Congratulations to Carla and the team!
4 Likes
Glad to see I was wrong about the three teams, although I think having 2 of them in the play-in round is a grudging acceptance. But as they say, bloom where you are planted.
Considering the fact that the Tigers had to play virtually the whole season without Maddie St. Rose and still contend right up until the end and then get an NCAA bid to boot makes this a truly remarkable season. I doubt Harvard or Columbia would have been in the hunt had they lost their best player. And they did it starting four sophomores. Two of which didn’t play all that much last year.
I thought Columbia got hosed having to play a play-in game. Kind of expected it for the Tigers but having a chance to be an 11 seed isn’t all that bad.
A historic day for the Ivy League. Now if only the men could get to this point.
1 Like
For the Tigers this is truly impressive. It looks scary for the next two seasons. They are definitely the favorites.
There is no way Harvard could have gotten in without Turner. But I do thing Columbia is capable of getting in without one of the three guards. It would have been way more difficult but I could see it happening.
This is HUGE for the league. We will now be in the conversation for years, easier to schedule, easier to get better recruits. I hope this leads into getting some All-Americans for the next recruiting seasons. That would elevate the league to the next level. And the fact that we got more bids than the Big East is hilarious. UConn head coach Geno was heavily concerned
Hope the League wins some games to
validate the Committee’s view of Ivy strength.
In that way, the play-ins may be a blessing.
I think the play in games are a great opportunity as well. I like midmajor vs power 5 matchups. I thought that all the play in games should be at large bids - I’m not sure how teams feel about the 16/16 games. But I always liked the idea of the teams on the bubble fighting their way in.
Going from one of the worst D-I leagues to a three-bid Ivy in 15 years is amazing.
(In some sense this year is a credit to Banghart as much as anything her Princeton teams did - both for raising the bar for the rest of the league, and directly for fostering Griffith and Moore.)
I’m not sure I can agree with that. Had St. Rose been able to play, Princeton surely would have won the game at Jadwin and thereby won the outright championship as they would have had only one loss and Columbia at least two. And that’s not even considering the possibility of Princeton also winning at Levien. Now take Henderson or Weiss out of that mix and the game at Jadwin isn’t close. If Columbia lost one of those two for virtually the whole season, who knows what that would have done to their NET. I’m guessing it wouldn’t have been good enough to get an at large bid.
That “surely” is not well grounded given what has happened the last three seasons. But anyways, I guess that with St. Rose, Princeton NET would have been considerably higher (they might have won to both Portland and Utah), so even if Columbia would have lost one of the two games, the NET difference wouldn’t be much for Columbia.
Anyways, talking about alternative pasts makes no sense, as Princeton players got developed faster because of the absence of St. Rose, and you never know what would have happened with her playing 38min per game all season. Similarly, the absence of Weiss or Henderson would have let Broom and/or Avlijas develop more and faster, so who knows how that team would have looked like. I just know that our game is collective enough that an absence of a player wouldn’t be the end of the world, and Griffith has proven more than enough that she is a great coach, so I trust that she would have solved any absence in a great way.
I guess we are looking at this a little differently. All that you say is true. I used the word surely because the game at Jadwin was essentially a 2-pt game. Columbia made two free throws with 1.5 secs left after we intentionally missed the second of two free throws but failed to get the offensive rebound. I find it hard to believe that St. Rose’s presence wouldn’t have made more than a two-point turn around in the Tiger’s favor…
As for the difference in Columbia’s NET ranking, I think it was more than a win or loss at Princeton. They won some close games, OT vs Providence, that they may not have won had they been missing Henderson or Weiss. Their margin of victory would undoubtedly been smaller in some other games.
As for the benefits of developing other players, that will pay off more next year. As for this year the loss of St. Rose was a negative. Also, I don’t think she would have played thirty-eight minutes a game most games to take playing time, developmental time, away from other players. Most notably Olivia Hutcherson, who’s been terrific BTW. She was the one who certainly saw more minutes in St. Rose’s absence. More than likely St. Rose in the lineup might have made for larger leads, allowing for almost as much substitution.
As for Columbia, yes, they would have seen a faster development of some of their Freshman. But those benefits would also have been reaped next year. There’s no way they would have been at the level of Henderson or Weiss this year. They were after all, Freshman.
There really is no right or wrong here. Just opinions that differ a little and make for an interesting discussion.
One thing we can agree on, Harvard has no chance without Turner.
Mike, Is Turner out?
They are all fair points. I said 38 min per game because that is what she played in the two close games (39min vs Duq, 37min vs Nova), and a lot of Princeton games are historically close. The point is not so much about playing time, but that both Belker and Chea had to step up in leadership, scoring, play-making ability and pressure handling because of St. Rose’s absence. And that is something you don’t learn easily if you have player in your team that already takes these responsibilities. The same way that Avlijas (btw she is a sophomore) and Broom didn’t have to do that because their role in the team is different with Henderson and Weiss healthy.
And yes, our chances of being in would have dropped a bit. But given how the bubble has been this year and that Princeton got a bid without an amazing non-conference resume, a 12-2 conference result and a semifinal loss at ILT, I see Columbia with a good chance of getting in if the situation was the opposite, because I see Columbia doing something similar to what Princeton did without St. Rose, which again, I have to admit is truly remarkable.
I just hope a healthy St. Rose can play for us
next year. We have a chance to be special,
especially if Amanze is also 100%.
I don’t think so. That comment was in regard to my initial post stating that I didn’t think Columbia or Harvard would have done as well as Princeton did had they lost their best player early in the season and for all of the Ivies.
Let’s hope she has a Niveen Rasheed type of recovery.
Thanks, Mike. Enjoy the game.
Here’s thorough coverage in The Next (per Jenn Hatfield) of the Three-Bid league result:
Ivy League earns historic three berths in 2025 NCAA Tournament - The Next
Hatfield wraps up the linked article by circling back to the Courtney Banghart connection, and how she influenced the progression to the Ivy’s 3-bid result. Columbia will play its game (or games) in Banghart’s home gym. And if in the unlikely event the Lions beat both the Huskies and WVU (who beat Princeton last year), Megan Griffith could be faced with coaching against her former boss and mentor. And another Banghart protege, Addie Micir, will bring her Lehigh team to nearby Cameron to play Duke, Courtney’s ACC rival.
1 Like
Iowa St. seems to be completely lost on how to run the offense. Parker Hill has been tremendous defensively so far and the whole team is putting a lot of pressure on Iowa guards that are rushing a lot and turning the ball over every other possession. If Princeton is a bit more patient in the offense to try to get better looks, given how they are dominating the boards, they will get a lead hard to overcome for Iowa.
Exactly what I was asking for. Amazing! This starts to look really good!
38-25 at half time
Very slow start, with a 5 minute scoreless drought, but Tigers turned it on in 2Q winning 27-7. Good defensive play was the instigator and they could have had an even bigger lead had they converted some good opportunities. Just have to stay focused to start 3Q and keep ISU disoriented.