A tale of two halfs...

[denverMU]

First half the absolute wrong game plan.  Slow it down play man-to-man against a much taller and talented group.  Walk around for 20 seconds on offense and then throw up a bad shot.  With about 15 minutes left in the second half, the absolute right game plan.  Play tough zone, rebound the ball and run.  I like Buzz and I really want him to stay but a little disappointing to have a week to prepare and spend it preparing the wrong strategy.  In the end very good season and we will only be better next year.  Thanks for all your hard work Buzz and the boys.

[ChicosBailBonds]

First half the absolute wrong game plan.  Slow it down play man-to-man against a much taller and talented group.  Walk around for 20 seconds on offense and then throw up a bad shot.  With about 15 minutes left in the second half, the absolute right game plan.  Play tough zone, rebound the ball and run.  I like Buzz and I really want him to stay but a little disappointing to have a week to prepare and spend it preparing the wrong strategy.  In the end very good season and we will only be better next year.  Thanks for all your hard work Buzz and the boys.

Totally agree...that's what I said before the game...PUSH PUSH PUSH.

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=26429.0

Only chance we have.  All that being said, UNC was on cruise control most of the second half which helped us out a bit.

[4everwarriors]

Any chance UNC called off the dogs in the second half?

[Blackhat]

Henson and Zeller started thinking about meeting up with Snooky at the 3 minute mark of the first half.   Those boys probably checked out a lot after a 25 pt halftime lead, like we do when we play Hillsdale or whatever.

[warriorfred]

I don't think UNC backed-off because they seemed sluggish in the last 10 minutes.  Their shots were not dropping and they seemed uneasy.  I have to agree with Chicos, I think we should have pushed right from the start.  UNC only played 7 (that I counted), I think we could have fatigued them.

[groove]

The zone did look effective at times, looked like a match-up extended zone, disguised by the fact that it seemed at times that a few of the MU players still thought they were suppose to be in man-to-man.

[JustinLewisFanClubPres]

Any chance UNC called off the dogs in the second half?

They didn't call off the dogs.  If they did, they wouldn't have had their C team in chucking for the last minute of the game.  They let up their intensity which shows that they are not a great team.  They beat us but we didn't help our cause at all for the first 22 minutes.  

I hope the young guys realize that you can't play tight and need forty minutes of imposing your will to win these big games.  Take this and learn and we can be something special moving forward.

[4everwarriors]

So, then, our coaching sucked ass?

[Avenue Commons]

It was hard not to wonder "what if" late in the game. If we only kept the TOs down, if a couple of those 3s dropped, if some of those close layups went in......

No doubt the better team won, but that coulda/shoulda been a closer game.

[mu03eng]

The difference in the halves was that in the first half our shots weren't falling.  Very difficult to get back and set-up a zone against UNCs fast transition when we aren't making shots.  Plus you turn turn the ball over and the same thing happens.  I'm very willing to be the zone would have been used in the 1st half had we hit shots

Its tough to go 2-17 from three and be successful.  Running wasn't the answer with the big front line waiting for drivers.

[MUBurrow]

Given the talent gap, it was a horse apiece. Either a) try to slow them down, and hope that the difference in pace from what they are used to flusters them enough to keep it close or b) try to run with them and hope you can just score with them enough to keep it close.

The way I see it, going into the game neither would really be wrong, and there would be an opportunity to second guess either way if it didnt turn out.  The part that didnt turn out is that the "burn" or slow-down offense looked to affect our consciences on offense, and no one seemed sure what was the appropriate shot to take playing that way.  The jump shots looked guilty, everyone grew a little too much of a conscience, and the O never really got on track. Its tough to predict the affect that change of strategy will have on your jump shots.  Tough, and things didnt work out. But I certainly cant blame Buzz, the staff, or anyone else. It was their call, they made it, and things didnt work out.

[El Duderino]

The difference in the halves was that in the first half our shots weren't falling.  Very difficult to get back and set-up a zone against UNCs fast transition when we aren't making shots.  Plus you turn turn the ball over and the same thing happens.  I'm very willing to be the zone would have been used in the 1st half had we hit shots

Its tough to go 2-17 from three and be successful.  Running wasn't the answer with the big front line waiting for drivers.

I just think it was a mix of the game plan and guys getting rattled when the shots weren't falling.

Buzz i think was so in fear of the great Carolina transition game that he did have the players playing out of how they normally playing, and to be honest, i likely would have wrongly done the same thing. Going into the game, i thought if it got into anything close to an up and down the court track meet with a score in the 80's, their superior talent would result in a sure lose. So i think Buzz also wanted to limit the number of possessions to a degree as i did, but it took the players out of simply being what they are. This team all year has pushed the ball off missed shots and turnovers, it's a big reason for our offensive efficiency, but tonight in the first half they took the foot off the fast break pedal quite a bit. In retrospect, i'd guess Buzz regrets it.

As for the missed shots, they were huge in our collapse. Yea, we were turning it over to much and the Carolina length was obviously affecting shots in the paint/causing turnovers, but we did have multiple open three pointers and a few layups that were simply missed during that 20-0 run or whatever it was.

I think if at least a couple of those open jumpers/layups had gone in, not only would it have lessened how far behind we got, it may have prevented the players from getting clearly rattled by that situation and completely imploding. Teams have gone on runs on MU before this year, but more like say 14-5 or 12-3 type of runs. By not scoring at all though, it felt as if it caused a deer in the headlights deal with the players to where they couldn't believe what was happening to them. Maybe if just 2-3 of those open shots/layups ad gone in, they wouldn't have lost their composure like that. Odds are we'd have still lost, but just not in such a ugly fashion.

[El Duderino]

Given the talent gap, it was a horse apiece. Either a) try to slow them down, and hope that the difference in pace from what they are used to flusters them enough to keep it close or b) try to run with them and hope you can just score with them enough to keep it close.

The way I see it, going into the game neither would really be wrong, and there would be an opportunity to second guess either way if it didnt turn out.  The part that didnt turn out is that the "burn" or slow-down offense looked to affect our consciences on offense, and no one seemed sure what was the appropriate shot to take playing that way.  The jump shots looked guilty, everyone grew a little too much of a conscience, and the O never really got on track. Its tough to predict the affect that change of strategy will have on your jump shots.  Tough, and things didnt work out. But I certainly cant blame Buzz, the staff, or anyone else. It was their call, they made it, and things didnt work out.

I agree with the general premise of your post, but what i mainly felt hurt the half court offense in the first half was two factors.

1. They simply missed some open threes/jumpers that they've made the first two games, especially DJO/Butler and there were about three missed layups during that brutal stretch.

2. Most importantly is the players could watch all the film they wanted about the Carolina length, but that's different than actually playing against it on the court. Their length caused multiple of the turnovers and in turn it looked like guys got hesitant with passes. That length also looked like it caused guys to be more hesitant about driving the paint which is the key to our half court offense. Then, even when a guy like DJO or Butler did get in the paint, they were hesitant to shoot out of fear of getting it swatted. Thus, guys would either get in the paint and change their shots to avoid all the long arms or they'd be scared to shoot it.

We just haven't played a team with that mix of length and athletic ability, and it disrupted our half court offense in multiple ways. By the time the players got used to it, the game was decided.

That kind of skilled athletic length is what often separates the UNC and Kansas programs from the other good, but not great programs.