12 SDSU Vs 4 Stanford, Stanford/Palo Alto, CA.

[jack power]

Re: 12 SDSU Vs 4 Stanford, Stanford/Palo Alto, CA.

I agree the Ladies did lose the game. Once you reach voting age, I would think it would be more correct to refer to them as Ladies and women. Girls seems kind of demeaning sort of high school in nature.

NTSA

[sfjacksfan99]

Re: 12 SDSU Vs 4 Stanford, Stanford/Palo Alto, CA.

This is exactly what I thought when the seedings come out this year. I would rather be underseeded because we are just a mid-major rather than play against a top 8 team in your second game. Unless of course we do make the big jump up to a #4 and get to host.

But in order to get that good of seed we are going to have make it to the sweet sixteen regularly and consistently be ranked in the top 20 for the next couple of years to realistically get that seed whether we are deserving or not. You don't see midmajors get to host the first two rounds, so if we want to get to that point we have to win a lot of big time games for the next couple years. Then maybe we will get one.

Ding Ding. Do we want to get some "respect" on a seed and get the 8/9 seed in the UConn region? NO! The Sweet 16 chance there is slim to none. I don't know what the best answer is. I think what happened seed-wise this year isn't ideal, but how's it going to get better as a mid-major?

[krak-r-jacks]

Re: 12 SDSU Vs 4 Stanford, Stanford/Palo Alto, CA.

At least at 6'3' the new recruit might be able to help protect the rim right away.I can only hope that we can start getting our posts heading in the direction to being as athletic and mobile as Ober is before she departs due to graduating after next year is over,as much as they can anyway.We need good post play to compliment our outstanding guard play.

jmo---watched her televised state tourney appearance. also watched her televised vb appearance. i think she will fall in the category of a "work-in-progress".

[krak-r-jacks]

Re: 12 SDSU Vs 4 Stanford, Stanford/Palo Alto, CA.

I agree with this. Honestly, when it came to defense and rebounding, if Ober was out, we were in big trouble. I like Thompson's potential, but she needs to improve on the boards, and especially on offense with her back to the basket. When she can face the basket, she is great at getting good looks because she's pretty athletic for her size and can go around some of the other team's bigs, but there were a lot of times last night where she backed into it and threw up some junk and looked very uncomfortable.

i believe thompson is at her best as a compliment to ober. pretty effective duo.

[jackdaniel]

Re: 12 SDSU Vs 4 Stanford, Stanford/Palo Alto, CA.

Ding Ding. Do we want to get some "respect" on a seed and get the 8/9 seed in the UConn region? NO! The Sweet 16 chance there is slim to none. I don't know what the best answer is. I think what happened seed-wise this year isn't ideal, but how's it going to get better as a mid-major?

Even as a seven seed in the 2009 NCAA Tournament,our second game was against a #2 seed Baylor team and this year our games were against a #5 seed and a #4 seed. A 12 seed is a good seed to have a good shot at making a sweet 16 appearance.Even high seeds bump into the top 4 seeds in the second round,that's why making the sweet 16 is so coveted.

[81alum]

Re: 12 SDSU Vs 4 Stanford, Stanford/Palo Alto, CA.

Greetings, Jackrabbit fans. I am a Stanford WBB fan who was at the game on Monday, and I have been trying to get an account over here on your boards ever since so I could come and compliment your team and your traveling fans. I watched your game against Miami as well, and in fact cheered for you--at first for selfish reasons when I mistakenly thought that SDSU would be an easier opponent for us than Miami, but the style of your play and your boisterous fans won me over before the Miami game was done. As I posted on the Cardboard--our home bboard--I thought after the Miami game that your team was a very dangerous opponent indeed and I did not feel confident about Monday's game going in. As it turns out, I was completely right not to feel confident!

First, I really liked the style of your offense. Our offense this year has frequently been stagnant--we have been predominantly a defensive team, holding teams to 31% shooting. The games we have lost have been about lack of offense but our defense has seldom let us down. But your team shot something like 42%--one of the few to really make our defense look bad. You did it by spreading out your three point shooting threats on the perimeter, bringing our man defense to the perimeter, and then going around and cutting to the basket. Your post players may not have physically matched up to ours, but they knew how to use the glass skillfully and went around the taller players. For that reason, you actually beat us in points-in-the-paint. All members of your team seemed to play with confidence. I loved the off-ball movement. Yes, your offense did have one scoring drought, but for the most part it was effective and certainly a lot prettier to watch than most.

Second, I was impressed with your fans. You came from a long ways away, and in numbers, and made yourselves heard. Clearly you are great supporters of WBB and devoted to your team. In fact, other than when Cal comes across the bay to play us, I don't think we had a bigger, louder group of fans from our opponent at Maples all year. You brought more people from South Dakota than our league opponents from the west coast. And I think it helped your team.

Some of you noticed our own poor attendance at the game--just under 2000 fans. It was, in fact, one of the smallest turnouts of the year for us. There were several reasons for that. It is spring break here at Stanford, and our students are not generally local. When they go home, they are not in driving distance of campus to attend a game. 6:00 on a weekday night was a big problem for many of our fans who work in various parts of the Bay Area--you might have noticed some people arriving as late as halftime. Attendance on Saturday was better by about 1200 people. (Stanford is actually about the same size as South Dakota State when you compare undergraduates.)

With regard to the officiating controversies....yes, I think there were some bad calls. I know our fans were unhappy about one of the calls on Erica McCall that sent her to the bench for the third quarter when your team made its most impressive performance. I'm sure there were some bad calls that benefited us too. At the end of the game, I really cannot see the foul that sent Lili to the line for the go-ahead point, and I've watched the replay repeatedly. Maybe there was a reach-in but if so it was pretty minor, and the refs had been letting a lot go. On the other hand, at the other end I think Erica got a clean block. I guess that means that I think the game should have gone to overtime. I'm not sure my heart could have taken that, though!

In summary, please accept my congratulations on your team's splendid performance. Your team, your coaches, and the fans representing you in Palo Alto all did you proud!

[NorCalJack]

Re: 12 SDSU Vs 4 Stanford, Stanford/Palo Alto, CA.

Thanks 81alumn for your kind words. I do live in the Bay Area and attended the game. After the conclusion of the game, I had a Stanford fan rush up to me and vigorously shook my hand and complimented our team and fan base. He stated that he wish his team had played more team basketball like SDSU. I know Stanford is a good ambassador for the Women's game and I have seen your fan base really support your program, so I would not let one low attendance impact my judgement on your fan base support.

Go Jacks!!!

[BTownJack]

Re: 12 SDSU Vs 4 Stanford, Stanford/Palo Alto, CA.

The block was clean on our last shot attempt of the game. It was the body contact by whomever was guarding the our shooter that could have warranted the foul call. Especially after what they called on the other and with the and-1 to give Stanford the go ahead point.

[NoVaJack]

Re: 12 SDSU Vs 4 Stanford, Stanford/Palo Alto, CA.

Greetings, Jackrabbit fans. I am a Stanford WBB fan who was at the game on Monday, and I have been trying to get an account over here on your boards ever since so I could come and compliment your team and your traveling fans. I watched your game against Miami as well, and in fact cheered for you--at first for selfish reasons when I mistakenly thought that SDSU would be an easier opponent for us than Miami, but the style of your play and your boisterous fans won me over before the Miami game was done. As I posted on the Cardboard--our home bboard--I thought after the Miami game that your team was a very dangerous opponent indeed and I did not feel confident about Monday's game going in. As it turns out, I was completely right not to feel confident!

First, I really liked the style of your offense. Our offense this year has frequently been stagnant--we have been predominantly a defensive team, holding teams to 31% shooting. The games we have lost have been about lack of offense but our defense has seldom let us down. But your team shot something like 42%--one of the few to really make our defense look bad. You did it by spreading out your three point shooting threats on the perimeter, bringing our man defense to the perimeter, and then going around and cutting to the basket. Your post players may not have physically matched up to ours, but they knew how to use the glass skillfully and went around the taller players. For that reason, you actually beat us in points-in-the-paint. All members of your team seemed to play with confidence. I loved the off-ball movement. Yes, your offense did have one scoring drought, but for the most part it was effective and certainly a lot prettier to watch than most.

Second, I was impressed with your fans. You came from a long ways away, and in numbers, and made yourselves heard. Clearly you are great supporters of WBB and devoted to your team. In fact, other than when Cal comes across the bay to play us, I don't think we had a bigger, louder group of fans from our opponent at Maples all year. You brought more people from South Dakota than our league opponents from the west coast. And I think it helped your team.

Some of you noticed our own poor attendance at the game--just under 2000 fans. It was, in fact, one of the smallest turnouts of the year for us. There were several reasons for that. It is spring break here at Stanford, and our students are not generally local. When they go home, they are not in driving distance of campus to attend a game. 6:00 on a weekday night was a big problem for many of our fans who work in various parts of the Bay Area--you might have noticed some people arriving as late as halftime. Attendance on Saturday was better by about 1200 people. (Stanford is actually about the same size as South Dakota State when you compare undergraduates.)

With regard to the officiating controversies....yes, I think there were some bad calls. I know our fans were unhappy about one of the calls on Erica McCall that sent her to the bench for the third quarter when your team made its most impressive performance. I'm sure there were some bad calls that benefited us too. At the end of the game, I really cannot see the foul that sent Lili to the line for the go-ahead point, and I've watched the replay repeatedly. Maybe there was a reach-in but if so it was pretty minor, and the refs had been letting a lot go. On the other hand, at the other end I think Erica got a clean block. I guess that means that I think the game should have gone to overtime. I'm not sure my heart could have taken that, though!

In summary, please accept my congratulations on your team's splendid performance. Your team, your coaches, and the fans representing you in Palo Alto all did you proud!

As both an SDSU alum and Stanford (fellowship) alum, thanks for this. Do us a favor, and lobby for a home-and-home. The best way to broaden the appeal of women's basketball is to take the few traditionally strong programs into areas of growing strength. The Jackrabbit home-season regular attendance average was 20 percent higher than attendance at the regional game at Maples, and in fact the Jackrabbit women drew more than 8,000 per game in their three wins in the Summit League tournament in Sioux Falls. I believe it's time to abandon the home-field advantage given legacy programs like Stanford's. You can't grow the appeal without broadening the base of where the games are played, and that is about to be proven in Sioux Falls this weekend, where I predict the regional draws big, big crowds.
Home and home, please. Notre Dame has already done it with the Jacks, and drew more than 5,000 this past season.

[goon]

Re: 12 SDSU Vs 4 Stanford, Stanford/Palo Alto, CA.

As both an SDSU alum and Stanford (fellowship) alum, thanks for this. Do us a favor, and lobby for a home-and-home. The best way to broaden the appeal of women's basketball is to take the few traditionally strong programs into areas of growing strength. The Jackrabbit home-season regular attendance average was 20 percent higher than attendance at the regional game at Maples, and in fact the Jackrabbit women drew more than 8,000 per game in their three wins in the Summit League tournament in Sioux Falls. I believe it's time to abandon the home-field advantage given legacy programs like Stanford's. You can't grow the appeal without broadening the base of where the games are played, and that is about to be proven in Sioux Falls this weekend, where I predict the regional draws big, big crowds.
Home and home, please. Notre Dame has already done it with the Jacks, and drew more than 5,000 this past season.

I think thats a win win for both programs. Its a good test and measuring stick for both programs so see how they are playing and the type of teams they are probably going to face come NCAA tourney time again. assuming both make it back. which both teams are very young so would appear both could make it back for sure.

[Southeast]

Re: 12 SDSU Vs 4 Stanford, Stanford/Palo Alto, CA.

Stanford up on ND by 7 at the end of the first period. Oh what could have been.....

Also, it looks like a nice crowd at the Premiere Center for tonight's Regional game. Appears to be a lot more people than there are at the Stanford/ND game. I'm seeing quite a bit of blue scattered about in the stands too.

[YanktonJack7]

Re: 12 SDSU Vs 4 Stanford, Stanford/Palo Alto, CA.

Stanford over Notre Dame 90-84; Wow.

[filbert]

Re: 12 SDSU Vs 4 Stanford, Stanford/Palo Alto, CA.

Stanford up on ND by 7 at the end of the first period. Oh what could have been.....

Also, it looks like a nice crowd at the Premiere Center for tonight's Regional game. Appears to be a lot more people than there are at the Stanford/ND game. I'm seeing quite a bit of blue scattered about in the stands too.

4,610 is the announced attendance.

[bigticket1]

Re: 12 SDSU Vs 4 Stanford, Stanford/Palo Alto, CA.

Stanford over Notre Dame 90-84; Wow.

All four of the higher seeds lost last night. Makes you wonder how many upsets would occur in the first two rounds if games were played at neutral sites like the men's tournament.

[bigticket1]

Re: 12 SDSU Vs 4 Stanford, Stanford/Palo Alto, CA.

Stanford up on ND by 7 at the end of the first period. Oh what could have been.....

Also, it looks like a nice crowd at the Premiere Center for tonight's Regional game. Appears to be a lot more people than there are at the Stanford/ND game. I'm seeing quite a bit of blue scattered about in the stands too.

There was a lot of blue in the crowd. Not that much excitement in the crowd though - hard to match the atmosphere of the Summit week.