SFA (16-3; 5-1) vs. UCA (10-11; 4-4)

WHERE: Conway, Arkansas
WHEN: Jan. 24; 7:00 P.M. (Wed.)

The Bears have won 3 of their last 5 including a 81-57 beating of New Orleans and are 6-2 at home.

Impressive non-conference wins @California and Arkansas-Little Rock as well as taking #18 UCLA to OT before falling 101-106.

UCA has scored 90 or more points in 7 contests this season.

PG: Jordan Howard 24.3 PPG 4 RPG 3 APG scoring a season high 41 points against UIW.

SR:3
JR:4
SO:3
FR:6

Play defense. Beat UCA. Simple formula. Much harder to do...

cboothe09 said:

---

Play defense. Beat UCA. Simple formula. Much harder to do...

---

Agreed. Keep them under 75, we win.

Before conference I would've said this is an easy automatic win. Now I think we're underdogs.

The prediction websites have us as a 3 point favorite or a 53/47 percent favorite. This is going to be a long week off, but maybe they can find a way to shut down Howard and co.

All depends on pace:

I Think we've seen enough of our shooting to know if we have to run and gun, we may be in trouble.

But, if we kinda muck it up and make them halfcourt, I like our odds....almost Danny-ball it.

We laid an egg at Hammond. Since then 5 wins (3 home, 2 road) by 17, by 8, by 10, by 20, by 10. Average win is by 13.0 points. In the mix were wins over unbeaten Nicholls and New Orleans. Not a bad five game run.

C. Arkansas' defense can be pretty nonexistent. We've shown this year we can run and gun. In fact, I think we shoot better when we do. I think we probably will be doing that a lot next week. The key is for us to do it - not UCA. Defense, not offense, is winning this game.

Hold Jordan Howard to 15-17 points and I like our chances. What kind of size do they have?

MasterAxe said:

---

All depends on pace:

I Think we've seen enough of our shooting to know if we have to run and gun, we may be in trouble.

But, if we kinda muck it up and make them halfcourt, I like our odds....almost Danny-ball it.

---

I think I almost prefer Danny-ball against UCA. It's what kept NWST from winning conference titles...

nacluth said:

---

We laid an egg at Hammond. Since then 5 wins (3 home, 2 road) by 17, by 8, by 10, by 20, by 10. Average win is by 13.0 points. In the mix were wins over unbeaten Nicholls and New Orleans. Not a bad five game run.

C. Arkansas' defense can be pretty nonexistent. We've shown this year we can run and gun. In fact, I think we shoot better when we do. I think we probably will be doing that a lot next week. The key is for us to do it - not UCA. Defense, not offense, is winning this game.

---

I honestly don't think we've had a "pretty" win yet in conference play. We have all season played to the level of our competition. We play a good SEC team, we play like a good SEC team. We play a mediocre SLC team, we play like a slightly less mediocre SLC team. Some of those games, games like NWST and ACU were much, much closer than their score indicated and of course much closer than they needed to be. If we play UCA to their level there's a really good chance we don't win. UCA is a team we need to play at our level, not their level.

I'm not expecting us to win every game by 30 like Brad did, especially not after how we've started conference play. But I don't think its unreasonable to expect this team to play at a level their capable of and consistently have games against conference opponents where the outcome is never in doubt.

That being said I think we beat UCA and I still think we win the SLC, I just want us to play to our own level and actually look somewhat impressive against well below average opponents.

Then again, if we continue to look the way we do now maybe the strategy is to get whoever we draw in the Tournament to overlook us big time.

Funny! That comment made me go back and look at stats too.

Underwood's teams average points against competition:
2013-4 76.0 to 63.4. (12.6 margin)
2014-5 78.6 to 64.4. (14.2 margin)
2015-6 80.2 to 63.3. (16.9 margin)

So far this year under Keller. Last year for many reasons I don't believe is comparable.
2017-8 80.9 to 67.5. (13.4 margin)

Obviously we're still a long way from the end of the season, but this team is comparable in an overall sense to those Underwood teams. Now they were pretty darn good in conference play. Their point margins went up some from their yearly average, but we've got a pretty good team this year. Make sure you appreciate it.

nacluth said:

---

Funny! That comment made me go back and look at stats too.

Underwood's teams average points against competition:
2013-4 76.0 to 63.4. (12.6 margin)
2014-5 78.6 to 64.4. (14.2 margin)
2015-6 80.2 to 63.3. (16.9 margin)

So far this year under Keller. Last year for many reasons I don't believe is comparable.
2017-8 80.9 to 67.5. (13.4 margin)

Obviously we're still a long way from the end of the season, but this team is comparable in an overall sense to those Underwood teams. Now they were pretty darn good in conference play. Their point margins went up some from their yearly average, but we've got a pretty good team this year. Make sure you appreciate it.

---

I think this could be the most talented team we have had. I think what we're missing at the current moment is a Thomas Walkup style player who can score at any moment to pull us out of those scoreless slumps. However, I don't know who I'd bet on between the 2016 team & this one if this team put together a full 40 minutes. I think I'd have to lean 2016 for the unprecedented success, but man, that'd be a fun game to watch.

I want to reiterate that I don't think this team is at all bad. On the contrary I agree that this is likely the most talented SFA team ever.
I also think a lot of our wins had deceptive scores. Consistent games where it's never in doubt is more what I want to see.
I know this is a great team from what we did pre conference. We just haven't played even remotely like we did before conference since Arlington Baptist.
It's the not playing to our potential that's bugging me more than the score.

I think this team is all kinds of talent, they have just gotten cold at times. Next year will be the best team ever if we can keep Kevon. I think the buzzards are circling.....

SFA_03 said:

---

It's the not playing to our potential that's bugging me more than the score.

---

I can totally agree with that.

What do you mean by the buzzards are circling with Kevon...?

tangerito said:

---

Next year will be the best team ever if we can keep Kevon. I think the buzzards are circling.....

---

??? That makes no sense. Have you heard something?

SFA has never lost to UCA in men's basketball, ever right!

edstile said:

---

tangerito said:

---

Next year will be the best team ever if we can keep Kevon. I think the buzzards are circling.....

---

??? That makes no sense. Have you heard something?

---

Maybe he's referring to the new potential transfer rules that are expected to be passed? I have no idea.

PurpleForever said:

---

edstile said:

---

tangerito said:

---

Next year will be the best team ever if we can keep Kevon. I think the buzzards are circling.....

---

??? That makes no sense. Have you heard something?

---

Maybe he's referring to the new potential transfer rules that are expected to be passed? I have no idea.

---

Educate me. What potential new rules? I haven't seen anything about that.

Edit: Never mind. After searching, I found a Sports Illustrated article about it. Under the new rules being considered a college player could transfer and be eligible to play at his/her new school immediately. So, in effect, players could play for multiple schools -- as many as three or four -- over their brief college careers.

I can't imagine that the NCAA would EVER pass such a rule. Can you imagine the utter chaos that would cause??? But according to the article, they are considering it. UNBELIEVABLE!

And BTW, PurpleForever said the rules are "expected to be passed". I article I read did not say that, just that some NCAA committee is considering it.

If that passed it would cause chaos. It's bad enough now. A friend of a friend that's not "affiliated " with a school comes calling.

INiedrauer said:

---

The new transfer rule would only allow a single transfer with instant eligibility over a college career (not including grad transfers).

---

I hope you're right, but that is not what the SI article said.

The playing down to a mediocre SLC squad is alright in the regular season. What really worries me is having that happen during the conference tournament and coming up on short end and ending up in the NIT...... YUCK!!!!

That's the real concern!

edstile said:

---

And BTW, PurpleForever said the rules are "expected to be passed". I article I read did not say that, just that some NCAA committee is considering it.

---

Everything that I've read and the coaches I've spoke to have said they expect it to get passed. They are attempting to "equal the playing field" in a sense between coaches and players. Coaches can leave at any time with no reprimand but an 18 year old can't change his mind about a life altering decision after he has signed. I'm not saying I agree with this line of thought, just giving what I've heard about it.

The new rule would allow an athlete to potentially play for three schools without sitting out (signed school, one-time transfer, grad transfer). There will be academic requirements that must be met but that is the gist of the proposal. We could proposal start a thread for this so we stop clogging up this one.

Game day!!! Bear season is officially open. No limit today. Happy hunting!

Will it be on the Southland stream? The espn app is better quality.

It's on the pay stream through UCA's video site, or you can connect there through the Southland app. Only audio is free today.