The CardBoard
A&M 63, Stanford 62 - 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: A&M 63, Stanford 62 (/thread-1390.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4

A&M 63, Stanford 62 - JeffInCorvallis - 04-03-2011

Crap.  Why does it look like we\'ve never played against a press?

Almost game balls to N. Ogwumike - enormously tough shot to put us up by one with 9 seconds to go and to Melanie Murphy who played an inspired game until she fouled out on a very questionable call with a couple of minutes to go.

I love Jeanette and I will always remember her as one of the most fiercely competitive women\'s bball players, but she did not have a great tournament this year.  Unlike last year.

A&M 63, Stanford 62 - JeffInCorvallis - 04-03-2011

Crap.  Why does it look like we\'ve never played against a press?

Almost game balls to N. Ogwumike - enormously tough shot to put us up by one with 9 seconds to go and to Melanie Murphy who played an inspired game until she fouled out on a very questionable call with a couple of minutes to go.

I love Jeanette and I will always remember her as one of the most fiercely competitive women\'s bball players, but she did not have a great tournament this year.  Unlike last year.

Re: A&M 63, Stanford 62 - yvonne - 04-03-2011

I kinda had a sense of foreboding when Chineye fouled out.

Re: A&M 63, Stanford 62 - yvonne - 04-03-2011

I kinda had a sense of foreboding when Chineye fouled out.

Re: A&M 63, Stanford 62 - M T - 04-03-2011

I\'d mind getting beat by a better team.  But I mind more getting beat by a team that was close only because of multiple bad calls.


Re: A&M 63, Stanford 62 - M T - 04-03-2011

I\'d mind getting beat by a better team.  But I mind more getting beat by a team that was close only because of multiple bad calls.


Re: A&M 63, Stanford 62 - Farm93 - 04-03-2011

Should not have been close enough for the calls to make a difference.  In the end, Texas A&M managed to deny Murphy the ball and no one else was comfortable and confident enough to get it done.

The height "advantage" that Stanford enjoyed at almost every position was critical because no one else on the team was comfortable enough or short enough to move the ball up easily against their opponent.

FWIW without Murphy that final score could have been really ugly.

FWIW2 - Murphy\'s fifth foul was a terrible call.

Re: A&M 63, Stanford 62 - Farm93 - 04-03-2011

Should not have been close enough for the calls to make a difference.  In the end, Texas A&M managed to deny Murphy the ball and no one else was comfortable and confident enough to get it done.

The height "advantage" that Stanford enjoyed at almost every position was critical because no one else on the team was comfortable enough or short enough to move the ball up easily against their opponent.

FWIW without Murphy that final score could have been really ugly.

FWIW2 - Murphy\'s fifth foul was a terrible call.

Re: A&M 63, Stanford 62 - Kathy - 04-03-2011

The calls didn\'t make it close. We had 22 turnovers.

Re: A&M 63, Stanford 62 - Kathy - 04-03-2011

The calls didn\'t make it close. We had 22 turnovers.

Re: A&M 63, Stanford 62 - Leftcoast - 04-03-2011

I\'m with you, MT.   How did Stanford LOSE this game?  

Tara\'s women let an outmatched team hang around all afternoon and then failed to match their intensity in the final four minutes.   In the end Stanford fell to a good team they should have beat.  Texas A&M was the team that played the last four minutes like the National Championship was on the line.  Stanford looked blinded by the glare of the moment\'s spotlight.    (And that wasn\'t the refs fault.)

Congrats to the seniors and a team that accomplished much.  This was a very good season but fell just short of being great.

Re: A&M 63, Stanford 62 - Leftcoast - 04-03-2011

I\'m with you, MT.   How did Stanford LOSE this game?  

Tara\'s women let an outmatched team hang around all afternoon and then failed to match their intensity in the final four minutes.   In the end Stanford fell to a good team they should have beat.  Texas A&M was the team that played the last four minutes like the National Championship was on the line.  Stanford looked blinded by the glare of the moment\'s spotlight.    (And that wasn\'t the refs fault.)

Congrats to the seniors and a team that accomplished much.  This was a very good season but fell just short of being great.

Re: A&M 63, Stanford 62 - meos - 04-03-2011

Well, the end of another Stan WBB season. A great program and strong team this year.

Sure, disappointing to see them bow out this way.
Too much poise missing in many parts of the game.
The road to victory was clear -- get the ball to Nneka, and they couldn\'t (or wouldn\'t), at least not enough.

The last play (9.3 secs left) would have been a great time for a surprise zone (also insuring all players got back on D, instead of aimlessly chasing the ball).

Mid-year I had on my wish list for Kayla to go for a breakout game of 30+ (just for developing the skills and mindset needed to do it). Here was a game where the light-switch needed to come on with the skill set to match (2-foot jump stops; going straight up and down, without leaning into smaller players). Just missed opportunities now ...

Bogus call on the 50-50 ball with Mel, but Stanford should never have  let the game get close enough for major ref influence. Hats off to Mel who was thrown into the fire and walked thru it quite well (after not playing much all year).

Re: A&M 63, Stanford 62 - meos - 04-03-2011

Well, the end of another Stan WBB season. A great program and strong team this year.

Sure, disappointing to see them bow out this way.
Too much poise missing in many parts of the game.
The road to victory was clear -- get the ball to Nneka, and they couldn\'t (or wouldn\'t), at least not enough.

The last play (9.3 secs left) would have been a great time for a surprise zone (also insuring all players got back on D, instead of aimlessly chasing the ball).

Mid-year I had on my wish list for Kayla to go for a breakout game of 30+ (just for developing the skills and mindset needed to do it). Here was a game where the light-switch needed to come on with the skill set to match (2-foot jump stops; going straight up and down, without leaning into smaller players). Just missed opportunities now ...

Bogus call on the 50-50 ball with Mel, but Stanford should never have  let the game get close enough for major ref influence. Hats off to Mel who was thrown into the fire and walked thru it quite well (after not playing much all year).

Re: A&M 63, Stanford 62 - stanfan - 04-03-2011

So, was Kokenis unable to play?  I know she hurt her ankle in a prior game, but thought she played some in Spokane.   I saw her in the game today for only a couple of minutes.  I wondered why she, as our quickest guard, and who has a pretty good handle,  did not get some minutes.  

Re: A&M 63, Stanford 62 - stanfan - 04-03-2011

So, was Kokenis unable to play?  I know she hurt her ankle in a prior game, but thought she played some in Spokane.   I saw her in the game today for only a couple of minutes.  I wondered why she, as our quickest guard, and who has a pretty good handle,  did not get some minutes.  

Re: A&M 63, Stanford 62 - fullmetal - 04-03-2011

When you get to the Final Four, every team is capable of beating every other team on any given day.  Bad calls or bad non-calls matter.

What I found surprising was the relative absence of the 3-pt shot from the Stanford arsenal.  That was a weapon they could have used to draw out the lead when they had that 10 pt advantage.

Lot of physical contact from A&M that should have been called.  It was mainly the small stuff, which is the shame of it, because the slapping at arms and reaching in is the harassment that made the press stifling.  And I was worried about the press.

Turnovers again, argh.

Finally, the team went for the steal on A&M\'s last full possession, which enabled the very good Aggie passers to break free for that layup.  Xavier is watching somewhere, eating schadenfreude pie.

That was a depressing loss to watch, and my aimless speculation of ESPN wanting something other than yet another Stanford-UConn finals matchup (and of course you can\'t touch UConn) isn\'t really helping.

Re: A&M 63, Stanford 62 - fullmetal - 04-03-2011

When you get to the Final Four, every team is capable of beating every other team on any given day.  Bad calls or bad non-calls matter.

What I found surprising was the relative absence of the 3-pt shot from the Stanford arsenal.  That was a weapon they could have used to draw out the lead when they had that 10 pt advantage.

Lot of physical contact from A&M that should have been called.  It was mainly the small stuff, which is the shame of it, because the slapping at arms and reaching in is the harassment that made the press stifling.  And I was worried about the press.

Turnovers again, argh.

Finally, the team went for the steal on A&M\'s last full possession, which enabled the very good Aggie passers to break free for that layup.  Xavier is watching somewhere, eating schadenfreude pie.

That was a depressing loss to watch, and my aimless speculation of ESPN wanting something other than yet another Stanford-UConn finals matchup (and of course you can\'t touch UConn) isn\'t really helping.

Re: A&M 63, Stanford 62 - Hank 91 - 04-03-2011

I\'m not sure they were overwhelmed by the moment; it seemed a lot more like they were <i>under</i>whelmed, as if they were already thinking about UConn. They would push their way out to an eight-point lead, then relax and let it slip away, then recover and push out to a ten-point lead, then relax again. By the end, when A&M drew close in the final minutes, it didn\'t seem like Stanford ran out of gas (or heart or desire or <i>ganas</i> or whatever cliché you want to use), but that A&M realized they actually had a shot, so they simply didn\'t let Stanford pull away again. But I think anyone watching the game -- including the announcers, who reminded us of this multiple times throughout -- would agree that Stanford was the better team and should\'ve won easily. Sadly, it doesn\'t always work out that way.

Re: A&M 63, Stanford 62 - Hank 91 - 04-03-2011

I\'m not sure they were overwhelmed by the moment; it seemed a lot more like they were <i>under</i>whelmed, as if they were already thinking about UConn. They would push their way out to an eight-point lead, then relax and let it slip away, then recover and push out to a ten-point lead, then relax again. By the end, when A&M drew close in the final minutes, it didn\'t seem like Stanford ran out of gas (or heart or desire or <i>ganas</i> or whatever cliché you want to use), but that A&M realized they actually had a shot, so they simply didn\'t let Stanford pull away again. But I think anyone watching the game -- including the announcers, who reminded us of this multiple times throughout -- would agree that Stanford was the better team and should\'ve won easily. Sadly, it doesn\'t always work out that way.