RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

The REAL bracket
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
RavenDog



Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 6863
Location: Home


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 1:04 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

purduefanatic wrote:
RavenDog wrote:
+1 AND these whitewash games needlessly bring about the possibilities for player injuries.


"Needlessly"? Do you propose that the NCAA just give UConn a bye into the 2nd Round? Sweet Sixteen? Elite 8? Final 4? National Championship game?


No, I'd prefer the field size be reduced.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66772
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 1:10 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

RavenDog wrote:
purduefanatic wrote:
RavenDog wrote:
+1 AND these whitewash games needlessly bring about the possibilities for player injuries.


"Needlessly"? Do you propose that the NCAA just give UConn a bye into the 2nd Round? Sweet Sixteen? Elite 8? Final 4? National Championship game?


No, I'd prefer the field size be reduced.


If you're talking about eliminating automatic bids, that would make the vast majority of regular season games meaningless. Better to have a couple of games in March be needlessly risky than hundreds of them all through the season.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
SpaceJunkie



Joined: 10 Sep 2012
Posts: 4241
Location: Minnesota


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 1:16 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
Well they earned their way in with an auto bid. My question is how they and NIU could possibly end up on the same seed line.


UNI beat Kansas St & Creighton in non-conference, (giving them more top-25 RPI wins than Maryland Smile ), while Drake's best non-conference win was against a Iowa team that faltered at the end of Big Ten play, so it makes sense that Drake could be the top 10-seed and UNI a lower 10-seed.

Actually, trying to figure out what the committee might have been thinking (besides or along with the male-coach conspiracy Smile ) with some of the seeds, here's my guess what they were thinking with some of the last teams in's seeds, knowing that (in some order) Auburn, Cal, Purdue, and UNI were the last teams in.

Purdue was ranked as a 10-seed, but let's have them play close to home in South Bend, so let's swap them with #9 seed Oregon (orange).

Was-ranked 10-seed California can't be with 2-seeds Stanford or Oregon St, and we can't swap them within the current #10-seed line with UNI because UNI already played Kansas St and Creighton this year (though we conveniently ignored regular season rematches elsewhere: see Louisville vs. Chattanooga). So let's swap them with Drake since Drake isn't too far away from Kansas St (<5 hours). (purple).

And I'm guessing South Florida was the best 10-seed but the committee decided they should stay in Florida instead of fly across country, so they swapped them with Toledo (green).

Basically I'm guessing Cal is seeded higher than Oregon because the committee decided that Purdue needed to play in South Bend, and they didn't bother switching Oregon & Cal afterwards to put them back at the seeds they started at.





Last edited by SpaceJunkie on 03/14/17 7:14 pm; edited 1 time in total
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8151
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 1:21 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

There is no TV show I watched this week that was more interesting or better produced than the selection show.

The brackets are reasonable.

And, to me, irrelevant.

I'd prefer all game matchups to be drawn by lot before each round.

That goes along with my long-time preference for having the entire tournament played over a three to five day period, at one central location, with a reduced field of 48 or 42 or 36, and possibly double elimination. AAU tournaments are held like this, and so were the NIT and Holiday Festival at Madison Square Garden in the 50's and 60's. You could get a three-day ticket for about $6 and watch great games for 10 hours a day. The arena was packed every day.


Last edited by GlennMacGrady on 03/14/17 1:28 pm; edited 1 time in total
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15690
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 1:24 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Matt5762 wrote:
Howee wrote:

Meanwhile, I feel reallyREALLY bad for Syracuse.


Syracuse seed and placement is fine. I have no idea why anyone feels bad for them - just like their men's team, if they could beat *anyone* outside of the Carrier Dome, they would've fared much better. Their profile is not remotely near as good as Miami's. Miami was probably a 4/5 and Syracuse a 7/8, but it's nothing egregious.


You obviously know/see something I don't: Syracuse ended up ahead of Miami in the ACC, and beat the crap out of 'em in their head-to-head. How is Miami better? Shocked



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
SpaceJunkie



Joined: 10 Sep 2012
Posts: 4241
Location: Minnesota


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 1:45 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
Matt5762 wrote:
Howee wrote:

Meanwhile, I feel reallyREALLY bad for Syracuse.


Syracuse seed and placement is fine. I have no idea why anyone feels bad for them - just like their men's team, if they could beat *anyone* outside of the Carrier Dome, they would've fared much better. Their profile is not remotely near as good as Miami's. Miami was probably a 4/5 and Syracuse a 7/8, but it's nothing egregious.


You obviously know/see something I don't: Syracuse ended up ahead of Miami in the ACC, and beat the crap out of 'em in their head-to-head. How is Miami better? Shocked


Miami has no bad/poor losses, which was probably a big factor (Syracuse lost to Drexel & Georgia Tech), along with having a much better non-conference, and did better in the ACC Tournament. Actually there wasn't that much separation between being the last 4-seed and being an 8-seed this year.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 1:47 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

SpaceJunkie wrote:

UNI beat Kansas St & Creighton in non-conference, (giving them more top-25 RPI wins than Maryland Smile ), while Drake's best non-conference win was against a Iowa team that faltered at the end of Big Ten play, so it makes sense that Drake could be the top 10-seed and UNI a lower 10-seed.


Drake beat UNI, not once, not twice, but THREE TIMES. Drake won the conference regular season. Drake won the conference tournament.

They're not equal. It doesn't remotely "make sense".


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11102



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 1:48 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
Does anyone not believe that if, say, Toledo was 107-0, THEY would be featured in a standalone 1-16 massacre?


Of course. UConn increases ratings; ratings generate ads; ads generate income. QED. The day that UConn doesn't increase ratings, the equation changes.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 1:51 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

SpaceJunkie wrote:


Miami has no bad/poor losses, which was probably a big factor.


Well, unless you consider a 33 point blowout to none other than Syracuse a bad loss.

This committee seemed more RPI oriented even than usual. And Miami had a much better RPI than Syracuse. I suspect it's that simple.


linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5408



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 1:52 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Conway Gamecock wrote:
linkster wrote:
Some here have made it clear that they have no interest in watching UConn but it has also been clearly demonstrated on the "ratings" thread that the mass market would, for the most part, rather watch a UConn blowout than an 8/9 game between two mediocrities or even most any other match up imaginable, and in the first round exciting games between two outstanding teams are non-existent. First round games are almost always either one-sided or a sad display of missed shots & unforced errors. Would a 2/15, a 3/14 or a 4/13 be more compelling? No. Or more watched? No. The numbers support that.

As much as some would have us believe that ESPN is in bed with UConn the fact is that UConn, even in a blowout, is the most popular show in wcbb and easily the biggest story of the tournament.


The entire point of team-based games is to compete with other teams to win the games. So you denounce games between two "mediocrities", where games are a "sad display of missed shots & unforced errors", and instead laud a game where ONE of the combatants will be such a team, versus Connecticut?

With the end result being a vastly un-competitive farce where the one team that is missing shots and committing errors stands out even more? At least with the other scenario, the playing field is more level and thus BOTH combatants have a more equal chance to compete and win. Which is the point of playing such type games, and also the main point why others like us wish to watch them. It's not that difficult to grasp, as long as one desires to.....


Your idea is true for the teams involved but not so much for the audience. People in general want to watch athletes display excellence. Nobody is going to put on a track meet involving 300 pound sprinters, no matter how "competitive the race. But they tune in to watch Edwin Moses win his umpteeth straight hurdle race, or to watch a Tiger Woods blow out a Masters field. Sure, the hope is for the game involving two teams playing excellent basketball, but they would rather watch one team playing great than neither team playing great. Look at the ratings for the UConn=South Carolina game. But if the choice is between watching a 49-46 Auburn win where there are more turnovers than baskets along with 60+ ft's, or watching UConn blow out USF 95-50, the public has spoken.

It's not a question of which is intrinsically better. It's a business decision ESPN makes based on which game will draw the highest rating and allow them to charge the most for commercials. Look at the ratings thread and the games from 2-27 to 3-6. Of all the games on ESPN2 the 3 UConn-USF blowouts drew the biggest audiences. Sure, the UConn-S Car game blew the doors off but we need to wait 2 or more weeks to get match ups like that one.


SpaceJunkie



Joined: 10 Sep 2012
Posts: 4241
Location: Minnesota


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 1:52 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
SpaceJunkie wrote:

UNI beat Kansas St & Creighton in non-conference, (giving them more top-25 RPI wins than Maryland Smile ), while Drake's best non-conference win was against a Iowa team that faltered at the end of Big Ten play, so it makes sense that Drake could be the top 10-seed and UNI a lower 10-seed.


Drake beat UNI, not once, not twice, but THREE TIMES. Drake won the conference regular season. Drake won the conference tournament.

They're not equal. It doesn't remotely "make sense".


I never said they were equal. I said Drake is a probably a better #10-seed (or they were actually a #9 seed as I theorized) than UNI.
Just like how UConn beat Baylor (along with South Carolina, and Notre Dame), yet nobody is bitching about how UConn and Baylor are equal because they are both #1 seeds because UConn is the better #1 seed.


linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5408



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 2:00 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Fighting Artichoke wrote:
linkster wrote:
Some here have made it clear that they have no interest in watching UConn but it has also been clearly demonstrated on the "ratings" thread that the mass market would, for the most part, rather watch a UConn blowout than an 8/9 game between two mediocrities or even most any other match up imaginable, and in the first round exciting games between two outstanding teams are non-existent. First round games are almost always either one-sided or a sad display of missed shots & unforced errors. Would a 2/15, a 3/14 or a 4/13 be more compelling? No. Or more watched? No. The numbers support that.

As much as some would have us believe that ESPN is in bed with UConn the fact is that UConn, even in a blowout, is the most popular show in wcbb and easily the biggest story of the tournament.


There is another more parsimonious (Occam's Razor) interpretation of the ratings : the viewers who prefer UConn vs. 16 seeds to a competitive 8/9 game are UConn fans. Bandwagon UConn fans (created in the past decade because of their sustained excellence) would rather watch UConn play anybody, regardless of how elegant the basketball is. I do not doubt that there are some fans like you, Linkster, but the vast majority just want to watch their team play. I know I would watch ND/RMU even though the game will (hopefully) be terrible from a competitive standpoint, but I wouldn't want the rest of the nation to have that game forced upon them.


No body is forcing anyone to watch. And tell me what game would draw a bigger audience?

I don't watch college football anymore but back in the day when I did the networks would put on Notre Dame-Army when the final score would likely be 45-6 rather than put on any of a number of competitve games. Why? Were the networks "in bed" with Notre Dame or were they making a business decision? Notre Dame was a nationally popular team then and UConn is a nationally popular team now. The difference is that today you can watch your team or any other team you'd like to see from start to finish in near HD clarity. Back in the day your choice was either a Notre Dame blowout or bowling.


Phil



Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Posts: 1255



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 3:49 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

purduefanatic wrote:
RavenDog wrote:
+1 AND these whitewash games needlessly bring about the possibilities for player injuries.


"Needlessly"? Do you propose that the NCAA just give UConn a bye into the 2nd Round? Sweet Sixteen? Elite 8? Final 4? National Championship game?


Not just UConn.

I put together a proposal for a double-bye format which would give the top 32 teams a single bye, and the top 16 a double-bye.

It would materially increase the chances of some upsets, and would material decrease the number of blowouts.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 3:52 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

linkster wrote:


It's not a question of which is intrinsically better. It's a business decision ESPN makes based on which game will draw the highest rating and allow them to charge the most for commercials. Look at the ratings thread and the games from 2-27 to 3-6. Of all the games on ESPN2 the 3 UConn-USF blowouts drew the biggest audiences. Sure, the UConn-S Car game blew the doors off but we need to wait 2 or more weeks to get match ups like that one.


Because ESPN is all about ratings and attracting the largest audience. uConn and Tenn games do that for ESPN.

ESPN proves daily that it doesn't give a shit about the good or growth or image of the game. And endlessly featuring these crapola UConn blowouts simply reinforces every horrible stereotype about WCBB. I'm sure it makes UConn fans and Bristol residents happy to see their home team on TV all the time. But it stinks for building interest in the sport. And it stinks for the rest of WBB fandom.

And don't give me this "elegance" garbage. It's not nearly as great as you imagine it to be.

There are other teams playing really good basketball. Indeed there are quite a few playing cleaner ball with fewer turnovers than UConn. They just aren't stocked with a whole bunch of top five recruits, so they don't win all of their games.


linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5408



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 4:25 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
linkster wrote:


It's not a question of which is intrinsically better. It's a business decision ESPN makes based on which game will draw the highest rating and allow them to charge the most for commercials. Look at the ratings thread and the games from 2-27 to 3-6. Of all the games on ESPN2 the 3 UConn-USF blowouts drew the biggest audiences. Sure, the UConn-S Car game blew the doors off but we need to wait 2 or more weeks to get match ups like that one.


Because ESPN is all about ratings and attracting the largest audience. uConn and Tenn games do that for ESPN.

ESPN proves daily that it doesn't give a shit about the good or growth or image of the game. And endlessly featuring these crapola UConn blowouts simply reinforces every horrible stereotype about WCBB. I'm sure it makes UConn fans and Bristol residents happy to see their home team on TV all the time. But it stinks for building interest in the sport. And it stinks for the rest of WBB fandom.

And don't give me this "elegance" garbage. It's not nearly as great as you imagine it to be.

There are other teams playing really good basketball. Indeed there are quite a few playing cleaner ball with fewer turnovers than UConn. They just aren't stocked with a whole bunch of top five recruits, so they don't win all of their games.


You can characterize it all you want but if not for ESPN women's basketball would be something you watch at 3:00 am on regional cable channels in replay.

I can understand fans wanting someone other than UConn winning a NC but to suggest that there is a more compelling storyline than their winning streak anywhere in the country is silly.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 4:49 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

linkster wrote:
to suggest that there is a more boring storyline than their winning streak anywhere in the country is silly.


There. Fixed your typo.


PickledGinger



Joined: 04 Oct 2013
Posts: 1350



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 5:01 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
linkster wrote:
to suggest that there is a more boring storyline than their winning streak anywhere in the country is silly.


There. Fixed your typo.


+1. The winning streak became old news as soon as they broke the record.


cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 12851
Location: In a world where a PSYCHOpath like Trump isn't potus.


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 5:55 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
linkster wrote:


It's not a question of which is intrinsically better. It's a business decision ESPN makes based on which game will draw the highest rating and allow them to charge the most for commercials. Look at the ratings thread and the games from 2-27 to 3-6. Of all the games on ESPN2 the 3 UConn-USF blowouts drew the biggest audiences. Sure, the UConn-S Car game blew the doors off but we need to wait 2 or more weeks to get match ups like that one.


Because ESPN is all about ratings and attracting the largest audience. uConn and Tenn games do that for ESPN.

ESPN proves daily that it doesn't give a shit about the good or growth or image of the game. And endlessly featuring these crapola UConn blowouts simply reinforces every horrible stereotype about WCBB. I'm sure it makes UConn fans and Bristol residents happy to see their home team on TV all the time. But it stinks for building interest in the sport. And it stinks for the rest of WBB fandom.

And don't give me this "elegance" garbage. It's not nearly as great as you imagine it to be.

There are other teams playing really good basketball. Indeed there are quite a few playing cleaner ball with fewer turnovers than UConn. They just aren't stocked with a whole bunch of top five recruits, so they don't win all of their games.



Especially the horrible stereotype that the sport is overrun with lesbians?

UConn fans watch every game anyway, most via "their own" regional network. ESPN rarely carries an AAC game, and only airs the AACT semis and final. They aired most of the highly anticipated match-ups this year, as they do every year. How does this "stink for building the game"?

All NCAAT games are available via watchespn. No games are being pre-empted by the Albany-UConn game.

Not sure why Bristol residents were singled out.

Not sure why the rant.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 12851
Location: In a world where a PSYCHOpath like Trump isn't potus.


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 5:56 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

PickledGinger wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
linkster wrote:
to suggest that there is a more boring storyline than their winning streak anywhere in the country is silly.


There. Fixed your typo.


+1. The winning streak became old news as soon as they broke the record.


Amen. The hype re: #100 was especially embarrassing.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5408



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 8:56 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I was also sick of the endless hype over 100.

But while it may be old news it still captures the interest of the public. Most streaks do or the media wouldn't be talking about them ad nauseam. DiMaggio's 56 game hitting streak is over 75 years old but it still is talked about whenever someone reaches 20 games in a row. It was also the daily headline on sports pages while he was setting it back in 1941, before TV or the internet. There are endless examples of the way the public embraces streaks. The hype over the possibility of the Patriots going 19-0 is one recent example. Notre Dame fans love to bring up that they ended UCLA's streak at every opportunity.

I'm not trying to say that it is the best topic of the tournament but as far as generating interest among that part of the population that has had little interest in wcbb there isn't one better. It's certainly more interesting than that ridiculous hand clap contest that has the women of ESPN tweeting away or the whining over why a team is a 9 seed instead of a 6 seed. The bottom line of any tournament is winning it and while it may bore some or nauseate others, UConn is the lead story.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 9:38 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

linkster wrote:
I was also sick of the endless hype over 100.

But while it may be old news it still captures the interest of the public. Most streaks do or the media wouldn't be talking about them ad nauseam. DiMaggio's 56 game hitting streak is over 75 years old but it still is talked about whenever someone reaches 20 games in a row. It was also the daily headline on sports pages while he was setting it back in 1941, before TV or the internet. There are endless examples of the way the public embraces streaks. The hype over the possibility of the Patriots going 19-0 is one recent example. Notre Dame fans love to bring up that they ended UCLA's streak at every opportunity.

I'm not trying to say that it is the best topic of the tournament but as far as generating interest among that part of the population that has had little interest in wcbb there isn't one better. It's certainly more interesting than that ridiculous hand clap contest that has the women of ESPN tweeting away or the whining over why a team is a 9 seed instead of a 6 seed. The bottom line of any tournament is winning it and while it may bore some or nauseate others, UConn is the lead story.


What "public's" interest is captured? Nobody cares any more. Even ESPN barely covers it any more. It just doesn't matter. It's boring.

It will be big news for some other school when they stop the streak, but UConn adding one game at a time to it is total non-news.

It was non-news when UCLA won 86, 87, 88. It was news when they got beat. As it will be when UConn gets beat. The next time the streak will matter is when they're celebrating some other school for ending it.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66772
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 9:41 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
The next time the streak will matter is when they're celebrating some other school for ending it.


Or when it reaches 200, whichever comes first.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 9:42 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

RavenDog wrote:
No, I'd prefer the field size be reduced.


So decrease the opportunities for student-athletes to compete in the NCAA Tournament? Got it.


linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5408



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 9:53 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
linkster wrote:
I was also sick of the endless hype over 100.

But while it may be old news it still captures the interest of the public. Most streaks do or the media wouldn't be talking about them ad nauseam. DiMaggio's 56 game hitting streak is over 75 years old but it still is talked about whenever someone reaches 20 games in a row. It was also the daily headline on sports pages while he was setting it back in 1941, before TV or the internet. There are endless examples of the way the public embraces streaks. The hype over the possibility of the Patriots going 19-0 is one recent example. Notre Dame fans love to bring up that they ended UCLA's streak at every opportunity.

I'm not trying to say that it is the best topic of the tournament but as far as generating interest among that part of the population that has had little interest in wcbb there isn't one better. It's certainly more interesting than that ridiculous hand clap contest that has the women of ESPN tweeting away or the whining over why a team is a 9 seed instead of a 6 seed. The bottom line of any tournament is winning it and while it may bore some or nauseate others, UConn is the lead story.


What "public's" interest is captured? Nobody cares any more. Even ESPN barely covers it any more. It just doesn't matter. It's boring.

It will be big news for some other school when they stop the streak, but UConn adding one game at a time to it is total non-news.

It was non-news when UCLA won 86, 87, 88. It was news when they got beat. As it will be when UConn gets beat. The next time the streak will matter is when they're celebrating some other school for ending it.


Maybe you should cut down on cheap wine. ESPN has maintained a running story of the streak and brought it up several times during the selection show. The seedings may have temporarily taken over the front page but only someone too lazy to look could miss it.

http://www.espn.com/womens-college-basketball/story/_/page/uconnwinstreak/connecticut-huskies-ncaa-record-win-streak

I agree it's boring but I'm a UConn fan and enjoy my Schadenfreude but for a non-fan who finds it boring you spend an inordinate amount of time telling us all that over and over and over. Rolling Eyes


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/14/17 10:07 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

linkster wrote:
it still captures the interest of the public.


linkster wrote:

I agree it's boring


Make up your mind.

Or should we assume you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.


Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Page 7 of 8

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin