All powetardness aside, did we look tired or something? I kind of thought we were. There were times when we seemed content jogging it up and frank had to chew ass mid jog to get denis to push it. and the exception was going hard after a rebound or loose ball, the rule was lazily getting after it. maybe it's just what mu makes teams look like, I dunno. it's almost like when we're at home, we assume we're going to get the rebound, assume we're going to get the call, assume we're going to hit the shot, assume we're going to come back. I thought the only two games in conference where we played with any real and true aggressiveness was ut and ku. the rest we kind of sleeped walked through.
I sat behind the MU bench as a guest. And to me the team just looked really frustrated on O. I do think it had a lot to do with the D MU was playing. It was aggressive (much like KSU's) and was quick to beat our players (especially the guards) to favorite spots for looks. That led to Lou holding the ball on several straight possesions, which resulted in a possible TO, missed shot, or short clock to work with. Credit MU for a pretty solid defensive effort.
Being inefficient in those possessions only magnified the issue of rebounding. They sent 4 to the defensive board and were perfect on box outs for most of the game. From my perspective this led to some anxiety on part of the team to make a play. And eventually they did.
I thought the D by KSU was outstanding for the most part. The didn't seem flustered at all on D after so many empty possesions on the other end. Credit Frank and company for keeping their heads in that situation.