- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 9,343
- Reaction Score
- 23,546
That was the #32 team in the country on KemPom. They were also 29th in adjusted offense and shot 27% from the field against a defense that has begun to look longer and more athletic with every minute Polley and Whaley get under their belt. It's immensely beneficial at any level when every player on the court can contest above the rim, but in college that's especially true. Watch Virginia sometime. Or don't, since their games are brutal. Either way, there is a guy in Tony Bennett who has built a great program by tapping into the marketing inefficiencies that tend to produce players like Whaley and Polley.
I try to remain level-headed after losses, so I can't overreact to a win. A lot of this is just part of the natural variance that you are going to see within a college basketball season and not a sign that we've turned any of corner. Bad teams look good sometimes at home. SMU looked like a reeling, short-handed team that had flown in from Dallas and was cold. I think they're coming off a loss at home to Temple, and without Foster, their tournament hopes are now very much in doubt.
But by the same token I tend to discard the Nova game. We simply aren't ready to compete with that caliber of team and there was no amount of preparation or marketing campaigns that were going to close that gap. We looked like a lower tier SEC team trying to play the Packers - start by working towards Georgia and Alabama and go from there. Providence is a lot better than us and they lost by 20 the other night. The goal should be to be as good as Providence by the end of the year and not Nova.
I think a game like this does pose some questions about Larrier. That's not to say we're a better team without him, but the roles seem more settled without him (although the opposite was true against Memphis) and he has started to assume some Purvis like vibes in that you're not really sure what he is. Is he a pick and pop guy? Is he a defensive ace? Is he a one on one guy who keeps the offense above water? I don't know.
Either way, the best case scenario for this season has always been one where the young guys become contributors and the older guys (I guess I am considering Vital old) begin to look better by extension. This is a bit of a wacky league where SMU can beat Wichita on the road and then lose to Temple at home. Outside of Cincinnati, all of these teams seem just as ADD as us and that gives you a shot at the end of the year in Orlando. If we can make it what we did a couple years ago where it's a partial UConn crowd, that can make a difference. Between Whaley, Polley, and Carlton, the front court is beginning to look competent. It has been a very tender sort of progress, especially when they have the ball in their hands, but that is typically the way it goes with these type of players. All of them look more comfortable and assertive now than they did just a few games ago.
Last thing: give the students credit for continuing to come to these games. It would be very easy to rake them over the coals for being entitled, shallow, self-occupied etc. if things were different, but they're still there providing a real home court advantage despite the fact that this isn't what they signed up for. A lot of these students don't know any better and sometimes that can be a good thing. It's what I've tried to stress to people on this board. It's OK to still enjoy yourself even if the team isn't what we're accustomed to it being and no that doesn't mean you're tolerating mediocrity. Sunday, I think, will be as telling a game as we've played in a while. Those are the type of games, away from home against an opponent in your weight class, without much glamour attached to it, that gauge whether the arrow is up, down, or in neutral.
I try to remain level-headed after losses, so I can't overreact to a win. A lot of this is just part of the natural variance that you are going to see within a college basketball season and not a sign that we've turned any of corner. Bad teams look good sometimes at home. SMU looked like a reeling, short-handed team that had flown in from Dallas and was cold. I think they're coming off a loss at home to Temple, and without Foster, their tournament hopes are now very much in doubt.
But by the same token I tend to discard the Nova game. We simply aren't ready to compete with that caliber of team and there was no amount of preparation or marketing campaigns that were going to close that gap. We looked like a lower tier SEC team trying to play the Packers - start by working towards Georgia and Alabama and go from there. Providence is a lot better than us and they lost by 20 the other night. The goal should be to be as good as Providence by the end of the year and not Nova.
I think a game like this does pose some questions about Larrier. That's not to say we're a better team without him, but the roles seem more settled without him (although the opposite was true against Memphis) and he has started to assume some Purvis like vibes in that you're not really sure what he is. Is he a pick and pop guy? Is he a defensive ace? Is he a one on one guy who keeps the offense above water? I don't know.
Either way, the best case scenario for this season has always been one where the young guys become contributors and the older guys (I guess I am considering Vital old) begin to look better by extension. This is a bit of a wacky league where SMU can beat Wichita on the road and then lose to Temple at home. Outside of Cincinnati, all of these teams seem just as ADD as us and that gives you a shot at the end of the year in Orlando. If we can make it what we did a couple years ago where it's a partial UConn crowd, that can make a difference. Between Whaley, Polley, and Carlton, the front court is beginning to look competent. It has been a very tender sort of progress, especially when they have the ball in their hands, but that is typically the way it goes with these type of players. All of them look more comfortable and assertive now than they did just a few games ago.
Last thing: give the students credit for continuing to come to these games. It would be very easy to rake them over the coals for being entitled, shallow, self-occupied etc. if things were different, but they're still there providing a real home court advantage despite the fact that this isn't what they signed up for. A lot of these students don't know any better and sometimes that can be a good thing. It's what I've tried to stress to people on this board. It's OK to still enjoy yourself even if the team isn't what we're accustomed to it being and no that doesn't mean you're tolerating mediocrity. Sunday, I think, will be as telling a game as we've played in a while. Those are the type of games, away from home against an opponent in your weight class, without much glamour attached to it, that gauge whether the arrow is up, down, or in neutral.
