Y'all are the remaining bastion of the Mooney defense system. What are your thoughts after opening night? You've gone kind of quiet.
Ulla, s-man where art thou?
- Thread starter 97spiderfan
- Start date
Those 2, VT4700 and I have formed a quorum of Truthers. Wait until we blow out STFU out of the water by 35. We will be back with a fury on this board. Mooney is busy fixing this and pinning these threads and instagram around the locker room. Get ready for a 180 turn around this week.
I'm here.
I've obviously got very little to be positive about. we were bad offensively. we shot poorly and our ball movement wasn't creating anything easy. I figured we'd have less problems on that side of the court.
of our big 3 ... Grant didn't play well and the shots he did make were more difficult than I want them to be. a few of Nick's 5 baskets were very tough finishes inside too. Jacob wasn't awful, but he's much better than he showed too. this is their team. if those 3 don't want a year like last year ... they've got to play better.
Nathan and Woj did exactly what I hoped for in their roles. they showed they can be effective as the 4th and 5th starters. they were very solid. but the big 3 weren't big, and the bench was non-existent.
I get not playing some of the freshmen if they're not ready yet. I hope they get their feet wet soon. but outside of Woj, the ones deemed most ready (Gustavson and Grace) weren't. and I needed and expected to see more from Noah. he's not a freshman. JJ battled, but if he's our 6th best player and right now he clearly is ... that's not a good thing.
so to answer what you're asking my opinion on, 97 ... Coach didn't put together a roster ready to beat Longwood on opening night. yeah, that's a huge problem. some of you put that all on the coach, and the buck does stop there. I personally put a lot of that on the big 3. those guys are supposed to be special. they should have won this game. instead they went 6-14 from the line, 4-16 from 3, and had 11 turnovers. that's just awful. they've GOT to be better than that. yeah ... Mooney's got to get it out of them. but they should get it out of themselves, too.
I don't think Mooney has lost Grant or Jacob. I can never get a read on Nick, but I think he's on board too. so I'm hoping and believing they pick it way the hell up next game. but we'll see. it's their careers.
I've obviously got very little to be positive about. we were bad offensively. we shot poorly and our ball movement wasn't creating anything easy. I figured we'd have less problems on that side of the court.
of our big 3 ... Grant didn't play well and the shots he did make were more difficult than I want them to be. a few of Nick's 5 baskets were very tough finishes inside too. Jacob wasn't awful, but he's much better than he showed too. this is their team. if those 3 don't want a year like last year ... they've got to play better.
Nathan and Woj did exactly what I hoped for in their roles. they showed they can be effective as the 4th and 5th starters. they were very solid. but the big 3 weren't big, and the bench was non-existent.
I get not playing some of the freshmen if they're not ready yet. I hope they get their feet wet soon. but outside of Woj, the ones deemed most ready (Gustavson and Grace) weren't. and I needed and expected to see more from Noah. he's not a freshman. JJ battled, but if he's our 6th best player and right now he clearly is ... that's not a good thing.
so to answer what you're asking my opinion on, 97 ... Coach didn't put together a roster ready to beat Longwood on opening night. yeah, that's a huge problem. some of you put that all on the coach, and the buck does stop there. I personally put a lot of that on the big 3. those guys are supposed to be special. they should have won this game. instead they went 6-14 from the line, 4-16 from 3, and had 11 turnovers. that's just awful. they've GOT to be better than that. yeah ... Mooney's got to get it out of them. but they should get it out of themselves, too.
I don't think Mooney has lost Grant or Jacob. I can never get a read on Nick, but I think he's on board too. so I'm hoping and believing they pick it way the hell up next game. but we'll see. it's their careers.
Why are you trolling, 97? Leave poor Ulla be.
Spiderman, very fair post IMHO. I think we can't have an offense that has 3 people allowed to shoot whenever, with one of them being the point guard and eschewing good shots to try and get the other two shots, with everyone else playing passive, reactive, and only shooting as a last option. We have to be dangerous and aggressive 1 through 5 on the court in order for it to work. That didn't happen on Friday.
Spiderman, very fair post IMHO. I think we can't have an offense that has 3 people allowed to shoot whenever, with one of them being the point guard and eschewing good shots to try and get the other two shots, with everyone else playing passive, reactive, and only shooting as a last option. We have to be dangerous and aggressive 1 through 5 on the court in order for it to work. That didn't happen on Friday.
Grant forgot what was successful for the team last year. Ger the ball at the foul line or elbow AND TURN AND FACE THE BASKET AND GET IN SCORING POSITION !! the whole defense changes when he does this!
It took him and/or the coaching staff half of last season to figure this out!
Watch what happens when the cobwebs clear his head and this happens ..
Cobwebs? He's not 80 years old, he should be able to remember what he did last year that worked. If they''re coming in with cobwebs after all the practices and scrimmages, that's on the coaches.
I wish you only got cobwebs when youre 80...i think he pressed. As for it being on the coaches i agree.
This is part of the problem with Mooney historically. Players don't get materially better year over year or even over the length of their stay. Some get marginally better, but mostly what you see is what you get. Some even regress under his thumb. So I'd be very worried at this point about Sal that he is so unready that he's not a viable option on a team with this talent level combined with our staff's track record for bringing that kind of guy along!
As for the big three, my concern would be that we have so little else that we (and by that I mean the coaches mostly) have heaped so much pressure on these guys to be saviors that they can't help but be burdened by the expectations,pressure.
Last edited:
This whole damn situation is offensive.
Mooney recruited all the players. He coaches all the players. If the players have a bad night every now and then, I get it. That happens. If the players routinely do certain things poorly or routinely make the same mistakes, that's on the coach.
We're 14 years into this. These things shouldn't be happening, but they are. Again.
We're 14 years into this. These things shouldn't be happening, but they are. Again.
I was not able to watch the game, and after seeing the score, I think I will skip watching the replay. I do not want to offer too much of an opinion since I did not watch, but it looks like spiderman nailed it with this post. The first thing I noticed when looking at the box score was that our top 3 did not deliver. They each went 5-13 from the field, Nick and Jacob were 4-15 from 3, and Grant was 4-9 at the line. And, like spiderman also said, a combined 11 turnovers from them. Yikes! On a positive note, Jacob had 6 steals and Grant had 3 blocks, but overall, it looks like all 3 played below average for them. If just one of them plays well, we probably beat Longwood. As the competition gets better, we need at least 2 of them to play well, and some games against the real good teams on our schedule, we will need all 3 to deliver.
So, this is an ugly loss, no doubt about it, but it is only one game. Let's just get better each game and be peaking when A-10 play starts. I am a long way from giving up on this season just because of one game.
VT, we not only lost the game, we were man handled down the stretch. We were out rebounded and didn’t have a field goal the last 5 mins of the game against LONGWOOD! This is bigger than one game. It’s a repeated pattern of the team not being ready to play and losing to programs we should not lose to. And the goal of an A10 team is simply not to improve in the OOC and peak when we hit A10 play. The goal in the OOC part of the schedule is to put yourself in position for an at large bid to the NCAA tournament.
Yes, B. Unfortunately it is a pattern. Mooney's interviews were all about making sure guys were ready for the level of competition when the season started. But did he walk the walk by scheduling a HSC team that would get spanked by 50 by the top prep teams in the NEPSAC??
I think not, I think not. Mooney seems to approach everything half assed. My god, go for it kid. Demand the players play hard. Scream at Sherod, so what if he tranfers. Challenge Grant to play against top competition in the off season. Strive for excellence. Look at that gd check you get and say: I want to make more. Take some testosterone or something. Quit mailing it in.
I think not, I think not. Mooney seems to approach everything half assed. My god, go for it kid. Demand the players play hard. Scream at Sherod, so what if he tranfers. Challenge Grant to play against top competition in the off season. Strive for excellence. Look at that gd check you get and say: I want to make more. Take some testosterone or something. Quit mailing it in.
But, improving during OOC play and peaking during A-10 play will go along way toward a top A-10 team getting an at large. Unless we finish below .500 OOC, our OOC games really do not mean a lot as far as an at large is concerned. Sure, you can play yourself out of an at large chance during OOC play, but not with an opening game loss. For A-10 teams to get an at large, the main thing needed is for the conference as a whole to have a good year with multiple teams in the top 50. Then, you want to finish top 4 with a real good A-10 record and have enough quality wins to get you in. We only went 7-6 OOC a few years ago, had some ugly losses, and did not even beat anyone great, and ended up being the first team out of the dance after going 12-6 in the A-10 because we had some top 50 A-10 wins. So, with 30 games left, an opening loss to Longwood, as bad as it might seem, will not be the difference in getting us into or out of the tourney.
I am more worried about how we look. St. Francis might be pretty good. They beat a D3 team by 50 and lost @ Boston College by 5.
Correct. If we do not lose our 1st round A-10 tourney game that year, we probably get in, even with a 7-6 OOC record. Which was exactly my point about our OOC games.
Pretty good? Relatively speaking I guess they might be a pretty good #300+ ranked team.
Does this mean to say that there is a scenario where we "look" good in a loss to STFU-NY?
Yes, if we can look good and improve, PQ and Hardt will have a toast to the finer aspects of Mooneyism.
When's the last time we played both St. Francises in the same calendar year in two different sports? I would venture a guess that the answer is the same as for the question "When will Mooney take us back to the NCAA tournament?"
Pretty good? Relatively speaking I guess they might be a pretty good #300+ ranked team.
Yes, they might be pretty good. They have played 2 games. They beat a D3 team by 50 and went on the road and took BC to the wire before losing by 5. So, based on those 2 games with nothing else to go on, yes, they might be pretty good. After only 2 games, I think the close loss at BC tells me more about a team than a totally made up, guessed at 300 ranking.
I think the numbers I research tell me more than a totally made up opinion. We agree to disagree.
Why couldn't there be? Maybe St. Francis is pretty good. BC is a decent ACC team who returned 4 starters and they took them to the wire.
My research tells me BC returned 4 starters and St. Francis took them to the wire. That is not a made up opinion. That is actually a fact. What does your research tell you?
I understand your opinion of the fact you stated. My research tells me the Longwood loss does knock UR out from any at large consideration this year.
Really? So, a team could go 30-1 and 18-0 in the A-10 and would not get an at large if that loss were to Longwood? Wow. I guess I learn something new everyday.
Longwood - picked 10 out of 11 teams in big south poll
St. Francis Brooklyn - picked 7 out of 10 in NEC poll (note: this was taken before crushing Cuny Medger Evans)
Richmond - picked 10 out of 14 in A10 poll.
All facts backed by research.
We’re in big trouble for Wednesday’s matinee.
SPECULATION
St. Francis Brooklyn - picked 7 out of 10 in NEC poll (note: this was taken before crushing Cuny Medger Evans)
Richmond - picked 10 out of 14 in A10 poll.
All facts backed by research.
We’re in big trouble for Wednesday’s matinee.
SPECULATION
Lol. Of course VT a team that goes 30-1 and 18-0 would get an at large bid, but I thought we were discussing that team to be specifically the 2018-19 Spiders? How I stated their Longwood loss does kill their at large chances? Your correct, the fact is they still could do it. Go Spiders!
Probably never. I haven’t researched the CBB annals.
At least we only have one sub-300 loss thus far.
