ShareThis Page

Pitt, West Virginia, Duquesne women's basketball teams await postseason fate

| Sunday, March 15, 2015, 11:06 p.m.

The Robert Morris women's basketball team lost its chance to return to the NCAA Tournament on Sunday, but the Pitt, Duquesne and West Virginia players still hope to hear their team's name called during Monday's Selection Show.

The Panthers (19-11) were considered a lower seed before they lost to Virginia Tech in second round of the ACC Tournament.

Their RPI dropped from 33 to 41 after the loss, although they still have wins over No. 8 North Carolina, Michigan and Ohio State. Pitt last went to the NCAA Tournament in 2009, losing in the Sweet 16. The Panthers haven't been to a postseason tournament since 2010, when they lost in the first round of the WNIT.

Duquesne (21-10) hopes to earn its first bid, although the chances are slim. The Dukes have an RPI of 48, but two years ago they were stunned when their 23-7 record and RPI of 36 weren't enough to earn them an at-large bid. They have appeared in the WNIT every year since 2009, advancing as far as the third round in 2011.

West Virginia (18-14) has gone to the tournament the past five years but stands only an outside chance of making it in. The Mountaineers lost to Oklahoma in the Big 12 quarterfinals.

The latest ESPN prediction has Pitt receiving a No. 12 seed and facing No. 5 Mississippi State. Duquesne was included in the list of first four out. West Virginia was a part of the next four out.

Karen Price is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. Reach her at or via Twitter @KarenPrice_Trib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.