barsad said:
Wilkinson is the second coming of Jerome Randle with those drives.
9 offensive rebounds, 4 by Mady is the difference.calbearinamaze said:
Rebounds: CAL 40 NCS 29
shot blocker / rebounderducky23 said:
Sissoko scored 6 points but absolutely dominated the game.
This is why it's so important to have a shot blocker. A shot blocker can change the entire look of your defense.
Yeah, they looked pretty weak. Especially their starting center #34, the backup #33 played much better but didn't get many minutes. OTOH Sissoko looked great and Dort looked good.bearister said:
I was wondering how these guys went from ACC Tourney Champs and the Final Four to what we saw tonight:
What Went Wrong? - Backing The Pack
https://www.backingthepack.com/2025/2/2/24357310/what-went-wrong
stu said:Yeah, they looked pretty weak. Especially their starting center #34, the backup #33 played much better but didn't get many minutes. OTOH Sissoko looked great and Dort looked good.bearister said:
I was wondering how these guys went from ACC Tourney Champs and the Final Four to what we saw tonight:
What Went Wrong? - Backing The Pack
https://www.backingthepack.com/2025/2/2/24357310/what-went-wrong
Attendance was terrible, much less than the women's games last week.
stu said:
Attendance was terrible, much less than the women's games last week.
barsad said:stu said:
Attendance was terrible, much less than the women's games last week.
New Forum rule, look it up first, then post.
Women's games
1/30 UNC - 2,888
2/3 Pitt - 2,733
Tonight's men's game vs NC State - 3,139, 16% off the average of 3,742, to be expected for an 8 pm game on a Wed night.
Yes, overall 3,742 average is bad, but not as bad as the women (surprising given how good they are this year).
Cal's opponents got 9,319 avg. to show how far off the norm we are. It's a long way back, but we'll get there.
But seriously, look it up, then post.
One of the things that amazes me is how well he runs the floor and the fact that he plays/runs so hard but has great cardio. Dort has many of the same traits with a little less polish/size.ducky23 said:
Sissoko scored 6 points but absolutely dominated the game.
This is why it's so important to have a shot blocker. A shot blocker can change the entire look of your defense.
barsad said:stu said:
Attendance was terrible, much less than the women's games last week.
New Forum rule, look it up first, then post.
Women's games
1/30 UNC - 2,888
2/3 Pitt - 2,733
Tonight's men's game vs NC State - 3,139, 16% off the average of 3,742, to be expected for an 8 pm game on a Wed night.
Yes, overall 3,742 average is bad, but not as bad as the women (surprising given how good they are this year).
Cal's opponents got 9,319 avg. to show how far off the norm we are. It's a long way back, but we'll get there.
But seriously, look it up, then post.
I'm sorry we only have Sissoko for one year. His leadership, effort, and smart play (ok, I think he got badly fooled on a shot-fake last night) make a huge difference. Literally as I write this, it hit me who he reminds me of: only long-time Warriors fans will remember Clifford Ray, but that's the guy.BearGoggles said:One of the things that amazes me is how well he runs the floor and the fact that he plays/runs so hard but has great cardio. Dort has many of the same traits with a little less polish/size.ducky23 said:
Sissoko scored 6 points but absolutely dominated the game.
This is why it's so important to have a shot blocker. A shot blocker can change the entire look of your defense.
polarbear said:
Good win, but why did we play NC State twice this year?
Enforcement of the rule has changed.OdontoBear66 said:
For those of you who know the rules changes better than me, has the definition of a moving screen changed lately. I ask for I see center and power forward players leading players down the key from the top to the bucket screening out the defensive players. Not only do they move with the defenders but they move left and right to assist the player driving the lane. Back in the day, such was not allowed and considered and offensive foul. I am seeing this everywhere now as I watch tons of Big East hoop along with ACC. Either a rules change or maybe instruction to referees, but sure has changed. And yes this starts out at the three point line with the offensive pair moving in tandem.
BearsandGiants,bearsandgiants said:barsad said:stu said:
Attendance was terrible, much less than the women's games last week.
New Forum rule, look it up first, then post.
Women's games
1/30 UNC - 2,888
2/3 Pitt - 2,733
Tonight's men's game vs NC State - 3,139, 16% off the average of 3,742, to be expected for an 8 pm game on a Wed night.
Yes, overall 3,742 average is bad, but not as bad as the women (surprising given how good they are this year).
Cal's opponents got 9,319 avg. to show how far off the norm we are. It's a long way back, but we'll get there.
But seriously, look it up, then post.
That's tickets sold, right? If so, very high likelihood that a midweek, late start against a weak opponent, especially after recent struggles, would keep butts at home vs the surging women's team. If these are paid vs turnstile numbers, I'd bet the women did better than the men.
Either way, last night the team looked like a competently coached team with decent talent. We know talent has been a huge issue. Maybe Madsen isn't the greatest coach, but if we can fund his recruits and he can continue to recruit increasingly talented athletes, we just might be good.
I was at all three games I mentioned and the two women's games had way more people. A friend who was there with me agrees. To my eye the published women's attendance figures were reasonably close, though I thought the North Carolina game drew noticeably more than the Pitt game. The men's NC State game attendance looked much smaller, I have no idea where those numbers came from.barsad said:stu said:
Attendance was terrible, much less than the women's games last week.
New Forum rule, look it up first, then post.
Women's games
1/30 UNC - 2,888
2/3 Pitt - 2,733
Tonight's men's game vs NC State - 3,139, 16% off the average of 3,742, to be expected for an 8 pm game on a Wed night.
Yes, overall 3,742 average is bad, but not as bad as the women (surprising given how good they are this year).
Cal's opponents got 9,319 avg. to show how far off the norm we are. It's a long way back, but we'll get there.
But seriously, look it up, then post.
Yeah, no way were there 3,139 butts in the seats last night against NC State. I'd say there were no more than 2,000 actually in attendance.bearsandgiants said:barsad said:stu said:
Attendance was terrible, much less than the women's games last week.
Tonight's men's game vs NC State - 3,139, 16% off the average of 3,742, to be expected for an 8 pm game on a Wed night.
That's tickets sold, right? If so, very high likelihood that a midweek, late start against a weak opponent, especially after recent struggles, would keep butts at home vs the surging women's team. If these are paid vs turnstile numbers, I'd bet the women did better than the men.
If only we had a George Johnson to go with him.HearstMining said:
I'm sorry we only have Sissoko for one year. His leadership, effort, and smart play (ok, I think he got badly fooled on a shot-fake last night) make a huge difference. Literally as I write this, it hit me who he reminds me of: only long-time Warriors fans will remember Clifford Ray, but that's the guy.
Golden One said:Yeah, no way were there 3,139 butts in the seats last night against NC State. I'd say there were no more than 2,000 actually in attendance.bearsandgiants said:barsad said:stu said:
Attendance was terrible, much less than the women's games last week.
Tonight's men's game vs NC State - 3,139, 16% off the average of 3,742, to be expected for an 8 pm game on a Wed night.
That's tickets sold, right? If so, very high likelihood that a midweek, late start against a weak opponent, especially after recent struggles, would keep butts at home vs the surging women's team. If these are paid vs turnstile numbers, I'd bet the women did better than the men.
I think there were more than 2,000. Admittedly, my method was crude, and my counting was spread out over the course of stoppages in play, but I counted 2,084 butts in the seats last night, and it is much more likely I undercounted than overcounted. But the undercount wasn't too high. You are right that there is no way there were 3,139 butts in the seats.Golden One said:Yeah, no way were there 3,139 butts in the seats last night against NC State. I'd say there were no more than 2,000 actually in attendance.bearsandgiants said:barsad said:stu said:
Attendance was terrible, much less than the women's games last week.
Tonight's men's game vs NC State - 3,139, 16% off the average of 3,742, to be expected for an 8 pm game on a Wed night.
That's tickets sold, right? If so, very high likelihood that a midweek, late start against a weak opponent, especially after recent struggles, would keep butts at home vs the surging women's team. If these are paid vs turnstile numbers, I'd bet the women did better than the men.
Cal8285 said:I think there were more than 2,000. Admittedly, my method was crude, and my counting was spread out over the course of stoppages in play, but I counted 2,084 butts in the seats last night, and it is much more likely I undercounted than overcounted. But the undercount wasn't too high. You are right that there is no way there were 3,139 butts in the seats.Golden One said:Yeah, no way were there 3,139 butts in the seats last night against NC State. I'd say there were no more than 2,000 actually in attendance.bearsandgiants said:barsad said:stu said:
Attendance was terrible, much less than the women's games last week.
Tonight's men's game vs NC State - 3,139, 16% off the average of 3,742, to be expected for an 8 pm game on a Wed night.
That's tickets sold, right? If so, very high likelihood that a midweek, late start against a weak opponent, especially after recent struggles, would keep butts at home vs the surging women's team. If these are paid vs turnstile numbers, I'd bet the women did better than the men.
Did you count everyone in the bathroom stalls?Cal8285 said:I think there were more than 2,000. Admittedly, my method was crude, and my counting was spread out over the course of stoppages in play, but I counted 2,084 butts in the seats last night, and it is much more likely I undercounted than overcounted. But the undercount wasn't too high. You are right that there is no way there were 3,139 butts in the seats.Golden One said:Yeah, no way were there 3,139 butts in the seats last night against NC State. I'd say there were no more than 2,000 actually in attendance.bearsandgiants said:barsad said:stu said:
Attendance was terrible, much less than the women's games last week.
Tonight's men's game vs NC State - 3,139, 16% off the average of 3,742, to be expected for an 8 pm game on a Wed night.
That's tickets sold, right? If so, very high likelihood that a midweek, late start against a weak opponent, especially after recent struggles, would keep butts at home vs the surging women's team. If these are paid vs turnstile numbers, I'd bet the women did better than the men.
Do you remember when they brought in Clifford to use his long arms to remove something that had lodged in the throat of a dolphin? I vaguely remember reading a story about this way back when...HearstMining said:I'm sorry we only have Sissoko for one year. His leadership, effort, and smart play (ok, I think he got badly fooled on a shot-fake last night) make a huge difference. Literally as I write this, it hit me who he reminds me of: only long-time Warriors fans will remember Clifford Ray, but that's the guy.BearGoggles said:One of the things that amazes me is how well he runs the floor and the fact that he plays/runs so hard but has great cardio. Dort has many of the same traits with a little less polish/size.ducky23 said:
Sissoko scored 6 points but absolutely dominated the game.
This is why it's so important to have a shot blocker. A shot blocker can change the entire look of your defense.
