ISU vs UNI postgame thread

Petey is so clutch.
... smarter than anyone on the court.
... makes very little mistakes.
... and is in the right spot all the time.

Most underrated kid out there. Period.

Petey and Diante compliment each other really well.

I think Petey is a very smart defensive player, but I don't give him as high of marks on offense when he has the ball in his hands. Can't fault the D effort and boards though. He scares me a bit with the ball in his hands going to the hole.
 
3 Positives
1. We won
2. Brackins
3. DG in overtime

3 Negatives
1. Peterson running the point the last 4 mins of regulation (Though he had a solid game)
2. Brackins barely touching the ball in OT (Though they played good D on him)
3. Haluska leaving his man wide open for the tying 3 pointer to double team a guy driving to the basket with 6 seconds left (No way to spin that one)

Great effort. Good D. And a W.

We need to see less of Haluska as the season progresses. He doesn't bring anything to the table.
 
classic. you can see why so many uni fans are actually hawkeye fans attending uni...they think the same way. What really happened tonight is a program on the rise passed a program that has peaked, on its home court.

Let's see - regulation ended in a tie. Just because a team wins doesn't mean they weren't outplayed. His assertion may not be that far fetched...
 
Why is nobody talking about the fact that the game should've been over because that wasn't a three from the corner? They only had one camera angle and it was far away but it was clearly a two...unless you're using last years line.

because we won. what would the point be. I agree it was a two, and a loss would have burned me but sit back and enjoy now.
 
Wow, I just got back from the game. That was a really fun game to watch. Good college basketball game.

I think there are three reason that we lost:

1. We never doubled Brackins and played him one on one the whole game and he got whatever he wanted. I can't figure out why we did not adjust to this the whole game.

2. The officiating inside. It was impossible to play D in the post without getting some crap foul called. They called TONS of ticky tack fouls on us inside while the ISU guards were pushing off the entire game.

3. Three point shooting. They just would NOT fall for us. Dammit. Good looks too. Good shooters. Can't believe they just would not fall.

I really thought that the Panthers outplayed the Cyclones tonight. We just shot horrible from 3. That is a big part of our game. If just a couple more of those fall, we win easily.

Good game by the Cyclones. Good job down the stretch. Good luck the rest of the year.

20 fouls to 18. Not that big of a difference and not a foul heavily called game.

Yep, to bad about the 3 point shooting. ISU only shot 14.3% when they usually shoot 40% compared to UNI's 18.8% to their season average of 33%.
 
Let's see - regulation ended in a tie. Just because a team wins doesn't mean they weren't outplayed. His assertion may not be that far fetched...

The vast majority of the time the team that outplays the other wins. Unless the team that lost was iowa or apparently uni. In this case they can always lose but always outplayed the victor.
 
The pussycats out played us? Send me some of what you are smoking tonight. If we would have hit a average number of threes, the game would have been a blow out and over with 10 minutes to go.

The officials cost you the game? They were equally bad for both teams.

Bottom line is you guys got out coached.

But the point is we didn't. I can use your same logic by saying that we would have won a few more football games this year if we ran better plays in the red zone, and we might have a couple of Big XII championship appearances if we had a kicker that could actually make a clutch FG. While all arguments are true, it's pointless to argue them because they're irrelevant.
 
Disagree. He's one of our better defenders, and can hit the three as well as anyone. He'll have a place in the rotation.

I disagree as well. He definitely brings something useful to the table and will and should continue to get minutes.
 
But the point is we didn't. I can use your same logic by saying that we would have won a few more football games this year if we ran better plays in the red zone, and we might have a couple of Big XII championship appearances if we had a kicker that could actually make a clutch FG. While all arguments are true, it's pointless to argue them because they're irrelevant.

I think that was his point.
 
While i agree that his foot was on the line it wasn't clear enough to overturn in that situation. i don't want to win a game that way. In retrospect it was a great experience for us.
 
We need to see less of Haluska as the season progresses. He doesn't bring anything to the table.

Disagree. He's one of our better defenders, and can hit the three as well as anyone. He'll have a place in the rotation.

Exactly. The guy is like glue as a defender. Doesn't get picked very often and fights through them. Ask DJ Augustine about him :wink:
 
But the point is we didn't. I can use your same logic by saying that we would have won a few more football games this year if we ran better plays in the red zone, and we might have a couple of Big XII championship appearances if we had a kicker that could actually make a clutch FG. While all arguments are true, it's pointless to argue them because they're irrelevant.

Kind of like it's pointless to argue if the losing team outplayed the winning team.
 
Pather, wow, complaining about the officiating, really? HAHAHAH.

We got screwed call after call, getting homered worse than I could have ever predicted at UNI, and you complain about a few "ticky tac" fouls?

Hilarious. It was like ISU was playing 5 on 8 all night. Thank god DG finally got some calls down the stretch or it might have looked too obvious...

And your team didn't outplay us. Your team lost. Your team bricked a boatload of 3's. Your team was dominated by our 2 good sophs. And the last shot your team made in regulation wasn't even a 3-pointer. His foot was on the line.
 
But the point is we didn't. I can use your same logic by saying that we would have won a few more football games this year if we ran better plays in the red zone, and we might have a couple of Big XII championship appearances if we had a kicker that could actually make a clutch FG. While all arguments are true, it's pointless to argue them because they're irrelevant.

Who made you sheriff? Wow.
 
classic. you can see why so many uni fans are actually hawkeye fans attending uni...they think the same way. What really happened tonight is a program on the rise passed a program that has peaked, on its home court.

Wow, the obsession with Iowa never ends. Very classy on your part.
 

Help Support Us

Become a patron