Sports Illustrated says we lose to UCLA

kitic77 wrote:
Yep, refs didn't cause 18 turnovers, allow UCLA 15 offensive rebounds or shoot 10 more shots. If we do a better job at hanging onto the ball or boxing out, we win. Oh and the refs didn't cause BYU to miss 10 FTs in a 7-pt loss.

have to agree. I'm not really blaming the refs (they just sounded like they were terrible) just like you can't blame the refs for the football loss against utah. Both games were totally winnable even with all the bad calls. of course BYU could have won that game. It sounds like the same type of game that they typically play at unlv, not like the game they played at ESA last week.



it's a marathon. hard to keep your motivation at 110 % for 30+ games. LEarn and move on.

declocoug wrote:

Yep, refs didn't cause 18 turnovers, allow UCLA 15 offensive rebounds or shoot 10 more shots. If we do a better job at hanging onto the ball or boxing out, we win. Oh and the refs didn't cause BYU to miss 10 FTs in a 7-pt loss.

have to agree. I'm not really blaming the refs (they just sounded like they were terrible) just like you can't blame the refs for the football loss against utah. Both games were totally winnable even with all the bad calls. of course BYU could have won that game. It sounds like the same type of game that they typically play at unlv, not like the game they played at ESA last week.



it's a marathon. hard to keep your motivation at 110 % for 30+ games. LEarn and move on.

Especially when everyone is going to pick your game as the game they go hard for a few of those of miles and hope to get a better time. If my analogy works.

I read in an article Thursday that BYU still hadn't looked at any UCLA film as of Wed night interview. Final exams may have had us underprepare for this game. Football, always a priority at BYU even with 6-6 football VS undefeated basketball, resulted in poor attendance in Anaheim.



Too many people seemed willing to assume UCLA wasxa bad team. They are not a formidable team, but they are not a bad team.



Shooting, and especially free throw shooting, are the Achilles heel of this team - even more so than the oft criticized big men.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Cougarbib2 wrote:
I read in an article Thursday that BYU still hadn't looked at any UCLA film as of Wed night interview. Final exams may have had us underprepare for this game. Football, always a priority at BYU even with 6-6 football VS undefeated basketball, resulted in poor attendance in Anaheim.



Too many people seemed willing to assume UCLA wasxa bad team. They are not a formidable team, but they are not a bad team.



Shooting, and especially free throw shooting, are the Achilles heel of this team - even more so than the oft criticized big men.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

And if we struggled to find time to prepare because of finals, then it is understandable why didn't play like our normal selves.

I hope this debacle was due to finals getting in the way of sufficient practice. It's a realistic excuse I guess. Whatever happens we need to have fewer than 5 losses going into the big dance to get the coveted 6 seed. A 7-10 just gives us an over-matched second round game where our weaknesses will be exposed. We'll see if this is the same old song and dance when we visit UNLV and UNM in the next little while.

mizzoucoug wrote:
You're both right. Lots of mindless turnovers and home-cooking refs who might as well be Pac-10 cheaters like last time we played @ UCLA.

The refs were not PAC 10 refs.

http://statsheet.com/mcb/referees/tony-greene" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://statsheet.com/mcb/referees/mike-nance" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://statsheet.com/mcb/referees/glenn-tuitt" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If you put any blame on the officiating for this loss, you are an idiot. Please don't make yourself look stupid by using the home cooking, pac-10 refs argument. They had 0 to do with the fact that we looked pathetic.



Man up and take it. We sucked on Saturday and the officials had nothing to do with it. Nothing.

My co-worker, who watched the game while I could only listen to KSL's x-stream feed, said the reffing was a factor in BYU's loss on Saturday. He used to ref so he's sympathetic with the refs, but said he had to say they were very biased for UCLA.



That being said, not having a healthy Hartsock and being a relatively poor free throw shooting team this season while turning the ball over much more than usual had more to do with it than anything else.



Let's just say SI called it and it wasn't too hard to imagine a BYU loss against a talented, gotta prove something UCLA squad playing in their own backyard.



If the teams play 4 games, BYU wins 3 if they are healthy.



I just want BYU to use this loss and the last of the preseason games to get ready for UNLV and send a message to the conference that the title will be BYU's by season's end.

CougarPeasant wrote:
My co-worker, who watched the game while I could only listen to KSL's x-stream feed, said the reffing was a factor in BYU's loss on Saturday. He used to ref so he's sympathetic with the refs, but said he had to say they were very biased for UCLA.

Fail. Absolutely false.



The officiating had nothing to do with it. We sucked on our own, we didn't have, nor did we need, any help from the officials. For or against us.



Sorry, but I don't care what your friend said. He may have officiated before but obviously he wasn't very good if he thought the officiating was "sympathetic" toward UCLA.



The officiating was fine. Stop perpetuating the stereotype that BYU fan's whine about officiating. It makes us look stupid.

northerncougar wrote:

My co-worker, who watched the game while I could only listen to KSL's x-stream feed, said the reffing was a factor in BYU's loss on Saturday. He used to ref so he's sympathetic with the refs, but said he had to say they were very biased for UCLA.

Fail. Absolutely false.



The officiating had nothing to do with it. We sucked on our own, we didn't have, nor did we need, any help from the officials. For or against us.



Sorry, but I don't care what your friend said. He may have officiated before but obviously he wasn't very good if he thought the officiating was "sympathetic" toward UCLA.



The officiating was fine. Stop perpetuating the stereotype that BYU fan's whine about officiating. It makes us look stupid.

Reading comprehension fail. I guess you didn't read the rest of my post. That and I have read accounts by others who said that the refs were a factor in this game. But neither my co-worker nor others who complained about the reffing said it was the deciding factor or the most significant factor. They all point to the poor rebounding, the turnovers, and the poor shooting as being the prime reasons why BYU lost.



And saying someone is a poor official without proof is in poor taste. If you disagree, that's one thing, but to berate someone for having a differing opinion is just wrong.

Honest question: How many of you play basketball or have played basketball before? Like in actual leagues? It could be high school, college, YMCA, competitive pick-up leagues...



The reason I ask is that anyone who understands the game realizes that the refs in the UCLA game were fine. i evaluated nearly every foul called on our players and they all looked 100% legit. There might have been one or two that were questionable. There were also a few questionable ones called against UCLA. The reffing wasn't "bad." In fact, I was fairly impressed with the refs. They called a high-tempo game pretty damn accurately.

Most of the fouls called were legit. It was the contact that wasn't called that is at issue. Just like when we play UNLV and SDSU and UNM and K-State last year - teams, like UCLA was on Saturday, are able to play extremely physical on our perimeter players without fouls being called each time. Their physical play was allowed to disrupt BYU's offense.



It's a tried and true strategy and props to teams who can pull it off. If the refs will allow you to play physical then you continue to do so.



Were the refs THE reason we lost? No. Were they A reason? Yes.



Officiating is very difficult, espeically in basketball, because you can have such a profound impact on the game. You can control scoring more in basketball than just about any other sport.



The problem was the consistency. The UCLA was inconsistently called. They called it loose at times and very tight at other. UCLA did a better job of adapting than BYU. They made the plays when they needed to and BYU didn't.



BYU did more to lose that game than the refs. As I said in other threads, BYU missed key shots, BYU missed key free throws, BYU turned it over at key times, BYU couldn't grab defensive rebounds at key times. The officials didn't do those things BYU did.

kitic77 wrote:
Most of the fouls called were legit. It was the contact that wasn't called that is at issue. Just like when we play UNLV and SDSU and UNM and K-State last year - teams, like UCLA was on Saturday, are able to play extremely physical on our perimeter players without fouls being called each time. Their physical play was allowed to disrupt BYU's offense.



It's a tried and true strategy and props to teams who can pull it off. If the refs will allow you to play physical then you continue to do so.



Were the refs THE reason we lost? No. Were they A reason? Yes.



Officiating is very difficult, espeically in basketball, because you can have such a profound impact on the game. You can control scoring more in basketball than just about any other sport.



The problem was the consistency. The UCLA was inconsistently called. They called it loose at times and very tight at other. UCLA did a better job of adapting than BYU. They made the plays when they needed to and BYU didn't.



BYU did more to lose that game than the refs. As I said in other threads, BYU missed key shots, BYU missed key free throws, BYU turned it over at key times, BYU couldn't grab defensive rebounds at key times. The officials didn't do those things BYU did.

This is what my co-worker said. UCLA was allowed to play much more physically without getting called for fouls. And the calls were inconsistent. I have not watched the game, but I've discussed it enough with others whose judgement I trust to know they wouldn't say it if there wasn't a basis for their comments.

CougarPeasant wrote:

CougarPeasant wrote:
My co-worker, who watched the game while I could only listen to KSL's x-stream feed, said the reffing was a factor in BYU's loss on Saturday. He used to ref so he's sympathetic with the refs, but said he had to say they were very biased for UCLA.

Fail. Absolutely false.



The officiating had nothing to do with it. We sucked on our own, we didn't have, nor did we need, any help from the officials. For or against us.



Sorry, but I don't care what your friend said. He may have officiated before but obviously he wasn't very good if he thought the officiating was "sympathetic" toward UCLA.



The officiating was fine. Stop perpetuating the stereotype that BYU fan's whine about officiating. It makes us look stupid.

Reading comprehension fail. I guess you didn't read the rest of my post. That and I have read accounts by others who said that the refs were a factor in this game. But neither my co-worker nor others who complained about the reffing said it was the deciding factor or the most significant factor. They all point to the poor rebounding, the turnovers, and the poor shooting as being the prime reasons why BYU lost.



And saying someone is a poor official without proof is in poor taste. If you disagree, that's one thing, but to berate someone for having a differing opinion is just wrong.

I stand by my post. Officiating wasn't an issue. In any way, shape or form. I read your whole post and I was only calling fail on the part about officiating. That is why I only quoted that part. If your friend thought the officiating was biased toward UCLA he wasn't watching the same game I watched. You brought up the fact that he was a former official, and I called him out for not knowing what he was talking about.



I am former baseball, basketball and football player. That doesn't mean I was any good at it.

kitic77 wrote:
Most of the fouls called were legit. It was the contact that wasn't called that is at issue. Just like when we play UNLV and SDSU and UNM and K-State last year - teams, like UCLA was on Saturday, are able to play extremely physical on our perimeter players without fouls being called each time. Their physical play was allowed to disrupt BYU's offense.



It's a tried and true strategy and props to teams who can pull it off. If the refs will allow you to play physical then you continue to do so.



Were the refs THE reason we lost? No. Were they A reason? Yes.



Officiating is very difficult, espeically in basketball, because you can have such a profound impact on the game. You can control scoring more in basketball than just about any other sport.



The problem was the consistency. The UCLA was inconsistently called. They called it loose at times and very tight at other. UCLA did a better job of adapting than BYU. They made the plays when they needed to and BYU didn't.



BYU did more to lose that game than the refs. As I said in other threads, BYU missed key shots, BYU missed key free throws, BYU turned it over at key times, BYU couldn't grab defensive rebounds at key times. The officials didn't do those things BYU did.

This is the way almost every game is called. The problem wasn't officiating. The problem was that we didn't adapt to how the officials called the game and UCLA did. The coaches and players were the problem. Not the officials.



Good grief people. We are so desperate to find a reason why we lost, that we look pathetic and silly.



We lost because we had zero interior defense, very little scoring from the perimeter and couldn't hit the floor with our free throws. As far as I could tell watching the game on Saturday, the officials had nothing to do with any of those. Nothing.

northerncougar wrote:

Most of the fouls called were legit. It was the contact that wasn't called that is at issue. Just like when we play UNLV and SDSU and UNM and K-State last year - teams, like UCLA was on Saturday, are able to play extremely physical on our perimeter players without fouls being called each time. Their physical play was allowed to disrupt BYU's offense.



It's a tried and true strategy and props to teams who can pull it off. If the refs will allow you to play physical then you continue to do so.



Were the refs THE reason we lost? No. Were they A reason? Yes.



Officiating is very difficult, espeically in basketball, because you can have such a profound impact on the game. You can control scoring more in basketball than just about any other sport.



The problem was the consistency. The UCLA was inconsistently called. They called it loose at times and very tight at other. UCLA did a better job of adapting than BYU. They made the plays when they needed to and BYU didn't.



BYU did more to lose that game than the refs. As I said in other threads, BYU missed key shots, BYU missed key free throws, BYU turned it over at key times, BYU couldn't grab defensive rebounds at key times. The officials didn't do those things BYU did.

This is the way almost every game is called. The problem wasn't officiating. The problem was that we didn't adapt to how the officials called the game and UCLA did. The coaches and players were the problem. Not the officials.



Good grief people. We are so desperate to find a reason why we lost, that we look pathetic and silly.



We lost because we had zero interior defense, very little scoring from the perimeter and couldn't hit the floor with our free throws. As far as I could tell watching the game on Saturday, the officials had nothing to do with any of those. Nothing.

+1



The illusion that "UCLA was able to play more aggressively" was that they DID play more aggressively - BYU was less effective at slashing to the hoop and pounding it down low because they COULDN'T - not b/c we were doing it super effectively but the refs kept ruining it or us.



With all the comments I had read, I expected the reffing in this game to make me sick when I saw it - I really did. I felt the same way when I saw the box score from the first half and how lopsided the fouls were.

Then I watched the game and realized that it was just us.

Officiating was fine. How many players did UCLA have with 4 fouls by the end of the game?



UCLA knew we were smaller and by watching game tape saw that if they played us physically they could frustrate us. Kansas State did it to us last year. UNLV plays us physically, and SDSU brings it too.



BYU plays small ball. You beat small ball by knocking them around. We responded to UCLA by swiping at them.

northerncougar wrote:

Most of the fouls called were legit. It was the contact that wasn't called that is at issue. Just like when we play UNLV and SDSU and UNM and K-State last year - teams, like UCLA was on Saturday, are able to play extremely physical on our perimeter players without fouls being called each time. Their physical play was allowed to disrupt BYU's offense.



It's a tried and true strategy and props to teams who can pull it off. If the refs will allow you to play physical then you continue to do so.



Were the refs THE reason we lost? No. Were they A reason? Yes.



Officiating is very difficult, espeically in basketball, because you can have such a profound impact on the game. You can control scoring more in basketball than just about any other sport.



The problem was the consistency. The UCLA was inconsistently called. They called it loose at times and very tight at other. UCLA did a better job of adapting than BYU. They made the plays when they needed to and BYU didn't.



BYU did more to lose that game than the refs. As I said in other threads, BYU missed key shots, BYU missed key free throws, BYU turned it over at key times, BYU couldn't grab defensive rebounds at key times. The officials didn't do those things BYU did.

This is the way almost every game is called. The problem wasn't officiating. The problem was that we didn't adapt to how the officials called the game and UCLA did. The coaches and players were the problem. Not the officials.



Good grief people. We are so desperate to find a reason why we lost, that we look pathetic and silly.



We lost because we had zero interior defense, very little scoring from the perimeter and couldn't hit the floor with our free throws. As far as I could tell watching the game on Saturday, the officials had nothing to do with any of those. Nothing.

My father-in-law was watching the game with me and he kept yelling/blaming the refs. He stopped watching half way through and then kept asking me about why I thought we lost. He was content to blame it on the refs and kept bringing it up. Finally, I told him we lost we because we coughed up the ball 20 times, couldn't make a shot and couldn't hit the broad side of a barn from the free-throw line. We lost the game, not the refs.



Some people just think the world is out to get them/BYU and any "bad" that happens to them/BYU is because of other people's actions and not their ability to act.

Gunk wrote:

kitic77 wrote:
Most of the fouls called were legit. It was the contact that wasn't called that is at issue. Just like when we play UNLV and SDSU and UNM and K-State last year - teams, like UCLA was on Saturday, are able to play extremely physical on our perimeter players without fouls being called each time. Their physical play was allowed to disrupt BYU's offense.



It's a tried and true strategy and props to teams who can pull it off. If the refs will allow you to play physical then you continue to do so.



Were the refs THE reason we lost? No. Were they A reason? Yes.



Officiating is very difficult, espeically in basketball, because you can have such a profound impact on the game. You can control scoring more in basketball than just about any other sport.



The problem was the consistency. The UCLA was inconsistently called. They called it loose at times and very tight at other. UCLA did a better job of adapting than BYU. They made the plays when they needed to and BYU didn't.



BYU did more to lose that game than the refs. As I said in other threads, BYU missed key shots, BYU missed key free throws, BYU turned it over at key times, BYU couldn't grab defensive rebounds at key times. The officials didn't do those things BYU did.

This is the way almost every game is called. The problem wasn't officiating. The problem was that we didn't adapt to how the officials called the game and UCLA did. The coaches and players were the problem. Not the officials.



Good grief people. We are so desperate to find a reason why we lost, that we look pathetic and silly.



We lost because we had zero interior defense, very little scoring from the perimeter and couldn't hit the floor with our free throws. As far as I could tell watching the game on Saturday, the officials had nothing to do with any of those. Nothing.

My father-in-law was watching the game with me and he kept yelling/blaming the refs. He stopped watching half way through and then kept asking me about why I thought we lost. He was content to blame it on the refs and kept bringing it up. Finally, I told him we lost we because we coughed up the ball 20 times, couldn't make a shot and couldn't hit the broad side of a barn from the free-throw line. We lost the game, not the refs.



Some people just think the world is out to get them/BYU and any "bad" that happens to them/BYU is because of other people's actions and not their ability to act.

I wonder if we are related. :crazy: My father-in-law, and the rest of my wife's family, were all screaming the same thing.



My nephew tried a couple of times to correct the family, but I assured him that I learned a long time ago that it was a lost cause. We spent the majority of the time laughing at them.