Definitely we are talented. Post game of MSU victory over NC national analysts spoke of Izzo coaching up his level of talent. Stating MSU doesn't have level of talent that Purdue, Michigan , or IL has in the Big 10 this year but still remains competitive
UConn 74, Illinois 61 Postgame
- Status
We have been a 3 pt shooting team during all of BU tenure and it has gotten even worse lately. You cannot break down a defense without an offense that drives the ball. Our opponents know this and it makes us easy to defend. When the 3s aren't falling we are usually doomed. BU does stress good defense and rebounding however. And that will win some games.
You do know it is easier to look good against Colgate and Long Island than it is against Alabama and UConn right?I don’t care to look because I’m about to go shovel some snow, but the last 5 games we beat Colgate by 20, played neck and neck with a top 10 team, throttled another team by 40 and then had two stinkers. Is it really just the past 2 games that are so horrendous that drag down the last 5? It is weird to me the Colgate/Bama/LIU stretch would be considered “bad basketball” in any way, shape or form if we are being truly objective about things here.
If we put the calculator down I think there’s a lot less impending doom than it would seem. We’ve had two games back to back wherein the first it looked like they just didn’t give a crap and the second where they couldn’t throw it in the ocean. If we play like this 2 game sample for the entire season, then yes things look super grim to me too, I’ll stay foolish for now though.
It seems every year someone or something looks great against the easiest part of our schedule and people get all excited. Then when you get into the grind of Big Ten play, it's a different story. My concern is that is Mirkovic. At least Fr Mirkovic. He's got a big frame, he's skilled, but he's slow. You can just overpower Colgate and Jackson State, but Big Ten teams have guys as big or bigger. Top 25 teams have athletic bigs that are going to make things much more difficult.
We're 8 games in, one thing I know for a fact, we're not as good as our best game, and we're not as bad as our worst game. But I think we lost to UConn because of Stojakovic, well, and the putrid 3 pt shooting. I've never hidden that I'm not an Underwood fan (not a hater either), I hate that we have 4 guys 6'9" or taller that take 55% of their shots from 3, 68% if you exclude Mirkovic. When you have off shooting nights, which we do, you lose. Our best year under Underwood, we had Terrence Shannon, who couldn't be stopped getting to the basket. Stojakovic is this year's Shannon. He's not nearly as athletic, but he's got good body control and is good at awkward angles in the paint. I hate that we shoot an insane amount of 3s, but when they don't fall we need a couple of guys that can get a basket, and we didn't have that yesterday. Boswell can't do it alone. Terrence has Domask, Boswell and Stojakovic should be able to get it done. And it sure would help if we had our 7 fters play on the block sometime.
Last edited:
chiefini
- Rockford, Illinois
Refereeing Blunder Costs Illinois Late Against UConn: Was the Call Justified?
The Illini likely were too deep in a hole to climb out, but down seven, they had a shot against the Huskies with two-plus minutes to go – until they didn't
www.si.com
I haven’t read every post on this thread yet so not sure if this excellent article has been posted.
To be fair you left out some others who hyped our talent.
Seth Davis
Lville
Seth Davis
Lville
blackdog
- Champaign
I think you are on the money here, would need to go back and watch more closely but it does seem like too many times shooters either have to make big adjustments or just aren't really ready to shoot. There is so much info out there on shot mechanics and how much footwork even before the catch makes a big difference and we dont seem to follow any of that.
I really, really hate complaining about the refs. Bad calls even out in the long run.Refereeing Blunder Costs Illinois Late Against UConn: Was the Call Justified?
The Illini likely were too deep in a hole to climb out, but down seven, they had a shot against the Huskies with two-plus minutes to go – until they didn't
I haven’t read every post on this thread yet so not sure if this excellent article has been posted.
But this call really gets me. The refs had the opportunity to rehash all of the shot clock issues (they couldn't review the over-the-back, but no matter). They spent a long time going over everything, and presumably did so in meticulous detail, and they still got it wrong. How is that even possible? Is there any explanation other than ref bias? Mind you, I don't buy the bias argument for even a second, but what is the real answer? A shot hit the rim, Conn got the board and the clock reset to 20 and the Conn guy eventually made an impossible shot. So, there should one and only one question: How much time passed between Conn getting the board and the ball leaving the shooters hand. Less than 20 seconds? Shot is good. More than 20 seconds? Shot is no good.
I watched an unedited game replay and I can see no way the ball left his hands within 20 seconds. So, how do we get there from here?
PS. We probably lose in any case, but we would all feel better with a 4 or 5 point loss when our late game momentum fell short than with a 13 point loss following a complete momentum killer.
PSS. Have the Connecticut boards spent much time on this? Probably not. It is human nature not to care much when the mistake is in your favor.
Here is what drives me nuts. And I made this point earlier. After the bad outcome on the 4 point play, Boswell did not touch the ball on the next possession.
I’m not sure why everybody is arguing over which different players on our roster played bad or not. Everybody was terrible outside of Bam. Regardless I still think the biggest reason we lost is coaching.
We refuse to stop shooting a million threes, and Brad enables them…we also have no set plays that work to get our best players in rhythm. And I’ve said it a million times but our ball screen defense is just so soft. Yes the players at this level should make wide open shots, but when we don’t, coach needs to assert himself.
I love Brad and I’m very grateful for where he has our program. But we will continue to lose games against coaches with superior X’s and O’s ability.
We refuse to stop shooting a million threes, and Brad enables them…we also have no set plays that work to get our best players in rhythm. And I’ve said it a million times but our ball screen defense is just so soft. Yes the players at this level should make wide open shots, but when we don’t, coach needs to assert himself.
I love Brad and I’m very grateful for where he has our program. But we will continue to lose games against coaches with superior X’s and O’s ability.
Ty for the rebounding, dog.
Players on both sides are operating on the clock they see. You have to make a call based on that.
It reminds me of the five down Missouri game.
McCasland is a really good coach. For all the slobbering over Sean Miller, we beat his Xavier team last year by 13. Stomped Dana Altman by 32 and Dusty May by 20 last year (and beat his #11 FAU team the year prior). People think highly of Otzelberger. Brad is 4-4 vs Izzo over last 5 seasons. People also like Dennis Gates as a coach (I really don't, personally, but that's irrelevant here), he is 2-1 vs him. Painter has kicked our butts sans last year and we are 0-2 vs Hurley and 0-2 vs Rick Barnes (just noting these, hurts my argument but I'm trying to be fair here).
All these samples are VERY small, so grains of salt and all of that.
I just disagree that we shoot 6-29 on mostly wide open shots and this means coaching is subpar.
As many have already said, its kind of hard to get in the paint when teams sag on you... its why we just have to make shots, Brad can't do that. He can recruit different players, I suppose, but that also has nothing to do with scheme or in-game coaching. Even if you run a completely different system, you still have to make shots.
I've said that really the only coach I'd be happy with if BU left is Oats. Every other coach, as you're noting here, has his own set of warts. There really aren't that many true difference makers left in the college coaching ranks, in my opinion. For example, I don't slobber one milliliter over Sean Miller.
But I'd offer two additional points to what you said.
One, BU can and should improve. He doesn't seem to be much interested in that. He's having some success on the recruiting side and it seems as if that's turned into a nonchalant attitude toward coaching up the players.
Two, your 6-29 number is not an outlier but is part of a trend going back to last year. Fans have a right to be concerned and the coaching staff should be looking at the why.
Ty would've made a huge difference because he would've replaced one of the bigs jacking 3s and Ty would've been cutting, offensive rebounding, and playing defense. Its not just what he brings, but what we would've got off the floor.
So in order to beat good coaches there has to be a huge talent gap to make up for it basically.
Its not even x's and o's. If Brad would just discipline mental mistakes like continually chucking 3s or bench KJ for all of his turnovers last year, it would make a huge difference. Unfortunately right now it seems like Andre is the only one getting that treatment and its insanely unfair.
I’m going to be THAT and say the court had a hand in our struggles.
Yes, we did not play well and our approach didn’t work.
A lot of mental games go into struggles, environment, etc.
The NBA three line didn’t do us favors. We were short on so many.
I’d like to see the shot chart for Bama game too. Maybe playing NBA courts play a role?
Idk, but I still love this team.
We have a bunch of guys going through some growing pains and flashing potential. Let’s keep building and develop some grit.
Yes, we did not play well and our approach didn’t work.
A lot of mental games go into struggles, environment, etc.
The NBA three line didn’t do us favors. We were short on so many.
I’d like to see the shot chart for Bama game too. Maybe playing NBA courts play a role?
Idk, but I still love this team.
We have a bunch of guys going through some growing pains and flashing potential. Let’s keep building and develop some grit.
I don’t think that we can read in enough to say he’s not trying to improve. They made a much needed staff change this summer, with the demotion of Hamer and addition of Crocker. Our defense has changed some, but imo not enough. So criticism is warranted but I’m not going so far as to say they’re not actively trying to improve.
I am completely sunk on the shooting woes the last two years… no clue. I don’t believe in curses or sage burning so there has to be an answer. One that, as you’re saying, they’ve yet to figure out. Hire some “shot doctor” type coach, someone who specializes in that. I thought Weber’s offenses were hard to watch and the outside shooting I’ve had to witness last year and also the past two games is extremely cringe (despite the offense otherwise being very good for the most part).
I don’t think we’ve had a huge talent advantage over any of those teams.
They didn’t bench KJ but they had him play more off the ball. So it’s not the change you wanted to see, but it’s a change, and hard for me to want to “bench” one of our best (if not our very best) players. Andrej was miserable yesterday, and you can’t bench everyone because you have to put 5 guys on the floor.
I've watched our Illini and several other teams play on courts with the NBA line, it seems like everyone is shooting from deeper than they otherwise would once that line is there.
Might just be habit of getting behind the furthest line, or guys trying to show the next level that can shoot that shot, who knows, but it definitely influences how teams play offense, and where defenses pick guys up.
Might just be habit of getting behind the furthest line, or guys trying to show the next level that can shoot that shot, who knows, but it definitely influences how teams play offense, and where defenses pick guys up.
Except they all but said they could not operate on the clock they saw because it reset in error. I think the solution then is to run the tape and stop it exactly when Conn took possession of the last rebound, the one that was supposedly over the back. Then start the tape and your stopwatch at the exact same time, and stop the stopwatch exactly when the ball leaves the hand of the shooter. Now, read the watch. 20.00 or less? The shot counts. 20.01 or more? The shot is no good.
As far as I can tell, the problem really is that simple. But if it is that simple, why couldn't three very professional coaches figure it out? That baffles me.
If a player doesn't understand that the clock is winding down he'll respond differently.
You've lost me here. The refs were reviewing the replay.
Or are you talking about how the players reacted after the refs made their call?
- Status