Four Questions

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Different roster, sure — but it's the mostly the staff running the same system, and the exact same flaws from a 17-28 stretch (ending 24-25 on a 5-8 slide before last year's 12-20 campaign) just showed up again: getting bullied on the glass (41-26), settling for contested jumpers when the half-court offense stalls (35% FG), and the returning core (Nigel 0-for-11, Parham 2-for-13) looking stuck.

We didn't get bullied on the glass. We grabbed 23.4% of our missed shots. They grabbed 29% of their missed shots. Advantage for them but not an overwhelming one by any stretch. Don't confuse getting bullied on the glass with missing a lot of two point shots.

I wouldn't say settling for contested jumpers was the problem either. We shot 36.4% from three, so we were taking good jumpers. It's not being able to hit contested (and uncontested) layups and floaters that was the issue, which was also an issue last season.

I'd also say that the staff isn't running the same system. I haven't picked up all the nuances yet, but a clear difference is that we are crashing the offensive boards a lot more this season while in past seasons we would cheat back in order to prevent run outs (which Michigan thoroughly took advantage of).

Past performance is relevant to evaluating coaching performance. It also has some value on projecting individual player performance. But I'd argue it's next to useless for projecting team performance.

I get why fans are ansty. But I think some patience is warranted before passing judgement on the current season.

[Viper]

What the struggles in the last half of the 25-25 season have absolutely no relevance to this season.

setting context