[M T]

I'm happy with a weekend split. Colorado is really good and they were fired up to play this game. We had opportunities. Our perimeter players struggled big time. We're not built to come back from big deficits. I wish we would have changed up our defense more often and had more success getting the ball inside. 
Fast break points: 22-3 Colorado
Points of turnovers: 28-11 Colorado 
Points in the paint: 30-18 Colorado
Those are three telling stats that we can't lose to that degree if we want to win against great teams.

Gosh, if they were different points, that would make a 48 point difference (80-32).  We must have crushed them otherwise (27 - -9)
Must be double counting.

It isn't quite real, but take away the last 2 seconds of the first 3 quarters, Stanford would have been ahead 59-58 with 30 seconds left. The last 30 seconds would have been very different.

Looking at what was counted as FB points:
4 of the FB points were credited for FT on fouls in the back court by Stanford in the last 19 seconds of Q4.  I don't think of those as FB points.
2 of the FB points were for the breakaway when Stanford loaded the back court on the CO throw-in with 26 seconds of Q4.
7 of the FB points were the last second shots at the end of the first 3 quarters.
That leaves 9 other FB points.

The FB points account for some of Colorado's higher FG% and all of their higher 3FG%.


So, if we can cut down on their end-of-quarter heroics and steals, that should make the difference.  I'm sure the team will work on those.  I'm not a fatalist; I do believe in the coach and the players, even the underclassmen (underclasswomen, who had 33% of the turnovers in 7% of the playing time).

[M T]

I'm happy with a weekend split. Colorado is really good and they were fired up to play this game. We had opportunities. Our perimeter players struggled big time. We're not built to come back from big deficits. I wish we would have changed up our defense more often and had more success getting the ball inside. 
Fast break points: 22-3 Colorado
Points of turnovers: 28-11 Colorado 
Points in the paint: 30-18 Colorado
Those are three telling stats that we can't lose to that degree if we want to win against great teams.

Gosh, if they were different points, that would make a 48 point difference (80-32).  We must have crushed them otherwise (27 - -9)
Must be double counting.

It isn't quite real, but take away the last 2 seconds of the first 3 quarters, Stanford would have been ahead 59-58 with 30 seconds left. The last 30 seconds would have been very different.

Looking at what was counted as FB points:
4 of the FB points were credited for FT on fouls in the back court by Stanford in the last 19 seconds of Q4.  I don't think of those as FB points.
2 of the FB points were for the breakaway when Stanford loaded the back court on the CO throw-in with 26 seconds of Q4.
7 of the FB points were the last second shots at the end of the first 3 quarters.
That leaves 9 other FB points.

The FB points account for some of Colorado's higher FG% and all of their higher 3FG%.


So, if we can cut down on their end-of-quarter heroics and steals, that should make the difference.  I'm sure the team will work on those.  I'm not a fatalist; I do believe in the coach and the players, even the underclassmen (underclasswomen, who had 33% of the turnovers in 7% of the playing time).