Dooley: Long coming back

[champion110]

right now, we have a better shot at making a final four in men's basketball than we do in women's basketball. just go check the landscape of those two sports. there are cinderella stories every year in men's hoops. i'm still waiting on that first cinderella story in women's hoops!!!

I think Oral Roberts would beg to differ with you.

[barkinloud]

right now, we have a better shot at making a final four in men's basketball than we do in women's basketball. just go check the landscape of those two sports. there are cinderella stories every year in men's hoops. i'm still waiting on that first cinderella story in women's hoops!!!

What a ridiculous statement!

[louisiana_dog]

Here is another way to look at it.

It gives Dooley more time to raise more money to hire a better replacement for Long next year.

[DogtorEvil]

I think Oral Roberts would beg to differ with you.

wut?

[DocMarvin362]

It is funny that so many of you come in this section just to state you don't like WBB. I don't see WBB fans coming on the baseball or football forums saying that. Grow up! If you don't like WBB or the Techsters, hang out in another section. It is not mandatory to even read the comments on here.

Wow... If that was directed at me, you misunderstood my post.

I care about the TECHsters because they are apart of TECH... period. What I don't care about is donating money solely to get rid of a coach. I went to about a dozen games last year and enjoy the atmosphere.

[champion110]

Wow... If that was directed at me, you misunderstood my post.

I care about the TECHsters because they are apart of TECH... period. What I don't care about is donating money solely to get rid of a coach. I went to about a dozen games last year and enjoy the atmosphere.

Not directed at you..... Some come on here solely for that purpose.

[champion110]

wut?

Should have said Oral Roberts University, not Oral Roberts himself. :icon_wink: I was responding to the "no cinderella story" comment. One only needs to look them up and see that they have played that role in the very recent past.

There are plenty of cinderella stories on the Women's side, as well as the men's. There is nothing wrong with trying to build FF contenders with both our men's team AND our women's team at the same time.

[Russdawg]

[quote=DocMarvin362;594648]Wow...

I care about the TECHsters because they are a part of TECH... period. What I don't care about is donating money solely to get rid of a coach. I went to about a dozen games last year and enjoy the atmosphere.[/quote]



Thanks for saying this!! I totally agree, and am so glad CHAMP and a few others express this. I know a lot of fans who feel this way but do not read BBB. This needs to be heard more often here.

Coach Long will be back, and its time now for anyone who is any kind of a Tech fan to get behind the team, the recruiting, etc, BE A FAN, and show what Louisiana Tech is all about. We should have high expectations next year: minimum requirement of 20 wins and post season play.

Let's get behind our team and our coach and our school and keep the ugliness and evaluations until after next season if they are justified at that time

GO TECHSTERS!!

[DrumDawg]

u know for an evangelist; he sure can play some ball

[TECH88]

right now, we have a better shot at making a final four in men's basketball than we do in women's basketball. just go check the landscape of those two sports. there are cinderella stories every year in men's hoops. i'm still waiting on that first cinderella story in women's hoops!!!

Good observation prof.

[OmahaDawg]

right now, we have a better shot at making a final four in men's basketball than we do in women's basketball. just go check the landscape of those two sports. there are cinderella stories every year in men's hoops. i'm still waiting on that first cinderella story in women's hoops!!!

very true. good post

[RealityCheck]

right now, we have a better shot at making a final four in men's basketball than we do in women's basketball. just go check the landscape of those two sports. there are cinderella stories every year in men's hoops. i'm still waiting on that first cinderella story in women's hoops!!!

Excellent post...8 lower-seed upsets in the men's first round with 6 double-digit seed wins. Just three in the women's first round with two double-digit seeds and a host #9 seed winning. And it's not just this year...this is normal every year.

[theprofessor]

There are plenty of cinderella stories on the Women's side, as well as the men's.

i guess that depends on your definition of plenty, doesn't it, champ? i decided to test how much i actually knew about the recent history of the women's tourney and looked up some of the results. what i found actually shocked me at how much history supports my theory.

to give a little background, i decided to go back to 1999, which was the last year tech advanced to the final four (9 years ago!!!). here's a year-by-year breakdown of what could be considered "cinderella" stories in the women's tourney:

1999: none. in all four brackets, the 1-4 seeds advanced to the sweet 16. tech made the final four as a #1 seed before losing in the national semifinals.

2000: uab as a #11 seed advanced to the sweet 16. tech made the elite 8 as a #1 seed, the last year the techsters were given a one seed.

2001: jackie stiles led southwest missouri state to the final four as a #5 seed in what can be considered the greatest cinderella story in women's basketball history. tech, as a #3 seed, advanced to the elite 8.

2002: the best year for lower seeds, as three #7 seeds and below made the sweet 16. byu (#11), drake (#7) and odu (#7, although a traditional power) all made it that far. tech, as a #5 seed, was upset in the first round by #12 uc-santa barbara in what was supposed to be leon barmore's final game.

2003: notre dame advanced to the sweet 16 as a #11, but they aren't a cinderella as they won a national title only a few years earlier. new mexico, a traditionally strong mid-major, made the sweet 16 as a #6 seed. tech, as a #5 seed, blew a huge second half lead against #1 lsu in palo alto, calif., with the last team that had final four talent.

2004: uc-santa barbara, which had won first-round games the two previous years, put together a sweet 16 run as a #11 seed. tech, as a #5 seed, lost to duke in the sweet 16.

2005: liberty, as a #13 seed, advanced to the sweet 16. tech, as a #11 seed that then made us shudder in disbelief, lost to temple in the first round.

2006: none. three of the four brackets saw the 1-4 seeds advance. only #5 utah and #8 boston college (not a cinderella) made the sweet 16. tech, as a #11 seed again, again lost a first-round game it should have won, this time against florida state.

2007: marist, a #13 seed, pulled two upsets before losing to national champion tennessee in the sweet 16. bowling green, as a #7, also made the sweet 16. ole miss, as a #7, made the elite 8, but again, that's no cinderella. tech, for the first time in its storied history, missed the tournament.

2008: the jury is still out, but through the first round, only #10 hartford and #11 florida state are double-digit seeds remaining. as is the case almost every single year, the chalk is winning the battle in the women's game.

in summary, it's still too early to consider this year's tourney, but over the past nine tournaments, there have been an average of one cinderella run per season. only southwest missouri in 2001 put together a truly magical run to the final four, which george mason did in the men's game just two years ago.

if you look at what's happened in the men's game this year -- with davidson and western kentucky both sitting in the sweet 16 -- the men's game each year gives more teams more chances to make a cinderella run. after doing this research, i'm more convinced than ever that tech's best chance to make the elite 8 again will come in the men's tourney, not the women's.

[champion110]

i guess that depends on your definition of plenty, doesn't it, champ? i decided to test how much i actually knew about the recent history of the women's tourney and looked up some of the results. what i found actually shocked me at how much history supports my theory.

to give a little background, i decided to go back to 1999, which was the last year tech advanced to the final four (9 years ago!!!). here's a year-by-year breakdown of what could be considered "cinderella" stories in the women's tourney:

1999: none. in all four brackets, the 1-4 seeds advanced to the sweet 16. tech made the final four as a #1 seed before losing in the national semifinals.

2000: uab as a #11 seed advanced to the sweet 16. tech made the elite 8 as a #1 seed, the last year the techsters were given a one seed.

2001: jackie stiles led southwest missouri state to the final four as a #5 seed in what can be considered the greatest cinderella story in women's basketball history. tech, as a #3 seed, advanced to the elite 8.

2002: the best year for lower seeds, as three #7 seeds and below made the sweet 16. byu (#11), drake (#7) and odu (#7, although a traditional power) all made it that far. tech, as a #5 seed, was upset in the first round by #12 uc-santa barbara in what was supposed to be leon barmore's final game.

2003: notre dame advanced to the sweet 16 as a #11, but they aren't a cinderella as they won a national title only a few years earlier. new mexico, a traditionally strong mid-major, made the sweet 16 as a #6 seed. tech, as a #5 seed, blew a huge second half lead against #1 lsu in palo alto, calif., with the last team that had final four talent.

2004: uc-santa barbara, which had won first-round games the two previous years, put together a sweet 16 run as a #11 seed. tech, as a #5 seed, lost to duke in the sweet 16.

2005: liberty, as a #13 seed, advanced to the sweet 16. tech, as a #11 seed that then made us shudder in disbelief, lost to temple in the first round.

2006: none. three of the four brackets saw the 1-4 seeds advance. only #5 utah and #8 boston college (not a cinderella) made the sweet 16. tech, as a #11 seed again, again lost a first-round game it should have won, this time against florida state.

2007: marist, a #13 seed, pulled two upsets before losing to national champion tennessee in the sweet 16. bowling green, as a #7, also made the sweet 16. ole miss, as a #7, made the elite 8, but again, that's no cinderella. tech, for the first time in its storied history, missed the tournament.

2008: the jury is still out, but through the first round, only #10 hartford and #11 florida state are double-digit seeds remaining. as is the case almost every single year, the chalk is winning the battle in the women's game.

in summary, it's still too early to consider this year's tourney, but over the past nine tournaments, there have been an average of one cinderella run per season. only southwest missouri in 2001 put together a truly magical run to the final four, which george mason did in the men's game just two years ago.

if you look at what's happened in the men's game this year -- with davidson and western kentucky both sitting in the sweet 16 -- the men's game each year gives more teams more chances to make a cinderella run. after doing this research, i'm more convinced than ever that tech's best chance to make the elite 8 again will come in the men's tourney, not the women's.

Congratulations, great research.

[OmahaDawg]

i guess that depends on your definition of plenty, doesn't it, champ? i decided to test how much i actually knew about the recent history of the women's tourney and looked up some of the results. what i found actually shocked me at how much history supports my theory.

to give a little background, i decided to go back to 1999, which was the last year tech advanced to the final four (9 years ago!!!). here's a year-by-year breakdown of what could be considered "cinderella" stories in the women's tourney:

1999: none. in all four brackets, the 1-4 seeds advanced to the sweet 16. tech made the final four as a #1 seed before losing in the national semifinals.

2000: uab as a #11 seed advanced to the sweet 16. tech made the elite 8 as a #1 seed, the last year the techsters were given a one seed.

2001: jackie stiles led southwest missouri state to the final four as a #5 seed in what can be considered the greatest cinderella story in women's basketball history. tech, as a #3 seed, advanced to the elite 8.

2002: the best year for lower seeds, as three #7 seeds and below made the sweet 16. byu (#11), drake (#7) and odu (#7, although a traditional power) all made it that far. tech, as a #5 seed, was upset in the first round by #12 uc-santa barbara in what was supposed to be leon barmore's final game.

2003: notre dame advanced to the sweet 16 as a #11, but they aren't a cinderella as they won a national title only a few years earlier. new mexico, a traditionally strong mid-major, made the sweet 16 as a #6 seed. tech, as a #5 seed, blew a huge second half lead against #1 lsu in palo alto, calif., with the last team that had final four talent.

2004: uc-santa barbara, which had won first-round games the two previous years, put together a sweet 16 run as a #11 seed. tech, as a #5 seed, lost to duke in the sweet 16.

2005: liberty, as a #13 seed, advanced to the sweet 16. tech, as a #11 seed that then made us shudder in disbelief, lost to temple in the first round.

2006: none. three of the four brackets saw the 1-4 seeds advance. only #5 utah and #8 boston college (not a cinderella) made the sweet 16. tech, as a #11 seed again, again lost a first-round game it should have won, this time against florida state.

2007: marist, a #13 seed, pulled two upsets before losing to national champion tennessee in the sweet 16. bowling green, as a #7, also made the sweet 16. ole miss, as a #7, made the elite 8, but again, that's no cinderella. tech, for the first time in its storied history, missed the tournament.

2008: the jury is still out, but through the first round, only #10 hartford and #11 florida state are double-digit seeds remaining. as is the case almost every single year, the chalk is winning the battle in the women's game.

in summary, it's still too early to consider this year's tourney, but over the past nine tournaments, there have been an average of one cinderella run per season. only southwest missouri in 2001 put together a truly magical run to the final four, which george mason did in the men's game just two years ago.

if you look at what's happened in the men's game this year -- with davidson and western kentucky both sitting in the sweet 16 -- the men's game each year gives more teams more chances to make a cinderella run. after doing this research, i'm more convinced than ever that tech's best chance to make the elite 8 again will come in the men's tourney, not the women's.

So we haven't won an NCAA women's tourney game since '04?