Great point. You can watch a Wis vs Rut rock fight game that ends 52-49 and then immediately watch a UNC v FSU (ACC) game that ends 92-89.
I think it's more how B10 teams are built with a lot of them running their offense through the low post. When that happens, the game is going to be slower, more physical, and more banging. When you have lots of cutting, picking, backing down, by nature, it's more physical and the refs have to let a certain amount of that to occur. Otherwise, both teams would have 25 fouls by halftime.
Same for me. Makes for a much more enjoyable season!
Couldn't agree more. I'm hoping maybe expansion will help that. But maybe UCLA and Oregon will be forced to change, instead of the other way around....
Makes total sense. I vowed to not get too hyped after this last loss…but here I am again, getting hyped…ready to go on this roller coaster and get hurt again haha
Or teams adjust to how the game is being called and instead of 25 calls being called by halftime guys are playing a cleaner game in the post.
It's hard to play a 'clean' game in the post. By nature, it's going to be physical. When you have a 7'4 300lb guy backing you down on the block, the only defense is to try and get physical.
I am almost positive that with UCLA's style and talent (Oregon isn't a slouch in those areas either) it will force teams to change to a more modern game. I really hope that the B1G does some corrections with officiating over the next couple years to more heavily punish bruiser ball.
I'm not sure honestly. As I haven't looked elsewhere as far as coaches. But if we get knocked out first round again. Losing to a 16, 15 and 13 seed and then losing to whatever seed it would be this year is just not acceptable. That would be 4 years in a row not making it out of the first round. The amount of talent we have had and then do that is not acceptable.
I've always said that relying (hoping) that the refs will call a game a certain way is a terrible game strategy. You can't rely on that happening.
To answer your question:
Many teams have played "old style of ball" recently and had a ton of success. UNC's recent championship game run played through the center, last years Uconn team played through their center, Duke's season with Zion played through the center, etc. If you have a dominant center, playing through the post is still an extremely effective style of play and you can win championships that way. (in College ball at least)
Due to this years team and the recruits we have coming in over the next few years, I am hoping we get to an E8 and F4 over the next 3 years. If that doesn’t happen, then I will be on board with looking elsewhere.
I mean did you watch the games? The other team was too small to stop anything in the post, a lob from outside and edey dunk could have happened on every play. That is only IF they weren't allowed to hang from his arms preventing him from doing so. The 2-3 guys not mugging Edey were on the perimeter mugging the person with the ball. We win those games if a few players don't choke under pressure, but we also win those games if the other team isn't permitted to foul every possession causing us to get frustrated and choke.
I’ll kinda give you UConn, even though they had really good guard play. But Duke did not play through a center with Zion and that UNC teams run was mainly due to their guards - Love and Davis and also Manek. Bacot had a huge presence on the rebounding side and scored, but offense was not ran through him first. You may go back to 2015 when duke won with Okafor. But they also had Winslow and Jones scoring a lot too…but that’s really the only one I can remember where a team may have run it’s offense through it’s center (but I don’t think they did)
And how exactly did they neutralize an almost 1' advantage that Edey had over every player on their team? What prevented us lobbing the ball to Edey every single time down the court? I'll give you a hint, it wasn't legal......
Yeah, look at how many FTs we shot vs Texas then how many we shot vs St Peter’s. Teams dare refs to call fouls and sometimes they do and sometimes they don’t. If I were a team playing Purdue I would foul as much as I could until refs actually started making calls.
So again, you can rely and hope that the refs call a game a certain way, but if they don't, what do you do?
That's a fair statement, and also why modern ball wins in the tourney more often. In general it takes the refs out of it as you don't have to worry about the double standard on calls that post players get. If you are splashing threes all game the refs can't stop you. Also driving to the basket gets calls from the refs at a much higher rate than low post play.
Completely disagree on it being difficult to call a clean game, the rules are pretty clear and playing physical is legal, displacing an offensive player or putting hands on an opponent to limit freedom of movement is illegal. Displacing a defensive player by lowering your shoulder into the player is illegal.
I love it when people think the program is dying. Leading up to last year's tourney we were one of 2 teams in the entire nation that had been to 4 of the last 5 sweet sixteens. Even now the list is very short of teams that have been to 4 of the last 6, and I think we are 4th-5th in the nation in consecutive tourney appearances.
Very much agree with this point. Extremely problematic that refs at times look at equality of outcomes, not the the methodology used to achieve it, allowing physically overmatched teams to use illegal tactics to avoid being physically dominated.
This right here. The rules other than charge and a couple other are very very specific. The ACC calls their games very much by the rule book, and it produces better overall basketball once everyone understands they can't get away with mugging people as a defensive strategy. Refs shouldn't be there to even the playing field, they should be there to enforce the rules as written. Bo Borski has on record said he focuses on advantage, not the actual rules. It amazed me that he said that and was still reffing the next year, but I guess the B1G thinks that's perfectly fine.
Because refs are not robots. They're not going to call every play by the rule book. Just like an umpire in baseball strike zones vary.
So, the Big 10 program with the most Big 10 championships hasn't had FF expectations in the past? Are you saying Purdue was just happy to be there and any wins in the tourney were gravy?
My bad. St. Peters loss was deeper. Just felt like it was early because they were a 15 seed. That bracket was gifted to us by who lost. And we gave it away. Still shouldn't be losing to double digit seeds year after year.
Think of it as not a modern game, but a revert back to a few decades ago game or pre 70s?
You’re describing .bad refs, which is something the Big Ten needs to do something about. If you ask the Big Ten or NCAA officials office if those things are discretionary calls you’ll get a definitive no.
I'm entering my 61st year (plus 6 years of MS/HS rooting). I was a friend with Mount in High School. Went to Whisky and L'ville in '69 ,,,, What a long, strange trip it's been.
I was Butler earlier and so I only have 51 totally sold out Purdue years!
I agree st peters was a worse loss even though it was in the Sweet sixteen...I loved last year's team but we weren't going far in the tourney compared to the jaden/Trevion team...we were too young and depended so much on our inconsistent shooting....Jaden played horrific against st peters though but we probably should've seen it coming...he had been inconsistent all year...he played well against Texas and Yale but we kinda knew the wheels would come off at some point...we also didn't have anyone else step up either...sasha was too inconsistent, hunter was not much of an offensive threat....tre/Zach combo was decent but was tough because you had to play both and it felt like sometimes they couldn't get in rhythm with the limited minutes each played....it was a talented team but frustrating at the same time....we just didn't gel and were inefficient at times....this year feels different...Zach will play as many minutes as he can, Smith is experienced and one of the best pgs we've had in awhile, loyer is steady and if he's hitting shots we're dangerous, if not he's still a good facilitator....Jones is a great backup pg and defender, he can legitimately spell Smith or loyer and his quickness is much needed, something we didn't have last year...Waddell is a great perimeter defender and a great athlete, will be valuable on fastbreaks...sprinkle in some shooting with Colvin and Heide and some experienced forwards and we've got the pieces and depth...the biggest issue will be getting enough guys playing time....I'm hoping that by January we'll have an 8/9 man rotation....3 players at least will be playing minimal minutes...playing too many guys can hurt efficiency and we should know by then who plays the best around edey, because that's the most important thing....that will make us reach our potential as a team....it may be someone less talented, but it will make us better as a team by being a positive contributor with edey in the game...something that the Ivey team couldn't do...
I’d argue that the biggest issue is not finding guys enough playing time but instead is finding players who can consistently hit from three. I get that there are guys on paper who should be good shooters but until we see it that remains to me number one question for this team. If we have too many guys who are shooting it well and playing well overall I’ll happily take that problem.
If you notice I said "if", we can become a 3 pt shooting team again, with Edey , FF.
That's why I think we need to have heide play the 4....his shooting is better than Gillis, tkr, and furst....
