The home winning streak is still intact!

[Goatnapper'96]

Without delving into threads can anyone tell me if Archaea turned into a pussy whining about BYU never being able to win a game that matters and all is lost?

Here are some opinions of mine:

1.) Rose got outcoached. Tom Izzo, who I wish his first name was Frank so I could throw down a Jerky Boys Frank Rizzo...cleanoutchyer ears!, is genuinely one of the best in the business. MSU is a national power on the same stage as Kentucky, Duke and North Carolina. It is not quite a program of that potential but because Izzo is such a damn good coach they are currently at the elite level. My point is that getting outcoached by Izzo doesn't mean Rose sucks, it just means he is not elite. It was frustrating to see Plaisted posting up at the 3 point line and BYU's one in four out motion becoming 4 out and one mostly out. BYU was outphysicalled plain and simple. Izzo adjusted and took away BYU's strengths and Rose was unable to counteradjust.

2.) Athletes. BYU has 3 very good players in Cummard, Tavernari and Plaisted. Tavernari having one poor game is not proof he is not that good. He played bad, that is going to happen. He will learn how to adjust to physical defenders. Tavernari's shot selection bothers me, but his ability does not. Cummard not showing up due to foul trouble in big games concerns me but I am not sure what BYU can do about it since Cummard is always going to defend the opponents best perimeter player. IMO Cummard should never be compared to Alex Jensen again. He has that type of ability, but he goes MIA too frequently in big games. Plaisted played well other than being pushed out to the 3 point line by the MSU bigs. Part of why these things afflict BYU is MSU has genuine depth and good athletes throughout their roster. BYU is at a zenith in talent and the reality is that BYU is just not going to be as good as the elite teams. This is why I think there is a good chance Rose bolts from BYU after riding Trent and co to another good year or two. It is a fact that there is a ceiling to BYU's potential for success. Saying that all is not lost.

3.) BYU was still in the game late despite the fact that Cummard was out most of the game with foul trouble and Tavernari played like shit. What we learn from this? BYU's depth is not crap. Clearly there was a difference between what MSU could put on the floor after their starters sat and what BYU could, but BYU's reserves held their own. Fredette and Collinsworth are good players and getting more comfortable. Whereas against UNC and Louisiville both looked lost and intimidated, I did not think that was the case against MSU. They are getting better and more confident. This will lead to better play as the season develops.

4.) The reason BYU lost was it got outrebounded. The reason BYU was outrebounded was because MSU was more physical and had better athletes. Being more physical can be fixed, I am not sure if the athletic part can be. Call it a blueprint for beating BYU or whatever, but my perspective is that MSU is just better equipped to take advantage of BYU's weaknesses. Even some of the elite teams will not be as capable of exploiting that as MSU was. The poor free throw shooting by BYU hurt immensely as well, but that is going to happen on occassion. Being outphysicalled can be prevented more that poor free throw shooting, IMO.

5.) I still believe BYU should win their first round NCAA game. I would rank BYU somewhere between 20-32 nationally. To get to the sweet 16 is going to take some luck and a fortuitous matchup. I don't think seeding is as key as what type of team the Y matches up with in the second round.

6.) As far as seeding goes I think the highest BYU can reach now is a 5. Any hope of being the favored team beyond the first round was wiped off the boards by yet another MSU offensive rebound.