[CompSci87]

I hesitate to bring up the topic, but I found a little tidbit from fivethirtyeight.com...

Not only were we the only #1 seed to ever lose to a #16 seed in Div 1 basketball (of either sex), in women's basketball, we are the only top-3 seed to lose in the first round.

Ouch.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/dont...ver-again/

BC

The Harvard loss gets brought up every year at tournament time, like clockwork, as if it's some lasting black mark on Stanford WBB, and I'm sick to death of it. It's "The Play" of WBB. This year ESPN had *two* stories about it, one largely a reference to the 538 story and the other a separate one.  ::)

I'll grant that the 538 story with the interviews of players and coaches who were there was well done and had some interesting material. Dare I hope that this one puts it to rest, or will we see more stories about it next year, or at least next time the Stanford women get a #1 seed?

[CompSci87]

I hesitate to bring up the topic, but I found a little tidbit from fivethirtyeight.com...

Not only were we the only #1 seed to ever lose to a #16 seed in Div 1 basketball (of either sex), in women's basketball, we are the only top-3 seed to lose in the first round.

Ouch.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/dont...ver-again/

BC

The Harvard loss gets brought up every year at tournament time, like clockwork, as if it's some lasting black mark on Stanford WBB, and I'm sick to death of it. It's "The Play" of WBB. This year ESPN had *two* stories about it, one largely a reference to the 538 story and the other a separate one.  ::)

I'll grant that the 538 story with the interviews of players and coaches who were there was well done and had some interesting material. Dare I hope that this one puts it to rest, or will we see more stories about it next year, or at least next time the Stanford women get a #1 seed?