He currently has 29 points, 11-14, 4-5 three pts, and 3-3 ftm. Juan and JWilson?
Jamil.
The key...do the opposite of whatever the heck Villanova has done against these guys.
Quote from: HaywardsHeroes32 on February 16, 2014, 05:48:08 PM
Jamil.
The key...do the opposite of whatever the heck Villanova has done against these guys.
You mean play defense?
Quote from: HaywardsHeroes32 on February 16, 2014, 05:48:08 PM
Jamil.
The key...do the opposite of whatever the heck Villanova has done against these guys.
Creighton sure has the Wildcats number.
Hope for flu.
Quote from: HaywardsHeroes32 on February 16, 2014, 05:48:08 PM
Jamil.
The key...do the opposite of whatever the heck Villanova has done against these guys.
After the first 5 minutes and JWilsons 3 personal fouls than who covers McBuckets?
Quote from: denverMU on February 16, 2014, 05:56:49 PM
After the first 5 minutes and JWilsons 3 personal fouls than who covers McBuckets?
at the point probably just leave him open. He's gona rain anywyas.
Lockdown the other guys.
Alternate Jamil, Derrick and Juan. I'm guessing Buzz may also try some junk defenses -- different traps and some type of box-in-1 or triangle-in-two matchup when Wragge is in. Not sure how well this will work with all the shooters they have.
Jamil, Juan, STjr, Jake, Todd, Deonte. Limited help, because Wragge is just ridiculous. McKay would have been useful against this bunch.
They look good at home. Bad match up for us...for most teams.
We need to get Wragge in foul trouble early. Feed Otule and Gradner right from the get-go. Thats our one advantage on them.
I think the key is going to be wragge.
Feed Ox all day long and get that traffic cone in foul trouble.
have wragge on the bench and you can guard McDermott a little tighter.
Very tough match-up for MU. The good news? A win would bIld on the recent succes, and completely change the complexion of this season.
Honestly, we need them to go cold. Kinda the same game plan North Carolina had against Illinois in the national championship in 2005. Feed the ball to Sean May (Davante) and hope their shooters have an off night.
Love watching Creighton play. Have to hope they are off on their 3's, but it is fun to watch a team with good shooters beat a bunch of guys that are good athletes but don't understand the game.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on February 16, 2014, 06:41:40 PM
Love watching Creighton play. Have to hope they are off on their 3's, but it is fun to watch a team with good shooters beat a bunch of guys that are good athletes but don't understand the game.
Wouldn't that make you a Wisconsin fan?
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on February 16, 2014, 06:41:40 PM
Love watching Creighton play. Have to hope they are off on their 3's, but it is fun to watch a team with good shooters beat a bunch of guys that are good athletes but don't understand the game.
Holy veiled racism
Not scared at all. Put a guy in his face, no problem.
Nova was one big brainfart today.
We are a much different team now. We beat them by double digits.
I'm more worried about teams like St. Johns.
Quote from: murara1994 on February 16, 2014, 06:50:34 PM
Holy veiled racism
Not only that, but sounds like a Vadger fan.
Quote from: real chili 83 on February 16, 2014, 06:51:47 PM
Not scared at all. Put a guy in his face, no problem.
Nova was one big brainfart today.
We are a much different team now. We beat them by double digits.
I'm more worried about teams like St. Johns.
What guy? The cat's 6' frickin' 8"
Team defense with Jamil on him.
Wilson will foul out
Quote from: 4everwarriors on February 16, 2014, 06:53:58 PM
What guy? The cat's 6' frickin' 8"
Never, breathe my friend.
We shut him down pretty well last time. Control the ball, drive on him, and get him into foul trouble.
Then, we have to guard against the three. And make some threes.
Wilson's gotta bring some NBA D to the game. (playoff NBA D)
Quote from: real chili 83 on February 16, 2014, 07:00:27 PM
Never, breathe my friend.
We shut him down pretty well last time. Control the ball, drive on him, and get him into foul trouble.
Then, we have to guard against the three. And make some threes.
I'm with ya, Bro.
The defensive game of Jamil's life. A miracle from Juan or Steve would help a bit.
Nova didn't drive at all. Derrick has to play like he did against X. All 5 guys on the floor must be engaged. All 4
of there losses came on the road. We have some athletic guys who can give them problems, like Bane ,Mayo,etc.
The key is going to be to attack them when we have the ball. I don't think Creighton is a very good defensive team so get Creighton to worry about playing defense and stopping us. We are going to need good games out of Mayo and Burton as they like to attack defenses in the paint. Get easy buckets or get to the foul line. Gardner's minutes should be limited this game. He is going to give up a lot on the defensive end which is fine if he is doing damage inside but if he is not, he needs to get pulled quickly.
We also need to do a better job of guarding Wragge. He was wide open all the time in our first meeting. Force the other 3 to beat you and offensively keep attacking the basket.
Butler did a good job against Creighton when they went small so that could our other option. Maybe this is the game Burton and JJJ get extended minutes with JWil playing the 5. Force Creighton to put the ball on the floor and don't help defend off of McDermott and Wragge.
Quote from: TallTitan34 on February 16, 2014, 06:48:36 PM
Wouldn't that make you a Wisconsin fan?
I went to Marquette, I don't care for Wisconsin....but I respect their success.
Besides, Wisconsin's offensive scheme is not the same as Creighton's.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on February 16, 2014, 06:41:40 PM
Love watching Creighton play. Have to hope they are off on their 3's, but it is fun to watch a team with good shooters beat a bunch of guys that are good athletes but don't understand the game.
[/quote
Who will you be rooting for?
Creighton plays excellent team defense and they're right up in your grill on each possession.
Quote from: murara1994 on February 16, 2014, 06:50:34 PM
Holy veiled racism
LOL. Don't forget to throw Hitler into your post....then you get a Godwin's Law and Godwin's Law II double bonus.
hopefully we are scouting/studying the creighton-george washington game really really close
Quote from: Stone Cold on February 16, 2014, 07:01:17 PM
Wilson's gotta bring some NBA D to the game. (playoff NBA D)
Wilson has never played NBA D in his life.
Quote from: mufanatic on February 16, 2014, 07:12:55 PM
The key is going to be to attack them when we have the ball. I don't think Creighton is a very good defensive team so get Creighton to worry about playing defense and stopping us. We are going to need good games out of Mayo and Burton as they like to attack defenses in the paint. Get easy buckets or get to the foul line. Gardner's minutes should be limited this game. He is going to give up a lot on the defensive end which is fine if he is doing damage inside but if he is not, he needs to get pulled quickly.
We also need to do a better job of guarding Wragge. He was wide open all the time in our first meeting. Force the other 3 to beat you and offensively keep attacking the basket.
Butler did a good job against Creighton when they went small so that could our other option. Maybe this is the game Burton and JJJ get extended minutes with JWil playing the 5. Force Creighton to put the ball on the floor and don't help defend off of McDermott and Wragge.
That is asking for a loss. We need Ox badly. He is our 1 big advantage. He can abuse them down low and rack up fouls. They shoot a ton. Whether its Ox or Chris we don't want them out there anyways. Creighton basically doesn't have a low post game unless its McDermott so I don't see Davante being an issue on D.
We absolutely need him.
Judging by most of the comments in this thread, it will be another ass kicking.
Quote from: mufanatic on February 16, 2014, 07:12:55 PM
The key is going to be to attack them when we have the ball.
Like herb brooks in Miracle..."you don't defend therm. You attack them!"
Quote from: mufanatic on February 16, 2014, 07:12:55 PM
The key is going to be to attack them when we have the ball. I don't think Creighton is a very good defensive team so get Creighton to worry about playing defense and stopping us. We are going to need good games out of Mayo and Burton as they like to attack defenses in the paint. Get easy buckets or get to the foul line. Gardner's minutes should be limited this game. He is going to give up a lot on the defensive end which is fine if he is doing damage inside but if he is not, he needs to get pulled quickly.
We also need to do a better job of guarding Wragge. He was wide open all the time in our first meeting. Force the other 3 to beat you and offensively keep attacking the basket.
Butler did a good job against Creighton when they went small so that could our other option. Maybe this is the game Burton and JJJ get extended minutes with JWil playing the 5. Force Creighton to put the ball on the floor and don't help defend off of McDermott and Wragge.
Pulling Gardner and playing Otule ensures getting our ass kicked
Quote from: Class71 on February 16, 2014, 07:15:20 PM
Who will you be rooting for?
I'll be cheering for Marquette as I have done for the last three decades whenever MU is playing.
Doesn't mean I can't appreciate another team and how they play. They do the little things, shoot well, don't have great athletes but maximize their talents to beat teams with far better athleticism. They are fun to watch, we will have our hands full, but if their 3's are off great chance to win. For the first time in a long time, I actually think MU will defend the 3. At least I hope they will. Can't imagine after the first game and scouting tonight's game they won't have that stuck in their brains.
We have a much better chjance of winning at Villanova than we do beating Creighton on Wednesday.
How do you beat a great shooting team? You will see Buzz's answer on Wednesday. :o
Breathe everyone.
Feed the Ox.
Feed the Ox.
They have never seen the likes of the Ox.
Quote from: real chili 83 on February 16, 2014, 07:32:02 PM
Breathe everyone.
Feed the Ox.
Feed the Ox.
They have never seen the likes of the Ox.
Except of course on New Year's Eve.
This is not a trick question. There are ways to beat this team. How about some suggestions?
Quote from: Class71 on February 16, 2014, 07:33:48 PM
This is not a trick question. There are ways to beat this team. How about some suggestions?
D up and turn 'em over.
Then again, slow the tempo and turn it into a possession game.
If you can somehow find a way to do both, you'll win the game.
Wanna avoid bein' shell shocked and down 20-5 after 4 minutes, hey?
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on February 16, 2014, 07:37:34 PM
Then again, slow the tempo and turn it into a possession game.
Yes. Slower tempo will be in our favor in this game. Unless there are clear, easy transition opportunities key the pace down.
As it relates to McBuckets.... I like it most when he has the ball. He is actually his most dangerous when he plays off the ball. He is still pretty good with the ball too but when he is forced to put the ball on the deck going towards the basket is when he is the least productive.
Quote from: Class71 on February 16, 2014, 07:33:48 PM
This is not a trick question. There are ways to beat this team. How about some suggestions?
San Diego State and GW beat them....maybe play them in Anaheim...the don't like Mickey Mouse.
In the four games they lost, three of them McDermott scored 21 or more....only against GW did he have a bad game (7 points). In those other 3 losses, the other guys struggled. Let McDermott get his points, don't let anyone else beat you.
Play Dawson 30 minutes. We need real assists, not basic assists.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on February 16, 2014, 07:37:34 PM
D up and turn 'em over.
Then again, slow the tempo and turn it into a possession game.
If you can somehow find a way to do both, you'll win the game.
A gold star.
We will not out shoot them but we can press, turn them over, control the tempo and turn it into a dog fight for the ball frustrating Dougie every inch of the way. The team with more heart wins. We will need to see our Xavier D game on steroids.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on February 16, 2014, 07:45:22 PM
San Diego State and GW beat them....maybe play them in Anaheim...the don't like Mickey Mouse.
In the four games they lost, three of them McDermott scored 21 or more....only against GW did he have a bad game (7 points). In those other 3 losses, the other guys struggled. Let McDermott get his points, don't let anyone else beat you.
I was at those games. San Diego State was a quasi home game for them. There were probably 400 Creighton fans and a few thousand San Diego State fans. As for GW, that was the worst shooting Creighton has done all year. Was not impressed with GW, we just sucked. We struggle with our shooting, you guys definitely can win. Happened against Providence and St. John's.
Quote from: Jet915 on February 16, 2014, 08:06:21 PM
I was at those games. San Diego State was a quasi home game for them. There were probably 400 Creighton fans and a few thousand San Diego State fans. As for GW, that was the worst shooting Creighton has done all year. Was not impressed with GW, we just sucked. We struggle with our shooting, you guys definitely can win. Happened against Providence and St. John's.
I was at the end of the GW game, Creighton looked awful. I was a little surprised, but I got to the game for the second half and McDermott couldn't score at all.
Play a Box & 1 with Juan inside his jersey. They rely on screens to open him up so a quasi-zone will slow them down.
Then, switch to a 1-3-1 half court trap for a while.
Then, put Burton on him and tell him to block a few shots.
Then, finish the 2nd half with Jamil on him because he'll still have a few fouls left.
Oh, and detain Jim Burr at the airport so we have a chance.
Wow, you guys make it seem like we shouldn't even bother showing up...
I smell fear...
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on February 16, 2014, 06:41:40 PM
Love watching Creighton play. Have to hope they are off on their 3's, but it is fun to watch a team with good shooters beat a bunch of guys that are good athletes but don't understand the game.
I prefer watching a good, aggressive defensive team denying success to a quality offensive team. I thought the St. John's-Creighton game was great. Creighton was fun to watch today as well, but I'm not quite sure that Villanova 'doesn't understand the game.' They simply conceded too much space and didn't play with any force on defense. They started by 'letting McDermott get his' and he took them for 39 on 17 shots.
Creighton is an explosive offensive team, but the height of the game is having two-way players who get stops on a Creighton-like offense and score on the other end. As other people have said, Creighton is not a great defensive team. They put pressure on teams to keep up with them. Take that away and you can win. McDermott had 25 against St. Johns on 18 shots, and he didn't have any points in the last 5 minutes, barely touching the ball. Wragge took 2 shots.
It's not like Creighton is a bunch of basketball geniuses who MU can only beat if we have the good fortune of Creighton missing shots. Play good aggressive defense. Make them miss.
Quote from: keefe on February 16, 2014, 08:32:59 PM
Wow, you guys make it seem like we shouldn't even bother showing up...
I smell fear...
Hmm, I actually got the exact opposite vibe.
Quote from: karavotsos on February 16, 2014, 09:18:22 PM
I prefer watching a good, aggressive defensive team denying success to a quality offensive team.
Pete?
Quote from: karavotsos on February 16, 2014, 09:18:22 PM
I prefer watching a good, aggressive defensive team denying success to a quality offensive team. I thought the St. John's-Creighton game was great. Creighton was fun to watch today as well, but I'm not quite sure that Villanova 'doesn't understand the game.' They simply conceded too much space and didn't play with any force on defense. They started by 'letting McDermott get his' and he took them for 39 on 17 shots.
Creighton is an explosive offensive team, but the height of the game is having two-way players who get stops on a Creighton-like offense and score on the other end. As other people have said, Creighton is not a great defensive team. They put pressure on teams to keep up with them. Take that away and you can win. McDermott had 25 against St. Johns on 18 shots, and he didn't have any points in the last 5 minutes, barely touching the ball. Wragge took 2 shots.
It's not like Creighton is a bunch of basketball geniuses who MU can only beat if we have the good fortune of Creighton missing shots. Play good aggressive defense. Make them miss.
I like all of this. Makes a lot of sense.
One thing I don't ever do is double off of Wragge, though. It's just not a good risk-reward option. Treat Wragge like a lot of teams treat Jake -- if we keep a man attached to him at all times, he can't score because he can't drive past us.
Double McDermott some, play him straight-up some, play some gadget defenses, but don't just concede points to him. Make him earn them. And never leave Wragge open. If 2 or 3 other guys get hot and beat us, well, that's life. You can't take away everything. Hopefully we can score enough to counteract Creighton's offense and we can wear them down with our aggressiveness on D.
I want to win (duh, we all do) and I will be disappointed if we lose. But I will only be big-time disappointed if we let Wragge go wild from 3-point range. Because it's just unnecessary. If you want to stop a guy like Wragge, you can -- and we should want to.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on February 16, 2014, 06:41:40 PM
Love watching Creighton play. Have to hope they are off on their 3's, but it is fun to watch a team with good shooters beat a bunch of guys that are good athletes but don't understand the game.
If you don't like Nova you must really hate Kansas and Indiana.
Quote from: MU82 on February 16, 2014, 09:29:55 PM
I like all of this. Makes a lot of sense.
One thing I don't ever do is double off of Wragge, though. It's just not a good risk-reward option. Treat Wragge like a lot of teams treat Jake -- if we keep a man attached to him at all times, he can't score because he can't drive past us.
Double McDermott some, play him straight-up some, play some gadget defenses, but don't just concede points to him. Make him earn them. And never leave Wragge open. If 2 or 3 other guys get hot and beat us, well, that's life. You can't take away everything. Hopefully we can score enough to counteract Creighton's offense and we can wear them down with our aggressiveness on D.
I want to win (duh, we all do) and I will be disappointed if we lose. But I will only be big-time disappointed if we let Wragge go wild from 3-point range. Because it's just unnecessary. If you want to stop a guy like Wragge, you can -- and we should want to.
Agree. Buzz talked about Wragge in the post-game on Saturday, and said teams pretty much just face-guard him all the time now. If you look at his last 5 or so games, he basically has not scored. But that leaves you playing 4-on-4, with one of the 4 being McDermott. Otule and Gardner got a little practice against Stainbrook faceguarding on Saturday. Gardner didn't get up on Stainbrook on 1 occasion and he nailed a 15-17 footer. Obviously, Wragge will be a more difficult assignment, but its clear what MU has to do against Wragge, and if recent history is any indication, if MU executes on Wragge he can be stopped.
Part of the result of this is also all the open driving lanes Creighton got today. Not saying it doesn't cause problems to faceguard Wragge, but I agree with you, if you don't guard him that way its a sure loss, and you can only blame your own execution. The gameplan is out there.
If we want to be a little bush league we could always make Flood a sacrificial lamb.
Send him in to take Doug out of the game.
Quote from: karavotsos on February 16, 2014, 09:46:07 PM
Part of the result of this is also all the open driving lanes Creighton got today. Not saying it doesn't cause problems to faceguard Wragge, but I agree with you, if you don't guard him that way its a sure loss, and you can only blame your own execution. The gameplan is out there.
I love this quote. Why? We, and Wragge, are willing to concede his offense to a large degree. It's no coincidence that Doug has gone bonkers since Lavin decided that in no way will Wragge beat us. The funny thing is, I agree: you absolutely cannot leave him open, and have no choice but to play a quasi-4 on 4 basketball game. And since there's really nothing we can do about it, we will accept the two or three looks Wragge winds up with instead of the 8 or 9 he was getting.
A friend of mine just told me that Wragge had the best +/- of any player in the game today for CU. So I think CU and their opponents have reached a sort of detente in regards to Ethan - 4 on 4 it has to be, and we will accept the tradeoff.
Naturally, the real question is how to stop Doug. Truthfully I thought there was a high chance we were in deep doo-doo today and that Nova would find the answer since they're terrific athletes, but that was just a virtuoso performance. I must say I am curious as to what Buzz will do because a) I have a lot of respect for him, b) you're at home and c) you have some players that are capable of playing similarly to St. John's.
Wednesday should be a fantastic game. I'm still pinching myself about how my CU rooting efforts are now things like Nova at home followed by Marquette on the road. That'll never get old.
Quote from: karavotsos on February 16, 2014, 09:18:22 PM
I prefer watching a good, aggressive defensive team denying success to a quality offensive team. I thought the St. John's-Creighton game was great. Creighton was fun to watch today as well, but I'm not quite sure that Villanova 'doesn't understand the game.' They simply conceded too much space and didn't play with any force on defense. They started by 'letting McDermott get his' and he took them for 39 on 17 shots.
Creighton is an explosive offensive team, but the height of the game is having two-way players who get stops on a Creighton-like offense and score on the other end. As other people have said, Creighton is not a great defensive team. They put pressure on teams to keep up with them. Take that away and you can win. McDermott had 25 against St. Johns on 18 shots, and he didn't have any points in the last 5 minutes, barely touching the ball. Wragge took 2 shots.
It's not like Creighton is a bunch of basketball geniuses who MU can only beat if we have the good fortune of Creighton missing shots. Play good aggressive defense. Make them miss.
All kinds of ways to skin the cat. I like many forms of basketball, including what you just mentioned as an example. You just don't see Creighton's approach that much anymore, and no I don't think Wisconsin's style is the same. I appreciate good defense as much as anyone, love a fast break style game, etc, etc. I miss the days when MU had 4 or 5 guys that could hit the three...that was fun when we had Diener, Novak, Wade, Bradlee all reigning three's while also able to go inside with Jackson, Merritt or watching DWade or someone else driving.
Wednesday should be a fun game, unfortunately I'm stuck in a conference so I'll have to catch it on DVR. That's a good thing...last two games have been the same scenario.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on February 16, 2014, 09:32:11 PM
If you don't like Nova you must really hate Kansas and Indiana.
I don't think I said I don't like Nova or their style...I just like Creighton's style contrast, especially against a team like that. I happen to like Nova's style, I just like Creighton's better. Many ways to skin the cat. No different than if my football team decides to pass you to death, run you to death, etc. Lots of ways to win.
Now, there are definitely teams that I think try to out-athlete someone that I don't care for. St. John's was like that earlier in the year, now they're actually playing with some basketball acumen and are much more fun to watch. Sometimes it takes a group a little longer to figure it out.
Do I care for IU's style this year...nope. KU's...not really. Style probably isn't the write way to couch it, the execution isn't there and the flow is cumbersome. The lack of 3 point shooters and the spacing makes for ugly viewing. Similar to MU at times. Amazing when a few 3's start to drop how much that makes an offense look better and easier to operate.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on February 16, 2014, 07:45:53 PM
Play Dawson 30 minutes. We need real assists, not basic assists.
You can't get an assist on a possession where you turn the ball over.
We have no chance against creighton. Im calling this a loss early:/
Quote from: Jaysfan on February 16, 2014, 10:12:54 PM
c) you have some players that are capable of playing similarly to St. John's.
Wednesday should be a fantastic game. I'm still pinching myself about how my CU rooting efforts are now things like Nova at home followed by Marquette on the road. That'll never get old.
I don't know if c) is true. St. John's murdered us with their aggression and athleticism. The Creighton-St. John's game was the best conference game I have seen this year. MU has not played at that level. Creighton has played at that level consistently with a bunch of vets who know themselves and one of the NCAA's top all-time scorers. I hope MU is up for the challenge.
Quote from: Dreadman24 on February 16, 2014, 11:04:51 PM
We have no chance against creighton. Im calling this a loss early:/
Do you ever do anything besides call losses?
Gardner is a huge liability in this game. The Jays can run small lineups where literally every player on the floor shoots 33% or better from 3. Whoever Gardner guards will rotate out to the perimeter where DG is not comfortable. He can be exploited, or is very least taken away from the basket which makes rebounding more difficult. I liked what someone else suggested about Gardner face guarding Wragge. His 3 point shot is his entire game...Gardner should be able to take that away.
As for Dougie McBuckets, he is too good. We cannot stop him once he has the ball. So how do we stop him? Keep him from getting the ball. Rack up the pressure on their backcourt. Deny them any easy passes to Doug. Force turnovers. When he does have the ball, throw as many different defenses at him as possible. Keep him off balance. Also, if he is going up for a layup, foul him hard. Make him think before coming inside again.
Chatman is not the best PG. I think attacking him is the key.
Quote from: Dreadman24 on February 16, 2014, 11:04:51 PM
We have no chance against creighton. Im calling this a loss early:/
Look Creighton is a good team but let's look at their big wins away from Omaha:
St. Joseph's 83-79
Nova 96-68
And their losses outside of Omaha:
George Washington
San Diego State
Providence
Saint John's
They can be beaten away from their home court. We have a solid shot for an upset in this game. I still think Nova wins the Big East and Creighton ends up in second. @Marquette, @Xaiver, and @GTown. This will define if Creighton is the best team in the Big East.
McDermont went to High a School with Harrison Barnes in Ames IA. What a team that must have been.
My bold prediction: if we hold them to 67 points this time, we win.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on February 16, 2014, 11:10:07 PM
Do you ever do anything besides call losses?
Dreadman was 9-26 on predictions last season, but he kept trying and can boast that he was spot-on about the Syracuse NCAA game.
Release another dive-bombing bat!
Seriously, this is Derrick's time: defense is his game and this is the moment.
Al once remarked the only thing that kept him in the NBA for a brief time was his ability guard the great Bob Cousy.
Quote from: DoggyDaddy on February 17, 2014, 08:26:31 AM
Release another dive-bombing bat!
Seriously, this is Derrick's time: defense is his game and this is the moment.
Al once remarked the only thing that kept him in the NBA for a brief time was his ability guard the great Bob Cousy.
Derrick's just not big enough.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on February 16, 2014, 07:45:53 PM
Play Dawson 30 minutes. We need real assists, not basic assists.
LOL!!!!!
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on February 16, 2014, 10:38:26 PM
I don't think I said I don't like Nova or their style...I just like Creighton's style contrast, especially against a team like that. I happen to like Nova's style, I just like Creighton's better. Many ways to skin the cat. No different than if my football team decides to pass you to death, run you to death, etc. Lots of ways to win.
Now, there are definitely teams that I think try to out-athlete someone that I don't care for. St. John's was like that earlier in the year, now they're actually playing with some basketball acumen and are much more fun to watch. Sometimes it takes a group a little longer to figure it out.
Do I care for IU's style this year...nope. KU's...not really. Style probably isn't the write way to couch it, the execution isn't there and the flow is cumbersome. The lack of 3 point shooters and the spacing makes for ugly viewing. Similar to MU at times. Amazing when a few 3's start to drop how much that makes an offense look better and easier to operate.
the whole "out-athlete" someone...is that like the MSU teams with cleeves that ran off of makes, and the cuse teams that are recruited to be extremely lengthy, or the quickness that louisville desires for their defensive scheme? i have no respect for creighton's sytle or bo's style. in my opinion it's the best creighton can do, and in bo's case, it almost ensures a good team (never a great one). i laughed when the announcers doing the UW-UM game yesterday stated bo was the only coach they've ever seen work on fundamentals this late in the season. good old bo...keep stressing the fundamentals and flaming out in the NCAA. bo is the greatest gift to MU basketball...to have a coach in the same state successful enough not to ever have to worry about loosing his job, but yet running a system that most top recruits aren't interested in makes it easier for buzz. every march/april creighton will miss a few too many threes, and WI will have to deal with the "out-athlete" issue.
in bo's case...an offense that is 121st in scoring and 30th in points allowed interesting. that st. john's team you ripped for not knowing how to play ball is holding opponents to a 40.5% shooting (54th in the nation...MU sits at 55), while UW sits at 115. UW's system is all about their offense, and when it struggles (or when they put up shots too quickly), they are screwed because they don't have the athletes to play defense. it was great to watch UW come out scoring big numbers this year...everyone knew bo couldn't let them play that way all year because they don't have the defense to back up a poor shooting night in a mild-tempo game...let alone an up-tempo game. so the crazy thing is those solid fundamental boys from UW that everyone thinks understand the game so well...they don't play defense that well, and i'm not sure how people defend that as the "pure" style of old-school fundamental basketball. it's a simple game of numbers that ensures a limited level of success.
Quote from: downtown85 on February 17, 2014, 04:33:13 AM
My bold prediction: if we hold them to 67 points this time, we win.
In the first half?
Quote from: 4everwarriors on February 17, 2014, 08:59:38 AM
In the first half?
No. In the game. We held them to 67 in the game in Omaha earlier this season. Doable in the BC in my opinion.
How's sunny FL, BTW?
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on February 16, 2014, 11:10:07 PM
Do you ever do anything besides call losses?
The real question is why do you not have him on ignore yet?
Quote from: esard2011 on February 17, 2014, 09:17:11 AM
The real question is why do you not have him on ignore yet?
He's "dreading" having to do that.
Quote from: avid1010 on February 17, 2014, 08:56:02 AM
the whole "out-athlete" someone...is that like the MSU teams with cleeves that ran off of makes, and the cuse teams that are recruited to be extremely lengthy, or the quickness that louisville desires for their defensive scheme? i have no respect for creighton's sytle or bo's style. in my opinion it's the best creighton can do, and in bo's case, it almost ensures a good team (never a great one). i laughed when the announcers doing the UW-UM game yesterday stated bo was the only coach they've ever seen work on fundamentals this late in the season. good old bo...keep stressing the fundamentals and flaming out in the NCAA. bo is the greatest gift to MU basketball...to have a coach in the same state successful enough not to ever have to worry about loosing his job, but yet running a system that most top recruits aren't interested in makes it easier for buzz. every march/april creighton will miss a few too many threes, and WI will have to deal with the "out-athlete" issue.
in bo's case...an offense that is 121st in scoring and 30th in points allowed interesting. that st. john's team you ripped for not knowing how to play ball is holding opponents to a 40.5% shooting (54th in the nation...MU sits at 55), while UW sits at 115. UW's system is all about their offense, and when it struggles (or when they put up shots too quickly), they are screwed because they don't have the athletes to play defense. it was great to watch UW come out scoring big numbers this year...everyone knew bo couldn't let them play that way all year because they don't have the defense to back up a poor shooting night in a mild-tempo game...let alone an up-tempo game. so the crazy thing is those solid fundamental boys from UW that everyone thinks understand the game so well...they don't play defense that well, and i'm not sure how people defend that as the "pure" style of old-school fundamental basketball. it's a simple game of numbers that ensures a limited level of success.
You know, I love MU Basketball and do not like UW Bball at all. I do not like Ryan either, but it does get tiring to hear all the BS criticizing him. The guy has a .725 career win % playing in one of the best conferences in the US. And that is over about 15 years or so. I think we could all wish that we had a coach with that type of career record. This is not meant to compare Bo to Buzz, and I am sure there will be the slurpers that throw the insults, but you have to respect what Ryan does with the talent he gets. I like Buzz, but people who trash Bo just do not recognize good coaching. And I can't stand Boeheim or Pitino either, but all are great coaches and should be recognized for what they have accomplished. Except when we play their teams, then it is appropriate to trash all we want.
They're legendary, hey?
Quote from: esard2011 on February 17, 2014, 09:17:11 AM
The real question is why do you not have him on ignore yet?
Meh, I like to know what the pundits are saying.
Quote from: downtown85 on February 17, 2014, 09:14:55 AM
No. In the game. We held them to 67 in the game in Omaha earlier this season. Doable in the BC in my opinion.
Only problem was they scored 67 and still destroyed us. Look, McBuckets is going to get his points, he is just an outstanding player.
We can win this game if we are able to make three's like we did Saturday. If the treys are not falling then it will be a very tough game to win. Can't trade treys for twos with them. If JT can get it going again, I think we take them.
It is what it is. But contrary to what u guys may believe I hope im wrong
Quote from: willie warrior on February 17, 2014, 09:41:41 AM
You know, I love MU Basketball and do not like UW Bball at all. I do not like Ryan either, but it does get tiring to hear all the BS criticizing him. The guy has a .725 career win % playing in one of the best conferences in the US. And that is over about 15 years or so. I think we could all wish that we had a coach with that type of career record. This is not meant to compare Bo to Buzz, and I am sure there will be the slurpers that throw the insults, but you have to respect what Ryan does with the talent he gets. I like Buzz, but people who trash Bo just do not recognize good coaching. And I can't stand Boeheim or Pitino either, but all are great coaches and should be recognized for what they have accomplished. Except when we play their teams, then it is appropriate to trash all we want.
I think Bo is a very good coach. And I can see why he was extremely successful at the D3 level, and why he has won 70+% of his games at UW. That being said, as avid points out, there is always going to be a cap on their progress. Until he can recruit better...and until he stops relying on the outside shot so much...UW will get beat somewhere and pretty much the same way it always gets beat.
Quote from: willie warrior on February 17, 2014, 09:41:41 AM
You know, I love MU Basketball and do not like UW Bball at all. I do not like Ryan either, but it does get tiring to hear all the BS criticizing him. The guy has a .725 career win % playing in one of the best conferences in the US. And that is over about 15 years or so. I think we could all wish that we had a coach with that type of career record. This is not meant to compare Bo to Buzz, and I am sure there will be the slurpers that throw the insults, but you have to respect what Ryan does with the talent he gets. I like Buzz, but people who trash Bo just do not recognize good coaching. And I can't stand Boeheim or Pitino either, but all are great coaches and should be recognized for what they have accomplished. Except when we play their teams, then it is appropriate to trash all we want.
but that's my point. boeheim and pitino have been to final fours and have rings. that talent that bo gets IS the talent that bo gets...that's a huge part of college basketball coaching that you're failing to acknowledge it correlates directly to the style of ball you plan. i think buzz could do the same things bo is doing, but then you have to realize you're not going to be able to recruit top talent because most kids don't want to play in that system. i wouldn't be at all interested in having bo at marquette. i think you trade a .725% win % for the ability to ever have an elite team. dick bennett teams played defense, and he went to a final four with his approach in a relatively short period of time. my point is that over 15 years we have seen a very complete picture of what bo's system does. it breeds consistency in all areas of the game, and they are consistently a good team...never a great team.
no one is saying bo's a bad coach. i'm simply arguing that his teams don't play great defense...the lack of athleticism keeps them from ever being a great team, and that after 15 years if he hasn't managed to get one of those teams that wins .725 % of their games into a deep ncaa run, i'm not sure it'll ever happen. i think there are clear trade-offs for the consistency gained through his system. it's amazing that with that win %, in the "best conference in the US," leading to many low seeds in the ncaa, he's never been able to get a final four let alone championship. now you can argue that what his output is up to expectation for what UW should have in a bball program, but that would fly in the face of many of the demands you post regarding MU and buzz.
Quote from: avid1010 on February 17, 2014, 11:44:25 AM
no one is saying bo's a bad coach. i'm simply arguing that his teams don't play great defense...the lack of athleticism keeps them from ever being a great team, and that after 15 years if he hasn't managed to get one of those teams that wins .725 % of their games into a deep ncaa run, i'm not sure it'll ever happen. i think there are clear trade-offs for the consistency gained through his system. it's amazing that with that win %, in the "best conference in the US," leading to many low seeds in the ncaa, he's never been able to get a final four let alone championship.
I think it is in that program to get to a Final Four. He does have athletes they are just not Top 50 type athletes. They will not ever win a NCAA title but think how many coaches/programs you can say that about?
I would not be surprised if before Bo retires they get a Final Four. However, I will not be surprised if they are a #2 seed and lose in the second round either.
Quote from: MarquetteDano on February 17, 2014, 11:56:21 AM
I think it is in that program to get to a Final Four. He does have athletes they are just not Top 50 type athletes. They will not ever win a NCAA title but think how many coaches/programs you can say that about?
I would not be surprised if before Bo retires they get a Final Four. However, I will not be surprised if they are a #2 seed and lose in the second round either.
i get that...i just think you also have to acknowledge the whole picture. how many teams have posted a winning percentage as good as bo's, over such an extended period of time, in a power conference, yet failed to ever make a final four. i'm not a stat junky, but i know it was well documented for a while that they had never beat a team with a lower seed. i'm not sure how many teams in power conferences have that kind of a winning %, but never make a final four. it would be interesting for a stat junky to pull the data. i can't think of another program in the B10 that would fit that bill over the last 15 years other than WI.
Quote from: avid1010 on February 17, 2014, 12:04:48 PM
i get that...i just think you also have to acknowledge the whole picture. how many teams have posted a winning percentage as good as bo's, over such an extended period of time, in a power conference, yet failed to ever make a final four. i'm not a stat junky, but i know it was well documented for a while that they had never beat a team with a lower seed. i'm not sure how many teams in power conferences have that kind of a winning %, but never make a final four. it would be interesting for a stat junky to pull the data. i can't think of another program in the B10 that would fit that bill over the last 15 years other than WI.
So few have had that kind of percentage that I would have to think the rest have all made Final Fours.
Quote from: MarquetteDano on February 17, 2014, 12:11:42 PM
So few have had that kind of percentage that I would have to think the rest have all made Final Fours.
so then my question...bad luck...or the limitation of his system? not saying it's not a heck of a lot better than most...just an anomaly when compared to like programs. with the seeds and consistency they've had over the last 15 years it shocks me that they haven't had dumb luck get them to the FF one time. hell, even crean did it :-)
Quote from: downtown85 on February 17, 2014, 04:33:13 AM
My bold prediction: if we hold them to 67 points this time, we win.
I agree. I think we are going to score enough. It's about holding them down.
I also think if Jake can find a way to get a clear advantage in the 3 point contest on Wragge were looking good as well.
Quote from: avid1010 on February 17, 2014, 11:44:25 AM
but that's my point. boeheim and pitino have been to final fours and have rings. that talent that bo gets IS the talent that bo gets...that's a huge part of college basketball coaching that you're failing to acknowledge it correlates directly to the style of ball you plan. i think buzz could do the same things bo is doing, but then you have to realize you're not going to be able to recruit top talent because most kids don't want to play in that system. i wouldn't be at all interested in having bo at marquette. i think you trade a .725% win % for the ability to ever have an elite team. dick bennett teams played defense, and he went to a final four with his approach in a relatively short period of time. my point is that over 15 years we have seen a very complete picture of what bo's system does. it breeds consistency in all areas of the game, and they are consistently a good team...never a great team.
no one is saying bo's a bad coach. i'm simply arguing that his teams don't play great defense...the lack of athleticism keeps them from ever being a great team, and that after 15 years if he hasn't managed to get one of those teams that wins .725 % of their games into a deep ncaa run, i'm not sure it'll ever happen. i think there are clear trade-offs for the consistency gained through his system. it's amazing that with that win %, in the "best conference in the US," leading to many low seeds in the ncaa, he's never been able to get a final four let alone championship. now you can argue that what his output is up to expectation for what UW should have in a bball program, but that would fly in the face of many of the demands you post regarding MU and buzz.
Bo has also been to a final 4--just no ring. While the ring sure helps, it does not dictate somebody's rep as a very good coach. Not defending Bo, but you cannot snarl at his career results, and denigrate the guy.
If Anderson starts you put him on McBuckets. Then after he is torched, you move either Ja. Wilson or Mayo on him. Plenty of options. Lots of posters on this board think Ja. Wilson, Mayo and Jake are good defenders, so they all can take turns. Hell, put Burton in there to muscle the guy also. One of those guys face guards Wragge on the perimeter. Ox stays down low with Otule when they are playing.
Quote from: willie warrior on February 17, 2014, 01:56:49 PM
Bo has also been to a final 4--just no ring. While the ring sure helps, it does not dictate somebody's rep as a very good coach. Not defending Bo, but you cannot snarl at his career results, and denigrate the guy.
bo's never been to a final four...as a D1 coach
which is interesting because you very often say you have higher expectations from MU, demand this and that of buzz, etc... bo has a 4% better winning percentage than buzz, and in 12 years has 4 sweet 16's and 1 elite eight. doesn't make buzz's 2 sweet 16's and 1 elite eight in five years look to shabby.
no one is ripping the guy (although i fully believe he's an egotistical a$$)...i'm just stating that for him to have the record he does in the B10 over the last 12 years and never make a FF run is an anomaly compared to his like peers (of which there are admittedly not many).
Quote from: avid1010 on February 17, 2014, 03:05:23 PM
bo's never been to a final four...as a D1 coach
which is interesting because you very often say you have higher expectations from MU, demand this and that of buzz, etc... bo has a 4% better winning percentage than buzz, and in 12 years has 4 sweet 16's and 1 elite eight. doesn't make buzz's 2 sweet 16's and 1 elite eight in five years look to shabby.
no one is ripping the guy (although i fully believe he's an egotistical a$$)...i'm just stating that for him to have the record he does in the B10 over the last 12 years and never make a FF run is an anomaly compared to his like peers (of which there are admittedly not many).
Ok, I stand corrected, UW made the final 4 the year before Bo arrived. I did not look it up previously. Reading is fundamental. If you read my posts, you would have observed that I said I was not comparing Ryan to Buzz. You just made that leap in your zealousness to criticize. And you said no one is ripping the guy. EL wrongo. m
Many on this board rip him all the time. They cannot stand him just like you. I don't like the guy either. he has made the dance all 12 of his years and will again this year. That is impressive. Now you made the statement that he has not made the final 4 run in 12 years. He did make the Elite 8 once--is that not a run? So why is that unusual? Buzz has 7 years coaching experience, one at UNO and has not made the Final 4 run either. Is that an analomy for him?
My only point was that the constant ripping of him--as you just did is not justified, IMO. But to each his own.
Quote from: willie warrior on February 17, 2014, 04:31:43 PM
Ok, I stand corrected, UW made the final 4 the year before Bo arrived. I did not look it up previously. Reading is fundamental. If you read my posts, you would have observed that I said I was not comparing Ryan to Buzz. You just made that leap in your zealousness to criticize. And you said no one is ripping the guy. EL wrongo. m
Many on this board rip him all the time. They cannot stand him just like you. I don't like the guy either. he has made the dance all 12 of his years and will again this year. That is impressive. Now you made the statement that he has not made the final 4 run in 12 years. He did make the Elite 8 once--is that not a run? So why is that unusual? Buzz has 7 years coaching experience, one at UNO and has not made the Final 4 run either. Is that an analomy for him?
My only point was that the constant ripping of him--as you just did is not justified, IMO. But to each his own.
no one ripped bo in this thread. i compared past statements you made about buzz to your defense of bo, and pointed out your hypocrisy. making an elite 8 run is not making a final four run. you demand better than elite 8 from buzz, yet defend an elite 8 run by bo. you want to add UNO to buzz's coaching experience, yet don't do so with bo's. time and time again you have demanded more from buzz, yet he's on pace to exceed the ncaa success of bo.
i do believe it's an anomaly (not analomy) to see a coach so successful in a major conference fail to reach the final four. feel free to prove me wrong by naming other coaches that have won their conference and have had as much success as bo without making a final four. that's all i was getting at in this post...until you chimed in.
Quote from: willie warrior on February 17, 2014, 04:31:43 PM
Ok, I stand corrected, UW made the final 4 the year before Bo arrived. I did not look it up previously. Reading is fundamental. If you read my posts, you would have observed that I said I was not comparing Ryan to Buzz. You just made that leap in your zealousness to criticize. And you said no one is ripping the guy. EL wrongo. m
Many on this board rip him all the time. They cannot stand him just like you. I don't like the guy either. he has made the dance all 12 of his years and will again this year. That is impressive. Now you made the statement that he has not made the final 4 run in 12 years. He did make the Elite 8 once--is that not a run? So why is that unusual? Buzz has 7 years coaching experience, one at UNO and has not made the Final 4 run either. Is that an analomy for him?
My only point was that the constant ripping of him--as you just did is not justified, IMO. But to each his own.
I don't think it's very fair to include UNO in the comparison of Buzz and Bo I mean we don't include UWM in the comparison. Just compare what they did at MU and UW respectively.
Quote from: avid1010 on February 17, 2014, 05:52:49 PM
no one ripped bo in this thread. i compared past statements you made about buzz to your defense of bo, and pointed out your hypocrisy. making an elite 8 run is not making a final four run. you demand better than elite 8 from buzz, yet defend an elite 8 run by bo. you want to add UNO to buzz's coaching experience, yet don't do so with bo's. time and time again you have demanded more from buzz, yet he's on pace to exceed the ncaa success of bo.
i do believe it's an anomaly (not analomy) to see a coach so successful in a major conference fail to reach the final four. feel free to prove me wrong by naming other coaches that have won their conference and have had as much success as bo without making a final four. that's all i was getting at in this post...until you chimed in.
OK_ I feel free--Your Boy Buzz--who you just compared favorably to Bo. And you, as well as many others are ripping Bo.
Quote from: DoggyDaddy on February 17, 2014, 08:26:31 AM
Al once remarked the only thing that kept him in the NBA for a brief time was his ability guard the great Bob Cousy.
You left out the punch line. Al said he was able to guard Bob Cousy for 6 fouls...
Quote from: willie warrior on February 17, 2014, 06:42:33 PM
OK_ I feel free--Your Boy Buzz--who you just compared favorably to Bo. And you, as well as many others are ripping Bo.
coming from a guy who thinks bo went to a final four...
haven't found a coach that has as much "regular" season success as bo without a final four appearance have you? does it piss you off that buzz in on track to have more post season success than bo?
he loosely recruited me while at UWM just because i was a freshman playing varsity (never good enough to play d1), but i have plenty of close friends that played for him at uw-p and uwm. i think he's an a$$, but a heck of a coach. many have tried and failed to copy his system, but i still feel his system has limitations.
like i said...feel free to name a coach with as much conference success and as little post season success. there's a reason many uw alum are grumbling about his inability to take the program to the next level. i think it works out nicely for mu.
Ryan is 16-12 in the NCAA Tournament for DI. DIII he's off the charts, a few titles, etc.
Ryan is in for sure this year, hopefully Buzz can get his team in this year.
Quote from: avid1010 on February 17, 2014, 09:06:37 PM
coming from a guy who thinks bo went to a final four...
haven't found a coach that has as much "regular" season success as bo without a final four appearance have you? does it piss you off that buzz in on track to have more post season success than bo?
he loosely recruited me while at UWM just because i was a freshman playing varsity (never good enough to play d1), but i have plenty of close friends that played for him at uw-p and uwm. i think he's an a$$, but a heck of a coach. many have tried and failed to copy his system, but i still feel his system has limitations.
like i said...feel free to name a coach with as much conference success and as little post season success. there's a reason many uw alum are grumbling about his inability to take the program to the next level. i think it works out nicely for mu.
I just did, Mr. "Loosely Recruited" which makes you an expert. Three or 4 sweet 16's and an elite 8 and 12 straight years in the dance is more than "a little post season success". And it does not piss me off if Buzz has more post season success than Bo. After all--you are the guy that says I demand it--so why would that piss me off? And I said I stood corrected about Bo making the Final 4. So for the record, Buzz does not have more post season success than Bo--you believe he does--great for you. That jury is still out. And for the record, being "loosely recruited" does not make one an expert, except in one's own mind. We do agree on two things, we dislike Bo and you are a legend in your mind.
Well, they haven't coached the same number of seasons, so kind of difficult to compare, but on a percentage basis, Buzz has actually had more success. Just sayin.
Quote from: willie warrior on February 18, 2014, 07:56:55 AM
I just did, Mr. "Loosely Recruited" which makes you an expert. Three or 4 sweet 16's and an elite 8 and 12 straight years in the dance is more than "a little post season success". And it does not piss me off if Buzz has more post season success than Bo. After all--you are the guy that says I demand it--so why would that piss me off? And I said I stood corrected about Bo making the Final 4. So for the record, Buzz does not have more post season success than Bo--you believe he does--great for you. That jury is still out. And for the record, being "loosely recruited" does not make one an expert, except in one's own mind. We do agree on two things, we dislike Bo and you are a legend in your mind.
Willie Warrior: Bo Ryan Slurper.
Quote from: willie warrior on February 18, 2014, 07:56:55 AM
I just did, Mr. "Loosely Recruited" which makes you an expert. Three or 4 sweet 16's and an elite 8 and 12 straight years in the dance is more than "a little post season success". And it does not piss me off if Buzz has more post season success than Bo. After all--you are the guy that says I demand it--so why would that piss me off? And I said I stood corrected about Bo making the Final 4. So for the record, Buzz does not have more post season success than Bo--you believe he does--great for you. That jury is still out. And for the record, being "loosely recruited" does not make one an expert, except in one's own mind. We do agree on two things, we dislike Bo and you are a legend in your mind.
you just did, mr. "bo ryan's been to the final four."
take the number of years into consideration and buzz is projected to have better post season results, yet you have been very harsh on buzz while coming to the defense of bo. interesting.
have you found a coach in this country that has had the regular season success that bo has had, yet failed to ever make a final four?
as far as the "legend in my own mind"...you're an idiot...but i guess you attack the person when you can't defend yourself against the argument.
Quote from: avid1010 on February 18, 2014, 01:30:20 PM
you just did, mr. "bo ryan's been to the final four."
take the number of years into consideration and buzz is projected to have better post season results, yet you have been very harsh on buzz while coming to the defense of bo. interesting.
have you found a coach in this country that has had the regular season success that bo has had, yet failed to ever make a final four?
as far as the "legend in my own mind"...you're an idiot...but i guess you attack the person when you can't defend yourself against the argument.
Yup--knew the name calling would start--and I have defended myself--you asked me to name somebody--I did--Buzz. Take your number of years projected to the speculation pile, because you can't use it. Buzz has been a HC for 7 years. When you don't like somebody else's argument--start the hollering and name calling--like you do. And when you scream idiot--look in the mirror--Einstein!. You sir, are on permanent ignore.
Quote from: willie warrior on February 18, 2014, 01:47:03 PM
Yup--knew the name calling would start--and I have defended myself--you asked me to name somebody--I did--Buzz. Take your number of years projected to the speculation pile, because you can't use it. Buzz has been a HC for 7 years. When you don't like somebody else's argument--start the hollering and name calling--like you do. And when you scream idiot--look in the mirror--Einstein!. You sir, are on permanent ignore.
damn...you win...again!