Indeed, one James Sido was seen recently applauding as Mizzou won a game. I realize that it's nice to see K-State lose after the other day, but honestly I didn't know what to think or feel yesterday.
And then it took our team what, like 25 minutes of game time to start playing like Kansas again. Some good dunks by the end (highlights here), and how about DJ going 10-10 from the line? Nevertheless, tomorrow's game looks much bigger than expected. Let's hope we can say the same thing for our margin of victory!
Finally some original photography on this blog! That handsome devil...
ReplyDeleteI guess I'll go along w/ the conventional wisdom and assume the bad start against CU was a "hangover" from Manhattan. Altitude might have been a factor, too.
Or have we entered a midseason doldrum period? The Super Bowl proved once again that it doesn't matter how you played all season; it matters how you play today.
One area where we continue to improve, though: free throws. We went 21 of 25 Saturday.
And I applaud Jamie's applause; when Missouri's success benefits the Jayhawks, I see no contradiction in being happy about it. That's all out the window tonight, though...
You know what I want? Now that we've crossed the photography line, I think we need a William Blake allusion in a post about the Mizzou game.
ReplyDeleteI'm not up to the task, but I think you have an MA in English Lit, dgl: what do you say? Were they burning bright?
(Oops--did I just make the allusion? Damn.)
Surprisingly boring game, considering it was Mizzou, actually (kuports.com headline: Border Snore. But I can live with that after the previous two games.
In fact, the biggest drama came before the tip, with the Tigers' weird snub of our players. WTF? Too good to shake hands? How about too good to lose by 19? No? Okay, it's a deal.
Arthur's fouls were a little troubling, since we can't really afford to lose him like we did against K-State (especially since Aldrich just doesn't quite look ready), but otherwise nearly everything looked good.
48-25 rebounding edge. 21-25 from the line (84%--not over 100% yet, but pretty damn good).
Play of the night? Definitely the double-team of Teahan. Brilliant. As dgl put it last night, "really, what other choice did they have?"
You can't do a Blake reference unless you want to praise the Tigers, or at least hold them in awe. That might work for the Memphis Tigers, if they go undefeated...
ReplyDeleteMike Anderson does have a scrappy bunch, no doubt about it. But I think they're more like Bill Watterson's tiger than Blake's.
Well, can't I compare them unfavorably to Blake's beast?
ReplyDelete"Tyger Tyger, burning . . . dim"?
For those of you keeping score at home, how canny do you find the resemblance between the two tigers dgl mentions?
Blake's tiger
Hobbes
And Baylor? What about Baylor?
Baylor is a really good team. I regrettably will probably miss this game; I'm eager to hear your reports on it.
ReplyDeleteWe haven't really talked about it, but the Big 12 is pretty damned good this year, top to bottom. The Pac-10 may have more great teams, but remember we held our own this year in the conference faceoff.
Who would have thought Baylor would be a tournament-worthy program only a few years out from their murder scandal? Don't sleep on this game...
They Burned Down our town!!!
ReplyDeleteNo applause, Mr. Sido! :(