Whew............

friarwolf · Post by **friarwolf** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 10:54 pm

Well, that was fun.....I guess.........

We lose that game by 10 last year. This year, we have enough playmakers to over come our mistakes. The refs tonight sucked it hard........Even Orsini was yelling "You're terrible" at the end of the game -loudly. Can we not get refs who will recognize home court should at least keep you from getting bent over and hosed hard......

Good balanced scoring tonight. We moved the ball well and were patient to wait for good shots. We even looked pretty good running our zone defense. Otis is good for two bone head plays per game. I was afraid Doh was going to go into over coaching hyperdrive with 8 minutes to go but he controlled himself. Last year, we couldn't convert break away layups - now we are attempting alley oops. Can't make them but I still love it that we have the guts to try them.............

McCoy showed a little bit of freshman nerves with those two missed free throws but Bamba and Derrick stepped up with theirs. Next time we have a foul to give, let's make sure we do it before they get anywhere near the 3 point line........

Overall, a good tune up for conference play. I am gonna be pissed if all we get for a write-up tomorrow is a wire report. Lots of high school ballers there tonight. I hope at our invitation................

Hoop Fan · Post by **Hoop Fan** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 11:01 pm

agree with everything you say, but on the last play it sure looked to me like Faye smartly took matters into his own hands and not only tried to foul the dribbler just before midcourt, he blatantly fouled him. No call. the refs had to make sure the Buffs got that 3 pointer up.

thats funny about Orsini. Glad somebody recognizes a jobbing in progress. Sure wish Doherty would chew some arse once in awhile and make sure we dont get jobbed at home. that silver haired ref tried his best to turn that game.

M Street Stang · Post by **M Street Stang** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 11:05 pm

We looked a lot better. However, we should have won by 15. When you're up by 10 with 10 to go, you need to put the pedal to the metal and win going away. Two observations:
1. We blew 3 consecutive possessions to close the half b/c our coach was trying to call a set offensive play and the guards were slow to implement. Coach needs to let them play!
2. We should have fouled at the end...we had two to give.
3. Refs were awful and probably cost us 5 points.

Treadway21 · Post by **Treadway21** » Mon Jan 05, 2009 11:07 pm

I wish we had more people there. It still got loud even with so few fans in Moody. It sure will be fun if we start bringing more people there.

This is my first game. McCoy is fun to watch. He looks very seasoned. I am looking forward to watching these guys develop. Kudos to Walker on this shooting off the bench.

Charleston Pony · Post by **Charleston Pony** » Tue Jan 06, 2009 6:27 am

Treadway21 wrote:I wish we had more people there. It still got loud even with so few fans in Moody. It sure will be fun if we start bringing more people there.

This is my first game. McCoy is fun to watch. He looks very seasoned. I am looking forward to watching these guys develop. Kudos to Walker on this shooting off the bench.

yes; it would sure help these guys in CUSA play to have a home court advantage.

ponyboy · Post by **ponyboy** » Tue Jan 06, 2009 8:32 am

They'll show once we continue winning. This was a good start.

friarwolf · Post by **friarwolf** » Tue Jan 06, 2009 10:27 am

Hoop Fan wrote:agree with everything you say, but on the last play it sure looked to me like Faye smartly took matters into his own hands and not only tried to foul the dribbler just before midcourt, he blatantly fouled him. No call. the refs had to make sure the Buffs got that 3 pointer up.

thats funny about Orsini. Glad somebody recognizes a jobbing in progress. Sure wish Doherty would chew some arse once in awhile and make sure we dont get jobbed at home. that silver haired ref tried his best to turn that game.

Yes, he did. Do we not get any say about refs? I find it hard to believe Roy Williams would ever let someone like that ref set foot on his court again. I wonder where those refs came from - a specific conference???????

A funny/sad moment in the first half occurred when several of our fans got into a shouting match with some Colorado fans sitting on the other side of the court. You could hear it all over the place.............

Peruna2001 · Post by **Peruna2001** » Tue Jan 06, 2009 10:31 am

friarwolf wrote:The refs tonight sucked it hard........Even Orsini was yelling "You're terrible" at the end of the game -loudly. Can we not get refs who will recognize home court should at least keep you from getting bent over and hosed hard......

Agreed. I loved hearing one of the refs threaten to call a foul while we were shooting free throws.

"If you pull him under again AND get the rebound, I'm going to call a foul on you."

Only if he got the rebound was he going to call the foul...lovely.

It was a fun game. Definitely closer than it should have been at the end.

therack · Post by **therack** » Tue Jan 06, 2009 1:58 pm

I agree with most of you that this was a great win for SMU, especially going into the conference play... I defintely loved balanced scoring which would greatly benefit during the conference play...

However, one thing bothered me a bit - why are we playing so much zone? Usually, teams play a lot of zone if a) not as athletic, b) height disadvantage, c) foul trouble, d) opponent's poor shooting from beyond the ark, e) short bench, f) opponent runs a very complex man-to-man offense. Now I am not claiming to be a basketball expert but it seems to me that CU did not meet any of the criteria above. Against the zone out team get exposed to 3 point shots which kept CU in the game for the most part. Just a thought...

White Helmet · Post by **White Helmet** » Tue Jan 06, 2009 2:01 pm

Doh was watching Mike Dement film where he would sit in zone until we gave about 35 3's.

Buckethead · Post by **Buckethead** » Tue Jan 06, 2009 2:20 pm

Did anyone else think that the Colorado coach's shirt's looked like they should be serving drinks on a plane or cruise ship?

DiamondM · Post by **DiamondM** » Tue Jan 06, 2009 2:25 pm

therack wrote:However, one thing bothered me a bit - why are we playing so much zone? Usually, teams play a lot of zone if a) not as athletic, b) height disadvantage, c) foul trouble, d) opponent's poor shooting from beyond the ark, e) short bench, f) opponent runs a very complex man-to-man offense. Now I am not claiming to be a basketball expert but it seems to me that CU did not meet any of the criteria above. Against the zone out team get exposed to 3 point shots which kept CU in the game for the most part. Just a thought...

On the post game, Doherty said we played more zone tonight than usual because Papa and Bamba were in the game at the same time a lot, and when we go zone with that line up we need to play more zone than man to man (I suppose because the two of them can't match up man to man with shooters).

Be ready for Box and 1 on Saturday against UTEP's one scorer.

friarwolf · Post by **friarwolf** » Tue Jan 06, 2009 2:50 pm

therack wrote:I agree with most of you that this was a great win for SMU, especially going into the conference play... I defintely loved balanced scoring which would greatly benefit during the conference play...

However, one thing bothered me a bit - why are we playing so much zone? Usually, teams play a lot of zone if a) not as athletic, b) height disadvantage, c) foul trouble, d) opponent's poor shooting from beyond the ark, e) short bench, f) opponent runs a very complex man-to-man offense. Now I am not claiming to be a basketball expert but it seems to me that CU did not meet any of the criteria above. Against the zone out team get exposed to 3 point shots which kept CU in the game for the most part. Just a thought...

Doherty is a disciple of Dean Smith who used several defenses during the course of a game to confuse the opponent's offense. With that said, he is trying to teach his players how correctly execute the 1-3-1, box and 1 and 2-3 zone defenses so they can easily transition from running a man to man defense into the zone defenses and back depending on his assessment of how the other team is running its offense. As we have witnessed, it can look like a train wreck when you have new players trying to learn to master it all and a coach who tends to overcoach.........

Pony_Fan · Post by **Pony_Fan** » Tue Jan 06, 2009 5:06 pm

therack wrote:I agree with most of you that this was a great win for SMU, especially going into the conference play... I defintely loved balanced scoring which would greatly benefit during the conference play...

However, one thing bothered me a bit - why are we playing so much zone? Usually, teams play a lot of zone if a) not as athletic, b) height disadvantage, c) foul trouble, d) opponent's poor shooting from beyond the ark, e) short bench, f) opponent runs a very complex man-to-man offense. Now I am not claiming to be a basketball expert but it seems to me that CU did not meet any of the criteria above. Against the zone out team get exposed to 3 point shots which kept CU in the game for the most part. Just a thought...

It was effective for various parts of the game. (beginning) - CU looked out of sorts for a while with the zone. It is harder to do backdoor cuts and passing lanes are a little bit more clogged it seems like.

With that said, it doesn't really matter what defense we are playing as teams seem to light us up at the 3 point line always. Open wing shooters are all over the place during games.

gostangs · Post by **gostangs** » Tue Jan 06, 2009 5:11 pm

When we switched to man is when we made some distance between us - they were very accurate outside vs our zone.

Whew............

Whew............

Re: Whew............