[tweet]https://twitter.com/terrypettit1/status/1380320260486619136?s=21[/tweet]
This time it’s WVB championships
This time it’s WVB championships
The ncaa does it again
04-09-2021, 11:30 AM
The NCAA will not get it right for women's sports until there are many more women at the top of the NCAA. I believe that they don't slight the women's sports on purpose -- well, at least most of them don't -- but they are just not aware of how many subtle, and not so subtle slights are out there. I have many friends who think they are gender equal who say things like referring to a men's team and the girl's team -- or men's team and the ladies team, and they have no idea that there's a belittling aspect to that. Or people, not Stanford sports fans for the most part, who know better, who congratulated me on the success of the "Lady Cardinal." No, it's not the Lady Cardinal, I say, it's the Cardinal. And they don't hear, because they assume . . Etc. Subtle slights may seem minor, but they are corrosive and insidious. I could go on and on, but that's enough.
The NCAA will not get it right for women's sports until there are many more women at the top of the NCAA. I believe that they don't slight the women's sports on purpose -- well, at least most of them don't -- but they are just not aware of how many subtle, and not so subtle slights are out there. I have many friends who think they are gender equal who say things like referring to a men's team and the girl's team -- or men's team and the ladies team, and they have no idea that there's a belittling aspect to that. Or people, not Stanford sports fans for the most part, who know better, who congratulated me on the success of the "Lady Cardinal." No, it's not the Lady Cardinal, I say, it's the Cardinal. And they don't hear, because they assume . . Etc. Subtle slights may seem minor, but they are corrosive and insidious. I could go on and on, but that's enough.
04-09-2021, 11:51 AM
(04-09-2021, 11:30 AM)WBB fan Wrote: The NCAA will not get it right for women's sports until there are many more women at the top of the NCAA. I believe that they don't slight the women's sports on purpose -- well, at least most of them don't -- but they are just not aware of how many subtle, and not so subtle slights are out there. I have many friends who think they are gender equal who say things like referring to a men's team and the girl's team -- or men's team and the ladies team, and they have no idea that there's a belittling aspect to that. Or people, not Stanford sports fans for the most part, who know better, who congratulated me on the success of the "Lady Cardinal." No, it's not the Lady Cardinal, I say, it's the Cardinal. And they don't hear, because they assume . . Etc. Subtle slights may seem minor, but they are corrosive and insidious. I could go on and on, but that's enough.Not to be too contrarian, but what are the ratings for this event? How many viewers are there?
Money talks.
I wouldn't give you two cents for all your fancy rules if, behind them, they didn't have a little bit of plain, ordinary, everyday kindness - yeah, and a little looking out for the other fella, too.
(04-09-2021, 11:30 AM)WBB fan Wrote: The NCAA will not get it right for women's sports until there are many more women at the top of the NCAA. I believe that they don't slight the women's sports on purpose -- well, at least most of them don't -- but they are just not aware of how many subtle, and not so subtle slights are out there. I have many friends who think they are gender equal who say things like referring to a men's team and the girl's team -- or men's team and the ladies team, and they have no idea that there's a belittling aspect to that. Or people, not Stanford sports fans for the most part, who know better, who congratulated me on the success of the "Lady Cardinal." No, it's not the Lady Cardinal, I say, it's the Cardinal. And they don't hear, because they assume . . Etc. Subtle slights may seem minor, but they are corrosive and insidious. I could go on and on, but that's enough.Not to be too contrarian, but what are the ratings for this event? How many viewers are there?
Money talks.
I wouldn't give you two cents for all your fancy rules if, behind them, they didn't have a little bit of plain, ordinary, everyday kindness - yeah, and a little looking out for the other fella, too.
04-09-2021, 12:49 PM
I clicked through and read the articles. I don’t think it’s too much to ask for athletes to have access to locker rooms to change and...bathroom facilities. I mean, this is a NCAA Division I championship.
But, on stuff like television coverage: NCAA is sure choosing some bad hills to die on. You can’t grow a national audience for women’s sports if you don’t make any particular effort to promote them. And in this age where social media can quickly expose hypocrisy, these kinds of problems illustrate how much the NCAA is an insulated echo chamber that can’t even anticipate obvious car crash scenarios. I particularly liked hearing from one of the coaches who pointed out that instead of just showing a live feed without broadcasters, there were plenty of qualified commentators who would have worked the early games for free. I mean, this happening a week after the women’s tournament debacle?
But, on stuff like television coverage: NCAA is sure choosing some bad hills to die on. You can’t grow a national audience for women’s sports if you don’t make any particular effort to promote them. And in this age where social media can quickly expose hypocrisy, these kinds of problems illustrate how much the NCAA is an insulated echo chamber that can’t even anticipate obvious car crash scenarios. I particularly liked hearing from one of the coaches who pointed out that instead of just showing a live feed without broadcasters, there were plenty of qualified commentators who would have worked the early games for free. I mean, this happening a week after the women’s tournament debacle?
I clicked through and read the articles. I don’t think it’s too much to ask for athletes to have access to locker rooms to change and...bathroom facilities. I mean, this is a NCAA Division I championship.
But, on stuff like television coverage: NCAA is sure choosing some bad hills to die on. You can’t grow a national audience for women’s sports if you don’t make any particular effort to promote them. And in this age where social media can quickly expose hypocrisy, these kinds of problems illustrate how much the NCAA is an insulated echo chamber that can’t even anticipate obvious car crash scenarios. I particularly liked hearing from one of the coaches who pointed out that instead of just showing a live feed without broadcasters, there were plenty of qualified commentators who would have worked the early games for free. I mean, this happening a week after the women’s tournament debacle?
But, on stuff like television coverage: NCAA is sure choosing some bad hills to die on. You can’t grow a national audience for women’s sports if you don’t make any particular effort to promote them. And in this age where social media can quickly expose hypocrisy, these kinds of problems illustrate how much the NCAA is an insulated echo chamber that can’t even anticipate obvious car crash scenarios. I particularly liked hearing from one of the coaches who pointed out that instead of just showing a live feed without broadcasters, there were plenty of qualified commentators who would have worked the early games for free. I mean, this happening a week after the women’s tournament debacle?
04-09-2021, 01:18 PM
(04-09-2021, 11:30 AM)WBB fan Wrote: The NCAA will not get it right for women's sports until there are many more women at the top of the NCAA. I believe that they don't slight the women's sports on purpose -- well, at least most of them don't -- but they are just not aware of how many subtle, and not so subtle slights are out there. I have many friends who think they are gender equal who say things like referring to a men's team and the girl's team -- or men's team and the ladies team, and they have no idea that there's a belittling aspect to that. Or people, not Stanford sports fans for the most part, who know better, who congratulated me on the success of the "Lady Cardinal." No, it's not the Lady Cardinal, I say, it's the Cardinal. And they don't hear, because they assume . . Etc. Subtle slights may seem minor, but they are corrosive and insidious. I could go on and on, but that's enough.
Thank you for noting these things. It sometimes even seeps into this board. I will try to be more careful more about my own language, and hope that others are as well.
BC
(04-09-2021, 11:30 AM)WBB fan Wrote: The NCAA will not get it right for women's sports until there are many more women at the top of the NCAA. I believe that they don't slight the women's sports on purpose -- well, at least most of them don't -- but they are just not aware of how many subtle, and not so subtle slights are out there. I have many friends who think they are gender equal who say things like referring to a men's team and the girl's team -- or men's team and the ladies team, and they have no idea that there's a belittling aspect to that. Or people, not Stanford sports fans for the most part, who know better, who congratulated me on the success of the "Lady Cardinal." No, it's not the Lady Cardinal, I say, it's the Cardinal. And they don't hear, because they assume . . Etc. Subtle slights may seem minor, but they are corrosive and insidious. I could go on and on, but that's enough.
Thank you for noting these things. It sometimes even seeps into this board. I will try to be more careful more about my own language, and hope that others are as well.
BC
Softball Fan
Unregistered
Unregistered
04-09-2021, 01:27 PM
"NCAA said a felt underlayment is applied to the bottom of each practice court for cushioning and to prevent court movement."
I don't like that. It doesn't seem safe. I hope this is a tested system and not a first time experiment.
Someone didn't put enough effort into setting up this tournament. There should have been some feedback and coordination with some of the participating coaches from the very beginning. I can perhaps give ESPN a pass. The ratings on VB are going to be minimal. As much as I would personally love to have professional commentary for all matches, financially it may not make sense to ESPN.
I don't like that. It doesn't seem safe. I hope this is a tested system and not a first time experiment.
Someone didn't put enough effort into setting up this tournament. There should have been some feedback and coordination with some of the participating coaches from the very beginning. I can perhaps give ESPN a pass. The ratings on VB are going to be minimal. As much as I would personally love to have professional commentary for all matches, financially it may not make sense to ESPN.
"NCAA said a felt underlayment is applied to the bottom of each practice court for cushioning and to prevent court movement."
I don't like that. It doesn't seem safe. I hope this is a tested system and not a first time experiment.
Someone didn't put enough effort into setting up this tournament. There should have been some feedback and coordination with some of the participating coaches from the very beginning. I can perhaps give ESPN a pass. The ratings on VB are going to be minimal. As much as I would personally love to have professional commentary for all matches, financially it may not make sense to ESPN.
I don't like that. It doesn't seem safe. I hope this is a tested system and not a first time experiment.
Someone didn't put enough effort into setting up this tournament. There should have been some feedback and coordination with some of the participating coaches from the very beginning. I can perhaps give ESPN a pass. The ratings on VB are going to be minimal. As much as I would personally love to have professional commentary for all matches, financially it may not make sense to ESPN.
04-09-2021, 02:08 PM
It would have been better if the original poster had linked to the article that the other 11 words of the tweet referenced. Tweets are often not useful themselves. NCAA faces mounting criticism over volleyball tournament in Omaha
To me this sounds like it is all about the effects of uncertainty and novelty of a one-off pandemic tournament situation. Just how one can maximize the health and safety of 48 teams in a tourney in a pandemic is not a problem that has any history for guidance.
For instance, if they played at different sites, there probably would have been complaints about the facilities being different. ("We had to bus for an hour to get to our site.") There probably would have been complaints about having to set up a bunch of different broadcast feeds.
The only mention of "men" is in a reference to the controversy in the BB tourneys that this set of complaints seems to be trying to jump on the coat-tails. It would be different if they were complaining about the differences between the men & women VB tourneys.
Whether the choice for there to have been a single site or multiple sites is one that can be argued. At a single site, the number of bathrooms is more limited, but with no spectators, the bathrooms normally used by spectators can be utilized. I bet there are negatives on each side. In such a case, someone will complain no matter the choice.
As Tara said, this was a season where flexibility is paramount. I hope that all involved are flexible enough for the tournament to be successful and the athletes to be healthy.
By the way, was it a VB (or BB) team that I saw this season staying on court between matches rather than going to a locker room? Was that Stanford?
Do I recall that even for Regionals, the NCAA required its own court to be installed on top of Stanford's VB court?
To me this sounds like it is all about the effects of uncertainty and novelty of a one-off pandemic tournament situation. Just how one can maximize the health and safety of 48 teams in a tourney in a pandemic is not a problem that has any history for guidance.
For instance, if they played at different sites, there probably would have been complaints about the facilities being different. ("We had to bus for an hour to get to our site.") There probably would have been complaints about having to set up a bunch of different broadcast feeds.
The only mention of "men" is in a reference to the controversy in the BB tourneys that this set of complaints seems to be trying to jump on the coat-tails. It would be different if they were complaining about the differences between the men & women VB tourneys.
Whether the choice for there to have been a single site or multiple sites is one that can be argued. At a single site, the number of bathrooms is more limited, but with no spectators, the bathrooms normally used by spectators can be utilized. I bet there are negatives on each side. In such a case, someone will complain no matter the choice.
As Tara said, this was a season where flexibility is paramount. I hope that all involved are flexible enough for the tournament to be successful and the athletes to be healthy.
By the way, was it a VB (or BB) team that I saw this season staying on court between matches rather than going to a locker room? Was that Stanford?
Do I recall that even for Regionals, the NCAA required its own court to be installed on top of Stanford's VB court?
It would have been better if the original poster had linked to the article that the other 11 words of the tweet referenced. Tweets are often not useful themselves. NCAA faces mounting criticism over volleyball tournament in Omaha
To me this sounds like it is all about the effects of uncertainty and novelty of a one-off pandemic tournament situation. Just how one can maximize the health and safety of 48 teams in a tourney in a pandemic is not a problem that has any history for guidance.
For instance, if they played at different sites, there probably would have been complaints about the facilities being different. ("We had to bus for an hour to get to our site.") There probably would have been complaints about having to set up a bunch of different broadcast feeds.
The only mention of "men" is in a reference to the controversy in the BB tourneys that this set of complaints seems to be trying to jump on the coat-tails. It would be different if they were complaining about the differences between the men & women VB tourneys.
Whether the choice for there to have been a single site or multiple sites is one that can be argued. At a single site, the number of bathrooms is more limited, but with no spectators, the bathrooms normally used by spectators can be utilized. I bet there are negatives on each side. In such a case, someone will complain no matter the choice.
As Tara said, this was a season where flexibility is paramount. I hope that all involved are flexible enough for the tournament to be successful and the athletes to be healthy.
By the way, was it a VB (or BB) team that I saw this season staying on court between matches rather than going to a locker room? Was that Stanford?
Do I recall that even for Regionals, the NCAA required its own court to be installed on top of Stanford's VB court?
To me this sounds like it is all about the effects of uncertainty and novelty of a one-off pandemic tournament situation. Just how one can maximize the health and safety of 48 teams in a tourney in a pandemic is not a problem that has any history for guidance.
For instance, if they played at different sites, there probably would have been complaints about the facilities being different. ("We had to bus for an hour to get to our site.") There probably would have been complaints about having to set up a bunch of different broadcast feeds.
The only mention of "men" is in a reference to the controversy in the BB tourneys that this set of complaints seems to be trying to jump on the coat-tails. It would be different if they were complaining about the differences between the men & women VB tourneys.
Whether the choice for there to have been a single site or multiple sites is one that can be argued. At a single site, the number of bathrooms is more limited, but with no spectators, the bathrooms normally used by spectators can be utilized. I bet there are negatives on each side. In such a case, someone will complain no matter the choice.
As Tara said, this was a season where flexibility is paramount. I hope that all involved are flexible enough for the tournament to be successful and the athletes to be healthy.
By the way, was it a VB (or BB) team that I saw this season staying on court between matches rather than going to a locker room? Was that Stanford?
Do I recall that even for Regionals, the NCAA required its own court to be installed on top of Stanford's VB court?
Softball Fan
Unregistered
Unregistered
04-09-2021, 04:15 PM
(04-09-2021, 02:08 PM)M T Wrote: I
Do I recall that even for Regionals, the NCAA required its own court to be installed on top of Stanford's VB court?
Yes, NCAA tournament always uses sports court over gym floors. However there is a gigantic difference between putting sports court on wood gym floors and concrete in a convention center. Gym floors; flat, level, and very consistent over the entire area. Concrete convention floors; not level, who knows the condition of the concrete floor.
https://www.si.com/college/2021/04/09/nc...tournament
Big Ten analyst Emily Ehman reported that eight practice courts inside the convention center are just sport court layered over cement flooring, creating a high-risk injury environment.
The other points you make are good points which I agree with. I don't see this as particularly being a men vs women issue.
(04-09-2021, 02:08 PM)M T Wrote: I
Do I recall that even for Regionals, the NCAA required its own court to be installed on top of Stanford's VB court?
Yes, NCAA tournament always uses sports court over gym floors. However there is a gigantic difference between putting sports court on wood gym floors and concrete in a convention center. Gym floors; flat, level, and very consistent over the entire area. Concrete convention floors; not level, who knows the condition of the concrete floor.
https://www.si.com/college/2021/04/09/nc...tournament
Big Ten analyst Emily Ehman reported that eight practice courts inside the convention center are just sport court layered over cement flooring, creating a high-risk injury environment.
The other points you make are good points which I agree with. I don't see this as particularly being a men vs women issue.
04-12-2021, 11:53 AM
(04-09-2021, 11:51 AM)Genuine Realist Wrote:(04-09-2021, 11:30 AM)WBB fan Wrote: The NCAA will not get it right for women's sports until there are many more women at the top of the NCAA. I believe that they don't slight the women's sports on purpose -- well, at least most of them don't -- but they are just not aware of how many subtle, and not so subtle slights are out there. I have many friends who think they are gender equal who say things like referring to a men's team and the girl's team -- or men's team and the ladies team, and they have no idea that there's a belittling aspect to that. Or people, not Stanford sports fans for the most part, who know better, who congratulated me on the success of the "Lady Cardinal." No, it's not the Lady Cardinal, I say, it's the Cardinal. And they don't hear, because they assume . . Etc. Subtle slights may seem minor, but they are corrosive and insidious. I could go on and on, but that's enough.Not to be too contrarian, but what are the ratings for this event? How many viewers are there?
Money talks.
Yup...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jn_5HQ1AJi4
Audaces fortuna iuvat
(04-09-2021, 11:51 AM)Genuine Realist Wrote:(04-09-2021, 11:30 AM)WBB fan Wrote: The NCAA will not get it right for women's sports until there are many more women at the top of the NCAA. I believe that they don't slight the women's sports on purpose -- well, at least most of them don't -- but they are just not aware of how many subtle, and not so subtle slights are out there. I have many friends who think they are gender equal who say things like referring to a men's team and the girl's team -- or men's team and the ladies team, and they have no idea that there's a belittling aspect to that. Or people, not Stanford sports fans for the most part, who know better, who congratulated me on the success of the "Lady Cardinal." No, it's not the Lady Cardinal, I say, it's the Cardinal. And they don't hear, because they assume . . Etc. Subtle slights may seem minor, but they are corrosive and insidious. I could go on and on, but that's enough.Not to be too contrarian, but what are the ratings for this event? How many viewers are there?
Money talks.
Yup...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jn_5HQ1AJi4
Audaces fortuna iuvat
04-12-2021, 11:57 AM
(04-12-2021, 11:53 AM)Mick Wrote:(04-09-2021, 11:51 AM)Genuine Realist Wrote:(04-09-2021, 11:30 AM)WBB fan Wrote: The NCAA will not get it right for women's sports until there are many more women at the top of the NCAA. I believe that they don't slight the women's sports on purpose -- well, at least most of them don't -- but they are just not aware of how many subtle, and not so subtle slights are out there. I have many friends who think they are gender equal who say things like referring to a men's team and the girl's team -- or men's team and the ladies team, and they have no idea that there's a belittling aspect to that. Or people, not Stanford sports fans for the most part, who know better, who congratulated me on the success of the "Lady Cardinal." No, it's not the Lady Cardinal, I say, it's the Cardinal. And they don't hear, because they assume . . Etc. Subtle slights may seem minor, but they are corrosive and insidious. I could go on and on, but that's enough.Not to be too contrarian, but what are the ratings for this event? How many viewers are there?
Money talks.
Yup...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jn_5HQ1AJi4
Well that lasted long for her.
(04-12-2021, 11:53 AM)Mick Wrote:(04-09-2021, 11:51 AM)Genuine Realist Wrote:(04-09-2021, 11:30 AM)WBB fan Wrote: The NCAA will not get it right for women's sports until there are many more women at the top of the NCAA. I believe that they don't slight the women's sports on purpose -- well, at least most of them don't -- but they are just not aware of how many subtle, and not so subtle slights are out there. I have many friends who think they are gender equal who say things like referring to a men's team and the girl's team -- or men's team and the ladies team, and they have no idea that there's a belittling aspect to that. Or people, not Stanford sports fans for the most part, who know better, who congratulated me on the success of the "Lady Cardinal." No, it's not the Lady Cardinal, I say, it's the Cardinal. And they don't hear, because they assume . . Etc. Subtle slights may seem minor, but they are corrosive and insidious. I could go on and on, but that's enough.Not to be too contrarian, but what are the ratings for this event? How many viewers are there?
Money talks.
Yup...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jn_5HQ1AJi4
Well that lasted long for her.
04-12-2021, 03:10 PM
(04-12-2021, 11:57 AM)French Rage Wrote:(04-12-2021, 11:53 AM)Mick Wrote:(04-09-2021, 11:51 AM)Genuine Realist Wrote:(04-09-2021, 11:30 AM)WBB fan Wrote: The NCAA will not get it right for women's sports until there are many more women at the top of the NCAA. I believe that they don't slight the women's sports on purpose -- well, at least most of them don't -- but they are just not aware of how many subtle, and not so subtle slights are out there. I have many friends who think they are gender equal who say things like referring to a men's team and the girl's team -- or men's team and the ladies team, and they have no idea that there's a belittling aspect to that. Or people, not Stanford sports fans for the most part, who know better, who congratulated me on the success of the "Lady Cardinal." No, it's not the Lady Cardinal, I say, it's the Cardinal. And they don't hear, because they assume . . Etc. Subtle slights may seem minor, but they are corrosive and insidious. I could go on and on, but that's enough.Not to be too contrarian, but what are the ratings for this event? How many viewers are there?
Money talks.
Yup...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jn_5HQ1AJi4
Well that lasted long for her.
I don't really understand the comment. Rousey has a $13 mms. net worth, more than 4x Megan Rapinoe's. 2008 Olympic judo bronze medal (first American woman to medal in judo), youngest judoka at the 2004 Atlanta Olympics when she was 17. Popular, successful MMA fighter, 14-2 career record, held UFC bantamweight championship. She's now in WWE.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
(04-12-2021, 11:57 AM)French Rage Wrote:(04-12-2021, 11:53 AM)Mick Wrote:(04-09-2021, 11:51 AM)Genuine Realist Wrote:(04-09-2021, 11:30 AM)WBB fan Wrote: The NCAA will not get it right for women's sports until there are many more women at the top of the NCAA. I believe that they don't slight the women's sports on purpose -- well, at least most of them don't -- but they are just not aware of how many subtle, and not so subtle slights are out there. I have many friends who think they are gender equal who say things like referring to a men's team and the girl's team -- or men's team and the ladies team, and they have no idea that there's a belittling aspect to that. Or people, not Stanford sports fans for the most part, who know better, who congratulated me on the success of the "Lady Cardinal." No, it's not the Lady Cardinal, I say, it's the Cardinal. And they don't hear, because they assume . . Etc. Subtle slights may seem minor, but they are corrosive and insidious. I could go on and on, but that's enough.Not to be too contrarian, but what are the ratings for this event? How many viewers are there?
Money talks.
Yup...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jn_5HQ1AJi4
Well that lasted long for her.
I don't really understand the comment. Rousey has a $13 mms. net worth, more than 4x Megan Rapinoe's. 2008 Olympic judo bronze medal (first American woman to medal in judo), youngest judoka at the 2004 Atlanta Olympics when she was 17. Popular, successful MMA fighter, 14-2 career record, held UFC bantamweight championship. She's now in WWE.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
Softball Fan
Unregistered
Unregistered
04-14-2021, 09:35 AM
ESPN is covering the first round of the NCAA WVB tournament for the first time ever starting today. The video quality is good. The commentators are good. Today you can choose from any of four matches being played at the same time all day long.
Under the circumstances I don't see how ESPN could do any better. I also like the first round is basically "play-in matches" where lower seeds play each other. In years past it was the regional highest seeds against the lowest seeds for the first round which made for extreme mismatches and boring games.
NCAA is advertising it as the 2020 championship which is the only way you can do it unless you want to have two 2021 championships.
Under the circumstances I don't see how ESPN could do any better. I also like the first round is basically "play-in matches" where lower seeds play each other. In years past it was the regional highest seeds against the lowest seeds for the first round which made for extreme mismatches and boring games.
NCAA is advertising it as the 2020 championship which is the only way you can do it unless you want to have two 2021 championships.
ESPN is covering the first round of the NCAA WVB tournament for the first time ever starting today. The video quality is good. The commentators are good. Today you can choose from any of four matches being played at the same time all day long.
Under the circumstances I don't see how ESPN could do any better. I also like the first round is basically "play-in matches" where lower seeds play each other. In years past it was the regional highest seeds against the lowest seeds for the first round which made for extreme mismatches and boring games.
NCAA is advertising it as the 2020 championship which is the only way you can do it unless you want to have two 2021 championships.
Under the circumstances I don't see how ESPN could do any better. I also like the first round is basically "play-in matches" where lower seeds play each other. In years past it was the regional highest seeds against the lowest seeds for the first round which made for extreme mismatches and boring games.
NCAA is advertising it as the 2020 championship which is the only way you can do it unless you want to have two 2021 championships.
Softball Fan
Unregistered
Unregistered
04-16-2021, 06:54 AM
Yesterday concluded the first two rounds of the NCAA tournament. It was by far and away the best coverage of the first two rounds ever. ESPN did an excellent job.
Three of the last four matches live-streamed were PAC-12 teams. The three PAC-12 teams, UCLA, Washington State, and Utah lost. Utah and Washington State were the only two top 16 seeds to lose in the second round.
In the fall season Stanford will have to win another championship to tamp down the noise in the volleyball world that the best days of the PAC-12 are in the rear view mirror.
Three of the last four matches live-streamed were PAC-12 teams. The three PAC-12 teams, UCLA, Washington State, and Utah lost. Utah and Washington State were the only two top 16 seeds to lose in the second round.
In the fall season Stanford will have to win another championship to tamp down the noise in the volleyball world that the best days of the PAC-12 are in the rear view mirror.
Yesterday concluded the first two rounds of the NCAA tournament. It was by far and away the best coverage of the first two rounds ever. ESPN did an excellent job.
Three of the last four matches live-streamed were PAC-12 teams. The three PAC-12 teams, UCLA, Washington State, and Utah lost. Utah and Washington State were the only two top 16 seeds to lose in the second round.
In the fall season Stanford will have to win another championship to tamp down the noise in the volleyball world that the best days of the PAC-12 are in the rear view mirror.
Three of the last four matches live-streamed were PAC-12 teams. The three PAC-12 teams, UCLA, Washington State, and Utah lost. Utah and Washington State were the only two top 16 seeds to lose in the second round.
In the fall season Stanford will have to win another championship to tamp down the noise in the volleyball world that the best days of the PAC-12 are in the rear view mirror.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »