[bl82]

Best Stanford box scores (and the season tab includes things like cumulative +/-):

https://stats.statbroadcast.com/statmoni...NS4wLjAuMA..

[bl82]

Best Stanford box scores (and the season tab includes things like cumulative +/-):

https://stats.statbroadcast.com/statmoni...NS4wLjAuMA..

[MV72018]

On the long drive home last night, I just kept thinking about how, SO MANY TIMES, in this game my mind would go from uh oh to WOW in a split second.

This team is gritty, creative, and never gives up. It's going to be a fun season.

Perhaps a bit early to say that (i.e., "gritty, creative, and never gives up"), no? Let's see how things look after we play some tough teams and fall signficantly behind. That would yield revealing data points.

[MV72018]

On the long drive home last night, I just kept thinking about how, SO MANY TIMES, in this game my mind would go from uh oh to WOW in a split second.

This team is gritty, creative, and never gives up. It's going to be a fun season.

Perhaps a bit early to say that (i.e., "gritty, creative, and never gives up"), no? Let's see how things look after we play some tough teams and fall signficantly behind. That would yield revealing data points.

[TonyLima]

1731195135[/url]']

1731095304[/url]']
On the long drive home last night, I just kept thinking about how, SO MANY TIMES, in this game my mind would go from uh oh to WOW in a split second.

This team is gritty, creative, and never gives up. It's going to be a fun season.

Perhaps a bit early to say that (i.e., "gritty, creative, and never gives up"), no? Let's see how things look after we play some tough teams and fall signficantly behind. That would yield revealing data points.

Sunday’s game will be the first data point on that metric.

[TonyLima]

1731195135[/url]']

1731095304[/url]']
On the long drive home last night, I just kept thinking about how, SO MANY TIMES, in this game my mind would go from uh oh to WOW in a split second.

This team is gritty, creative, and never gives up. It's going to be a fun season.

Perhaps a bit early to say that (i.e., "gritty, creative, and never gives up"), no? Let's see how things look after we play some tough teams and fall signficantly behind. That would yield revealing data points.

Sunday’s game will be the first data point on that metric.

[Hieronymus]

For all the bashing of PAC-12 networks, I liked it, especially where you had both the PAC-12 Net and the PAC-12 Bay Area. It meant you had a second channel for live broadcast and DVRing. With ACCN and ACCNX, you only have one. With ACCNX it’s only live streaming and replays.

I don’t think we harshed on the PAC network over the broadcast quality - it was everything business decision related. Truth is the PAC probably spent too much for broadcast quality and announcers vs. the return.

In contrast the ACC network quality in sports like volleyball and soccer is laughably bad. Minimal announcer quality - like a softball player doing a soccer broadcast solo. The technical quality is even worse. Sound outages. A soccer game that only had the top left of the  broadcast for 30 minutes. Wrong graphics and scores. It is truly terrible. I would fire a high school AV director if this is what they produced. I miss the PAC network greatly in terms of actually watching games.

[Hieronymus]

For all the bashing of PAC-12 networks, I liked it, especially where you had both the PAC-12 Net and the PAC-12 Bay Area. It meant you had a second channel for live broadcast and DVRing. With ACCN and ACCNX, you only have one. With ACCNX it’s only live streaming and replays.

I don’t think we harshed on the PAC network over the broadcast quality - it was everything business decision related. Truth is the PAC probably spent too much for broadcast quality and announcers vs. the return.

In contrast the ACC network quality in sports like volleyball and soccer is laughably bad. Minimal announcer quality - like a softball player doing a soccer broadcast solo. The technical quality is even worse. Sound outages. A soccer game that only had the top left of the  broadcast for 30 minutes. Wrong graphics and scores. It is truly terrible. I would fire a high school AV director if this is what they produced. I miss the PAC network greatly in terms of actually watching games.

[81alum]

For all the bashing of PAC-12 networks, I liked it, especially where you had both the PAC-12 Net and the PAC-12 Bay Area. It meant you had a second channel for live broadcast and DVRing. With ACCN and ACCNX, you only have one. With ACCNX it’s only live streaming and replays.

I don’t think we harshed on the PAC network over the broadcast quality - it was everything business decision related. Truth is the PAC probably spent too much for broadcast quality and announcers vs. the return.

In contrast the ACC network quality in sports like volleyball and soccer is laughably bad. Minimal announcer quality - like a softball player doing a soccer broadcast solo. The technical quality is even worse. Sound outages. A soccer game that only had the top left of the  broadcast for 30 minutes. Wrong graphics and scores. It is truly terrible. I would fire a high school AV director if this is what they produced. I miss the PAC network greatly in terms of actually watching games.

I have not seen a single ACC broadcast yet, so I don't have the direct knowledge you folks have.  I sit six feet behind the broadcasters though and the the body language of the ACC broadcasters certainly seems less involved than Mary Murphy et al. They slouch and look bored as they wait for the game to begin, as opposed to the Pac 12 broadcasters who were going over notes, talking to each other and important passers-by, etc., in the minutes leading up to game time.  I thought the quality of the Pac 12 broadcasters was quite good, if a little bit biased in favor of Stanford.  I guess I will find out the ugly truth about the changeover once I have to watch a game I cannot attend.

[81alum]

For all the bashing of PAC-12 networks, I liked it, especially where you had both the PAC-12 Net and the PAC-12 Bay Area. It meant you had a second channel for live broadcast and DVRing. With ACCN and ACCNX, you only have one. With ACCNX it’s only live streaming and replays.

I don’t think we harshed on the PAC network over the broadcast quality - it was everything business decision related. Truth is the PAC probably spent too much for broadcast quality and announcers vs. the return.

In contrast the ACC network quality in sports like volleyball and soccer is laughably bad. Minimal announcer quality - like a softball player doing a soccer broadcast solo. The technical quality is even worse. Sound outages. A soccer game that only had the top left of the  broadcast for 30 minutes. Wrong graphics and scores. It is truly terrible. I would fire a high school AV director if this is what they produced. I miss the PAC network greatly in terms of actually watching games.

I have not seen a single ACC broadcast yet, so I don't have the direct knowledge you folks have.  I sit six feet behind the broadcasters though and the the body language of the ACC broadcasters certainly seems less involved than Mary Murphy et al. They slouch and look bored as they wait for the game to begin, as opposed to the Pac 12 broadcasters who were going over notes, talking to each other and important passers-by, etc., in the minutes leading up to game time.  I thought the quality of the Pac 12 broadcasters was quite good, if a little bit biased in favor of Stanford.  I guess I will find out the ugly truth about the changeover once I have to watch a game I cannot attend.

[M T]

I thought the quality of the Pac 12 broadcasters was quite good, if a little bit biased in favor of Stanford.  I guess I will find out the ugly truth about the changeover once I have to watch a game I cannot attend.

Maybe part of the issue is a smali N.  I just switched over to catch the end of the Cal WVB match on ACCNx.  The color guy is former Cal head coach Rich Feller.  I'm sure his commentary is excellent.

ACCNx for Stanford WVB got stuck with someone who didn't know VB,, much less Stanford WVB.  Maybe she'll be great for softball.   She is giving stats and staying on top of the action.  She's by herself so she's got to do it all.  She's trying, but it seems unlikely she'll ever have the dynamics in her call that will make her really good.  If only she knew VB or had a color person who does....

ACCNx for Stanford WBB had a color commentator who knows baseball and seemed to know every clichè.  I felt like he likes to hear himself talk.  Clichès are an easy way to keep talking without having to think about it. His style certainly rubs me the wrong way.  I wondered if this was his first time viewing Stanford WBB.

It hurts me to think we may be stuck with these announcers for years....

[M T]

I thought the quality of the Pac 12 broadcasters was quite good, if a little bit biased in favor of Stanford.  I guess I will find out the ugly truth about the changeover once I have to watch a game I cannot attend.

Maybe part of the issue is a smali N.  I just switched over to catch the end of the Cal WVB match on ACCNx.  The color guy is former Cal head coach Rich Feller.  I'm sure his commentary is excellent.

ACCNx for Stanford WVB got stuck with someone who didn't know VB,, much less Stanford WVB.  Maybe she'll be great for softball.   She is giving stats and staying on top of the action.  She's by herself so she's got to do it all.  She's trying, but it seems unlikely she'll ever have the dynamics in her call that will make her really good.  If only she knew VB or had a color person who does....

ACCNx for Stanford WBB had a color commentator who knows baseball and seemed to know every clichè.  I felt like he likes to hear himself talk.  Clichès are an easy way to keep talking without having to think about it. His style certainly rubs me the wrong way.  I wondered if this was his first time viewing Stanford WBB.

It hurts me to think we may be stuck with these announcers for years....

[BostonCard]

ACCNx for Stanford WVB got stuck with someone who didn't know VB,, much less Stanford WVB.  Maybe she'll be great for softball.   She is giving stats and staying on top of the action.  She's by herself so she's got to do it all.  She's trying, but it seems unlikely she'll ever have the dynamics in her call that will make her really good.  If only she knew VB or had a color person who does....

OMG, it was the "tools the block" announcer.  She knows just enough to throw around terms that she doesn't totally understand.  "Tooling the block" means hitting deliberately off the outside of the block; it doesn't mean just that winning the point after being partially blocked.

BC

[BostonCard]

ACCNx for Stanford WVB got stuck with someone who didn't know VB,, much less Stanford WVB.  Maybe she'll be great for softball.   She is giving stats and staying on top of the action.  She's by herself so she's got to do it all.  She's trying, but it seems unlikely she'll ever have the dynamics in her call that will make her really good.  If only she knew VB or had a color person who does....

OMG, it was the "tools the block" announcer.  She knows just enough to throw around terms that she doesn't totally understand.  "Tooling the block" means hitting deliberately off the outside of the block; it doesn't mean just that winning the point after being partially blocked.

BC

[WBB fan]

Maybe we need an ACC bet thread, could gripe about coverage of all sports there, which where the last few posts seem to be heading

[WBB fan]

Maybe we need an ACC bet thread, could gripe about coverage of all sports there, which where the last few posts seem to be heading

[OCcardinal]

Stanford has shot over 70% for two games in a row. Since the 2009-10 season (as far back as Herhoopstats goes), Stanford has shot over 70% on 3s only 3 times.

Sorry to bust your story, but against Le Moyne, Stanford shot 55.2% FG% and 52.9% 3FG%.

Oops, thanks. Looked at the wrong stat sheet there. Well, let me put it another way.  Since the 2009-10 season Stanford WBB has shot at least 52.9% on threes and also made at least 14 threes in only 4 games.  Two of them are this season.  Another was against Gonzaga in 2022.  Demetre lead the team with 5 threes in that one. Maybe we'll have a chance to extend the streak vs Gonzaga today.

[OCcardinal]

Stanford has shot over 70% for two games in a row. Since the 2009-10 season (as far back as Herhoopstats goes), Stanford has shot over 70% on 3s only 3 times.

Sorry to bust your story, but against Le Moyne, Stanford shot 55.2% FG% and 52.9% 3FG%.

Oops, thanks. Looked at the wrong stat sheet there. Well, let me put it another way.  Since the 2009-10 season Stanford WBB has shot at least 52.9% on threes and also made at least 14 threes in only 4 games.  Two of them are this season.  Another was against Gonzaga in 2022.  Demetre lead the team with 5 threes in that one. Maybe we'll have a chance to extend the streak vs Gonzaga today.