neither UMinn or Purdue get past 2nd round of WNIT, Iowa gets embarrassed by 10 seed Creighton at home, Nebraska loses the 8/9 matchup, and IU barely escapes a big upset to #11 Princeton, tied with under a minute left until they squeeked out a 1 point win. UMich took care of business and OSU has been curb stomping LSU on their home floor all game, still up 14 with 3 minutes left in the game on the plus side.
rough post season for BT women so far
- Thread starter MichaelRR
- Start date
What are you talking about?? The Big Ten has 4 teams in the Sweet 16. That's the most the conference has had in forever and most likely the most by any conference this year. And we are a last second 3 away from having 5.
Oh and give me a break about the WNIT losses. Neither Minnesota or Purdue were favored to win their second round games.
I know it's hard to feed the trolls but this is just a completely ignorant post, laughably ignorant and uniformed, actually.
Give it up
Oh and give me a break about the WNIT losses. Neither Minnesota or Purdue were favored to win their second round games.
I know it's hard to feed the trolls but this is just a completely ignorant post, laughably ignorant and uniformed, actually.
Give it up
Last edited:
The ACC also got 4, but only had three host seeds. The Pac only got one to the S16, having had a terrible tournament to date along with the B12, this brings their 7 year average to just under 4 a year in the S16. Now, lets talk about snowballs in hell, otherwise known as the BT chances of getting a FF team for the first time since we got one from the ACC in 2015 or a natively recruited BT team made it in 05.
Yeah I posted that before UNC upset Arizona at home, I figured AZ was going to win that. So we have had 4 of the 6 teams who made the tournament get to the S16 with one of the teams overachieving their seed (OSU) and another underachieving (Iowa). The 8/9 game is usually always a complete toss up with the winner never to be expected to make it past the next round. You can also argue that Minnesota making it past the 1st round of the WNIT was overachieving as they entered the tournament a few games under .500 with a depleted roster due to transfers. Purdue essentially performed to expectations by getting to the 2nd round. So of the 8 B10 teams to make a postseason tournament, 5 teams have performed to expectations, 2 have overachieved and 1 team underachieved. The underachiever, Iowa, clearly got hot late in the years, peaked in the B10 tournament, and overall skill-wise were a bit over-seeded on the 2 line. They are not the most talented team in the Big 10 - I wouldn't even put them in the top 3. Talent wise it's always been Michigan, Maryland and IU.
Don't move the goal posts and talk about which of these teams can make the final four because honestly none of them were ever expected to prior to the tournament, that would be a major overachievement. No lets go back to your original intent of making this post and that's about how the conference was CURRENTLY performing, and as you can tell that post was complete BS, uninformed drivel but I expect that from you.
Don't move the goal posts and talk about which of these teams can make the final four because honestly none of them were ever expected to prior to the tournament, that would be a major overachievement. No lets go back to your original intent of making this post and that's about how the conference was CURRENTLY performing, and as you can tell that post was complete BS, uninformed drivel but I expect that from you.
Last edited:
Not "moving the goal posts" Iowa's loss is a glaring sign of weakness in the BT IMHO as is Baylor's for the B12. You mention only being a missed 3 away from 5 in the S16 but ignore being a missed basket from having two BT teams upset at home. I also don't think you can call Purdue and UMinn's losses "expected", but that is just you making up more justifications that the BT isn't becoming irrelevant in WBB.
What other missed basket? 1 game was decided by a last second basket. Creighton made a last second 3 to upset Iowa. You talking about IU-Princeton? Did you watch that game or nah? I'm going to go with no.
Purdue and Minny were road underdogs in their 2nd round games (Minny was probably a road underdog in their first against a 20-win Green Bay team) - and both lost as expected a road underdog to do. Both 20+ win SD State and Marquette were major bubble teams that just missed out on the tournament. Purdue came in struggling, a few games over .500 and Minny with a crappy 14-17 overall record was only invited because Northwestern declined their bid, any normal year they wouldn't have even been in consideration for a bid. I'm convinced your overall sports knowledge is embarrassingly low for someone who likes spouting off his opinions on message boards.
Purdue and Minny were road underdogs in their 2nd round games (Minny was probably a road underdog in their first against a 20-win Green Bay team) - and both lost as expected a road underdog to do. Both 20+ win SD State and Marquette were major bubble teams that just missed out on the tournament. Purdue came in struggling, a few games over .500 and Minny with a crappy 14-17 overall record was only invited because Northwestern declined their bid, any normal year they wouldn't have even been in consideration for a bid. I'm convinced your overall sports knowledge is embarrassingly low for someone who likes spouting off his opinions on message boards.
Last edited:
Ah yes, the attempted insults, coming from someone that believes Maryland is one of the elite programs in WBB, your opinion on the matter holds very little weight with me. LOL go look int he mirror and repeat the statements about not knowing much about women's basketball, it would fit much better...... 
They are right. You are wrong. Take the L and move on.Ah yes, the attempted insults, coming from someone that believes Maryland is one of the elite programs in WBB, your opinion on the matter holds very little weight with me. LOL go look int he mirror and repeat the statements about not knowing much about women's basketball, it would fit much better......
Come on Mike, 4 teams in the final 16 is pretty solid, your arguement has more merit if you were talking about the mens game, women not so much. It’s interesting that the 2nd round games are really good now, this didn’t use to be the case, in past years the home court higher seeds usually rolled, now, some lost or some barely escaped.
That's because the women's game is seeing more parity than ever before with some really solid mid major programs emerging (Missouri State, Belmont, UCF, FGCU, Princeton, Gonzaga, South Dakota). The transfer rule might not be as terrible as I thought it'd be for non-power 5's as I figured it'd be difficult to build a program with your best players always leaving for bigger programs, but it also allows those sitting on the bench at P5 programs the chance to easily transfer "down" and become impact players at their lower level schools, Creighton's Lauren Jensen is the poster child for that - as she transferred from Iowa after averaging 1ppg with the Hawkeyes and led her Bluejays to a win over the Hawkeyes. The rise of the Big East (it's not just UCONN and everyone else now) in WBB has really helped with parity and is making the tournament a lot more fun as "upsets" are becoming much more commonplace. It's not just the P5 schools dominating year in, year out.
Last edited:
It is "solid" but it will be more impressive if it becomes a trend instead of a blip. Two years in a row makes it more solid, but over the last 7 years the Pac has AVERAGED almost 4 in the S16 and the SEC and ACC have averaged twice what the BT has until the last two years. It COULD be a move in the right direction for the conference, but not until we have a team capable of challenging the actual elite programs. Right now, the conference does not have that, and we look to be losing a lot from the top programs so the conference may slide back down to 0-2 teams in the S16 soon which is where it was from 2015-20. If we get 4 again next season, I will be more impressed.
You are king at changing the goal posts in order to support that you have a single clue as to what you're talking about. You felt the need after looking at the results of THIS YEAR's post season play of the B10 conference, to display your most incredible "wisdom", by creating a completely new post about how rough of a post season it was CURRENTLY for the conference. That inane assertion was (very easily) proven false, flat out wrong, and incredibly obtuse and instead of acting like a grown adult and admitting defeat you try to change the entire discussion to argue something completely different; uhhh uhhh.. oh "Maryland isn't an elite program" "the B10 has had a bad 7 year average tournament record" "B10 doesn't have the teams to win a NC or go to the F4" in this weird attempt to somehow support the initial post and prove you know what the heck you're talking about. But it doesn't matter because whenever anyone proves you wrong you just try and change the topic to something else that you think fits your "point". Having any type of discussion with you is flat out impossible, you are worse than a politician, and that's saying something these days.
Oh and just to let you know as I just realized this (and I can admit I was wrong in my initial response that it's been "forever" that 4 B10 made the S16) - this is the 2nd consecutive year the B10 has had 4 teams in the Sweet 16.
Last edited:
We disagree, I can do it civilly, you cannot without showing immaturity or having the nature of a troll. I think the BT, the B12, and the PAC all had rough post seasons so far. To say you expected a BT team to lose in the 2nd round of the WNIT to a mid major school is showing that you yourself haw a low opinion of the strength of the conference. Iowa losing at home as a 2 seed to a 10 seed is a sign of weakness, that only one BT team is expected to win in round three is a sign of weakness, that ZERO BT teams have a realistic chance of the FF is a sign of weakness IMHO. You obviously disagree, its a shame you are not possessed of the skills of doing so with intellect, tact, civility, and decent debate skills, but 1 of the three isn't bad, and arguably, you might have hit 2.
You’re exactly correct about the transfer situation, some good players sitting on benches would be wise to step to a smaller program and do well. The women are allowed 15 scholarships, there’s lots of good players sitting on top program benches that can flourish at other places.
Similar threads
