majerus mojo Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Perhaps not asinine to simply try to contradict them, but certainly asinine to suggest they stop following the team because they agree with someone who made a less-than-positive observation about our team's play. It was a joke, though one I definitely wish you would follow through with. Maybe just post less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillikenLaw Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 It was a joke, though one I definitely wish you would follow through with. Maybe just post less. Oh. Good one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 The big similarity being everyone said we couldn't beat those teams, at the time, for the exact same reasons (ATHLETICISM!) being mentioned now. And yes, people are saying we're going to have an early exit from the tournament. But it would be asinine to try and contradict them. Really, who on here besides one guy has said anything like we are going to have an early exit from the tournament? I don't remember many regular posters on here saying we were going to lose to those teams because of athleticism. My concern is that we appear to have match up problems with teams that have both length and athleticism. Under Majerus our tempo would help negate both. We don't control tempo like we did under Majerus. We got throttled by Oregon last year and have had dificulty with those teams this year. I think it is a legit concern. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
majerus mojo Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Oh. Good one. Who knows, maybe you could catch fire and have a chance to really add some substance as we go deeper into the season here on Billikens.com. You seem to suck talking about athleticism, conferences, and long-term analysis. I'm just pointing out what others and myself have observed. Sorry if it's a little negative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Agree. The staff started inserting Crawford into the lineup seemingly out of the blue to inject some life into our perimeter shooting and I think they are doing the same with Tanner. He can be a tough inside out matchup and if they can get him comfortable with a few plays and start to get a productive 5-7 minutes out of him it could be a new look and a difference maker for us. I also heard Rammer say on the pre-game that Tanner's knee had been bothering him and was back to 95% last night so that is likely why he has been MIA. JC and staff know we're going to need more depth on the inside down the road, hence TL getting minutes last night. Why not against VCU? Different style. You need quick good ball handlers against them. Right now, TL looks like a better option than GG, who looks lost out there lately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufan13 Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Oregon shot 72% from 3 against us last year. On the season teams shot 33% from 3 against us. On the season Oregon shot 33% from 3. Game on the west coast vs a Pac 12 team. Fluke. They hit some incredible, contested shots that changed the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Holding someone below their scoring average and controlling tempo are two different things. You don't think we controlled tempo in that game? We even outscored them in fastbreak points 12-4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufan13 Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Holding someone below their scoring average and controlling tempo are two different things. Exactly. So we may not control the tempo vs an athletic team, but we can still beat them with our defense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
majerus mojo Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Oregon shot 72% from 3 against us last year. On the season teams shot 33% from 3 against us. On the season Oregon shot 33% from 3. Game on the west coast vs a Pac 12 team. Fluke. They hit some incredible, contested shots that changed the game. 72%, or the highest anyone has shot in a tournament game since '94 or something ridiculous. Don't think the Ducks athleticism is the reason we lost, and I don't think anyone is capable of blowing this team out the way our defense plays, aside from a once a decade shooting performance as described. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Went through the play by play on ESPN and Manning was the only front end miss. OK - I give in - I must have been wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 You're asking for consistency from A10 refs? For the road team? Are you looking for peace in the Middle East too? Look, the refs were not an issue in the game - they may not have been great but they were fair to both sides - look at the foul shots - both teams were close - they hit theirs and we did not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dwayne's_World Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 72%, or the highest anyone has shot in a tournament game since '94 or something ridiculous. Don't think the Ducks athleticism is the reason we lost, and I don't think anyone is capable of blowing this team out the way our defense plays, aside from a once a decade shooting performance as described. Not to mention that the committee can't screw up the seeding nearly as bad as they did last year. I don't think there will be as good a 12 seed this time... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufan13 Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Only 18 teams in the Top 50 of KenPom play a faster tempo than us this season. Mason doesn't even play a faster tempo than we do. We average 68 possessions per game. Wisconsin averages 64 possessions a game. 65 against us. Wichita St averages 66 a game. 67 against us. Valpo averages 66 a game. 67 against us. Indiana St averages 66 a game. 68 against us. Dayton 65 a game. 72 against us. Richmond 64 a game. 73 against us. St. Joes 66 a game. 66 against us. VCU 71 a game. 71 against us. This year's team performs well at a faster pace. There have been a couple games were we play to our opponents pace and won. There have been games where we play to our pace and win. 2 games that we lost we got forced into a slower tempo. So maybe against the more athletic, faster teams, we'll do ok. Last year we played about 65 possessions a game. Against Oregon we played 70. This year, if we play 70 against a team like that, it's only a 2 possession difference. This is not last year's team. Since 2005 7 of 36 Final Four Teams have ranked in the Top 100 in tempo. That includes Memphis who ranked 99th. And UNC 3 teams who were in the top 100. I'm not overly worried about this super fast and athletic teams. Our style suits a deep run better. I said it before, but now I'm done with this board for a while. I might be close to "Listener of the Streets" status, but it's not worth it. Maybe I can crack Backhands top posters. People on here do a good job of running off posters. Either way, the negativity will never stop. And those people won't let the rest of us enjoy the season because all they can talk about is how we'll lose to a super athletic team a month from now because those super athletic teams have no weaknesses at all. We may lose to an athletic team in the tournament, but why worry about it now? That just means you won't enjoy the season now or then. Go Bills. Keep the streak alive. Final Four. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 The big similarity being everyone said we couldn't beat those teams, at the time, for the exact same reasons (ATHLETICISM!) being mentioned now. And yes, people are saying we're going to have an early exit from the tournament. But it would be asinine to try and contradict them. +1 I'm more worried about running into a team in the NCAA Tourney that shoots lights out. We didn't get blown out by Oregon because of their "athleticism", we did because they shot out of their minds - 70% from 3-point land and many were contested or from way deep - crazy shots. Mason killed us on the boards the first game, but the more important reason was they we struggled is they were also shooting lights out from outside. Without their great shooing, all that athleticism wouldn't have met anything. We have beaten plenty of "athletic" teams over the years that don't shoot well. Some of our fans buy the "athleticism" stuff that opposing fans typically throw at us. Are there teams more "athletic" than us? Of course, but we beat a lot of those teams and our athleticism is underrated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
majerus mojo Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 How about a narrative (thanks, Mr. Strauss) that athletic teams don't want to see SLU when the bracket is unveiled, and not vice versa. Wouldn't that be nuts. Spin is spin. To act like the A-10 is devoid of the great athletes the power conferences possess is splitting hairs. You know what they might actually have? More highly touted players with more stars on their recruiting pages. What they definitively don't have is the experience or cohesion our guys do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MB73 Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 No one knows the answer. It remains to be seen since we are in the A-10. I think if we face certain athletic power conference teams in the NCAA with big front lines (etc.) we might have them outflanked if they are not disciplined enough. If we play our mistake free best and make them be undisciplined athletes, not complete team basketball players as we have become, then we can win. No doubt. It will be fascinating to watch when we get there, 2nd round let's say, against a Big 10 or Big 12 team with muscle and "athleticism". But if we face a power conference disciplined team with a big front line, they pack it in, stop JJ drives & DE down low and make us hit 3's, that could be a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
majerus mojo Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 RT @tomtimm: In last 14 minutes, 11 seconds of Mason game, SLU made 13 of 16 FGs, 5 of 6 3's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlarry Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 RT @tomtimm: In last 14 minutes, 11 seconds of Mason game, SLU made 13 of 16 FGs, 5 of 6 3's. They should just shoot like that the entire game, it would make things much easier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Pelican Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Yeah, if a guy is gonna miss, he shouldn't take that shot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Much more concerned about where we're potentially playing as opposed to who. The San Jose thing still reeks. We're a complete afterthought for the committe re: location. I don't think we were an afterthought on location at all. The way the pod system works 4 seeds almost certainly will get placed in geographic locations that don't make sense. 1 seeds all get placed closest first. Then the 2 seeds, on down the line. By the time they get to the 4 seeds they have to go wherever is leftover. If we don't move off the 4 seed line, the same thing will likely happen to us this year. We will get stuck in Spokane or San Diego and will likely have to play a west coast team in the second round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe_davola Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 I don't think we were an afterthought on location at all. The way the pod system works 4 seeds almost certainly will get placed in geographic locations that don't make sense. 1 seeds all get placed closest first. Then the 2 seeds, on down the line. By the time they get to the 4 seeds they have to go wherever is leftover. If we don't move off the 4 seed line, the same thing will likely happen to us this year. We will get stuck in Spokane or San Diego and will likely have to play a west coast team in the second round. That sucks but I agree with you. It could very well be a 'road' game for us in the second round. Hopefully we keep our road warrior mentality during the tourney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBills Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 SLU may not be as athletic as a lot of major conference teams, but they aren't P.E. at summer fat camp, either. I personally think the athleticism point is being overstated. SLU has beaten and lost to athletic teams. Athleticism is not our kryptonite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoyaBilliken Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Good discussion. The staff is very good at what they do. I believe they will have the guys ready. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
majerus mojo Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 I don't think we were an afterthought on location at all. The way the pod system works 4 seeds almost certainly will get placed in geographic locations that don't make sense. 1 seeds all get placed closest first. Then the 2 seeds, on down the line. By the time they get to the 4 seeds they have to go wherever is leftover. If we don't move off the 4 seed line, the same thing will likely happen to us this year. We will get stuck in Spokane or San Diego and will likely have to play a west coast team in the second round. I don't care about the first two games since all of the locations are far from STL, more concerned with being in Indianapolis or Memphis region, and there a lot of teams that those locations are the most desirable for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo027 Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 I don't think we were an afterthought on location at all. The way the pod system works 4 seeds almost certainly will get placed in geographic locations that don't make sense. 1 seeds all get placed closest first. Then the 2 seeds, on down the line. By the time they get to the 4 seeds they have to go wherever is leftover. If we don't move off the 4 seed line, the same thing will likely happen to us this year. We will get stuck in Spokane or San Diego and will likely have to play a west coast team in the second round. Pretty much. From last year: Auburn Hills: 3 Michigan St and 4 Michigan Lexington: 1 Louisville and 3 Marquette Salt Lake City: 1 Gonzaga and 3 New Mexico San Jose: 4 SLU and 4 Syracuse Dayton: 1 Indiana and 2 Ohio St Austin: 3 Florida and 2 Miami KC: 1 Kansas and 4 K-State Philly: 2 Duke and 2 Georgetown We'll probably always get the shaft on locations since we'll never draw as many fans as a big public school. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.