Turn Off Ads?
Page 46 of 48 FirstFirst ... 3642434445464748 LastLast
Results 676 to 690 of 712

Thread: 2011/2012 UC Basketball official thread

  1. #676
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,904

    Re: 2011/2012 UC Basketball official thread

    Well, that didn't go well.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #677
    ZCTRMTP!!!!! texasdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    10,822

    Re: 2011/2012 UC Basketball official thread

    Still a great season considering how it started off. Some wins in the NCAA would be nice.
    A summer watching a bad Reds' team, is still a pretty good summer.

  4. #678
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    709

    Re: 2011/2012 UC Basketball official thread

    Despite the fact that I'm disappointed by the fact that they lost, I was impressed to see them fight back from 16 down with under 10 to play. A lot of teams would have checked out, they fought back but couldn't find a way to win.

    I'm looking forward to seeing where they end up being seeded.

  5. #679
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Posts
    6,057

    Re: 2011/2012 UC Basketball official thread

    I barely saw it until about 28 seconds to go and it was 48-44? Did these teams forget how to shoot? That's horrible.

  6. #680
    part of BBN jmac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    2,309

    Re: 2011/2012 UC Basketball official thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Cloninger View Post
    I barely saw it until about 28 seconds to go and it was 48-44? Did these teams forget how to shoot? That's horrible.
    The score was around 25-14 or something like that at halftime. I really didnt think either team played particularly well. Louisville has played a bunch of games the last part of the season where they have barely managed to get to 50 with the exception being ND.
    Last edited by jmac; 03-11-2012 at 12:40 PM.

  7. #681
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,836

    Re: 2011/2012 UC Basketball official thread

    That was a tough one. It was a game we should have won, Louisville did not play particularly well. I don't know if it was tired legs or nerves, but they were just out of sorts.

    Just getting there is quite an accomplishment for these guys, but man that game was there for the taking.

    Regroup, get ready for Thursday or Friday...hoping we can get a couple of good matchups and make the Sweet 16.

  8. #682
    Pre-tty, pre-tty good!! MWM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    12,324

    Re: 2011/2012 UC Basketball official thread

    Not a bad draw for the Bearcats. You'd like to get an easier round 1 than texas, but FSU in the second round is probably better than most had hoped for.
    Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David

  9. #683
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Posts
    6,057

    Re: 2011/2012 UC Basketball official thread

    Quote Originally Posted by MWM View Post
    Not a bad draw for the Bearcats. You'd like to get an easier round 1 than texas, but FSU in the second round is probably better than most had hoped for.

    New Mexico and Saint Mary's are higher seeds? This is a joke. They were in avery tough league ...worthy of more than an 8th.

  10. #684
    NL Central champs
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    472

    Re: 2011/2012 UC Basketball official thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Cloninger View Post
    New Mexico and Saint Mary's are higher seeds? This is a joke. They were in avery tough league ...worthy of more than an 8th.
    I am confused, they got a six seed, the bracket is here.

  11. #685
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Posts
    6,057

    Re: 2011/2012 UC Basketball official thread

    Quote Originally Posted by VottoFan54 View Post
    I am confused, they got a six seed, the bracket is here.
    MY apologies. I saw ESPN Bracketology...or whatever....... and it had them at 8th playing St. Louis.

  12. #686
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    270

    Re: 2011/2012 UC Basketball official thread

    I'm pretty pleased with that draw. Texas has some talent, but is exactly the type of team that UC carves up. FSU is tougher, gonna probably need to win ugly in that one.

    And look who they could play in the sweet sixteen...

  13. #687
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,904

    Re: 2011/2012 UC Basketball official thread

    Watching the Bracketology show I think two different guys picked FSU going to the final four. Isn't this the same team who lost to Boston College a month ago?

    Clearly, when they show up they can be a good team (wins over UNC and Duke), but this team just doesn't look like a #3 seed to me. For as long as I can remember, whenever the brackets came out (and UC was in it), I have never liked our draw. Be us drawing UCONN in round 2, or UCLA in round 2.... I just never liked how we got seeded against other teams. This year, I feel pretty good, which clearly means that we are going to lose in the first round.

  14. #688
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    709

    Re: 2011/2012 UC Basketball official thread

    Quote Originally Posted by dougdirt View Post
    Watching the Bracketology show I think two different guys picked FSU going to the final four. Isn't this the same team who lost to Boston College a month ago?

    Clearly, when they show up they can be a good team (wins over UNC and Duke), but this team just doesn't look like a #3 seed to me. For as long as I can remember, whenever the brackets came out (and UC was in it), I have never liked our draw. Be us drawing UCONN in round 2, or UCLA in round 2.... I just never liked how we got seeded against other teams. This year, I feel pretty good, which clearly means that we are going to lose in the first round.
    In some way FSU reminds me a bit of UC in the respect that when they play well they're capable of beating anyone but they can also lay an egg, play poorly and lose to teams they should beat. They obviously got hot at the end of the season, so it'll be interesting to see if they can maintain that momentum in the NCAA tournament.

    That said, as a UC fan I like the way the bracket sets up. As long as the good UC team shows up, they should be able to beat Texas and I think FSU is the most vulnerable of the #3 seeds. Ohio State is good, but I'd rather face them than Missouri or Kansas.

    All things considered, I think the committee was pretty fair with UC.

  15. #689
    Charlie Brown All-Star IslandRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Melbourne, FL
    Posts
    4,862

    Re: 2011/2012 UC Basketball official thread

    As the resident FSU guy, let me explain their season:

    FSU has a rep for being great defensively and hit-or-miss on offense. Defensively, they're superb. They were #4 in field goal percentage defense in Division I, after leading the nation the two years prior. They're big, athletic, fundamentally sound and they play their tails off. On offense, they don't take care of the basketball and the big guys aren't great finishers. They were near the bottom on turnovers and probably close to the bottom if there was a category for missed chippies. As a result, they often had prolonged offensive outages, hitting rock bottom when they scored ten -- yes, ten -- points in the first half against Princeton... and they managed to lose to Harvard too. They also stunk it up against Michigan State and Florida. In short, they just weren't good on offense through the non-conference part of the schedule.

    After Ian Miller returned mid-year from academic suspension, Leonard Hamilton decided to junk his big lineup and went to a three-guard alignment. It didn't take immediately (a blowout loss to Clemson to open the ACC schedule, at which point most FSU fans were predicting an NIT berth) but then the offense started flowing. Besides Miller regaining his form, the extra floor time for Michael Snaer led to his taking a big step up and playing at an all-ACC level. Miller and Snaer can both put the ball on the floor and create a shot as well as shoot the three, so with the three-guard lineup, FSU had a lot fewer prolonged cold streaks in the second half. And even though turnovers are still a problem, it's not quite as horrific now that the ball is in the bigs' hands less.

    The huge win against UNC (the first one, the 90-57 game) can't be emphasized enough, either. They realized, hey, we have it in us to be way better than we've been. A coach can preach it but sometimes it has to be seen to be believed.

    The Boston College loss you pointed out is instructive as well, because a glance at their schedule would lead you to believe they play up and down to the level of competition. That's true, but it's not a question of focus so much as style. Simply put, they play fast much better than they play slow, and most good teams like to play fast. Tournament matchups are going to be a big factor for these guys.
    Not all who wander are lost

  16. #690
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,904

    Re: 2011/2012 UC Basketball official thread

    SWEET 16


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25