| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
hoopfan24
Joined: 09 Oct 2006
Posts: 896
Back to top |
 Posted: 03/15/08 11:42 am ::: |
Reply  |
|
| TheWildJacko wrote: |
I'm a Stanford fan, and typically I'd be annoyed about people bringing up the Harvard game, but...this debate is lame. Like, really lame. Has anybody accomplished anything?
The Harvard game DOES have historical value. It's the only game of its kind. Harvard fans SHOULD be proud, and Stanford fans can gripe (and we do), but there's no changing the fact that we lost that game. There WERE mitigating circumstances, but there were mitigating circumstances for just about every event in history. It's all a matter of degree. You are arguing as if you are somehow trying to either prove or disprove that the game in fact happened. That argument will go nowhere, as there is nothing to debate. Do we really care which team or which coach has pulled the biggest choke jobs in the past decade? Are we 13 year olds? Hm, wait, this is a message board, after all...
What is more relevant to today is, Does this year's Stanford team relate in any way to the team that lost the Harvard game? NO. Does anyone think it likely that this year's Stanford team will repeat the Harvard game? Honestly? I doubt it. Does anyone wish such injuries upon Stanford before the tournament? I'd be shocked if anyone on this message board did, no matter what they may think of the Stanford program. Does anyone think that when the media brings up the Harvard game, it will do anything more than fuel another argument on this message board or another one like it? Again, probably not.
Can we move on? |
I agree with most of your pts. I know it will be brought up, even more so this year because Stanford should be #1, and it's the 10th anniv of the game. I too want the attention paid to this year's team. The Duke poster here didn't know about the injuries, which is an example how the media has not been responsible, which is my pt more so than the game itself. Is that asking too much, or for pilight not to rub in our nose every yr? Yes. Are we 13? Prollly.
|
|
CamrnCrz1974
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 18371
Location: Phoenix
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/15/08 1:10 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| hoopfan24 wrote: |
| The Duke poster here didn't know about the injuries, which is an example how the media has not been responsible, which is my pt more so than the game itself. |
So it is the media's fault? So every detail of every story has to be mentioned, otherwise the media is to blame? Really...does every upset loss come with an explanatory paragraph ten years later?
It couldn't possibly be that the poster didn't follow women's hoops as closely then.
|
|
hoopfan24
Joined: 09 Oct 2006
Posts: 896
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/15/08 1:56 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| CamrnCrz1974 wrote: |
| hoopfan24 wrote: |
| The Duke poster here didn't know about the injuries, which is an example how the media has not been responsible, which is my pt more so than the game itself. |
So it is the media's fault? So every detail of every story has to be mentioned, otherwise the media is to blame? Really...does every upset loss come with an explanatory paragraph ten years later?
It couldn't possibly be that the poster didn't follow women's hoops as closely then. |
yep. I certainly don't expect every detail, just simples facts leading to the game, that no other team lost 2 AAs days before a NCAA, so one fact goes with the other regarding history. Do you think it wouldn't be reported if Taurarsi/Bird, Holdsclaw/Catchings, Syl/Simone, etc missed a NCAA game? At that time, Folkl and Nygaard were equally important to Stanford.
|
|
Rothum
Joined: 07 Jul 2005
Posts: 1729
Location: Connecticut
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/15/08 2:28 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| hoopfan24 wrote: |
| CamrnCrz1974 wrote: |
| hoopfan24 wrote: |
| The Duke poster here didn't know about the injuries, which is an example how the media has not been responsible, which is my pt more so than the game itself. |
So it is the media's fault? So every detail of every story has to be mentioned, otherwise the media is to blame? Really...does every upset loss come with an explanatory paragraph ten years later?
It couldn't possibly be that the poster didn't follow women's hoops as closely then. |
yep. I certainly don't expect every detail, just simples facts leading to the game, that no other team lost 2 AAs days before a NCAA, so one fact goes with the other regarding history. Do you think it wouldn't be reported if Taurarsi/Bird, Holdsclaw/Catchings, Syl/Simone, etc missed a NCAA game? At that time, Folkl and Nygaard were equally important to Stanford. |
funny, but when I hear about Taurasi's awful game and ND beating UConn, it's usually an afterthought that the injuries to Ralph and Sveta get mentioned. So, uh, you're mistaken there.
And you're claim Stanford should be #1 is laughable, unless you meant to say A #1 seed. Because no way in hell does Stanford deserve to be ranked over a UConn team that dominated them.
_________________
Kindness should never be random.
Sun STH
"What do you do when those with all the power are harming those who have none? You start by standing up and telling the truth."
I write for Off-Court.com Anything I write on this website are my own views and do not represent the organization in anyway.
|
|
njjosh
Joined: 07 Nov 2004
Posts: 1458
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/15/08 3:13 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Rothum wrote: |
| hoopfan24 wrote: |
| CamrnCrz1974 wrote: |
| hoopfan24 wrote: |
| The Duke poster here didn't know about the injuries, which is an example how the media has not been responsible, which is my pt more so than the game itself. |
So it is the media's fault? So every detail of every story has to be mentioned, otherwise the media is to blame? Really...does every upset loss come with an explanatory paragraph ten years later?
It couldn't possibly be that the poster didn't follow women's hoops as closely then. |
yep. I certainly don't expect every detail, just simples facts leading to the game, that no other team lost 2 AAs days before a NCAA, so one fact goes with the other regarding history. Do you think it wouldn't be reported if Taurarsi/Bird, Holdsclaw/Catchings, Syl/Simone, etc missed a NCAA game? At that time, Folkl and Nygaard were equally important to Stanford. |
funny, but when I hear about Taurasi's awful game and ND beating UConn, it's usually an afterthought that the injuries to Ralph and Sveta get mentioned. So, uh, you're mistaken there.
And you're claim Stanford should be #1 is laughable, unless you meant to say A #1 seed. Because no way in hell does Stanford deserve to be ranked over a UConn team that dominated them. |
Svetland Abrosimova was injured against Tennessee at the beginning of that February. Shea Ralph was injured in the Big East tournament title game. Neither were the week of an NCAA Tournament game.
Oh, and Notre Dame kicked UConn's a$$ earlier that season when both of those players were healthy.
|
|
hoopfan24
Joined: 09 Oct 2006
Posts: 896
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/15/08 3:18 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| njjosh wrote: |
| Rothum wrote: |
| hoopfan24 wrote: |
| CamrnCrz1974 wrote: |
| hoopfan24 wrote: |
| The Duke poster here didn't know about the injuries, which is an example how the media has not been responsible, which is my pt more so than the game itself. |
So it is the media's fault? So every detail of every story has to be mentioned, otherwise the media is to blame? Really...does every upset loss come with an explanatory paragraph ten years later?
It couldn't possibly be that the poster didn't follow women's hoops as closely then. |
yep. I certainly don't expect every detail, just simples facts leading to the game, that no other team lost 2 AAs days before a NCAA, so one fact goes with the other regarding history. Do you think it wouldn't be reported if Taurarsi/Bird, Holdsclaw/Catchings, Syl/Simone, etc missed a NCAA game? At that time, Folkl and Nygaard were equally important to Stanford. |
funny, but when I hear about Taurasi's awful game and ND beating UConn, it's usually an afterthought that the injuries to Ralph and Sveta get mentioned. So, uh, you're mistaken there.
And you're claim Stanford should be #1 is laughable, unless you meant to say A #1 seed. Because no way in hell does Stanford deserve to be ranked over a UConn team that dominated them. |
Svetland Abrosimova was injured against Tennessee at the beginning of that February. Shea Ralph was injured in the Big East tournament title game. Neither were the week of an NCAA Tournament game.
Oh, and Notre Dame kicked UConn's a$$ earlier that season when both of those players were healthy. |
of course I meant #1 seed vs. overall 1 seed. Doh.
I will repeat again for those whose can't read well, NO team lost 2 AAs DAYS before a NCAA game. I know when Svet, Shea, Catchings all went down with injuries. ND wasn't a 16 seed, were they?
|
|
CalwbbFan
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
Posts: 1474
Back to top |
|
hoopfan24
Joined: 09 Oct 2006
Posts: 896
Back to top |
|
CalwbbFan
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
Posts: 1474
Back to top |
|
dukemayo
Joined: 27 May 2005
Posts: 696
Location: Durham, NC
Back to top |
|
Queenie
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 18032
Location: Queens
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/15/08 7:43 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Not to inflame things any further, but I've always wondered exactly how much flak Olympia Scott-Richardson caught from Allison Feaster when they were Sting teammates. Just food for thought.
Question, though: if two starters were lost to injuries right before the tournament, did the injuries happen after the bracket was announced, or did the committee honestly think Stanford could defend a #1 seed without two of their major players? Forgive me if I sound ignorant; in 1998, I was still getting into the Liberty, never mind the college game.
_________________
Ardent believer in the separation of church and stadium.
|
|
hoopfan24
Joined: 09 Oct 2006
Posts: 896
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/15/08 9:34 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Queenie wrote: |
Not to inflame things any further, but I've always wondered exactly how much flak Olympia Scott-Richardson caught from Allison Feaster when they were Sting teammates. Just food for thought.
Question, though: if two starters were lost to injuries right before the tournament, did the injuries happen after the bracket was announced, or did the committee honestly think Stanford could defend a #1 seed without two of their major players? Forgive me if I sound ignorant; in 1998, I was still getting into the Liberty, never mind the college game. |
Vanessa Nygaard, a third team AA, and senior leader who held the 3 pt record for single season at the time, went down on Sat. night at Oregon St., which was the night before the selection show on Sun.
Her initial MRI on Sunday morning at Stanford was inconclusive due to the swelling. She expected to play with a brace, but the 2nd MRI on Monday, the day after the brackets were set, showed an ACL tear. This was 5 days before H game.
Kristin Folkl, a Jr. 1st team and Kodak AA, leading rebounder and scorer, tore her ACL during practice on Tuesday, after the brackets were set and 4 days before H game.
|
|
CalwbbFan
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
Posts: 1474
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/15/08 9:38 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| I would think that even if the injuries had happened before the brackets were announced, Stanford would have still had the #1 seed since isn't it based on team performance over the course of a season, rather than what players are available come tourney time??
|
|
hoopfan24
Joined: 09 Oct 2006
Posts: 896
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/15/08 10:01 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| CalwbbFan wrote: |
| I would think that even if the injuries had happened before the brackets were announced, Stanford would have still had the #1 seed since isn't it based on team performance over the course of a season, rather than what players are available come tourney time?? |
well, Nykesha Sales went down with season ending achilles heal injury earlier in the season and Uconn got the 2 seed. I would understand the comm. putting Stanford at the 2 seed if Nygaard's final MRI results were known at the time of the seedings. I would also certainly put Stanford at 2 or 3 if they Folkl and Nygaard were hurt at the time of seedings. Harvard wasn't a 16 seed either, not with Feaster who averaged 28 pts per game.
|
|
CalwbbFan
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
Posts: 1474
Back to top |
|
fancy_daniel
Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Posts: 4489
Location: Los Angeles
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/15/08 11:21 pm ::: Re: Happy anniversary, Stanford fans |
Reply |
|
| LadyDevilFan wrote: |
| pilight wrote: |
It was 10 years ago today that the Harvard Crimson pulled off the first, last, and only upset of a #1 seed by a #16 seed, beating the Card 71-67.
Somewhere, Allison Feaster is smiling. |
Not to interrupt the fabulous Cam v. hoopfan debate.... but I just wanted to take a minute to thank Pilight for posting this reminder. I proudly put it in my facebook status today. And if that makes me a |
I however, think its pretty pointless. It's done, let's move on.
|
|
|
|
).....