Ohio Basketball Topic
Topic: Hungry?
Page: 2 of 2
GoCats105
General User
GC105
Member Since: 1/31/2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Post Count: 7,823
person
mail
GoCats105
mail
Posted: 3/29/2013 7:25 AM
mf279801 wrote:expand_more
I had the same thought/concern when we seemed slow out of the gate for our first several games against easy opposition this year...


Huh?  We came out like gangbusters, winning our first five games by an average margin of 25 points.  The only lackluster effort until the Robert Morris game was against Hampton.   Then we got punched in the mouth and never really recovered our swagger.


Yes, we won our first five games by an average of 25 points, and in each of those games it seemed like we started slow and sloppy, not going out there and playing with great passion until the game got underway:

Portland - 1-point game at the 10-minute mark, tied at the half, up 15 at the 30minute mark
UNC Wilmington - Checking the box score, we came out on fire and never looked back
Wofford - Tied/1-point game for the first 9 minutes, then we took off
Hampton - We trailed by 1 13.5 minutes into the game before taking off
Richmond - We went up 2-0 and didn't lead again until there were 4.5 minutes left in the 1st half, didn't take the lead for good until about the 14 minute mark in the 2nd half.

So yes, I'd say that with one exception we started our first few games slow.


Sooooo...because they were tied to Portland in the first game of the season at halftime that means we came out slow? It was the first game of the season! I don't think anyone was expecting Ohio to lead 33-6 at half. If you remember correctly, we destroyed them in the second half. That win was a great way to start and I was not disappointed at all.
Casper71
General User
C71
Member Since: 12/1/2006
Post Count: 3,237
person
mail
Casper71
mail
Posted: 3/29/2013 9:56 AM
Hey, most all of us have been critical of this team and the coaches for something this entire year.  But give me a break...they still won 14 league games.  They went to the MACC game.  Statistically, there were lots of improvements (other than 3 point defense).  All in all, we had the target on our back all year and came out ok (other than OOC).  Bottom line is this group was solid but not as spectacular or lucky this year as they had been in years past.  I don't see blaming the coach OR the players for anything.  And, I do think that every year stands on it's own.  Getting to one Sweet 16 does not guarantee anything the next year.

Having said all that, I do believe the JC coaches differently than JG.  Is that good or bad?  I'll tell you my opinion in two or three more years!  As for this year, it's probably graded out as a B.
OrlandoCat
General User
OC
Member Since: 3/15/2005
Post Count: 355
person
mail
OrlandoCat
mail
Posted: 3/29/2013 10:24 AM
Recovering Journalist wrote:expand_more
How did the NCAA Tournament became an Ohio birthright after two aberrant runs? Those three tourney wins defied all measures of the regular seasons they followed. Neither the 2010 team nor the 2012 team won the MAC in the regular season. They both had middling RPIs and mediocre KenPom ratings. Neither had a true signature win until the tournament.

The only difference between making the tournament and not making it was the fact that Akron improved enough win all three match-ups. Just like the only thing that allowed us to even make the tournament was an OT win in 2010 and a missed jumper in 2012.


Here's what makes me nervous about the JC hire.  I think he will be a great MAC coach, his record at Kent State proves that before he even steped into the Convo - but we need/want to be more then just great in the MAC.   JC will win the MAC by playing the same game that the 'big 6' play, but with players that didn't make thoes teams.  For a team like Ohio, you have to play a different, more athletic style of ball, and rely on the 3 to keep you in it (see us last year, FGCU this year).  Since this appears to be Coach Groce's style, I think you'll see him struggle to finish better than 4th year in and year out in the Big 10, but always get hot in March and make a good run in the NCAA every couple years.

So yes, I do believe that we will consistantly be one of the top teams in the MAC for however long JC decideds to stay here, but, I don't believe that we will ever be a threat in March, we're not going to beat them at thier game (see Akron any year they made the NCAA's).

For what it's worth, I'd take a MAC tournament banner and couple wins in the NCAA every 2 - 3 years over consecutive MAC regular season titles, and first round losses in the NCAA when/if we get there.  I think if we're honest, most people will say the same.  Who won the MAC regular season last year?  It doesn't matter - we made the sweet 16.

Like it or not folks, regular season MAC titles mean next to nil for raising our national profile, which I think is what we're looking for when we talk 'next level.'

The next level to me is getting out of the MAC.  We'll never be more then what we are untill we do.  We don't need to dominate here to get out (Kent state basketball would have been gone already if just winning was all you needed to do), we just need to be marketable, and I do think we're almost there on that front.
Last Edited: 3/29/2013 10:33:25 AM by OrlandoCat
mf279801
General User
M279801
Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Newark, DE
Post Count: 2,486
person
mail
mf279801
mail
Posted: 3/29/2013 10:28 AM
GoCats105 wrote:expand_more
I had the same thought/concern when we seemed slow out of the gate for our first several games against easy opposition this year...


Huh?  We came out like gangbusters, winning our first five games by an average margin of 25 points.  The only lackluster effort until the Robert Morris game was against Hampton.   Then we got punched in the mouth and never really recovered our swagger.


Yes, we won our first five games by an average of 25 points, and in each of those games it seemed like we started slow and sloppy, not going out there and playing with great passion until the game got underway:

Portland - 1-point game at the 10-minute mark, tied at the half, up 15 at the 30minute mark
UNC Wilmington - Checking the box score, we came out on fire and never looked back
Wofford - Tied/1-point game for the first 9 minutes, then we took off
Hampton - We trailed by 1 13.5 minutes into the game before taking off
Richmond - We went up 2-0 and didn't lead again until there were 4.5 minutes left in the 1st half, didn't take the lead for good until about the 14 minute mark in the 2nd half.

So yes, I'd say that with one exception we started our first few games slow.


Sooooo...because they were tied to Portland in the first game of the season at halftime that means we came out slow? It was the first game of the season! I don't think anyone was expecting Ohio to lead 33-6 at half. If you remember correctly, we destroyed them in the second half. That win was a great way to start and I was not disappointed at all.


Oh my GOD, I said I had a concern at the start of the year with how we were starting our games, not that I was disappointed in the results. I like how you mention portland and say nothing about the other 3 games on that list where we started slow. And how, exactly, did the slow-start strategy work for us against Bobby Mo?

Lets be clear, I think we had a good season (it could have ended better, but those are the breaks).
Last Edited: 3/29/2013 10:30:28 AM by mf279801
Monroe Slavin
General User
MS
Member Since: 12/21/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121
person
mail
Monroe Slavin
mail
Posted: 4/7/2013 3:15 AM
I still blame our theoretical power forward.  The oppo didn't hardly have to defend that position.  It took itself largely out of the game, out of meaning.  Significantly allowing opposition to concentrate more on our other players.

And that position allowed many key breakdowns on defense.

It just worked out poorly for the team.


Also, I'm plenty ready to argue with anyone who thinks that "cuse, WichState, Michigan and Louisville are not the four top teams.  Those teams played at a really top level today.  They were in the Final Four for a reason:  they are the best.  Really excellent teams.

In fact, they have so many good players that they made the floor seem smaller than in the prior rounds of the tournament.  Just wasn't much room to operate because the defense was so tough.  And what tough battles for rebounds.  Guys really pounding the boards.
cc-cat
General User
C
Member Since: 4/5/2006
Location: matthews, NC
Post Count: 4,016
person
mail
cc-cat
mail
Posted: 4/7/2013 11:28 AM
OrlandoCat wrote:expand_more
Here's what makes me nervous about the JC hire.  I think he will be a great MAC coach, his record at Kent State proves that before he even steped into the Convo - but we need/want to be more then just great in the MAC.   JC will win the MAC by playing the same game that the 'big 6' play, but with players that didn't make thoes teams.  For a team like Ohio, you have to play a different, more athletic style of ball, and rely on the 3 to keep you in it (see us last year, FGCU this year).

or get those "big 6" players and development them - ala Trent, Devereau, etc.

OrlandoCat wrote:expand_more
Since this appears to be Coach Groce's style, I think you'll see him struggle to finish better than 4th year in and year out in the Big 10, but always get hot in March and make a good run in the NCAA every couple years.

Why?  Ohio didn't always get hot

OrlandoCat wrote:expand_more
So yes, I do believe that we will consistantly be one of the top teams in the MAC for however long JC decideds to stay here, but, I don't believe that we will ever be a threat in March, we're not going to beat them at thier game (see Akron any year they made the NCAA's).


This is the debate.  It is all speculation right now. 
Last Edited: 4/7/2013 11:29:30 AM by cc-cat
Showing Messages: 26 - 31 of 31
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)