Bear Down Wildcats

Was the first time I had flashbacks of last years team offensively post-Ashley. I'm glad this was the first and I hope it is the last

Burn the jerseys, burn the film

Total anomaly (I hope)

Bench the highest scoring player the second half!

The whole team minus york and ristic and TJ in the closing minutes sucked absolute balls. Pitts played a solid game even if it wasnt nice on paper.

Take the win and move on.

Oh and I'm glad we got this out of the way today and not next saturday

Just chalk it up as a stinker and move on. Wouldn't worry too much about it

Play like that against Utah and they beat us by 25

We wont play like that against utah

Main Event wrote:Just chalk it up as a stinker and move on. Wouldn't worry too much about it

Exactly. Frankly, I'm not even surprised the way that fucking game went. It's the usual against those bums.


Utah better be ready.

Defense was fine. Rebounding was outstanding.

Starters' offense sucked, but that's how you win a game like that.

Weird game. We get outscored 22-0 over the first 6 minutes of both halves and win by 10. That means over that 28 minute period we outscored them by 32

Makes sense. Shoulda been a 30 point win

UAEebs86 wrote:Defense was fine. Rebounding was outstanding.

Starters' offense sucked, but that's how you win a game like that.

That is Sean Miller in a nutshell. Expect defense is usually excellent.

Katzenfreund wrote:This performance reminded me of last year's game at Pauley and Miller's dumb decision to abandon the strategy that had gotten us a 13-point lead with 5:15 minutes to go. Suddenly we stopped our offense and turned the ball over in our attempts to run out the shot clock. UCLA outscored us 16-2 in the following 3:31 minutes and took the lead with 1:44 remaining.

Tonight, Miller pulled the dominant player, that gave us a comfortable lead, and sat him down for almost the entire second half in favor of Stone Hands. Unreal and stupid beyond belief. Tarczewski must have pictures on him.

Chuckled at the capitalization of that.

Miller is one loyal, defense loving guy.

NETSFAN4HASSAN wrote:

Katzenfreund wrote:This performance reminded me of last year's game at Pauley and Miller's dumb decision to abandon the strategy that had gotten us a 13-point lead with 5:15 minutes to go. Suddenly we stopped our offense and turned the ball over in our attempts to run out the shot clock. UCLA outscored us 16-2 in the following 3:31 minutes and took the lead with 1:44 remaining.

Tonight, Miller pulled the dominant player, that gave us a comfortable lead, and sat him down for almost the entire second half in favor of Stone Hands. Unreal and stupid beyond belief. Tarczewski must have pictures on him.

Chuckled at the capitalization of that.

Miller is one loyal, defense loving guy.

Yep.

And that is totally fine but as I have said before, it truly hampers any chance to win a national championship let alone make the Final Four. Coaching a dominant defense and a good to average offense will year and in and year out dominate a sub-par Pac-12 and almost always get a team to at least the Sweet Sixteen. Will it get you much further when you really have to play the best teams in the country? Probably not.

Ashley and RHJ...wtf? Did either of these guys look like future pros tonight? Not saying they can't bounce back and return to form, but under the powerful gaze and glow of a national audience, these two were terrible.

Beachcat97 wrote:Ashley and RHJ...wtf? Did either of these guys look like future pros tonight? Not saying they can't bounce back and return to form, but under the powerful gaze and glow of a national audience, these two were terrible.

Don't forget Stanley Johnson. Missed his first 7(?) shots, pulled for poor defense, and had untimely turnovers.

Merkin wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:Ashley and RHJ...wtf? Did either of these guys look like future pros tonight? Not saying they can't bounce back and return to form, but under the powerful gaze and glow of a national audience, these two were terrible.

Don't forget Stanley Johnson. Missed his first 7(?) shots, pulled for poor defense, and had untimely turnovers.

SJ was awful. That's why Miller benched him multiple times. That was the worst this team has looked on offense this year. It's actually very fortunate that we survived such a godawful game from three of our key players (SJ, BA, RHJ), and I'd include TJ too but he hit a huge shot in the waning moments and also hit his FTs. I'm not sure we can survive a game like that in March.

Beachcat97 wrote:

Merkin wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:Ashley and RHJ...wtf? Did either of these guys look like future pros tonight? Not saying they can't bounce back and return to form, but under the powerful gaze and glow of a national audience, these two were terrible.

Don't forget Stanley Johnson. Missed his first 7(?) shots, pulled for poor defense, and had untimely turnovers.

SJ was awful. That's why Miller benched him multiple times. That was the worst this team has looked on offense this year. It's actually very fortunate that we survived such a godawful game from three of our key players (SJ, BA, RHJ), and I'd include TJ too but he hit a huge shot in the waning moments and also hit his FTs. I'm not sure we can survive a game like that in March.

You keep outdoing yourself.

NETSFAN4HASSAN wrote:

Katzenfreund wrote:This performance reminded me of last year's game at Pauley and Miller's dumb decision to abandon the strategy that had gotten us a 13-point lead with 5:15 minutes to go. Suddenly we stopped our offense and turned the ball over in our attempts to run out the shot clock. UCLA outscored us 16-2 in the following 3:31 minutes and took the lead with 1:44 remaining.

Tonight, Miller pulled the dominant player, that gave us a comfortable lead, and sat him down for almost the entire second half in favor of Stone Hands. Unreal and stupid beyond belief. Tarczewski must have pictures on him.

Chuckled at the capitalization of that.

Miller is one loyal, defense loving guy.

For reals. My questions is. Who/what player carries us ultimately to that Final Four?

CBCat wrote:

NETSFAN4HASSAN wrote:

Katzenfreund wrote:This performance reminded me of last year's game at Pauley and Miller's dumb decision to abandon the strategy that had gotten us a 13-point lead with 5:15 minutes to go. Suddenly we stopped our offense and turned the ball over in our attempts to run out the shot clock. UCLA outscored us 16-2 in the following 3:31 minutes and took the lead with 1:44 remaining.

Tonight, Miller pulled the dominant player, that gave us a comfortable lead, and sat him down for almost the entire second half in favor of Stone Hands. Unreal and stupid beyond belief. Tarczewski must have pictures on him.

Chuckled at the capitalization of that.

Miller is one loyal, defense loving guy.

For reals. My questions is. Who/what player carries us ultimately to that Final Four?

TJ

CBCat wrote:

NETSFAN4HASSAN wrote:

Katzenfreund wrote:This performance reminded me of last year's game at Pauley and Miller's dumb decision to abandon the strategy that had gotten us a 13-point lead with 5:15 minutes to go. Suddenly we stopped our offense and turned the ball over in our attempts to run out the shot clock. UCLA outscored us 16-2 in the following 3:31 minutes and took the lead with 1:44 remaining.

Tonight, Miller pulled the dominant player, that gave us a comfortable lead, and sat him down for almost the entire second half in favor of Stone Hands. Unreal and stupid beyond belief. Tarczewski must have pictures on him.

Chuckled at the capitalization of that.

Miller is one loyal, defense loving guy.

For reals. My questions is. Who/what player carries us ultimately to that Final Four?

I know it isn't Dusan Ristic

Olsondogg wrote:

CBCat wrote:

NETSFAN4HASSAN wrote:

Katzenfreund wrote:This performance reminded me of last year's game at Pauley and Miller's dumb decision to abandon the strategy that had gotten us a 13-point lead with 5:15 minutes to go. Suddenly we stopped our offense and turned the ball over in our attempts to run out the shot clock. UCLA outscored us 16-2 in the following 3:31 minutes and took the lead with 1:44 remaining.

Tonight, Miller pulled the dominant player, that gave us a comfortable lead, and sat him down for almost the entire second half in favor of Stone Hands. Unreal and stupid beyond belief. Tarczewski must have pictures on him.

Chuckled at the capitalization of that.

Miller is one loyal, defense loving guy.

For reals. My questions is. Who/what player carries us ultimately to that Final Four?

I know it isn't Dusan Ristic

Obviously, he's on the bench. Duh.

CBCat wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:

CBCat wrote:

NETSFAN4HASSAN wrote:

Katzenfreund wrote:This performance reminded me of last year's game at Pauley and Miller's dumb decision to abandon the strategy that had gotten us a 13-point lead with 5:15 minutes to go. Suddenly we stopped our offense and turned the ball over in our attempts to run out the shot clock. UCLA outscored us 16-2 in the following 3:31 minutes and took the lead with 1:44 remaining.

Tonight, Miller pulled the dominant player, that gave us a comfortable lead, and sat him down for almost the entire second half in favor of Stone Hands. Unreal and stupid beyond belief. Tarczewski must have pictures on him.

Chuckled at the capitalization of that.

Miller is one loyal, defense loving guy.

For reals. My questions is. Who/what player carries us ultimately to that Final Four?

I know it isn't Dusan Ristic

Obviously, he's on the bench. Duh.

Yes, benches are one of the most overrated aspects of the college game. There aren't many nights like tonight...both for Dusan and the starters.

To answer your question, it will most likely be a combination of several starters that do it. Even "Stone Hands".

Olsondogg wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:

Merkin wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:Ashley and RHJ...wtf? Did either of these guys look like future pros tonight? Not saying they can't bounce back and return to form, but under the powerful gaze and glow of a national audience, these two were terrible.

Don't forget Stanley Johnson. Missed his first 7(?) shots, pulled for poor defense, and had untimely turnovers.

SJ was awful. That's why Miller benched him multiple times. That was the worst this team has looked on offense this year. It's actually very fortunate that we survived such a godawful game from three of our key players (SJ, BA, RHJ), and I'd include TJ too but he hit a huge shot in the waning moments and also hit his FTs. I'm not sure we can survive a game like that in March.

You keep outdoing yourself.

lol

You can't be serious?

What did he just say that was in anyway incorrect?

RockyRaccoon wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:

Merkin wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:Ashley and RHJ...wtf? Did either of these guys look like future pros tonight? Not saying they can't bounce back and return to form, but under the powerful gaze and glow of a national audience, these two were terrible.

Don't forget Stanley Johnson. Missed his first 7(?) shots, pulled for poor defense, and had untimely turnovers.

SJ was awful. That's why Miller benched him multiple times. That was the worst this team has looked on offense this year. It's actually very fortunate that we survived such a godawful game from three of our key players (SJ, BA, RHJ), and I'd include TJ too but he hit a huge shot in the waning moments and also hit his FTs. I'm not sure we can survive a game like that in March.

You keep outdoing yourself.

lol

You can't be serious?

What did he just say that was in anyway incorrect?

Is there a way to auto-response a poster? Like every time there's a post, this kicks out:

From a rival's board, couldn't say it better: "You guys are killing Miller, but he's been in the top 10 40 straight weeks, 36 straight home wins, he kicks UCLA's ass in recruiting, has been to the sweet 16 and elite 8 twice (knocking on the door), is winning the PAC 12 every year now."

Is there a way to auto-response a poster? Like every time there's a post, this kicks out:

From a rival's board, couldn't say it better: "You guys are killing Miller, but he's been in the top 10 40 straight weeks, 36 straight home wins, he kicks UCLA's ass in recruiting, has been to the sweet 16 and elite 8 twice (knocking on the door), is winning the PAC 12 every year now."

I guess I would auto-respond with my OWN thoughts,

"And that is totally fine but as I have said before, it truly hampers any chance to win a national championship let alone make the Final Four. Coaching a dominant defense and a good to average offense will year and in and year out dominate a sub-par Pac-12 and almost always get a team to at least the Sweet Sixteen. Will it get you much further when you really have to play the best teams in the country? Probably not."

Anyway that doesn't explain Olsondogg's odd response to Beachcat's correct analysis of tonight's game.

Just need WildcatPaulG to join in and we have the Three Musketeers!

I'm curious, when was the last time Arizona lost a game to an opponent that scored 47 points? I'm not sure we survive another game against a team that can score at that caliber.

Olsondogg wrote:I'm curious, when was the last time Arizona lost a game to an opponent that scored 47 points? I'm not sure we survive another game against a team that can score at that caliber.

Are you praising the Wildcats' defense?

Anyway, what was incorrect about Beachcat's post?

RockyRaccoon wrote:

Is there a way to auto-response a poster? Like every time there's a post, this kicks out:

From a rival's board, couldn't say it better: "You guys are killing Miller, but he's been in the top 10 40 straight weeks, 36 straight home wins, he kicks UCLA's ass in recruiting, has been to the sweet 16 and elite 8 twice (knocking on the door), is winning the PAC 12 every year now."

I guess I would auto-respond with my OWN thoughts,

"And that is totally fine but as I have said before, it truly hampers any chance to win a national championship let alone make the Final Four. Coaching a dominant defense and a good to average offense will year and in and year out dominate a sub-par Pac-12 and almost always get a team to at least the Sweet Sixteen. Will it get you much further when you really have to play the best teams in the country? Probably not."

Anyway that doesn't explain Olsondogg's odd response to Beachcat's correct analysis of tonight's game.

If Horne's shot was just a little bit in the other direction, Final Four, your post doesn't happen. If Nick Johnson's shot falls last year, Final Four, your post doesn't happen. I'm pretty sure those were great chances at a Final Four.

Bosy Billups wrote:

RockyRaccoon wrote:

Is there a way to auto-response a poster? Like every time there's a post, this kicks out:

From a rival's board, couldn't say it better: "You guys are killing Miller, but he's been in the top 10 40 straight weeks, 36 straight home wins, he kicks UCLA's ass in recruiting, has been to the sweet 16 and elite 8 twice (knocking on the door), is winning the PAC 12 every year now."

I guess I would auto-respond with my OWN thoughts,

"And that is totally fine but as I have said before, it truly hampers any chance to win a national championship let alone make the Final Four. Coaching a dominant defense and a good to average offense will year and in and year out dominate a sub-par Pac-12 and almost always get a team to at least the Sweet Sixteen. Will it get you much further when you really have to play the best teams in the country? Probably not."

Anyway that doesn't explain Olsondogg's odd response to Beachcat's correct analysis of tonight's game.

If Horne's shot was just a little bit in the other direction, Final Four, your post doesn't happen. If Nick Johnson's shot falls last year, Final Four, your post doesn't happen. I'm pretty sure those were great chances at a Final Four.

That's true that they were inches away.

I don't in anyway believe Miller will be shutout of a Final Four. He will likely make several in his career but still the gap between a National Championship and a Final Four berth is enormous. Unless something changes with the way he approaches offense, I don't imagine that happening.

Offense is always the eye catcher for fans. But Zeus played a very good 2nd half, and Ristic is a dumpster fire on defense. Yeah, he had a great scoring first half, including the shot he tossed up without glass that fell through even though his control on the shot was about zero. But Zeus held the defensive line, rebounded, held ground to allow others to rebound (rebounding won us this game...UCLA is pretty fucking good on the offensive glass and got jack crap against us), and, quite frankly, made sure Ristic didn't have a place to play in the 2nd half. Zeus also had a rather athletic tip in at a crucial point in the 2nd half.

So the coach went with the sure thing over the offensive option with the horrible defense. And I am really glad he did. UCLA, after the opening run, simply couldn't sustain. Because they couldn't score. Because they couldn't get an open look, find anyone (single digit assists), OR, most importantly, get the 2nd chance points on the offensive glass that they generally count on. And many of those dominant factors that decided this game are simply more in favor of Zeus playing than a freshman, albeit a fresh with excellent footwork, who is a work in progress (to be nice) on the defensive/d rebounding side of the court.

We didn't only score 57 because Dusan Ristic didn't play in the 2nd half, for chrissake. Our usual producers caused that deficiency, and I highly doubt Dusan Ristic would have continued to score on every shot in the 2nd half. I am pretty sure he would have given up more points and rebounds than Zeus, and I can only base that on having seen games, not practices. So I am going to defer to the coach on this one, the guy with two elite 8s and a sweet 16 in his first 5 years while piloting the dominant program in the west, while wholeheartedly agreeing with his decision based on what has been available to observe, both in this game and all season.

EVCat wrote:Offense is always the eye catcher for fans. But Zeus played a very good 2nd half, and Ristic is a dumpster fire on defense. Yeah, he had a great scoring first half, including the shot he tossed up without glass that fell through even though his control on the shot was about zero. But Zeus held the defensive line, rebounded, held ground to allow others to rebound (rebounding won us this game...UCLA is pretty fucking good on the offensive glass and got jack crap against us), and, quite frankly, made sure Ristic didn't have a place to play in the 2nd half. Zeus also had a rather athletic tip in at a crucial point in the 2nd half.

So the coach went with the sure thing over the offensive option with the horrible defense. And I am really glad he did. UCLA, after the opening run, simply couldn't sustain. Because they couldn't score. Because they couldn't get an open look, find anyone (single digit assists), OR, most importantly, get the 2nd chance points on the offensive glass that they generally count on. And many of those dominant factors that decided this game are simply more in favor of Zeus playing than a freshman, albeit a fresh with excellent footwork, who is a work in progress (to be nice) on the defensive/d rebounding side of the court.

We didn't only score 57 because Dusan Ristic didn't play in the 2nd half, for chrissake. Our usual producers caused that deficiency, and I highly doubt Dusan Ristic would have continued to score on every shot in the 2nd half. I am pretty sure he would have given up more points and rebounds than Zeus, and I can only base that on having seen games, not practices. So I am going to defer to the coach on this one, the guy with two elite 8s and a sweet 16 in his first 5 years while piloting the dominant program in the west, while wholeheartedly agreeing with his decision based on what has been available to observe, both in this game and all season.

If I'm not mistaken, Ristic played almost the entire last 10 minutes of the first half. UCLA scored 8 points in that span and had no offensive rebounds.

When UCLA was going on their various runs tonight, it was because the Wildcats were doing nothing on offense. It is not like these were 15-5 runs or 10-5 runs, these were 10-0, 12-0 runs. The Wildcats, like most teams in basketball, are at their best defensively when they score and can set better. Ristic provided that at the end of the first half and was subsequently sent to the bench for his efforts.

Beachcat97 wrote:

Merkin wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:Ashley and RHJ...wtf? Did either of these guys look like future pros tonight? Not saying they can't bounce back and return to form, but under the powerful gaze and glow of a national audience, these two were terrible.

Don't forget Stanley Johnson. Missed his first 7(?) shots, pulled for poor defense, and had untimely turnovers.

SJ was awful. That's why Miller benched him multiple times. That was the worst this team has looked on offense this year. It's actually very fortunate that we survived such a godawful game from three of our key players (SJ, BA, RHJ), and I'd include TJ too but he hit a huge shot in the waning moments and also hit his FTs. I'm not sure we can survive a game like that in March.

SJ had a lot of big rebounds. He also hit a very important layup as he drove through the entire defense in the second half which was the start of the final spurt which ended the game. Arizona basically outscored UCLA 20 to 4 or so at the end of the game. Ashley, H-J and SJ couldn't hit anything including little layups. This was just a bad night for them. I don't think it has anything to do with Miller. It was just a weird night. Thank goodness it happened at home and came on a night where the guys hung in there and played defense and won by 10 which is amazing given how bad they shot.

RockyRaccoon wrote:

Bosy Billups wrote:

RockyRaccoon wrote:

Is there a way to auto-response a poster? Like every time there's a post, this kicks out:

From a rival's board, couldn't say it better: "You guys are killing Miller, but he's been in the top 10 40 straight weeks, 36 straight home wins, he kicks UCLA's ass in recruiting, has been to the sweet 16 and elite 8 twice (knocking on the door), is winning the PAC 12 every year now."

I guess I would auto-respond with my OWN thoughts,

"And that is totally fine but as I have said before, it truly hampers any chance to win a national championship let alone make the Final Four. Coaching a dominant defense and a good to average offense will year and in and year out dominate a sub-par Pac-12 and almost always get a team to at least the Sweet Sixteen. Will it get you much further when you really have to play the best teams in the country? Probably not."

Anyway that doesn't explain Olsondogg's odd response to Beachcat's correct analysis of tonight's game.

If Horne's shot was just a little bit in the other direction, Final Four, your post doesn't happen. If Nick Johnson's shot falls last year, Final Four, your post doesn't happen. I'm pretty sure those were great chances at a Final Four.

That's true that they were inches away.

I don't in anyway believe Miller will be shutout of a Final Four. He will likely make several in his career but still the gap between a National Championship and a Final Four berth is enormous. Unless something changes with the way he approaches offense, I don't imagine that happening.

So Kevin Ollie is a better coach than Miller? Come on bro, you know in the tourney, when you get to the Sweet 16 and beyond, it's pretty much a matchup game, and getting hot at the right time. Shit, Kentucky dropped out of the top 25 last year for a period of time...they sucked for a stretch! Like, were terrible, turible, turdible, but then at tourney time, they got hot.

As all the great coaches who actually do this for a living say, winning a NC or even getting to a Final Four does not define if a coach is great or not, because of the aforementioned reasons.

HOWEVER, like Miller says, if you're competing year in and year out, like Lute did, the chances and odds are that you will breakthrough. That consistency in a program, winning conference championships, recruiting at a high clip, getting into the NCAA tournament year in and year out, competing in it and making it past the first weekend multiple years, that's what defines a great coach.

If Miller gets to "Several Final Fours" in his career, that is E L I T E.

And in those "Several Final Fours", the odds are he would win at least one of those games.

/Thread

Bosy Billups wrote:

RockyRaccoon wrote:

Bosy Billups wrote:

RockyRaccoon wrote:

Is there a way to auto-response a poster? Like every time there's a post, this kicks out:

From a rival's board, couldn't say it better: "You guys are killing Miller, but he's been in the top 10 40 straight weeks, 36 straight home wins, he kicks UCLA's ass in recruiting, has been to the sweet 16 and elite 8 twice (knocking on the door), is winning the PAC 12 every year now."

I guess I would auto-respond with my OWN thoughts,

"And that is totally fine but as I have said before, it truly hampers any chance to win a national championship let alone make the Final Four. Coaching a dominant defense and a good to average offense will year and in and year out dominate a sub-par Pac-12 and almost always get a team to at least the Sweet Sixteen. Will it get you much further when you really have to play the best teams in the country? Probably not."

Anyway that doesn't explain Olsondogg's odd response to Beachcat's correct analysis of tonight's game.

If Horne's shot was just a little bit in the other direction, Final Four, your post doesn't happen. If Nick Johnson's shot falls last year, Final Four, your post doesn't happen. I'm pretty sure those were great chances at a Final Four.

That's true that they were inches away.

I don't in anyway believe Miller will be shutout of a Final Four. He will likely make several in his career but still the gap between a National Championship and a Final Four berth is enormous. Unless something changes with the way he approaches offense, I don't imagine that happening.

So Kevin Ollie is a better coach than Miller? Come on bro, you know in the tourney, when you get to the Sweet 16 and beyond, it's pretty much a matchup game, and getting hot at the right time. Shit, Kentucky dropped out of the top 25 last year for a period of time...they sucked for a stretch! Like, were terrible, turible, turdible, but then at tourney time, they got hot.

As all the great coaches who actually do this for a living say, winning a NC or even getting to a Final Four does not define if a coach is great or not, because of the aforementioned reasons.

HOWEVER, like Miller says, if you're competing year in and year out, like Lute did, the chances and odds are that you will breakthrough. That consistency in a program, winning conference championships, recruiting at a high clip, getting into the NCAA tournament year in and year out, competing in it and making it past the first weekend multiple years, that's what defines a great coach.

If Miller gets to "Several Final Fours" in his career, that is E L I T E.

And in those "Several Final Fours", the odds are he would win at least one of those games.

/Thread

Hypothetically speaking, if Miller never wins a national championship but goes to 2-3 Final Fours and is consistently making it to at least the Sweet Sixteen and winning the Pac-12, would you still consider him a great coach?

I suppose I am in the minority when I say no because what is so important about getting a top recruiting class if you aren't winning a championship? How big of a deal is winning the Pac-12 when it is such a sub-par conference the last few years?

Also when you mention teams like last year's UCONN or Kentucky, that does happen but that is still the exception rather than the rule. The vast majority of champions and teams that have made the final four are still the top few seeds.

ASUHATER! wrote:Play like that against Utah and they beat us by 25

I predicted this post. Why is it that worry warts think their team is the only one with inconsistent performances? Posts like these imply that Utah's performance is set in stone. Which is weird when they sucked the first time we played them.

RockyRaccoon wrote:Hypothetically speaking, if Miller never wins a national championship but goes to 2-3 Final Fours and is consistently making it to at least the Sweet Sixteen and winning the Pac-12, would you still consider him a great coach?

I suppose I am in the minority when I say no because what is so important about getting a top recruiting class if you aren't winning a championship? How big of a deal is winning the Pac-12 when it is such a sub-par conference the last few years?

roy williams during his kansas years is your exemplar

Defense was very good. UCLA scored 47. Outside the two horrendous starts, they scored 23 points.

gumby wrote:Defense was very good. UCLA scored 47. Outside the two horrendous starts, they scored 23 points.

Cats held the best offensive rebounding team to a single offensive rebound. Outrebounded UCLA by 20. A lot of guys quit playing when their offense isn't working. The Cats didn't Although it seemed worse, the Cats didn't turn over the ball much. If you think about it, Arizona won because they had a boatload more possessions than UCLA did.

if Utah plays like that again ... Cats by 25!

Louisville's superior offensive system scored 55 against Miami at home last night.

Pitino doesn't get good players, and needs an OC.

UAEebs86 wrote:Louisville's superior offensive system scored 55 against Miami at home last night.

His resume though.

gumby wrote:if Utah plays like that again ... Cats by 25!

You are missing the point.... Haven't you been reading the boards? We will play like we did last night on the road at Utah, so we won't even SCORE 25 points.

If it is any consolation, post game call in show makes these boards look rational.

One thing I learned last night? After Dusan speaks with his family post-UCLA game, he will probably be wanting to transfer due to his lack of PT in the 2nd half; he reinforced his point by stating Dusan "played his ass off" a dozen times during the call. Caller suggested Kaleb's problem is " between the ears".

A few callers later, a lady calls in to "dispute" the guy above.'s 'between the ears' comment. Confirms that Kaleb has "NO problem between the ears".. Because he was accepted at Eller which (according to her) is as good if not better than Wharton.

You couldn't make this stuff up.

Harvey Specter wrote:

gumby wrote:if Utah plays like that again ... Cats by 25!

You are missing the point.... Haven't you need reading the boards? We will play like we did last night on the road at Utah, so we won't even SCORE 25 points.

If it is any consolation, post game call in show makes these broads look rational.

This probably wasn't intentional-either way it makes me laugh.

Hmm ... I see the point. If we play like last night - - holding team to 25 below average - - and we lose by 25, that means we'll barely score more than 20.