Interesting Contrast Between The Game Thread & Talk (Around Me) In Pauley
by Bruin Dad and Grad on Feb 5, 2010 1:46 PM PST
3 comments
Nestor asked me to bump this to a FanShot....
Last night there was a total disconnect. The fans around me were not nearly as frustrated by the game as those on the in-game thread (and UCLA fans tend to be very vocal in their criticism). I will watch the game tonight on replay and maybe I will get frustrated too.
In the arena, it appeared to me that the team played with intensity (particularly the starters). The level of play and energy was well above what we saw against SC, in the 76 Classic etc. They may have lost last night but it was not the hopeless team from earlier in the year.
We seemed to play pretty good defense over most of the game. I have said before that our zone packs the paint and if the opposition passes crisply it will force our over rotation to the point where there were wide open shots. Stanford did that and got wide open shots. They beat the zone by making their 3’s. That is how you beat the zone. But beating the zone does not mean we did not playwith intensity.
The team does appear to lose focus at times. One of the things I will watch for in tonight’s replay is if the subs are as good at getting it inside as the starters. The run to pull it out at the end was a patient focus on getting high probability inside shots. Have not seen the subs able to get the ball in.
And, N, one of the things that you sense when you are in Pauley is how much this team is together. A coworker who was also at the game last night was talking with me about how excited the bench got during the game. They were into it for the whole game not just the last few minutes. That specifically included BL and MM. This is different than they looked in Anahiem or in some of the earlier games. They appear, admittedly from a distance, to be coming together as a team. All the comments about the other players resenting the starters does not appear to be true in Pauley. (But who really knows).
To me the following are the positive things:
1. Team is starting to show signs of improvement: free throw shoting, turnovers etc.
2. The team appears to be developing an identity
3. The team appears to coming together.
4. The team is starting to play closer to its potential. The team is starting to bring more intensity to every game.
Admittedly this was all suppose to happen earlier in the season and the team’s potential may not be that great.
So I am looking forward to the end of the work day to try and figure out why the tone of the thread was so overwhelmingly negative compared to how it felt in Pauley.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.
1 recs |
3 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Interesting you pointed that out...
because I felt exactly the same way. While there was occasional frustration in the student section, most of the time we felt pretty good, especially during our offensive run in the second half. RN and TH had GREAT games, and that almost made up for our weak defense. I admit that it was frustrating to see undefended threes and to watch Fields put up 35. But overall I am beginning to sense some chemistry not only within the team but between the student section and the team as well. It’s no secret that the students LOVE RN and MAH.
Troy is burning
+1
Thanks. Felt the energy on the court way up in the “cheap” seats as well. They seemed together, they knew what they were doing, were executing and creating more than usual,and were exciting to watch. They were working and we could feel it and it was exciting.
So I watched the game on replay
Couple of comments.
The TV commentators made comments that would allow you to be negative or positive about the Bruins. They talked about how they came out intense and the talked about Stanford having more energy.
The TV commentators never mentioned RN’s foul trouble in the first half. I am not sure when he went out (and he did come back in) but it represented a serious handicap to our new “patient inside out” offense. I cant say whether the 2nd teamers can get the ball in because there was no one to get the ball to.
Because of camera angles you did not see the Bruin bench erupt in the first half at all. You only saw a little in the second half. I believe that is one dynamic people in Pauley could see that did not come through on TV.
The Bruins did not maintain their intensity. They came out strong in the first half and lost it. Wavered in the second half.
The quick 3 point shots by ND and ML in the first half were as ugly the second time as the first.
All in all: there were things negative and positive to reinforce your half empty or half full viewpoint.
by Bruin Dad and Grad on Feb 6, 2010 10:24 AM PST reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
