Connect with us

Arizona

What Tommy Lloyd said after Arizona’s win over Colorado

Published

on

What Tommy Lloyd said after Arizona’s win over Colorado


After clinching the Big 12 Conference regular season title outright with a win over Iowa State on Monday night, Tommy Lloyd gave his team a few days off from practice. The break was well earned, but when the team returned they didn’t look like the group that had just romped through the Big 12.

“It’s been a long season. Thursday, we came back and practiced, I didn’t even recognize the team,” Lloyd said after Arizona’s 89-79 win over Colorado. “That’s to be expected.”

Arizona showed signs of a conference championship hangover on Saturday night, falling behind by 11 points to the Buffaloes in the first half. The Wildcats closed the half on a run, and eventually put themselves in position for a program-record 29th regular season win.

Whether it was the altitude, the extended break from practice, or the 9 p.m. start time, Arizona didn’t quite like right … until it did.

Advertisement

”You could probably try to find lots of reasons,“ Lloyd said. ”But I know this: human nature is tough to beat. Human nature is almost undefeated, So a lot of these seasons is just figuring out how to endure the ups and downs, and the emotions that go with the season.“

Our recap of the game can be found here. Below is what Lloyd said postgame.

Lloyd on Arizona overcoming a sluggish start: “I knew it was going to be a tough game down here. As you guys know, I have a lot of respect for Tad and their coaching staff and the program. They play spirited. It was a great test for our guys. I had been bouncing around a few plans to change our rotation, play more guys, and then when I saw the way we came out, a little bit flat, not great energy, I thought it was more important that we figured out how to dig back in the game and be able to draw on that rather than then maybe play some other guys. We’ve rode hard with these eight guys. They’re really good players. I think our energy is good right now, once we got to got it figured out in that game, we were pretty good. But I think it’s important for us to understand, as you head into the postseason that, you’re going to have games like that where you’re playing against a team that’s playing their ass off and playing really good, and maybe your energy’s not quite where you want it to be, but you got to be able to dig deep and respond. I was really proud of our guys’ effort. Hopefully this was a lesson learned, you know, because obviously it’d be great if we could continue to play for a long time.”

On the significance of the team’s late first half run: “Well, obviously it’s a massive benefit getting closer. Then basically you get in a neck in neck game right away, and then we can kind of set up our next run, is what you’re hoping. We were down 11, I think we just told our guys, like, ‘Hey, it’s one of these situations. Let’s just climb our way back in this game, possession by possession. See if we cut into this lead a little bit and put ourselves in and position in the second half to make it a ball game.‘ I think that’s a great skill to learn how to do, to kind of figure out how to not let the let the game get away from you too early. And I thought our guys did a great job with a nice little run there towards the end of the first half.”

On what may have contributed to Arizona’s first half play: “I don’t know. You’ll have to ask our guys. I don’t know, altitude. I know we played obviously Monday night against Iowa State. And you know, there’s a lot of emotions in the game, and a lot of pats on the back so to speak. And then we took Tuesday off. We took Wednesday off. It’s been a long season. Thursday, we came back and practiced, I didn’t even recognize the team. That’s to be expected. And then Friday we were a little bit better. I thought we had a good practice. I was hoping we’d come out and play really well from the start today, but we didn’t. And the ability to figure it out, it’s really important. And I thought the guys really showed some resolve, and I’m proud of them.”

Advertisement

On the fan support in Boulder: “Oh for sure. Our fans are a force. Our fans are the backbone of our program. Arizona’s had a long, strong basketball tradition way before I was even born. So we wanted to tap into that, and we love coming on the road and hearing the U of A chants and all of our fans out there. It just reminds us how special it is for us to be representing University of Arizona basketball.”

On facing Colorado’s backcourt: “Two good players. I felt like we weren’t on it defensively for long stretches in the game today. And let’s give Colorado a lot of credit on offense, I mean they’re a good offensive team. Their offensive numbers, they show that. Those two guards are good, and those guys were important parts of the scout, but their bigs also hit a few jump shots that maybe you’re not you’re not counting on. It was kind of a collective effort by them. I thought we made a lot of defensive mistakes, and I don’t want to take any credit away from Colorado, but we got to be a little more disciplined in some situations with our coverages and our recoveries and things of that nature. We’ve been a really, really good defensive team at times this season. We’re at our best defensively when we’re limiting our mistakes.”

On facing Isaiah Johnson: “He’s a really good player. Obviously the most I’ve ever watched him was this week, and obviously on the court today. I mean, everything he did impressed me. He’s got a great handle, he’s a lefty, and he knows how to get right, to get back left, consistently. And then he’s got a knack for getting fouled, which is a great skill to have.”

On Brayden Burries and Koa Peat’s performances: “I thought Brayden obviously didn’t have a good start to the game. I thought I looked down there. and I don’t know what he was like 1-6 or something like that. We just don’t really have to challenge him. He’s a competitor, and he kind of figured it out on his own and got himself going a little bit. I didn’t realize he had 31 points, but for him to do that was great. And then obviously let’s mention Koa. Koa goes 12 for 15, 25 points. I think he had about 19 in the first half. When your team’s not playing good, it’s great to have a guy like that step up and kind of keep your team in the game. Koa did a great job of that in the first half.”

On what spurred Peat’s 19-point first half: “I think Koa is just a really good basketball player. I think he got to his spots, he made a few shots, he finished with force at the rim. He’s just a really good player. I don’t think it was anything in particular, but he got a good rhythm going and he had a great game.”

Advertisement

On Bangot Dak’s play: “His length impacts the game around the rim, and I think he made those three (field goals), I didn’t realize he was only 3-8, but he made them all in a row, and in the second half, we were trying to kind of pull away a little bit, and he kept them in the game. Just a good player. He’s just a good player and it has been fun to watch him, kind of from afar, develop. He’s obviously gotten better over the course of three years. But I got a lot of respect for him.”

On playing a late Saturday night game and whether that contributed to the slow start: “You could probably try to find lots of reasons. But I know this: human nature is tough to beat. Human nature is almost undefeated, So a lot of these seasons is just figuring out how to endure the ups and downs, and the emotions that go with the season. The fatigue that comes with the season. I can’t give you like one thing in particular. But again, in closing, I want to give a lot of credit to Colorado. I thought they came out with great energy, and they kind of got us on our heels a little bit. And then I want to give our guys credit for being able to respond to an adverse situation and a tough road environment, just a tough situation.”

On the adjustment of playing later in the day: “It is what it is. I love Saturday afternoon games and you know that. We got a Saturday night game, you know? And you know what? I do know this, it’s great to be on national TV a lot. And if you want to be on national TV a lot, you’re going to have, especially on the West Coast, you’re going to get some of these hops, some of these 9 pm games. So no complaints for me. Just want to get on the bus, get on the plane, get home and get rested up.”



Source link

Advertisement

Arizona

Arizona girl who vanished 32 years ago has been found alive, sheriff says

Published

on

Arizona girl who vanished 32 years ago has been found alive, sheriff says


An Arizona girl who vanished in 1994 has been found alive, the Gila County sheriff said Wednesday. 

Christina Marie Plante disappeared from Star Valley, Arizona when she was 13 years old, the Gila County Sheriff’s Office said. She was last seen on May 19, 1994, around 12:30 p.m., after leaving home on foot to go to a stable where her horse was kept, according to a missing persons poster. She was last seen wearing shorts, a t-shirt and tennis shoes, and was considered “missing/endangered and under suspicious circumstances,” according to the sheriff’s office. 

Sheriff Adam J. Shepherd said in a news release that the girl was reported missing at the time, and “extensive search efforts” involving local and regional resources were conducted. Plante was listed in national missing children databases, and missing persons posters were distributed around the region, state and country. 

“Despite exhaustive ground searches, interviews and investigative follow-up, no viable leads were developed” at the time of her disappearance, Shepherd said,and the case remained open.Over the decades, investigators re-examined evidence and pursued any new information that became available, he said. 

Advertisement

The sheriff’s office eventually established a cold case unit, which focused on unresolved investigations, Shepherd said.  Detectives in the unit used “advances in technology, modern investigative techniques and detailed case review” to develop new leads that “ultimately led to a breakthrough,” Shepherd said. 

A missing persons poster for Christina Marie Plante.

Gila County Sheriff’s Office


Shepherd did not say where Plante was found, or share any circumstances of her disappearance “out of respect for Christina’s privacy and well-being.” Shepherd said that investigators have confirmed her identity, and that her status as a missing person “has been officially resolved.” 

Advertisement

Shepherd said that the case “underscores the importance of cold case review initiatives and the impact of evolving technology in bringing long-awaitd answers to families and communities,” and said the sheriff’s office “remains committed to pursing all unresolved cases.” 



Source link

Continue Reading

Arizona

Arizona State University researcher warns against overtrusting AI in Iran strikes

Published

on

Arizona State University researcher warns against overtrusting AI in Iran strikes


PHOENIX (AZFamily) — The U.S. military’s AI-powered battlefield intelligence system can compress targeting decisions that once took days into minutes or seconds. But in that push for speed, a preliminary inquiry by the Pentagon found the U.S. relied on outdated intelligence and struck an Iranian school, killing about 170 people, mostly children.

It turns out there’s a lot of research on what happens when humans deploy AI in battlefield settings and why things can go wrong.

“AI is not ready for prime time,” said Nancy Cooke, director of ASU’s Center for Human, AI, and Robot Teaming, on the latest episode of Generation AI. “It is unreliable. It can do unexpected things. And humans may have the tendency to overtrust it.”

Cooke has spent years studying what happens when humans team up with artificial intelligence in high-stakes scenarios. In her research on simulated drone pilot teams, she’s watched AI perform its assigned tasks flawlessly while simultaneously making the humans perform worse.

Advertisement

AI-powered tools like the Maven Smart System, the Pentagon’s battlefield intelligence platform that identifies and prioritizes targets, create a risk for over-reliance on AI recommendations, she said.

Large language models appear deceptively human-like, Cooke explained, but “they’re very much not like human intelligence, although people may think so and then overtrust them as a result.”

Three-person drone experiment

Cooke’s research team created simulated three-person drone teams, then substituted AI for one human pilot. The AI executed its core functions without error, controlling airspeed, heading and altitude.

But something unexpected happened.

“[The AI pilot] acted like there was no one else on the team,” Cooke said. “It did not anticipate the information needs of its fellow team members. And as a result, the coordination of the whole team broke down.”

Advertisement

The humans changed their behavior, too. Thinking they were working with a superior AI, the research subjects decided to follow the machine’s lead. “AI isn’t anticipating information needs. So, I’m going to stop doing that too,” seemed to be their subconscious logic.

The result: teams with AI got reconnaissance photos slower than all-human teams, despite AI’s superior individual performance.

“Even though AI may be fast, the combination of AI working with humans may be slow and bad,” Cooke said.

“It Shouldn’t Be Trusted”

Both over-reliance and under-trust of AI pose challenges on the battlefield, but Cooke is convinced one error is more serious.

“Definitely over-trusting is worse. Because it shouldn’t be trusted. It’s going to give you bad information a lot of the time. Not all of the time. And it’s going to be fast, but that’s not necessarily better,” she said.

Advertisement

The Maven Smart System represents exactly what worries her most. The Pentagon has praised the system for combining eight or nine different intelligence systems into one, condensing targeting decisions from days or hours into minutes.

“So many things can go wrong,” Cooke said. “You have all these different system components that haven’t been tested. They have no safeguards on them. We don’t know how they play off of each other and work together. It’s just a recipe for disaster.”

The Anthropic precedent

Some AI companies are drawing their own red lines. The Pentagon labeled Anthropic a supply chain risk in March after the company refused to grant the military a license to use its products for “any lawful purpose,” without restrictions for domestic mass surveillance or autonomous lethal weaponry.

Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei said he objected, in part, because he did not believe the company’s models could reliably handle such grave tasks.

“Anthropic was spot on. They’re not ready,” Cooke said. “And I don’t know that they’re going to be ready in a very long time.”

Advertisement

Her position goes further than timing concerns. Some decisions, she argues, should remain exclusively human: “decisions to target something, decisions to shoot.”

Information overload

Cooke’s wildfire research reveals another dimension of the challenge of partnering humans with AI. Drones can collect vast amounts of reconnaissance data, but processing it remains “a complex cognitive task to go over reels and reels of video.”

Her research found that too much information creates its own problems, leading to decision paralysis and worse outcomes; the opposite of what AI integration promises to deliver.

The pattern holds across domains: AI excels at narrow technical tasks but struggles with the contextual awareness and anticipation that effective teamwork requires, she said.

“I think you have to make sure that people realize that this is not human intelligence and humans have a lot to offer,” Cooke said. “The best combination would be good human intelligence coupled with good technology.”

Advertisement

The escalation question

Critics argue that moral qualms about autonomous weapons put the U.S. at a disadvantage against adversaries like China or Russia, who might deploy fully autonomous systems.

They worry about next-generation weapons that can decide to fire on their own. In a world where milliseconds might be the difference between life and death, these critics argue human-in-the-loop weapons won’t be able to keep up.

Cooke sees it differently: she thinks autonomous systems run the risk of friendly fire and may be vulnerable to foreign hacking, turning advanced weapons into threats against their own operators.

More broadly, she views the AI arms race as inherently escalatory, potentially raising the risk of countries opting for a weapon of last resort: a nuclear bomb. “People are pushing to, you know, move fast and break things. And indeed, we will.”

See a spelling or grammatical error in our story? Please click here to report it.

Advertisement

Do you have a photo or video of a breaking news story? Send it to us here with a brief description.

Copyright 2026 KTVK/KPHO. All rights reserved.



Source link

Continue Reading

Arizona

Why is gas so expensive in Arizona? What to know

Published

on

Why is gas so expensive in Arizona? What to know


play

The average price of regular gasoline in the United States surpassed $4 per gallon in late March.

But as high as that rate may be, it remains lower than the highest average price recorded by AAA. The price of gasoline in June 2022 wins that dubious distinction. And in Arizona, where the average reached $4 before the national rate, prices are still not at their highest recorded amount.At least not yet. The difference between prices on March 31 and the highs recorded in June 2022 are rather narrow.

Advertisement

Here’s what we know about the stretches between current gas prices and those recorded as the highest ever and why these highs are different from nearly four years ago.

Why is gas so high right now?

The Strait of Hormuz, a narrow shipping channel connecting the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman was shut off by Iran for countries exporting oil to the U.S., after the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran on Feb. 28.

Why was gas so high in June 2022?

Sanctions on the world’s second-highest producer of oil, Russia, for that country’s February 2022 invasion of Ukraine was the principal reason for record-setting gas prices.

What is the current average U.S. gas price compared to the highest recorded price?

As of March 31, the average rate of regular gasoline in the U.S. was $4.018, according to AAA. The average price of regular gasoline reached its highest price in the U.S. on June 14, 2022, when it sold at a rate of $5.016, according to AAA.

Advertisement

What is the current average Arizona gas price compared to the highest recorded price?

As of March 31, the average rate of regular gasoline in Arizona was $4.682, according to AAA. The average price of regular gasoline reached its highest price in Arizona on June 17, 2022 when it sold at a rate of $5.388, according to AAA.

What are the current average Phoenix-area gas prices compared to the highest recorded prices?

As of March 31, the average rates of regular gasoline by city or areas in the Valley, according to AAA, are listed below. Also listed, are the city’s or area’s highest recorded prices and their dates, according to AAA.

  • East Valley: $4.956 – $5.700 on June 16, 2022
  • Glendale: $4.956 – $5.715 on June 15, 2022
  • Peoria: $4.965 – $5.716 on June 16, 2022
  • Phoenix proper: $4.966 – $5.699 on June 15, 2022
  • Phoenix-Mesa: $4.913 – $5.688 on June 15, 2022
  • Scottsdale: $4.970 – $5.726 on June 15, 2022
  • West Valley: $4.944 – $5.712 on June 15, 2022



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending