NCAA To Announce Preliminary Seedings Monday.

[IrishTiger]

Curious so I looked it up. Eugene to Spokane is 460 miles.... 7 hr 23 minute drive according to Google. Thats approximately the distance from Storrs to Richmond Va. Those backyards out west are huuuuuuuuuuuuuuge compared to the backyards of the east coast

My Point was it’s in the Northwest and a state away from Where University of Oregon is. I didn’t think I had to be so specific. Especially when ND had like a 5 Hr plane ride to get there.

 

[Plebe]

My Point was it’s in the Northwest and a state away from Where University of Oregon is. I didn’t think I had to be so specific. Especially when ND had like a 5 Hr plane ride to get there.

More like four hours, but hey let's not let the facts stand in the way of a good story.
"The victory was all the sweeter because we had to climb Mount Rainier barefoot both directions while a flock of angry ducks harassed us!"

I wonder, did Stanford crow about how they "beat Notre Dame in their backyard" when they beat them in Lexington, Kentucky (which actually is driving distance from South Bend)?

 

[SimpleDawg]

I have watched Marquette 4 times this year, MSST, DePaul, ND, and Georgetown. They were not hitting from 3 point land against ND or Georgetown and they did not looked like top ten team. They shot well against DePaul from outside and were unbelievable against MSST from outside. Marquette is dangerous but based on the game I saw Stanford play against Baylor (a team much like MSST) I think I would rather play Marquette.

Well..... Baylor allowed 30 three-point shots against Stanford, and Stanford made 13 of them. They allowed 32 three-point shots against UConn, and UConn made 11 of them. UConn got only 18 points off of 2s, and Stanford only got 20 points off of 2s. The way Baylor defends inside and in the paint is clearly a strength of theirs.

So I guess based on that..... I don't want Baylor at all. They're not Tennessee or Marquette, they're tough in the paint. They'll have a better answer for Danberry and Howard. We can't win shooting 3s.

I don't think Vic would allow 30+ three point shots though, so if Stanford has to win by 2s, I don't think they can come close to matching our ability in the paint or elbow or midrange.

We allowed 21 three-point shots against Marquette and 25 against South Carolina (though 5 of them were SC jacking up bricks on the last possession) . But 20 or 21 shots is pretty much our ceiling; and that's overall a little bit better. But they made a lot of 2s too. Overall, they were just both shooting very well. We overcame Marquette and South Carolina because our offense is very strong and consistently unstoppable this year. But of course against Baylor it'll be another story.

I just want to be able to count on our offense to completely carry us through this year. And that's good thinking on my part. But first we have to avoid Baylor and hope the Pac-12 ousts them like they usually do. Baylor is not very lucky against the Pac-12, being kicked out by Oregon State so often, only loss this year to the Pac-12, and only 2 losses last year to the Pac-12. I think Louisville and Notre Dame will also be a bit tougher defensively against us, but if there's one team I'd want to avoid like the plague... it's definitely Baylor..


...

 

[LoTrader]

Agree to disagree. Marquette is smart enough to know they don't have the advantage in height, but they compensate by exploiting you with their strengths. They can play around your "advantages." And they can make you play Marquette ball. I haven't seen Mississippi State being forced to play anyone else's game this year but against them, so for reference... the Mississippi State/Marquette game. Keep in mind this comes from a Mississippi State fan's perspective, so if you were to ask Bulldog Nation, I'm sure the majority of us would choose to play Stanford. Reason being the debacle against Marquette earlier in the year. And because the style of play of Stanford's to my eyes is not so tough for us, and I think we'll score 85 on them at will. I'd think Notre Dame may wanna avoid Stanford. Just like South Carolina better pray they don't get Albany because they shrivel up and prune against UConn. By that notion, the team I see as the absolute nightmare for Marquette is Louisville because of how physical they play, I doubt Marquette will get anything easy on them or get anything past them.

....

If MSU vs Stanford comes to be in the NCAA Tournament, I'll take that action all day long. MSU will not score 85 or more on Stanford.

 

[Jmsdawg]

Well..... Baylor allowed 30 three-point shots against Stanford, and they made 13 of them. They allowed 32 three-point shots against UConn, and UConn made 11 of them. UConn got only 18 points off of 2s, and Stanford only got 20 points off of 2s. The way Baylor defends inside and in the paint is clearly a strength of theirs.

So I guess based on that..... I don't want Baylor at all. They're not Tennessee or Marquette, they're tough in the paint. They'll have a better answer for Danberry and Howard. We can't win shooting 3s.

I don't think Vic would allow 30+ three point shots though, so if Stanford has to win by 2s, I don't think they can come close to matching our ability in the paint or elbow or midrange.

We allowed 21 three-point shots against Marquette and 25 against South Carolina (though 5 of them were SC jacking up bricks on the last possession) . But 20 or 21 shots is pretty much our ceiling; and that's overall a little bit better. But they made a lot of 2s too. Overall, they were just both shooting very well. We overcame Marquette and South Carolina because our offense is very strong and consistently unstoppable this year. But of course against Baylor it'll be another story.

I just want to be able to count on our offense to completely carry us through this year. And that's good thinking on my part. But first we have to avoid Baylor and hope the Pac-12 ousts them like they usually do. Baylor is not very lucky against the Pac-12, being kicked out by Oregon State so often, only loss this year to the Pac-12, and only 2 losses last year to the Pac-12. I think Louisville and Notre Dame will also be a bit tougher defensively against us, but if there's one team I'd want to avoid like the plague... it's definitely Baylor..


...

I want to see the post matchup, Tee and Brown, but I want that to be at the FF. I think Tee is better than Brown and I really think that would be a great game!

 

[jonson]

If MSU vs Stanford comes to be in the NCAA Tournament, I'll take that action all day long. MSU will not score 85 or more on Stanford.

I agree. I find it interesting that in these discussions many Mississippi State fans seem to forget that they have lost to a Pac 12 team--I guess because they consider the loss a fluke, even though they scored well below 85 points, allowed 84, and were, I think most would agree, generally out-coached. I don't believe that any of the top 6 seeds--or, indeed, any of the top 3 Pac 12 seeds in the current listing--will be an easy out.

 

[SimpleDawg]

I agree. I find it interesting that in these discussions many Mississippi State fans seem to forget that they have lost to a Pac 12 team--I guess because they consider the loss a fluke, even though they scored well below 85 points, allowed 84, and were, I think most would agree, generally out-coached. I don't believe that any of the top 6 seeds--or, indeed, any of the top 3 Pac 12 seeds in the current listing--will be an easy out.

But you have to also consider that Mississippi State is stronger this year offensively. This year we're doing things we couldn't last year. We're beating teams more impressively this year, and our style is conducive to more overall points scored on average. We couldn't explode like we could against Tennessee last year - even though, yes we should be superior to them, so it's no surprise we won by double digits. And I think overall, we played South Carolina better this year than last year partly because we're stronger offensively though non-Mississippi State fans may disagree with that claim.

I'm just thinking how much better we're playing this year rather than the Pac-12 not being able to compete against us - I'm really not thinking in my head "the Pac-12 is weak." You have to also remember that Stanford is not Oregon despite being in the Pac-12 so the 74 points we scored against them is actually not bad for a team that should be superior to Stanford. And while I do believe our Oregon loss was a fluke, I also think the same of your Michigan State loss, which at this point can't be used to point out any weaknesses about Oregon.

There are a couple of teams that I would prefer to play over Stanford in the top 12, but compared to the elite 6 and Marquette.... I'd take Stanford. After that, I do believe Stanford is better than a few teams currently on the #2 or #3 line. I do think that despite our one Pac-12 loss, there's no evidence of Mississippi State being weak against the Pac-12 recently. You can make the claim about Baylor because their last 3 losses were to the Pac-12, and 2 out of 3 recent tournament losses to Oregon State, but if Mississippi State has a kryptonite, it's certainly South Carolina and not the Pac-12.


...

 

[DefenseBB]

Plebe is becoming my go to poster. So much knowledge about WBB, thanks for all you do you make the BY the place I go to for WBB info. Again, THANKS!

Google Image Result for https://thumbs.gfycat.com/TameFrenchBlackcrappie-size_restricted.gif

 

[Orangutan]

We're talking about an entirely different scale here, not to mention like I said there isn't a sizable portion of the local population predisposed to rooting for them. So, yeah, you're incorrect about that.

Well, there was the wrinkle of Graves having coached at Gonzaga, so I think a decent chunk of the local fans who would otherwise have been neutral were rooting for Oregon.

I don't think it was enough to give Oregon a significant home court advantage or anything. Maybe enough to contribute to ND's inferiority complex, so in that way it was perhaps a psychological advantage for ND.

"We have to go to their region and play in front of fans rooting for them and all the experts think they are going to win and they're undefeated since going to this starting 5 and Ionescu is the best thing since sliced bread..." etc. etc.

 

[LoTrader]

But you have to also consider that Mississippi State is stronger this year offensively. This year we're doing things we couldn't last year. We're beating teams more impressively this year, and our style is conducive to more overall points scored on average. We couldn't explode like we could against Tennessee last year - even though, yes we should be superior to them, so it's no surprise we won by double digits. And I think overall, we played South Carolina better this year than last year partly because we're stronger offensively though non-Mississippi State fans may disagree with that claim.

I'm just thinking how much better we're playing this year rather than the Pac-12 not being able to compete against us - I'm really not thinking in my head "the Pac-12 is weak." You have to also remember that Stanford is not Oregon despite being in the Pac-12 so the 74 points we scored against them is actually not bad for a team that should be superior to Stanford. And while I do believe our Oregon loss was a fluke, I also think the same of your Michigan State loss, which at this point can't be used to point out any weaknesses about Oregon.

There are a couple of teams that I would prefer to play over Stanford in the top 12, but compared to the elite 6 and Marquette.... I'd take Stanford. After that, I do believe Stanford is better than a few teams currently on the #2 or #3 line. I do think that despite our one Pac-12 loss, there's no evidence of Mississippi State being weak against the Pac-12 recently. You can make the claim about Baylor because their last 3 losses were to the Pac-12, and 2 out of 3 recent tournament losses to Oregon State, but if Mississippi State has a kryptonite, it's certainly South Carolina and not the Pac-12.


...

The loss to Oregon was a fluke? I just hope MSU gets another chance to play Oregon, and/or Stanford. BTW, I'm also a fan of MSU, they are a very solid team, and I expect will do very well in the NCAA Tournament.

 

[SimpleDawg]

The loss to Oregon was a fluke? I just hope MSU gets another chance to play Oregon, and/or Stanford. BTW, I'm also a fan of MSU, they are a very solid team, and I expect will do very well in the NCAA Tournament.

Yeah, I think it's a fluke. McCowan isn't gonna get 5 points again. She's playing some of the best basketball of her life right now. Hebard consistently went to the top of the key and McCowan followed her. They drew up plays to intentionally get McCowan out of the paint, and Cazorla just drove into an open lane where McCowan made no impact. Danberry fouls out, Bre'Amber Scott doesn't even play until the 4th quarter, Espinosa-Hunter made no impact, Vic takes half of his starters out when he still had a chance to win. I think it was just an early season fluke.

FYI, I think all of those early losses were flukes. Baylor loss to Stanford clearly a fluke. Mulkey played her reserves a lot, Kalani Brown was in a slump, they couldn't score enough points early on to offset Stanford's 3s on the other end, and was taken out early. Stanford shot 43.33% from 3 on 30 three-point shots and yet managed only 68 points. Safe to say Mulkey will take that one loss anyday.

That Michigan State defeat of Oregon clearly a fluke. South Carolina loss to Drake.... etc. Need I go on...


And thanks... I appreciate that. And I hope Oregon State can upset Oregon at least once. I like my Pivec a lot, and Oregon losing can obviously help our seeding a little better and get us out of Albany.


...

 

[LoTrader]

Yeah, I think it's a fluke. McCowan isn't gonna get 5 points again. She's playing some of the best basketball of her life right now. Hebard consistently went to the top of the key and McCowan followed her. They drew up plays to intentionally get McCowan out of the paint, and Cazorla just drove into an open lane where McCowan made no impact. Danberry fouls out, Bre'Amber Scott doesn't even play until the 4th quarter, Espinosa-Hunter made no impact, Vic takes half of his starters out when he still had a chance to win. I think it was just an early season fluke.

FYI, I think all of those early losses were flukes. Baylor loss to Stanford clearly a fluke. Mulkey played her reserves a lot, Kalani Brown was in a slump, they couldn't score enough points early on to offset Stanford's 3s on the other end, and was taken out early. Stanford shot 43.33% from 3 on 30 three-point shots and yet managed only 68 points. Safe to say Mulkey will take that one loss anyday.

That Michigan State defeat of Oregon clearly a fluke. South Carolina loss to Drake.... etc. Need I go on...


And thanks... I appreciate that. And I hope Oregon State can upset Oregon at least once. I like my Pivec a lot, and Oregon losing can obviously help our seeding a little better and get us out of Albany.


...

I don't think any of those losses were flukes. If OSU beats UO that won't be a fluke either. Truthfully, I'm expecting UO to win both of these games vs OSU. I will be attending the Feb. 18 game at Gill Coliseum, which I think will be OSU's best chance of a win. And BTW, it is refreshing to hear someone outside of the PAC-12 viewership recognize what a stud Mikayla Pivec [is/has been] since coming on the WCBB scene. You have a good eye (except maybe recognizing "fluke" games ).

 

[eebmg]

I want to see the post matchup, Tee and Brown, but I want that to be at the FF. I think Tee is better than Brown and I really think that would be a great game!

In the few games I have seen with McGowan, I am most impressed by her much better demeanor and body language. She seems to have improved her attitude in dealing with lack of fouls called and decided that is just the way it is going to be and to fight through that. Does not hurt when Anriel is in there fighting on the boards.

 

[Plebe]

And thanks... I appreciate that. And I hope Oregon State can upset Oregon at least once. I like my Pivec a lot, and Oregon losing can obviously help our seeding a little better and get us out of Albany.

A single loss by Oregon to Oregon State won't be enough to drop Oregon below MSU.
If they get swept by OSU, maybe...

 

[Orangutan]

Hebard consistently went to the top of the key and McCowan followed her. They drew up plays to intentionally get McCowan out of the paint, and Cazorla just drove into an open lane where McCowan made no impact.

Um, these items sort of read like the reason it wasn't a fluke.

To me, it's no coincidence that McCowan played such a poor game when going up against a strong team on the road that pushed her out of her comfort zone defensively.

 

[j66kicker]

Yeah, I think it's a fluke. McCowan isn't gonna get 5 points again. She's playing some of the best basketball of her life right now. Hebard consistently went to the top of the key and McCowan followed her. They drew up plays to intentionally get McCowan out of the paint, and Cazorla just drove into an open lane where McCowan made no impact. Danberry fouls out, Bre'Amber Scott doesn't even play until the 4th quarter, Espinosa-Hunter made no impact, Vic takes half of his starters out when he still had a chance to win. I think it was just an early season fluke.

FYI, I think all of those early losses were flukes. Baylor loss to Stanford clearly a fluke. Mulkey played her reserves a lot, Kalani Brown was in a slump, they couldn't score enough points early on to offset Stanford's 3s on the other end, and was taken out early. Stanford shot 43.33% from 3 on 30 three-point shots and yet managed only 68 points. Safe to say Mulkey will take that one loss anyday.

That Michigan State defeat of Oregon clearly a fluke. South Carolina loss to Drake.... etc. Need I go on...


And thanks... I appreciate that. And I hope Oregon State can upset Oregon at least once. I like my Pivec a lot, and Oregon losing can obviously help our seeding a little better and get us out of Albany.


...

Just for background before I say this: I'm not a PAC-12 fan, and have generally considered them to be sort of an 'intramural' level conference (Maybe it's that traditionally they've always had a number of unathletic-looking players - no way they would even be on the bench for UConn in that condition - and funky old-fashioned uniforms). But Stanford has always been for real - they are 7-for-17 against UConn. And for sure Oregon beating anybody this year is not a fluke - they are the real deal (and, thanks to Phil Knight, they are have been bucking the PAC-12 funky uniform trend - always have the cool unis).

MSU just plain got beat by Oregon. If you didn't play well, give Oregon some credit for that - geez. And stop with all the "look out for Marquette" stuff. I guess Marquette isn't exactly a 'joke' this year, but regarding their NCAA prospects they basically are. Just stop it.

 

[SimpleDawg]

Just for background before I say this: I'm not a PAC-12 fan, and have generally considered them to be sort of an 'intramural' level conference (Maybe it's that traditionally they've always had a number of unathletic-looking players - no way they would even be on the bench for UConn in that condition - and funky old-fashioned uniforms. But Stanford has always been for real - they are 7-for-17 against UConn. And for sure Oregon beating anybody this year is not a fluke - they are the real deal (and, thanks to Phil Knight, they are have been bucking the PAC-12 funky uniform trend - always have the cool unis).

MSU just plain got beat by Oregon. If you didn't play well, give Oregon some credit for that - geez. And stop with all the "look out for Marquette" stuff. I guess Marquette isn't exactly a 'joke' this year, but regarding their NCAA prospects they basically are. Just stop it.

Ok, you're not really understanding me. I'm not stripping Oregon of any credit for beating MSU, but I call flukes anything that won't impact our ability to win games in March. Will our loss to Oregon really impact our ability to win in March? Come on now. It didn't matter who the opponent was really, and I know Oregon can win the national championship this year. What are you really on about again? Would you call that 100-67 loss of Notre Dame to Louisville last year a fluke? Obviously.... we can argue if it was now, given Notre Dame's run to the title.

I guess we can debate what the word "fluke" means, but to me, if it doesn't impact our ability to win in March, why should we care about that game?

And . It's not I'm acting like a proud MSU fanboy, but yeah.... I guess I am scared of Marquette. And keep in mind, they're predicted as a #2 seed, they don't have any impressive wins but that's the only thing to take away from them. How can someone who was predicted as a #2 seed for the entire February be anyone to NOT watch out for? And I fail to see why Stanford's history with UConn matters against MSU. A game in 2005 doesn't have anything to do with 2019.

If you're still thinking.... "this MSU fanboy is deluded and is crying about that Oregon loss." OMG, I'm long over that and Bulldog Nation is getting along fine. It was just one loss, dude. Every team in the country has one. LOL

...

 

[j66kicker]

Ok, you're not really understanding me. I'm not stripping Oregon of any credit for beating MSU, but I call flukes anything that won't impact our ability to win games in March. Will our loss to Oregon really impact our ability to win in March? Come on now. It didn't matter who the opponent was really, and I know Oregon can win the national championship this year. What are you really on about again? Would you call that 100-67 loss of Notre Dame last year a fluke? Obviously.... we can argue that, given Notre Dame's run to the title.

I guess we can debate what the "fluke" means, but to me, if it doesn't impact our ability to win in March, why should we care about that game?

And . It's not I'm acting like a proud MSU fanboy, but yeah.... I guess I am scared of Marquette. And keep in mind, they're predicted as a #2 seed, they don't have any impressive wins, but how can someone who was predicted as a #2 seed for the entire February be anyone to NOT watch out for. And I fail to see why Stanford's history with UConn matters against MSU. A game in 2005 doesn't have anything to do with 2018.

If you're still thinking.... "this MSU fanboy is deluded and is crying about that Oregon loss." OMG, I'm long over that and Bulldog Nation is getting alone fine. It was just one loss dude. Every team in the country has one. LOL

...

Yeah I guess I'm not really understanding you. You're still saying your loss to Oregon was a fluke and that, "it didn't matter who the opponent was, really." But you're afraid of Marquette. I'm not saying you're a deluded fanboy. Maybe just a confused fanboy?

Whatever. No hard feelings, just observations from my POV. Good luck to the Bulldogs. Hope you take care of business and we get to meet head-up.

 

[SimpleDawg]

Well.... You're still saying your loss to Oregon was a fluke and that, "it didn't matter who the opponent was, really." But you're afraid of Marquette. I'm not saying you're a deluded fanboy. Maybe just a confused fanboy?

Whatever. No hard feelings, just observations from my POV. Good luck to the Bulldogs. Hope you take care of business and we get to meet head-up.

Oh no, no hard feelings here at all. I can see how maybe I didn't write that very clearly. I meant the "it didn't matter who the opponent was" because a loss that early in the season to ANYONE probably isn't a cause for concern. Especially an 8 point loss on the road to a current #1 seed. That Michigan State loss Oregon had is long gone at this point, similarly.

Oregon is a national title threat, no doubt about it. Mississippi State is too. Maybe I am just a little bit confused. Maybe I used the word "fluke" and everyone just took it point blank and shunned some of the context. I am worried about Marquette, but if we play Oregon again.... not saying that'll be any easier. Hopefully that'll be in Tampa though and having played both once already this year, Vic will know that they're gonna both try to play around and away from McCowan again like they did in the first game, and hopefully he knows better now.

Good day

...

 

[Jmsdawg]

In the few games I have seen with McGowan, I am most impressed by her much better demeanor and body language. She seems to have improved her attitude in dealing with lack of fouls called and decided that is just the way it is going to be and to fight through that. Does not hurt when Anriel is in there fighting on the boards.

Tee is much stronger than she was last year, moving her now is like pushing on a wall she just does not budge. She also appears motivated to win. I am not aware of what was bothering her early in the season but since the SC game she has been a monster. If she can continue playing as the monster and we have no critical injuries we are going to be a tough out for any team we play.

 

[jonson]

Yeah, I think it's a fluke. McCowan isn't gonna get 5 points again. She's playing some of the best basketball of her life right now. Hebard consistently went to the top of the key and McCowan followed her. They drew up plays to intentionally get McCowan out of the paint, and Cazorla just drove into an open lane where McCowan made no impact. Danberry fouls out, Bre'Amber Scott doesn't even play until the 4th quarter, Espinosa-Hunter made no impact, Vic takes half of his starters out when he still had a chance to win. I think it was just an early season fluke.

...

I agree that is is very unlikely that McCowan will have only 5 points in a rematch. However, in response to all of the what if's/if only's/won't happen again's that Mississippi State fans like to say about the game--many of which you mention here--one could just as easily list a bunch on the Oregon side: Ionescu won't shoot 5-19, Sabally, who is likewise "playing some of the best basket ball of her life right now," will be on the court for more than 18 minutes and take more than 3 shots, etc., etc., etc.

All of this is of course just speculation on the part of the fans of both teams. The one certainty is that Mississippi State won't have Bibby, who played very well and took a lot of attention throughout the game. Maybe Espinosa-Hunter and/or Scott would have similar impact but that, too, remains to be seen. Just to be clear, I'm not saying that you couldn't win a rematch, and I'm certainly not saying that Mississippi State isn't one of the top teams this year, but I also think some Mississippi fans "doth protest too much" when talking about the loss to Oregon, as well as seem to shortchange Pac 12 teams in general.

 

[SimpleDawg]

I agree that is is very unlikely that McCowan will have only 5 points in a rematch. However, in response to all of the what if's/if only's/won't happen again's that Mississippi State fans like to say about the game--many of which you mention here--one could just as easily list a bunch on the Oregon side: Ionescu won't shoot 5-19, Sabally, who is likewise "playing some of the best basket ball of her life right now," will be on the court for more than 18 minutes and take more than 3 shots, etc., etc., etc.

All of this is of course just speculation on the part of the fans of both teams. The one certainty is that Mississippi State won't have Bibby, who played very well and took a lot of attention throughout the game. Maybe Espinosa-Hunter and/or Scott would have similar impact but that, too, remains to be seen. Just to be clear, I'm not saying that you couldn't win a rematch, and I'm certainly not saying that Mississippi State isn't one of the top teams this year, but I also think some Mississippi fans "doth protest too much" when talking about the loss to Oregon, as well as seem to shortchange Pac 12 teams in general.

Oh I agree. Ionescu was great from the line, but we can't count on her going 5-19 again. And we simply can't foul her that much, or Oregon much in general or it's 27-28 from the free throw line again. I think Cazorla was arguably MVP of the game. And there's another if/what if. What if we shut down Cazorla next time? And I am in complete agreeance with you on Sabally, who is my favorite player on the team, and definitely THE physical presence of Oregon's, the hardest player to stop at the top, and she's getting better each game.

I see your point. There's ifs and what ifs on both sides, for sure. We can't just say "Oregon is the same team from last time we played while Mississippi State has gotten better." Because Sabally has gotten better during the course of the year too, so that's one damper in that theory.

Regarding other Mississippi State fans.... I'm not sure how they think compared to how I think, but I don't think any Mississippi State fan here is friends with me personally. That's one thing i will say. The South Carolina fans have unity, but we don't really support each other and our opinions are all over the place. I am not sure what the other Mississippi State fans have complained about in the match with Oregon, but I personally have conceded a loss to Oregon, and have not looked back since. I'm worried about moving forward obviously. And as for the Pac-12, I started this conversation speaking entirely about Stanford and how threatening I feel they are. I really was not expanding this conversation to make it be about how weak the Pac-12 is, and I certainly don't view them as "lightweight."

Before December, I admit I talked a little bit of trash about Oregon, and I didn't think they could compete with us, but that script has changed obviously, because evidence shows that Oregon has gotten much better this year. That's about it the sum of it, for me personally. Not sure about the other Mississippi State fans, they're entitled to their own opinion of course, but I'm not gonna bother to jot down all of their takes/opinions/theories and remember them for next time.


..

 

[MSGRET]

Curious so I looked it up. Eugene to Spokane is 460 miles.... 7 hr 23 minute drive according to Google. Thats approximately the distance from Storrs to Richmond Va. Those backyards out west are huuuuuuuuuuuuuuge compared to the backyards of the east coast

When I went to see Gabby play in Reno it took me over 8 hours driving to get there from Vegas. Most states West of the Mississippi except for California have distance between their major cities.

 

[nwhoopfan]

When I went to see Gabby play in Reno it took me over 8 hours driving to get there from Vegas. Most states West of the Mississippi except for California have distance between their major cities.

I think people that haven't experienced it firsthand just don't grasp that. Even looking at a map doesn't really bring it home. Gotta be out there driving hour after hour after hour on a blacktop heading to somewhere else to understand.

 

[triaddukefan]

I think people that haven't experienced it firsthand just don't grasp that. Even looking at a map doesn't really bring it home. Gotta be out there driving hour after hour after hour on a blacktop heading to somewhere else to understand.

As a youth....... i went with my friend and his family to Colorado Springs by car. We left Kansas City (Mo) on a Monday morning... and drove all day to Colorado Springs. I remember being in the back seat with my Rand McNally map thinking.......... lawd hamercy.... Kansas is never going to end .... and then we got to the Colorado state line.... and still had another 3 hours to go

NC is another sneaky long state.... most people dont consider it to be a big state... it isnt... but to get to the outer banks from far western part of the state... takes a good 9 hours via car.