JTS
All American
Posts: 2,812
Joined: Jan 2007
Reputation: 80
I Root For:
Location: |
RE: Pastner says that we will only have 2 plays
(07-31-2014 11:38 AM)TripleA Wrote: (07-31-2014 10:36 AM)SL030676 Wrote: (07-30-2014 04:49 PM)TripleA Wrote: (07-30-2014 04:24 PM)TiminMem23 Wrote: Who cares how many plays they run? How about not getting blown out 4-5 times like last season (@OK St, @Cincy, Home UCONN, Neutral Site Virginia). And when I say blown out, I mean absolutely hammered from start to finish.
Why are you revising history that we can still remember? We got hammered 6 times last year, but NEVER from start to finish.
1. Lost at OSU 101-80, but only lost the second half by 3 points.
2. Lost at home to Cincy, 69-53, but only trailed at the half, 27-26.
3. Lost at SMU 87-72, but we were tied at the half 29-29.
4. Lost at Cincy 97-84, but only trailed by 1 with 16 minutes left in the game.
5. Lost in the AAC tourney to UConn 72-53, but we were down 16, only 45 seconds into the second half, and lost by 19, so only lost from there by 3 points.
6. Lost to UVA in NCAA tourney 78-60, but only lost by 3 in the second half.
All other losses were 10 points or less.
So, not only are you wrong, but we never had ONE GAME last year where we were "absolutely hammered from start to finish." In every case, we got rolled in one half, and were essentially even in the other half.
My goodness you can put some spin on recent history. The OSU, @Cincy, UCONN Tourney, and UVA losses were beatings from start to finish. Claiming we only lost by single digits in the second half, after the games were already out of reach is not a valid argument. It totally takes out the fact that the other team knows they are up big, and lose some of their initial focus. In additon, player rotations on both ends change dramatically, especially in the last ten minutes when a team is up big. To put it in terms even you can understand, it would be like a Mich State fan arguing in 08 that despite being down thirty at the half, they weren't hammered because they "outscored us by 12 in the second half".
The OSU game we ran into Smart’s career night, the UCONN tourney loss we looked lost, and unmotivated, and the UVA game we were simply outclassed. As far as CINCY, the poster stated the @CINCY loss was a blowout, not the home loss. However, we could have played those guys 10 times last year, and would have lost all ten. They simply intimidated, and outmuscled us. In addition, if you remember, our defense was so poor, their offense (which was putrid) had career nights. You are correct about the @SMU game, but once they got rolling, we fell apart in the second half.
So, not only are YOU wrong, but we DID HAVE MULTIPLE GAMES last year where we were "absolutely hammered from start to finish." The fact of the matter is that there was no team in the top 25 last year that suffered as many bad losses (by points) as we did. However, you have to be honest with yourself, and take off the blue shades to see it.
BTW not to be totally negative, we had some great wins as well (@Louisville, home Louisville, GW, Gonzaga, OSU ext.)
Then we just disagree. Getting hammered from start to finish means just that. If you're tied at the half that is NOT getting hammered from start to finish. And I don't need to take off any blue shades., or do anything else you tell me I'm quite critical when I see something I think is valid to criticize. We did get stomped several times.
I'm simply taking issue with the characterization that it was from "beginning to end' in each game, which implies we were never competitive for a minute. That is not the case. We were tied with SMU at the half, and one down to Cincy.
I cannot believe anyone could even argue with that. Not that it really matters in the end. I'm just saying the characterization is inaccurate.
It's English and implication and facts I'm debating. It doesn't have a damn thing to do with basketball, but you obviously missed that.
Semantics
|
|
/
Pastner says that we will only have 2 plays
