hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Mar 1, 2007 11:16:25 GMT -5
I can't believe no one has mentioned this game yet. I stayed up for the whole thing. What a great game that featured several swings each way. Acie Law IV was a man out there. The two shots he hit to force the 2 overtime periods were awesome. And what precision they executed the miss of the free throw. It damn near worked. You can't ask for a better look than they got with a second to go.
And Texas was Texas. They are about as athletic as any team around and with Durant, Augustin, James and Abrams leading the way, I have no doubt that they can beat any team on any given day.
Texas A&M might be the best coached team I have seen. It certainly helps to have a senior leader like Law running the team, but it isn't just him. They are just all well coached.
What a great game between two teams that I do not want to see in my bracket.
|
|
|
|
Post by ExcitableBoy on Mar 1, 2007 11:26:56 GMT -5
Texas A&M might be the best coached team I have seen. It certainly helps to have a senior leader like Law running the team, but it isn't just him. They are just all well coached. Obviously you don't watch many Hoyas games. We are the best coached team anyone has ever seen. |
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Mar 1, 2007 11:28:50 GMT -5
Texas A&M might be the best coached team I have seen. It certainly helps to have a senior leader like Law running the team, but it isn't just him. They are just all well coached. No doubt that you are a very well coached team as well. I wish I could say the same of my Gators, but right now we aren't. |
|
RDF
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 8,835
|
Post by RDF on Mar 1, 2007 11:38:30 GMT -5
Anyone who draws Texas in NCAA--the fans of that team will need as much Tums as possible--it's going to be an exciting, tight game. They have played 2 of the more exciting games I've seen and definately the best two games of the year with Oklahoma State game in Stillwater and last night's game. Hifi mentioned them earlier in year, so he gets credit for that.
As for A&M--Gillespie is a great coach and they are a very fun team not to mention solid team in all areas--after watching them and seeing some Big XII top teams play--they have chance for deep run in tournament and Hifi might be onto something with his proclimation of Texas being a sleeper/team to watch in upcoming weeks. I like A&M a lot more after seeing them the past couple of weeks and think they are best overall team in the league--Kansas has most talent but will it get over the hump of Self induced problems? No pun intended--and if it was--well it bombed but we move along anyways...
Hifi--Florida is suffering from clinching their division too soon and their kids are looking forward to SEC and NCAA tournament. That reminds me of an NBA team who is only focused on Playoffs and throws some games away--which eventually leads to trouble. The past few games remind me of Shaquille O'Neal's last team in Los Angeles--they just focused on Playoffs, thought showing up would get it done and then all things fell apart. Main thing for UF is to get hungry and try to dominate EVERY game--when you are a veteran team with championship pedigree, you need to create self centered challenges like--we need to hold this team to a certain amount of points, or we need to have each guy reach double figures, etc..... and rest takes care of itself. If you start ignoring "meaningless" games for bigger picture--you put too much focus on that and often flame out early.
|
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Mar 1, 2007 12:26:17 GMT -5
I agree with you 100%. I saw it coming a lot sooner too. In fact I called it the "NBA mentality." It's that idea that you can turn it on and turn it off. We all know it's impossible to play your best for 90-100 games, like NBA teams are asked to do. Even college teams are not going to be at their best for 35 games. But winning when you aren't at your best is underrated. I think we were due for a letdown so to speak. Obviously coming off a Title year where you return virtually everyone will lead to complacency. Then blowing people out by 15-20 only led to more. Then we hit a stride where we would play poorly in the first half and then flip the switch and win in the second. It has finally caught up with us. We had a more favorable schedule earlier in conference play but then finish with a 6 game stretch that included Vandy, LSU and Tennessee all on the road and then finishing this Sunday with Kentucky at home. Sure enough we didn't have that edge that we needed to win those competitive games.
Also, I think you are right about clinching the conference. It probably would have been better for us if Kentucky or Vandy had been a little more consistent. We had basically clinched the regular season title when the slump began. Thechnically Vandy could have caught us had they run the table and had we lost every game, but that wasn't going to happen. So we went into Vandy with a magic number of 1. Going into the season the players mentioned that they really wanted an outright SEC regular season title. That was one thing they had yet to accomplish. Maybe if that was still in danger we would have played better of late.
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,482
|
Post by hoyarooter on Mar 1, 2007 13:38:46 GMT -5
I've been on the A&M bandwagon since I saw them play UCLA in the Wooden Classic. They're just a very solid team at both ends of the floor with no glaring weaknesses. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see them in the final four.
I didn't see the game (ended just as I arrived home), but I did see the highlights on ESPN. Wow, two amazing comebacks by A&M to force the overtimes. Acie Law is nails.
|
|
bubbrubbhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
We are the intuitive minds that plot the course. Woo-WOOO!
Posts: 1,369
|
Post by bubbrubbhoya on Mar 1, 2007 14:03:11 GMT -5
|
|
RDF
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 8,835
|
Post by RDF on Mar 1, 2007 14:10:20 GMT -5
I agree with you 100%. I saw it coming a lot sooner too. In fact I called it the "NBA mentality." It's that idea that you can turn it on and turn it off. We all know it's impossible to play your best for 90-100 games, like NBA teams are asked to do. Even college teams are not going to be at their best for 35 games. But winning when you aren't at your best is underrated. I think we were due for a letdown so to speak. Obviously coming off a Title year where you return virtually everyone will lead to complacency. Then blowing people out by 15-20 only led to more. Then we hit a stride where we would play poorly in the first half and then flip the switch and win in the second. It has finally caught up with us. We had a more favorable schedule earlier in conference play but then finish with a 6 game stretch that included Vandy, LSU and Tennessee all on the road and then finishing this Sunday with Kentucky at home. Sure enough we didn't have that edge that we needed to win those competitive games. Also, I think you are right about clinching the conference. It probably would have been better for us if Kentucky or Vandy had been a little more consistent. We had basically clinched the regular season title when the slump began. Thechnically Vandy could have caught us had they run the table and had we lost every game, but that wasn't going to happen. So we went into Vandy with a magic number of 1. Going into the season the players mentioned that they really wanted an outright SEC regular season title. That was one thing they had yet to accomplish. Maybe if that was still in danger we would have played better of late. Well the game against Tennessee could be explained by the kids being traumatized by seeing Pat Summitt in a cheerleading outfit and singing. That is enough to make me scared to come out of a huddle-and making things worse was Phil Fulmer and Peyton Manning were there too--the place looked like the STAR WARS BAR, only uglier and more disturbing. If someone was going to be a cheerleader for that game--at least they could've went with Candace Parker--but Summitt---YIKES! |
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Mar 1, 2007 14:53:15 GMT -5
I agree with you 100%. I saw it coming a lot sooner too. In fact I called it the "NBA mentality." It's that idea that you can turn it on and turn it off. We all know it's impossible to play your best for 90-100 games, like NBA teams are asked to do. Even college teams are not going to be at their best for 35 games. But winning when you aren't at your best is underrated. I think we were due for a letdown so to speak. Obviously coming off a Title year where you return virtually everyone will lead to complacency. Then blowing people out by 15-20 only led to more. Then we hit a stride where we would play poorly in the first half and then flip the switch and win in the second. It has finally caught up with us. We had a more favorable schedule earlier in conference play but then finish with a 6 game stretch that included Vandy, LSU and Tennessee all on the road and then finishing this Sunday with Kentucky at home. Sure enough we didn't have that edge that we needed to win those competitive games. Also, I think you are right about clinching the conference. It probably would have been better for us if Kentucky or Vandy had been a little more consistent. We had basically clinched the regular season title when the slump began. Thechnically Vandy could have caught us had they run the table and had we lost every game, but that wasn't going to happen. So we went into Vandy with a magic number of 1. Going into the season the players mentioned that they really wanted an outright SEC regular season title. That was one thing they had yet to accomplish. Maybe if that was still in danger we would have played better of late. Well the game against Tennessee could be explained by the kids being traumatized by seeing Pat Summitt in a cheerleading outfit and singing. That is enough to make me scared to come out of a huddle-and making things worse was Phil Fulmer and Peyton Manning were there too--the place looked like the STAR WARS BAR, only uglier and more disturbing. If someone was going to be a cheerleader for that game--at least they could've went with Candace Parker--but Summitt---YIKES! Jack already gave the name "Mos Eisley" (the Star Wars Bar) to the Carrier Dome. You're gonna have to come up with a different moniker to describe the other orange place. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Mar 1, 2007 16:52:46 GMT -5
making things worse was Phil Fulmer and Peyton Manning were there too--the place looked like the STAR WARS BAR, only uglier and more disturbing. Did you catch Fulmer picking his nose when the cameras flashed to him the 2nd time? |
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Mar 1, 2007 16:59:24 GMT -5
making things worse was Phil Fulmer and Peyton Manning were there too--the place looked like the STAR WARS BAR, only uglier and more disturbing. Did you catch Fulmer picking his nose when the cameras flashed to him the 2nd time? Now that you mention it, I did see that. Austin, did you by chance go to that A&M game last night? |
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Mar 1, 2007 18:32:35 GMT -5
Now that you mention that I did see that. Austin, did you by chance go to that A&M game last night? Looked for tickets on craigslist yesterday but upper deck seats were going for $125+ each, lower deck for $300+. I didn't want to go to the game that badly. |
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Mar 2, 2007 12:08:43 GMT -5
Austin, just curious, what is the scalping law, if any, out there?
We had a ridiculous "$1" over face officially in place until last year. Now the free market rules, as it should.
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,482
|
Post by hoyarooter on Mar 2, 2007 13:44:10 GMT -5
Back in the day, the law here in California was that you couldn't sell a ticket outside the stadium for anything other than face value -- i.e., you were scalping if you sold for less. No idea if that's still the case.
|
|
|
|
Post by ExcitableBoy on Mar 2, 2007 14:34:16 GMT -5
Outside Verizon it says it is illegal to buy or sell tickets at, above, or below the face value.
This has to be the most rediculous policy around. I understand no resale above face value and can I am willing to listen to arguments against no resale at face value. But below face value, too??!! Come on!!
The policy is so rediculous that even the multiple police officers standing on F Street pay no mind to the scalpers on either end of the block.
|
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Mar 3, 2007 1:09:06 GMT -5
Obviously I don't know for sure, but I would guess that what you are talking about is similar to what is now in place here. Prior to two years ago, there was a State Statute that made it illegal to sell tickets for anything more than 1 dollar over face. Obviously, there were more than one or two "criminals" running free.
The real catch then was that licensed "travel agents" were essentially exempt.
The new law, adopted June 1, 2006 repealed such restictions.
Now, the governing body is the next lower agency. In this case, that would be county or city ordinances.
From what I have heard, most municipalities have followed suit and adopted whatever the State has decided upon. But, the next issue is a bit more complicated. Governing bodies have pretty much sided with the "owners" in that they frequently allow the venue to decide what goes and what doesn't.
At the Georgia Dome and at the Waterhouse Center in Orlando (Magic, concerts etc ...) it is illegal to sell tickets at all. As I understand it, the bridge that closes the gap between "policy" and "law" is that the venue is private, and as such is allowed to set their own policies.
If you violate them, then you are told to leave the premises. If it goes further, then potentially a "trespassing" charge could be levied.
Additionally, the private property owners are also in charge of sales in general, and from what I have heard, many have essentially prostituted themselves to a private agency which then controls who can and can't sell anything.
Personally, I think it is nothing but a corrupt aspect of the City government in most cases. Basically, if you are on public property, then you need a permit to sell almost anything almost anywhere. If you are on private property, then the "owner" of the property is in charge of such decisions, except for the fact that tons of government agencies are involved as well. Obviously the Health Department is the most obvious, but there are others.
The bottom line is that ultimately the Private Property can decide what you can and can't do.
In our case, the University, which is private, doesn't allow ticket sales at all (nudge, nudge, wink wink). They also require a permit for selling anything. So if you are on university property, you are at their mercy.
If you are across the street, then have at it. The problem is that you can't have an open container on "public" property.
Beer or ticket .... but not both.
I hate red tape.
|
|
bubbrubbhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
We are the intuitive minds that plot the course. Woo-WOOO!
Posts: 1,369
|
Post by bubbrubbhoya on Mar 3, 2007 1:13:42 GMT -5
The policy is so rediculous that even the multiple police officers standing on F Street pay no mind to the scalpers on either end of the block. That's because they know that it's Fun Street!  |
|
