Football Home Game
Sat, August 31, 2024
Sat, August 31, 2024
Basketball Home Game
Fri, November 1, 2024
Fri, November 1, 2024
I missed it
I missed it
What did Shaw do around the 5:00 remaining mark that put him in the doghouse? I was in the other room and when I came back in he was sitting on the bench. Maybe this was a good thing at the end of the game to have him out.
Last edited by satireag on March 5th, 2014, 11:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 1860
- Joined: March 11th, 2013, 12:15 pm
- Has thanked: 4 times
- Been thanked: 694 times
- Aggiefan33
- Posts: 2205
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 10:21 am
- Has thanked: 512 times
- Been thanked: 142 times
Re: I missed it
After he was called for an offensive foul, he had choice words for the official. I doubt his words were any were than what I was saying though.
Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk. Please forgive my improper grammar and/or spelling issues.
Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk. Please forgive my improper grammar and/or spelling issues.
The harder you work, the harder it is to Surrender. - Men's Basketball locker room
- dyedblue
- Posts: 8410
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 4:21 pm
- Has thanked: 24 times
- Been thanked: 828 times
Re: I missed it
That is one technical I did not mind. I loved the emotion and fire - we need more of that.
“The winning team has a dedication. It will have a core of veteran players who set the standards. They will not accept defeat.” --Merlin Olsen
- mehascrayon
- Posts: 409
- Joined: October 31st, 2012, 11:14 am
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
I missed it
That call was weak.
Last edited by mehascrayon on March 6th, 2014, 10:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
"What position did Stew play at Gonzaga?"
"Master of the Universe."
"Master of the Universe."
- Aglicious
- Site Admin
- Posts: 7106
- Joined: January 14th, 2004, 12:00 am
- Location: Vega$
- Has thanked: 910 times
- Been thanked: 2366 times
Re: I missed it
Not to derail this thread too much but after Shaw's technical and giving them their two FT's we had a lead of 1 point. From that 8:12 mark on we were able to extend the lead to as much as 13 points and we never trailed. Previous to the technical and with Shaw getting the majority of the minutes, we only ever lead by as much as 4 and were down by as much as 8.satireag wrote:Maybe it is for the best to just pull him out for the last five minutes every game!
So what changed? For one, our defense changed - we held Wyoming to 7 points over the next seven and a half minutes (they tacked on another 4 points in junk time) after the technical or .933 points/min over that stretch. Previous to the technical, we were allowing 1.34 points/min. In addition to the defense, our offense suddenly put up 2.62 points/min. over that last 8 min of the game compared to the 1.37 points/min. we had been putting up during the previous 32 minutes of the game. We were nearly twice as efficient on offense and played better defense without Shaw on the court.
Now, the Shaw lovers can debate that his technical lit a fire under the team and gave them a boost and the Shaw haters can look to the numbers as see that we actually play better team basketball without him.
- MarioWest
- Posts: 919
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 9:48 am
- Location: Atlanta, GA
- Has thanked: 59 times
- Been thanked: 184 times
Re: I missed it
I agree. The color commentator thought Shaw was in the wrong to even argue but it looked like they just got tangled up a bit. Shaw must have used some very strong words with the ref though, because that T came awfully quickly and it seemed to be based solely off of what Shaw said. I definitely didn't see him "almost bump" the official.mehascrayon wrote:That call was weak.
- 2004AG
- Posts: 12395
- Joined: November 16th, 2010, 11:42 am
- Has thanked: 774 times
- Been thanked: 1587 times
Re: I missed it
Do you honestly consider the last five minutes of one game a large enough sample size to make that kind of statement?Aglicious wrote:Not to derail this thread too much but after Shaw's technical and giving them their two FT's we had a lead of 1 point. From that 8:12 mark on we were able to extend the lead to as much as 13 points and we never trailed. Previous to the technical and with Shaw getting the majority of the minutes, we only ever lead by as much as 4 and were down by as much as 8.satireag wrote:Maybe it is for the best to just pull him out for the last five minutes every game!
So what changed? For one, our defense changed - we held Wyoming to 7 points over the next seven and a half minutes (they tacked on another 4 points in junk time) after the technical or .933 points/min over that stretch. Previous to the technical, we were allowing 1.34 points/min. In addition to the defense, our offense suddenly put up 2.62 points/min. over that last 8 min of the game compared to the 1.37 points/min. we had been putting up during the previous 32 minutes of the game. We were nearly twice as efficient on offense and played better defense without Shaw on the court.
Now, the Shaw lovers can debate that his technical lit a fire under the team and gave them a boost and the Shaw haters can look to the numbers as see that we actually play better team basketball without him.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Aglicious
- Site Admin
- Posts: 7106
- Joined: January 14th, 2004, 12:00 am
- Location: Vega$
- Has thanked: 910 times
- Been thanked: 2366 times
Re: I missed it
It was 8 min. and it was a distinct moment of change in the game. To that point we were losing about 50% of the time in the game, afterward we never trailed and extended the lead like we had not been able to do at any other point.2004AG wrote:Do you honestly consider the last five minutes of one game a large enough sample size to make that kind of statement?Aglicious wrote:Not to derail this thread too much but after Shaw's technical and giving them their two FT's we had a lead of 1 point. From that 8:12 mark on we were able to extend the lead to as much as 13 points and we never trailed. Previous to the technical and with Shaw getting the majority of the minutes, we only ever lead by as much as 4 and were down by as much as 8.satireag wrote:Maybe it is for the best to just pull him out for the last five minutes every game!
So what changed? For one, our defense changed - we held Wyoming to 7 points over the next seven and a half minutes (they tacked on another 4 points in junk time) after the technical or .933 points/min over that stretch. Previous to the technical, we were allowing 1.34 points/min. In addition to the defense, our offense suddenly put up 2.62 points/min. over that last 8 min of the game compared to the 1.37 points/min. we had been putting up during the previous 32 minutes of the game. We were nearly twice as efficient on offense and played better defense without Shaw on the court.
Now, the Shaw lovers can debate that his technical lit a fire under the team and gave them a boost and the Shaw haters can look to the numbers as see that we actually play better team basketball without him.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- 2004AG
- Posts: 12395
- Joined: November 16th, 2010, 11:42 am
- Has thanked: 774 times
- Been thanked: 1587 times
Re: I missed it
Oh well i take it all back. 5 minutes of one game is not nearly enough but 8 minutes changes everything.Aglicious wrote:It was 8 min. and it was a distinct moment of change in the game. To that point we were losing about 50% of the time in the game, afterward we never trailed and extended the lead like we had not been able to do at any other point.2004AG wrote:Do you honestly consider the last five minutes of one game a large enough sample size to make that kind of statement?Aglicious wrote:Not to derail this thread too much but after Shaw's technical and giving them their two FT's we had a lead of 1 point. From that 8:12 mark on we were able to extend the lead to as much as 13 points and we never trailed. Previous to the technical and with Shaw getting the majority of the minutes, we only ever lead by as much as 4 and were down by as much as 8.satireag wrote:Maybe it is for the best to just pull him out for the last five minutes every game!
So what changed? For one, our defense changed - we held Wyoming to 7 points over the next seven and a half minutes (they tacked on another 4 points in junk time) after the technical or .933 points/min over that stretch. Previous to the technical, we were allowing 1.34 points/min. In addition to the defense, our offense suddenly put up 2.62 points/min. over that last 8 min of the game compared to the 1.37 points/min. we had been putting up during the previous 32 minutes of the game. We were nearly twice as efficient on offense and played better defense without Shaw on the court.
Now, the Shaw lovers can debate that his technical lit a fire under the team and gave them a boost and the Shaw haters can look to the numbers as see that we actually play better team basketball without him.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
- Posts: 694
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:46 am
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 149 times
Re: I missed it
I will stick up for Jared on the initial call. The Wyoming player had grabbed Jared and was pulling him down, jared lost balance
and ran over him. Definitely a bad call. No excuse for the technical though.
and ran over him. Definitely a bad call. No excuse for the technical though.
-
- Posts: 8791
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 1:39 am
- Has thanked: 837 times
- Been thanked: 489 times
Re: I missed it
I would argue we often looked better while he was suspended for 5 games too...2004AG wrote:Do you honestly consider the last five minutes of one game a large enough sample size to make that kind of statement?Aglicious wrote:Not to derail this thread too much but after Shaw's technical and giving them their two FT's we had a lead of 1 point. From that 8:12 mark on we were able to extend the lead to as much as 13 points and we never trailed. Previous to the technical and with Shaw getting the majority of the minutes, we only ever lead by as much as 4 and were down by as much as 8.satireag wrote:Maybe it is for the best to just pull him out for the last five minutes every game!
So what changed? For one, our defense changed - we held Wyoming to 7 points over the next seven and a half minutes (they tacked on another 4 points in junk time) after the technical or .933 points/min over that stretch. Previous to the technical, we were allowing 1.34 points/min. In addition to the defense, our offense suddenly put up 2.62 points/min. over that last 8 min of the game compared to the 1.37 points/min. we had been putting up during the previous 32 minutes of the game. We were nearly twice as efficient on offense and played better defense without Shaw on the court.
Now, the Shaw lovers can debate that his technical lit a fire under the team and gave them a boost and the Shaw haters can look to the numbers as see that we actually play better team basketball without him.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Aglicious
- Site Admin
- Posts: 7106
- Joined: January 14th, 2004, 12:00 am
- Location: Vega$
- Has thanked: 910 times
- Been thanked: 2366 times
Re: I missed it
I'm not a hater or a lover, I am Switzerland. I don't have an agenda, it was just an observation about how the team performed pre-technical and post-technical. Stating "We were nearly twice as efficient on offense and played better defense without Shaw on the court" was fact, not my opinion. It was also not a statement about every game or the season as a whole, just last night's game.2004AG wrote:Oh well i take it all back. 5 minutes of one game is not nearly enough but 8 minutes changes everything.Aglicious wrote:It was 8 min. and it was a distinct moment of change in the game. To that point we were losing about 50% of the time in the game, afterward we never trailed and extended the lead like we had not been able to do at any other point.2004AG wrote:Do you honestly consider the last five minutes of one game a large enough sample size to make that kind of statement?Aglicious wrote:Not to derail this thread too much but after Shaw's technical and giving them their two FT's we had a lead of 1 point. From that 8:12 mark on we were able to extend the lead to as much as 13 points and we never trailed. Previous to the technical and with Shaw getting the majority of the minutes, we only ever lead by as much as 4 and were down by as much as 8.satireag wrote:Maybe it is for the best to just pull him out for the last five minutes every game!
So what changed? For one, our defense changed - we held Wyoming to 7 points over the next seven and a half minutes (they tacked on another 4 points in junk time) after the technical or .933 points/min over that stretch. Previous to the technical, we were allowing 1.34 points/min. In addition to the defense, our offense suddenly put up 2.62 points/min. over that last 8 min of the game compared to the 1.37 points/min. we had been putting up during the previous 32 minutes of the game. We were nearly twice as efficient on offense and played better defense without Shaw on the court.
Now, the Shaw lovers can debate that his technical lit a fire under the team and gave them a boost and the Shaw haters can look to the numbers as see that we actually play better team basketball without him.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
- Posts: 3924
- Joined: December 13th, 2010, 10:07 pm
- Location: Salem, Oregon
- Has thanked: 681 times
- Been thanked: 1168 times
- Contact:
Re: I missed it
Our team wasn't the only variable. Wyoming was getting no help off the bench. Their starters were pretty much gassed by the last eight minutes. Like most things, it's complex.
Freelance adventurer and international man of mystery.
-
- Posts: 1860
- Joined: March 11th, 2013, 12:15 pm
- Has thanked: 4 times
- Been thanked: 694 times
Re: I missed it
I was 10 feet from the play. Shaw definitely hooked the defender with his left arm. I think Shaw would be viewed in a totally different light if two things changed:
1. He never took another shot outside of 10 feet.
2. He stopped trying to act like such a hard a$$. He is not a tough guy, so please stop acting like one.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
1. He never took another shot outside of 10 feet.
2. He stopped trying to act like such a hard a$$. He is not a tough guy, so please stop acting like one.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- treesap32
- Moderator
- Posts: 16777
- Joined: July 28th, 2005, 1:00 am
- Location: Washington D.C.
- Has thanked: 1112 times
- Been thanked: 2655 times
- Contact:
Re: I missed it
I thought it was a good call after seeing the replay. Shaw hooked him, and was subsequently pushed to the ground. The first foul was what was called as is usually the case. Shaw then reacted by jumping up and aggressively approaching the official. I wasn't surprised he picked up the technical.
Re: I missed it
The thing that bothers me most about the way Shaw plays is that he is constantly trying to draw fouls and whining to the refs when he doesn't get something. It seems almost every play, whether offense or defense, if he gets beat or misses a shot, he always complains to a ref as he starts to stroll down the court. I'd rather he just buck up and hustle his a$$ down court instead of trying to draw fouls. He'd be better at defending if he focused himself on actual defensive strategy rather than falling over and flailing his gangly arms (Wacky-Waving-Inflatable-Arm-Flailing-Tube-Man). This goes hand-in-hand with all the comments about him playing weak, but does anyone else get as annoyed by this as me?