View previous topic :: View next topic |
Who will win this game? |
Connecticut |
|
18% |
[ 4 ] |
South Carolina |
|
81% |
[ 18 ] |
|
Total Votes : 22 |
|
Author |
Message |
blaase22
Joined: 28 Mar 2011 Posts: 4164 Location: Paradise
Back to top |
|
WfanFrJmp
Joined: 24 May 2016 Posts: 1427
Back to top |
Posted: 04/03/22 9:20 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
They got it done!! SO PROUD OF SC!!
|
|
Silky Johnson
Joined: 29 Sep 2014 Posts: 3382
Back to top |
Posted: 04/03/22 9:22 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Meh. I'm annoyed that they couldn't have the common courtesy to lose early enough in the tournament to payoff on my #HateHard parlay, but there's never a bad time for a Connecticut loss.
_________________ Professional Hater. The Baron of #HateHard
My team no longer exists, so I'll have to settle for hating yours.
|
|
Ex-Ref
Joined: 04 Oct 2009 Posts: 9025
Back to top |
Posted: 04/03/22 9:24 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Nice move Dawn. Taking the trophy to the band.
_________________ "Women are judged on their success, men on their potential. It’s time we started believing in the potential of women." —Muffet McGraw
“Thank you for showing the fellas that you've got more balls than them,” Haley said, to cheers from the crowd.
|
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005 Posts: 8274 Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
Posted: 04/03/22 9:28 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Better players, better offense, better defense, better rebounding, better game plan, better execution, better bench, better coaching = expected winner, with even more ease than I imagined. Because I couldn't imagine UConn's guards being so effete and ineffective.
Congrats to the Gamecocks.
Good fortune post graduation to ONO and Williams, two of the most frustrating career players I have ever watched at UConn, and transfer Evina Westbrook. |
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004 Posts: 67139 Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
Posted: 04/03/22 9:32 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
The UConn bias is such that Holly Rowe announced one of their players as MOP
_________________ I'm sick and tired of the stories that you always tell
Shakespeare couldn't tell a story that well
See, you're the largest liar that was ever created
You and Pinocchio are probably related
Full of criss-crossed fits, you lie all the time
Your tongue should be embarrassed, you're a threat to mankind
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004 Posts: 67139 Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
Posted: 04/03/22 9:35 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
mercfan3 wrote: |
South Carolina played an excellent game, and UConn needed a subpar game for them to win. |
SC shot 36% from the floor, 18% from three, and 65% on FTs. How badly would they have needed to play?
_________________ I'm sick and tired of the stories that you always tell
Shakespeare couldn't tell a story that well
See, you're the largest liar that was ever created
You and Pinocchio are probably related
Full of criss-crossed fits, you lie all the time
Your tongue should be embarrassed, you're a threat to mankind
|
|
Conway Gamecock
Joined: 23 Jan 2015 Posts: 1901 Location: Here
Back to top |
Posted: 04/03/22 9:38 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
elsie wrote: |
why such a disparity in free throws/fouls? SC does not play that clean. |
No post presence for Connecticut. CT didn't battle at all with SC for rebounds in the paint - USC out-rebounded CT 49-24. CT mostly looked for their offense outside on perimeter jump shots. Williams is typically the #1 Huskie that drives to the basket and slashes into the paint, and she was non-existent tonight.
Nelson-Ododa led the Huskies in free throw attempts this past season, and she took two (2) field goal attampts all game.
Dorka Juhasz was CT's #2 highest FT shooter, and she was unavailable to play.
Williams was CT's #3 FT shooter, and she was mostly invisible all game long.
Westbrook was CT's #4 FT shooter, and she took 10 attempts in 18 minutes, at least one attempt I saw she was legitimately fouled by Boston that wasn't called, but she took no foul shots. In fact, those top 4 Huskie players took zero (0) foul attempts tonight.....
|
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006 Posts: 63947
Back to top |
Posted: 04/03/22 9:39 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
pilight wrote: |
The UConn bias is such that Holly Rowe announced one of their players as MOP |
A Steve Harvey moment?
_________________ Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
mercfan3
Joined: 23 Nov 2004 Posts: 19836
Back to top |
Posted: 04/03/22 9:40 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
pilight wrote: |
mercfan3 wrote: |
South Carolina played an excellent game, and UConn needed a subpar game for them to win. |
SC shot 36% from the floor, 18% from three, and 65% on FTs. How badly would they have needed to play? |
They needed less intense defense and rebounding. They were an A+ in those areas the whole game.
_________________ “Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
|
|
lynxmania
Joined: 18 Feb 2011 Posts: 10697 Location: Minnesota
Back to top |
|
Rock Hard
Joined: 02 Aug 2010 Posts: 5428 Location: Chocolate Paradise
Back to top |
|
bballjunkie
Joined: 12 Aug 2014 Posts: 785
Back to top |
Posted: 04/03/22 9:50 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
[quote="pilight"][quote="mercfan3"]South Carolina played an excellent game, and UConn needed a subpar game for them to win.[/quote]
SC shot 36% from the floor, 18% from three, and 65% on FTs. How badly would they have needed to play?[/quote]
THIS Uconn had no business getting to the final, but the state of the game is the stats above. They say it all about the current players in college basketball.
|
|
huskiemaniac
Joined: 24 Nov 2004 Posts: 1050 Location: NE CT
Back to top |
Posted: 04/03/22 10:14 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
GlennMacGrady wrote: |
Better players, better offense, better defense, better rebounding, better game plan, better execution, better bench, better coaching = expected winner, with even more ease than I imagined. Because I couldn't imagine UConn's guards being so effete and ineffective.
Congrats to the Gamecocks.
Good fortune post graduation to ONO and Williams, two of the most frustrating career players I have ever watched at UConn, and transfer Evina Westbrook. |
This. ^^^^^
Congrats to the Gamecocks!
|
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009 Posts: 15759 Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
Posted: 04/03/22 11:10 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Biggest kudos to The Gamecocks for a stellar performance. There were really pretty impervious on defense, and (at least while Boston was on the floor) they were nearly unstoppable on offense.
Huskies played their hearts out, even if not with the same finesse that SC did. They really DID prevent an embarrassment of a blowout. I see a tired Geno.
Murdle? Cardinal? I do believe we Stanford rooters could not have expected any better outcome if they'd made it to the final against this well-tuned, hyper-ready Gamecock Team.
_________________ Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004 Posts: 67139 Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
Posted: 04/04/22 7:26 am ::: |
Reply |
|
bballjunkie wrote: |
THIS Uconn had no business getting to the final, but the state of the game is the stats above. They say it all about the current players in college basketball. |
Yes, things were much better in 2010 when UConn won shooting 32%. That was better than their opponent, Stanford, who shot 26%. Maybe you think it was better in 2002, when UConn handily defeated Oklahoma while going 0/9 from three with 21 turnovers.
_________________ I'm sick and tired of the stories that you always tell
Shakespeare couldn't tell a story that well
See, you're the largest liar that was ever created
You and Pinocchio are probably related
Full of criss-crossed fits, you lie all the time
Your tongue should be embarrassed, you're a threat to mankind
|
|
huskiemaniac
Joined: 24 Nov 2004 Posts: 1050 Location: NE CT
Back to top |
Posted: 04/04/22 12:12 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
pilight wrote: |
bballjunkie wrote: |
THIS Uconn had no business getting to the final, but the state of the game is the stats above. They say it all about the current players in college basketball. |
Yes, things were much better in 2010 when UConn won shooting 32%. That was better than their opponent, Stanford, who shot 26%. Maybe you think it was better in 2002, when UConn handily defeated Oklahoma while going 0/9 from three with 21 turnovers. |
In case anyone is interested, the 2002 and 2010 UConn teams would throttle the current one by such wide margins, that the likes of Stacy Marron, Jacquie Hernandes, et al, would get significant (for them) court time.
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013 Posts: 7867 Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
Posted: 04/04/22 12:20 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
This game went exactly the way I expected it to. SC simply ran over UConn. Defense, rebound, and run. The rebounding was insane! Rebounding beats poor shooting, because if you can rebound a poor shot, you can get it in there much of the time on the second or even third try. And it wasn't so much that UConn didn't have a post presence as that SC just shut it down and didn't let the post players in there. They might have been better with Juhasz, but I think only marginally. Also the flopping didn't help them at all; I think the refs knew they were going to do it and just ignored it. And between Boston inside and Henderson out there, well, what can anyone say except what a phenomenal night?!
Congrats to Dawn and the Gamecocks on a well-deserved win and championship.
_________________ Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004 Posts: 67139 Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
Posted: 04/04/22 12:24 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
huskiemaniac wrote: |
pilight wrote: |
bballjunkie wrote: |
THIS Uconn had no business getting to the final, but the state of the game is the stats above. They say it all about the current players in college basketball. |
Yes, things were much better in 2010 when UConn won shooting 32%. That was better than their opponent, Stanford, who shot 26%. Maybe you think it was better in 2002, when UConn handily defeated Oklahoma while going 0/9 from three with 21 turnovers. |
In case anyone is interested, the 2002 and 2010 UConn teams would throttle the current one by such wide margins, that the likes of Stacy Marron, Jacquie Hernandes, et al, would get significant (for them) court time. |
No doubt. There's more depth of talent today and it's far more widely dispersed.
But I agree that the stats of one game, even the NCAA final, are not indicative of the game as a whole or even necessarily of the teams that post them.
_________________ I'm sick and tired of the stories that you always tell
Shakespeare couldn't tell a story that well
See, you're the largest liar that was ever created
You and Pinocchio are probably related
Full of criss-crossed fits, you lie all the time
Your tongue should be embarrassed, you're a threat to mankind
Last edited by pilight on 04/04/22 12:40 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Rock Hard
Joined: 02 Aug 2010 Posts: 5428 Location: Chocolate Paradise
Back to top |
Posted: 04/04/22 12:31 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
pilight wrote: |
huskiemaniac wrote: |
pilight wrote: |
bballjunkie wrote: |
THIS Uconn had no business getting to the final, but the state of the game is the stats above. They say it all about the current players in college basketball. |
Yes, things were much better in 2010 when UConn won shooting 32%. That was better than their opponent, Stanford, who shot 26%. Maybe you think it was better in 2002, when UConn handily defeated Oklahoma while going 0/9 from three with 21 turnovers. |
In case anyone is interested, the 2002 and 2010 UConn teams would throttle the current one by such wide margins, that the likes of Stacy Marron, Jacquie Hernandes, et al, would get significant (for them) court time. |
No doubt. There's more depth of talent today and it's far more widely dispersed. |
I agree.
_________________ You can win, as long as you keep your head to the SKY! Be OPTIMISTIC!
|
|
|
|