I was not able to watch game due to family commitments, but I was able to sneak a peak at the score every now and then on my iPhone. I was also able to look at the live stats. Carter was the leading scorer at half, but apparently didn't play a whole lot in the second half. Is he injured? Can someone who actually watched the game tell me if there was more energy than against USF? The final stats say we hit only 16.7 percent of our 3s and 33.9 percent overall. That won't win many games. I'm not in the fire Saul camp yet, but I'm drifting in that direction. Let's see how things go in another venue. Maybe there was just something weird about the court or something. Bad sight lines or something? I'm digging for excuses. If this kind of play continues, I'll join FearLeon's campaign. Frank develops players who get better with experience. Are we seeing that on the basketball court? Seems it may be the opposite. Stay tuned . . . this is a developing story.

We ARE playing without Dartis and Gollon. Then again you have wanted Saul gone for the past 2 years.

What has Saul done during those 2 years? Why is it out of the realm of possibility that Saul has underachieved during those years? Last year we had injuries but several guys who HE recruited who didn't make it. No depth. We never have depth.

LoL .. i can go back to Groce, Hunter, Bandy, even Jim Snyder who recruited guys who didn't make it. So losing Carter was a non-issue? I could go on about others but will quit.

Agreed. Think about the talent of the Sweet 16/DJ Cooper era and compare that to our current squad.

Coop and Co. would win by what, 20? 25? It would be men against boys.

Way too many excuses from you Saul...oops..I mean Jerry86. Pretty sure its within the job requirements of one of the top two paid employees at our fine institution to deduce ways to deal with injuries and adversity. The talent depth on this team is substandard. The player development is substandard. The competitive edge is substandard. The witty post game comments and stupid facial expressions are overtly obnoxious. I have no understanding as to why or how anyone can be satisfied with the lower tier of mediocrity over a sustained period of time. Apologists unite!

Losing guys like Carter is huge but the fact that we have 4 guys sitting on the bench who saw NO time yesterday was disheartening. It means that we are bringing in projects instead of instant impact guys.

Saul is 2-4 in the MAC Tournament and very well below .500 in conference play.

Groce was 9-2 in the MAC Tournament with a pair of championships.

So yeah, they basically are the same.

Do you know who else had 4 guys sitting on the bench who saw NO time yesterday? Pretty much every other team that played unless the game was a blowout.

Agreed - Whatever it is, he doesn't look like the same guy who essentially willed Ohio to a 'W' in Charleston last year at this time. Something is amiss with him.

I'm with you there - in a way. I'm with you in that most teams have 2-3 guys who ride the pine most of the year. I like McMurray, and think most of his lack of PT is simply because of who is ahead of him. Murrell is puzzling to me, as I expected a little more. I had no expectation that James or Springs would get much PT this year though. I'm with you in that "instant impact guys" don't grow on trees, and it would make sense to reflect back on previous coaching staffs to consider whether or not this is all that different. I don't know if it is, or isn't.



While the lack of Dartis and Gollon plays a factor, there's no good reason to lose that one to Loyola. None. They couldn't throw the ball in the ocean, and didn't seem to adapt enough. That was a troubling thing for me as a I watched.

Another troubling thing for me, and it has been for the last 3-4 years, is that there isn't a second defensive look to switch things up. Or if there is, it's not used nearly enough. At the end of the game, with 3 minutes to go, they cranked up the pressure and got results. Why not do that once in awhile throughout the game to change the tempo? I don't care if it's pressure trapping, a zone, or whatever, but a way to change looks defensively is, and has been, needed.

Thanks, Andrew, for the info. I'm glad that it was foul trouble and not another injury.

If I could summarize this team, so far. It's kind of like a "collective Bean." What I meant by that is that back when we had Bean, I used to tell people this team lived by the Bean and died by the Bean, meaning that if Bean was hot from three-land we'd win, if he wasn't we'd lose. This team seems to have a collective Bean mentality: Keep jacking 'em up whether your hot or not, hoping you'll eventually get hot. No change in the game strategy when the threes aren't dropping. Some games "Beaning it" works, some games it doesn't. An oversimplification for sure, but I think there's a grain of truth here.