NCAA Tournament Playalong Thread - Page 17

gales0678 · #**321** 04-07-2009, 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalakhani

I think Snipe was saying that makes izzo a good coach because he wins with little talent. I dont disagree (double negative-bad,bad,bad) that he is a good coach. He's a wonderful coach. I just scoff at the idea that he does it with not a lot of talent.

Your example is an excellent one. Look at that georgetown team. They were amazing. They pressed people out of existence. Any of those players could have started for virtually any team in the country. So they didnt do well in the pros? Doesnt matter.

I use to say that the 87 Indiana hoosier team was a testament to how great a coach Bob Knight was. They were the only NCAA champ that i recall that won a title with no 1st round draft picks (present or future) on the team. Think about that. But on further review, they had excellent college talent. Steve Alford was a 4 year all american, olympian and one of the best players ever to come out of the state of indiana. Daryl Thomas was a wonderful college player. Ricky Calloway was a good college player. There was plenty of talent on that team. Its just that none of that talent translated into pro talent.

exactly - look at the '87 team they beat in the final 4 - sherman douglas , derek coleman were kinda busts as nba players coinsidering where they were drafted , ron skiely had a good pro career and developed more in the pros
as for the unlv team they beat , daddio paddio was a bust and banks who couldn't miss that year for the tark didn't make in in the nba for very long of at all if i remember

Crown@club · #**322** 04-07-2009, 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gales0678

for all the big east fans that thought lousiville was a legit #1 team - UNC scored more points in a half a game than Louisville scored in the entire game against MSU

now if that don't convince you that they were a fraud i don't know what will , i picked wake in that region and was wrong , but , lousiville could have been the most overated #1 team ever in the tournament

You mean Washington wasn't it in 2005? I guess Wake Forest was placed in the right brackett.

Crown@club · #**323** 04-07-2009, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gales0678

crown - lousiville can't score in the half court like UNC

unc scored more points in 20 minutes than louisville did in 40 minutes against msu - don't you think there is a large talent gap between the 2 teams

I know UNC has more talent. I'm just saying that as well as they've been playing the last 2 games, that they should had been able to execute their game plan against UNC. If last night was the game plan, then that was horrible. Should had been more patient with the basketball. MSU 21 turnovers. Most were from their own accord.

gales0678 · #**324** 04-07-2009, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crown@club

You mean Washington wasn't it in 2005? I guess Wake Forest was placed in the right brackett.

again crown who did louisville beat in the tourney ???

they faced 1 top 10 team and got totally exposed as a fraud that couldn't score

i say it was a great job by coach and he should be coach of the year for what he was able to get this team to do in the regular season

i had the right thinking , but picked the wrong team , when you see a bad favorite aren't you supposed to pick against them?

King Glorious · #**325** 04-07-2009, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crown@club

I know UNC has more talent. I'm just saying that as well as they've been playing the last 2 games, that they should had been able to execute their game plan against UNC. If last night was the game plan, then that was horrible. Should had been more patient with the basketball. MSU 21 turnovers. Most were from their own accord.

What you aren't getting is that you can have a game plan but that doesn't mean that your opponent is going to let you play it. Just like in football. You may be a running team but if you fall behind early, say a fumble returned or a kickoff returned for a touchdown, you have to change your game plan a little bit. They surely wanted to be more patient. But they have no inside game against UNC so that means their entire offense was on the perimeter. UNC was all over the passing lanes and forcing the Spartan offense out further than they wanted. By overplaying the passing lanes, two things happen. They get a lot of steals and opportunities to run out. But they also get out of position often and leave you with open shots. Coaches may preach that they want you to slow things down but they'll also tell you not to pass up wide open shots. The State players got a lot of open looks but while they were open, they were also rushed. Long jumpers often lead to long rebounds and once again, the Heels were out and running. The simple fact is that they didn't have the players to impose their game plan over UNC's and once they fell behind, they had to adjust. They weren't going to crawl back from 10-15 back by working the shot clock down on each possession.

dalakhani · #**326** 04-07-2009, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crown@club

I know UNC has more talent. I'm just saying that as well as they've been playing the last 2 games, that they should had been able to execute their game plan against UNC. If last night was the game plan, then that was horrible. Should had been more patient with the basketball. MSU 21 turnovers. Most were from their own accord.

Whether there were two seconds or twenty seconds left on the shot clock MSU wasnt going to get the looks they were getting in the other games. What difference would it have made if they would have passed the ball around another ten seconds?

The tone of the game was set early. Mich St's first bucket was a contested three pointer by their center. A few seconds later it was an air ball from the wing. Carolina was getting clean looks from their best players in their favorite spots.

MSU had a size advantage against louisville-they exploited it. They had a backcourt and speed advantage against UConn- they exploited it. Exactly where was their advantage against Carolina?

They go halfcourt and carolina is bigger and more athletic on the interior. Carolina also defends the three well. Your only hope is to go uptempo because if you dont, you cant score. Its as simple as that.

gales0678 · #**327** 04-07-2009, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dalakhani

Whether there were two seconds or twenty seconds left on the shot clock MSU wasnt going to get the looks they were getting in the other games. What difference would it have made if they would have passed the ball around another ten seconds?

The tone of the game was set early. Mich St's first bucket was a contested three pointer by their center. A few seconds later it was an air ball from the wing. Carolina was getting clean looks from their best players in their favorite spots.

MSU had a size advantage against louisville-they exploited it. They had a backcourt and speed advantage against UConn- they exploited it. Exactly where was their advantage against Carolina?

They go halfcourt and carolina is bigger and more athletic on the interior. Carolina also defends the three well. Your only hope is to go uptempo because if you dont, you cant score. Its as simple as that.

the only advantage was a better jockey - izzo vs wiliams , but sometimes the jock can't get the slower rat up no matter how hard he tries , and sometimes the bad jock can do everything possible to lose and it don't matter as he has the faster animal

Crown@club · #**328** 04-07-2009, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gales0678

again crown who did louisville beat in the tourney ???

they faced 1 top 10 team and got totally exposed as a fraud that couldn't score

i say it was a great job by coach and he should be coach of the year for what he was able to get this team to do in the regular season

i had the right thinking , but picked the wrong team , when you see a bad favorite aren't you supposed to pick against them?

How do you go from complaining about your Wake Forest in the same brackett as Louisville and then say that Louisville was the weakest of the #1's for not only this year but in a long time?

gales0678 · #**329** 04-07-2009, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crown@club

How do you go from complaining about your Wake Forest in the same brackett as Louisville and then say that Louisville was the weakest of the #1's for not only this year but in a long time?

louisville finshed the season #1 - fact they were the #1 team in the country

i did not think wake forest was the #16 team in the country , i thought they should have been a #3 seed , not that it mattered as they didn't play

#**330** 04-07-2009, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

The team that was a strong and deserving favorite won like they were supposed to. Too much athleticsm and talent across the board. For all the talk about the Big East this year, it's funny that the best team came from the ACC yet again. Duke has a title, UNC has two, and Maryland has one in this decade.

Definitely.
People sort of shoved them under the rug
after they lost in the ACC tourney.

Mich ST. did a hell of a job just getting to the
final. Izzo did a great job with this bunch.

Postscript:

This was one of the least exciting tournaments I have
witnessed. The number of close games in the later rounds
was just not there (my vote for best game Vill v. Pitt which
actually lived up to expectations).

Still a great event.