I would like to start off by thanking everyone that sent questions in; it's good to see that my opinion is of some value. Listed below are assorted questions with my response.

Higher Authority: "I've always heard that when you play a team with more speed and athleticism, you have to play a zone (because they'll run or draw a lot of fouls by you in a man-to-man defense). But if you go to a zone and they can drain their perimeter shots, how does a team compensate for that?"

Excellent question, and it's one that numerous coaches struggle with. Although it is a complicated question, the answer is actually quite simple. The best zone defense is a solid man-to-man help defense. Whenever you are playing a team with more athleticism and speed than you, a true "man-to-man" defense is never going to work (you will give up lay-ups on every defensive possession). Now, when I say a true man-to-man defense, I am referring to everyone hugged up on his or her man without regard to help side defense. In essence, the game is turned into a series of one-on-one match ups, and although this makes for an exciting brand of basketball, the team with the least amount of athleticism always will lose. However, if you play a solid man-to-man "help" defense, you take away the other team's advantage. The opponents don't have just one man to beat; they have two or three. In essence, this sort of defense is actually a zone defense with man-to-man properties. The easiest example I can give of this type of defense is the following:

Let's say the ball is on the wing, and the team on offense is trying to run an "isolation" play, whereby they clear everyone out in hopes of creating a one-on-one match up for a guard. Now, if the defensive team is taught the fundamentals of defense, three things will happen.

1) The person guarding the ball will force the offensive player to drive toward the baseline, which essentially acts as another defender. If the offensive player is allowed to drive toward the middle (in the free throw line area), the offense will get a good shot more times than not.

2) The other players will be in a position (preferably with one player entirely in the lane and the others with one foot in the lane) to rotate over when the offensive player starts to drive towards the basket. If this is done right, the player that is entirely in the lane will meet the offensive player outside of the lane (near the baseline), which will force the offensive player to either dribble back out or pass out.

3) When the ball is passed out, the other three defensive players will then be in a position to guard the nearest man to them that the ball is passed to. When this process is complete, it repeats itself until the offensive team is forced into a bad shot or even a shot clock violation.

I've digressed a bit, so back to the original question. A true zone defense should never be run simply because a team is faster or more athletic. The only acceptable reason is that the other team's post players are dominating yours to the point where you have to double-team them. So, let's say a team is in a zone defense due to the dominating big men. If the offense moves the ball around fast enough, there always will be an open shot. So what does the defense do now? If they go to a man-to-man, the post players will score 20 apiece. If the opponents double-team the big guys or go to a zone defense, the guards will score 15 apiece. The best the defense can hope for is that they outscore the other team on the offensive end, because if a team has dominant big guys and good shooters, it's simply a matter of the defense picking their poison. All the great teams in college basketball have had this deadly combination, and you won't win championships without it.

RedRiverPony: If you could change one rule to make the game of college basketball better, what would you change and why?

In my opinion, the three-point line needs to be extended out a little bit. This would open up the game a lot, and teams wouldn't rely on the three as much. When I was playing, it seemed as if everything was too crowded down low. This is mainly due to the three-point line being as close as it is. The guards would only take a couple of steps in order to drop down on me and get the ball out of my hands. But if the three-point line was extended, the guards would have more distance to cover, and the posts would have more time to make a legitimate post move. If the NBA had the same three-point line, Shaquille O'Neal and Yao Ming wouldn't be as dominant as they are.

Hoss: Is there a win during your years at SMU that you remember most fondly (and why) and a loss that stung more than others (and why)?

I would have to say that the 60-59 win against Purdue my junior year (2003-04) was the fondest. They were ranked No. 17 I believe, and they were hosting their annual tournament. Their gym was packed that night, but the only thing we could hear was a group of about 10 people cheering us on right above our bench. Kris Lowe's dad was screaming his lungs out, trying to will us to victory while 10,000 people were booing us. You would think that 10,000 would be able to drown out 10, but Kris' dad and the other nine faithful (my mom and sister included) made their voices heard. It truly was us against the world, and the game was a thriller. We made some plays at the end, and we were ecstatic when the finer buzzer sounded. The place went dead quiet, except for the faithful 10.

Perhaps the defeat that most stung was the loss against UNLV in 2002-03. We played great, but the referees hindered us. I have only played in two games where I truly believed that the refs did everything they could to keep us from winning, and this was one of them (the other was in sixth grade). We ended up losing by one, 79-78, but should have won by 10.

PonyFan: Eric, I've been concerned with the ball handling of our guards. Killen and Willingham look like they're decent handling the ball, but not great, not the kind of guards who can dribble the ball out of jail when they get cornered. How do you think the Ponies will do when the competition gets tougher and teams start throwing more press defenses at us?

This is an excellent question and a great topic. The next time you're at a game, notice how Coach Doherty will have a big guy set a blind screen for the point guard when they haven't passed halfcourt yet. Apparently, the scouting reports prepared by opposing teams seem to think the same thing about Jon and Dez. This is evident by the way the opposing point guards try to pressure us the entire way down the court. By having a big guy set this blind screen, it eases the pressure a bit.

When a team faces a full-court press, dribbling should be the last thing on their minds. The most effective way to beat a press is by making three passes - one pass to get the ball in, a second to get the ball in the middle of the court and third to get the ball past halfcourt. The easiest way to do this is by placing a post guy that is a good passer and ball handler right in the middle of the floor. Once the ball gets to him/her, there isn't a press in the world that can't be broken. The bottom line is, if we try to dribble through the press we could run into difficulties, if we pass through it we will break it every time.