[81alum]

The press stories about the game are playing up those third quarter heroics by Karlie and Britt--for good reason.  Between the two of them, we hit 9 straight shots.  Britt scored 11 points in the last 2:36 of the third.  I think the Colorado coach was chagrined but that she doesn't really know our team.

  "Their non-shooters shot the heck out of it tonight."

http://www.cubuffs.com/news/2017/1/15/wo...2-win.aspx

[81alum]

The press stories about the game are playing up those third quarter heroics by Karlie and Britt--for good reason.  Between the two of them, we hit 9 straight shots.  Britt scored 11 points in the last 2:36 of the third.  I think the Colorado coach was chagrined but that she doesn't really know our team.

  "Their non-shooters shot the heck out of it tonight."

http://www.cubuffs.com/news/2017/1/15/wo...2-win.aspx

[2006alum]

Delightful to see Britt back to her Texas & Purdue self for two quarters. And I'm very hopeful 2017 Karlie is here to stay. It'd be fantastic if she could finish her college career making as many headlines as her younger sister is. Weird that Fingall had such an off night, but she's really young and I think conference games on the road are a different beast than UC Davis at home, etc. I'm sure (or at least I'm hopeful!) it's a learning blip. And great to see Kayl picking up where she left off - shooting 3/5 is actually better than she was shooting before her injury and during most of last season. Now if we can just get Wilson up to speed on the playbook, we'll have a pretty complete team. As Tara said, we really basically have 8 starters, and multiple starters who can play at each position. I can't even remember the last time we could say that - maybe Appel's senior year season when we lost to UConn in the national championship game?

The press stories about the game are playing up those third quarter heroics by Karlie and Britt--for good reason.  Between the two of them, we hit 9 straight shots.  Britt scored 11 points in the last 2:36 of the third.  I think the Colorado coach was chagrined but that she doesn't really know our team.

  "Their non-shooters shot the heck out of it tonight."

http://www.cubuffs.com/news/2017/1/15/wo...2-win.aspx

Although I agree with you that this sounds unfair to our players, I think she *may* have been referring to DiJonai. Here's the full quote:

Their non-shooters shot the heck out of it tonight. We had people double their 3-point output for their entire season tonight.

And, indeed, DiJonai went 2 for 2 from 3pt range, doubling her output for the season and improving her 3pt shooting to 4 of 12 on the season. She might also have been referring to Marta, who went 1 for 2 from 3pt range and had only attempted 8 shots total from beyond the arc all season before yesterday. Crazy fact: after Karlie, Marta has our best 3pt % of everyone who's taken at least 10 shots. What a change from the start of this season!

[2006alum]

Delightful to see Britt back to her Texas & Purdue self for two quarters. And I'm very hopeful 2017 Karlie is here to stay. It'd be fantastic if she could finish her college career making as many headlines as her younger sister is. Weird that Fingall had such an off night, but she's really young and I think conference games on the road are a different beast than UC Davis at home, etc. I'm sure (or at least I'm hopeful!) it's a learning blip. And great to see Kayl picking up where she left off - shooting 3/5 is actually better than she was shooting before her injury and during most of last season. Now if we can just get Wilson up to speed on the playbook, we'll have a pretty complete team. As Tara said, we really basically have 8 starters, and multiple starters who can play at each position. I can't even remember the last time we could say that - maybe Appel's senior year season when we lost to UConn in the national championship game?

The press stories about the game are playing up those third quarter heroics by Karlie and Britt--for good reason.  Between the two of them, we hit 9 straight shots.  Britt scored 11 points in the last 2:36 of the third.  I think the Colorado coach was chagrined but that she doesn't really know our team.

  "Their non-shooters shot the heck out of it tonight."

http://www.cubuffs.com/news/2017/1/15/wo...2-win.aspx

Although I agree with you that this sounds unfair to our players, I think she *may* have been referring to DiJonai. Here's the full quote:

Their non-shooters shot the heck out of it tonight. We had people double their 3-point output for their entire season tonight.

And, indeed, DiJonai went 2 for 2 from 3pt range, doubling her output for the season and improving her 3pt shooting to 4 of 12 on the season. She might also have been referring to Marta, who went 1 for 2 from 3pt range and had only attempted 8 shots total from beyond the arc all season before yesterday. Crazy fact: after Karlie, Marta has our best 3pt % of everyone who's taken at least 10 shots. What a change from the start of this season!

[81alum]

[quote author=81alum link=topic=16453.msg186589#msg186589 date=1484577688]
The press stories about the game are playing up those third quarter heroics by Karlie and Britt--for good reason.  Between the two of them, we hit 9 straight shots.  Britt scored 11 points in the last 2:36 of the third.  I think the Colorado coach was chagrined but that she doesn't really know our team.

  "Their non-shooters shot the heck out of it tonight."

http://www.cubuffs.com/news/2017/1/15/wo...2-win.aspx

Although I agree with you that this sounds unfair to our players, I think she *may* have been referring to DiJonai. Here's the full quote:

Their non-shooters shot the heck out of it tonight. We had people double their 3-point output for their entire season tonight.

And, indeed, DiJonai went 2 for 2 from 3pt range, doubling her output for the season and improving her 3pt shooting to 4 of 12 on the season. She might also have been referring to Marta, who went 1 for 2 from 3pt range and had only attempted 8 shots total from beyond the arc all season before yesterday. Crazy fact: after Karlie, Marta has our best 3pt % of everyone who's taken at least 10 shots. What a change from the start of this season!
[/quote]
Oh, I see what you mean.  I thought that phrase was referring to her own players.  Colorado is not normally a spectacularly shooting three point team. 

[81alum]

[quote author=81alum link=topic=16453.msg186589#msg186589 date=1484577688]
The press stories about the game are playing up those third quarter heroics by Karlie and Britt--for good reason.  Between the two of them, we hit 9 straight shots.  Britt scored 11 points in the last 2:36 of the third.  I think the Colorado coach was chagrined but that she doesn't really know our team.

  "Their non-shooters shot the heck out of it tonight."

http://www.cubuffs.com/news/2017/1/15/wo...2-win.aspx

Although I agree with you that this sounds unfair to our players, I think she *may* have been referring to DiJonai. Here's the full quote:

Their non-shooters shot the heck out of it tonight. We had people double their 3-point output for their entire season tonight.

And, indeed, DiJonai went 2 for 2 from 3pt range, doubling her output for the season and improving her 3pt shooting to 4 of 12 on the season. She might also have been referring to Marta, who went 1 for 2 from 3pt range and had only attempted 8 shots total from beyond the arc all season before yesterday. Crazy fact: after Karlie, Marta has our best 3pt % of everyone who's taken at least 10 shots. What a change from the start of this season!
[/quote]
Oh, I see what you mean.  I thought that phrase was referring to her own players.  Colorado is not normally a spectacularly shooting three point team. 

[M T]

As usual, a great write-up by 81alum.  I kinda hate to use it as the points to provide counterpoints against, but it is convenient.

As a team, we turned the ball over too many times, although this was largely corrected in the second half. 

Interestingly, each team was credited with 5 steals.  Colorado was averaging 13+ steals per game, so  "way too many" turnovers is also "fewer turnovers than all other P12 opponents".  (TO by P12 opponents: SC:20, UCLA:16, UA:19, ASU:19, Cal:20, Stanford:14).

And while we out rebounded Colorado by 10, they actually had one more O-board than we did. 

I read that statement to be a comment that our offensive rebounding was suspect, but it is using that combination of stats that is suspect to me.  We OUTREBOUNDED Colorado under our offensive end.  We got 60.5% of our defensive rebound chances and 53.8% of the offensive rebounding chances!!

Alanna again made the most of her limited time.  While she was just 1/3, she shot her free throws with great confidence (6/7) and gave valuable minutes while Erica was in foul trouble.

Colorado went to their jumbo package and they were pushing around Erica & Kaylee, resulting in fouls for us.  Alanna does better in these situations.  I expect her to get good time against UW.  Nadia is apparently a little green yet, but I expect her to be strong at this in the future.

Bri was critical--especially so with Marta out for much of the second half.  ... Carrington had just 7 minutes but had a fantastic three point stroke, burying two deliberate tries in nothing but net.

When that happened, I thought we'd see more of Carrington & Anna Wilson.

I'm not quite sure why it happened, but when Marta went out (3rd 8:28  41-24), Brittany lit up.  At that point, she had 5 pt, 1A, 3TO, 1F, 1B, 1St.  When she came back about 1.5 quarters later (4th 3:14 82-70), Brittany had added 13pt, 1A, 1TO, 2St.  If I were a Stanford coach, I'd look at that and see why that happened & if there is something that Marta can do to give Brittany more opportunities when they are both on the court.  If you discount which player was scoring, Stanford scored 41 points in that 1.5 quarters (that's a rate of 109 points in a 40-minute game).  If a team scores like that when one player is out, you should look at what happened.  (To be fair, Stanford only scored 3pts in the first 1:15 of the game before Marta replaced Brittany.)

The Colorado player was responsible for Marta being on the floor in the first place. She backed into Bird (no call), knocking her backward into Marta and sending both of them to the floor. Then she continued backing up, tripped over one of her victims (Marta) and landed on Marta's head. Talk about a bull in a china shop!

It was great to see Marta back in the game later, looking cheerful and unfazed. She didn't even have a band-aid on over her stitches.

What I saw was that the feet of Marta and Bird collided, resulting in a twisted ankle for Marta with Bird's foot on it.  That took down Marta, and then Bird.  The Colorado player, unaware of the players on the ground, was backing up and felt something under her feet. Rather than stepping hard on the uneven surface, she instead fell, landing on the head of Marta who was just raising her head. Had she not been raising her head, I think she would have been better off.

I felt the worst play was of the officials.  Anita Ortega repeatedly called fouls (against Stanford) that weren't there when looked at in good views on slow replay.  (I'm not saying she was unfair, but I only was looking at fouls called against Stanford.  Interesting...the two officials other than Missy, are both former players of WBB teams in the PAC-12 (neither of the this game's teams), and in their school's hall of fame.  It is not surprising that former players become officials.)  I tend to think some officials call fouls like someone might predict rain in Seattle in the fall.  If you are in Florida in November and say it is raining in Seattle, most likely you are right.  But if you are wrong, your ability to call rain in Seattle should be questioned.    Some of the calls Sunday were pretty bad.  I remember one where a foul might have been called on the shot, but the whistle wasn't blown until after the shooter had rebounded the ball (from the underside of the basket) and lost it out of bounds.  I was shocked that it was supposedly a shooting foul.

I loved seeing the team running plays for Karlie to get shots off, and it paid off.  I have a lot of respect for how Karlie plays all aspects of the game.

[M T]

As usual, a great write-up by 81alum.  I kinda hate to use it as the points to provide counterpoints against, but it is convenient.

As a team, we turned the ball over too many times, although this was largely corrected in the second half. 

Interestingly, each team was credited with 5 steals.  Colorado was averaging 13+ steals per game, so  "way too many" turnovers is also "fewer turnovers than all other P12 opponents".  (TO by P12 opponents: SC:20, UCLA:16, UA:19, ASU:19, Cal:20, Stanford:14).

And while we out rebounded Colorado by 10, they actually had one more O-board than we did. 

I read that statement to be a comment that our offensive rebounding was suspect, but it is using that combination of stats that is suspect to me.  We OUTREBOUNDED Colorado under our offensive end.  We got 60.5% of our defensive rebound chances and 53.8% of the offensive rebounding chances!!

Alanna again made the most of her limited time.  While she was just 1/3, she shot her free throws with great confidence (6/7) and gave valuable minutes while Erica was in foul trouble.

Colorado went to their jumbo package and they were pushing around Erica & Kaylee, resulting in fouls for us.  Alanna does better in these situations.  I expect her to get good time against UW.  Nadia is apparently a little green yet, but I expect her to be strong at this in the future.

Bri was critical--especially so with Marta out for much of the second half.  ... Carrington had just 7 minutes but had a fantastic three point stroke, burying two deliberate tries in nothing but net.

When that happened, I thought we'd see more of Carrington & Anna Wilson.

I'm not quite sure why it happened, but when Marta went out (3rd 8:28  41-24), Brittany lit up.  At that point, she had 5 pt, 1A, 3TO, 1F, 1B, 1St.  When she came back about 1.5 quarters later (4th 3:14 82-70), Brittany had added 13pt, 1A, 1TO, 2St.  If I were a Stanford coach, I'd look at that and see why that happened & if there is something that Marta can do to give Brittany more opportunities when they are both on the court.  If you discount which player was scoring, Stanford scored 41 points in that 1.5 quarters (that's a rate of 109 points in a 40-minute game).  If a team scores like that when one player is out, you should look at what happened.  (To be fair, Stanford only scored 3pts in the first 1:15 of the game before Marta replaced Brittany.)

The Colorado player was responsible for Marta being on the floor in the first place. She backed into Bird (no call), knocking her backward into Marta and sending both of them to the floor. Then she continued backing up, tripped over one of her victims (Marta) and landed on Marta's head. Talk about a bull in a china shop!

It was great to see Marta back in the game later, looking cheerful and unfazed. She didn't even have a band-aid on over her stitches.

What I saw was that the feet of Marta and Bird collided, resulting in a twisted ankle for Marta with Bird's foot on it.  That took down Marta, and then Bird.  The Colorado player, unaware of the players on the ground, was backing up and felt something under her feet. Rather than stepping hard on the uneven surface, she instead fell, landing on the head of Marta who was just raising her head. Had she not been raising her head, I think she would have been better off.

I felt the worst play was of the officials.  Anita Ortega repeatedly called fouls (against Stanford) that weren't there when looked at in good views on slow replay.  (I'm not saying she was unfair, but I only was looking at fouls called against Stanford.  Interesting...the two officials other than Missy, are both former players of WBB teams in the PAC-12 (neither of the this game's teams), and in their school's hall of fame.  It is not surprising that former players become officials.)  I tend to think some officials call fouls like someone might predict rain in Seattle in the fall.  If you are in Florida in November and say it is raining in Seattle, most likely you are right.  But if you are wrong, your ability to call rain in Seattle should be questioned.    Some of the calls Sunday were pretty bad.  I remember one where a foul might have been called on the shot, but the whistle wasn't blown until after the shooter had rebounded the ball (from the underside of the basket) and lost it out of bounds.  I was shocked that it was supposedly a shooting foul.

I loved seeing the team running plays for Karlie to get shots off, and it paid off.  I have a lot of respect for how Karlie plays all aspects of the game.

[M T]

Pretty much ever since the 3pt shot was allowed, Stanford WBB has had some extraordinary shooters.  But it seems many other teams now are doing as well.  I wondered about how much WBB is now focused on 3pt shooting. 

That led me to this table, which I thought I'd share.  It shows the expected points per three point or two point attempt, plus the points per FGA.  Washington is well ahead of everyone else.  (I used the PAC-12 stats, so this for all games, not just conference games.)  Of interest is that UCLA is very far down on this list.

(Karlie's 3FGA efficiency is 1.48 pts/3FGA, but of course, your whole game can't revolve around her.)

I think this table also needs opponent's efficiency as well.  But the quality of opponent matters even more for that, so maybe limiting it to conference would be better.

Pts/3FGA.	Pts/2FGA.	Pts/FGA.
1.20	1.10	1.14	Wash
1.03	1.09	1.07	Cal
1.21	0.99	1.05	Ore
1.05	1.01	1.02	Stanford
1.16	0.95	1.02	OSU
1.13	0.93	0.97	USC
0.92	0.95	0.94	ASU
0.93	0.94	0.94	Ariz
0.99	0.91	0.93	Col
1.05	0.87	0.92	WSU
0.88	0.93	0.91	UCLA
0.79	0.96	0.91	Utah

[M T]

Pretty much ever since the 3pt shot was allowed, Stanford WBB has had some extraordinary shooters.  But it seems many other teams now are doing as well.  I wondered about how much WBB is now focused on 3pt shooting. 

That led me to this table, which I thought I'd share.  It shows the expected points per three point or two point attempt, plus the points per FGA.  Washington is well ahead of everyone else.  (I used the PAC-12 stats, so this for all games, not just conference games.)  Of interest is that UCLA is very far down on this list.

(Karlie's 3FGA efficiency is 1.48 pts/3FGA, but of course, your whole game can't revolve around her.)

I think this table also needs opponent's efficiency as well.  But the quality of opponent matters even more for that, so maybe limiting it to conference would be better.

Pts/3FGA.	Pts/2FGA.	Pts/FGA.
1.20	1.10	1.14	Wash
1.03	1.09	1.07	Cal
1.21	0.99	1.05	Ore
1.05	1.01	1.02	Stanford
1.16	0.95	1.02	OSU
1.13	0.93	0.97	USC
0.92	0.95	0.94	ASU
0.93	0.94	0.94	Ariz
0.99	0.91	0.93	Col
1.05	0.87	0.92	WSU
0.88	0.93	0.91	UCLA
0.79	0.96	0.91	Utah

[fullmetal]

Look at the emphasis on 3pt shooting in the NBA and collegiate men's ball these days.  Why shouldn't women's basketball also take advantage of spacing, tempo, and more open shots?

[fullmetal]

Look at the emphasis on 3pt shooting in the NBA and collegiate men's ball these days.  Why shouldn't women's basketball also take advantage of spacing, tempo, and more open shots?

[81alum]

[quote author=81alum link=topic=16453.msg186484#msg186484 date=1484458397]
As a team, we turned the ball over too many times, although this was largely corrected in the second half. 

Interestingly, each team was credited with 5 steals.  Colorado was averaging 13+ steals per game, so  "way too many" turnovers is also "fewer turnovers than all other P12 opponents".  (TO by P12 opponents: SC:20, UCLA:16, UA:19, ASU:19, ןɐɔ:20, Stanford:14).

And while we out rebounded Colorado by 10, they actually had one more O-board than we did. 

I read that statement to be a comment that our offensive rebounding was suspect, but it is using that combination of stats that is suspect to me.  We OUTREBOUNDED Colorado under our offensive end.  We got 60.5% of our defensive rebound chances and 53.8% of the offensive rebounding chances!!
[/quote]

Thank you for your insights, MT!  We had 11 turnovers in the first half and only 3 in the second half.  That was a very important correction.  Did you notice the two turnovers when we passed to a cutter, but the cutter went the wrong way?  Those two turnovers looked quite ugly.  I can't remember the players involved, but I hope they sort that out in practice this week.  The announcers said something about "never fake a back door cut" or else that can happen.  Meaning one of our players faked another of our players into throwing an errant pass?

On the rebounding, it wasn't our offensive rebounding that I thought might be lacking, but the fact that we didn't box out as well as we might on the defensive end and gave up a lot of offensive rebounds to Colorado.  I don't know what the average ratio of defender's defensive rebounds to offense's offensive rebounds should be for a good team, but 60.5% of our defensive chances doesn't sound very good to me.  Doesn't that mean that nearly 40% of the time Colorado got a second chance?  Or am I interpreting that wrong?

[81alum]

[quote author=81alum link=topic=16453.msg186484#msg186484 date=1484458397]
As a team, we turned the ball over too many times, although this was largely corrected in the second half. 

Interestingly, each team was credited with 5 steals.  Colorado was averaging 13+ steals per game, so  "way too many" turnovers is also "fewer turnovers than all other P12 opponents".  (TO by P12 opponents: SC:20, UCLA:16, UA:19, ASU:19, ןɐɔ:20, Stanford:14).

And while we out rebounded Colorado by 10, they actually had one more O-board than we did. 

I read that statement to be a comment that our offensive rebounding was suspect, but it is using that combination of stats that is suspect to me.  We OUTREBOUNDED Colorado under our offensive end.  We got 60.5% of our defensive rebound chances and 53.8% of the offensive rebounding chances!!
[/quote]

Thank you for your insights, MT!  We had 11 turnovers in the first half and only 3 in the second half.  That was a very important correction.  Did you notice the two turnovers when we passed to a cutter, but the cutter went the wrong way?  Those two turnovers looked quite ugly.  I can't remember the players involved, but I hope they sort that out in practice this week.  The announcers said something about "never fake a back door cut" or else that can happen.  Meaning one of our players faked another of our players into throwing an errant pass?

On the rebounding, it wasn't our offensive rebounding that I thought might be lacking, but the fact that we didn't box out as well as we might on the defensive end and gave up a lot of offensive rebounds to Colorado.  I don't know what the average ratio of defender's defensive rebounds to offense's offensive rebounds should be for a good team, but 60.5% of our defensive chances doesn't sound very good to me.  Doesn't that mean that nearly 40% of the time Colorado got a second chance?  Or am I interpreting that wrong?

[CompSci87]

[quote author=CompSci87 link=topic=16453.msg186544#msg186544 date=1484521347]
The Colorado player was responsible for Marta being on the floor in the first place. She backed into Bird (no call), knocking her backward into Marta and sending both of them to the floor. Then she continued backing up, tripped over one of her victims (Marta) and landed on Marta's head. Talk about a bull in a china shop!

What I saw was that the feet of Marta and Bird collided, resulting in a twisted ankle for Marta with Bird's foot on it.  That took down Marta, and then Bird.  The Colorado player, unaware of the players on the ground, was backing up and felt something under her feet. Rather than stepping hard on the uneven surface, she instead fell, landing on the head of Marta who was just raising her head. Had she not been raising her head, I think she would have been better off.
[/Quote]

I was looking at that play through my Cardinal-colored glasses, but I do think the Colorado player initiated the domino effect by backing up into Bird to try to gain better position, thus pushing her backward. Marta was right behind Bird, leading to their feet getting tangled and the rest happening as you described.

The Colorado player was unable to keep her balance after Bird fell and thus couldn't help taking another step backward.

Backing up like that really was a normal thing for the Colorado player to do that rarely gets called if not extreme. Just had an unfortunate result.

[CompSci87]

[quote author=CompSci87 link=topic=16453.msg186544#msg186544 date=1484521347]
The Colorado player was responsible for Marta being on the floor in the first place. She backed into Bird (no call), knocking her backward into Marta and sending both of them to the floor. Then she continued backing up, tripped over one of her victims (Marta) and landed on Marta's head. Talk about a bull in a china shop!

What I saw was that the feet of Marta and Bird collided, resulting in a twisted ankle for Marta with Bird's foot on it.  That took down Marta, and then Bird.  The Colorado player, unaware of the players on the ground, was backing up and felt something under her feet. Rather than stepping hard on the uneven surface, she instead fell, landing on the head of Marta who was just raising her head. Had she not been raising her head, I think she would have been better off.
[/Quote]

I was looking at that play through my Cardinal-colored glasses, but I do think the Colorado player initiated the domino effect by backing up into Bird to try to gain better position, thus pushing her backward. Marta was right behind Bird, leading to their feet getting tangled and the rest happening as you described.

The Colorado player was unable to keep her balance after Bird fell and thus couldn't help taking another step backward.

Backing up like that really was a normal thing for the Colorado player to do that rarely gets called if not extreme. Just had an unfortunate result.

[CompSci87]

Did you notice the two turnovers when we passed to a cutter, but the went the wrong way?  Those two turnovers looked quite ugly.  I can't remember the players involved, but I hope they sort that out in practice this week.  The announcers said something about "never fake a back door cut" or else that can happen.  Meaning one of our players faked another of our players into throwing an errant pass?

Yes, and that's something I hear from the announcers on Warriors' broadcasts too. I think I saw that happening: the player started to go left, hesitated, and either stopped or went right. Left was toward the basket and thus a backdoor cut.

Sometimes faking out your own teammates hurts much more than faking out the opponent helps! In a totally different context, I notice the same thing when playing cards...

[CompSci87]

Did you notice the two turnovers when we passed to a cutter, but the went the wrong way?  Those two turnovers looked quite ugly.  I can't remember the players involved, but I hope they sort that out in practice this week.  The announcers said something about "never fake a back door cut" or else that can happen.  Meaning one of our players faked another of our players into throwing an errant pass?

Yes, and that's something I hear from the announcers on Warriors' broadcasts too. I think I saw that happening: the player started to go left, hesitated, and either stopped or went right. Left was toward the basket and thus a backdoor cut.

Sometimes faking out your own teammates hurts much more than faking out the opponent helps! In a totally different context, I notice the same thing when playing cards...

[CompSci87]

That led me to this table, which I thought I'd share.  ...

Thanks, MT, very interesting stats!

[CompSci87]

That led me to this table, which I thought I'd share.  ...

Thanks, MT, very interesting stats!

[BobK]

I counted 10 bad calls in the first half.  It's called the Missy Rule  ???    One in the 2nd half
My favorite was the Colorado player out of bounds grabbing the ball and missy ruling that's fine by me. Lol
Iirc 6 against Stanford 5 against Colorado


Now for the sad news.  We can't host the first two NCAA rounds

[BobK]

I counted 10 bad calls in the first half.  It's called the Missy Rule  ???    One in the 2nd half
My favorite was the Colorado player out of bounds grabbing the ball and missy ruling that's fine by me. Lol
Iirc 6 against Stanford 5 against Colorado


Now for the sad news.  We can't host the first two NCAA rounds

[CompSci87]

My favorite was the Colorado player out of bounds grabbing the ball and missy ruling that's fine by me. Lol

Was that the one where the ball bounced near the baseline first? Missy must have thought it bounced just outside the baseline and so was already out of bounds. Maybe she was right; I wasn't sure from the video.

Now for the sad news.  We can't host the first two NCAA rounds

Yikes. Why? Date conflict??

[CompSci87]

My favorite was the Colorado player out of bounds grabbing the ball and missy ruling that's fine by me. Lol

Was that the one where the ball bounced near the baseline first? Missy must have thought it bounced just outside the baseline and so was already out of bounds. Maybe she was right; I wasn't sure from the video.

Now for the sad news.  We can't host the first two NCAA rounds

Yikes. Why? Date conflict??

[Spiny_Norman]

[quote author=BobK link=topic=16453.msg186664#msg186664 date=1484610324]
My favorite was the Colorado player out of bounds grabbing the ball and missy ruling that's fine by me. Lol

Was that the one where the ball bounced near the baseline first? Missy must have thought it bounced just outside the baseline and so was already out of bounds. Maybe she was right; I wasn't sure from the video.

Now for the sad news.  We can't host the first two NCAA rounds

Yikes. Why? Date conflict??
[/quote]

looks like Stanford is hosting Pac 12 W Gymnastics championship on March 18, the weekend of 1st and 2nd round games

[Spiny_Norman]

[quote author=BobK link=topic=16453.msg186664#msg186664 date=1484610324]
My favorite was the Colorado player out of bounds grabbing the ball and missy ruling that's fine by me. Lol

Was that the one where the ball bounced near the baseline first? Missy must have thought it bounced just outside the baseline and so was already out of bounds. Maybe she was right; I wasn't sure from the video.

Now for the sad news.  We can't host the first two NCAA rounds

Yikes. Why? Date conflict??
[/quote]

looks like Stanford is hosting Pac 12 W Gymnastics championship on March 18, the weekend of 1st and 2nd round games

[BobK]

I'll find out more about the conflict tomorrow.  Or Plan B

[BobK]

I'll find out more about the conflict tomorrow.  Or Plan B

[2006alum]

[quote author=CompSci87 link=topic=16453.msg186669#msg186669 date=1484612498]
[quote author=BobK link=topic=16453.msg186664#msg186664 date=1484610324]
Now for the sad news.  We can't host the first two NCAA rounds

Yikes. Why? Date conflict??
[/quote]
looks like Stanford is hosting Pac 12 W Gymnastics championship on March 18, the weekend of 1st and 2nd round games
[/quote]
Don't they use Burnham Pavilion for gymnastics? Or is there a Pac-12, NCAA, or Stanford rule against hosting multiple things in the same weekend?

[2006alum]

[quote author=CompSci87 link=topic=16453.msg186669#msg186669 date=1484612498]
[quote author=BobK link=topic=16453.msg186664#msg186664 date=1484610324]
Now for the sad news.  We can't host the first two NCAA rounds

Yikes. Why? Date conflict??
[/quote]
looks like Stanford is hosting Pac 12 W Gymnastics championship on March 18, the weekend of 1st and 2nd round games
[/quote]
Don't they use Burnham Pavilion for gymnastics? Or is there a Pac-12, NCAA, or Stanford rule against hosting multiple things in the same weekend?

[oldalum]

We have been using Maples for home W gymnastics dual meets.
For the Pac-12 championships with 8 teams, seems like they would have to use Maples to accommodate the fans.
The NCAA basketball would have to be Friday/Sunday games; seems like the only conflict is that the two second-round basketball teams would not be able to practice in Maples on Saturday, they'd have to use the practice facility. Unless the gymnasts come and practice a day before the meet, in which case we could not host.

[oldalum]

We have been using Maples for home W gymnastics dual meets.
For the Pac-12 championships with 8 teams, seems like they would have to use Maples to accommodate the fans.
The NCAA basketball would have to be Friday/Sunday games; seems like the only conflict is that the two second-round basketball teams would not be able to practice in Maples on Saturday, they'd have to use the practice facility. Unless the gymnasts come and practice a day before the meet, in which case we could not host.

[BobK]

Confirmed can't host at Maples

[BobK]

Confirmed can't host at Maples