TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,450
|
Post by TC on Mar 19, 2010 8:09:52 GMT -5
The only stop we got tonight was post-game on our players' Twitter accounts. I really dislike all the Twitter complaints. If you're reading the player's twitter accounts, you are going on to something personal of theirs. Last time I checked, Ohio didn't score 97 points because Greg Monroe was tweeting in the lane instead of playing defense - Twitter is an every day part of life for people in 2010. I like the fact that the players tweet and it was great for finding out that Austin was sick and then getting better, or that finding out the Providence game would happen and that travel problems were resolved. Since the Athletic Department isn't going to offer those sorts of details, it's nice to get them directly.
|
|
jagtrader
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 121
|
Post by jagtrader on Mar 19, 2010 8:26:02 GMT -5
I keep reading about all these deep-rooted flaws the Hoyas have -- lack of leadership, lack of depth, lack of a perimeter defender, lack of intensity, mediocre coach and so on. Did the Hoyas have all these flaws when they were coming within one basket of winning the BET six days ago? It wasn't a perfect team, for sure, but the situation is not as dire or complex as people make it out to be. They were outplayed by a team that played great in a one-and-done situation.
|
|
RDF
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 8,835
|
Post by RDF on Mar 19, 2010 9:13:32 GMT -5
RDF, your III bashing is annoying. Let it go dude. His is our coach and he is a really good one. Something on D is amiss for sure but your love of the glory days when we had no offensive strategy and played great D ain't coming back soon so get used to it. It's "bashing" to bring up the truth? Where did I say he's a "bad coach"? I said he needs to quit making excuses for the lack of defense--and in all honesty I was NICE in regards to what his coaching job has been the past 2 seasons--but then again I also pointed out I think he needs HELP--i.e. NEW ASSISTANTS--which you take as bashing the Head Coach. The REALITY of being a HEAD COACH is: 1. If your team doesn't improve--you will take heat 2. If they flop in NCAA's the coach/team take criticism 3. When the same mistakes in Nov/Dec show up in March--you are not doing a good job. This team: 1. Turns the ball over too much 2. Doesn't defend well--be it team or individually 3. Doesn't make adjustments (Staff related) 4. Can't sustain any positive effort--they get a win and then revert to bad habits from earlier in year. All 4 facets are responsibility of HC. III needs to bring in some people who will help him coach/recruit. His initial staff got results and 2 of them were hired as HC's--you honestly think anyone is going to be beating down Dave Cox and Kenya Hunter's door? Pitt got better the minute Cox left, and Sean Miller missed Hunter about as much as this team plays defense. Being a Head Coach means you are going to get criticized and I think III did a great job last week--the team had their most sustained/best effort all year--and played 4 strong games. Last night was a microcosm of what is WRONG with Georgetown Basketball-and needs to be addressed if they want to improve. To make the "we're a young team" EXCUSE is ridiculous. That is just accepting your plight and you know what-if that's the attitude around here--don't expect improvement to ever take place. Any coach will tell you if you don't protect/value the basketball and don't defend--you will not win anything of importance--and fact it NEVER has improved for 2 years-says a lot. Fact is--his team was talented enough to still win 23 games in spite of this--tells you how good they could be if they would actually address the issues that a HC should've addressed in November/December.
|
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,420
|
Post by the_way on Mar 19, 2010 9:21:28 GMT -5
the 07 teamy was not a great team WHAT? Credibility - shot. It wasn't. Good, not great. JT2's teams in the Final Four were great teams. the 2007 team was a good bunch that overachieved with one great player...Jeff Green. You could argue that the 2006 team was better. We played the eventuall National champs, Florida, tougher than the O7 team played the Ohio STate team that lost to the same Florida team.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Mar 19, 2010 9:29:57 GMT -5
You could argue that.
You'd be wrong, but you could argue it.
Winning 30 games, winning the Big East regular season title, winning the Big East tournament title, going to the Final Four.....yeah, that's not a great team at all.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Mar 19, 2010 9:33:23 GMT -5
I think we are young and lack leadership, outside of Freeman. the problem with the youth argument is that folks don't say it when we win. only when we lose. I think a great point is made about something bigger than yourselves effects your motivation and how you play. But, i'm not sure that was the case with the Hibbert, Wallace, and Green era. JTIII needs guys who are self-motivated. And ultimately, all winning coaches do. Its the type of player that you have. Sure, some coaches can give speeches, but if kids don't want to do it, its no point. When JTIII first got here, he walked into an ideal situation. He had kids who were self-motivated. Hibbert could barely walk and run up and down the court, and he turned himself into an NBA 1st round draft pick. Green had lead his high school team to a state championship. he knew what it meant to be a leader and play in the high-stakes type of environment. Wallace had an uncanny field for the game in terms of running a team and sensing when his team needed him most or when it was good for him to fall back and get others involved. Ewing, Jr. could have played fpr a Division III school. His motor, enthusiasm, and tenacity would not change. Thats the type of kid that he was. Crawford, rarely saw time on the basketball court. Yet, he had the respect of his teammates and they viewed him as a leader and looked to him for leadership. How often do you see that in sports? So yeah, playing for something bigger is all great, but when it comes down to it, kids have to "want it" regardless of the circumstances. All the great competitors compete. They compete just as hard in the big games as they do in pick-up games. Circumstances and external factors mean nothing. The opportunity to compete is the primary, motivating factor. With this group we have....we can light up the stat sheet and box scores, we have the McDonald's All-americans, rivals.com ranked recruits....but where is the "it" factor with this team. That extra "umph" that you can't put your finger on, that makes a team special. I don't see that with this group we have right now. Freeman finally showed some intangibles this year, imo. But other than that, I haven't seen that from Monroe and Wright, our other top players. Maybe another year of experience will change that, maybe it won't. Way, you confuse me with your assertion that Freeman is the only one who has shown any leadership triats on this squad. Granted, he has carried the team for a half on a couple of occasions, and has probably been the most consistent, and I know that leadership does not necessarily manifest itself with screaming and gesturing on the floor, but why in particular do you feel Austin is the only leader on the team?
|
|
RDF
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 8,835
|
Post by RDF on Mar 19, 2010 9:38:34 GMT -5
Freeman was the most consistent guy all season. Little did we know he was playing with Diabetes, but he didn't flinch when things got tough--in fact last night was worst I've seen him this year in regards to body language--he checked out of that game the minute he got his 2nd Foul and his drive to lane didn't fall which made me think his body was failing him. Overall--he was most consistent, toughest player, and did what leaders do--take over the game when team needed. He committed to improving his body, game, and it showed on the court. That is leadership. Freeman is the most composed player this team has currently. His demeanor stays the same if they are up 30 or down 30--and yet his play elevated in most games with last night being the exception.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Mar 19, 2010 9:39:25 GMT -5
I keep reading about all these deep-rooted flaws the Hoyas have -- lack of leadership, lack of depth, lack of a perimeter defender, lack of intensity, mediocre coach and so on. Did the Hoyas have all these flaws when they were coming within one basket of winning the BET six days ago? It wasn't a perfect team, for sure, but the situation is not as dire or complex as people make it out to be. They were outplayed by a team that played great in a one-and-done situation. I agree with most pf your points, but part of the problem with last night is that we weren't simply "outplayed" - we were outhustled, outcoached, and played a team that was ready to play more than we were. I heard numerous commentators after the game, including former players and coaches, state that we came out "flat" and could not get over it. Part of a coach's job is to have his players ready to play every night - and certainly in the first round of the NCAA's. Now the players should be able to get up themselves, but the coach has a part to play as well. No one played that part last night.
|
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,420
|
Post by the_way on Mar 19, 2010 9:43:58 GMT -5
Frazier,
That game @ Louisville said it all for me.
That was an important game for us. We were reeling and needed that game badly.
And what did we do in the 1st half? Lay an egg. The most important game of the year at that point, to determine what direction we were going and in the 1st half we came out flat and lethargic.
2nd half: FREEMAN TOOK OVER, put the team on his back and said with his play, we weren't going out like that and we won the game. Thats stepping up. thats leadership. Rising to the occasion when it matters most. It wasn't just points on a stat sheet that still resulted in a loss.
He saved our season. We lose that game, and we are done for the season, emotionally. We
We taken to the cleaners by Notre Dame at home when Freeman was sick.T hen when he is out with diabetes, who stepped up in his absence for us when we needed it in the WVA game without Freeman? Not Wright. Not Greg. We get demolished. They certainly have talent to do so, or maybe they don't. Maybe they are just complimentary players, although talented. Absence of leadership.
Wright is in his 2nd full year as a starter, and Greg is sophomore so i understand why they can't do this. Freeman is a junior, most experience on the team, and maybe thats why he could.
|
|
cnyhoya
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 399
|
Post by cnyhoya on Mar 19, 2010 9:44:48 GMT -5
I keep reading about all these deep-rooted flaws the Hoyas have -- lack of leadership, lack of depth, lack of a perimeter defender, lack of intensity, mediocre coach and so on. Did the Hoyas have all these flaws when they were coming within one basket of winning the BET six days ago? It wasn't a perfect team, for sure, but the situation is not as dire or complex as people make it out to be. They were outplayed by a team that played great in a one-and-done situation. 1. Ohio is a much less talented team overall. 2. You are indirectly pointing out the one undeniable and defining characteristic of this past year's team...INCONSISTENT! I have never, ever seen a team capable of playing so well in spurts and also of playing so badly. Even casual observers that I know will ask me which GU team will show up from game to game. If you add up our great wins, and our horrible losses this year, I am sure it will be an NCAA record!
|
|
Filo
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,908
|
Post by Filo on Mar 19, 2010 9:46:10 GMT -5
'Cause _Way has never really liked Greg or Chris, so by default, only the player he likes can have the positive traits.
In the beginning of the season, I said that as Austin goes, so goes the Hoyas. I think that turned out to be pretty accurate. But it wasn't Austin's leadership that we needed and missed in the big losses. It was his intensity and scoring.
|
|
NCHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,924
|
Post by NCHoya on Mar 19, 2010 10:07:07 GMT -5
I agree about not making excuses. However, I have been saying this since last year, JT3's biggest fault is he is a poor pyschologist, which is necessary to be a great coach. Not all players will be self-motivated, you need to get past that as a coach.
The problem I see with this team is MATURITY, period. So JT3 calls it young, but he cannot call his player immature to the media. That is the reality, these kids have been told how great they are since age 12, they need to learn how to earn success not just feel entitled to it.
We will get better, JT3 is learning this and it is being reflected in his recruiting already. He is good right now, JT# will be a great coach when it is all said and done.
|
|
|
Post by blueviper on Mar 19, 2010 10:28:40 GMT -5
Completely agree with those saying that D is the biggest improvement needed for next reason, BUT we also played some very solid if not great games defensively. The real problem with this team was consistency. One time awhile back I talked to my cousin who's a scratch golfer and asked him what he works on when he practices. He said that he "tries to make his misses better".
Every team has off nights, but what separates good from great teams is how well you can perform when things aren't going your way. As everybody knows, when things went poorly for this team, they went REALLY poorly.
I think the responsibility for this comes down to two things: coaching and leadership. JT III still has my faith that he can admit what didn't work and improve it for next year, but this trend of underperformance ever since the Final Four run has to be unsettling for any fan. He deserves the benefit of the doubt after what he did with Roy and that team in '06-07, but the longer his track record becomes, the more we can, and should, hold him accountable for it.
|
|
jagtrader
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 121
|
Post by jagtrader on Mar 19, 2010 10:32:33 GMT -5
I keep reading about all these deep-rooted flaws the Hoyas have -- lack of leadership, lack of depth, lack of a perimeter defender, lack of intensity, mediocre coach and so on. Did the Hoyas have all these flaws when they were coming within one basket of winning the BET six days ago? It wasn't a perfect team, for sure, but the situation is not as dire or complex as people make it out to be. They were outplayed by a team that played great in a one-and-done situation. 1. Ohio is a much less talented team overall. 2. You are indirectly pointing out the one undeniable and defining characteristic of this past year's team...INCONSISTENT! I have never, ever seen a team capable of playing so well in spurts and also of playing so badly. Even casual observers that I know will ask me which GU team will show up from game to game. If you add up our great wins, and our horrible losses this year, I am sure it will be an NCAA record! Sure, Ohio is less talented. Did it look like a 14 seed Thursday? The Bobcats played a tremendous game. To put all the blame on the Hoyas and ignore the opponent is what fans do, but it's a disservice to the other side. They played great. Not good. Great. Inconsistency can be the product of relying so heavily on so few players. Asking these guys to play 35 minutes through the schedule they played is a tall task. They're going to have bad nights and nights with low energy. That leads to bad defense.
|
|
|
Post by ColumbiaHeightsHoya on Mar 19, 2010 10:39:01 GMT -5
Also, Chris Wright was a beast in that game for all those who chirped all year about how bad he was. He kept us alive. We'll be good next year and should have a deeper rotation thus limiting the minutes which may help with the defensive intensity.
|
|
|
Post by IlladelpHoya on Mar 19, 2010 10:53:14 GMT -5
This is the first time I've posted in a few years, but I am blown away by this thread. What do you expect John Thompson III to do after a devastating loss? Go on national television and say -- I'm very disappointed in my 19-22 year old players? They embarrassed themselves, they embarrassed me, they embarrassed the school? You're out of your mind, man. He's the coach, he's their leader. After a game like this, you go on television, congratulate the other team for playing phenomenally, talk about how disappointed you are, and say something positive about your own guys ... in this case, it's that they are "young". I'm fine with that. Would you prefer a coach who criticizes his players (NONE OF WHOM ARE GRADUATING) at their lowest moment? Do you think he's really satisfied with what happened and chalks it all up to "youth"?? We can talk honestly about whether or not JTIII is the right coach to lead this program to greatness (I happen to think he is) but to criticize him for not selling his players out right after a shocking (SHOCKING) loss? C'mon man, I'm sorry this hurts you ... it hurts me too, but you and I logged a combined 0 minutes last night. Let the coach talk about his players the way he wants to.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Mar 19, 2010 11:03:35 GMT -5
Rdf- The quote that was used on the front page about youth was a response by Thompson in reference to why a team can beat Nova and Duke but lose to teams like Rutgers and USF during the season. Basically why didn't they come out focused and ready every single game this season. He said, because they are realatively young they have to go through growing pains, and thats what some of those problems were. If you don't think the fact that this team was so inconsistent during the season was atleast partially due to the fact that we have no seniors and have the second lowest experience age in the Big East then, I don't really know what to say.
You're making it sound like the quote was directed at this game when it wasn't at all. It was directed at the overall inconsistent play over the course of the season.
|
|
RDF
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 8,835
|
Post by RDF on Mar 19, 2010 11:04:49 GMT -5
This is the first time I've posted in a few years, but I am blown away by this thread. What do you expect John Thompson III to do after a devastating loss? Go on national television and say -- I'm very disappointed in my 19-22 year old players? They embarrassed themselves, they embarrassed me, they embarrassed the school? You're out of your mind, man. He's the coach, he's their leader. After a game like this, you go on television, congratulate the other team for playing phenomenally, talk about how disappointed you are, and say something positive about your own guys ... in this case, it's that they are "young". I'm fine with that. Would you prefer a coach who criticizes his players (NONE OF WHOM ARE GRADUATING) at their lowest moment? Do you think he's really satisfied with what happened and chalks it all up to "youth"?? We can talk honestly about whether or not JTIII is the right coach to lead this program to greatness (I happen to think he is) but to criticize him for not selling his players out right after a shocking (SHOCKING) loss? C'mon man, I'm sorry this hurts you ... it hurts me too, but you and I logged a combined 0 minutes last night. Let the coach talk about his players the way he wants to. Again--people who can't understand the simple concept of accepting that CHANGE is necessary. Who said III had to criticize players individually? Nobody needs to be called out-but he should call HIMSELF OUT and fall on the sword as any great leader does. Thing is--you allow excuses to continue when you don't accept reality. III has ignored reality the past 2 years, and honestly forced something on the program that hasn't worked at all--small ball, he's not addressed the sloppy play/turnovers, the lack of defense, the lack of urgency,etc... No matter what issue you point to--"he had to due to lack of personnel" or "we're young"--it's an excuse that the HC can CONTROL. You dont' like the personnel--you can go out and recruit new players--or you staff can--which is your responsibility as well--to hire people who will do what you need to be done. The LAST thing that needed to be mentioned last night was "youth" and it's a "young team". You know what happens when you ignore reality? You have an "old" team who is sloppy with the ball, has no sense of urgency, plays defense once in a while, and makes excuses. Players don't get better with experience, they get better with hard work and improvement. If you give people excuses they'll take it for all it's worth--as witnessed by the defense of III--who needs to take this beating like a man and accept FULL RESPONSBILITY to be a better coach who holds everyone--including HIMSELF responsible for the fate of the program-be it success or failure. You can't be front and center when things are great and then cast blame on "Youth" when the team fails. If you aren't honest with yourself/the team--then expect more disappointment and more opportunity for excuses. Excuses are like A-Holes--everyone has one and they all STINK!
|
|
NCHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,924
|
Post by NCHoya on Mar 19, 2010 11:06:20 GMT -5
Completely agree with those saying that D is the biggest improvement needed for next reason, BUT we also played some very solid if not great games defensively. The real problem with this team was consistency. One time awhile back I talked to my cousin who's a scratch golfer and asked him what he works on when he practices. He said that he "tries to make his misses better". Every team has off nights, but what separates good from great teams is how well you can perform when things aren't going your way. As everybody knows, when things went poorly for this team, they went REALLY poorly. I think the responsibility for this comes down to two things: coaching and leadership. JT III still has my faith that he can admit what didn't work and improve it for next year, but this trend of underperformance ever since the Final Four run has to be unsettling for any fan. He deserves the benefit of the doubt after what he did with Roy and that team in '06-07, but the longer his track record becomes, the more we can, and should, hold him accountable for it. Going from a 16-15 NIT squad to 23-11 with the #1 SOS, a #3 seed and shot away from BE Champs with less overall talent is simply not under-achieving. Perhaps the expectations some of you hold is why III is "underachieving." Kids come into program as MCDAAs all the time and do not pan out. However, III has shown he can continue to develop players and improve their game. Have any rotation players regressed this season? I am not buying this underachievement notion. If anything, he is being held to the standard of over-achieving in his first few years.
|
|
RDF
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 8,835
|
Post by RDF on Mar 19, 2010 11:14:54 GMT -5
Rdf- The quote that was used on the front page about youth was a response by Thompson in reference to why a team can beat Nova and Duke but lose to teams like Rutgers and USF during the season. Basically why didn't they come out focused and ready every single game this season. He said, because they are realatively young they have to go through growing pains, and thats what some of those problems were. If you don't think the fact that this team was so inconsistent during the season was atleast partially due to the fact that we have no seniors and have the second lowest experience age in the Big East then, I don't really know what to say. You're making it sound like the quote was directed at this game when it wasn't at all. It was directed at the overall inconsistent play over the course of the season. It's an excuse. They lost because they didnt' play defense or protect the ball like any team worth a crap does. He said "I didn't want to say it all year but it was youth...." that is what set me off. Really? It's YOUTH why you can't get this team focused? It's youth why you can't protect the ball--when all 5 of your starters played heavy minutes for 2/3 years? It's youth when you have guys who play defense like a 50 and Up league at your local Health Club?? Just say you got your ass kicked, need to make adjustments, and will come back with more determined group--no matter who is/isn't here. It's a time where a true leader says I'VE GOT TO DO A BETTER JOB and will show it. Nobody or nothing needs to be blamed--last night was a microcosm of the past 2 years of Georgetown basketball--a very good offensive team with good but small talent and no urgency/understanding of how to play. When you have a 6'9 PF who shoots 28% firing up a 3pt shot in your 3rd possession down the court, and he's not immediately taken out of the game or a timeout is NOT taken---you have issues. That play, along with team not hustling back on defense warranted immediate timeouts and an ass chewing that would've blistered the arena. He's been "nice" to this group--they don't respond to it. He went off on them against Cuse in BET and they did--so which way should have told him to get his point across? Sometimes you need to be mean and tell guys they are not doing a damn thing--they are failing and embarrassing themselves--to motivate. Sometimes you need to pat on back/hug--but this group didn't and hasn't responded to Mr Nice Guy stuff. They dont' maintain a focus and they don't put forth the level of effort that it takes to be a champion. Talent is there--as shown by fact when they give a crap they can play--but it's a Coach's job to get that out of a team on a CONSISTENT BASIS and to make an excuse is pathetic. So they were "young" against Temple, Washington, Butler, Duke, Nova, Cuse, Marquette, etc..... or is that only when you lose? Just let me know what excuse we're going with so I'm board with the BS Train!
|
|