A great run. Hope the coach gets paid and stays.

Was rooting for Michigan about halfway through the second half because Wagner is flat better than any of the clunking chucksters on Loyola. Somebody actually played defense against them and they folded like a lawn chair. Not a complete fraud, because its impressive for an 11 seed to get to the Final Four no matter what, but the first really good team they played slapped them around and wore them out. That sequence with the 4 or 5 straight possessions resulting in a turnover was embarrassing. There was a wide open three that some guy on Loyola flat airballed. Michigan wasn't going to keep missing the wide open shots Loyola was gifting them.

It was pretty obvious that if there was not an HISTORIC gutting of their bracket (first time ever none of the top 4 seeds in a region made it to the Sweet 16 IIRC) Loyola would not have made the Final Four. Kentucky would've assblasted them had they not choked against K-State. They fought and when Michigan couldn't get anything to fall it looked like it might be a game. A lot of Michigan's players let the pressure get to them, but their best player didnt and that was enough. But in the end Loyola didn't belong, even on a night where Michigan was nowhere near their best they ran them out of the gym.

That's fine. Nobody gives a shit about that school anyways. Their girls were never cute, their parties were always gay and they are right there neck-and-neck with DePaul for attracting out-of-state posers who never migrate out of the Roosevelt-Western-Howard box (I suppose this is further west now, probably Pulaski) yet claim to be Dr. Chicago after 5 semesters. It was fun for a little but lets get real. If it were UIC or even Northwestern I'd have felt differently, but not Loyola. I wouldn't be upset to see them win, but I also would never be invested in their success.

Completely wrong.

They are a team that plays very good defense with a match up zone and good defenders, 1 - 7. They don't have a single player that can consistently create their own shot, but they compensate for that by being very disciplined on offense and of making every player on the other team guard.

They looked like the better team last night for 75% of the game. Contrary to what they said, I don't believe they got worn down. Michigan is a very good defensive team, and Loyola just had a few possessions in crunch time where they turned it over too much and couldn't recover.

This was not some lucky run they went on. They would beat Michigan 3 or 4 times out of ten, and Michigan may very well be the national champion.

_________________

Loyola barely scored for the first 10 minutes of the game.

It took Michigan having twice as many turnovers as they usually do, shooting like 15% from the field and missing half their free throws for Loyola to secure just an 8 point lead at half. If Michigan had played up to even a fraction of their usual standards Loyola would've been down by 20 at the break. When Michigan woke up they prompty rattled off a 19-3 run and buried Loyola, who looked completely helpless in all respects.

_________________

Why is that automatically Michigan being bad rather than Loyola's defense?

Also, Michigan has looked like that every game except one in the tournament.

I'm not quite sure why you would define Loyola by a 5-minute span when they didn't look good rather than the other 4.5 games where they looked great. It's selection bias.

_________________

They looked great against one of the easier paths to the Final Four ever. UMBC took care of the 1 seed and Arizona imploded. After that the region descended into chaos and if UK could make free throws (lmao bless UK) they'd have beaten K-State, looted poor Loyola and probably throttled Michigan.

Like I said, nothing against Loyola because they still had some thrilling wins, but lets not pretend they beat anyone great. Nor has Michigan really. And that's still true now heading into the final.

Loyola is still in the books as tied for the lowest seed ever to make the Final Four. It was a great run. But a run that was doomed to end once they encountered an opponent that could lock them down and wear them out.

I'll give Loyola this, they are coached spectacularly. Louisville fucked up hiring Mack instead of him. He is perfectly suited to coach the NCAA going forward in a world without one-and-dones, the future of NCAA basketball looks like what Loyola runs. Its just that the teams that really win will do so with much better players and not Cameron Krutwig.

because michigan was missing wide open shots. unless your strategy is giving guys too much space as a psychological method to make them miss.

michigan plays to the ability of their opponents often times. its why they lost 7 games, a few to people they had no business losing and were only a 20+ ranked team until their run.

in watching that game, arizona, uva, tenn, and cinci would of all been up 20 on michigan in that first half. so many missed shots at the rim by loyola. but ultimately loyola only has so much skill and were only up 7. and thats fine. there is nothing wrong with noting that. they had a great run with less skilled players. sometimes it comes together. i think they just faced their first real nba talent in mo (end of 1st round projected pick) and the difference was staggering. krutwig can only do so many of those rope a dope over the shoulder shots.

i dont' get why people see that as a dis on them.

I don’t consider it a diss, nor do I have emotional ties to Loyola. I just think it’s wrong. People have been waiting the whole tournament to say, “well, it was fun while it lasted, but they just didn’t have the talent.” It’s nonsense. They beat Florida, Miami, Tennessee, Las Vegas, and K-State. There are NBA-caliber players on those teams. But now we’re saying Mo Wagner is just too much for Loyola to compete with? He had a great game and was a matchup problem. Big deal.

I disagree about the defense not having an effect. Michigan was taking threes because they couldn’t penetrate. The threes were not within the rhythm of the offense. In the second half, Michigan was finally able to get some penetration.

At this point, I’m not sure what’s being argued. I think we’d have to say Michigan is the better team, but it’s not some monumental deficit like some are saying.

Loyola only lost 5 games all year prior to Michigan, and for three of those games, Custer was out. Regardless of competition, you’d be hard-pressed to find any team that could put up a better record, even in the MVC.

I truly believe Loyola was one of the ten best teams in the country this year.

_________________

like i said, they were only up 7 on a team that shot poorly while wide open. so many of these other teams would of been up 20. we like to say its the defense whenever a team shoots poorly but watching the game it clearly wasn't defense. the only guys going were wagner and matthews with inside presence! i don't get that analysis. michigan ran what it always ran and just didn't hit shots.

miami was a good beat but i chalk that up to 1st round tossups. better teams get beat all the time on thursdays. that is the only team they beat that has guards projected to be drafted. that was their first big man to deal with.

i definitely don't think they are a top 10 team but i'll agree with top 25.

Loyola's coach is not that great. He was already fired once in his career. He will have a hard time having a consistent winning record at Loyola. What he had was a group of kids that had good fundamentals and gelled really well. It was more lightning in the bottle than amazing coaching.

Come on. You have no idea if other teams would have been up 20. Michigan’s length bothered Loyola, which is why they missed a lot of close looks early on. We can agree to disagree on Loyola’s defense. There is a difference between “wide open” within the flow of the offense and “sort of” open because they couldn’t get enough penetration to force Loyola to help.

Overall, I’m not defending Loyola. I just don’t understand the infatuation with athleticism and “next level” talent. Loyola will never win that argument, but they probably do dozens of other things much better than their opponent. The are your typical “greater than the sum of their parts” team.

Loyola would never beat anyone by thirty points, but that’s not the object of basketball. The goal is to win each game, whether it’s by 2 or 100.

_________________

i don't get where this couldn't get penetration. there was plenty of penetration. over 50% of their shots came in the paint. the entire first half i'm like these are good looks they are running everything they had been running the entire last month. there was no defensive pressure that looked any different than any other pressure they'd faced.

That’s my recollection of it. Beilein was raving about their D, too. IDK, maybe there’s some I’m forgetting. Would have to re-watch.

_________________

Kap and Bernsie are both talking tonight's NCAA Men's final!

Let me spell it out to them.

NOBODY CARES!

_________________
favrefan said:"Chris Coghlan isn't gonna pay your rent, Jimmy."

I care, but it hurts too much to watch. My lord, that was the most exciting run I have seen . . .