Hanging behind the three point line doesn't get you suspended twice.

I'm talking about on the court.

Sorry, I’m not really a basketball guy so you’re right I have no basketball IQ. But hear me out here, right now we are next to last in the “horrible” MAC with a 2-5 record, only Ball is worse at 1-4. So as bad as the MAC is, we’re next to last. The last 2 years we were 5-2 and 4-3 at this juncture. Including the MAC tourney we finished 20-13 and 19-14. Is this what we expect for Ohio basketball? I expect us to get better and make the MAC tourney, but we have a very long wa to go.

This. At the end of the day, this is Boals ball and his roster. It's position-less with a heavy emphasis on 3PT shooting. Like SBH said, for better or worse.

I tend to lean towards the latter, since it's glaring we need guys in the paint who aren't the prototypical Boals player. Even Kuany and Evans who have size, also have the ability hit the 3. I'm not sure Boals is looking at a kid at this point if he can't to some extent.

Just look at our recruiting tab on here. There's only two total "bigs" on the first page we offered for 2025 in Scantlebury and Alan Gballou. Our current class consists of more (bigger) wings/guards. Mosley is the closest thing to potential post player by default given he's 6'7. That's it. Doesn't exactly solve anything for next season.

It's not an NIL issue, this how Boals prefers to build his roster. The Myles Fosters of the portal world cost a premium, but we don't need that. We need guys who man the paint, crash boards, and can be disruptive on defense. A slash of 5-6ppg, 5-8rpg, and 1-2bpg. You know why that doesn't cost $200K? Because that's currently our old friend Seth Towns. 6ppg/7rpg/1.5bpg.

Players with this skill-set are littered throughout the landscape from HS, JUCO, D2, and D3. I really just don't think Boals is looking at them because it's not his style. It's almost like he's trying to outsmart the basketball world with his position-less preference and 3pt shooting, while neglecting rebounding and physical play.

It reminds me a lot of Bengals and how Zac Taylor has built his team. The Bengals have been dubbed as a Pac12 team trying to play in Big10. All Finesse and no physicality. That's pretty much our brand of basketball.

We lost this game to a smaller, scrappier, harder working team. PERIOD!
Live by the 3 die by the 3. PERIOD!




GO BOBCATS

Yet Ohio is the 4th ranked team in KenPom in the MAC because they have tested themselves against similar competition while many MAC teams schedule cupcakes. Ohio is 178th in KenPom and there's eight MAC teams below 200.

That's obviously not the expectation for this team and we shouldn't be content with it but we should also realize we're a mid-major and we're not always going to live up to our expectations. I thought this could be a Top 100 team before the season as did many coaches and experts but they're clearly not.

As you get more evidence, you need to adjust your expectations. This will be a good team in the MAC but they're not going to be a top tier mid-major.

They'll be fine and people that pay attention to the metrics realize that. At one point last year, OU lost 7 of 9 games during the middle of the season and people were complaining... Guess what? The metrics said they were going to be solid in the MAC and they were. It's going to be a similar case this year.

I agree that Boals should target scrappy, athletic bigs that can rebound and creat havoc even if they can't score. I'm disappointed that we've lacked those type of players on the roster. Just adding one guy like that could make a difference.

I don't have an issue with Boals coaching philosophy. He's won a lot of games at the D1 level and a lot of schools have implemented similar strategies. On paper, it looked like it could be successful this year.

Positionless basketball is something a lot of good mid-majors have done in recent years. In theory, stacking up on guards and shooters is a good thing at this level but they need to shoot better than what they're doing.

If you can't hit your open threes, you're gonna be in for a lot of long nights when you can't defend or rebound. Another issue is that you can get by with a lack of size if you can pressure and create turnovers which Ohio can do at times but not nearly enough on a consistent basis.

On your first point, you are correct in saying that follow your shot is not really taught anymore, especially at the college and professional levels and probably most high school programs. For the exact reason you mentioned later in your post. The risk of getting burned in transition. Most coaches want 2-3 players starting to get back in transition right away after a shot (some more, some less depending on how aggressive the coach is in their rebounding/transition defense thinking), and the easiest way to do this is for the shooter and one or two players to consistently get back. The thinking is that a non-shooting player that can start crashing as the ball is shot is more likely to get an offensive rebound than the shooter that has to land and then build momentum towards the ball. As with any strategy, it doesn't always play out that way, but the thinking is that doing this consistently is the most efficient rebounding/transition defense strategy. And usually the more conservative strategy is employed more often when you play with more guards that aren't going to get many offensive rebounds over big guys that can go get offensive rebounds. In my opinion that is clearly the case with us, because we have fewer guys who could end up with the O-board, we probably opt to get back on defense to protect against easy buckets in transition.

On your second point, yeah it is important to box out. But when you play two big guys that are less athletic, shorter, and not as strong as other teams, along with having two small guards on the court at all times, you can box out however much you want. Sometimes you are going to get out sized to rebounds. I feel like that is the bigger issue with this team. We just don't have the size, length and athleticism to rebound with the teams we've competed with so far. It's not an effort issue, it's a style of play issue. As many others have stated, Boals has clearly chosen to play with more guards and shooting vs athleticism and size. That can benefit you in some ways, but is clearly hurting us in the rebounding battle on both ends. (This is my opinion, I'll be the first to admit I don't spend every possession making sure all 5 guys on the floor are boxing out, so it could be partially and effor issue, I just think size is the bigger issue).

Ohio has been a Top 150 KenPom team the past two years. They’re still battling and competing and were 81st the year they defeated Virginia in the NCAA Tournament. They’ve rarely been a Top 100 team during the past decade.

This is what we are as a program now. A consistently solid MAC school that hopes to make a run in Cleveland every year. Once in a while, we put together a special roster that has the upside of being a little bit better but the rest is fairy tales for the most part. The MAC had some good years when UB was rolling and now the league is struggling again. I doubt we’ll see it return to the heights of the 90’s anytime soon.

OU is still a solid mid-major program and fun to watch. Just a difficult start to the season.

I can handle being 81st and in the tournament. I would rather sit home than be 181st and in the tournament. That's just feels like being patronized. I don't think we are going to end up 181st. We'll figure some things out. But I can't accept this, "at least the MAC is awful now talk". I'd much rather be the 81st best team and finish last than the 181st team and finish first. The former would be better for our long term prospects. I get, "The MAC is awful so we might still win" type of talk but not the, "at least the MAC is awful" talk.

Well, that worked great. We finished 6th in an event where every team is battling the same transfer portal issues. Illinois State and James Madison have the same issues. At some point, you can't use this excuse.

I am all right with Boals offensive strategy. Most of our guys can shoot about 30 to 33% on threes. What I disagree with totally is his defensive strategy. We all know the game has become a three-point shooting contest. Yet we continue to have five guys in the lane doubling and tripling and leave wide open shooters at the arc. Against us, these wide open shooters are hitting their threes. Also, the concept of rebounding. We need a big banger who can rebound and protect the lane. Then we wouldn’t have to do all this double on triple teaming in the lane.