Get ready to add the word “quad” to the women’s college basketball vocabulary this season. The NCAA Division I women’s basketball committee made a subtle but important decision over the summer that takes another step toward equalizing the NCAA men’s and women’s tournaments. Beginning with the upcoming 2024-25 season, the women’s tournament will use the quadrant-based system as part of the evaluation process to select the 68 teams that will participate in March Madness.
Much like the women’s committee abandoned RPI for NET (the NCAA Evaluation Tool) as the primary metric used to grade teams for the 2020-21 season a few years after the men, the “quad system” — which the men’s committee adopted in 2017 — will be in effect to measure the quality of a win or loss for the women. The quad system places games into brackets, employing a sliding scale to account for where the game was played.
NET will continue to be used as the primary ranking system for all teams, but the quality of a win or loss will now be determined by Quadrants 1-4 rather than the NET Top 25, NET Top 50, or NET Top 100.
Essentially, the switch to quadrants doesn't change the bigger picture. Good is still good. A bad loss will be just as glaring as it was last season. South Carolina still would have been the heavy favorite heading into the NCAA tournament had quadrants been implemented in March. The hype around Caitlin Clark and Iowa still would have produced the Hawkeyes' first No. 1 seed since 1992. Columbia, Miami and Villanova still would have been fighting for the final spot in the tournament.
But questions always arise with change. We address the answers and how the switch to the quad system could affect the season and what March will look like in 2025.
What is a quad?
This is a grouping of matches based on the rating of the opponents and the venue where the match was played. The selection committee will include in their team sheets (the compilation of all relevant data for each team under consideration) the record in each of the four quadrants. The NET rating remains the linchpin of that scale.
A home game against a team ranked 1-25 in the NET, a neutral court game against an opponent ranked 1-35, and a road game against a team ranked 1-40 is classified as Quad 1. These are the wins that will be discussed the most throughout the season. The better a team's record in Quad 1, the higher its seeding in the NCAA tournament.
Quad 2 is home 26 to 55, neutral 36 to 65 and road 46 to 80.
Quad 3 is home 56 to 90, neutral 66 to 105, and highway 81 to 130.
Quadrant 4 has a home score of 91+, neutral of 106+ and away of 131+.
These ranks are based on historical data for women's basketball since 2010 and are exclusive to women's basketball. For those familiar with men's basketball, these are not the same quadrant ranks.
How will the use of quads be different?
This is a slightly different way of looking at a win or loss. Quadrants are a simpler way of identifying that winning away from home is harder and rewarded more substantially. Quadrant ranks basically replace the top 25, 50 and 100 records.
The terminology used by commentators, writers, and especially bracket experts will change from “South Carolina is 6-0 against NET Top 25 teams and 17-0 against NET Top 50 teams” to “South Carolina's record against Quad 1 opponents is 12-0.”
The difference between these records sheds light on when local/neutral/route ranges apply and how the definition of a premium win can change.
How will they be incorporated?
The selection committee will use each team's record in all four quads as a benchmark based on the strength of their resume. The quality of a win is now largely defined by the quads. However, this does not necessarily mean that the team with the most wins in Quad 1 will be the highest ranked overall. While that could be the case and might even be likely, the committee will still use other selection criteria, just as it has in the past.
Strength of schedule, NET ranking, head-to-head, overall record and competitiveness in losses, plus committee members' own experience watching teams play throughout the season, are still among the considerations they will use to evaluate each school.
What does good look like?
South Carolina's example from last year is a good starting point. Most teams, of course, aren't as dominant as last year's Gamecocks. That 12-0 version of South Carolina may be tough to duplicate, but getting into double digits in Quad 1 wins will be a good argument almost every year for a No. 1 seed.
Since the men have been using this system for seven years, they provide some historical examples. The top three in Quad 1 wins for the men last season were top seeds: Houston, UConn and Purdue. North Carolina was the fourth No. 1 and had 10 Quad 1 wins. But, like the entire selection process, there is no set rule. Every year there are different teams and circumstances.
Using the men’s tournament as an example again, the 2023 Houston men failed to reach double digits in Quad 1 (8-3) but earned a seed at the top. However, the Cougars went 31-3 overall and were the top NET-rated team, proving that Quad 1 wins will matter, but they won’t be the only criteria applied.
All of the No. 1 and No. 2 seeds in the 2024 NCAA Tournament reached double digits in wins in Quad 1. Had the quad system been used last season on the women's side, the No. 1 seeds likely would have remained the same.
Which teams are poised for success with the new quad system?
That doesn't change. Teams that plan well (play a lot of Quad 1 games) and win games against that schedule will still receive top seedings. The mission is the same whether the criteria is net wins or record against Quad 1 and 2 opponents: play and beat other good teams.
UConn will play Notre Dame, Iowa State, USC and South Carolina (all projected top-10 teams) among its non-conference opponents.
The SEC and Big Ten should be the deepest conferences, giving South Carolina, LSU, Texas, USC, UCLA and Ohio State plenty of opportunities to rack up impressive records in Quad 1.
This all sounds familiar. The quadruple system doesn't change anything.
