[81alum]

Playing a weak schedule before this game was not good.  But I defer to others who know more about scheduling difficulties.

My earlier question remains unanswered.  Betts scored 4 points in 4 minutes, then rode the bench for the rest of the game (including OT after Brink fouled out).

Re Brink, she continues to have ticky-tack fouls called against her.  That fourth foul was, at worst, a touch.

1) No, it was not good.  South Carolina had Maryland.  We had Portland.    But scheduling is not entirely a matter of choice.

2) I also would like to know why Betts did not play more.  At the chalk talk, Kate talked her up, acknowledged what a weapon she was, and said "we hope the game situation allows us to increase her minutes" or something like that.  So I was surprised that with all the foul trouble that others were having that we did not give her more time.  I do know that in big games, Tara usually defaults to experience, so maybe that was it. 

3) Brink has been doing much, much better on the fouling front this year--until this game.  I think there must just be something about anatomy that makes officials see her fouls more clearly than other players.  I can't see any other explanation--completely different officials from different leagues all seem to do it.

---

Yes, it was telling - seemed like Tara only trusted six players, the only ones with double-digit playing time. Look at the disparity in bench points: 34-9. We know Tara prioritizes defense; I wonder if Tara planned to go deeper but decided to shorten the rotation when that 12-point lead evaporated in the second quarter - after Boston sat down with her second foul, we had some trouble getting back in transition with their speedier lineup. Tara also went away from the switching defense we’d been seeing. Will be interesting to see the adjustments in the coming games.

In the behind-the-bench Tara acknowledged that we did not push the pace as much as she wanted us to.

[81alum]

Playing a weak schedule before this game was not good.  But I defer to others who know more about scheduling difficulties.

My earlier question remains unanswered.  Betts scored 4 points in 4 minutes, then rode the bench for the rest of the game (including OT after Brink fouled out).

Re Brink, she continues to have ticky-tack fouls called against her.  That fourth foul was, at worst, a touch.

1) No, it was not good.  South Carolina had Maryland.  We had Portland.    But scheduling is not entirely a matter of choice.

2) I also would like to know why Betts did not play more.  At the chalk talk, Kate talked her up, acknowledged what a weapon she was, and said "we hope the game situation allows us to increase her minutes" or something like that.  So I was surprised that with all the foul trouble that others were having that we did not give her more time.  I do know that in big games, Tara usually defaults to experience, so maybe that was it. 

3) Brink has been doing much, much better on the fouling front this year--until this game.  I think there must just be something about anatomy that makes officials see her fouls more clearly than other players.  I can't see any other explanation--completely different officials from different leagues all seem to do it.

---

Yes, it was telling - seemed like Tara only trusted six players, the only ones with double-digit playing time. Look at the disparity in bench points: 34-9. We know Tara prioritizes defense; I wonder if Tara planned to go deeper but decided to shorten the rotation when that 12-point lead evaporated in the second quarter - after Boston sat down with her second foul, we had some trouble getting back in transition with their speedier lineup. Tara also went away from the switching defense we’d been seeing. Will be interesting to see the adjustments in the coming games.

In the behind-the-bench Tara acknowledged that we did not push the pace as much as she wanted us to.