The CardBoard
WBB: South Carolina 62 Stanford 53 - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: WBB: South Carolina 62 Stanford 53 (/thread-13632.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4

Re: WBB: South Carolina 62 Stanford 53 - fullmetal - 04-01-2017

Severely questionable calls at best...had an amateur hour feel to them watching from the sports bar TV here.  Sigh.  And I thought McCall had the ball hip-checked out of her hands on a moving screen.

Re: WBB: South Carolina 62 Stanford 53 - 81alum - 04-02-2017

I just found this Tara interview from after the game:

http://www.knowyourleak.com/Tara-VanDerveer-Says-Pac-12s-Gauntlet-Of-Talent-Prepared-Stanford-For-Final-Four-Run-1094668.html

The loss of Karlie and the inability to get to the free throw line are mentioned.  But she keeps it in perspective.  "This team has brought me tremendous joy all season, and I am not going to let 20 minutes ruin what was a tremendous year."

I have to say, that sounds like a coach who still loves coaching.

Re: WBB: South Carolina 62 Stanford 53 - TheFarm07 - 04-02-2017

I hope Tara will continue to coach for a long time, not just as a Stanford alum/fan, but as a women's basketball fan, the game will not be the same once she decides to retire

Re: WBB: South Carolina 62 Stanford 53 - M T - 04-02-2017

Another ding from our final game.  Karlie went into the game leading the NCAA in 3FG% but she went 0 for 2.  Had she sunk a third attempt, or had not taken any threes, she would have remained in first.  But she finished second at 48.5%.  Not too shabby.

I'm sure Karlie would have been happy with 0-10 if it could have meant we won (and it might have, given the way the first quarter went).  But she was oh so close...




Re: WBB: South Carolina 62 Stanford 53 - JJJ - 04-03-2017

I find this story a bit strange.

Quote:Karlie Samuelson was hurting. The senior sharpshooter suffered a right ankle sprain while slipping on the court in a second-quarter moment that might have doomed Stanford on Friday night in the Women’s Final Four.

Quote:Samuelson didn’t know what happened with 4:38 left in the half as she was sprawled on the floor. It didn’t appear she slipped because of contact. McCall and a Stanford staffer carried her to the sideline as if she were precious cargo.

http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/03/31/womens-final-four-stanford-falls-to-no-3-south-carolina/

Ok, Karlie may not have known what happened then and there, but I thought it was rather clear on replay that she rolled her ankle after stepping on a defender's foot.  She didn't "slip" as they claim.  :'(

Re: WBB: South Carolina 62 Stanford 53 - CompSci87 - 04-03-2017

I noticed that too and put it down to Karlie, the team, and the reporter not having had the benefit of seeing the TV replays at the point when the interview was done and the story was written.

Re: WBB: South Carolina 62 Stanford 53 - Viking_Guy - 04-03-2017

Wasn't there a tripping foul called?

VG


Re: WBB: South Carolina 62 Stanford 53 - CompSci87 - 04-03-2017

I don't remember if there was. If so it was a common foul and non-shooting; I would have remembered if there were free throws.

Re: WBB: South Carolina 62 Stanford 53 - JJJ - 04-03-2017

I believe a foul was called (non-shooting) although I didn't know what the call was. Tripping sounds about right.

Re: WBB: South Carolina 62 Stanford 53 - Viking_Guy - 04-03-2017

Cuz it sure looked to me like Cuevas stuck her leg in there as Karlie split the seam.  I was a bit upset at the time, though, so my memory may be clouded.

VG


Re: WBB: South Carolina 62 Stanford 53 - CompSci87 - 04-03-2017

I doubt it was deliberate, but she put her foot down right where Karlie was going, and Karlie stepped on it.

Re: WBB: South Carolina 62 Stanford 53 - will - 04-04-2017

Yeah it was a tripping foul. But heck if my ankle had gone in all those directions, I would be in the hospital and not remember what happened. She is one tough cookie. I think she wanted to not show the pain so it would not affect her team.

Re: WBB: South Carolina 62 Stanford 53 - Jskass - 04-04-2017

well next year South Carolina now loses not only Coates, but also Davis and Gray who both declared for the WNBA draft.

Re: WBB: South Carolina 62 Stanford 53 - 81alum - 04-05-2017

(04-04-2017, 11:21 AM)Jskass link Wrote:well next year South Carolina now loses not only Coates, but also Davis and Gray who both declared for the WNBA draft.
Each of them transferred to South Carolina and had to sit out a year, so I hope they are both graduating.  It is not necessarily declaring early from the academic standpoint.  If they are not graduating, then that would make me squeamish that the national champion was powered by two players who each played a single year for their program and left with eligibility remaining. 

Re: WBB: South Carolina 62 Stanford 53 - fullmetal - 04-05-2017

Well, if women's basketball players are declaring for the draft with eligibility remaining, then that's another step in the elevation of the sport.

As for being a team fueled by one-and-done mercenaries...it was bound to happen as soon as professional women's basketball became a viable career.

Re: WBB: South Carolina 62 Stanford 53 - BobK - 04-05-2017

The rule forever has been draft eligible after 4 years of college.  So nothing has changed.Â