WICHITA STATE (8-9, 0-4) at SOUTH FLORIDA (10-5, 3-1) Game Thread

[BAShocker]

Off the court, Bell might be the best, most nicest kid ever.

But if he dribbles directly right into a double team one more time, then promptly turn the ball over, I may lose it.

[Kung Wu]

And that's his story. His 2 years at Drexel, he was 42 and 36% from 3. Last year at WSU, he played only 14+ mpg and shot 38/23% from 2 and 3.

Was he the point guard at Drexel, or did he have a true PG like Cortes that knows how to make a leading pass to him?

[pinstripers]

1. Yes, we could actually go winless in conference.
2. But I don't think we will.
3. Cortes showed promise last game, not this game.
4. Losing to a jackass like Pryor really sucks.
5. I know what is on the card that Coach pulls out.
6. It reads, "put card back in pocket."
7. I don't think we'd have won if the Bulls only shot 20 free throws,
8. Good shooting covers many flaws.
9. Bad shooting exposes them.
10. I'm rooting for the Bills.

[Kung Wu]

I caught Pryor's post game interview ...

[molly jabali]

Totally indisposed during the game… Cortez played 7 minutes???? Was he hurt?

[Stickboy46]

Totally indisposed during the game… Cortez played 7 minutes???? Was he hurt?

quickly fouling and turning the ball over 2 times in the first 15 seconds you get back in the game will do that

[molly jabali]

Thank you....wow....not good....

[WuDrWu]

Last 3 games combined we are +11 in the first half and -50 in the second half.

PLUS ELEVEN

vs

MINUS FIFTY


FIFTY.

[Dan]

Last 3 games combined we are +11 in the first half and -50 in the second half.

PLUS ELEVEN

vs

MINUS FIFTY


FIFTY.

clearly getting outcoached with halftime adjustments. Not a good stat for those that like stats.

[JVShocker]

I caught Pryor's post game interview ...

[WuDrWu]

I don't have the heart to go back and see the discussion on the F1 in the first half, but thinking about it while jabbing myself in the ear with a ball pin hammer, I came to this thought and I'm curious what ShockRef has to say.

Clearly it was a bad call at first. Beavis shouldn't have been called for the foul.

But chucking the cutter (screener in this case) is hardly unusual in a game that has become WAY too physical, but that's how they want it played (or allow the big boys to play).

So they missed the call.

Beavis flops like a stuck fish anyway. While he is doing a good job and playing well, no way he should be going to the line 167 times a game as he's been doing lately. Refs are buying his schtick hook, line and sinker. He clearly exaggerated the chuck. Caitlin Clark approved this flop.

Be that as it may......

When reviewed, I don't believe the rules allow the officials to "take away" the foul that has already been called. Am I correct?

I also don't believe they can review it and call a common foul on X there. Am I correct? (I think I am on both counts but I'd like clarification)

What I think they came up with is the following: The only thing we can call is an F1 or F2. It's really not an F1 (calling it an F1 takes an extremely vivid imagination in my opinion), HOWEVER, if we call it an F1, we can then say that the F1 stopped play, therefore there was no foul to be called on Beavis. So justice prevails, foul on X (as it should have been in the first place) and no foul on Beavis (even though he flopped).

Now, I don't know that they even could do that, but it's the only thing that made sense to me. Of course in the end, the screwed WSU who got hit with a terrible F1 they didn't deserve instead of USF getting screwed on a foul they didn't deserve. So a little extra bump for us was a better outcome, so to speak, then a foul on them.

Thoughts?

[JVShocker]

Last 3 games combined we are +11 in the first half and -50 in the second half.

PLUS ELEVEN

vs

MINUS FIFTY


FIFTY.

[Stickboy46]

I don't have the heart to go back and see the discussion on the F1 in the first half, but thinking about while jabbing myself in the ear with a ball pin hammer, I came to this thought and I'm curious what ShockRef has to say.

Clearly it was a bad call at first. Beavis shouldn't have been called for the foul.

But chucking the cutter (screener in this case) is hardly unusual in a game that has become WAY too physical, but that's how they want it played (or allow the big boys to play).

So they missed the call.

Beavis flops like a stuck fish anyway. While he is doing a good job and playing well, no way he should be going to the line 167 times a game as he's been doing lately. Refs are buying his schtick hook, line and sinker. He clearly exaggerated the chuck. Caitlin Clark approved this flop.

Be that as it may......

When reviewed, I don't believe the rules allow the officials to "take away" the foul that has already been called. Am I correct?

I also don't believe they can review it and call a common foul on X there. Am I correct? (I think I am on both counts but I'd like clarification)

What I think they came up with is the following: The only thing we can call is an F1 or F2. It's really not an F1 (calling it an F1 takes an extremely vivid imagination in my opinion), HOWEVER, if we call it an F1, we can then say that the F1 stopped play, therefore there was no foul to be called on Beavis. So justice prevails, foul on X (as it should have been in the first place) and no foul on Beavis (even though he flopped).

Now, I don't know that they even could do that, but it's the only thing that made sense to me. Of course in the end, the screwed WSU who got hit with a terrible F1 they didn't deserve instead of USF getting screwed on a foul they didn't deserve. So a little extra bump for us was a better outcome, so to speak, then a foul on them.

Thoughts?

I'm not ShockRef ... but the bolded was the conclusion that I came up with too. Pryor got hit in the chest by Bell, went flying like he was shot with a shotgun, then laid on the ground holding his face (must have hit his face while flopping like a fish because Bell sure didn't hit it), got the coach all riled up so they went to review the "hit to the face". They realized they really screwed up that call but knew they can't just review a common foul and change it or else we would be doing that all day. So they decided they would call the flagrant to "fix" the mistake.

That said, in the 2nd half, the flagrant on USF was also extremely soft, though more correct than this call. That one did lead to a 6 pt possession for us and was the only reason we were in the game at the end

[WuDrWu]

Thought for the day:

He who learns must suffer.

[Shocktoberfest]

N

Nice job. Gifs today from horribly underrated movies. There is an irony to Groundhog day that is painful.