Thursday, January 29, 2009

I think there may be some confusion, folks

So, if you head over to ESPN's women's hoops page right now, you can vote in a poll which asks you which of four teams does NOT currently deserve a No. 1 seed. Unless there's a surprising amount of Alabama fans hanging out at ESPN's women's hoops page, the good people of the Heart of Dixie may have not read the question quite closely enough (click for big):

If the question was which team DOES deserve a No. 1 seed, this would make more sense. (Particularly since, as your hypothetical undefeated SEC champions, Auburn would indeed be the best choice of the four to receive a place on the top line.) As is, I'm ... well, a little confused. Can we fix this, JCCW readers? After their loss to the Sooners last night, I voted for Baylor.

Anyhizzoo, this sort of all an elaborate introduction to informing you, if you don't already know, that the Auburn women put their perfect season on the line at Georgia's Stegman Coliseum tonight, a place where Auburn hasn't won since--get this--1993. Only playing them every other year has something to do with that, of course, but still ... that's 0-for-8 and Fortner's never won there.

All that should end tonight, since Georgia's mostly struggled with the better teams on their schedule, including a 56-44 defeat to a Xavier squad that's arguably the best team they've played at home. The Dawgs also squeaked past the Tide by just two points in their last outing in T-town. Just like Auburn, their best players are the point guard and the big forward, but unlike Auburn, those players are not Whitney Boddie and DeWanna Bonner.

On the other hand, Vandy was ranked No. 18 when they came into Stegman last week and left with an 11-point loss hung around their necks. Add in that Auburn is both wearing the "best team in the league" bullseye that Tennessee so graciously handed over last Saturday and is inevitably due for some kind of letdown, and the game could be close. The guess here is that Auburn pulls it out late, but that it's not pretty. We'll see.

No comments: