*****Iowa vs UCLA 🏆 Game Thread*****

Hawk48

All-Conference
Jun 10, 2005
1,039
1,591
113
Beat by 51 points, just wow and very disappointing to say the least. This was a litmus test and Iowa staff and team failed miserably. Iowa will need several upgrades in the future to actually compete for FF, but JMHO
 

QChawks

Heisman
Dec 17, 2022
10,387
22,381
113
Not to fret - hopefully we'll get another shot at them in the NCAA's.
nope GIF
 

UIAlumFireFighter

All-Conference
Sep 26, 2018
1,088
1,626
113
Beat by 51 points, just wow and very disappointing to say the least. This was a litmus test and Iowa staff and team failed miserably. Iowa will need several upgrades in the future to actually compete for FF, but JMHO
Unless she greatly improves, Hays will never be worth much coming off the bench. Certainly not a starter.
Deal has to improve a ton
Wright is good but 5’4” ? That’s an issue.

Need to portal numerous players.
 

DukeSlater

All-Conference
Jul 2, 2023
1,791
4,132
113
Minus CC they've never been able to compete at that level. And in both championship games they were also outmatched. So it's pretty much same as it ever was.
Of course, with CC Iowa did beat defending national champion South Carolina, a team on a 40-game winning streak, in the national semis a couple years ago. So "never" would be a bit hyperbolic, but your point is generally accurate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Burghawk87

Franisdaman

Heisman
Nov 3, 2012
14,822
22,129
113
Beat by 51 points, just wow and very disappointing to say the least. This was a litmus test and Iowa staff and team failed miserably. Iowa will need several upgrades in the future to actually compete for FF, but JMHO

Flat out embarrassing.

UCLA Shooting:

13-26 (50%) from three
27-37 (73%) from inside the arc
................................................................
40-63 (63%) Overall Shooting

.........3-5 (60%) FTs
................................................................
...........96 points
====================


IOWA Shooting:

......5-23 (22%) from three
12-38 (32%) from inside the arc
................................................................
17-61 (28%) Overall Shooting

.........6-8 (75%) FTs
................................................................
...........45 points
====================
 

DukeSlater

All-Conference
Jul 2, 2023
1,791
4,132
113
People need to calm TF down. Taylor, Ava, and Chit Chat are sophomores. Our seniors are Kylie and Hannah, both of whom have their noted deficiencies. Our bench contributors are all true freshmen.

UCLA starts five seniors, one of whom is national POTY. They are 30-1 for a reason, folks. Anyone who didn’t prepare for today as a very real possibility, I don’t know what universe you live in. JFC.
Sure, losing was likely, but getting embarrassed by over 50 points!? That was not on my Bingo card. I mean Ohio State only lost to UCLA by ten yesterday. This mismatch was an utter disaster in every conceivable way. But it's only one game. The NCAA will be a clean slate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: the24fan

DukeSlater

All-Conference
Jul 2, 2023
1,791
4,132
113
I always love when a channel gets to televise game and announcers butcher names.
Well, CBS used to be a reputable organization. Not any more. And apparently they have never thought of giving their announcers the phonetic pronunciations of Iowa player names.
 

Kceasthawk@77

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2005
2,313
4,174
113
Ava might not be 100 percent. But she can’t be effective in this game regardless. Just not athletic enough against UCLa size.
I don't know why we keep using the term "not athletic enough". That's simply not true. Heiden is plenty athletic. She's more athletic then Gus was as an AA. What she's not is 6'7" with a wingspan of someone who's almost 7". It has nothing to do with her not being "athletic enough".
 

pablow

All-American
Mar 13, 2010
895
5,009
93
Our defensive intensity against Illinois and Michigan was scary. That was entirely MIA today. WTF?

UCLA is not 51 points better than us. We earned this humiliation by sucking at basically every aspect of the game.

This is on us.