Big East Tournament: Cincinnati Loses to Georgetown, 62-43
The Cincinnati Bearcats (22-11, 9-9 Big East) lost 62-43 to the No. 5 Georgetown Hoyas (25-5, 14-4 Big East) in the quarterfinals of the 2013 Big East tournament today at Madison Square Garden in New York City.
Cashmere Wright led the Bearcats in scoring with 14 points, including going 4-of-5 from beyond the arc. JaQuon Parker scored 12 points and was 2-of-3 from three-point range. Sean Kilpatrick only had 4 points, going 2-of-12 from the field including 0-of-8 from beyond the arc.
Georgetown started the game on a 24-8 run. UC answered by going on a 23-7 run, spanning the end the first and beginning of the second half.
Cincinnati tied the game at 31-31 with 18:46 left in the game on a Wright three-pointer.
UC took its first lead since early in the game, 33-31, with 16:23 left on a Wright jump shot.
Then Georgetown outscored the Bearcats 31-10 the rest of the way. The Hoyas regained the lead, 36-33, with 14:55 left on a Smith-Rivera three-pointer.
Cincinnati was stuck at 39 points for over six minutes late in the game.
The Bearcats trailed the Hoyas 29-24 at halftime. UC went nearly 10 minutes without a field-goal in the first half. Cincinnati had eight points and trailed by 16 points with 6:24 left in the first half before going on a 16-5 run entering the locker room at halftime. That run included four three-pointers, three of them from Wright and one from Parker.
UC shot 36.8 percent (14-of-38) from the field while Georgetown shot 43.8 percent (21-of-48). Georgetown made seven three-pointers (7-of-17) compared to Cincinnati, which made six (6-of-17). The Hoyas shot 72.2 percent (13-of-18) from the free-throw line while UC shot 69.2 percent (9-of-13).
Georgetown outrebounded Cincinnati 23-22.
Cincinnati turned the ball over 14 times compared to Georgetown, which turned it over nine times.
Georgetown will play the winner of today’s matchup between Syracuse vs. Pittsburgh on Friday at 7 p.m. in the semifinals of the 2013 Big East tournament at The Garden.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?