If anyone starts a thread about a certain game going on right now, you're dead to me
- Thread starter SilentsAreGolden
- Start date
Were you watching Old Yaler while grooming your bulldog?
Did anyone actually think Duke would not pull away? It is like thinking Boston U had ANY chance against UK last night.
That reminds me of the one about the Tennessee student on spring break in Florida. He saw a coed in a bar that he really liked so he went up to her and said, "Ah'm from Tennessee. What school do you go to? She coyly answered, "Yale." He then said, "Aaah'm from Tennessee. What school do you go to?"
That 1-3-1 has been good for Duke so far. It also helped them in the Georgetown game.
Honestly, I expected Duke would win by about 13 and get a game from Yale for about 20 to 30 minutes. Yale nearly beat SMU on the road a few days ago. SMU would safely be a tourney team this season if not for their self-imposed postseason ban. Of course the postseason ban is no surprise given that Larry Brown is SMU's coach
As much as I hate Knight, I would just point out that he won 3 titles only playing man-to-man. If I mistook your inference that Cal should start playing some zone, appy polly loggies.
that 1-3-1 didnt do squat against UK though...... Which is a surprise considering the zone BU played against us gave us fits. Maybe playing Duke made them focus and Bu they just didnt care as much.
Rick Pitino won 2 titles playing full court ball pressure and falling back into a 2-3 zone. Coach K has won 5 titles playing man 99% of the time. My point is would you rather play man to man like you want to and lose to Yale or try something else to see if it works? I think zones are gimmicks and if you can figure them out(and shoot) you destroy them. However I watched UL beat UConn in 2014 3 times by double digits each time and once by 40 because they zoned them and made them shoot 3's. We zoned them in the title game, got back in the game, and they made one 3 and Cal got out of it. What I will never understand is trying something new and the other team does 1 good thing and then you quit doing it. What about the other 35 minutes when you were doing what you wanted to do and getting your ass kicked? For Cal especially it just doesn't make sense to me, he's willing to scrap his offense each year and do what fits the team, but if he needs to do something other than straight man to man the entire game on defense he balks at the idea? Look I don't want to be Syracuse or UL, I just thought it showed well on Coach K tonight that he tried something he doesn't like to do and stuck with it. It won them the game. I think it's something Cal could do as well.
Really fair point. No more versatile offensive coach, no more stubborn defensive coach.
Although, to be fair, his defenses are top 15 like every year.
But I agree that gimmicks can help at times.
That's my only point, obviously if you can play man to man the entire time that's what you want to do. However if a situation arises, whether it's once a season or once a game you can't be afraid to do it. Brad Stevens zoned the Thunder to slow down Westbrook and won the game by 15 points other night. Just saying there is a time for everything.
Similar threads
