Poor coaching, poor officiating plus jet lag = loss every time
- Thread starter jdbulldog
- Start date
I'd say "Definitely" rather than Probably. I'll also go out on a limb and say no other team will come within 5 FT attempts of what Oregon shot last night vs us. Officiating affected the game more than it should have. What was called and what wasn't.
Our refusal to go zone lost us that game.
The pick and rolls slaughtered us. McCowan was completely neutralized. She spent the entire time uselessly running around at the perimeter, then getting blown by for easy layups. By the end of the game she was completely gassed, and hadn't contributed much of anything.
What's the harm in going zone when your opponent is already making every shot they take?
The pick and rolls slaughtered us. McCowan was completely neutralized. She spent the entire time uselessly running around at the perimeter, then getting blown by for easy layups. By the end of the game she was completely gassed, and hadn't contributed much of anything.
What's the harm in going zone when your opponent is already making every shot they take?
No panic here, disappointed? Yes. Lost to a top ten team on the road. The Ducks played very well, hit all their free throws and that coupled with dubious officiating led to the loss. We also did not have our A game.
+1. Oregon is a good shooting team and they may have lit our zone up, but it was worth a try, particularly after T was gassed from hedging high ball screens all night. Just the change of pace may have helped. That was one thing Stans was usually good at, going to zone or half court trap at the right time.
The officiating was terrible, but we lost that game because Oregon was better in every facet of the game.
Well Schaefer and Howland both refuse to play ANY zone defense. We already know this and so it will always be a factor that we only play one style of defense constantly the whole game every game for both the men's and women's teams.
Sorry for the downvote. Fat fingered the upvote.
I don't think it hurts us too much. It shows Vic what we need to work on and lets the players know what it's like to play in a hostile environment.
Props to Oregon. They played a good game and had a big time home court advantage with that crowd.
Zone? Are you kidding me? Have you ever actually played basketball? And don't tell me you were state champs in high school!!!! I've heard that one before. They would have broken 100 if we played zone!!
Showing zone for a possession is a very good way to change things up and create a bit of disruption to the flow of the opponent's offense. Going to zone doesnt mean the team needs to then commit to it for the rest of the game- they can simply go into a zone for a possession or two and switch back to man.
That often creates the disruption needed to stop a run or to make an offense adjust and not keep doing what they were doing before the zone showed up.
This can be shown time and again across years of modern college basketball. Examples are simply too many to even list and not worth looking for since its so common.
Switching to zone for a possession or two is like calling a timeout after another basket. Just another way to try and stop a run.
Defense
I wish we had adjusted the way defended ball screens set by the 5. They would move McCowan 20 feet from the basket and take advantage of our method of defending on ball screens. McCowan would hedge hard. During her hedge, her momentum is going away from the paint. And Oregon would use that as an opportunity to penetrate. That is asking a lot from a 6'7 center to continually play 20-25 feet away from the basket defensively. Instead of the hard hedge, sag a bit and recover. Had we gone zone, they are the type team that can bust it. They can shoot the lights out. I wish we had adjusted our method of defending on ball screens. The high on ball screen has given us fits and seems like an early blueprint to open up the paint. I also think our help rotations were so good last year on the hard hedge. That is another big factor.
At the end of the day, it was a loss on the road to a very good basketball team. It will be a learning opportunity. And we need to build depth. The growing pains are investments.
Those were my simple observations. That said, Vic obviously knows what he is doing and this team will continue to get better. Games like last night serve as good building blocks and teaching opportunities for March.
I wish we had adjusted the way defended ball screens set by the 5. They would move McCowan 20 feet from the basket and take advantage of our method of defending on ball screens. McCowan would hedge hard. During her hedge, her momentum is going away from the paint. And Oregon would use that as an opportunity to penetrate. That is asking a lot from a 6'7 center to continually play 20-25 feet away from the basket defensively. Instead of the hard hedge, sag a bit and recover. Had we gone zone, they are the type team that can bust it. They can shoot the lights out. I wish we had adjusted our method of defending on ball screens. The high on ball screen has given us fits and seems like an early blueprint to open up the paint. I also think our help rotations were so good last year on the hard hedge. That is another big factor.
At the end of the day, it was a loss on the road to a very good basketball team. It will be a learning opportunity. And we need to build depth. The growing pains are investments.
Those were my simple observations. That said, Vic obviously knows what he is doing and this team will continue to get better. Games like last night serve as good building blocks and teaching opportunities for March.
Last edited:
Notre Dame beat them in elite 8 running a 2-3 zone.. There was no pick and roll ********. So your theory is just keep doing the same thing that is killing your All-American and allowing them a layup or a foul(they made 28-29). If you aren't going to try a zone then let someone else guard the big girl and keep T in the paint--Can we not play T and Carter?
She was late rotating back everytime. So your options are dont have her poke out so far or sit zone. They ran circles around her.
What would basketballdog do different?
Don't come in here with that crap!!!! How bad did we beat them last year running the same defense? We ran them out of the gym!!!
The internet never ceases to amaze me. We have a coach who has played in back to back national championship games and you dumb asses think you know more.
High expectations will always come after success, but it is kinda funny. If our men’s team played a Top 10 team on the road, I feel safe in saying that most would predict a sizeable(10+ pt) loss. However, with the women, it’s become an absolute shock when they lose, no matter the circumstances
All I can say is that I guess it shows us how big of a monster Vic has created
All I can say is that I guess it shows us how big of a monster Vic has created
100% agree. I almost posted this last night, but held back. I love Vick, but his almost refusal to play zone is extremely frustrating. I got so sick of seeing them coming down the floor and running the pick and roll. They are a great shooting team, but when you're getting torched consistently, its time to try something else. You don't have to run it every play, but my gosh why can't we run a little zone from time to time. Please Vick
Yo...nice fourth post... nobody is saying to stay in the zone the whole game...while you may be talking about the zone played by a team at the local YMCA...rest assured Jazz and Danbury playing passing lanes in a 2-3 zone would be a scary proposition....
Basketball isn't rocket science. It's a fairly simple game. The problem is that coaches tend to be stubborn and don't want to change. No one thinks Vic is dumb, but it's fairly obvious what we could have changed to give ourselves a chance. He's just refused to add a zone to his repitore over the years, so he's probably not comfortable running it and probably hasn't had the team practice it either.
But it's clearly risky to have a team run a full court press and man to man when you have no bench. That is going to wear the kids out and leave them vulnerable to fouling out. It worked last year because we had 3 reliable bench players, and that team was offensively talented. They could overcome shoddy defense where this team simply can't right now.
Last edited:
We actually played a poor defensive game against them last year, but our team was so good on offense that it didn't matter.
We played a bad defensive game against them last year, but the offense was good enough to overcome it. They scored 79 on us last year, which is roughly the same as this year.
I know enough to be sure that the odds of hitting a 17 foot jumper over and over is a helluva lot lower than making a layup which is what they would have had to do over and over if we would have kept T in the paint on D all night.
Latest
-
01
Maroon and White
"I started something I didn't finish": Mississippi State QB Kamario Taylor joins Sports Center to talk 2027 return
-
02
Maroon and White Basketball
Bulldogs prepare to level up competition, starting with Xavier in neutral site meeting
-
03
Maroon and White Football
Mississippi State Week 11 Preview: Who carries the load?
-
04
Maroon and White Football
Mississippi State Week 11 Preview: Run vs. Run
-
05
Maroon and White Basketball
Mississippi State 79-57 Troy: Bulldogs build big early lead in home win over Trojans