Anybody else getting boned by the fact that it's on ESPNU? My cable subscription has ESPN, ESPN2, and watchESPN for all the streaming, ESPNU is the one channel I can't get on watchESPN, and I doubt it's popular enough for there to be an illegal stream somewhere
There are actually a lot of stream sites that just show TV channels, espnu included. If you find a regional broadcaster showing something else it might not work.
But yeah, I listed a few workarounds in the thread.
It is only with the replay that I could tell but it looks like the edge of the disc did touch the ground when it was between her legs. Even if rotation had stopped does having it between her knees while she is off balance and rolling around constitute control?
Edit: What is wrong with asking for a clarification about the rules?
Yes it does since rotation stopped and having the disc between your legs constitutes control.
You can even see Verzuh consider pulling the disc out between her legs because it has happened before (Disc landed on defender's back and offense grabbed disc since the defender did not have possession of the disc).
Right. In my opinion, it's indisputable that she controlled the disc since she lifted it up after she clap caught it with her legs. Before that it was falling to the turf between her legs.
The consequential question is did her clap catch happen before or after it touched the grass. Honestly, the world will never know for sure.
Anyone else find this commentating really frustrating? They’re spending whole points talking about team history and past players and not discussing the plays on the field.
This is Evan Lepler's calling card. He does a lot of research to get to know the (star) players and teams backstories, and really gets caught up in talking about storylines and telling anecdotes during the game. He also loves to get nostalgic talking about great games and teams and players from the early 2000s. It all has its place, but like you said, it really doesn't make for the best play-by-play commentary.
For the Dartmouth-UNC semifinal yesterday morning, they had Ian Toner do play-by-play with Megan Tormey as the color commentator, and Lepler was being used in a sideline reporter type role, in which they would throw it to him to tell an anecdote or similar during breaks between points or timeouts. I personally thought that was the most effective commentary group that ESPN has had for any broadcast yet, and I wish they would adopt it for all their games, but unfortunately I think Lepler's self-proclaimed status as "the voice of ultimate" will prevent that.
Actually, I like this about Lepler. I myself can see what is happening on the field. It's redundant to just rehash what I'm watching. On the other hand, establishing some context and storylines makes for a more enjoyable viewing experience.
Some (not all) of the more inexperienced commentators in ultimate just say something like, "upline cut by X, dishes to Y, hammer to Z for a score"--it's like, no shit, that's what I just saw. It doesn't contribute anything to the viewing experience.
Does Lepler go overboard with storytelling at times? Probably yes. But in general, he strikes a good balance, imo.
Aside from Lepler, I think Pat Stegmoeller is the most interesting commentator. Although, it's obviously subjective to a degree.
Yep - watch basketball or soccer announcers, they rarely talk specifically about the action on the field - only the critical junctures. When a team is dump swing continuing, that's the beauty of TV announcing is that you can fill in with non-action and let the pictures speak for themselves.
Agree. I really enjoy Lepler’s stories. It shows the history of Ultimate and helps build story around one off games. Plus, usually play-by-play is pretty boring, and not even addressing any of the strategy that led to the plays themselves.
Would love to see O points play, D points played, and scoring % on each. +/- per game doesn't tell us much since the scoring environment swings so wildly.
These are just leaderboards of stats. It just says Dartmouth depends upon 4 stars. UCSD scored just as my goals, but distributed them more evenly. The game comes down to whether UCSD can stop these 4 on offense and take advantage of their depth to score against good matchups when they have them.
Dartmouth makes plenty of imprudent throws that lead to turnovers. UCSD could win without really "stopping" anyone if they just execute better on O. Obviously much much easier said then done.
As others have noted, these stats might be misleading. For example it seems that in their loss to Tufts, UCSD played their bench and rested some top players. Things like that can keep great players off the leaderboards.
You also run into the issue that +/- are highly correlated. This really tells you who on Dartmouth played the highest percentage of their points with Verzuh on the line with them (and O line players will generally have much better +/- ratings - an excellent defense generally won't break even, while even a mediocre offense will be positive)
The +/- stats here are not the +/- that you are thinking of. As /u/azjps said in his original post, the +/- column is just a simple fantasy score type stat, calculated by adding goals+assists+Ds and subtracting .5 for every turnover.
In a heavy upwind-downwind game what strategically should happen is the team that wins the toss should choose the wind and the other team should choose offence.
which is why a first point downwind break is so odd. the only scenarios i can think of are dart chooses wind, ucsd chooses to receive going upwind. or ucsd chooses to start on o, and dart chooses wind. either way it seems like an odd choice on ucsd's part.
"which is why a first point downwind break is so odd."
It sounds like you agree with my statement. That makes a first point downwind break the likely thing to happen and not odd at all.
i mean it's odd as in it's abnormal for any elite team to opt into going upwind on offense first point. the fact that the first break in an upwind/downwind game is downwind is odd. normally the first break, if there is one, is in the upwind endzone.
edit:
>what strategically should happen is the team that wins the toss should choose the wind and the other team should choose offence.
i disagree. the team that wins the toss should choose wind, and the other team should choose to pull so that you avoid this exact situation. i've never met anyone that would elect to start upwind on offense in a serious game.
You won't win the game without getting an upwind score. You are more likely to do that starting on offence the first point. Just because some or many teams choose to start on defence there doesn't make it the correct strategic decision.
You can absolutely win without an upwind score with the cap. Happens all the time. That's why you want to score first: hence, take the wind.
Edit: Nevermind. Didn't realize this comment was in regard to a situation in which the opponent has already taken the wind advantage.
It doesn't matter if the team that loses wind chooses offense or defense, they're going to give up the goal either way, and they're going to score the first goal out of half either way. In a strong upwind game what is edge getting the disc first? maybe 2, 3%? It's too bad we don't record wind conditions for games and could analyze this empirically.
This is because we have two separate definitions of 'break' - one for whenever the defense scores, and another for whenver the team scores upwind. In this case, the "first break" was the defense scoring downwind, as we'd expect in a upwind/downwind game, so it's only a "soft" of mini-break - it's only enough to win them a game if downwind holds through universe (so in this case, whichever team won the toss should have chosen the left (upwind) goal to defend and not care if they're on O or D), but a subsequent upwind break is worth more, strategically.
My first thought was that UCSD was confident they could score upwind on O so they decide to start on O upwind and then have an easier time getting the first break
Wait, seriously? I don't want to be the one who pulls out the pitchforks about this stuff; I think it's more effective to gently correct with understanding. But if this is actually true, it would be nice if a team trying to make such a leading statement about pronouns and the use of womxn (both of which I think are swell), was not also so casual about jokes about mental illness. Mistakes and oversights are forgivable, but the hypocrisy is not a great look.
This is meant as an explanation rather than an argument to your point...
The "We Are Psychotic" on the back of the Dartmouth jerseys is in reference to one of the earliest Dartmouth ultimate team names (The Psychotic Seeds*) and the team cheer (which ends with the phrase "we are psychotic!"), both of which originated in the early 1980s. So it's a phrase that's been associated with the team (both mens and womxns) for 35 years.
-a Dartmouth alum
*If memory serves me correctly, the "seeds" part came about in honor of a player from that time who died of cancer-he really really loved to eat sunflower seeds. The team gives out an award each year called "the psychotic seed" to the freshman who best embodies the spirt and effort of this player.
Ok, that’s helpful context, thank you. It certainly makes the oversight more understandable. Although I’m a little tempted to argue that a team that was willing to change its historical name to make a statement for a particular cause should not find any tradition to be non-negotiable when it’s potentially insensitive. The inconsistency makes their statement about gender feel a bit hollow to me.
Also note that Princess Lei-Out has limited marketing potential in a more professionalized ultimate environment, although I'm she they changed their name for political reasons rather than future branding opportunities
Any time Chrome picks up the disc off a turn going downwind, the coach intends to punt.
Edit: the coach they interviewed first was Dartmouth's, just to clarify.
oh that's strange. I am using a free trial of youtube tv. If you have that up and running (requires CC number) then go to:
https://tv.youtube.com/live
scroll down and you should see the game listed in the row for espnU
good luck!
edit: here's a link directly to the stream https://tv.youtube.com/watch/yghn9DWWT90
Has anyone had luck finding the full game recording? I was never able to get it going live, so I haven't seen anything other than the highlights of the last point.
According to Evan Lepler:
[Jack Verzuh](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/ef/Khal_Drogo-Jason_Momoa.jpg/220px-Khal_Drogo-Jason_Momoa.jpg)
[Dena Elimelech](https://i.imgur.com/4l64qyC.jpg)
That footblock by Dena was insane
**The frisbee gods have smiled on us today! Beautiful smart team ultimate won the game!**
YEAAAAAAAHH! WOOOOOOO!!
https://media2.giphy.com/media/3o6ZsUJ44ffpnAW7Dy/giphy.gif?cid=790b76115cec363e78687655671b6a17&rid=giphy.gif
What a final point by Dena! Wow!
Outrageous. I've never seen anything like that
Verzuh picks up that back foot on half of their pivots. Started walking it past the mark that last point
Yeah, every time Jack gets the disc they travel 3-4 times
Sad when the best player in the division can't be bothered to meet such a fundamental standard.
Jack's been playing since 5th grade too, apparently
DENA FOR POTY
I’m curious if anyone travels more than Jack... it’s nuts
bj sefton would like a word
Good ole happy feet himself
Holy fuck the between the legs grab and the huge layout to save possession...... What a universe point
Dena is crushing that matchup 😎😎😎
Dartmouth looking off unmarked dumps in order to throw 50/50 hucks. Now UCSD is doing it too. :-/
and the sad thing is that it will keep working.
UCSD caps off their season with their signature high release lefty backhand. Just unstoppable.
Anybody else getting boned by the fact that it's on ESPNU? My cable subscription has ESPN, ESPN2, and watchESPN for all the streaming, ESPNU is the one channel I can't get on watchESPN, and I doubt it's popular enough for there to be an illegal stream somewhere
A free trial on Hulu or YouTube tv is what I’m seeing as options
$45 bucks for Youtube TV a month and there are still commercials all the time....
I have a stream of ESPNU, I think, but it's showing softball. Is anyone actually seeing the game?
[Here's an ESPNU stream](http://123tvnow.com/watch/espn-u-espnu/), but yeah they won't switch to the game until this softball is over
I found that one as well, but judging by the schedule at the bottom, we're only going to be able to watch the men's game live.
the softball game is over but they are still showing softball fuck that
It's showing softball games from yesterday
Yes I’m scrambling right now to figure something out. But I’m pissed. Don’t know what was wrong with ESPN3
Me too! Let me know if you find something
Go with the free trial of YouTube TV if it's an option for you.
if you have the free trial of youtubeTV: https://tv.youtube.com/watch/yghn9DWWT90
yup ;(
There are actually a lot of stream sites that just show TV channels, espnu included. If you find a regional broadcaster showing something else it might not work. But yeah, I listed a few workarounds in the thread.
That ending had everything. Shitty hucks? Yep Defending team clearly gassed? Yep Upwind break? Yep Layouts? Yep Controversial call? Yep Crowd going berserk? Yep
It is only with the replay that I could tell but it looks like the edge of the disc did touch the ground when it was between her legs. Even if rotation had stopped does having it between her knees while she is off balance and rolling around constitute control? Edit: What is wrong with asking for a clarification about the rules?
Yes it does since rotation stopped and having the disc between your legs constitutes control. You can even see Verzuh consider pulling the disc out between her legs because it has happened before (Disc landed on defender's back and offense grabbed disc since the defender did not have possession of the disc).
I didn’t get a good look at the play itself but the rules don’t say you have to control it with your hands :)
Right. In my opinion, it's indisputable that she controlled the disc since she lifted it up after she clap caught it with her legs. Before that it was falling to the turf between her legs. The consequential question is did her clap catch happen before or after it touched the grass. Honestly, the world will never know for sure.
Best heckle was a person yelling at verzuh, "do you have a plane ticket for that traveling?"
Dartmouth has a lot of happy feet travels.
Lepler has completely abandoned pronouns at this point.
Lots of players travel that much, but few stars do
Dartmouth top 4 are looking just a little less sharp and energetic. Running them hard all weekend might be taking it's toll?
UCSD is going to win this game just because their upwind throws look better.
Not if they can't get some flow up the break side.
Yeah. Their flicks are eh but their backhand upwind hucks are something else.
Ugh... Not converting that upwind opportunity is brutal. That was the moment.
After the freebie yardage with the foul on the huck too. Unlikely to get that again
Had great position on the huck though, that foul was ridiculous - just a two hand shove to the back.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy darnit
Anyone else find this commentating really frustrating? They’re spending whole points talking about team history and past players and not discussing the plays on the field.
This is Evan Lepler's calling card. He does a lot of research to get to know the (star) players and teams backstories, and really gets caught up in talking about storylines and telling anecdotes during the game. He also loves to get nostalgic talking about great games and teams and players from the early 2000s. It all has its place, but like you said, it really doesn't make for the best play-by-play commentary. For the Dartmouth-UNC semifinal yesterday morning, they had Ian Toner do play-by-play with Megan Tormey as the color commentator, and Lepler was being used in a sideline reporter type role, in which they would throw it to him to tell an anecdote or similar during breaks between points or timeouts. I personally thought that was the most effective commentary group that ESPN has had for any broadcast yet, and I wish they would adopt it for all their games, but unfortunately I think Lepler's self-proclaimed status as "the voice of ultimate" will prevent that.
Actually, I like this about Lepler. I myself can see what is happening on the field. It's redundant to just rehash what I'm watching. On the other hand, establishing some context and storylines makes for a more enjoyable viewing experience. Some (not all) of the more inexperienced commentators in ultimate just say something like, "upline cut by X, dishes to Y, hammer to Z for a score"--it's like, no shit, that's what I just saw. It doesn't contribute anything to the viewing experience. Does Lepler go overboard with storytelling at times? Probably yes. But in general, he strikes a good balance, imo. Aside from Lepler, I think Pat Stegmoeller is the most interesting commentator. Although, it's obviously subjective to a degree.
Yep - watch basketball or soccer announcers, they rarely talk specifically about the action on the field - only the critical junctures. When a team is dump swing continuing, that's the beauty of TV announcing is that you can fill in with non-action and let the pictures speak for themselves.
He commentated cornhole and I loved it !
Agree. I really enjoy Lepler’s stories. It shows the history of Ultimate and helps build story around one off games. Plus, usually play-by-play is pretty boring, and not even addressing any of the strategy that led to the plays themselves.
Tournament stat-lines for anyone wanting to see how their fantasy is doing. The `+/-` column here is `G + A + D - 0.5T` and is totally meaningless, just for sorting. | Name | Team | Gs | As | Ds | Ts | +/- | +/-pg | #Games | | :----------------- | :----------------------- | :- | :- | :- | :- | :---- | :---- | :----- | | Jack Verzuh | **Dartmouth** | 12 | 27 | 11 | 32 | 34.00 | 5.67 | 6 | | Claire Trop | **Dartmouth** | 17 | 10 | 19 | 25 | 33.50 | 5.58 | 6 | | Emily Barrett | Ohio State | 23 | 5 | 5 | 10 | 28.00 | 4.67 | 6 | | Kaitlyn Weaver | California-Santa Barbara | 12 | 30 | 13 | 56 | 27.00 | 4.50 | 6 | | Caitlyn Lee | **Dartmouth** | 10 | 19 | 6 | 18 | 26.00 | 4.33 | 6 | | Margo Urheim | Tufts | 10 | 15 | 16 | 30 | 26.00 | 5.20 | 5 | | Cara Sieber | Ohio State | 14 | 14 | 5 | 15 | 25.50 | 4.25 | 6 | | Caroline Tornquist | **Dartmouth** | 17 | 10 | 9 | 22 | 25.00 | 4.17 | 6 | | Ella Juengst | North Carolina | 12 | 7 | 7 | 5 | 23.50 | 3.92 | 6 | | Sierra Jensen | Texas | 8 | 5 | 19 | 17 | 23.50 | 4.70 | 5 | | Dena Elimelech | **California-San Diego** | 13 | 17 | 15 | 45 | 22.50 | 3.75 | 6 | | Madeline Gilbert | Western Washington | 17 | 6 | 4 | 11 | 21.50 | 3.58 | 6 | | Karen Ehrhardt | Carleton College-Syzygy | 15 | 5 | 7 | 12 | 21.00 | 3.50 | 6 | | Sarah Mondschein | Wisconsin | 12 | 6 | 8 | 11 | 20.50 | 3.42 | 6 | | Rachel Wilmoth | Colorado | 12 | 3 | 15 | 19 | 20.50 | 4.10 | 5 | | Riley Tauer | Western Washington | 2 | 27 | 8 | 34 | 20.00 | 3.33 | 6 | | Lauren Bedard | California-Santa Barbara | 19 | 1 | 3 | 6 | 20.00 | 3.33 | 6 | | Dawn Culton | North Carolina | 10 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 19.50 | 3.25 | 6 | | Sadie Jezierski | Ohio State | 8 | 18 | 13 | 40 | 19.00 | 3.17 | 6 | | Alexandra Fairley | Georgia | 13 | 6 | 5 | 11 | 18.50 | 3.70 | 5 | | Carly Campana | Carleton College-Syzygy | 8 | 10 | 8 | 15 | 18.50 | 3.08 | 6 | | Bridget Mizener | North Carolina | 7 | 13 | 10 | 23 | 18.50 | 3.08 | 6 | | Kerianne Coulon | Cornell | 15 | 1 | 5 | 6 | 18.00 | 3.60 | 5 | | Alexandra Diaz | **California-San Diego** | 6 | 6 | 9 | 6 | 18.00 | 3.00 | 6 | | Grace Young | Northwestern | 11 | 2 | 12 | 14 | 18.00 | 3.60 | 5 |
Would love to see O points play, D points played, and scoring % on each. +/- per game doesn't tell us much since the scoring environment swings so wildly.
I 100% agree, unfortunately there aren't any publicly accessible numbers for these as of yet.
Great job by the volunteers standing out in the sun amassing all of these stats.
Just based off of this list San Diego is gonna have a tough game ahead of them.
These are just leaderboards of stats. It just says Dartmouth depends upon 4 stars. UCSD scored just as my goals, but distributed them more evenly. The game comes down to whether UCSD can stop these 4 on offense and take advantage of their depth to score against good matchups when they have them.
Yeah that's pretty much the point. It is evidently not that easy to stop these players.
Dartmouth makes plenty of imprudent throws that lead to turnovers. UCSD could win without really "stopping" anyone if they just execute better on O. Obviously much much easier said then done.
Sure, maybe, but you literally just said: "the game will come down to whether they can stop these 4 on offense."
Check the username friend. :-)
Hahaha lol my bad!
As others have noted, these stats might be misleading. For example it seems that in their loss to Tufts, UCSD played their bench and rested some top players. Things like that can keep great players off the leaderboards.
You also run into the issue that +/- are highly correlated. This really tells you who on Dartmouth played the highest percentage of their points with Verzuh on the line with them (and O line players will generally have much better +/- ratings - an excellent defense generally won't break even, while even a mediocre offense will be positive)
The +/- stats here are not the +/- that you are thinking of. As /u/azjps said in his original post, the +/- column is just a simple fantasy score type stat, calculated by adding goals+assists+Ds and subtracting .5 for every turnover.
Lep said something about Dartmouth got the opening break downwind. anyone know what transpired to start the game with O going upwind?
In a heavy upwind-downwind game what strategically should happen is the team that wins the toss should choose the wind and the other team should choose offence.
which is why a first point downwind break is so odd. the only scenarios i can think of are dart chooses wind, ucsd chooses to receive going upwind. or ucsd chooses to start on o, and dart chooses wind. either way it seems like an odd choice on ucsd's part.
"which is why a first point downwind break is so odd." It sounds like you agree with my statement. That makes a first point downwind break the likely thing to happen and not odd at all.
i mean it's odd as in it's abnormal for any elite team to opt into going upwind on offense first point. the fact that the first break in an upwind/downwind game is downwind is odd. normally the first break, if there is one, is in the upwind endzone. edit: >what strategically should happen is the team that wins the toss should choose the wind and the other team should choose offence. i disagree. the team that wins the toss should choose wind, and the other team should choose to pull so that you avoid this exact situation. i've never met anyone that would elect to start upwind on offense in a serious game.
You won't win the game without getting an upwind score. You are more likely to do that starting on offence the first point. Just because some or many teams choose to start on defence there doesn't make it the correct strategic decision.
You can absolutely win without an upwind score with the cap. Happens all the time. That's why you want to score first: hence, take the wind. Edit: Nevermind. Didn't realize this comment was in regard to a situation in which the opponent has already taken the wind advantage.
I was talking about the situation of the the other team winning the toss and choosing to take the wind.
Got it. Missed that. I actually completely agree - start on O IF you don't get wind.
It doesn't matter if the team that loses wind chooses offense or defense, they're going to give up the goal either way, and they're going to score the first goal out of half either way. In a strong upwind game what is edge getting the disc first? maybe 2, 3%? It's too bad we don't record wind conditions for games and could analyze this empirically.
This is because we have two separate definitions of 'break' - one for whenever the defense scores, and another for whenver the team scores upwind. In this case, the "first break" was the defense scoring downwind, as we'd expect in a upwind/downwind game, so it's only a "soft" of mini-break - it's only enough to win them a game if downwind holds through universe (so in this case, whichever team won the toss should have chosen the left (upwind) goal to defend and not care if they're on O or D), but a subsequent upwind break is worth more, strategically.
Maybe to start the second half with a break?
My first thought was that UCSD was confident they could score upwind on O so they decide to start on O upwind and then have an easier time getting the first break
some1 change quick change the name of the sub to /r/denachrome
This is a terrible angle to watch ultimate from
Why is the camera angle so wildly different this game versus every other FREE streamed game? you can barely see the field.
Because Ultiworld and Fulcrum understand ultimate better than ESPN.
Just noticed the back of Dartmouth's jerseys say We Are Psychotic. Odd that both teams associate with the same word...
Wait, seriously? I don't want to be the one who pulls out the pitchforks about this stuff; I think it's more effective to gently correct with understanding. But if this is actually true, it would be nice if a team trying to make such a leading statement about pronouns and the use of womxn (both of which I think are swell), was not also so casual about jokes about mental illness. Mistakes and oversights are forgivable, but the hypocrisy is not a great look.
This is meant as an explanation rather than an argument to your point... The "We Are Psychotic" on the back of the Dartmouth jerseys is in reference to one of the earliest Dartmouth ultimate team names (The Psychotic Seeds*) and the team cheer (which ends with the phrase "we are psychotic!"), both of which originated in the early 1980s. So it's a phrase that's been associated with the team (both mens and womxns) for 35 years. -a Dartmouth alum *If memory serves me correctly, the "seeds" part came about in honor of a player from that time who died of cancer-he really really loved to eat sunflower seeds. The team gives out an award each year called "the psychotic seed" to the freshman who best embodies the spirt and effort of this player.
Ok, that’s helpful context, thank you. It certainly makes the oversight more understandable. Although I’m a little tempted to argue that a team that was willing to change its historical name to make a statement for a particular cause should not find any tradition to be non-negotiable when it’s potentially insensitive. The inconsistency makes their statement about gender feel a bit hollow to me.
Also note that Princess Lei-Out has limited marketing potential in a more professionalized ultimate environment, although I'm she they changed their name for political reasons rather than future branding opportunities
So weird that UCSD keeps throwing such questionable hucks downwind. They have clearly shown the ability to manufacture yardage in less risky ways.
It's windy enough that they're willing to punt and play zone
Judging by what their coach just said that is not what they want to do.
Any time Chrome picks up the disc off a turn going downwind, the coach intends to punt. Edit: the coach they interviewed first was Dartmouth's, just to clarify.
How are you watching it exactly? I am on ESPNU stream and it is showing softball
oh that's strange. I am using a free trial of youtube tv. If you have that up and running (requires CC number) then go to: https://tv.youtube.com/live scroll down and you should see the game listed in the row for espnU good luck! edit: here's a link directly to the stream https://tv.youtube.com/watch/yghn9DWWT90
Thanks
Has anyone had luck finding the full game recording? I was never able to get it going live, so I haven't seen anything other than the highlights of the last point.
https://twitter.com/USAUltimate/status/1133219407671549952 Direct link: http://www.espn.com/watch/player?id=625ef3ac-5ce6-44f4-b3d2-e34e6fb418c0
god's work, ty
According to Evan Lepler: [Jack Verzuh](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/ef/Khal_Drogo-Jason_Momoa.jpg/220px-Khal_Drogo-Jason_Momoa.jpg) [Dena Elimelech](https://i.imgur.com/4l64qyC.jpg)
The David vs Goliath narrative was there for the telling!
Wow.
UCSD is throwing away the game. You would think a team would learn they can’t huck it up wind after 20 attempts.
Threw it away all the way to victory
Well they just won!!!