I agree, this is a big game tonight for the Dukes.  I expect this team to bring some athleticism to the Palumbo tonight.  A lot of good athletes to choose from in Florida.  I see they beat Villanova quite handily, squeaked by Pitt at Pitt, and crushed Richmond at home.  I Hope the shots are falling for the Dukes tonight.

IF nothing else can take SOME positives in that Enika was in uniform last night (although she did not play) - while if 100% healthy - she still might have struggled defensively against a team like that -but perhaps with her rebounding UCF might have not gotten the second chance points/rebounds they did - perhaps Kadri Ann would have been a little fresher at the end -  Realize there are only 200 minutes out there to give but think staff might be a little disappointed with the production from Sole when she IS in.

Agree with Hook Shot about the dribbling -  when the team DID crack the press - should have kept blowing to the basket or letting the 3 point shot go (even when they weren't falling)  Chassidy and Juliana seem to have that "Shooters Mentality" where if someone goes 0-5 is CONVINCED the SIXTH WILL FALL and end the cold spell -  I think with Kalin and Libby it's more of a "deferring to the seniors" - or we are on a shorter leash - so if THEY shoot quickly in a similar situation and the shots don't fall - will be taken out more quickly - did see Chassidy and JV doing the dribbling as well but more often was NOT when the press was broken. 

KUDOS to Libby for the way SHE was hitting the boards!!

Update on Nina - WAS on the Bench - BUT in Street Clothes.

It was a clunker. They'll rebound from it.

I was at the game, and their two guards were just too much for the Dukes to handle off the dribble.  #2 was a very impressive player and when they inserted the other guard #3, the Dukes just couldn't contain both.  The officiating was pretty liberal in terms of allowing one of their players, #11 to openly carry the ball throughout the game.  They called her for it twice in the 4th quarter, but it was kind of late to start calling it.  It was noticeable that any call against UCF was quickly answered by one of the refs, the overweight guy, with a call against the Dukes.  The thinner guy was just clueless the whole game and was just a poor ref.  The woman was very inconsistent as well.
So, they are a team that Duquesne could beat, but would need to clean up the offensive rebounds and hit more open shots.  it can easily be done. 
I believe Dan's philosophy this year is to schedule as tough as possible in the non-con and pay little  attention to the record.  Prepare the team with the toughest opponents, and  forget about an at-large out of the A-10, unless you are part of the backdoor inner circle of women's basketball, or you have a ridiculous record dotted with wins over P-5 teams on the road.  So pay little attention to the outcome of these games.  The focus will be on winning the A-10 Tournament, pure and simple.  That is our path to the NCAA.  The rest is insignificant, don't worry about it!

Some of this discussion shows me that it's not Dan Burt's philosophy that's screwed up, but rather it's the way that sports fans & media think & the path to the NCAA tourney that are screwed up.  We value a won-lost record to the point where a team that doesn't back down from scheduling any opponent & takes on some challenging games is "doing it wrong."  It reminds me of back in the '90s when I followed boxing (back when I could stay up late for the big fights).  Oscar de la Hoya took on all the tough fighters that others were avoiding, lost a couple, & was talked about like he was nothing.  The boxing media glorified unbeaten fighters who only took on chumps.  College basketball has gotten to that point, too.  The local media is raving about the Pitt men's record, mostly achieved in home games against patsies.  The Power 5 schools won't schedule a tough opponent during the nonconference schedule & won't accept road games.  The nonconference schedule thru-out college basketball is mostly boring.  I applaud Dan for taking on tough opponents & going anywhere to play anybody.  (This year he didn't have much of a choice with the unavailability of the Palumbo, but still, that's how he's usually done it.)  I don't want to pay to see my team blow out bad teams night after night.  I want good games.  For example, I remember way back when Wooden's UCLA Bruins came here for the Steel Bowl.  Wouldn't it be cool to see teams of that caliber in person today?

Officer Dribble wrote:

Some of this discussion shows me that it's not Dan Burt's philosophy that's screwed up, but rather it's the way that sports fans & media think & the path to the NCAA tourney that are screwed up.  We value a won-lost record to the point where a team that doesn't back down from scheduling any opponent & takes on some challenging games is "doing it wrong."  It reminds me of back in the '90s when I followed boxing (back when I could stay up late for the big fights).  Oscar de la Hoya took on all the tough fighters that others were avoiding, lost a couple, & was talked about like he was nothing.  The boxing media glorified unbeaten fighters who only took on chumps.  College basketball has gotten to that point, too.  The local media is raving about the Pitt men's record, mostly achieved in home games against patsies.  The Power 5 schools won't schedule a tough opponent during the nonconference schedule & won't accept road games.  The nonconference schedule thru-out college basketball is mostly boring.  I applaud Dan for taking on tough opponents & going anywhere to play anybody.  (This year he didn't have much of a choice with the unavailability of the Palumbo, but still, that's how he's usually done it.)  I don't want to pay to see my team blow out bad teams night after night.  I want good games.  For example, I remember way back when Wooden's UCLA Bruins came here for the Steel Bowl.  Wouldn't it be cool to see teams of that caliber in person today?

Was out at Maples Pavilion Saturday to watch #11 Stanford defeat #3 Baylor.  Earlier this season, saw (then #9) Oregon State defeat South Carolina and then (barely) lost to (then) #1 Notre Dame- so please don't paint Power 5 schools with such a broad brush.  

My earlier comment was about the math.  Whether you applaud the strategy or not, there is now only one path for the Dukes to get to the big Dance and (as flawed as it may be) we will not see the NCAA Committee change their philosophy for selecting at large schools who do not win their conference tournament, any time soon.

I appreciate your comments.  Years back, the Selection Committee made a conscious shift in their evaluation process where you began to see an over-representation of Power Five schools from the same conferences making the Tourney while many mid-majors, with superb records, failed to get in.  The situation, as you know, has only gotten worse.

I come from a Power Five conference (the PAC-12) and love the Stanford women (I also love Duquesne and several other mid-majors).  While the talent level and play is obviously much higher, I believe the beauty of the women's game has been permanently eroded when six or even seven PAC-12 schools are invited to the 'big dance' while mid-majors (with exceptional seasons) are left out.

I learned details from two Committee members on the reasoning behind their decision-making and I find the rationale flawed.

There was a time (you might remember) when winning the regular season conference mattered.  It no longer matters.  That means a mid-major who wins the regular season can have one off-game in the tourney and not make it to the NCAA.  Why (then) have a regular season?  I don't understand those metrics. 

Agree that the team's play is critical.

I had the impression that Dan touted this year's team would be 'very good' (and that may still play out), but from my perspective, last year's team (at a similar point in the season), was performing much better; especially with a greater inside/outside scoring balance.

I am certainly no coach and I lack the insights regarding what is going on with certain players, but I am quite surprised and disappointed that Laia Sole (who Dan said is the best offensive post player he has ever coached), is not getting more minutes and (more importantly) is not in the lineup very much along with Kadi-Ann.  I recall when Kadri-Ann and Amadea had a great high/low post thing going.  The way things are now, Duquesne's opponents 'squeeze' Kadri-Ann - where she has difficulty getting the ball in the low post.  Sole's presence would give the Dukes another post option. The other problem is, there are certain players (whose names I won't mention), who consistently do not feed the ball into the posts.  I would bench them.

I hope you are right about the team coming together soon.  Other than launching 3 point shots at a very low percentage of baskets made, the offense struggles in the half court to manufacture points.  Lots of respect for Assistant Coach Matt, but the offensive patterns he designed (and worked so well with some prior teams), may need a revisit.

Defensively, (and again I'm a fan, not a coach), I would love to see a pressure zone because our gals cannot defend quicker, more athletic teams.