Ole Miss takes down Stanford (merged)

[cohenzone]

Think I misread. Thought you were saying “they both looked terrible on offense” meaning brink and Jones. Were you just talking about both teams? My mistake in that case!

Yup. Both teams.

 

[The deacon]

At the beginning of the year, on this very board, I said Stanford was vastly overrated because of:

1. No PG
2. No Shooting

I was taken to the cleaners by many posters who assured me that Haley Jones(the most overrated WCBB player in the last 20 years) coud play point forward and that Hannah Jump would make so many 3's.

Well, here we are.....

Why only the last 20 years regarding Haley? Why not the most overrated ever? Please, tell us how you really feel...

 

[hoophuskee]

I really don't think I did. Stanford made more 3's than UConn, so making 3's wasn't their biggest problem this year. UConn's breakdown goes from Senechal's 72 to Muhl's 36. Pretty similar to Stanford, no? Stanford had 4 players that made 20 or more, UConn had 5. That's real close. I could give you the PG part, but absolutely not the 3 point shooting.

I think you are unintentionally misunderstanding ucbart's point. My guess is that he made his prediction about Stanford at the beginning of the year. So you'd agree with the the point that more than likely if UCONN had a heathy Azzi, that their 3pt shooting would have been superior, right?

 

[nwhoopfan]

I think you are unintentionally misunderstanding ucbart's point. My guess is that he made his prediction about Stanford at the beginning of the year. So you'd agree with the the point that more than likely if UCONN had a heathy Azzi, that their 3pt shooting would have been superior, right?

Certainly if Fudd had played all year, she would've hit plenty of 3s, and UConn might've made more total than Stanford. Their % was a bit better than Stanford's. My point is that 3 point shooting really wasn't Stanford's Achilles heel this year.

 

[nwhoopfan]

That's what I figured--multiple threads about Stanford losing, hardly a peep about Indiana. Methinks there is some bias on this board!

 

[hoopsnloops32]

Certainly if Fudd had played all year, she would've hit plenty of 3s, and UConn might've made more total than Stanford. Their % was a bit better than Stanford's. My point is that 3 point shooting really wasn't Stanford's Achilles heel this year.

unless you think a Fudd-less and Ducharmeless UConn was good, that was definitely your Achilles heel as it was ours when our shooters were out. If those two don’t return UConn isn’t playing anymore, likely don’t win the BET and aren’t a 2 seed.

 

[visitingcock]

That's what I figured--multiple threads about Stanford losing, hardly a peep about Indiana. Methinks there is some bias on this board!

Bias? No, it's just more noteworthy.

1. At. The beginning of the year, the question re the final four was “ Scar, UConn, Stanford and Who?” Of course people are more interested in the fall of one of the named teams than the potential who” that emerged mid year.”

2. The PAC was touted as the best conference for most of the year (and still is by the NET). The Fall of its powerhouse creates more glee among those (like me) who felt that the conference was way overrated. (I say that in fear of facing UCLA again)

3. Stanford has a number of players and coach who have won the championship and been to the Final Four. Indiana has non - player or coach. We have been posting about them for three years, Indiana has been a hot topic for about a half year, okay, make it 2:3rds of a year,

It’s not really bias. We had few questions about Stanford (at least before there PAC tourney loss) But many about Indiana.

Years of experience have conditioned us to a tournament loss by a Big Ten loss by any team not Named Maryland.

I was shocked by Stanford's loss. I was surprised by Indiana’s.

 

[KY Card Fan]

In his reseeding of the Sweet 16, Creme says....The upset of the tournament -- perhaps the upset of the last 12 NCAA tournaments -- belongs to the Rebels.

I recall a game in the 2013 tournament that might be classified as a bigger upset than this one. My math degree tells me that was 10 years ago....

 

[Dillon77]

That's what I figured--multiple threads about Stanford losing, hardly a peep about Indiana. Methinks there is some bias on this board!

Hey, Hey, hey. The Stanford threat represented a full-morning "after of" comments. The Indiana upset was followed by Duke-Colorado and UCLA-Oklahoma. Let me have my second coffee before composing something on the Miami win beside how Destiny Harden hit the game winner and dropped an F-bomb on live TV?

 

[TheGOAT23]

That's what I figured--multiple threads about Stanford losing, hardly a peep about Indiana. Methinks there is some bias on this board!

No way that there is any bias on this board. I like both programs and both coaches. You can compare the two programs, but, historically, there is no comparison in regards to WBB. Which will people talk about more, win or lose? Stanford or Indiana? Tara or Teri? Stanford’s Happy Meal AAs or Indiana’s Happy Meal AAs(??) ? Stanford’s AAs or Indiana’s AAs? So by nature, people will want to talk about Stanford even though Indiana lost to a 9 seed and Stanford lost to an 8 seed. If they are not talking about you…..

 

[hoophuskee]

gotcha.

That's what I figured--multiple threads about Stanford losing, hardly a peep about Indiana. Methinks there is some bias on this board!

What? Who were you posting to and what do you mean by the above? Stanford losing before the Final Four especiaily this early is news. Indiana losing isn't near as much. They haven't been knocked out this early since 2007.

 

[hoophuskee]

No way that there is any bias on this board. I like both programs and both coaches. You can compare the two programs, but, historically, there is no comparison in regards to WBB. Which will people talk about more, win or lose? Stanford or Indiana? Tara or Teri? Stanford’s Happy Meal AAs or Indiana’s Happy Meal AAs(??) ? Stanford’s AAs or Indiana’s AAs? So by nature, people will want to talk about Stanford even though Indiana lost to a 9 seed and Stanford lost to an 8 seed. If they are not talking about you…..

I don't understand what his or her point is. Even his or her argument with ucbart was odd. He or she wanted to get specific about 3 pt shooting- okay. But it still was poor guard play that we can say ucbart was referring to. UCbart felt it would be Stanford's undoing and it obviously was. Stanford is usually a ittle threat every year.

 

[maccca3232]

That's what I figured--multiple threads about Stanford losing, hardly a peep about Indiana. Methinks there is some bias on this board!

Perhaps they weren't convinced that Stanford should have been a 1 seed over UConn? Also Stanford lost the day before Indiana did.

 

[BRS24]

That's what I figured--multiple threads about Stanford losing, hardly a peep about Indiana. Methinks there is some bias on this board!

Perhaps they weren't convinced that Stanford should have been a 1 seed over UConn? Also Stanford lost the day before Indiana did.

Two nights of staying up way to late has turned my brain into mush, however wasn't the Indiana game last night live at the same time as UConn/Baylor? I think the focus on the Stanford loss is due to all the chatter about whether they were a 1 seed, especially after the P12T. They hadn't been playing inspired hoop, and when the woman from the selection committee used some vanilla explanation on why they got the 1 seed, of course there would be more focus on them.

Both Ole Miss and Miami were playing with house money, Miami more so with a 19-12 record. For those of us that remember the 1998 seeding uproar, the resulting 16 seed Harvard beating 1 Stanford, it's not surprising that the discussion here is more focused on Stanford. UConn & fans don't have any sort of "history" with Indiana, so there's less to compare and debate.

 

[MSSportsGuy]

In his reseeding of the Sweet 16, Creme says....The upset of the tournament -- perhaps the upset of the last 12 NCAA tournaments -- belongs to the Rebels.

I recall a game in the 2013 tournament that might be classified as a bigger upset than this one. My math degree tells me that was 10 years ago....

Yeah if Charlie is referring to Baylor and Louisville that's only 10 tournaments. I can argue that Harvard as a 16 beating Stanford as a 1 in 1998 is a bigger upset than the most recent Stanford loss but that's 25 years ago.

 

[JellyBean]

Would you take her over Bueckers and Clark in next year’s draft, assuming they all enter? Posts as good as her are hard to come by

Nope, assuming they all enter and my team had a decent post player and I needed a guard, I am picking Bueckers or Clark before Brink. A lot just depends on what the team needs.

 

[JellyBean]

Two nights of staying up way to late has turned my brain into mush, however wasn't the Indiana game last night live at the same time as UConn/Baylor? I think the focus on the Stanford loss is due to all the chatter about whether they were a 1 seed, especially after the P12T. They hadn't been playing inspired hoop, and when the woman from the selection committee used some vanilla explanation on why they got the 1 seed, of course there would be more focus on them.

Both Ole Miss and Miami were playing with house money, Miami more so with a 19-12 record. For those of us that remember the 1998 seeding uproar, the resulting 16 seed Harvard beating 1 Stanford, it's not surprising that the discussion here is more focused on Stanford. UConn & fans don't have any sort of "history" with Indiana, so there's less to compare and debate.

Well said.

 

[Gamecockfan77]

That's what I figured--multiple threads about Stanford losing, hardly a peep about Indiana. Methinks there is some bias on this board!

Stanford losing was more noteworthy to me because I considered Stanford to be a legitimate threat.

So that's a compliment to Stanford more than anything else.

 

[nwhoopfan]

NET is bogus I think. Maybe that had the Pac 12 rated higher, but the Big 10 was getting hyped as the best conference all year long. It was. The Pac 12 was considered a bit down. Let's not completely rewrite the narrative now. Yes Stanford is historically a much more storied program, but Indiana was higher on the S curve and maybe until a couple weeks ago was considered probably the 2nd best team in the country. It was just as big of an upset if not more so.

 

[hoophuskee]

NET is bogus I think. Maybe that had the Pac 12 rated higher, but the Big 10 was getting hyped as the best conference all year long. It was. The Pac 12 was considered a bit down. Let's not completely rewrite the narrative now. Yes Stanford is historically a much more storied program, but Indiana was higher on the S curve and maybe until a couple weeks ago was considered probably the 2nd best team in the country. It was just as big of an upset if not more so.

Can we stop with the over-hyping of the B1G and Indiana please? UCONN could lose to Ohio State for sure this upcoming game but until then-- Ohio State and Indiana aren't even an overall spec of notice vs the battles and history UCONN has had with Stanford.

You're not a UCONN fan - no problem with that for sure. But if UCONN fans seem more interested in Stanford maybe you should recognize that there might be some emotional reason from the past vs teams from the B1G that UCONN has run into and consistently run-over for the past 20+ years? Maybe Ohio State runs over UCONN. Sure- can happen. But there has been games that Stanford has run-over UCONN. This has happened,

The 2 coaches are the most winningest WCBB coaches ever. They remain active and have been to more Final Fours ever. Why you keep bringing up Indiana vs discussions of Stanford - a long time rival of UCONN's is pretty odd. Thats about as nice as I can put it.

 

[Rooster C.]

Well, there may indeed be a bias on the boards here - but an understandable one. I think the same would happen if it were Notre Dame. Probably it would have been better to simply start a new thread about Miami/Indiana upset. I for one am happy for Coach Yo and Coach Meier. Now if somebody upsets SC (ain't gonna happen) then you'll really see something here!!

 

[LwrcasefaN]

At the beginning of the year, on this very board, I said Stanford was vastly overrated because of:

1. No PG
2. No Shooting

I was taken to the cleaners by many posters who assured me that Haley Jones(the most overrated WCBB player in the last 20 years) coud play point forward and that Hannah Jump would make so many 3's.

Well, here we are.....

I think we say things at times that deserve being taken to the cleaners. AND...we know when that is. If Stanford was "vastly" overrated, then I missed the moment. Ranking teams this year has been a challenge. I don't think Jones is overrated. I do think she was misutilized...for a number of reasons. Two years in the WNBA and she'll be an all-star.

 

[bovwa10]

I think we say things at times that deserve being taken to the cleaners. AND...we know when that is. If Stanford was "vastly" overrated, then I missed the moment. Ranking teams this year has been a challenge. I don't think Jones is overrated. I do think she was misutilized...for a number of reasons. Two years in the WNBA and she'll be an all-star.

What Tara should’ve done this year was start Jones at the 4 and Brink at the 5 and surround them with a bunch of shooters, similar to what Indiana did this year. That setup would have allowed Jones and Brink to shine the most imo

 

[npignatjr]

Reminded me of a NBA game from the 80s -- lots of physical contact around the basket and everywhere.

The 80s mostly the Celtics and Lakers that was good basketball. Then came the pistons and the grabbing holding can't call all the fouls play.

 

[Phil]

And the last 2 minutes of every close game take forever -- just like the NBA.

I have a partial fix. I think it is a complete waste of time for player to shoot two foul shots (or three) if they are fouled. Send them to the free-throw for one-shot worth two, or three if it was a three point attempt. (Obviously only worth one point in an and-one situation) While this only cuts out about 10 seconds, in a close game they may be both fouling, and the extra time for single-point shots can add over a minute to the game, which can be excruciating when the clock says is under a minute left in the game. I have floated this proposal before and there's a typical knee-jerk reaction but I haven't heard a cogent explanation why this should not be done.