Just tuning in, down 25-17 with 2:30 to go in the half. Ouch.
MBB at USF
12-22-2018, 04:13 PM
(12-22-2018, 03:58 PM)JohnR34231 Wrote:(12-22-2018, 03:53 PM)chrisk Wrote:(12-22-2018, 03:44 PM)JJJ Wrote: Just tuning in, down 25-17 with 2:30 to go in the half. Ouch.
Definitely not anprospective NCAA team
I don't think that should come as a shock to anyone.
Not shocked, but surprised. I thought this would be a better team than what has been seen so far this season. No consistency.
(12-22-2018, 03:58 PM)JohnR34231 Wrote:(12-22-2018, 03:53 PM)chrisk Wrote:(12-22-2018, 03:44 PM)JJJ Wrote: Just tuning in, down 25-17 with 2:30 to go in the half. Ouch.
Definitely not anprospective NCAA team
I don't think that should come as a shock to anyone.
Not shocked, but surprised. I thought this would be a better team than what has been seen so far this season. No consistency.
12-22-2018, 04:21 PM
(12-22-2018, 04:13 PM)PVTree Wrote:(12-22-2018, 03:58 PM)JohnR34231 Wrote:(12-22-2018, 03:53 PM)chrisk Wrote:(12-22-2018, 03:44 PM)JJJ Wrote: Just tuning in, down 25-17 with 2:30 to go in the half. Ouch.
Definitely not anprospective NCAA team
I don't think that should come as a shock to anyone.
Not shocked, but surprised. I thought this would be a better team than what has been seen so far this season. No consistency.
Unless this team picks it up, we may start missing Dawkins (10-2 at UCF).
(12-22-2018, 04:13 PM)PVTree Wrote:(12-22-2018, 03:58 PM)JohnR34231 Wrote:(12-22-2018, 03:53 PM)chrisk Wrote:(12-22-2018, 03:44 PM)JJJ Wrote: Just tuning in, down 25-17 with 2:30 to go in the half. Ouch.
Definitely not anprospective NCAA team
I don't think that should come as a shock to anyone.
Not shocked, but surprised. I thought this would be a better team than what has been seen so far this season. No consistency.
Unless this team picks it up, we may start missing Dawkins (10-2 at UCF).
12-22-2018, 04:38 PM
(12-22-2018, 04:21 PM)chrisk Wrote:(12-22-2018, 04:13 PM)PVTree Wrote:(12-22-2018, 03:58 PM)JohnR34231 Wrote:(12-22-2018, 03:53 PM)chrisk Wrote:(12-22-2018, 03:44 PM)JJJ Wrote: Just tuning in, down 25-17 with 2:30 to go in the half. Ouch.
Definitely not anprospective NCAA team
I don't think that should come as a shock to anyone.
Not shocked, but surprised. I thought this would be a better team than what has been seen so far this season. No consistency.
Unless this team picks it up, we may start missing Dawkins (10-2 at UCF).
No way. At least Haase's teams are exciting at times. JDawk's teams were boring, and he was slowly Dookifying the team. I don't miss the floor slaps nor the annual pilgrimage to visit Chewy ( did the team need to be kneeling as they entered Chewy arena?).
(12-22-2018, 04:21 PM)chrisk Wrote:(12-22-2018, 04:13 PM)PVTree Wrote:(12-22-2018, 03:58 PM)JohnR34231 Wrote:(12-22-2018, 03:53 PM)chrisk Wrote:(12-22-2018, 03:44 PM)JJJ Wrote: Just tuning in, down 25-17 with 2:30 to go in the half. Ouch.
Definitely not anprospective NCAA team
I don't think that should come as a shock to anyone.
Not shocked, but surprised. I thought this would be a better team than what has been seen so far this season. No consistency.
Unless this team picks it up, we may start missing Dawkins (10-2 at UCF).
No way. At least Haase's teams are exciting at times. JDawk's teams were boring, and he was slowly Dookifying the team. I don't miss the floor slaps nor the annual pilgrimage to visit Chewy ( did the team need to be kneeling as they entered Chewy arena?).
12-22-2018, 04:50 PM
I’m sorry but if this is exciting I feel for you :)
Wish we had a Ferrari to drive this team.
Wish we had a Ferrari to drive this team.
12-22-2018, 06:57 PM
This offense has been struggling almost all year. We are 242 in D-I in offensive efficiency (I don't believe that includes today, so this will go down). What worries me is that I'm not seeing much indication that Haase is making changes to fix this. I'm not in the coaching change camp (this year is still a free pass for me), but I am feeling less confident about Haase going forward. I know all the excuses - young team, lack of a reliable post player, Ryan out, DaSilva just now getting his shot back. But this offense still doesn't meet the eye test for me. We've seen other teams we play do more on offense than we do, with less talent.
Anyway, the Pac-12 is down this year, so we will have our chances to get wins. Hopefully Haase is up to the task.
Anyway, the Pac-12 is down this year, so we will have our chances to get wins. Hopefully Haase is up to the task.
This offense has been struggling almost all year. We are 242 in D-I in offensive efficiency (I don't believe that includes today, so this will go down). What worries me is that I'm not seeing much indication that Haase is making changes to fix this. I'm not in the coaching change camp (this year is still a free pass for me), but I am feeling less confident about Haase going forward. I know all the excuses - young team, lack of a reliable post player, Ryan out, DaSilva just now getting his shot back. But this offense still doesn't meet the eye test for me. We've seen other teams we play do more on offense than we do, with less talent.
Anyway, the Pac-12 is down this year, so we will have our chances to get wins. Hopefully Haase is up to the task.
Anyway, the Pac-12 is down this year, so we will have our chances to get wins. Hopefully Haase is up to the task.
12-22-2018, 09:50 PM
Who was the last great Stanford player. A guy who could take a game over consistently? Not Powell, not Randle. Not even Brook.
We were spoiled. Knight, Mr. Lee, Mad Dog, Jacobsen, Childress..... Been a while.
We were spoiled. Knight, Mr. Lee, Mad Dog, Jacobsen, Childress..... Been a while.
12-23-2018, 10:41 AM
(12-22-2018, 09:50 PM)Phogge Wrote: Who was the last great Stanford player. A guy who could take a game over consistently? Not Powell, not Randle. Not even Brook.
We were spoiled. Knight, Mr. Lee, Mad Dog, Jacobsen, Childress..... Been a while.
I'd have to say Childress. Hernandez was really good at many things but I don't recall him being able to consistently create his own shot, which you would have to be able to do in order to take a game over.
(12-22-2018, 09:50 PM)Phogge Wrote: Who was the last great Stanford player. A guy who could take a game over consistently? Not Powell, not Randle. Not even Brook.
We were spoiled. Knight, Mr. Lee, Mad Dog, Jacobsen, Childress..... Been a while.
I'd have to say Childress. Hernandez was really good at many things but I don't recall him being able to consistently create his own shot, which you would have to be able to do in order to take a game over.
Maybe the Dawkins years have slipped down the memory hole, but I can remember Chasson Randle taking over a lot of games. I don't think we'd have close to winning the NIT in 2015 without him.
Here are his 2015 NIT point totals:
18, 35, 26, 24, 25.
That 25 was the final against Miami and included our last 4 points in the 2nd half and 6 of our 7 points in OT, including the game-winning 2 FTs with 3 seconds left when we were down 1. The only other point was a meaningless FT by Anthony Brown with under a second left.
Randle had his shortcoming as a PG, but he could sure take over games as a scorer.
Here are his 2015 NIT point totals:
18, 35, 26, 24, 25.
That 25 was the final against Miami and included our last 4 points in the 2nd half and 6 of our 7 points in OT, including the game-winning 2 FTs with 3 seconds left when we were down 1. The only other point was a meaningless FT by Anthony Brown with under a second left.
Randle had his shortcoming as a PG, but he could sure take over games as a scorer.
Maybe the Dawkins years have slipped down the memory hole, but I can remember Chasson Randle taking over a lot of games. I don't think we'd have close to winning the NIT in 2015 without him.
Here are his 2015 NIT point totals:
18, 35, 26, 24, 25.
That 25 was the final against Miami and included our last 4 points in the 2nd half and 6 of our 7 points in OT, including the game-winning 2 FTs with 3 seconds left when we were down 1. The only other point was a meaningless FT by Anthony Brown with under a second left.
Randle had his shortcoming as a PG, but he could sure take over games as a scorer.
Here are his 2015 NIT point totals:
18, 35, 26, 24, 25.
That 25 was the final against Miami and included our last 4 points in the 2nd half and 6 of our 7 points in OT, including the game-winning 2 FTs with 3 seconds left when we were down 1. The only other point was a meaningless FT by Anthony Brown with under a second left.
Randle had his shortcoming as a PG, but he could sure take over games as a scorer.
12-24-2018, 04:40 PM
(12-24-2018, 10:00 AM)burger Wrote: Maybe the Dawkins years have slipped down the memory hole, but I can remember Chasson Randle taking over a lot of games. I don't think we'd have close to winning the NIT in 2015 without him.
Here are his 2015 NIT point totals:
18, 35, 26, 24, 25.
That 25 was the final against Miami and included our last 4 points in the 2nd half and 6 of our 7 points in OT, including the game-winning 2 FTs with 3 seconds left when we were down 1. The only other point was a meaningless FT by Anthony Brown with under a second left.
Randle had his shortcoming as a PG, but he could sure take over games as a scorer.
Yes, I think Randle was a great player who could put the team on his shoulders.
(12-24-2018, 10:00 AM)burger Wrote: Maybe the Dawkins years have slipped down the memory hole, but I can remember Chasson Randle taking over a lot of games. I don't think we'd have close to winning the NIT in 2015 without him.
Here are his 2015 NIT point totals:
18, 35, 26, 24, 25.
That 25 was the final against Miami and included our last 4 points in the 2nd half and 6 of our 7 points in OT, including the game-winning 2 FTs with 3 seconds left when we were down 1. The only other point was a meaningless FT by Anthony Brown with under a second left.
Randle had his shortcoming as a PG, but he could sure take over games as a scorer.
Yes, I think Randle was a great player who could put the team on his shoulders.
12-24-2018, 05:47 PM
All the recent names mentioned here were great and were capable of carrying the team (Randle, Fields, Childress, et al), but I wanted to just say that having finally watched the DVR of the USF game, I was pleasantly surprised. This is probably because I had read all the criticisms first and knew to expect them, but we were actually conceivably able to win until the last couple of minutes, as opposed to a totally uncompetitive effort.. Silver linings (basically all in the second half): defensive intensity/focus/effort improved visibly; Bryce Wills!, what an athlete; correctable errors (ill-advised passes, shot clock violations) where the players will (hopefully) make better decisions with the passage of time; we actually kept pace with their scoring in the second half, to name a few. I'm hopeful that Okpala and Davis will grow into such load-bearing players. I was entertained (though sometimes painfully), and I will keep watching and cheering.
All the recent names mentioned here were great and were capable of carrying the team (Randle, Fields, Childress, et al), but I wanted to just say that having finally watched the DVR of the USF game, I was pleasantly surprised. This is probably because I had read all the criticisms first and knew to expect them, but we were actually conceivably able to win until the last couple of minutes, as opposed to a totally uncompetitive effort.. Silver linings (basically all in the second half): defensive intensity/focus/effort improved visibly; Bryce Wills!, what an athlete; correctable errors (ill-advised passes, shot clock violations) where the players will (hopefully) make better decisions with the passage of time; we actually kept pace with their scoring in the second half, to name a few. I'm hopeful that Okpala and Davis will grow into such load-bearing players. I was entertained (though sometimes painfully), and I will keep watching and cheering.
Well, the downside is Lunardi's latest bracketology has the Pac-12 on the outside looking in: just two teams likely to dance (Arizona State and Oregon).
The upside is that he has USF as among the "last four in," which means he thinks USF as an at-large is better than all but two PAC-12 teams. We played them close to the final minutes, so by the ever-so-speculative transitive property, we should be competitive with all but one or two teams in the conference.
Then again, given how bad the conference is this year, there's really no excuse not to finish in the top 3 or 4...
The upside is that he has USF as among the "last four in," which means he thinks USF as an at-large is better than all but two PAC-12 teams. We played them close to the final minutes, so by the ever-so-speculative transitive property, we should be competitive with all but one or two teams in the conference.
Then again, given how bad the conference is this year, there's really no excuse not to finish in the top 3 or 4...
Well, the downside is Lunardi's latest bracketology has the Pac-12 on the outside looking in: just two teams likely to dance (Arizona State and Oregon).
The upside is that he has USF as among the "last four in," which means he thinks USF as an at-large is better than all but two PAC-12 teams. We played them close to the final minutes, so by the ever-so-speculative transitive property, we should be competitive with all but one or two teams in the conference.
Then again, given how bad the conference is this year, there's really no excuse not to finish in the top 3 or 4...
The upside is that he has USF as among the "last four in," which means he thinks USF as an at-large is better than all but two PAC-12 teams. We played them close to the final minutes, so by the ever-so-speculative transitive property, we should be competitive with all but one or two teams in the conference.
Then again, given how bad the conference is this year, there's really no excuse not to finish in the top 3 or 4...
Based on our quality of play to date, we are solidly on the NiT bubble.
BC
BC
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »