The Cowgirls are back in action in the NCAA Tournament.

For the second time in Jacie Hoyt’s three seasons at OSU, the Cowgirls will be in the NCAA Tournament. In 2023, the Cowgirls suffered a heartbreaking loss to Miami in the first round and will soon look to get their first win in the big dance since 2021. 

OSU has established itself as one of the top teams in the Big 12 and the entire country this season. At 25-6, this team has a case to be the best in program history. While an NCAA Tournament run would solidify those beliefs, getting out of the first round will be no easy task.

Game Information: No. 7 Oklahoma State (25-6) vs. No. 10 South Dakota State (29-3)

Date/Time: Saturday, March 22 at 2:30 p.m. CT

Where: Gampel Pavillion – Storrs, CT

TV/Streaming: ESPN2

Spread: Oklahoma State -5.5

Total Points: Over/Under 139.5 points

Moneyline: Oklahoma State -260, South Dakota State +200

All betting odds via ESPN Bet

While OSU’s season has been defined by signature wins and bad losses, the Jackrabbits haven’t done much losing at all. Sitting at 29-3, the Summit League champions went unbeaten in conference play and are riding a 19-game winning streak.

With plenty of talent throughout the rotation, SDSU is a popular pick to pull the first-round upset. With Brooklyn Meyer’s dominant inside play producing 17.4 points per game and a variety of good shooters surrounding her, the Jackrabbits are a dangerous team.

However, OSU has plenty of talent on its side as well. Stailee Heard has shown her ability to step up in big moments, putting up 59 points and 25 rebounds across two Big 12 Tournament contests. Alongside Heard, the Cowgirls have Anna Gret Asi and Micah Gray as reliable scoring options. With Tenin Magassa holding down the middle, her play against the Jackrabbits’ inside attack will be critical. 

With so much firepower on both sides and an abundance of team success, this would have been a highly touted matchup, even in the regular season. Now, as the stakes are at their highest, these talented teams will battle it out in what should be one of the best games of the opening weekend.

Game odds refresh periodically and are subject to change. If you or someone you know has a gambling problem and wants help, call 1-800-GAMBLER.

Want to join the discussion? Like Oklahoma State Cowboys on SI on Facebook and follow us on Twitter to stay up to date on all the latest Cowboys news. You can also meet the team behind the coverage.

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (Dakota News Now) – South Dakota’s legislature passed several election-related bills this last session, one state political organization however is looking to stop a particular bill in its tracks.

On Friday, the Voter Defense Association of South Dakota laid out a list of concerns regarding House Bill 1169 but the biggest issue of all for the organization is that they said the bill will take away the rule of the people.

Matthew Schweich the president of the Voter Defense Association of South Dakota cited several problems with the bill including how difficult it would be to try and track down enough people from every district.

“This bill would require circulators to carry petitions for each of South Dakota’s 35 districts. It’s already hard enough to get people to sign, imagine having to carry clipboards to accommodate every voter you might encounter,” Schweich said.

In addition, Schweich said by making the collection process so strenuous, the people of South Dakota will only have a harder time getting their voices heard.

“Just one state senate district if they don’t like the initiative, could choose not to sign it and block it even if the entirety of South Dakota other than that senate district wanted an opportunity to vote on that constitutional amendment, just one senate district could block it and we don’t think that’s fair,” Schweich said.

The legislature has already passed House Joint Resolution 5003 which will let voters decide whether a constitutional amendment should require a 60% vote to pass.

Former state Senator Reynold Nesiba says lawmakers should propose a different question to the voters.

“If they want to ban it, then they should put it on the ballot, let the people vote on it entirely but instead they do this underhanded approach making it impossible for anybody to set up 35 drives,” Nesiba said.

Governor Rhoden has until March 31 to either sign or veto the bill.

Schweich told those in attendance that if Governor Rhoden does indeed sign the bill into law, he and his team are ready to put in the effort and get the bill referred to the ballot in 2026.

Copyright 2025 Dakota News Now. All rights reserved.

Gov. Larry Rhoden’s office announced Friday morning that Rhoden signed House Bill 1259 into law on Thursday, which restricts trans people from using bathrooms that match their gender identity in public schools and state-owned buildings.

He also signed House Bill 1239, to make public schools and public libraries create book appeal policies, and House Bill 1174, to give fathers more rights over single womens’ fetuses or newborns.

Rhoden said in a press release that the bills he signed “protect South Dakota values.”

“South Dakota is a place where commonsense values remain common, and these bills reinforce that fact,” Rhoden said in a press release. “These bills promote strong families, safety in education, and freedom from the ‘woke’ agenda like what has happened in too many other places.”

More: South Dakota Senate OKs bill segregating restrooms by sex assigned at birth

As HB 1259 becomes law July 1, it marks the first time in state history that any similar anti-trans bathroom bill has made it on the books. Similar legislation has come before the South Dakota Legislature at least five different times — once in 2016 and 2017, twice in 2018 and once in 2022 — but never became law until now.

The bill from 2016, House Bill 1008, was vetoed by former Gov. Dennis Daugaard after he met with several trans individuals from all different walks of life who encouraged him to change his mind and veto it.

More: A decade of hate: How trans activists pressured Gov. Dennis Daugaard to veto HB 1008 in 2016

There was also increasing pressure from international attention on the bill, outspoken messages from trans celebrities, contentious protests at legislative coffees, a looming tourism boycott of the entire state, and binders full of signatures asking Daugaard to veto the bill.

South Dakota groups plan protests in response

The Transformation Project and its Advocacy Network, along with the ACLU of South Dakota, Sioux Falls Pride and Trans Action SD, plan to protest HB 1259 at 11 a.m. Sunday at Van Eps Park in Sioux Falls.

A similar protest was held Feb. 22 outside of a legislative coffee meeting at Southeast Technical College where local residents could ask legislators questions about bills they were hearing in Pierre. More than two dozen people rallied there to call out the bill’s segregation of restrooms by sex assigned at birth.

Jack Fonder, a community health worker with the Transformation Project, said he and others at the Project are “deeply saddened and profoundly concerned” by Rhoden’s decision to sign HB 1259 as it restricts restroom access for transgender and gender-diverse individuals, especially “our most vulnerable community members — trans youth.”

“Legislation like HB 1259 does not make South Dakota safer; instead, it further isolates and marginalizes transgender individuals, sending a message that they are unwelcome in public spaces,” Fonder said. “Trans and gender-diverse youth already face disproportionately high rates of bullying, mental health struggles, and discrimination. This law will only intensify those challenges, making it harder for them to navigate everyday life with dignity and safety.”

Fonder called on the community and allies to stand with the Project in supporting transgender South Dakotans.

“To our transgender youth: You are seen, you are valued, and you are not alone,” he added. “We will continue fighting for your right to exist safely and authentically in every space.”

HB 1259 was also opposed by South Dakota Youth Activism, the South Dakota Bureau of Human Resources and Administration, South Dakotans for Equity, the South Dakota Municipal League, and other South Dakota residents who’ve called it anti-trans and said it invites discrimination and litigation to the state.