[SkiBum80]

1700192904[/url]']
Right now, some of you may be asking why Stanford would schedule a game like this. There are two parts. First give the starters a rest. Second give the bench players some serious playing time.

And to be fair, when scheduled probably far in advance, might not know if this opponent might get new hot coach and/or bunch of quality transfers in via portal

[SkiBum80]

1700192904[/url]']
Right now, some of you may be asking why Stanford would schedule a game like this. There are two parts. First give the starters a rest. Second give the bench players some serious playing time.

And to be fair, when scheduled probably far in advance, might not know if this opponent might get new hot coach and/or bunch of quality transfers in via portal

[CompSci87]

And... It takes two to tango. You can only schedule the teams that are willing to play you.

[CompSci87]

And... It takes two to tango. You can only schedule the teams that are willing to play you.

[82lsju]

And... It takes two to tango. You can only schedule the teams that are willing to play you.

any idea how much we pay the visiting team for this sort of game?

[82lsju]

And... It takes two to tango. You can only schedule the teams that are willing to play you.

any idea how much we pay the visiting team for this sort of game?

[Softball Fan]

Right now, some of you may be asking why Stanford would schedule a game like this. There are two parts. First give the starters a rest. Second give the bench players some serious playing time.

Cal Poly is not competitive.  Little chance for them to score near the basket with designed plays.

[Softball Fan]

Right now, some of you may be asking why Stanford would schedule a game like this. There are two parts. First give the starters a rest. Second give the bench players some serious playing time.

Cal Poly is not competitive.  Little chance for them to score near the basket with designed plays.

[chrisk]

1700192904[/url]']
Right now, some of you may be asking why Stanford would schedule a game like this. There are two parts. First give the starters a rest. Second give the bench players some serious playing time.

And to be fair, when scheduled probably far in advance, might not know if this opponent might get new hot coach and/or bunch of quality transfers in via portal

I think these games against lower tier teams are scheduled earlier in the year, not years in advance.
I doubt the Stanford WBB pays these teams very much and they don't have much in the way of travel expenses.

[chrisk]

1700192904[/url]']
Right now, some of you may be asking why Stanford would schedule a game like this. There are two parts. First give the starters a rest. Second give the bench players some serious playing time.

And to be fair, when scheduled probably far in advance, might not know if this opponent might get new hot coach and/or bunch of quality transfers in via portal

I think these games against lower tier teams are scheduled earlier in the year, not years in advance.
I doubt the Stanford WBB pays these teams very much and they don't have much in the way of travel expenses.

[CompSci87]

If anyone can record tonight's game, it would be greatly appreciated.  I am otherwise engaged this evening.  GO CARD!

I've set it up to try. I may have found a fix for the no-audio issue with youtube-dl (and yt-dlp), but I wasn't able to test it. Also, I will be at the game, so if something goes wrong, I probably won't notice or be able to fix it remotely.

Sorry, inability to test led to failure. I broke something else and got nothing.

[CompSci87]

If anyone can record tonight's game, it would be greatly appreciated.  I am otherwise engaged this evening.  GO CARD!

I've set it up to try. I may have found a fix for the no-audio issue with youtube-dl (and yt-dlp), but I wasn't able to test it. Also, I will be at the game, so if something goes wrong, I probably won't notice or be able to fix it remotely.

Sorry, inability to test led to failure. I broke something else and got nothing.

[81alum]

Well, it is hard to learn a lot about our team from a game like this, but there were a few interesting bits of information that became clearer.

Chalk Talk

First, at the chalk talk, Kate Paye addressed the crowd.  She was as happy and upbeat as I have ever seen her.  The good team chemistry seems to be infecting the coaches.  I asked about the triangle and she seemed eager to answer.  Yes, we are running the triangle now, but not all the time.  She reviewed the history of our offenses and noted that we ran the triangle from the days of Brooke to the graduation of Chiney, then we used some continuity offenses and the Princeton for 6 or 7 years.  Interestingly, she said last year we tried several offenses and none of them worked.  We all knew that, but it was nice to hear it confirmed by a coach.

Paye said the Triangle can be thought of as a "3 around 2" offense, meaning three players out and around two posts.  The Princeton, she said, is more of a "4 around 1" offense.  She said that when we have both Brink and Iriafen in the game together, we tend to play the triangle, and when we have just one of those two, we tend to play the Princeton.

She also was asked specifically about two of the freshmen.  She said Agara came in with a three point shot and had to be encouraged to start driving to the basket instead.  Of course, that is where we have seen her shine.  But her three point shot will also come along, and Paye said we might even see her playing point guard some day.  Note:  I seem to recall that she played guard for a long time in high school but grew 4 inches in one year?  I think I read something along those lines, which would explain her guard-like moves in that large, tall body.

Paye was also asked about Ogden.  She noted that Ogden had had one bad shooting game but they all knew she was an excellent shooter.  Apparently Stanford played a closed scrimmage with Saint Mary's earlier this season, and Ogden led with something like 27 points.  Paye also praised her defense--the second chalk-talk coach to do so.

Paye also commented on Iriafen's improvement.  The strength and conditioning coach apparently said that Iriafen was the strongest female athlete at Stanford.  I noticed when she was on the court next to one or two equally tall SLO players that her biceps looked twice the diameter.  She really looks strong, and that strength shows with her explosive moves through bodies around the basket.

The Game:

The atmosphere at the game was somewhat improved.  It was a shame that the band, cheerleaders, and dollies were all absent for Indiana,  but they were all present for this game.  Attendance, of course, was much diminished tonight.

As for the performances of players, these are my biggest take-aways:

• Bosgana performed well on offense and defense and has a well rounded stat line to prove it.  She has improved indeed.
  
• Harriel was the biggest surprise of the night.  She played 25 minutes, was 4/6 from three point range, and even had 4 rebounds and 3 steals.  She looks like a quite capable point guard.
  
• Iriafen continues on her tear.
  
• Ogden broke out of her slump.
  
• Demetre did not really break out of her prolonged slump and this worries me now.  However, she continued to rebound extremely well--something she has been fairly consistent with.
  
• Clardy is human, going 0/6.  I think our freshmen are terrific, but most freshmen are a bit inconsistent, and Clardy and Ogden have each had hot and cold spells.
  
• Agara played quite well and even hit one of those threes.
  

[81alum]

Well, it is hard to learn a lot about our team from a game like this, but there were a few interesting bits of information that became clearer.

Chalk Talk

First, at the chalk talk, Kate Paye addressed the crowd.  She was as happy and upbeat as I have ever seen her.  The good team chemistry seems to be infecting the coaches.  I asked about the triangle and she seemed eager to answer.  Yes, we are running the triangle now, but not all the time.  She reviewed the history of our offenses and noted that we ran the triangle from the days of Brooke to the graduation of Chiney, then we used some continuity offenses and the Princeton for 6 or 7 years.  Interestingly, she said last year we tried several offenses and none of them worked.  We all knew that, but it was nice to hear it confirmed by a coach.

Paye said the Triangle can be thought of as a "3 around 2" offense, meaning three players out and around two posts.  The Princeton, she said, is more of a "4 around 1" offense.  She said that when we have both Brink and Iriafen in the game together, we tend to play the triangle, and when we have just one of those two, we tend to play the Princeton.

She also was asked specifically about two of the freshmen.  She said Agara came in with a three point shot and had to be encouraged to start driving to the basket instead.  Of course, that is where we have seen her shine.  But her three point shot will also come along, and Paye said we might even see her playing point guard some day.  Note:  I seem to recall that she played guard for a long time in high school but grew 4 inches in one year?  I think I read something along those lines, which would explain her guard-like moves in that large, tall body.

Paye was also asked about Ogden.  She noted that Ogden had had one bad shooting game but they all knew she was an excellent shooter.  Apparently Stanford played a closed scrimmage with Saint Mary's earlier this season, and Ogden led with something like 27 points.  Paye also praised her defense--the second chalk-talk coach to do so.

Paye also commented on Iriafen's improvement.  The strength and conditioning coach apparently said that Iriafen was the strongest female athlete at Stanford.  I noticed when she was on the court next to one or two equally tall SLO players that her biceps looked twice the diameter.  She really looks strong, and that strength shows with her explosive moves through bodies around the basket.

The Game:

The atmosphere at the game was somewhat improved.  It was a shame that the band, cheerleaders, and dollies were all absent for Indiana,  but they were all present for this game.  Attendance, of course, was much diminished tonight.

As for the performances of players, these are my biggest take-aways:

• Bosgana performed well on offense and defense and has a well rounded stat line to prove it.  She has improved indeed.
  
• Harriel was the biggest surprise of the night.  She played 25 minutes, was 4/6 from three point range, and even had 4 rebounds and 3 steals.  She looks like a quite capable point guard.
  
• Iriafen continues on her tear.
  
• Ogden broke out of her slump.
  
• Demetre did not really break out of her prolonged slump and this worries me now.  However, she continued to rebound extremely well--something she has been fairly consistent with.
  
• Clardy is human, going 0/6.  I think our freshmen are terrific, but most freshmen are a bit inconsistent, and Clardy and Ogden have each had hot and cold spells.
  
• Agara played quite well and even hit one of those threes.
  

[M T]

Have my eyes failed me?  The box score at GoStanford says the officials were Kelly Broomfield, Lorena Ahumada,  Charles Gonzalez.  But I would have sworn the head official was Kyle Bacon.   I didn't know the other two officials, but they need to study the rule book more. Two calls that I believe were miscalled (by the other 2 refs, but not overruled by Bacon) as I saw the plays:  

• A call of a kicked ball, where the ball hit the heel of a player running down court.  The trouble is that the rule book says that the contact by the foot or leg has to be intentional.
  
• A call of a held ball where a CP player attempted to shoot close to the basket but got the ball caught in the torso of a Stanford player who had her hands up.  The shooter left her feet and came back to the ground.  Sorry, but the rule that would make that a held ball is if the defender has her hand on the ball.  It should have been called a travel.
  

I don't know about the live stream but the KZSU announcers totally missed it.  There was an early stoppage because Brink got an (uncalled) elbow to the head after a foul shot (IIRC).  I didn't see it live, but saw Brink's reaction.  We did get a brief view of it on the big screen.  My opinion is that it should have been called a foul (illegal contact by non-swinging elbow) but the review can not cause an ordinary foul to be called.  It was proper to review it and to find Brink did not fake it.

There are some things Brink does that I think will get her in trouble someday. At least once tonight, I felt she swung her arms hard (under CP's goal after getting a rebound) when there were players around her.  Even without contact, that can be called an intentional foul.  She also lets her body react to pushes and fouls more than other players.  That puts her at risk of an official deciding that she's accentuating the contact. If the official judges that the contact was not illegal, he may call her for faking a foul.
"Faking being fouled occurs when a player simulates being fouled or
makes theatrical or exaggerated movements when there is no illegal contact by
committing acts such as, but not limited to, overtly embellishing the impact of
incidental contact on block/charge plays or attempted tries for goal (flopping),
using a "head bob" to simulate illegal contact, or using any other tactics in order
to create an opinion of being fouled and therefore gaining an advantage."

(I listened to KZSU most of the game (I have noise-cancelling earplugs that I would use anyway just to reduce the noise in Maples).  For student announcers, they did a decent job (far better than the KZSU WVB or WSoc announcers).  Congrats.  I send a little money to KZSU for their sports coverage every year.)

[M T]

Have my eyes failed me?  The box score at GoStanford says the officials were Kelly Broomfield, Lorena Ahumada,  Charles Gonzalez.  But I would have sworn the head official was Kyle Bacon.   I didn't know the other two officials, but they need to study the rule book more. Two calls that I believe were miscalled (by the other 2 refs, but not overruled by Bacon) as I saw the plays:  

• A call of a kicked ball, where the ball hit the heel of a player running down court.  The trouble is that the rule book says that the contact by the foot or leg has to be intentional.
  
• A call of a held ball where a CP player attempted to shoot close to the basket but got the ball caught in the torso of a Stanford player who had her hands up.  The shooter left her feet and came back to the ground.  Sorry, but the rule that would make that a held ball is if the defender has her hand on the ball.  It should have been called a travel.
  

I don't know about the live stream but the KZSU announcers totally missed it.  There was an early stoppage because Brink got an (uncalled) elbow to the head after a foul shot (IIRC).  I didn't see it live, but saw Brink's reaction.  We did get a brief view of it on the big screen.  My opinion is that it should have been called a foul (illegal contact by non-swinging elbow) but the review can not cause an ordinary foul to be called.  It was proper to review it and to find Brink did not fake it.

There are some things Brink does that I think will get her in trouble someday. At least once tonight, I felt she swung her arms hard (under CP's goal after getting a rebound) when there were players around her.  Even without contact, that can be called an intentional foul.  She also lets her body react to pushes and fouls more than other players.  That puts her at risk of an official deciding that she's accentuating the contact. If the official judges that the contact was not illegal, he may call her for faking a foul.
"Faking being fouled occurs when a player simulates being fouled or
makes theatrical or exaggerated movements when there is no illegal contact by
committing acts such as, but not limited to, overtly embellishing the impact of
incidental contact on block/charge plays or attempted tries for goal (flopping),
using a "head bob" to simulate illegal contact, or using any other tactics in order
to create an opinion of being fouled and therefore gaining an advantage."

(I listened to KZSU most of the game (I have noise-cancelling earplugs that I would use anyway just to reduce the noise in Maples).  For student announcers, they did a decent job (far better than the KZSU WVB or WSoc announcers).  Congrats.  I send a little money to KZSU for their sports coverage every year.)

[CompSci87]

I noticed the kicked ball call. Fortunately it didn't make any difference because the ball went out of bounds off Stanford anyway.

[CompSci87]

I noticed the kicked ball call. Fortunately it didn't make any difference because the ball went out of bounds off Stanford anyway.

[76lsjumb]

1700203990[/url]']
Have my eyes failed me?  The box score at GoStanford says the officials were Kelly Broomfield, Lorena Ahumada,  Charles Gonzalez.  But I would have sworn the head official was Kyle Bacon.   I didn't know the other two officials, but they need to study the rule book more. Two calls that I believe were miscalled (by the other 2 refs, but not overruled by Bacon) as I saw the plays:  

• A call of a kicked ball, where the ball hit the heel of a player running down court.  The trouble is that the rule book says that the contact by the foot or leg has to be intentional.
  
• A call of a held ball where a CP player attempted to shoot close to the basket but got the ball caught in the torso of a Stanford player who had her hands up.  The shooter left her feet and came back to the ground.  Sorry, but the rule that would make that a held ball is if the defender has her hand on the ball.  It should have been called a travel.
  

I don't know about the live stream but the KZSU announcers totally missed it.  There was an early stoppage because Brink got an (uncalled) elbow to the head after a foul shot (IIRC).  I didn't see it live, but saw Brink's reaction.  We did get a brief view of it on the big screen.  My opinion is that it should have been called a foul (illegal contact by non-swinging elbow) but the review can not cause an ordinary foul to be called.  It was proper to review it and to find Brink did not fake it.

There are some things Brink does that I think will get her in trouble someday. At least once tonight, I felt she swung her arms hard (under CP's goal after getting a rebound) when there were players around her.  Even without contact, that can be called an intentional foul.  She also lets her body react to pushes and fouls more than other players.  That puts her at risk of an official deciding that she's accentuating the contact. If the official judges that the contact was not illegal, he may call her for faking a foul.
"Faking being fouled occurs when a player simulates being fouled or
makes theatrical or exaggerated movements when there is no illegal contact by
committing acts such as, but not limited to, overtly embellishing the impact of
incidental contact on block/charge plays or attempted tries for goal (flopping),
using a "head bob" to simulate illegal contact, or using any other tactics in order
to create an opinion of being fouled and therefore gaining an advantage."

(I listened to KZSU most of the game (I have noise-cancelling earplugs that I would use anyway just to reduce the noise in Maples).  For student announcers, they did a decent job (far better than the KZSU WVB or WSoc announcers).  Congrats.  I send a little money to KZSU for their sports coverage every year.)

Yes, it was Kyle Bacon. FWIW, I agree that both the calls you describe were wrongly called.

As for the going to the monitor on the elbow to Brink’s head, our seats are in the second row directly behind the monitor, and there is a second monitor facing us that shows exactly what the refs are reviewing. From several slo-mo replays we saw, it was pretty clear that the elbow made slight contact with Brink’s chin, but it was also clear that Brink’s “reaction” was, shall we say, “embellished.”  Indeed, that was the very word that I heard Bacon use in describing the assessment to the scorers desk. I guess they just decided to play on, rather than call a “flop,” but, had they made that call, it would have been backed by the video, I think… (and, believe me, I’m no Kyle Bacon fan). I know Brink gets beat up pretty badly out there, but I could see her reactions causing us a problem in some tight spot later this season if she isn’t a little more … discreet… in that regard.

[76lsjumb]

1700203990[/url]']
Have my eyes failed me?  The box score at GoStanford says the officials were Kelly Broomfield, Lorena Ahumada,  Charles Gonzalez.  But I would have sworn the head official was Kyle Bacon.   I didn't know the other two officials, but they need to study the rule book more. Two calls that I believe were miscalled (by the other 2 refs, but not overruled by Bacon) as I saw the plays:  

• A call of a kicked ball, where the ball hit the heel of a player running down court.  The trouble is that the rule book says that the contact by the foot or leg has to be intentional.
  
• A call of a held ball where a CP player attempted to shoot close to the basket but got the ball caught in the torso of a Stanford player who had her hands up.  The shooter left her feet and came back to the ground.  Sorry, but the rule that would make that a held ball is if the defender has her hand on the ball.  It should have been called a travel.
  

I don't know about the live stream but the KZSU announcers totally missed it.  There was an early stoppage because Brink got an (uncalled) elbow to the head after a foul shot (IIRC).  I didn't see it live, but saw Brink's reaction.  We did get a brief view of it on the big screen.  My opinion is that it should have been called a foul (illegal contact by non-swinging elbow) but the review can not cause an ordinary foul to be called.  It was proper to review it and to find Brink did not fake it.

There are some things Brink does that I think will get her in trouble someday. At least once tonight, I felt she swung her arms hard (under CP's goal after getting a rebound) when there were players around her.  Even without contact, that can be called an intentional foul.  She also lets her body react to pushes and fouls more than other players.  That puts her at risk of an official deciding that she's accentuating the contact. If the official judges that the contact was not illegal, he may call her for faking a foul.
"Faking being fouled occurs when a player simulates being fouled or
makes theatrical or exaggerated movements when there is no illegal contact by
committing acts such as, but not limited to, overtly embellishing the impact of
incidental contact on block/charge plays or attempted tries for goal (flopping),
using a "head bob" to simulate illegal contact, or using any other tactics in order
to create an opinion of being fouled and therefore gaining an advantage."

(I listened to KZSU most of the game (I have noise-cancelling earplugs that I would use anyway just to reduce the noise in Maples).  For student announcers, they did a decent job (far better than the KZSU WVB or WSoc announcers).  Congrats.  I send a little money to KZSU for their sports coverage every year.)

Yes, it was Kyle Bacon. FWIW, I agree that both the calls you describe were wrongly called.

As for the going to the monitor on the elbow to Brink’s head, our seats are in the second row directly behind the monitor, and there is a second monitor facing us that shows exactly what the refs are reviewing. From several slo-mo replays we saw, it was pretty clear that the elbow made slight contact with Brink’s chin, but it was also clear that Brink’s “reaction” was, shall we say, “embellished.”  Indeed, that was the very word that I heard Bacon use in describing the assessment to the scorers desk. I guess they just decided to play on, rather than call a “flop,” but, had they made that call, it would have been backed by the video, I think… (and, believe me, I’m no Kyle Bacon fan). I know Brink gets beat up pretty badly out there, but I could see her reactions causing us a problem in some tight spot later this season if she isn’t a little more … discreet… in that regard.

[stopandpop]

Yes, the team rolled and as others have pointed out, some good performances.

Not surprising, but disappointing nevertheless, the empty seats of so many season ticket holders.  There were quite a few Cal Poly fans up her in the Bay Area for their games against Cal and Stanford and was actually happy when so many of them sat in the empty (season ticket holders') seats.  Here they were, cheering loudly for their (not very good) team, proudly supporting them.  The season ticket holders who choose not to attend these games are not true fans.

This has been discussed on the Board for a very long time and we know many of the root causes, but the 6th. ranked team in the country deserves much better.

[stopandpop]

Yes, the team rolled and as others have pointed out, some good performances.

Not surprising, but disappointing nevertheless, the empty seats of so many season ticket holders.  There were quite a few Cal Poly fans up her in the Bay Area for their games against Cal and Stanford and was actually happy when so many of them sat in the empty (season ticket holders') seats.  Here they were, cheering loudly for their (not very good) team, proudly supporting them.  The season ticket holders who choose not to attend these games are not true fans.

This has been discussed on the Board for a very long time and we know many of the root causes, but the 6th. ranked team in the country deserves much better.

[81alum]

Yes, the team rolled and as others have pointed out, some good performances.

Not surprising, but disappointing nevertheless, the empty seats of so many season ticket holders.  There were quite a few Cal Poly fans up her in the Bay Area for their games against Cal and Stanford and was actually happy when so many of them sat in the empty (season ticket holders') seats.  Here they were, cheering loudly for their (not very good) team, proudly supporting them.  The season ticket holders who choose not to attend these games are not true fans.

This has been discussed on the Board for a very long time and we know many of the root causes, but the 6th. ranked team in the country deserves much better.

Agreed.  Attendance was 2554, which is what I've come to expect on week night games, but I'm not sure how they count that.  Those might not be tickets used but tickets sold, is my guess, since it did not look like 2500 to me.  Indiana was 3678 which was better but still too low for a top matchup at a convenient time.

[81alum]

Yes, the team rolled and as others have pointed out, some good performances.

Not surprising, but disappointing nevertheless, the empty seats of so many season ticket holders.  There were quite a few Cal Poly fans up her in the Bay Area for their games against Cal and Stanford and was actually happy when so many of them sat in the empty (season ticket holders') seats.  Here they were, cheering loudly for their (not very good) team, proudly supporting them.  The season ticket holders who choose not to attend these games are not true fans.

This has been discussed on the Board for a very long time and we know many of the root causes, but the 6th. ranked team in the country deserves much better.

Agreed.  Attendance was 2554, which is what I've come to expect on week night games, but I'm not sure how they count that.  Those might not be tickets used but tickets sold, is my guess, since it did not look like 2500 to me.  Indiana was 3678 which was better but still too low for a top matchup at a convenient time.

[oldalum]

 The season ticket holders who choose not to attend these games are not true fans.

Season ticket "member" attendance is also spotty for many regular season W Soccer games. I wish those STMs would donate tickets they don't intend to use back to Stanford so they can be re-sold, or even given away to youth groups or others. But I am not a fan of categorizing fans as true or false. There will always be a spectrum of fans' involvement and we can use all of them.

[oldalum]

 The season ticket holders who choose not to attend these games are not true fans.

Season ticket "member" attendance is also spotty for many regular season W Soccer games. I wish those STMs would donate tickets they don't intend to use back to Stanford so they can be re-sold, or even given away to youth groups or others. But I am not a fan of categorizing fans as true or false. There will always be a spectrum of fans' involvement and we can use all of them.

[BobK]

The Pac 12 uses tix sold for attendance.
No clue what the ACC uses but we shall see
Hard for this long time season ticket holder to come down from Roseville for every game. :)

[BobK]

The Pac 12 uses tix sold for attendance.
No clue what the ACC uses but we shall see
Hard for this long time season ticket holder to come down from Roseville for every game. :)

[stopandpop]

The Pac 12 uses tix sold for attendance.
No clue what the ACC uses but we shall see
Hard for this long time season ticket holder to come down from Roseville for every game. :)

There are legit reasons (like Bob K's), not to be able to come to some of the games, but for those reasonably close to Stanford, not choosing to support this team is extremely disappointing.

[stopandpop]

The Pac 12 uses tix sold for attendance.
No clue what the ACC uses but we shall see
Hard for this long time season ticket holder to come down from Roseville for every game. :)

There are legit reasons (like Bob K's), not to be able to come to some of the games, but for those reasonably close to Stanford, not choosing to support this team is extremely disappointing.

[TonyLima]

The Pac 12 uses tix sold for attendance.
No clue what the ACC uses but we shall see
Hard for this long time season ticket holder to come down from Roseville for every game. :)

There are legit reasons (like Bob K's), not to be able to come to some of the games, but for those reasonably close to Stanford, not choosing to support this team is extremely disappointing.

One more reason. I’m old, just finishing recovery from cataract surgery, hesitant to drive at night. Will give it a try when my new glasses arrive.

---

If anyone can record tonight's game, it would be greatly appreciated.  I am otherwise engaged this evening.  GO CARD!

I've set it up to try. I may have found a fix for the no-audio issue with youtube-dl (and yt-dlp), but I wasn't able to test it. Also, I will be at the game, so if something goes wrong, I probably won't notice or be able to fix it remotely.

Sorry, inability to test led to failure. I broke something else and got nothing.

Will be posting to Youtube sometime in the afternoon Nov 17. With any luck.

[TonyLima]

The Pac 12 uses tix sold for attendance.
No clue what the ACC uses but we shall see
Hard for this long time season ticket holder to come down from Roseville for every game. :)

There are legit reasons (like Bob K's), not to be able to come to some of the games, but for those reasonably close to Stanford, not choosing to support this team is extremely disappointing.

One more reason. I’m old, just finishing recovery from cataract surgery, hesitant to drive at night. Will give it a try when my new glasses arrive.

---

If anyone can record tonight's game, it would be greatly appreciated.  I am otherwise engaged this evening.  GO CARD!

I've set it up to try. I may have found a fix for the no-audio issue with youtube-dl (and yt-dlp), but I wasn't able to test it. Also, I will be at the game, so if something goes wrong, I probably won't notice or be able to fix it remotely.

Sorry, inability to test led to failure. I broke something else and got nothing.

Will be posting to Youtube sometime in the afternoon Nov 17. With any luck.

[CompSci87]

My seat neighbors live near Gilroy and find it tough to make it to games these days. We see them at weekend day games sometimes. Number one fan BobK lives even farther in the opposite direction and can't always make it to games. So let's not be too quick to criticize. But I do agree that it's a great idea to gift back your tickets when you can't go, so that someone else can use your good seats.

[CompSci87]

My seat neighbors live near Gilroy and find it tough to make it to games these days. We see them at weekend day games sometimes. Number one fan BobK lives even farther in the opposite direction and can't always make it to games. So let's not be too quick to criticize. But I do agree that it's a great idea to gift back your tickets when you can't go, so that someone else can use your good seats.

[TonyLima]

My seat neighbors live near Gilroy and find it tough to make it to games these days. We see them at weekend day games sometimes. Number one fan BobK lives even farther in the opposite direction and can't always make it to games. So let's not be too quick to criticize. But I do agree that it's a great idea to gift back your tickets when you can't go, so that someone else can use your good seats.

Something I always try to do. But I occasionally forget. Usual excuse.

[TonyLima]

My seat neighbors live near Gilroy and find it tough to make it to games these days. We see them at weekend day games sometimes. Number one fan BobK lives even farther in the opposite direction and can't always make it to games. So let's not be too quick to criticize. But I do agree that it's a great idea to gift back your tickets when you can't go, so that someone else can use your good seats.

Something I always try to do. But I occasionally forget. Usual excuse.

[M T]

Don’t the ushers check tickets for the areas that season ticket holders sit in?  Yeah, you can move around some or maybe move in after the half.

I’d bet some of the tickets are held by companies that don’t really care.

[M T]

Don’t the ushers check tickets for the areas that season ticket holders sit in?  Yeah, you can move around some or maybe move in after the half.

I’d bet some of the tickets are held by companies that don’t really care.

[stopandpop]

Don’t the ushers check tickets for the areas that season ticket holders sit in?  Yeah, you can move around some or maybe move in after the half.

I’d bet some of the tickets are held by companies that don’t really care.

Ushers are inconsistent.  There is typically an usher at the top, checking tickets to the lower level, but no consistent checking when visiting fans, eager to set behind their team's bench, migrate to where the season ticket holders' seats are.  The lower level usher will sometimes walk over and ask the visitors to show their tickets, but oftentimes does not.  I enjoy engaging the visitors while letting them know their seats are most likely in the corner section.  If any season ticket holders do show up, the visitors are almost always disappointed. LOL.

Just a brief comment on one aspect of that game last evening.  Brink only had 2 shot attempts and made them both along with her 4 free throws. I think that gives her 60 in a row going back to last season.  In the Indiana game, Stanford's guards and wings were getting the ball into Brink quickly and effectively.  Against lowly Cal Poly, I recall Brink posting up at least 4 times, sealing her opponent and calling for the ball, arms outstretched- and she wasn't getting the passes.  This did not matter much against an overmatched opponent, but (unless corrected) it will mean plenty against PAC-12 foes.  She needs touches.

[stopandpop]

Don’t the ushers check tickets for the areas that season ticket holders sit in?  Yeah, you can move around some or maybe move in after the half.

I’d bet some of the tickets are held by companies that don’t really care.

Ushers are inconsistent.  There is typically an usher at the top, checking tickets to the lower level, but no consistent checking when visiting fans, eager to set behind their team's bench, migrate to where the season ticket holders' seats are.  The lower level usher will sometimes walk over and ask the visitors to show their tickets, but oftentimes does not.  I enjoy engaging the visitors while letting them know their seats are most likely in the corner section.  If any season ticket holders do show up, the visitors are almost always disappointed. LOL.

Just a brief comment on one aspect of that game last evening.  Brink only had 2 shot attempts and made them both along with her 4 free throws. I think that gives her 60 in a row going back to last season.  In the Indiana game, Stanford's guards and wings were getting the ball into Brink quickly and effectively.  Against lowly Cal Poly, I recall Brink posting up at least 4 times, sealing her opponent and calling for the ball, arms outstretched- and she wasn't getting the passes.  This did not matter much against an overmatched opponent, but (unless corrected) it will mean plenty against PAC-12 foes.  She needs touches.