JACKS WOMEN NOW RATED #65 IN ONE POLL!!!

[JBNJBQ]

The Jacks Women's Basketball Team has taken over the 65 spot in this weeks poll:



http://www.dolphinsim.com/ratings/ncaa_wbb/



They are now ahead of........

Liberty
Mississippi
Alabama
Kentucky
Wake Forest
Nebraska
Hartford
Delaware
Washington
Texas A & M
Brigham Young
Rice
Mississippi State
Wisconsin
South West Missouri State


Just to name a few!!!!!

[fezzador]

Re: JACKS WOMEN NOW RATED #65 IN ONE POLL!!!

Heh.

We should petition the NCAA and see if they can make an exception for SDSU to make the Women's Basketball tournament this year... we're certainly good enough right now.

[filbert]

Re: JACKS WOMEN NOW RATED #65 IN ONE POLL!!!

Woah, there...UW Milwaukee and UW Green Bay are ahead, not to mention NDSU and Northern. UWGB is 9-2 with the 2 being close losses to Minnesota and Wisconsin. That will be as tough a game as we've played, they're #29 in the Dolphin rating. If we sweep in Wisconsin, then we can do some woofin'.

I'd love to see us run the table and give the WNIT folks something to think about, but you gotta go back to that one game at a time thing . . .

[Texas_Jacks_Fan]

Re: JACKS WOMEN NOW RATED #65 IN ONE POLL!!!

Jacks now at #63

Next opponents: UW-GB #26 UW-Milwaukee #114

These will both be tough games.

[Rabbit74]

Re: JACKS WOMEN NOW RATED #65 IN ONE POLL!!!

The Jacks women are now up to number 53 in this ranking after the big victory last night!

http://www.dolphinsim.com/ratings/ncaa_wbb/

How many of us thought our close loss to Oregon State back in November was to a team we should have beat? They are now ranked number 112. Just another example of how much the women have exceeded everyones expectations.

[Dakota]

Re: JACKS WOMEN NOW RATED #65 IN ONE POLL!!!

As I said in another thread I feel we should have beat USC, Purdue and Oregon State.

[tony]

Re: JACKS WOMEN NOW RATED #65 IN ONE POLL!!!

Is there any reason SDSU couldn't get invited to the NIT this year?

[Dakota]

Re: JACKS WOMEN NOW RATED #65 IN ONE POLL!!!

I don't think we have enough DI games, I think coach touched on it in a interview and said next year we would be eligible.

[gojacksgo]

Re: JACKS WOMEN NOW RATED #65 IN ONE POLL!!!

yeah, we are not eligible this year, but with a strong showing this year, I'm pretty sure the nit committee will have at least heard of us for next year. Then, they can't really doubt us if we put together 2 strong years. I can see them overlooking us no matter our record this year had we been eligible just becuase it was our first year. Maybe I'm wrong though.

[NorCalJack]

Re: JACKS WOMEN NOW RATED #65 IN ONE POLL!!!

Although we are not eligible this year, I believe smaller schools have a more difficult time making the WNIT than larger schools. Obviously one criteria to being invited to the WNIT is the teams record, the other major criteria is attendance. The WNIT games are held at the home courts of the teams participating, unlike the NCAA which is held at a neutral site. The WNIT makes money through ticket sales and very little on TV, so attendance is very important to them.

If the WNIT had to decide between two schools with identical records, they would probably pick the larger school. As an example if the smaller school played at an arena that had a capacity of 7,000 and the larger schoold had a capacity of 15,000, I think that would weigh heavily in the decision to award the larger school a spot into the WNIT.

Next year we need to build upon the momentum the women have established this year and improve our record and we need large crowds at Frost to improve our chances next year.

Go Jacks

[SDsportsFan]

Re: JACKS WOMEN NOW RATED #65 IN ONE POLL!!!

I'm glad that they take attendance into account. We may not be as big of a school as a lot of other D-I schools, but our women draw more fans than a lot of D-I programs. Some of the crowds our women have been playing in front of are pathetic. Our women will outdraw many of the teams in the NIT this year. I think taking attendance into account will only help us when we become NIT eligible.