Jump to content

Texas A&M/CC from the MD couch .....


Taj79

Recommended Posts

While I did watch it (thanks go bills once again) it was under the distraction of also watching my granddaughter and the Iggles. Again, lots of things to watch this year but concentrating on growth and game expansion.

I fear games like this will be the norm --- we did the same thing in the first two but came back to survive. Not yesterday. Welcome to the rollercoaster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is time for Crews to find a rotation. There is a reason that teams have a rotation and it is to give people a rhythm. I would like to see a 9 man rotation. With that said I have absolutely no idea how Crews could do that without axing some upperclassmen. It is almost like Crews was trying to go to a 10 man rotation (leaving MR and AG on the bench) but that didnt work bc I thought both of them deserve bigger minutes.

Manning needs to sit. He must be the best big in practice by a mile. McBroom needs to move to the 2 to back up Ash. Right now, we need steady players and I think that Crawford, Bartley, Reynolds and Gillman are the bench players that need to find more minutes. This is going to be very difficult to do though because there is no one who has not shined bright at least one time this season (except for Manning). The freshmen are not scared and I feel much more comfortable with one of them at PG then McBroom.

I feel myself not in meltdown mode like I would be last year if this had happened (or even after Santa Clara). When expectations are low, you really can just sit back and think, we are going to have Roby, MR, MB, AG, BJ, and MY for 3 more years....that is pretty nice to think about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you are underestimating the time needed to come to the very conclusions you want. Three games does not give a good enough base. For example, Bartley was a non-player in Game 1. Better in 2, maybe a regression in 3. Yarbrough was nothing in game 1, but was dynamite in Game 2. Game 3 he just made a few when TXAMCC was not going to foul as I saw it. Based on these three games, yes, your assessment of Manning seems right on however he has done just as much if not more than Lancona, and I'm not ready to cut bait there. Agbeko is our rebounder it seems, but his offense is dreadful. Here's a novel idea -- dunk it Reggie.

It's ups and downs and is going to be for this whole year. The whole year? Yes. Because the conference schedule will be a whole different learning process and I fear the OOC is so weak, nothing much of anything worthwhile will be gleaned from it. Just game experience.

I think Crews is trying to figure out not only what his freshmen have and can provide but also what his seniors cannot. Manning and Glaze have been around for four years. I don't see a lightbulb going off in Manning. Glaze is still hurt but let's say I'm not so conifdent there either. At some point, as a coach, you're going to have to say the hell with the present and build for the future. No matter how you cut it, that next year does not include either of those guys and with the youth on our bench, I can see it coming down to developing that youth for the future and sitting the seniors. I could see myself thinking that way if I were Crews or any other coach in such a position. But I'm not so I don't have to make that call. Its a cruel and somewhat heartless call, but so it is.

And the more Gl;aze stays off the court, the more inconsequential he becomes. He could be hoarding that entire lightbulb but we will need to know soon. And maybe the injury means we never know. Based on what I am seeing ----- no sustained feeding into the low post as it is --- Glaze coming back and giving his usual will only amount to one or two putbacks a night. Nothing more right now. I'd still go with training the youth in that situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is time for Crews to find a rotation. There is a reason that teams have a rotation and it is to give people a rhythm. I would like to see a 9 man rotation.

How many teams have a nine man rotation this early in the season? Especially with this big a turnover from last year to this one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I might get my head chopped off here, but besides JM the other biggest disappointment has been McB. Yeah, I know helluva game against SIUC followed up by two clunkers. He was a refreshing addition last year as instant offense until he hit the speed bump towards the end. I don't see where his PG skills are, however, as he still seems to be a shoot first pass last type of player. He fits the bill as an off the bench guy who may or may not fill it up just when you need it. We have some really nice D1 FR prototypes at PG, MB and MR. Let 'em play. DR has to play. MY has to play. AY has to play for seniority purposes plus he's better than I expected. A lot of folks on here thought he was going to be a 20ppg guy. Where did that come from? He was a part timer at Nova for a reason. But he's a gamer and needs to be out there. I hate to knock any Billiken player this hard, but if you look up stiff you'll see JM's picture. I think Husak gave us more. As for the Sophs, they all have to play until they show they are just not gonna make at this level. I think all 3 can play in the A10. RA just isn't refined enough yet, but he's got skills. TL can be a CE type. And MC, given the chance, could be a sniper if someone would kick it out to him and he's open. He's not a Drew Slow on the Trigger Diener. He's got a very nice release and has shown this under fire. Besides he's got a pretty cool head out there and doesn't make many mistakes w/ the ball. So, 6 FR, 3 SOPHs, and 1 JR get the bulk of the minutes.

There is no meltdown, because expectations have never been too high for this year's team. They can go anywhere from 10 Ws to 20, but there will be games like last night, so just accept them as part of growing up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been trying to focus on game-to-game improvements, but the frenetic, 12 player rotation has made things difficult to assess

McBroom is getting minutes for his defense, not his offense. He has improved dramatically in that respect. That's why he's leading us in minutes. It's sort of a catch-22 though because, in my opinion, his presence hurts the flow of our offense. He's shooting 30% from the field...that needs to change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. In addition to someone peeing in Joe's Kool-Aide is does appear someone dropped some hallucinogens into the Kool-Aide the rest of us are drinking. A few comments:

1. Glaze. We all sure hope that he gets healthy and plays differently this year than he has the past 3 years; however, other than hope, I have seen no evidence that he is some type of an offensive threat. Team need for an inside presence does not mean that he has the ability. Yes, he has adds energy and yes, he gets put back/junk baskets and does get some rebounds, but we be attain A-10 prediction status (10th place or so) if our plan is for GG to be our inside presence. And yes, while we cannot blame him for yesterday's loss, to suggest that if only we had GG ... then we would be better is also wrong.

2. Jim Crews cannot be praised for playing 12 men during wins and then ridiculed for playing the same 12 when we lose. Wake up. A 9 or 10 man rotation is dreamland. Wake up to reality. We have at least 11 players who deserve minutes. Now, if we believe some should get more than others, then fine. But to say that JC should stick with 9 guys and let 4 guys sit is stupid.

3. JM. Sorry, but I don't see the improvement. His minutes must be cut and cut now.

3. McBroom. Please don't play him anymore at point guard. Originally, I said it should be Reynolds, good or bad, and that we should stick with it. If Bartley is a better option, then stick with that. If both, then fine but please, no more AM.

4. I did not watch yesterday's game, but our guards must do a better job of getting the ball to our bigs.

5. Public outcry against Adrian Peterson and no outcry against those comparing Ash to Larry Hughes? Really? :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. In addition to someone peeing in Joe's Kool-Aide is does appear someone dropped some hallucinogens into the Kool-Aide the rest of us are drinking. A few comments:

1. Glaze. We all sure hope that he gets healthy and plays differently this year than he has the past 3 years; however, other than hope, I have seen no evidence that he is some type of an offensive threat. Team need for an inside presence does not mean that he has the ability. Yes, he has adds energy and yes, he gets put back/junk baskets and does get some rebounds, but we be attain A-10 prediction status (10th place or so) if our plan is for GG to be our inside presence. And yes, while we cannot blame him for yesterday's loss, to suggest that if only we had GG ... then we would be better is also wrong.

2. Jim Crews cannot be praised for playing 12 men during wins and then ridiculed for playing the same 12 when we lose. Wake up. A 9 or 10 man rotation is dreamland. Wake up to reality. We have at least 11 players who deserve minutes. Now, if we believe some should get more than others, then fine. But to say that JC should stick with 9 guys and let 4 guys sit is stupid.

3. JM. Sorry, but I don't see the improvement. His minutes must be cut and cut now.

3. McBroom. Please don't play him anymore at point guard. Originally, I said it should be Reynolds, good or bad, and that we should stick with it. If Bartley is a better option, then stick with that. If both, then fine but please, no more AM.

4. I did not watch yesterday's game, but our guards must do a better job of getting the ball to our bigs.

5. Public outcry against Adrian Peterson and no outcry against those comparing Ash to Larry Hughes? Really? :rolleyes:

Well said on all. Agree on Hollywood @ point but not sure how you , or me or JC FTM, would do that? go 3 guard with Ash going to the 3 and MR or Bartley @ point. Or make it Ash? If AM gets his shot going keep him @ the 2?

If I was coach I would pretty much go with Ash and the F and S class. With that sh*tty loss, weak weak ooc schedule, and future likely losses which even the most optimistic of us would agree about we're out of dance. That is unless we get the automatic bid which I would think we'd have as good a chance as any to take with our talent level these last 2 years. These kids and our 2 bigs coming our are future and early indications make me think the new 6 are stifles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The guards did not have a great game but the bigs missed plenty of bunnies. No excuse for that - what is the point of getting the ball inside if the guys can not score. Our bigs seem tentative when they go up - they seem to not be aggressive when going up for the shot and would rather finesse it around the defender. Just go up hard! - you will either make or get fouled or both all being preferable to missing. Manning has been a big disappointment - he has not improved and honestly I am tired of hearing about his sprained ankles. If the guy could walk and chew gum at the same time then maybe he would stop stepping on everybody's feet in practice. Grandy may as well become a male cheerleader if he can not stay healthy. I figured we were do for a game like this but not at home so it was a disappointment. We had them in the second half by 8 and then went on one of our classic scoring droughts. Free throws - what can I say but for damn sake make them! This is not rocket science just make them. We lost the game at the foul line - I know we were not very good in other aspects but if we had hit 75% of our fts we win this game. Lets see if the freshmen can get back on track for tonight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

my bad I thought I typed at the end that we appear to have NO stiffs in our frosh six

I agree. Like the look of all of them. Hard to keep a six man class together for four years so will be interesting to see if they all finish their careers at SLU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. Like the look of all of them. Hard to keep a six man class together for four years so will be interesting to see if they all finish their careers at SLU.

The historic character that we like to associate with the program hopefully helps keep egos and frustrations in check.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...