Alabama
- Thread starter UR80sfan
- Start date
Bigger defenders who are long and athletic make it harder for small guards to get quality shots. If the opponent can match the quickness of Gilyard and Francis, you can expect trouble.
Last edited:
my issue is we should have won this game. However, we couldn't rebound couldn't defend. Also, we can't make any shots.
The buildings "on fire" are "away" venues................home is okay................
It's not just about on the road to Bama.
Is there a better example of "trending downward" than the last three games against mediocre teams?
The answer is "no" ...sadly ..................we are playing uninspired basketball... need to change quickly...start Wojcik.......what we are doing is not working.................
Sherod has always struggled against big, strong, athletic opponents because he is at a deficit athletically. His move to basket is virtually null and void against the guys with whom he is over matched physically.
At some point what you see is what you get. We are better than all the mediocre teams we beat but we aren’t a good team. We are average. Very average. Wisconsin was an aberration more than offset by Radford who we are definitely better than.
At some point we will win another game against a team we shouldn’t when we shoot really well and/or that other team has an off night. And we’ll lose again against a bad team or two. What I am worried about is all the games against teams in the middle. Right now, we still can’t defend, still can’t rebound and are totally dependent on our three point shooting. That hasn’t been a good recipe for a few years. I don’t see it being a great path this year either. .500 in conference sounds about right based on what I have seen.
We have more upside on a nightly basis with Blake but more downside too because he seems pretty set on getting his shots no matter the kind of night he is having. We have 5 guys who are double figure guys and he’s getting 15-20 shots a night no matter how it’s going for him. I will have to check some history but his number of shots is unprecedented for us I believe. Especially on a team with so many other viable alternatives. And one assist and 17 shots for an under 6’ guy isn’t working either. Sherod is similar. He’s bringing very little beyond stand still jump shooting. His minutes are in decline and that’s a good sign. Mooney tends to be too loyal to “good soldier” guys but he is bringing Burton along quickly. I think he needs to temper Blake’s minutes as well.
But I see 500ish in conference and with 10-3 OOC We are an NIT team. Nothing more and nothing less.
At some point we will win another game against a team we shouldn’t when we shoot really well and/or that other team has an off night. And we’ll lose again against a bad team or two. What I am worried about is all the games against teams in the middle. Right now, we still can’t defend, still can’t rebound and are totally dependent on our three point shooting. That hasn’t been a good recipe for a few years. I don’t see it being a great path this year either. .500 in conference sounds about right based on what I have seen.
We have more upside on a nightly basis with Blake but more downside too because he seems pretty set on getting his shots no matter the kind of night he is having. We have 5 guys who are double figure guys and he’s getting 15-20 shots a night no matter how it’s going for him. I will have to check some history but his number of shots is unprecedented for us I believe. Especially on a team with so many other viable alternatives. And one assist and 17 shots for an under 6’ guy isn’t working either. Sherod is similar. He’s bringing very little beyond stand still jump shooting. His minutes are in decline and that’s a good sign. Mooney tends to be too loyal to “good soldier” guys but he is bringing Burton along quickly. I think he needs to temper Blake’s minutes as well.
But I see 500ish in conference and with 10-3 OOC We are an NIT team. Nothing more and nothing less.
From now on, only schedule away games in Hampton Roads. Norfolk State, where you at?
I like Blake a lot, despite tonight, but I did mention this a few times early - if you have Gilyard (who is a great player) you kind of need a bigger guard and an athletic lengthy wing to have some size against legit competition. Blake is 3-23 from three vs. our three SEC foes, and I am thinking not a coincidence. I like his confidence, but that doesn't mean you can reign it in and defer a little when you are having an off night.
“Away from the RC” would include neutral site games as well. In those games we are 1-2, so away from home would be 3-3. We shot 39% (25% from 3) vs Alabama, 36% (29% from 3) vs Radford, 41% (26% from 3) vs ODU, 45% (51%) vs Hampton, 43% (11%) vs Auburn, and 46% (35%) vs Wisconsin. Good performance vs Hampton, okay performance vs Wisconsin, and the rest bad shooting performances.
It looked to me like Grant was able to make some hay inside. Nathan had foul trouble and we were forced into an three point shooting contest.
As noted previously, this has been something of a theme in the past, only this year we’ve mostly been able to overcome the off nights shooting in other ways. As a general rule, 2 for 17 from three by our starters isn’t going to win many games.
As noted previously, this has been something of a theme in the past, only this year we’ve mostly been able to overcome the off nights shooting in other ways. As a general rule, 2 for 17 from three by our starters isn’t going to win many games.
Agreed but anyone who has followed this team in years past can see it coming. Same old same old. And we started to think this might be a special season and a special team, but its not going to happen. Thats why the disappointment.
Best Spiders team in 50 years indeed.
We will likely finish up above .500 and we may be a middle of the table NIT team, but that's about it. CM at the helm is a major limiting factor.
We rag on his recruiting but he can't motivate his players even when he clearly has some talent on the squad.
#NoMoreMooneyTruthing
We will likely finish up above .500 and we may be a middle of the table NIT team, but that's about it. CM at the helm is a major limiting factor.
We rag on his recruiting but he can't motivate his players even when he clearly has some talent on the squad.
#NoMoreMooneyTruthing
urfan1, I'd like to renew my request for a sarcasm font. Or at least a "how the UR AD would spin it" font.
Oh yeah.................well.........................NIT would be an improvement over back to back 20 loss seasons.....................looking somewhere, anywhere, for some "silver lining"..................but it's a cloudy rainy day.............
Garrett is the Mooney of the NFL. Dude has hung around far too long and delivered nothing. Team always comes up small in big moments. Stands on the sidelines looking like a big doofus. Very Mooneyesque. At least, every Dallas fan, I know hates Garrett, unlike some of us, who like the mediocrity that an average coach delivers. Garrett is a nice guy too, just a completely average football coach.
And then look at Philly (my team, so I love me some Garrett). The damn entire team is injured and most of the back-ups are injured too, but they get to play a basically completely healthy Dallas team and whip their asses. Why? Coaching and leadership.
It is CMs job to reign in Francis since he can't control himself.
It is not a coincidence hes 3-23 against SEC competition... too many of our games are decided in how well HE plays and that is wrong to me.
Francis, to me, had "6th man" written al over him. I dont care how many minutes he actually plays, but he should be coming off the bench as a spark instead of being the deciding factor as to whether we win or lose.
Blake needs to start and play a lot of minutes. Games will usually be decided by how well their best players shoot. Doesn't mean you bring them off the bench. If that were the case, all of the real good players out there would not be starting right now. And, no, Blake was not the reason we lost our games. It's not like everyone else played great and he didn't. Far from it.
Blake is a starter on this team. His game does need some refining, but others on the team are in the same boat.
I think in general when you have a third guy scoring it opens everything up. Most teams are going to key on Jacob and grant. If you get any of those other three rolling the remaining two will have openings to score.
Outside of ego, please explain to me why a player NEEDS to start. And Blake certainly won a few games for us but YES i feel he lost a tow for us as well... or certainly was the main reason we werent even in the game.
If by refining you mean offensive discipline i agree.
I love the unequaled self confidence he brings, and i understand you must take this bad with the good, but sometimes his ego is writing checks he can never hope to cash.
I also feel CM can make that 6rh man thing a positive. The games moves better with Goose in there to start, to help get everyone involved, Blake can be like The Microwave when he comes into the game.
A player needs to start if he is one of his team's best players and him on the floor gives his team the best chance to win. Ego is irrelevant.
Blake has the Gonzo attitude and mindset. But I do agree Moon needs to reign in Francis at times. Now it is time for him to show big against VCU , Dayton and the big A10 games.
Not necessarily. Blake coming in after 4 minutes, when the other team is a little tired? I’d be open to trying it. He’s definitely one of our best 5, but finding the right way to get him going (or our team going) in a game might mean having him off the bench. Also, it’s more important who ends the game than who starts it.
What I’m most disappointed with so far this season is Gilyard not forcing his will on a game consistently. He’s still my favorite player on the squad, but we NEED him to lead and be influential for all 40. I think everything else falls into place after that.
Similar threads
