The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

I think they were letting the guys play, but Mehenti was never quite the threat on offense the same way he is on defense. More than that, the plan defensively looked to be much the same way it was in the last game except with the more subtle change of playing the mid range more than the perimeter. Interestingly enough, the guys were much better offensively overall, but the defensive intensity just couldn't match the presence of Parker. UCLA performed way better than I expected. It's a double digit loss, but it definitely wasn't a double digit kind of game.

(03-21-2015 01:36 PM)BlazerPhil Wrote:  We need a 6'5" wiry guard and a JUCO big man in the mould of Gabe Kennedy or Will Campbell asap.

Wouldn't have minded seeing Kenneth Cooper swapping paint with that monster.

We knew the UCLA bigs would give us a lot of trouble, but I had hope we'd be able to limit their guards. Ultimately, the UCLA guards finished 17-29 from the floor, and the entire team shot 60%. No matter how well you play, it's hard to overcome that.

Regardless, if any you expected we'd be here today after the first several games of the year, kudus to you.

The future is bright. We just need a true big and a guard/playmaker.

Fouls
UAB 21
UCLA 16

Yeah, you just can't allow a team to shoot at such a high percentage and expect to pick up a win. It's just that it was murder in the paint. Parker was killing people in the post and practically everyone penetrated at will. That was just excellent offensive execution.

I was expecting that more out of Iowa State, honestly. I thought it'd be more of a defensive struggle against UCLA. The guys showed heart, but UCLA just poured it on too thick.

ISU's bigs were slow. UCLA's bigs are not

Do not think Iowa State would have beaten UCLA today either, based on how well UCLA played. Sometimes you just run into a buzz-saw.

(03-21-2015 02:04 PM)Blazer85 Wrote:  Do not think Iowa State would have beaten UCLA today either, based on how well UCLA played. Sometimes you just run into a buzz-saw.

If Naing had played better than Thursday, it would have been close.

(03-21-2015 02:04 PM)BlazerPhil Wrote:  ISU's bigs were slow. UCLA's bigs are not

Yep. Plus ISU big's were similar in body type to ours, and we had guys athletic enough to guard Niang on the perimeter.

UCLA's bigs are big.

Niang would have a been a match-up problem for UCLA.

(03-21-2015 02:04 PM)BlazerPhil Wrote:  ISU's bigs were slow. UCLA's bigs are not

That's interesting. I thought the reverse.

ISU was a fast team in general, and Niang and McKay were quick, too. If anything, I think it was Parker just straight up playing big boy basketball under the basket as opposed to any agility.

I think Niang would have presented a very big problem for UCLA.

Haha could over play Niang on the perimeter and force him to drive , Haha was long enough to alter Niang's shot, as Niang couldn't get away. Haha had a matchup today with UCLA's super freshman that is very similar in body type to Lee.

I know Alford is criticized a lot by UCLA fans but he had a good gameplan today. He knew we'd try to focus in on little Alford and they took advantage of the mismatches that created down low. It was pretty simple actually.

I'd have to rewatching to be sure, but I think that every three UAB hit was followed by an easy lay up at the other end. It would not have mattered if we hit a three every possession, we would have eventually caught up, but we didn't. It just kept the game barely out of reach.

I think sometimes the worse thing that can happen for a team like UAB is to get hot early from three. They go against the game plan and start relying on it.