If I'm reading those tiebreakers correctly, St. Bona #2, UR #3, URI #4.
URI gets punished for losing to Dayton twice - which is stupid.
@ Bona
- Thread starter Eight Legger
- Start date
URI gets punished for losing to Dayton twice - which is stupid.
You can blame anyone you want, maybe with the exception of Burton. The object of
basketball is to score more points than your opponent. When you shoot as bad as we did
tonight we’re always going to lose.
Let’s move on.
basketball is to score more points than your opponent. When you shoot as bad as we did
tonight we’re always going to lose.
Let’s move on.
Thanks, I can’t seem to open scheduled tonight so assumed all played Dayton once.
Of course both SLU & Duquesne could affect two of those teams...
I just have a real hard time saying that “nick was off” when he got only 6 shots. He’s the third best three point shooter in the A-10 and he was able to take half the shots from beyond the arc and a quarter of the total shots than Blake. I’ve been saying offline to some that it’s really troublesome to see how Nick and Blake don’t seem to mesh well together out there. The stats show that. I hope to watch the game to actually see what the stats don’t show.
Blake is our leading scorer Only because he chucks it up the most. He's doubled edged sword. Probably costs us a third of the points he scores through wasted possessions when he jacks up ill advised (-foolish) shots. It's late season. Should know better by now with proper coaching.
How can you say Nick and Blake don't mesh well together when they are both averaging 30+ minutes a game and we are 20-7? They have both played well in some of our biggest wins.
We must be watching a different game. Blake is very much a team player. I see Blake being the guy having to create when we are up against the shot clock. That is where several of his misses come from, but also plenty of makes. He rarely takes a bad, heavily guarded shot early in the clock.
Last edited:
After watching tonights performance, sorry but i dont think we win at Dukes.
Well maybe but it sure seems that the years when we needed a win there, we didnt get it.
I do, and it seems like we have been counted out after every one of our losses. Bottom line is we are 20-7 and still alive for an at large.
I can say it VERY easily. Blake chucks up a lot of shots and is inefficient. Ideally, with a Princeton/motion style offense, we should be able to work the ball around for the open shooter. We have 4 1000 point scorers. Each should be between 10-16 shots a game, I would say. These shot disparities aren’t going to help us win.
Going into tonight, Blake was averaging 14.3 shots overall and 7.4 from 3, and Nick was averaging 10.3 shots overall and 5.8 from 3. This seems fine to me. It's not the dramatic difference some of you are making it out to be. Tonight was the exception, not the norm.
LOL. You are overreacting to this one game. All 4 average between 9 and 14 shots a game.
The main issue is that Francis’s shots come mostly at the expense of Gilyard’s. And Gilyard is a more efficient scorer than Francis.
So my observations:
1. Too many Flying Dutchmen. It was clear that Schmidt coached his guys up as they pulled the ball back and waited for this on numerous possessions.
2. Grant was gameplanned out. Nate has to be a factor when that happens but he wasn’t.
3. Blake is great but he has to find other guys too. He did take some poor shots and they weren’t all at the buzzer.
4. I think CM needs to start pressing earlier when we are down. I appreciate a certain willingness to “stay the course” but I’d like to see us try to change the game flow before the hole is dug too deep.
1. Too many Flying Dutchmen. It was clear that Schmidt coached his guys up as they pulled the ball back and waited for this on numerous possessions.
2. Grant was gameplanned out. Nate has to be a factor when that happens but he wasn’t.
3. Blake is great but he has to find other guys too. He did take some poor shots and they weren’t all at the buzzer.
4. I think CM needs to start pressing earlier when we are down. I appreciate a certain willingness to “stay the course” but I’d like to see us try to change the game flow before the hole is dug too deep.
Last edited:
Really nice pad post. Your comedy tour is arriving where, and when?
All shots are not good looks. You are absolutely right when even the announcer comments on we are rushing our shots you have to figure that’s what it is. For me, The rushing was because of their D and our size. Nick had to hit he didn’t so try another streak shooter Wojcik, make some adjustment to adjust for the Golden double teams, do something to adjust, that’s why you’re paid a million bucks
Free him from himself?
Since you asked, if it weren't for Chicago State, they would have gone 0-for february. What's the weather like in Bakersfield? I hope whatever he did to get booted off was worth it. All of his stats are down, he's had 3 Games with "0" points, he plays in the middle of nowhere in a HS gym.
https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/player/gamelog/_/id/4066833/demonte-buckingham
LOL, just kidding around since a super sensitive poster brought him up out of nowhere. But feel free to get your blood pressure up this morning. And I did not even pile on Mooney, but you are begging me to hit send on the billboard, especially since he admits it worked. Carry on.
Friday March 6th in Pittsburgh - I'm hoping that one gets canceled.
Then Brooklyn the following week.
After that, I'll have a series of shows back in Richmond to support my new album You Mad, Bro? Naw, I've Been Madness-Free for Nine Years
Sherods usage went up when Blake was hurt, so this stat is padded. Blake is a good player but there are certainly some games where he comes out and seemingly has a minimum amount of shots he wants to take. Sherod is the opposite end of the spectrum usually; if he doesn’t hit his first few shots, he stops shooting altogether.
Sadly Sherod will miss his first two shots and then go sulk in the corner the rest of the game. Wish he had more killer instinct, and keep shooting.
The stats are not padded. Nick averaged the same number of shots without Blake than he does with him. Nick took 65 total shots in the 6 games Blake missed, including games with 7, 7, and 9 shots.
I do see us winning the three u mentioned but if you have been a fan of Spider bball the past 8 years you cant be confident that we win at Dukes. Mooney just doesnt win the big/ must win games against decent opponents on the road. He tightens up and gets out coached by a decent coach virtually every time. And Dukes new coach is good.
We will be back on the bubble in a must win road game against a decent team and there is no way that a spider fan during the Mooney era can be confident for a win. You just cant be VT, Gallipoli, 32, etc... you can hope and pray and try to give positive vibes and pass out as much mantra as you want but you cant be confident. Its Mooney’s history.
Here are some stats:
Blake has the lowest FQ% other than Grace and most, but not all, of the practice sqad
His 3pt % is below that of Sherod, Gilly, and Wojcik
Yet he taken 12% more shots than Sherod, 15% more than Grant, and 22% more than Gilly while missing 6 games.
Equals = he shoots too much. We would a better team if he dialed it back a bit.
Problem was no one else beyond Burton out of the rest of the team looked to be playing with any sort of sense of urgency or aggression until it was too late.
You must be young.....that was the "norm" no matter which team was shooting free throws. It was considered bad taste and impolite to make noise. Manners were important.
He is by far our best option at creating his own shot, and it is really nice to have him as a guy who can get a decent shot off when we are against the shot clock. Some he will make and some he will miss, and as a result, he will usually get the most shots, and the FG % will not be great.
Teams suffer dramatically as the shot clock winds down. Blake gives us a good chance at points either with a made bucket or getting fouled and making FTs as the shot clock winds down. I am more than content when he shoots.
As far as being a better team if he didn't shoot as much, we are 20-7, and a big reason we are that good is because of Blake. What do think we would be if he didn't shoot as much? And, you can't just look at a few bad shooting games without looking at all the good ones.
Don't know if it was mentioned, but looked it up that 49% of Bonny's opponents shots are 3PTA in conference play. No surprise then that Spiders attempted 35. Bonny wanted UR to shoot plenty and they did.
Issue was they couldn't make the amount needed to win. Spiders shoot like their % says and they win. Though with enough misses, no doubt blame fairly points in Mooney's direction for no adjustment.
Issue was they couldn't make the amount needed to win. Spiders shoot like their % says and they win. Though with enough misses, no doubt blame fairly points in Mooney's direction for no adjustment.
Does Blake Francis shoot too much? Yes sometimes he does. I think a few times this season it has hurt us pretty badly.
BUT, I also think he gives us an added dimension that takes us from a borderline NIT team to a borderline NCAA tournament team. He has played with an edge and toughness we've been lacking. He has played very good defense all year, and at times has singlehandedly shut down our opponents' best scorers. And his aggressiveness on offense has often helped us avoid long droughts as well as keeping us from going into the bleed the clock mode too early.
Point being, I don't think we have to pick a "side" in this discussion. Blake played poorly for most of the game yesterday (I'm sure he'd be the first to admit it). But to argue that he and Nick can't play together or that Blake is somehow harmful to the team on a broader level is foolish. Most of this group has played well under 0.500 ball in their careers here prior to Blake starting.
BUT, I also think he gives us an added dimension that takes us from a borderline NIT team to a borderline NCAA tournament team. He has played with an edge and toughness we've been lacking. He has played very good defense all year, and at times has singlehandedly shut down our opponents' best scorers. And his aggressiveness on offense has often helped us avoid long droughts as well as keeping us from going into the bleed the clock mode too early.
Point being, I don't think we have to pick a "side" in this discussion. Blake played poorly for most of the game yesterday (I'm sure he'd be the first to admit it). But to argue that he and Nick can't play together or that Blake is somehow harmful to the team on a broader level is foolish. Most of this group has played well under 0.500 ball in their careers here prior to Blake starting.
We're better with Francis than without. I like him creating a shot when needed. That said, he shoots too much. Particularly wild out of control shots.
Taking the most threes and having the lowest shooting percentage....hmmmm wonder if that is at all akin to being the coach with the most wins in Richmond history and also the rarely mentioned fact of being the coach with the most losses in Richmond history? Hey..nothing ventured....nothing gained....? Lots of attempts can lead to higher numbers...that said....have to give Francis credit for never giving up..............
I seem to recall after Davidson had a terrible shooting night against us, missing lots of open threes, but hitting some down the stretch to make the score more respectable, somebody described that as a dominant win and them just getting lucky.
Oh yeah, that's right.
I watched the VCU game in person (thanks 32Counter!), and Blake and Nick complimented each other just fine.
Chill out. That was a good team, and we shot like poop with a bunch of wide open shots. I'll take my chances against that game plan every time--Grant passing out of a double team and giving us a ton of open threes.
Chill out. That was a good team, and we shot like poop with a bunch of wide open shots. I'll take my chances against that game plan every time--Grant passing out of a double team and giving us a ton of open threes.
