For the three stooges,

Uconn didnt simply make shots in the 2nd half to win. They dominated the offensive boards to yield more shots. Run the clock down, miss, rebound, then gain a fresh shot clock (35s) to Memphis one and done shot attempts. This is how the game got away.

Napier was 1 for 8 from 3 and 5 for 13 total therefore the brilliant idea that they simply made shots is assanine. They took better shots, drove the lane and got layup after layup then hit a few outside. Did Memphis penetrate? No.

Thanx for the laughs though, stooges. Later

UConn certainly used the long possessions to their benefit but these long possessions put the fans to sleep. In addition to hopefully shortening the 35 second clock to 30, the rule that resets the shot clock to 35 on any defensive foul should soon be going the way of the dinosaur. The NBA resets shot clocks to 14 on any defensive foul under that time. The NCAA has been debating a 30 second shot clock and 15-18 (still debating) shot clock reset on fouls. Hopefully action will be taken this Summer during their rules committee meetings.
It was just so frustrating, and boring, to watch UConn use 25 seconds of shot clock dribbling around, then the crowd exhorted the Tigers for the last 10 seconds knowing a shot was coming, and one of our guards gets antsy and fouls 30 feet from the basket. New 35 second shot clock for UConn. Yawn. If we could have just gotten 6-8 ahead UConn couldn't have played that game.

Indeed . This is why the commentators mentioned shortening the shot clock to 24 like the nba.

The OP however wanted to try and choose tidbits of the time to say uconn simply made shots to fit his agenda whereas it was easy to prove him wrong.

Uconn missed shots to begin the 2nd half just like memphis however he didnt want to bring that up because it then points to being outrebounded (which happens when you have guards matched against bigger players) and allowing multiple 2nd chance points. Uconn didnt shoot 70% for the game but they didnt have to because they could simply rebound and score a layup.

6'6" Krohma was 5/5 for the game (no D by CC whatsoever) and Daniels scored 23pnts on 9/15 shots. Uconn used their bigs much more than Memphis. Their center was 3/4. Those are some high %s from their bigs. THAT is where the game was won...sticking to their gameplan of scoring inside out and allowing Memphis to jack from outside in the 2nd half in desparation.

(01-17-2014 04:41 PM)UofMark Wrote:  UConn certainly used the long possessions to their benefit but these long possessions put the fans to sleep. In addition to hopefully shortening the 35 second clock to 30, the rule that resets the shot clock to 35 on any defensive foul should soon be going the way of the dinosaur. The NBA resets shot clocks to 14 on any defensive foul under that time. The NCAA has been debating a 30 second shot clock and 15-18 (still debating) shot clock reset on fouls. Hopefully action will be taken this Summer during their rules committee meetings.
It was just so frustrating, and boring, to watch UConn use 25 seconds of shot clock dribbling around, then the crowd exhorted the Tigers for the last 10 seconds knowing a shot was coming, and one of our guards gets antsy and fouls 30 feet from the basket. New 35 second shot clock for UConn. Yawn. If we could have just gotten 6-8 ahead UConn couldn't have played that game.

This answers why we stopped zoning even though it was working. The zone led to more offensive rebounds

(01-17-2014 06:49 PM)tigers0830 Wrote:  This answers why we stopped zoning even though it was working. The zone led to more offensive rebounds

Bollocks. Desire and drive led to more offensive rebounds for UCONN.

(01-17-2014 04:35 PM)CUSA_NEWS Wrote:  For the three stooges,

Uconn didnt simply make shots in the 2nd half to win. They dominated the offensive boards to yield more shots. Run the clock down, miss, rebound, then gain a fresh shot clock (35s) to Memphis one and done shot attempts. This is how the game got away.

Napier was 1 for 8 from 3 and 5 for 13 total therefore the brilliant idea that they simply made shots is assanine. They took better shots, drove the lane and got layup after layup then hit a few outside. Did Memphis penetrate? No.

Thanx for the laughs though, stooges. Later

To be fair, your spelling of "assinine" is asinine.

(01-17-2014 06:49 PM)tigers0830 Wrote:  This answers why we stopped zoning even though it was working. The zone led to more offensive rebounds

Who cares when you outscored them everytime you were in the zone?

"Hey, we're not rebounding good in the zone. Let's go back to doing what we were doing when we got down by 8 points. I don't care if the zone got us back on top."

:/

Cincy beat us much like they beat Pit with a deliberate game that got them good shots and FTs while limiting Pit possessions, especially the last 10 mins of the game. Our UConn game went much the same way. Unfortunately our answer to our 3pt shot success in the 1st half was to shoot more 3pt shots that weren't successful in the 2nd half like the 1st half. We quit feeding the ball inside where we had also had some success or made careless attempts that resulted in TOs. We are not dedicated to an inside out game & it hurts against a grind it out or deliberate opponent (esp when we aren't dominate rebounding). In our conference tourney & the NCAA tourney beyond the 1st round, we will see a steady diet of grind it out or deliberate opponents who will try to equalize physical skills or protect weaknesses with deliberate play (shorten the game, limit possessions). Good defense, rebounding and an inside game wins tough games. I'm not sure we are prepared for that or have that mindset.

(01-19-2014 10:10 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  Cincy beat us much like they beat Pit with a deliberate game that got them good shots and FTs while limiting Pit possessions, especially the last 10 mins of the game. Our UConn game went much the same way. Unfortunately our answer to our 3pt shot success in the 1st half was to shoot more 3pt shots that weren't successful in the 2nd half like the 1st half. We quit feeding the ball inside where we had also had some success or made careless attempts that resulted in TOs. We are not dedicated to an inside out game & it hurts against a grind it out or deliberate opponent (esp when we aren't dominate rebounding). In our conference tourney & the NCAA tourney beyond the 1st round, we will see a steady diet of grind it out or deliberate opponents who will try to equalize physical skills or protect weaknesses with deliberate play (shorten the game, limit possessions). Good defense, rebounding and an inside game wins tough games. I'm not sure we are prepared for that or have that mindset.

You're right; Crawford and Dixon should NEVER have shot those WIDE OPEN 3's when it was 66-63 UConn.

Quote:Unfortunately our answer to our 3pt shot success in the 1st half was to shoot more 3pt shots that weren't successful in the 2nd half like the 1st half.

Dixon shot and missed a 3 pointer with 9:56 left. Crawford and Dixon missed consecutive 3 pointers on the same possession with 4:15 left. Joe Jackson missed a 3 pointer with 35 seconds left. That's it for the last 10 minutes of the game. We are ranked 301st out of 345 teams in 3 point field goal attempts in the country. Hardly a case of jacking up 3's without conscience.

People need to come up with something more creative; or only say crap like this to the stupid people they hang out with, who aren't going to check simple facts.