Sweet Sixteen and Beyond

[ewok33]

i've felt all along that gonzaga's weakness was at the point, and in the final desperate seconds tonight, that was evident. after u.c.l.a. scored the go-ahead (and eventual winning basket) there were still nine seconds left--plenty of time for raivio to dribble into the front court and either get a good shot or set up a three. instead, he drove crazily out of control and lost the ball.

conversely, after farmar stripped the ball from batista, he didn't just throw up a wild shot. he took his time and found a guy underneath for the easy game-winner. the zags needed that kind of poise and leadership at the end of the game, and might have gotten it from stockton, santangelo, dickau or steppe, one of their great point guards from the past. ironic then that on a night the zags had the dominant big men in morrison and batista, "point-guard u." was stuck with raivio.

I honestly think Raivio would be a better 2 guard. He is a heck of a shooter. The only thing I don't know about him, is can he create his own shot off the dribble. Reddick improved immensley in the last couple of years on that. Maybe the Zags need to recruit a true point man, and let Raivio be a scorer. :twocents:

 

[Grizbacker1]

CDAGRIZ Wrote:

Backer, I really like your last paragraph. That is so true, and so well put. I still have this strong hope that maybe AMMO will decide to come back for one more year because of this game. But he is most likely gondola.

That is funny you said that. I bet a lot of people had that thought crossing through their minds after seeing the anguish on AM's face. I know I was thinking it, but I really think you are right thinking he is gone to the NBA. I don't think he is going to help himself any by staying another year. The defenses AM sees now will do nothin gto help him prepare for the NBA because he won't see gimmick D there. Just bigger, stronger, faster, meaner guys who want to school him a little. The only advice I have for him is make sure he knows the school fight song because the Veterans are gonna gave him singing it a lot, along with carrying their luggage on road trips, buying them dinner, all the fun rookie stuff.

I am really looking forward to seeing him play at the next level. He may never reach Stockton status, bit who does.

 

[Montana Gym Rat]

A couple of things I thought about the game...

1) Those announcers were so pro-UCLA that they both popped huge Wooden's when the Bruins got that steal and made the game winning shot. So to take anything they said as non-biased is absolutely ridiculous.

2) Gonzaga lost the game. All they had to do was make one basket in the last 3 minutes and they would have won. Actually, all they had to do was get the ball acrossed half court with 19 seconds left and they would have won the game.

3) Keeping point 2 in mind - UCLA didn't have any business being in the position to make that steal at the end of the game. They got absolutely destroyed for 35 minutes of the game. The refs started calling the game by different standards in the last 3 minutes. The reason that Gonzaga went scoreless was because UCLA's physicality wasn't kept in check by the officials. They were allowed to grab and bump wherever they pleased and no calls were made.

This can be backed up by the fact that the highest powered offense in the nation went scoreless the last 3 minutes. It wasn't all because the Zags went cold. That not good enough for you? There were no fouls called against UCLA in the last 3 minutes, but 4 fouls called against the Bulldogs. UCLA shot 7 FTs in this same stretch - Gonzaga didn't get to the stripe once.

Gonzaga still should have executed and won the game despite the officials though. It's just disappointing to me that the better team was put in a position to lose because the officials changed the way they called the game down the stretch. :twocents:

 

[Grizbacker1]

MGR<

With all due respect, that is total crap. I was at the game! Any suggestion the refs started favoring UCLA is a joke! I agree Gonzaga should have won the game, but they didn't. Blame Few if you want to blame someone, but not the refs. You say the refs favored UCLA???? Kind of like when the refs called the foul on UCLA, when the Gonzaga player hit the bottom of the backboard with the shot (did the backboard get credit for a block?). Or when they didn't give UCLA shots on an obvious shooting foul. Or when they didn't give UCLA a basket, when it was clearly a shot attempt on the foul. Yeah, the refs really favored UCLA. I think the real issue is you love Gonzaga, or had them in a pool. The Gonzaga people I talked to after the game never blamed the officiating, they blamed themsleves and credited UCLA for not quitting. UCLA could have just threw in the towel and gave up, got blown out by 30 or more, and chalked it up to inexperience. Howland wouldn't let them. They made the plays down the stretch.

Gonzaga should have won the game, but let's not blame anyone but Gonzaga for this loss. You are smarter than that MGR. :thumb:

 

[Montana Gym Rat]

I agree, Gonzaga is the main focus of blame. They had opportunities to win the game and didn't. That's why I made it point #2 ahead of 3...and why I also mentioned to keep that in mind while I discussed the last 3 minutes.

Facts are facts though. UCLA got 7 FT's off of 4 Gonzaga fouls. I'm not saying that the refs were the reason for the comeback, because UCLA's effort was huge in the game. But their comeback was facilitated by the officiating down the stretch. If you can't admit that - then you love UCLA (which wouldn't be suprising with the California base). I really don't have a bias one way or the other.

The point remains, and its one that hasn't really been touched on, that UCLA's comeback was made possible by a change in the officiating. You're talking about a team in Gonzaga that went to the line 26 times in the first 37 minutes, and not once after that. You're talking about a very physical UCLA team that committed 22 fouls in the first 37 minutes, but none after that. I'm just laying out the facts, and I see a discrepency in officiating between the first 37 minutes and the last 3 minutes.

Once again, I think Gonzaga is mainly to blame. UCLA worked hard and made big plays, but I think their physical play was made allowable down the stretch more so than the rest of the game. The lack of consistency is my issue, and I strongly believe that without this advantage, they don't come any closer than 5 or 6 points. :twocents:

 

[Montana Gym Rat]

And yes, there were some bad calls against UCLA, but they were there for Gonzaga as well.

I'm not saying the officiating was against Gonzaga, I just think the refs let a lot more go down the stretch while UCLA was on defense. They set a standard throughout the game, and weren't consistent with it at the end.

This can usually be overcame by staying aggressive and attacking on offense.

 

[CerealCityGriz]

How bout them Huskies tonight. I don't know if UConn deserved to win the game, but it would have been nice if they would have called the goaltending there in overtime. I am going to start my conspiracy theory. Was UConn to win so that we did not have a George Mason-UW regional final? I'm sure the tv ratings will be better now.