Nevada Hoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 18,518
|
Post by Nevada Hoya on Mar 7, 2016 15:31:38 GMT -5
Ok, this season was a learning experience. They say you learn more from your mistakes as from your successes. Given this premise, the Hoyas should steamroll through the rest of the season.
|
|
hoyasaxa2003
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,918
Member is Online
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Mar 7, 2016 16:16:52 GMT -5
Aside from the obvious (shoot, drive, pass, defend), you win tournaments and tournament games via toughness. IMO, that is the single greatest weakness of all JT3 teams, not just this season's spectacularly underachieving group. For lack of a better term, we almost always play "softer" than our opponents in one-and-done situations. We have had players throughout his tenure who have played with willpower, fire and intensity (Green, little Ewing, Sapp, Starks, Brill, etc.). But I can't think of one of JT3's teams that was defined by a white hot passion to ball their opponents into submission. I've always found that ironic given JTJr's MO. Even Esh's worst teams played with urgent desperation...even if it was often somewhat pathetic given the disparity in their talent re: to their opponents.
It's absolutely not possible that we as fans care more about the games than do these guys who have dedicated a massive portion of their young lives to the sport. But that fact isn't readily apparent when you watch this team and in fact quite a few much better GU teams before it.
I think this issue of mental toughness is the key to the future of the program under JTIII. We can talk strategy, need for a PG, need for a rim protector, etc. all we want. But more than anything, we need more toughness. We need more naturally aggressive kids who are leaders. We have certainly had some guys like this, as smokeyjack point out. But usually not enough. With a coach who is super calm (for a major college head coach!), I think a team needs players that are more fully self motivated to always go hard and fight back when other teams go at you hard. JTIII just is not going to be a guy who consistently fires his team up. He also is a guy who is not going to send his team into a panic by being overly emotional - there are upsides and downsides to all coaching personalities. This year's team in particular is lacking enough outgoing, aggressive personalities. Starks and Trawick played this role for the most part in recent years. But DSR was the leader of this team almost by default, and he just has a calm,cool personality. Not a guy who can pull a team along with him when the going gets tough. I am hoping that JTIII sees this - recruiting guys like Mosely and Lykes, who are tough, aggressive leaders - shows that he realizes he needs more of these kind of players. On the current team - derrickson, Govan, copeland, white all seem like pretty laid back personalities. Copeland shows a little fire at times, and white has been pretty energized on the bench this year. Campbell was a real leader on his high school team, but he just has not been remotely good enough to play any kind of leadership role at Georgetown. Peak has some dog in him, he is probably the guy that can take over the leadership role next year - maybe with some help from Mosely, if he is good enough to get significant court time. Even if players improve their skills, and thompson makes the effective adjustments to the offensive and defensive schemes - I still fear that without this toughness and leadership, we'll have a hard time making really significant improvement. I am sorry, but I simply don't believe all the talk about toughness. I do think there's something to be said for leadership, as that can make a true difference both on and off the court. But, when people start talking about "toughness," you are really talking about emotions. And, I'm sorry, but if you have "toughness" without good basketball it's not going to get you anywhere. "Toughness" is in the eye of the beholder. People think Trawick was tough because he was emotive, aggressive, and wore his emotions on his sleeve. Fans love seeing that. It's exciting, and it's fun. But, that's Trawick's personality. Other people can have just as much fire and desire for the game, but they simply express it differently. For example, people often criticized Austin Freeman because he didn't "show" that he had desire, etc., yet he still performed well. Maybe that's just the way his personality-type is. The bigger problem is that people ascribe "toughness" to winning and "softness" to losing, regardless of whether it's actually there. I mean, have you ever seen a winning team described as "soft"? Of course not, because "winning" means you have toughness (to many). If anything, the NBA is a good example of this. The guys with the most fire and who "display" the most effort don't always win, and that's because you can show as much toughness as you want, but the better talent generally still prevails.
|
|
lichoya68
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
OK YOUNGINS ARE HERE AND ARE VERY VERY GOOD cant wait GO HOYAS
Posts: 17,440
|
Post by lichoya68 on Mar 7, 2016 16:31:33 GMT -5
GO HOYAS PRIDE NOW BEAT DEPAUL one by one you never know YUP
|
|
calhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,362
|
Post by calhoya on Mar 7, 2016 17:56:14 GMT -5
True test for players and coach. The talent is there. They have beaten this team twice. Focus plus effort should equal a win.
|
|
|
Post by HometownHoya on Mar 7, 2016 18:53:47 GMT -5
Take care of the ball and put it through the hoop. Our guys are guys that get turnt up on offense and that will carry over to D.
I've taken Thursday as a sick day so hopefully it will be to watch the Hoyas but if we lose to DePaul to end this season, I may actually be sick.
|
|
smokeyjack
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,301
|
Post by smokeyjack on Mar 7, 2016 19:04:25 GMT -5
I think this issue of mental toughness is the key to the future of the program under JTIII. We can talk strategy, need for a PG, need for a rim protector, etc. all we want. But more than anything, we need more toughness. We need more naturally aggressive kids who are leaders. We have certainly had some guys like this, as smokeyjack point out. But usually not enough. With a coach who is super calm (for a major college head coach!), I think a team needs players that are more fully self motivated to always go hard and fight back when other teams go at you hard. JTIII just is not going to be a guy who consistently fires his team up. He also is a guy who is not going to send his team into a panic by being overly emotional - there are upsides and downsides to all coaching personalities. This year's team in particular is lacking enough outgoing, aggressive personalities. Starks and Trawick played this role for the most part in recent years. But DSR was the leader of this team almost by default, and he just has a calm,cool personality. Not a guy who can pull a team along with him when the going gets tough. I am hoping that JTIII sees this - recruiting guys like Mosely and Lykes, who are tough, aggressive leaders - shows that he realizes he needs more of these kind of players. On the current team - derrickson, Govan, copeland, white all seem like pretty laid back personalities. Copeland shows a little fire at times, and white has been pretty energized on the bench this year. Campbell was a real leader on his high school team, but he just has not been remotely good enough to play any kind of leadership role at Georgetown. Peak has some dog in him, he is probably the guy that can take over the leadership role next year - maybe with some help from Mosely, if he is good enough to get significant court time. Even if players improve their skills, and thompson makes the effective adjustments to the offensive and defensive schemes - I still fear that without this toughness and leadership, we'll have a hard time making really significant improvement. I am sorry, but I simply don't believe all the talk about toughness. I do think there's something to be said for leadership, as that can make a true difference both on and off the court. But, when people start talking about "toughness," you are really talking about emotions. And, I'm sorry, but if you have "toughness" without good basketball it's not going to get you anywhere. "Toughness" is in the eye of the beholder. People think Trawick was tough because he was emotive, aggressive, and wore his emotions on his sleeve. Fans love seeing that. It's exciting, and it's fun. But, that's Trawick's personality. Other people can have just as much fire and desire for the game, but they simply express it differently. For example, people often criticized Austin Freeman because he didn't "show" that he had desire, etc., yet he still performed well. Maybe that's just the way his personality-type is. The bigger problem is that people ascribe "toughness" to winning and "softness" to losing, regardless of whether it's actually there. I mean, have you ever seen a winning team described as "soft"? Of course not, because "winning" means you have toughness (to many). If anything, the NBA is a good example of this. The guys with the most fire and who "display" the most effort don't always win, and that's because you can show as much toughness as you want, but the better talent generally still prevails. I can absolutely name you good teams who are soft. Take UNC - very good team that I consider very soft. Roy Williams teams rarely play like their lives depend on the outcome, and he's won two titles and is in Top 20 in all-time vics. Maybe it's just me, but I'll take a Huggins-style team every day that leaves it all on the floor over a finesse group. Never thought I'd long for the grinding, virtually unwatchable dump-and-chase Pops offense, but I'd trade in a heartbeat to watch a team that plays defense like every possession is its last.
|
|
hoyasaxa2003
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,918
Member is Online
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Mar 7, 2016 20:03:24 GMT -5
I am sorry, but I simply don't believe all the talk about toughness. I do think there's something to be said for leadership, as that can make a true difference both on and off the court. But, when people start talking about "toughness," you are really talking about emotions. And, I'm sorry, but if you have "toughness" without good basketball it's not going to get you anywhere. "Toughness" is in the eye of the beholder. People think Trawick was tough because he was emotive, aggressive, and wore his emotions on his sleeve. Fans love seeing that. It's exciting, and it's fun. But, that's Trawick's personality. Other people can have just as much fire and desire for the game, but they simply express it differently. For example, people often criticized Austin Freeman because he didn't "show" that he had desire, etc., yet he still performed well. Maybe that's just the way his personality-type is. The bigger problem is that people ascribe "toughness" to winning and "softness" to losing, regardless of whether it's actually there. I mean, have you ever seen a winning team described as "soft"? Of course not, because "winning" means you have toughness (to many). If anything, the NBA is a good example of this. The guys with the most fire and who "display" the most effort don't always win, and that's because you can show as much toughness as you want, but the better talent generally still prevails. I can absolutely name you good teams who are soft. Take UNC - very good team that I consider very soft. Roy Williams teams rarely play like their lives depend on the outcome, and he's won two titles and is in Top 20 in all-time vics. Maybe it's just me, but I'll take a Huggins-style team every day that leaves it all on the floor over a finesse group. Never thought I'd long for the grinding, virtually unwatchable dump-and-chase Pops offense, but I'd trade in a heartbeat to watch a team that plays defense like every possession is its last. The thing is our defense isn't bad because they don't play "defense like every possession is its last." They're just not good.
|
|
drquigley
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,391
|
Post by drquigley on Mar 7, 2016 22:07:04 GMT -5
We are playing with house money. The BET is a gift for this team. Nothing more to lose. Let's see DSR, LJ and Ike have career games and see what happens
|
|
|
Post by manilahoyafan on Mar 8, 2016 4:01:09 GMT -5
Now you guys are talking....!
Brand new season. Don't even have to win that many to be a champ.
Don't ask why; ask why not?
|
|
HoyaFanNY
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Never throw to the venus on a spider 3 Y banana!
Posts: 4,992
|
Post by HoyaFanNY on Mar 8, 2016 5:52:18 GMT -5
just win the game and roll the dice vs nova. nothing to lose here....except another game.
|
|
KHoyaNYC
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,900
|
Post by KHoyaNYC on Mar 8, 2016 7:01:54 GMT -5
There is a part of me that thinks the team just needs to remember what a win feels like to have a puncher's chance against Nova. Then the more rational part of me takes over and says we will be fortunate enough to beat DePaul before quietly exiting this season.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Mar 8, 2016 7:52:21 GMT -5
There is a part of me that thinks the team just needs to remember what a win feels like to have a puncher's chance against Nova. Then the more rational part of me takes over and says we will be fortunate enough to beat DePaul before quietly exiting this season. This is no time for rational thought dammit!! Survive and advance. Start tomorrow.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,373
|
Post by prhoya on Mar 8, 2016 8:45:45 GMT -5
There is a part of me that thinks the team just needs to remember what a win feels like to have a puncher's chance against Nova. Then the more rational part of me takes over and says we will be fortunate enough to beat DePaul before quietly exiting this season. Exactly. DePaul beat us two years ago in the BET, so they probably were pumped when they saw the brackets.
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on Mar 8, 2016 10:08:33 GMT -5
I think this issue of mental toughness is the key to the future of the program under JTIII. We can talk strategy, need for a PG, need for a rim protector, etc. all we want. But more than anything, we need more toughness. We need more naturally aggressive kids who are leaders. We have certainly had some guys like this, as smokeyjack point out. But usually not enough. With a coach who is super calm (for a major college head coach!), I think a team needs players that are more fully self motivated to always go hard and fight back when other teams go at you hard. JTIII just is not going to be a guy who consistently fires his team up. He also is a guy who is not going to send his team into a panic by being overly emotional - there are upsides and downsides to all coaching personalities. This year's team in particular is lacking enough outgoing, aggressive personalities. Starks and Trawick played this role for the most part in recent years. But DSR was the leader of this team almost by default, and he just has a calm,cool personality. Not a guy who can pull a team along with him when the going gets tough. I am hoping that JTIII sees this - recruiting guys like Mosely and Lykes, who are tough, aggressive leaders - shows that he realizes he needs more of these kind of players. On the current team - derrickson, Govan, copeland, white all seem like pretty laid back personalities. Copeland shows a little fire at times, and white has been pretty energized on the bench this year. Campbell was a real leader on his high school team, but he just has not been remotely good enough to play any kind of leadership role at Georgetown. Peak has some dog in him, he is probably the guy that can take over the leadership role next year - maybe with some help from Mosely, if he is good enough to get significant court time. Even if players improve their skills, and thompson makes the effective adjustments to the offensive and defensive schemes - I still fear that without this toughness and leadership, we'll have a hard time making really significant improvement. I am sorry, but I simply don't believe all the talk about toughness. I do think there's something to be said for leadership, as that can make a true difference both on and off the court. But, when people start talking about "toughness," you are really talking about emotions. And, I'm sorry, but if you have "toughness" without good basketball it's not going to get you anywhere. "Toughness" is in the eye of the beholder. People think Trawick was tough because he was emotive, aggressive, and wore his emotions on his sleeve. Fans love seeing that. It's exciting, and it's fun. But, that's Trawick's personality. Other people can have just as much fire and desire for the game, but they simply express it differently. For example, people often criticized Austin Freeman because he didn't "show" that he had desire, etc., yet he still performed well. Maybe that's just the way his personality-type is. The bigger problem is that people ascribe "toughness" to winning and "softness" to losing, regardless of whether it's actually there. I mean, have you ever seen a winning team described as "soft"? Of course not, because "winning" means you have toughness (to many). If anything, the NBA is a good example of this. The guys with the most fire and who "display" the most effort don't always win, and that's because you can show as much toughness as you want, but the better talent generally still prevails. I don't think you know what toughness means
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on Mar 8, 2016 10:14:25 GMT -5
I can absolutely name you good teams who are soft. Take UNC - very good team that I consider very soft. Roy Williams teams rarely play like their lives depend on the outcome, and he's won two titles and is in Top 20 in all-time vics. Maybe it's just me, but I'll take a Huggins-style team every day that leaves it all on the floor over a finesse group. Never thought I'd long for the grinding, virtually unwatchable dump-and-chase Pops offense, but I'd trade in a heartbeat to watch a team that plays defense like every possession is its last. The thing is our defense isn't bad because they don't play "defense like every possession is its last." They're just not good. Lol
|
|
guru
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,607
|
Post by guru on Mar 8, 2016 12:51:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by wrestlemania on Mar 8, 2016 13:37:18 GMT -5
I fear a mail job if DePaul gains some confidence early and forces GU to play from behind. Doesn't help that they will be playing on a neutral floor in front of about 16,000 empty chairs.
|
|
hoyasaxa2003
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,918
Member is Online
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Mar 8, 2016 14:14:45 GMT -5
Let this be the 1 in 100 times it happens. When we played FGCU, we were something like a 98% favorite. We should know more than most that it's possible.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Mar 8, 2016 14:44:55 GMT -5
I fear a mail job if DePaul gains some confidence early and forces GU to play from behind. Doesn't help that they will be playing on a neutral floor in front of about 16,000 empty chairs. While this team has sputtered and wheezed far too many times this season, they have never mailed it in. They won't start tomorrow, no matter how it goes early on. They have fought from behind plenty of times. If this was the old 16 team BET and we were a noon game on the first day it might be a smaller crowd. A night game, with the Johnnies to follow, will draw a decent atmosphere.
|
|
richfame
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,266
|
Post by richfame on Mar 8, 2016 19:58:01 GMT -5
Most likely our last shot at happiness this season. Please let's play a solid 40 minutes. I would not be happy if we won this game, I would be indifferent. What an awful season. Now if we beat DePaul and Nova( who is over rated BTW) that would be something to get happy about.
|
|