Syracuse just looked a lot more efficient. A few stats that best shows what I mean is points in the paint. Syracuse outscored Wisconsin 30 to 10. ESPN--Wisconsin only scored two paint points in the second half and did not attempt a shot in the paint in the final 14 minutes of the game. Me--It takes real skill to score like that inside.
Numbers don't really do justice to what I mean by "better", even the 55% FG Pct to Wisky's 43%, it is just the way it appeared to me, like I said very efficient. Wisconsin's 3 balls did land but like they say, you live by the 3 you die by the 3(which doesn't apply in this game as their 3s gave them life support--not enough to win and not really the cause of their loss), but my point is there are games where those shots don't fall even by efficient 3-point shooting teams so I view it more as a flaw if that is the team's main strength. Syracuse played well inside and outside, they weren't bad from 3-point land themselves.
I don't think it is a terrible thing a team can play a better game and barely win or even lose. It's sports. In football sometimes a team will dominate in time of possession, passing efficiency, rushing yards and still lose.
= new reply since forum marked as read
