ShareThis Page

Roundup: Mercyhurst shut down by Grand Valley

| Friday, Dec. 6, 2002

  • Grand Valley State 56, Mercyhurst 41 — Grand Valley State had three players score in double figures, led by Julie Zeeff's 14 points, as they defeated host Mercyhusrt 56-41 last night.

    Both teams were plagued by poor shooting most of the game with Grand Valley State shooting 35-percent from the field and Mercyhurst shooting 33-percent from the field and 58-percent from the free throw line.

    Katie Lorincz scored 10 points to lead Mercyhusrt (1-5, 0-1).

  • Gannon 82, Ferris State 74 — Molly Dorrell scored 13 points to lead Gannon (4-2) past Ferris State (3-1, 1-1).

    Five players scored in double figures for Gannon, which shot better than 50 percent for the game.


  • Mercyhurst 84, Grand Valley State 63 — Scott Melle scored a game-high 28 points and Joshua Helm added 22, as Mercyhurst (4-1, 1-0) cruised by visiting Grand Valley State last night.

    Grand Valley State struggled from the field in the first half, shooting 33-percent, as Mercyhurst jumped out to a 41-27 lead at halftime.

    Jason Bauer scored 18 points to lead Grand Valley State (3-4, 0-2).

  • Gannon 73, Ferris State 62 — Geoff Hustad scored a game-high 26 points and three others chipped in with 10 each as Gannon improved its record to 6-0 with a 73-62 win against visiting Ferris State last night.

    Adam Anderson score 18 points to lead Ferris State (2-3, 0-2).

  • TribLIVE commenting policy

    You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

    We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

    While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

    We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

    We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

    We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

    We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

    We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

    click me