It's both (except I don't agree with the "didn't want to"). Norfolk shot WAY above their average (everything they threw up was dropping) and we weren't playing a lick of defense. I can understand them outplaying us in the paint, but you can't tell me that their guards are quicker or better than ours. Hard to explain why our defense sucked so bad.

I'm going with this:

Over the frequent flyer miles thing? The Nevin Shapiro stuff is six months in the past and pretty clearly not valid/provable at this point. DaQuan Jones played this year, with the approval of the NCAA. That's the major allegation.

But who knows, with the NCAA. His supposed infractions/the infractions of his staff pale in comparison to things that have gotten nothing more than a slap on the wrist in the past.

The NCAA has been digging a long time and found, apparently, jack shit.

I have been away all weekend, had not had a chance to post, so I want to post this.....
I am not dissapointed in the way we played, we played very well...Norfolk would have beaten ANYBODY( Kentucky, OSU, N. Carolina, KU...ANYBODY) that game...they were shooting lights out and grabbin good boards...That's all I'm going to say.

I'm not disappointed in the way our OFFENSE played, but our defense gave up tons of open looks.

We usually do unfortunately.

A big part of that is a product of playing without a second big man on the floor most of the time. Causes the need for double teams on the block, which creates a need for rotations, etc. Good ball movement should generate an open look MOST of the time in that situation.

O'Quinn playing out of his mind and hitting circus shots underneath forced double on him as well.

O played great, as it has all year. D played at a disadvantage, as it did all year.

More traditional look next year should help quite a bit on defense. If Bowers has a complete recovery, shouldn't be much of a drop-off from that spot offensively (less 3-point shooting, better finishing at the rim/offensive rebounding options). And having a long, lean shot blocker at the spot should help quite a bit.

Ross should be a pretty strong rebounder out of the 3 spot, too. He's big, and thick.

Only question is if Criswell/Rosburg/Feldman/Jankovic can give them solid D and rebounding at the 5 spot.

I'll admit I'm a basketball n00b when it comes to strategy, defenses, etc.

So given that, I see people referring to the 1, 2, 5... a lot. Can you break down what all those numbers mean and how it applies to Mizzou this year and going forward?

1 = point guard
2 = shooting guard
3 = college generally called the “wing”, NBA more referred to as “small forward” (mix of a guard and a forward)
4 = power forward
5 = center

Mizzou and Florida both scored the exact same number of points against Norfolk State, 84 points.

Florida won by 34 points, Mizzou lost by 2.

The difference?
3 point shooting:
Norfolk vs. Mizzou: 10 for 19, 30 points.
Norfolk vs. Florida: 4 for 24, 12 points.

And, Kim English only scored two points. He couldn't walk the walk.

Thanks. I should have Googled it myself. But still curious how our current lineup fits in to that since all we have are guards and Ratliff.

Easy. 4 Guards and 1 Forward.

Right, but who's at what number?

P. Pressey at the 1 I would assume and Ratliff at the 5?

Or are they all 1's and 2's?

Is this somewhat correct?

1: P. Pressey
2: Denmon
3: M. Pressey?
4: English
5: Ratliff

If they could close the deal on Pollard, it should allow them to have a hyper-athletic 4 in Pollard with decent size (unlike English) with Bowers playing a slightly undersized 5.

If Dixon can repeat the year he had this year as the starting 2, it would give them an evolutionary version of this year's squad, just much younger.

But we didn't close the deal on Pollard when he came and then pissed down our legs in the tourney. Once again, I think the dream is dead there.