Pretty sad we lost that lead in regulation and couldn't put TCU away.

IowaBear said:

---

Because we play zero defense. And we're prone to long lapses offensively. IMO those are the 2 biggest reasons why no lead we have is safe
I get crapped on for saying this but I'd give my left nut to have a big who can get us 2 anytime he wants. We rely so heavily on 3s and jumpers that we go stale. Add that to the ole D we play and you've got an issue

---

This. It's hard to extend runs/leads when you can't stack stops. We had this exact same problem last year.

I do think this year's team is better equipped to score when we go cold from deep than last year's, though, because we have more slashers who can get to the rim and free-throw line. Last year's team was totally dependent on the 3 ball. This team can score in more ways.

The offensively challenged teams seem to show a pulse against us - hmmmm…I wonder why? Watch…UCF will inexplicably find the offensive magic Wednesday night.

WA Jim said:

---

The offensively challenged teams seem to show a pulse against us - hmmmm…I wonder why? Watch…UCF will inexplicably find the offensive magic Wednesday night.

---

In fairness, we've won two of three against bad offensive teams, and it took a truly awful offensive effort and choke jobs at the end of regulation and overtime to lose in Manhattan.

We could certainly lose at UCF, but I don't expect them to have a big offensive night against us. We've shown some ability to slow bad offensive teams. We're just helpless against good ones.

In fairness? I think it is fair to say we are bad on defense - I know we have won 3 conference games - but we barely beat some pretty bad offensive teams - could have lost the Ok State game - could have lost the Cincy game - BYU - they live and die by the 3 jack and they died by it - and then you look at non-con teams we played - gave up 91 to Florida - 70 to Nicholls, John Brown and Gardner Webb somebody - 79 to Cornell -88 to Michigan State

but all I was saying we are bad on defense and we are

The defensive struggles are well-documented, but the KSU and Texas games, in particular, were lost at the offensive end. Huge, inexplicable stretches of lack-of-production killed us. Here's some notes for you:

We made just 2 FGs in the final 5 minutes against KSU, for a total of 5 points, and made just 8 FGs the entire 2nd half! KSU also hit just 2 FGs in the last 5 minutes, but got 4 extra FTs that ended up being the difference.

Oh, but it got much worse against Texas. We made just ONE field goal after LL's layup at the 9:09 mark of the 2nd half. Just one!! And managed only 12 total points the rest of the half. Can you guess what that one FG was? It was JB's clutch three to tie on our last possession. That was it for our production from the field for 1/4 of the entire game. Texas didn't hit a three the entire 2nd half, and that wasn't for lack of trying.

Yes, I understand that some stiffer defensive possessions might make the difference, but you aren't going to win many games with those kind of offensive droughts. They just can't happen. Scratch across just ONE or TWO field goals in either of those games and we win.

Point well made and well taken. Those were pretty awful offensive stretches - I think those things can happen and have happened even on some of our better teams, so all the more important to hold it together defensively and we did in the 2nd half against Texas - but imagine if we play better defense in the first half - we win that game.

I haven't seen The Bears in person yet - so mostly watching from high, awkward camera angles (just kidding) - but going to see them in person Wednesday night in Orlando - so maybe I will learn something.

UCF has struggled with teams when they couldn't drive to the basket and were forced to rely on outside shooting-- K State (loss by 25), Houston (loss by 15), UC (loss by 11). They've done well against teams with limited resistance in the lane - (UT, WVU and KU). WVU and UT are as bad as we are at giving up driving layups. Texas opened the game with a 22-6 lead on UCF as the UCF guards clanked shot after shot. It was only after they decided to get aggressive and start driving to the basket that they turned it around and Texas basically couldn't stop them. It's why UCF shot 51% from the floor. It worked against KU mainly because Dickinson picked up 2 quick fouls early and 2 later on and only got to play 28 minutes.

I think they'll have a relatively easy time penetrating and scoring against us and won't have to rely on outside shooting since basically everyone else has done the same thing in conference. I think it will come down to our shooting to determine the game. If we're on, we will win. If we shoot the ball from 3 like we have in 4 of the 6 conference games, we'll pick up our 4th consecutive loss.

The primary issue is defense. We just haven't been able to stop drives to the basket late in games.

I think you nailed it

And so did you

WA Jim said:

---

In fairness? I think it is fair to say we are bad on defense - I know we have won 3 conference games - but we barely beat some pretty bad offensive teams - could have lost the Ok State game - could have lost the Cincy game - BYU - they live and die by the 3 jack and they died by it - and then you look at non-con teams we played - gave up 91 to Florida - 70 to Nicholls, John Brown and Gardner Webb somebody - 79 to Cornell -88 to Michigan State

but all I was saying we are bad on defense and we are

---

We are bad on defense, but not so bad that terrible offensive teams have been able to abuse us, which was my point. We looked like a competent defensive team against Oklahoma State, Cincinnati and Kansas State. We likely will against UCF on Wednesday too.

But that says more about those teams' offensive capabilities than our abilities on the defensive end.

I don't expect us to be able to stop BYU, Florida, Michigan State or Cornell. All have top-50 offenses. We're going to get stuck in a shootout with any good offensive team -- just as we have the last two games against Texas and TCU.

DanaDane said:

---

UCF has struggled with teams when they couldn't drive to the basket and were forced to rely on outside shooting-- K State (loss by 25), Houston (loss by 15), UC (loss by 11). They've done well against teams with limited resistance in the lane - (UT, WVU and KU). WVU and UT are as bad as we are at giving up driving layups. Texas opened the game with a 22-6 lead on UCF as the UCF guards clanked shot after shot. It was only after they decided to get aggressive and start driving to the basket that they turned it around and Texas basically couldn't stop them. It's why UCF shot 51% from the floor. It worked against KU mainly because Dickinson picked up 2 quick fouls early and 2 later on and only got to play 28 minutes.

I think they'll have a relatively easy time penetrating and scoring against us and won't have to rely on outside shooting since basically everyone else has done the same thing in conference. I think it will come down to our shooting to determine the game. If we're on, we will win. If we shoot the ball from 3 like we have in 4 of the 6 conference games, we'll pick up our 4th consecutive loss.

---

Sounds like a good game for the zone. It's not hard to keep teams out of the paint if that's you're only goal. It's stubbornness that keeps most coaches from making the proper adjustment.

Fortunately, Scott Drew has shown a willingness to use a zone when it has made sense to do so.

Hotsauce said:

---

The defensive struggles are well-documented, but the KSU and Texas games, in particular, were lost at the offensive end. Huge, inexplicable stretches of lack-of-production killed us. Here's some notes for you:

We made just 2 FGs in the final 5 minutes against KSU, for a total of 5 points, and made just 8 FGs the entire 2nd half! KSU also hit just 2 FGs in the last 5 minutes, but got 4 extra FTs that ended up being the difference.

Oh, but it got much worse against Texas. We made just ONE field goal after LL's layup at the 9:09 mark of the 2nd half. Just one!! And managed only 12 total points the rest of the half. Can you guess what that one FG was? It was JB's clutch three to tie on our last possession. That was it for our production from the field for 1/4 of the entire game. Texas didn't hit a three the entire 2nd half, and that wasn't for lack of trying.

Yes, I understand that some stiffer defensive possessions might make the difference, but you aren't going to win many games with those kind of offensive droughts. They just can't happen. Scratch across just ONE or TWO field goals in either of those games and we win.

---

Texas was lost as much on defense as it was offense. Even with the drought, we scored 73 points on 47.9 percent shooting and 50 percent from 3-point range. All of those figures are more than enough to win a college basketball game.

Offense gets easier when you're making stops and getting transition opportunities off long rebounds and turnovers. We lost that game as much because we were incapable of making a stop for most of it as we did because we couldn't score.

WA Jim said:

---

The offensively challenged teams seem to show a pulse against us - hmmmm…I wonder why? Watch…UCF will inexplicably find the offensive magic Wednesday night.

---

I bet they don't shoot 14.2% from field

I've shopped it around and found that big who can get the two points when you can get him the ball. He will cost a boatload of NIL cash. Problem is, that left nut of yours has no value to anyone else but you.

No defense. We are ranked outside the top 100 in defensive efficiency, so opponents have a very good chance of scoring against us on any possession.

It certainly doesn't help that we are middle of the pack for FTs. # 143 at 72.24%. And missed some huge ones against KSU and TCU.

Yeah, our defense is pretty porous. Seems like Drew may need to shake the lineup somewhat. Maybe sit Missi and Walker or Nunn and start Love and Josh.

Alf said:

---

Yeah, our defense is pretty porous. Seems like Drew may need to shake the lineup somewhat. Maybe sit Missi and Walker or Nunn and start Love and Josh.

---

Unfortunately we just don't have the personnel either starting or coming off the bench. Walter tries hard but his footwork defensively is faulty and gets beat off the dribble. Not to single him out but Nunn was a huge swing and miss. I was expecting a tough veteran to shore up our perimeter D. but he is not that guy. We really don't have any bench alternatives. Grimes quit and left, and Little isn't ready for the quickness and athleticism of big 12 play. Love is excelling in his 6th man role and is also a bad defender, so starting him would probably make us even worse on defense. Josh and Missi are splitting minutes at the 5 so it wouldn't matter which of them starts.

Crawfoso1973 said:

---

Alf said:

---

Yeah, our defense is pretty porous. Seems like Drew may need to shake the lineup somewhat. Maybe sit Missi and Walker or Nunn and start Love and Josh.

---

Unfortunately we just don't have the personnel either starting or coming off the bench. Walter tries hard but his footwork defensively is faulty and gets beat off the dribble. Not to single him out but Nunn was a huge swing and miss. I was expecting a tough veteran to shore up our perimeter D. but he is not that guy. We really don't have any bench alternatives. Grimes quit and left, and Little isn't ready for the quickness and athleticism of big 12 play. Love is excelling in his 6th man role and is also a bad defender, so starting him would probably make us even worse on defense. Josh and Missi are splitting minutes at the 5 so it wouldn't matter which of them starts.

---

I agree with all that. It's not like we have a Davion or Vital to bring off the bench. Just seems that the team is in a funk and changing the lineup a bit may create a spark,

Alf said:

---

Yeah, our defense is pretty porous. Seems like Drew may need to shake the lineup somewhat. Maybe sit Missi and Walker or Nunn and start Love and Josh.

---

Probably would be a good idea, or at very least make sure those 2 are on the floor at key times where you need a defensive stop.

I love Love's offensive punch, but he is a terrible defender.