Third Quarter Woes

[37620VOL]

UCONN is in the Big Least not SEC, I took it as an SEC, since if you're comparing to the SEC teams , none have played UCONN

I am truly shocked, shocked, I tell you, to find out that Connecticut is not in the SEC.

 

[37620VOL]

Updated through 3/1/26

Opponent	Result	Q1 Diff	Q2 Diff	Q3 Diff	Q4 Diff	Total
vs. Florida	W 76–65	+10	-3	-4	+8	+11
at Auburn	W 73–56	+13	+2	+8	-6	+17
at Miss. State	W 90–80	+7	+3	+1	-1	+10
vs. Arkansas	W 85–50	+11	+2	+11	+11	+35
at #21 Alabama	W 70–59	-3	+10	-2	+6	+11
vs. #11 Kentucky	W 60–58	+4	+3	-6	+1	+2
vs. Miss. State	L 62–77	+3	-12	-8	+2	-15
at Georgia	W 82–77 (OT)	+1	+1	+2	-4	+5
at #3 S. Carolina	L 50–93	-7	-8	-15	-13	-43
vs. Missouri	W 98–53	+16	+15	+11	+3	+45
vs. #4 Texas	L 63–65	-8	+8	-3	+1	-2
at #17 Ole Miss	L 81–94	-6	+5	-11	-1	-13
vs. Texas A&M	L 74–82	-8	+3	-13	+10	-8
at #11 Oklahoma	L 93–100	+2	-4	-5	0	-7
at #6 LSU	L 73–89	+4	-1	-10	-5	-16
vs. #5 Vanderbilt	L 77–87	-4	+10	-15	-1	-10
SEC TOTALS		+35	+30	-59	+21

 

[37620VOL]

"Gemini, statistically, how significant is the variance of the LV results in the third quarter?"

Gemini:
To determine if the Lady Vols' 3rd-quarter struggles are a fluke or a statistically significant anomaly, we can run a One-Way ANOVA (to compare all quarters) and an Independent T-test (to compare the 3rd quarter specifically against the other three).

Using the data from all 16 SEC games, the results show that the 3rd quarter is not just "bad"—it is a distinct statistical outlier.

The Variance Breakdown​

The "variance" tells us how much the scores fluctuate around the average. Interestingly, the 3rd quarter has the highest variance ($72.50$) of any period. This means the 3rd quarter is not only the lowest-scoring, but also the most unpredictable.

Is it "Statistically Significant"?​

In statistics, a p-value of less than 0.05 is the standard threshold for "significance"—meaning there is less than a 5% chance the result happened by accident.

1. ANOVA Result (Comparing all 4 quarters)​

• P-value: 0.093
• Interpretation: At the 0.05 level, the difference across all four quarters is "marginally significant." This is because the 4th quarter (mean $+0.69$) bridges the gap between the dominant 1st half and the disastrous 3rd quarter, smoothing out the overall curve.

2. T-Test Result (Q3 vs. The Rest of the Game)​

• P-value: 0.014
• Interpretation: This is the smoking gun. When you compare the 3rd quarter directly to the combined performance of the 1st, 2nd, and 4th quarters, the result is highly statistically significant ($p < 0.05$).

The Verdict: There is only a 1.4% probability that Tennessee’s 3rd-quarter drop-off is due to random chance. Statistically, the Lady Vols essentially become a different, significantly worse team the moment they walk out of the halftime tunnel.

---

​

 

[1reVOLver]

As it is highly unlikely that the Q3 drop off is due to random chance, let’s speculate about the factors that may account for it.

1) Crappy S&C. They are exhausted after fairy good Q1 efforts. Highly unlikely, as Q4 results improve.

2.a.) Coaching instructions are misguided. Possible. How probable? Your guess is as good as any.

2.b.) Coaching instructions are excellent, and ignored. Possible. How probable? Your guess isas good as any.

2.c.) Coaching instructions are excellent, Some or most team members
are incapable of following instructions. Possible? I dunno.

Edited to add, albeit somewhat mirthfully- Players are focused on their cell phones, monitoring their brokerage accounts. The joys of NIL distract them from paying heed to coaching instructions.

Further silly edits: The coaches, recognizing that prior games' Q3 adjustments have not yielded the expected benefits, have resorted to AI. Claude, recently freed from bellicose pursuits, is employed, as is hùndàn, 混蛋, a cheapo Chinese NSL LM.
Results continue to defy logic.

 

[RetroVol]

"Gemini, statistically, how significant is the variance of the LV results in the third quarter?"

Gemini:
To determine if the Lady Vols' 3rd-quarter struggles are a fluke or a statistically significant anomaly, we can run a One-Way ANOVA (to compare all quarters) and an Independent T-test (to compare the 3rd quarter specifically against the other three).

Using the data from all 16 SEC games, the results show that the 3rd quarter is not just "bad"—it is a distinct statistical outlier.

The Variance Breakdown​

The "variance" tells us how much the scores fluctuate around the average. Interestingly, the 3rd quarter has the highest variance ($72.50$) of any period. This means the 3rd quarter is not only the lowest-scoring, but also the most unpredictable.

Is it "Statistically Significant"?​

In statistics, a p-value of less than 0.05 is the standard threshold for "significance"—meaning there is less than a 5% chance the result happened by accident.

1. ANOVA Result (Comparing all 4 quarters)​

• P-value: 0.093
• Interpretation: At the 0.05 level, the difference across all four quarters is "marginally significant." This is because the 4th quarter (mean $+0.69$) bridges the gap between the dominant 1st half and the disastrous 3rd quarter, smoothing out the overall curve.

2. T-Test Result (Q3 vs. The Rest of the Game)​

• P-value: 0.014
• Interpretation: This is the smoking gun. When you compare the 3rd quarter directly to the combined performance of the 1st, 2nd, and 4th quarters, the result is highly statistically significant ($p < 0.05$).

---

​

Which means... what? I think most observers already had concluded that this pattern likely represented something more than chance, but the question is what. An analysis of Kim's results in the third quarter over her career would isolate one variable.

 

[1reVOLver]

An analysis of Kim's results in the third quarter over her career would isolate one variable.

I think I know where you are headed with this. I tend to agree with you. But…
A persnickety observer might question whether the absence of ceteris paribus conditions in DII and mid-major competition might invalidate the comparison.
Just tell them that sniping from the peanut gallery is prohibited.

 

[37620VOL]

Which means... what? I think most observers already had concluded that this pattern likely represented something more than chance, but the question is what. An analysis of Kim's results in the third quarter over her career would isolate one variable.

That is the big question, isn't it?

We aren't in the locker room, so we don't know what's going on. I would be tempted if I had already tried every logical solution to do something drastic. For the next two games, I would not go into the locker room at half time. I would stay on the court, we would stay warmed up, shoot game style shots, and work on anything that we struggled on in the first half. Almost turn half time into a period of practice.

 

[1reVOLver]

For the next two games, I would not go into the locker room at half time. I would stay on the court, we would stay warmed up, shoot game style shots, and work on anything that we struggled on in the first half. Almost turn half time into a period of practice.

Couldn’t work worse than what we have seen for the last half dozen games.

 

[creekdipper]

Doesnt account for OT in table…

Chuckie in his prophetic phase.

 

[madtownvol]

That is the big question, isn't it?

We aren't in the locker room, so we don't know what's going on. I would be tempted if I had already tried every logical solution to do something drastic. For the next two games, I would not go into the locker room at half time. I would stay on the court, we would stay warmed up, shoot game style shots, and work on anything that we struggled on in the first half. Almost turn half time into a period of practice.

This pattern is so significant that I would look for something structural or systemic. The brute empirical observation is that going to the locker room is bad for this team. So not doing that might be the needed change. I think GLV’s theory that sitting for an extended period is incompatible with their physical training is as good as any explanation. It also fits with their upward trend in the 4th quarter.

 

[volsagain]

That is the big question, isn't it?

We aren't in the locker room, so we don't know what's going on. I would be tempted if I had already tried every logical solution to do something drastic. For the next two games, I would not go into the locker room at half time. I would stay on the court, we would stay warmed up, shoot game style shots, and work on anything that we struggled on in the first half. Almost turn half time into a period of practice.

Maybe she's tried different things but none have worked. But hopefully she will try even harder to get this figured out. How about starting the 5 that played the best first half and then only change out players that need more direction or of course foul trouble. Wandering if it's now in their heads and effecting there shots.

 

[creekdipper]

It does seem at times that Kim is currently stuck in the Twilight Zone between her system and a more traditional system. Trying to figure her way out of the abyss.

Or like ole Sissy Fuss.

 

[volfan102455]

But we play a lot better in the fourth than we do in the third. So, it seems like they are either losing focus/intensity at halftime or we are making crappy adjustments or the players struggle to implement good halftime adjustments.

Wasn't there one season a Josh Heupel team was a suck fest in the third quarter?

Could be that the other team lets up as the game is won. LSU definitely let up. UCONN and SC did not.

 

[Amb3096]

Could be that the other team lets up as the game is won. LSU definitely let up. UCONN and SC did not.

Other teams let up once they know the game is won, and Tennessee uses that as an opportunity to have their starters press the other team’s bench so they can lose by 15 instead of 20.

I also disagree that South Carolina dint let up. They could have easily won by over 50. They took their foot off the gas for sure.

 

[glv98]

Other teams let up once they know the game is won, and Tennessee uses that as an opportunity to have their starters press the other team’s bench so they can lose by 15 instead of 20.

I also disagree that South Carolina dint let up. They could have easily won by over 50. They took their foot off the gas for sure.

Was that the game where Kim said in the pressor that it would have been 50 if the game had been any longer? I think it was SC but there were so many grueling beatdowns I'm not sure.

 

[Woodworker]

It does seem at times that Kim is currently stuck in the Twilight Zone between her system and a more traditional system. Trying to figure her way out of the abyss.

Or like ole Sissy Fuss.

She may not know another system or isn't very good at coaching it. I think this was her Dads design from early on when she played for him. Yesterday down by 10 ish with 3:00 minutes to go we had no plan. If she was a good coach she would have got better with better players than she had last year.
Freshman can ball so that's not an excuse.

 

[Amb3096]

Was that the game where Kim said in the pressor that it would have been 50 if the game had been any longer? I think it was SC but there were so many grueling beatdowns I'm not sure.

I think so. Also, the sub patterns prevented it from getting even worse. Ironically, SC's injuries this game hurt Tennessee more than it hurt SC. If Dawn could have subbed out Latson and Raven sooner, she probably would have, but she didn't' have any other guards available. She did have Tessa and Edwards call it a day early in the 4th quarter and Dauda in for Okot around the halfway mark. If she kept them in there, the lead would have kept swelling in spite Tennessee never going deep to their bench. They had their best players in right until the buzzer sounded.

 

[Rooster1]

Other teams let up once they know the game is won, and Tennessee uses that as an opportunity to have their starters press the other team’s bench so they can lose by 15 instead of 20.

I also disagree that South Carolina dint let up. They could have easily won by over 50. They took their foot off the gas for sure.

Well I don’t know about that. I’ve watched the game a few times. Did they let up? It depends if you define that on loose terms like not keeping all of the starters in even longer type of stuff. But that gets subjective. I didn’t see a let up.

 

[Amb3096]

Well I don’t know about that. I’ve watched the game a few times. Did they let up? It depends if you define that on loose terms like not keeping all of the starters in even longer type of stuff. But that gets subjective. I didn’t see a let up.

"Let up" in a sense that she let her bench finish off a significant portion of the fourth quarter. There's a huge dropoff between Tessa, Edwards and Okot vs. McDowell, Dauda and Tournabize (especially since she had practically just joined the team). They were definitely using up a lot of the clock before they made their move.

 

[volfan102455]

This pattern is so significant that I would look for something structural or systemic. The brute empirical observation is that going to the locker room is bad for this team. So not doing that might be the needed change. I think GLV’s theory that sitting for an extended period is incompatible with their physical training is as good as any explanation. It also fits with their upward trend in the 4th quarter.

I still think it is probably related to adjustments made by the coach of the opposing team more than anything else. The opposing team also gets to rest for 15 minutes.

And don't they start out rested in the first quarter??

 

[glv98]

I still think it is probably related to adjustments made by the coach of the opposing team more than anything else. The opposing team also gets to rest for 15 minutes.

And don't they start out rested in the first quarter??

Good point. The opponents having 15 minutes of rest puts us back on equal ground at the beginning of the third quarter. For a system that thrives on wearing the opponents down physically this is a problem.

Throw in adjustments by opposing coach which aren’t countered by us and you have a prototypical LV 3rd qtr.

 

[volfan102455]

Good point. The opponents having 15 minutes of rest puts us back on equal ground at the beginning of the third quarter. For a system that thrives on wearing the opponents down physically this is a problem.

And in some of the close games, it was a hard-fought battle to get back tied or within a point or two in the 2nd quarter. Then you come back out - the opposing team's players are rested, probably have a better idea of how to approach the game - and the tide turns. Also has to be mentally deflating at that point.

But that is what this system is. It relies on wearing the other team down - but you give rest to the type of players that are on the top teams, and they are no longer tired in the 3rd quarter. And that opposing team has survived what sometimes is a very intense second quarter. Now they have the upper hand. And now the Lady Vol players are faced with having to make another monumental run, the second time in a game. Of course, they are gassed both physically and mentally and the game ends.

 

[VOLINVONORE]

This years team reminds my of an old saying. one can lead a horse to water, but one can not make them drink. I view our Ladies basketball somewhat the same way. you can coach them up and have them prepared to play. However, you can not make them play as they have been coached. I believe the Freshmen have been well coached very and , in most cases ,have played the way they were coached. I can not say the same about some of the upperclassmen. They seem to revert back to individual old habits which disrupts the outcome of the game when get more competitive. Coop, for example, is very talented and when she plays under control is the biggest asset we have on the court. However, when the games get close, she seems to transform into a player who believe only she can carry the team to victory. That has not worked out as well as any of us wanted it. She is not the only player who alters their performance the game get tighter. we see more forced passes which should have never been thrown. We see forced off balanced shots which would have never been attempted when the pressure was less. I saw these actions more from the upperclassmen than the Freshmen. This is why I think the our Freshmen will be the perfect base on which future teams can be built.

 

[glv98]

However, you can not make them play as they have been coached. I

Kim can't make them play as coached. But top coaches can. Thats what separates them out and why their teams win championships

 

[knoxvol52]

Kim can't make them play as coached. But top coaches can. Thats what separates them out and why their teams win championships

Some we've had 1 top Coach in history of Lady Vols?