2010 NCAA Tournament (and NIT) Thread

[Butter]

West Virginia starting to hit some shots, Morgan St. up 19-17 with 7:22 left in 1H.

[gstelmack]

From the web scoreboard I'm watching, looks like West Virginia woke up, now within 2.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

From the web scoreboard I'm watching, looks like West Virginia woke up, now within 2.

Kevin Jones is getting them going. He is 4-4 with 9 points.

[Arles]

Cornell is off to a nice start.

[jbergey22]

Gophers on a nice run. Xavier is having issues making shots inside.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

From the web scoreboard I'm watching, looks like West Virginia woke up, now within 2.

If WVU doesn't fall behind by 10 at some point in the 1st half I get worried.

[gstelmack]

West Virginia turning into a blowout finally.

Cornell is up 9 over Temple with 15 minutes to play.

Xavier is eeking out a 5 point lead over Minnesota with 11:21 to play.

[Scoobz0202]

Jordan Crawford ain't bad. Ain't bad at all.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Scoobz0202

Jordan Crawford ain't bad. Ain't bad at all.

Just ask LeBron

[Dr. Sak]

Looks like WVU could've had the chance to rest its starters for their next game.

[Thomkal]

I guess Cornell is for real. For all the hype on them coming into the tournament, I thought they might struggle.

[mauchow]

As a Badger fan I really hope this isn't the second coming of the Davidson game with Cornell..... I feel the Badgers were a better defensive team as Temple but still very similar. Cornell is giving me the willies. Lets take care of Wofford first though. Go Badgers!!!

[RedKingGold]

I had the wrong 12-5.

Damn you UTEP.

[jbergey22]

I had tickets to Milwaukee(5 hour drive) today in one of the boxes. I turned it down and my friends thing I am crazy.

I guess my point was I could drive 5 hours to watch two games and pretty much miss the rest of them or I could stay home and watch all of the games. Basically the same reason I dont like going to Viking afternoon games during the regular season. The advantage of being able to watch all of the games is more important than just seeing the 1 game.

Gophers lost so I am happy with my decision.

[Swaggs]

Glad to see WVU look pretty solid (after getting down by our customary first half 10 points).

I was hoping that Truck Bryant might be able to find his shot during garbage time, but no such luck. Looking forward to Clemson/Mizzou, but I think we'll probably get Pitt on both channels here in Morgantown.

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by mauboy1

As a Badger fan I really hope this isn't the second coming of the Davidson game with Cornell..... I feel the Badgers were a better defensive team as Temple but still very similar. Cornell is giving me the willies. Lets take care of Wofford first though. Go Badgers!!!

The Cornell win is probably good for Wisconsin. They haven't made any kind of a run in Bo Ryan's tenure without getting to play a few double digit seeds in a row, while they're 1-7 against teams seeded in the top half of the bracket while he's been there.

[SackAttack]

Dear Missouri: Stop giving Clemson wide-open looks at three.

Love and kisses,

Josh.

[Samdari]

Go Sienna!

[Lathum]

If I am a Mizzou fan I am worried. Clemson had turned the ball over 12 times and is still winning by 3

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Lathum

If I am a Mizzou fan I am worried. Clemson had turned the ball over 12 times and is still winning by 3

They had a stretch where they let Clemson do whatever they wanted from three, and coupled that with not hitting any of their own shots. It's the combination that's cause for concern. Clemson will run away with this game if they're allowed to shoot 3's all day and Missouri doesn't put points of their own on the board, turnovers be damned.

[Radii]

All Mizzou has to do is stay close and give Clemson and chance to be Clemson in the end.

[whomario]

does the HD on the online service work for you guys ? All i´m getting is a blank screen when i try to switch

[timmynausea]

An Oakland guy just took an elbow over the eye and got gashed Vitali Klitschko vs. Lennox Lewis style. It looks bad enough to stop the match and go to the score cards.

[muns]

Pitt looks like ass

[JohnnyBGood]

Man, that Chris Kramer from Purdue is a little pitbull.

[muns]

hell of a come back by Sienna

[Karlifornia]

How did that first free throw go down for Louis Jackson? I've Ubiles on my Top Gun team, so I'm hoping for a Siena miracle...looks bleak at this point, though.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by muns

hell of a come back by Sienna

hope they can finish it off

[Thomkal]

ya know CBS, you don't have to go to a commercial everytime there's a timeout, especially when you just came back two seconds ago from a commercial.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Wofford/Wisconsin down to the wire.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

ya know CBS, you don't have to go to a commercial everytime there's a timeout, especially when you just came back two seconds ago from a commercial.

sure they do

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[Karlifornia]

God, Clemson played retarded right to the very end. Frustrating team to watch.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

But Missouri is the better program, they should win with their talent

Good call. How do you think we will do against West Virginia? Do tell!

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Karlifornia

God, Clemson played retarded right to the very end. Frustrating team to watch.

At least with Clemson you know its coming. I am sorry to keep ragging on them, I got nothing against Clemson fans, but its as reliable as the sun coming up tomorrow.

[panerd]

Let's get it done OSU. Big 8 represent!

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

They had a stretch where they let Clemson do whatever they wanted from three, and coupled that with not hitting any of their own shots. It's the combination that's cause for concern. Clemson will run away with this game if they're allowed to shoot 3's all day and Missouri doesn't put points of their own on the board, turnovers be damned.

Interesting. Len Elmore was thinking the same thing that I was at that point which was the exact opposite of what you note. Clemson was very fortunate that they weren't down 8-10 points at half. Clemson was shooting a ridiculous percentage from long range at half and had far too many turnovers. You had to know that the worst 3 point shooting team in the ACC simply would not keep up that shooting, but the turnovers would keep coming. That's exactly what happened.

Really excited to see our leading scorer break out of his funk and our inside players dominate the matchup down low. That was supposed to be the strength of Clemson and Mizzou's big men shut them down on the defensive end and outran them on the break. Quite a welcome surprise.

Looking forward to WVU matchup. They're obviously the Big East champs and it'll be a great test for Mizzou.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Radii

At least with Clemson you know its coming. I am sorry to keep ragging on them, I got nothing against Clemson fans, but its as reliable as the sun coming up tomorrow.

I'm not sure it affected the end result, but there were 3 or 4 head-scratching moves in the last 5 minutes. Fouling when you didn't need to foul, not fouling when you should, fouling the best free throw shooter on the court after worse shooters had handled the ball during that possession, etc. Gus and Len seemed baffled as was everyone else.

[panerd]

Ramsey and Bowers looked great today. Bring on the Mountaineers!

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Pitt doing a nice job taking care of business. But where the hell are the fans? That place was empty for most of the game.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Interesting. Len Elmore was thinking the same thing that I was at that point which was the exact opposite of what you note. Clemson was very fortunate that they weren't down 8-10 points at half. Clemson was shooting a ridiculous percentage from long range at half and had far too many turnovers. You had to know that the worst 3 point shooting team in the ACC simply would not keep up that shooting, but the turnovers would keep coming. That's exactly what happened.

Really excited to see our leading scorer break out of his funk and our inside players dominate the matchup down low. That was supposed to be the strength of Clemson and Mizzou's big men shut them down on the defensive end and outran them on the break. Quite a welcome surprise.

Looking forward to WVU matchup. They're obviously the Big East champs and it'll be a great test for Mizzou.

Oh, brother. So what you're saying is that Clemson was lucky that Missouri was letting them do whatever they wanted beyond the arch?

That's, uh, a pretty weak argument, even by your standards.

Clemson wasn't going to shoot 75% on three's all day, but they didn't have to. They needed to either fix the turnovers or keep Missouri's shooting % down. They accomplished neither.

Missouri had to do exactly what I said - either start hitting their shots, or close down on Clemson's three-pointers. They went from 32% shooting halfway through the 1st to 53% by the end of the game. Between that and the turnovers, it was enough to advance, even with Clemson shooting 50% from distance (and 43% from inside the arch, which should have been even better reason to close down on Clemson outside once it became obvious we were giving them too much space).

[Lathum]

WTF, yesterday I got the mid day game and today I am not

[panerd]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

Oh, brother. So what you're saying is that Clemson was lucky that Missouri was letting them do whatever they wanted beyond the arch?

That's, uh, a pretty weak argument, even by your standards.

Clemson wasn't going to shoot 75% on three's all day, but they didn't have to. They needed to either fix the turnovers or keep Missouri's shooting % down. They accomplished neither.

Missouri had to do exactly what I said - either start hitting their shots, or close down on Clemson's three-pointers. They went from 32% shooting halfway through the 1st to 53% by the end of the game. Between that and the turnovers, it was enough to advance, even with Clemson shooting 50% from distance (and 43% from inside the arch, which should have been even better reason to close down on Clemson outside once it became obvious we were giving them too much space).

When Mizzou is playing their game the whole point of their 40 minutes of hell is to wear the opposing team down. That is exactly what happened. Around 7-8 mins left they ran out of gas. Haven't seen it from Mizzou in a few weeks but it does work when they are on.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by panerd

When Mizzou is playing their game the whole point of their 40 minutes of hell is to wear the opposing team down. That is exactly what happened. Around 7-8 mins left they ran out of gas. Haven't seen it from Mizzou in a few weeks but it does work when they are on.

Sure it is. But the point remains the same - what I said was that Missouri needed to either shut down the three or start hitting their own shots. Tell me what in "40 minutes of hell" contradicts what I said?

You cannot give up 50% behind the line, shoot 32% for the game yourself, and win. I don't care how well-conditioned you are, or how tenacious you are on defense. Unless you're generating two shots for every one you give up to make up for your poor shooting, and maybe not even then.

Missouri played a great game, and that system took 'em deep last year. Hopefully we can make another run this year.

But I repeat - I was not wrong. Missouri was never going to win that game if they both let Clemson have all day from three-point land *and* kept shooting like shit.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

Sure it is. But the point remains the same - what I said was that Missouri needed to either shut down the three or start hitting their own shots. Tell me what in "40 minutes of hell" contradicts what I said?

You cannot give up 50% behind the line, shoot 32% for the game yourself, and win. I don't care how well-conditioned you are, or how tenacious you are on defense. Unless you're generating two shots for every one you give up to make up for your poor shooting, and maybe not even then.

Missouri played a great game, and that system took 'em deep last year. Hopefully we can make another run this year.

But I repeat - I was not wrong. Missouri was never going to win that game if they both let Clemson have all day from three-point land *and* kept shooting like shit.

Maybe MJ4H or MBBF can speak better to the system than I can but I will give it a shot. Mizzou tries to create the turnover and wears the opposing team down defensively. This often leads to many turnovers and also leads to many opposing team wide open shots in the first half. Ignoring this year if you look at last year's team they were often trailing and giving up a lot of threes in the first half and then they just outrun and wear down their opponent in the second half.

This of course sometimes backfires. Nebraska couldn't miss in the big 12 tournament, Kansas and K-State are in a different class this season. But generally that is the gameplan. You are correct that we need to make baskets to get our game to work but the wide open threes are a trademark of Mizzou's first half defence. And let's be honest Clemon wasn't going to continue to shoot lights out from 3.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

Oh, brother. So what you're saying is that Clemson was lucky that Missouri was letting them do whatever they wanted beyond the arch?

That's, uh, a pretty weak argument, even by your standards.

Clemson wasn't going to shoot 75% on three's all day, but they didn't have to. They needed to either fix the turnovers or keep Missouri's shooting % down. They accomplished neither.

Missouri had to do exactly what I said - either start hitting their shots, or close down on Clemson's three-pointers. They went from 32% shooting halfway through the 1st to 53% by the end of the game. Between that and the turnovers, it was enough to advance, even with Clemson shooting 50% from distance (and 43% from inside the arch, which should have been even better reason to close down on Clemson outside once it became obvious we were giving them too much space).

No, that wasn't my argument. Mizzou was focusing on the interior knowing that Clemson is a poor three point shooting team. This is the NCAA tournament. You have to choose your poison. Mizzou was creating turnovers and shutting down their interior strength. You tip your hat to a team if they walk out and shoot 65-70% over the course of a game and beat you after being a poor long range team over the previous 31 games. But the odds were heavily in Mizzou's favor that wasn't going to happen.

Coach Anderson made the correct decision to let them shoot from outside and it paid off. They were shooting 43% from inside the arc because Mizzou was focusing on interior defense, not because they were missing open shots inside.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by panerd

You are correct that we need to make baskets to get our game to work but the wide open threes are a trademark of Mizzou's first half defence. And let's be honest Clemon wasn't going to continue to shoot lights out from 3.

This is my point, though. This is what I said in the first damn place, and you guys are focusing too heavily on the other half of what I said - If not A, then B.

Missouri ran "their" defense to perfection, but they weren't following through offensively, and if they couldn't get the offense going, they were going to need to make a defensive adjustment to stay in the game. Why are we arguing about this?

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

You aren't crediting the Mizzou genius enough.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

This is my point, though. This is what I said in the first damn place, and you guys are focusing too heavily on the other half of what I said - If not A, then B.

Missouri ran "their" defense to perfection, but they weren't following through offensively, and if they couldn't get the offense going, they were going to need to make a defensive adjustment to stay in the game. Why are we arguing about this?

Not really arguing. I just watch Mizzou with a lot of casual fans this time of year who always get real upset when we aren't winning in the first half and I just tell them to relax and be patient. (and outside of the Nebraska debacle I am usually proven correct) I don't really have a whole lot of difference in opinion with you on this I don't think. Just wasn't that worried about their 3-point shooting as that didn't seem to be one of their stengths the whole year.

(OK I was a little concerned. )

[SportsDino]

Ya, statistically if you can destroy the interior game by a good fraction, at the expense of giving up the three to a team that makes a low average of them anyway.... I'd go with tightening up the inside and then just trying to get a hand in the way on the long shots whenever you can.

In my opinion, nothing is more frustrating than losing reliability in your inside game. Even fairly open threes more often than not result in a rebound attempt instead of a score... so your taking lower percentage shots and you have lower probability of getting the offensive rebound.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by panerd

Let's get it done OSU. Big 8 represent!

Word

SI