without trying it now do we ?

We don’t know if making right handed players on Baylor, UConn or ND shoot left handed works yet either.

 

[Franisdaman]

a saw an ESPN headline that UConn just got an oral commit from the #1 ranked player

and that player is from a Minneapolis suburb high school.

that has to be a kick in Lindsay Whalen's you know what losing the #1 rated kid in the nation out of your own back yard. To UConn, too.

F' UConn.

 

[BraydonRoberts5]

I made it through the top ten, zero teams have used 15. Game changer I say.

That's what I expected. There's no real reason to have a roster of 15 when the typical rotation is only 7 or 8.

 

[Franisdaman]

That's what I expected. There's no real reason to have a roster of 15 when the typical rotation is only 7 or 8.

i guess you could say it helped NC State this year. they lost 4 players to season ending knee injuries so having that 11 person roster helped in the end; they got a 3 seed, of course, in the NCAA tournament

 

[BraydonRoberts5]

i guess you could say it helped NC State this year. they lost 4 players to season ending knee injuries so having that 11 person roster helped in the end; they got a 3 seed, of course, in the NCAA tournament

Even in cases of extreme injury like that there would still be 3-4 players who aren't in the regular rotation if the roster size is 15. Good to have extra bodies for practice, I suppose, but extremely hard to manage in healthy years.

For fun I checked, and NC State had 13 on its roster this year. Only 12 of those players ended up playing in a game.

 

[Tylerl_28]

Even in cases of extreme injury like that there would still be 3-4 players who aren't in the regular rotation if the roster size is 15. Good to have extra bodies for practice, I suppose, but extremely hard to manage in healthy years.

For fun I checked, and NC State had 13 on its roster this year. Only 12 of those players ended up playing in a game.

And at least one of those players was a walk on.

 

[Franisdaman]

Even in cases of extreme injury like that there would still be 3-4 players who aren't in the regular rotation if the roster size is 15. Good to have extra bodies for practice, I suppose, but extremely hard to manage in healthy years.

For fun I checked, and NC State had 13 on its roster this year. Only 12 of those players ended up playing in a game.

I still think women's basketball has a major problem and I don't know how you fix it.

* Everyone who is paying even a little bit attention knows that Uconn is going to make the Final 4 every year. This year is their 12th straight appearance.

* The #8 team in the country (Iowa) played 2 of the Final Four teams this year (Notre Dame & Baylor). The #8 team in the country should not be losing to both by 30 points. But that's where women's basketball is today. There is an ocean separating the 8th best team and the #1 team.

* There is no "March Madness" in women's basketball. People aren't tuning in for a major upset because major upsets don't happen.

* Attendance at the sites has been awful. Even the 1st and 2nd round games when one of the 4 teams is the host the fans still did not show up. And the tickets were cheap!

 

[cidhawkeye]

I still think women's basketball has a major problem and I don't know how you fix it.

* Everyone who is paying even a little bit attention knows that Uconn is going to make the Final 4 every year. This year is their 12th straight appearance.

* The #8 team in the country (Iowa) played 2 of the Final Four teams this year (Notre Dame & Baylor). The #8 team in the country should not be losing to both by 30 points. But that's where women's basketball is today. There is an ocean separating the 8th best team and the #1 team.

* There is no "March Madness" in women's basketball. People aren't tuning in for a major upset because major upsets don't happen.

* Attendance at the sites has been awful. Even the 1st and 2nd round games when one of the 4 teams is the host the fans still did not show up. And the tickets were cheap!

Go read the report to the NCAA that the other guy kept using a sliver of. Some interesting ideas to look at.

 

[dekhawk]

Go read the report to the NCAA that the other guy kept using a sliver of. Some interesting ideas to look at.

You’re coming around.

 

[cidhawkeye]

You’re coming around.

Lol, I sure am. Still haven’t moved on those items... in 6 years.

 

[wneff]

Dropping 2 scholarships for woman drops 2 from men sport

I don't know enough about Title IX. Over the long term, does it affect Iowa's compliance if they aren't awarding those scholarships? I would think they would be counting scholarships actually awarded and not what could be awarded.

 

[wneff]

Even in cases of extreme injury like that there would still be 3-4 players who aren't in the regular rotation if the roster size is 15. Good to have extra bodies for practice, I suppose, but extremely hard to manage in healthy years.

For fun I checked, and NC State had 13 on its roster this year. Only 12 of those players ended up playing in a game.

Anyone have any idea what percentage of teams practice against men? They don't necessarily need female scholarship athletes to have a practice.

 

[BraydonRoberts5]

I still think women's basketball has a major problem and I don't know how you fix it.

* Everyone who is paying even a little bit attention knows that Uconn is going to make the Final 4 every year. This year is their 12th straight appearance.

* The #8 team in the country (Iowa) played 2 of the Final Four teams this year (Notre Dame & Baylor). The #8 team in the country should not be losing to both by 30 points. But that's where women's basketball is today. There is an ocean separating the 8th best team and the #1 team.

* There is no "March Madness" in women's basketball. People aren't tuning in for a major upset because major upsets don't happen.

* Attendance at the sites has been awful. Even the 1st and 2nd round games when one of the 4 teams is the host the fans still did not show up. And the tickets were cheap!

I agree it's a problem, but like you, I don't know how to fix it.

Anyone have any idea what percentage of teams practice against men? They don't necessarily need female scholarship athletes to have a practice.

I'd guess most, if not all of them. Iowa does.

 

[milehighhawkeye24]

I don't know enough about Title IX. Over the long term, does it affect Iowa's compliance if they aren't awarding those scholarships? I would think they would be counting scholarships actually awarded and not what could be awarded.

There has to be equal # of scholarships available to men and woman across the board. With football having 85 that makes things tough

 

[grayhair81]

Rowing already has 20 scholarships and you want to give them more?

This. If they reduced women's bball scollies, they would have to add them to an obscure sport somewhere for the sake of Title IX.

 

[UpstreamHawkeye]

Iowa can add a women's wrestling team...

 

[dekhawk]

This. If they reduced women's bball scollies, they would have to add them to an obscure sport somewhere for the sake of Title IX.

I agree. My issue is how to make women’s basketball competitive. I’m not suggesting decreasing women’s scholarships overall , just basketball in an attempt to improve it. Many will and have argued against this but it’s a suggestion. Won’t know if it works unless they try it.

 

[cidhawkeye]

I agree. My issue is how to make women’s basketball competitive. I’m not suggesting decreasing women’s scholarships overall , just basketball in an attempt to improve it. Many will and have argued against this but it’s a suggestion. Won’t know if it works unless they try it.

Other than the statistical proof that it wouldn't impact at least the top 10 programs. Is there something other than an opinion to think it would make a change?

 

[cyberhawk]

Without trying to be disparaging, I believe this notion that reducing scholarships will ‘level the playing field’ [so to speak], is false for two reasons. The first reason has already been discussed and I think a good case was made that these rosters are already below the scholarship limit which is not analogous to the example given (football). The second reason I believe it is false has not been debated and that is the assertion [that limiting the scholarships in other sports (eg football) has been successful] has not necessarily been proven. While rosters have been equalized, we still see the perpetuation of certain teams (eg Alabama) dominating the BCS rankings year after year. I do agree that the ‘one and done’ or early declaration for the professional draft is a factor in the men’s game. Another observation that was mentioned is that a number of scholarships have been deprived from potential players and are therefore wasted. So in the interest of being solution oriented, I offer my own. First, limit undergraduate scholarships (to 14, 13, or even 12) and simultaneously permit [1, 2, or even 3] additional graduate scholarships (up to 15 total). Then also give players six years to complete five years of eligibility. Presumably (at least by me) the best players would opt to forgo their fifth year of eligibility (and graduate school) to play professionally. But perhaps some [more academically inclined] would stay to complete their five years (and have there graduate school paid for). I believe this would increase the average age, experience and overall competitiveness of schools (eg Stanford, Northwestern and Iowa) that recruit these players.

 

[dekhawk]

Other than the statistical proof that it wouldn't impact at least the top 10 programs. Is there something other than an opinion to think it would make a change?

Do you have a link that has that statistical proof on the top 10 programs. I’ve not seen that and would be interested to see those facts. We’ve had several people provide examples of 2 or 3 of these schools and how many are on scholarship at year end. I would like to see how many were offered, accepted , left school for whatever reason , injuries etc.

 

[cidhawkeye]

Do you have a link that has that statistical proof on the top 10 programs. I’ve not seen that and would be interested to see those facts. We’ve had several people provide examples of 2 or 3 of these schools and how many are on scholarship at year end. I would like to see how many were offered, accepted , left school for whatever reason , injuries etc.

For the current top 10 zero teams started the year with 15 players on their team.

 

[cyberhawk]

Do you have a link that has that statistical proof on the top 10 programs. I’ve not seen that and would be interested to see those facts. We’ve had several people provide examples of 2 or 3 of these schools and how many are on scholarship at year end. I would like to see how many were offered, accepted , left school for whatever reason , injuries etc.

You simply are not going to find all of the information that you would like to see in one single link. If you are really that interested it would take a comprehensive search and you will still not get 100% of what you would like, especially the number of offers. Or I can save you a lot of time and just tell you that the numbers that have been presented here jive with what I have seen and learned for myself over several years of online searching.
Here is perhaps the best and most comprehensive site for up to date recruiting news...
https://mobile.twitter.com/Raoul_000
It also provides information on injuries, transfers and more.

 

[chuck285]

It's really funny about which sport needs repaired. There is very little that can be done or changed. The NCAA is making big money and that's the bottom line.
I follow wrestling and they are only allow to have 9.9 scholarships for four or five years. But at Penn State they have 30 or more young men in the wrestling programs every year. Penn State has been rumored to have 3 million dollars in their wrestling club and after their kids, who were just "walk ons" graduate they go to the wrestling club and work for a summer and somehow all their student loans are paid off by the wrestling club. The NCAA doesn't care to look into this as this isn't a big revenue maker for them.

 

[cyberhawk]

Wow! This is shocking. That’s almost as good as a scholarship. I wonder if this rumor has any veracity.
Where does the money come from? What do the graduates do? Are they the only school that does this? If so, why don’t other schools do it?