Well that was fun! On to face UCLA. Not likely, but also not impossible. My wife surprised me with a trip to Vegas so I'll have to decide how I want to bet on the Ags when I am there. I am thinking the spread is probably the smarter option
If they beat UCLA... It'll be because Turgeon put something nasty together. Will I eat my words? Hell yes. Do I have UCLA winning it all? Yup... Have I ever gotten anything right? Nope...
I also picked UCLA to win it all. Turge did some scouting on UCLA, and has stated that they are going to do some things differently in this game. Jordan will see more minutes than before. Turge apparently has decided that the only way we can hope to win is to use our size to our advantage. I think he is right. I also think that if Jordan plays soft on defense, letting guys go around him (as usual) or gets himself into foul trouble, we're done. At that point, it is all on the players.
I doubt they will hang with UCLA more than one half. Team chemistry (including the coach) just isn't there.
I doubt that anybody will beat this UCLA team. I think they're gonna win the whole thing. That being said, referring to the coach when you cite a lack of chemistry just seems odd to me.
I've said this elsewhere. Each and every time I've watched A&M play this season (about 5 times), they've played poorly. Maybe it's my imagination, but the coach doesn't seem to connect well with the players. Something isn't right with his and the players' body language. I don't think he likes them and I don't think the players like him enough. I know they miss Acie Law IV, but I betcha Gillespie would have gotten a lot more out of this team. In all seriousness, I don't watch A&M every week like some here so take my comments as 2 cents. I want them to beat UCLA, who I've been against ever since the officials gave them the Stanford game.
I hear ya A3P0. More than once an Aggie player has put up points when Turgeon clearly begged them to run out the time. Makes you wonder how much the players respect the guy. LOL. He couldn't figure that out 20 games ago? Shouldn't we be using that strategy at all times? Seriously though, sometimes we feed the post too much and our guards fade out of the game. We lose balance. I hope that doesn't happen.
Well how many of them went to A & M to play for Turgeon? None I would guess. The guy may not connect with them because they were expecting to play for Billy. We had the same problem at UK at the beginning of the season. The players didn't seem to be on the same wavelength as Billy G. But once he had Ramel Bradley (one of our two seniors) on board, the rest of the team seemed to follow. It took our other senior, Joe Crawford, until January to really click with the coach and the rest of the team. Part of that was because of health issues though.
Gillispie was in the same boat at TAMU though. Law and Jones were as good as transferred after BCG put them through boot camp. Wright, Law, Jones, Kirk, etc... None of those guys came to College Station to play for Gillispie. Brad Walker was probably the only BCG guy. But he had a significant impact the first season. Gave the team an identity immediately.
Let's hope the A&M players don't lose their composure in the 2nd half and crumble. I really want them to pull this one out somehow.
Uhhh...no. You use that strategy when you believe that your size up front is far superior to your opponent. UCLA has a large size disadvantage up front against TAMU. Texas and Kansas less so. You adapt your strategy for the particular game. That may be because our guards (Sloan in particular) have been woefully inconsistent. Which games that we lost would Gillispie have won? Not more than a couple. Law being gone gave us a tremendous hole at the point. We have no legit PG right now. Harris coming in next year will alleviate that. Jones playing PF for the first time, rather than C has been a year long adjustment. He has looked lost at PF, and cannot keep his lunch in his stomach. From a pure talent perspective, this year's team is not as good as last year's team. When you have Law and Jones coming into their own at the same time that you take over the team, it sure does help.
Choke for the ages. With everything on the line, A&M practically escorts Collison to the basket -- twice! -- for layups to win the game. At least the turnarounds by Love were difficult shots -- you can respect losing a game on those. If you're the big man, you have to step out to deny Collison the driving lane. If you're an A&M wing defender, you have to be ready to step in and help -- especially against a team like UCLA lacking perimeter shooters. Basically, you have to do something and anything besides give the best PG in America a clear lane to the basket for a layup. And against a UCLA defense that had swatted everything near the basket, Sloan decides to play 1 on 5 in the final seconds and sets up the most obvious rejection in the history of the sport. Just awful execution on both ends of the floor -- particularly offensively, but also on the two defensive possessions -- when it mattered most.
It was a complete choke job for the last 10 minutes of the game. Even though they played good defense, A&M's inability to execute simple passes and not even get shot attempts is what killed them. And getting so many close-in shots blocked is inexcusable. They went from 10:00 to a little more than 1:00 left in the game and scored one point. I figured they would crumble at some point in the game. Kevin Love doesn't play like a freshman. Not only is he talented, the guy is mature beyond his years. If UCLA had focused more on getting him the ball inside earlier, they would have won going away. They have a cakewalk next game and probably into the Final Four. Very lucky for them.
To lose the way we did tonight, this one just stings. UCLA did a great job locking down on the paint, which is where we did all our damage in the first half.
Coming from a Longhorn, just wanted to congratulate the Aggies on a great season and for giving UCLA all that it could handle. $KO40A$
