How do you get a team to play very well for 40 minutes?  It's not easy in general and was seemingly especially difficult for this year's GW Revs.  Almost half of the team's games resulted in a disappointing effort followed by a strong one, or vice versa.

In the out of conference season, the trend showed up on Day 1.  Playing its first ever Division 1 game, Mercyhurst managed to go into halftime all tied up, only to eventually fall by 17.  NC A&T managed to make things more than interesting, losing by just 5 after trailing by 11 at the half.  Same for Old Dominion who led by a point at halftime before GW rallied to win by 8.  GW trailed Kansas State by 19 at the half before making a game out of it.  In the same tournament, GW played much better in its second half win over Illinois State.  

There were "roller coaster" games involving GW training AU by 6 at the half, coming back to take a 13 point second half lead, only to fall by 10 in overtime.  The game at Richmond followed a very similar script with GW down 8 at the half only to take and then lose a sizable lead.  There were other regrettable first halves against conference opponents, including a 13 point deficit to Duquesne and a 15 point margin to Loyola.  There were strong first halves that ended up as losses or the narrowest of wins, including two out of 3 George Mason games, St. Louis (a 14 point lead that ended up as a 6 point win), VCU (a one point halftime lead which had already been cut into during the first half), St. Joe's (a solid first half where GW trailed by 3 only to lack competitiveness in the second half), the A10 Tournament win against Fordham (nearly lost after being up 8 at halftime) and of course, Boise State who turned a 6 point deficit into a 6 point halftime lead, into a 30 point victory.

In case you are of the mindset that this is college basketball and all teams show inconsistency, I will beg to differ.  This GW season struck me as one where the Revs rarely put two solid halves together.  Even great first halves against Dayton and at Fordham resulted in those teams outscoring the opponents by just 4 points in the second half (not a complaint since these first halves were dominant enough).  That game against UVA Wise where GW led by 13 at the half and won by 40?  The NJIT game where GW won each half by 10?  Those were the only occasions when GW outscored its opponent by double figures each half.  Yes, it's understandable to let one's foot off the gas after taking a big lead but this season was every bit as much about GW clawing back into games after surrendering a big lead as it was playing poorly with a big lead.

I wish we had some answers to help explain this.  Sometimes, they played well enough to keep things close but in the end, lost to a better team.  Sometimes, it would seem like the opponent very noticeably raised their game a few notches and GW was just unable to match the intensity.  Sometimes, we seemed to sleepwalk out of the gate, only to wake up in time to make things interesting.  Regardless of the circumstances, it did appear as if this GW team was unable to stay laser-focused for 40 minutes, or during most games, for even more than 20 minutes.  Particularly down the stretch, losses to VCU, St. Joe's, Loyola, George Mason in the A10 Tournament, and Boise State all seemed like we took our best shot (except Loyola, there were no best shots in this one)  only to see the opponent weather the storm and GW meekly fold as a result.

We can talk about the need for a power forward or more explosive backcourt all day long but until the team is able to display a far more formidable display of mental toughness and focus, I'm not sure it will even matter.