getcha some respect Mustangs

[Hoop Fan]

If I'm Dement, I would challenge my team to earn some damn respect and attention tonight. The DMN ignored the game from SMUs perspective today. Short article about Techs point guard. I don't think they owe us anything, but it certainly is a slap in the face. If I'm BHop, Isham or any local high school star, I have a serious chip on my shoulder tonight.

[Waz]

Someone was smoking something when the line for tonights game came in at 6. Tech's quickness and agressiveness on D will give us some major turnover problems and if we don't take care of the ball early, we will be digging out from deep and home court won't mean diddly. Our zone could also be dissected. Should be interesting. I hope we have a good crowd.

[OldPony]

Tech was torched from the outside against GT. The corner 3 was always open. They play a sagging defense to make up for a lack of height underneath-Sound familiar?

[Nacho]

Can someone explain to me why a relatively fast, quick team like ours plays zone almost exclusively. We have some decent size inside. I don't get it.

[Red Horse]

Dement seems to be enamored with the 1-3-1 zone and it is killing us when any team has a good three point shooter or two. We would be much better off if he played a switching man to man which gives man principles with some zone principles. But I agree with you - I would much rather see us play man defense.

[Pony_Fan]

from the Horses Mouth-

"Actually we give up more 3's in transition and in our man for man -..the 1-3-1- is actually a 2-3 to start and "matches" with their alignment --presently it has proven to be our best defense --however we continue to try to get our team to make an individual commitment and a collective team commitment to man defense --when they do that as a group we will be better any defense that is called for"

How is the 2-3 a match zone to begin with?
To me, it just has the one point man and slides over to cover the perimeter - often too late. I think we will get burned in transition defense tonight and they will have easy layups. I don't know why he wants to stick with the 1-3-1 when it doesn't work in my opinion. Most of our players (excluding Miller) are quick enough to cover man to man. What is wrong with a standard 2-3? or a box and 1?

<small>[ 12-01-2003, 02:33 PM: Message edited by: Pony_Fan ]</small>

[Hoop Fan]

well, you got your wish. SMU played very little 1-3-1. Most of the night looked like a simple 2-3 to me. I wont say it was the difference in the game, but it sure looked better and more comfortable.