BuffLuke80
Well-Known Member
I didn't know that. He has some vets on his team though, they should know that stuff by now. I'm pretty sure they didn't want Berry as the main option.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Colorado at USC post game thread
- Thread starter Buffnik
- Start date
FtColBuff
Member
Great year winning the PAC12 Tourney. Did you know that we played a whole schedule that didn't include one single top 25 team in the nation. PAC was down that year. In fact we didn't play a top 25 team until the Big Dance in which we went 1-1.
I know people think I don't know what I'm talking about when I say we are tapped out with Tad. But for the record, here is what we have with him for the last six years. Yes, he is the best thing til this point to happen to the Men's BBall program. No doubt. But we have hit our ceiling with him. We have played 32 games against teams that were in the top 25 at the time we played them in his 6 years. We are 11-21. Out of the 11, we won 6 at home, 2 on the road, one in the PAC 12 tourney, one on a neutral court, and 1 in the Big Dance.
What is damning is, the in the last 3 years we are 2-12 against top 25 teams, including no wins this year. Hey I am glad that Tad can get us to 20+ wins 5 out of 6 years. But we haven't turned the corner into being a dominate team that is consistently ranked in the top 25 every year, and if the right storm hits, we could go back to what we were before. Has Tad hit his ceiling? I say yes. Same mistakes made every year, we are good enough to get to 20 wins, and maybe a 1st round win in the Big Dance.
Show me where and when we will turn the corner? I would love to see that. And I believe that when we stop averaging 19 turnovers a game.
Just saying
Unfortunately, we just don't have anyone who can create his own shot this year when the defense raises its intensity.
Homework for this summer:
Fletch, King & Fortune -- work on your handles
Dom -- get stronger
Yaz -- get stronger, work on jumper to stretch defense
White -- handle & strength to be ready to start
Peters & Brown -- be ready to play (handle & strength)
Homework for this summer:
Fletch, King & Fortune -- work on your handles
Dom -- get stronger
Yaz -- get stronger, work on jumper to stretch defense
White -- handle & strength to be ready to start
Peters & Brown -- be ready to play (handle & strength)
I will defer to people who know basketball better than me (which is pretty much everyone) but isn't the key to breaking down a zone being able to drive into the creases? Get the zone to collapse and then pass out of it.
Being able to create your own shot 1 on 1 is great but not as useful against a zone. Right now, it just seems like nobody can drive into a zone with any sort of control.
Being able to create your own shot 1 on 1 is great but not as useful against a zone. Right now, it just seems like nobody can drive into a zone with any sort of control.
The biggest thing against a zone is quick, crisp passes to get the defense out of to collapse so they are out of position and then capitalize on it. The guards were throwing the ball around carelessly all night, even when they were winning.
dyemeduke
Well-Known Member
You make some fair statements, but I think it's a leap in assumptions and logic to say we're tapped out with Tad. Coaches are learning and evolving, and I don't think he's reached his ceiling...but that's just difference of opinion I guess.
Rankings shouldn't be so important - they come as a product of statement wins. If you can consistently win 20 games a year, to me, that's equivalent of being a borderline top-25 team (I KNOW there can be holes poked in that statement, but just let me have that statement; it's not egregious).
How do we turn the corner and elevate into more dominant presence? Well, this question does go back to your statement about Tad being tapped out. Without having seen more from him, sure, he's not the guy to make us a top 10 team overnight. However, good luck finding that coach...they are rare and will cost you a lot of money, and you will likely strike out on someone who seems like a slam dunk hire before you get a guy that is it. Other options: We need to develop another player with the talent to go NBA lottery, or just get a few one/two-and-dones.
Many people say exactly what you say - drive/dribble penetration. To me, yes, but that simplifies the main theme. You beat the zone with good ball movement. Dribble penetration moves the ball into the middle of the zone, forcing defenders to react. Once you get defenders reacting to you, you can move the ball around to the person that is free. Get the defense reacting though is the main key imo. I have said for a long time that Arvydas Sabonis would have been the best person ever to beat a zone if he played his prime in the US. Instead of penetrate with the dribble, do it with the pass to a big in the high post. He can shoot a wide open mid-range if middle man doesn't help. If someone does help, move shooters around to get free and pass ball off.
I never played serious bball though, never had a coach even, so would be interested to see how others would attack it.
Attack the gaps (without turning the ball over)
Swing the ball (Without turning the ball over)
Stretch the defense with the 3 (You have to shoot the open looks)
We did none of those things last night. Lazy Passes, poor ball handling and not shooting the open looks are exactly what a zone wants.
BuffLuke80
Well-Known Member
There is more than one way to beat it, depends what zone they are running too. I actually think you need to do both, penetrate and swing the ball. If you don't move, you make yourself easy to guard.
Yeah, guys not being aggressive really hurts. In theory, we have a great way to attack the zone. You see Wes as a baseline slot guy, who can get easy dunks off of rotations. You see Scott as the high post guy, who can hit an open jumpshot as well as make the important pass when the rotation comes. The problem is, our PGs don't attack, so we get way more passing around the perimeter than is needed.
We also aren't getting guys cutting when they go zone. Whoever passes the ball should be cutting immediately after. It creates space and allows for Gordon to get dunks, Scott to get open shots/drives/force fouls, King to get open 3s, etc. Dom, Yaz, Fortune are the ones Boyle trusts to set up the offense, they need to be driving and kicking out (which they do on occasion) then immediately looking to backdoor cut. Instead, Dom and Yaz both wander around outside the 3pt line, which screws up angles and allows the defense to get their hands in passing lanes.
We also aren't getting guys cutting when they go zone. Whoever passes the ball should be cutting immediately after. It creates space and allows for Gordon to get dunks, Scott to get open shots/drives/force fouls, King to get open 3s, etc. Dom, Yaz, Fortune are the ones Boyle trusts to set up the offense, they need to be driving and kicking out (which they do on occasion) then immediately looking to backdoor cut. Instead, Dom and Yaz both wander around outside the 3pt line, which screws up angles and allows the defense to get their hands in passing lanes.
So bummed to read this and the other thread this morning. Pissed away a needed win. Furk. Need to get over on Fucla now, no question
Deleted member 807
Guest
Would some basketball superfan on a high horse please shame me into not feeling disappointed about last night's performance at USC.
Keep in mind my disappointment does not equate to calling for Tad's head.
Keep in mind my disappointment does not equate to calling for Tad's head.
If you're not disappointed about pissing away that opportunity last night, then you don't care enough.
We should all be pissed and expect better. I have too much respect for Tad and these players to say that last night was worthy of them.
What Nik said. Disappointment is fine. The "sky is falling" thing is what's ridiculous.
I've been saying for weeks, for the team to dance we have to protect home court and steal one on the road. Ziskin on both the BSN podcast and the Rivals podcast has said that the team literally just needs two wins out of their last 5 to be a lock. He's a little more trusting than I am, but that lines up with what a lot of people are saying. So for the team to still be in a good condition and see posts with people freaking out and wanting to fire Tad because we've "hit our ceiling" is really confusing to me.
CU has thirteen 19 win seasons in their history.
Tad has 5 of those 13.
In only 6 years.
So forgive some of us for being short with people who are screaming bloody murder (not you Skiddy, I don't want you to think I'm calling you out on this one).
CVilleBuff
Well-Known Member
Yeah, it's not losing to USC that's the issue. It's losing to USC by blowing a 60-45 lead with 8 minutes left by allowing a 33-7 run. We did absolutely everything that you could possibly do wrong down the stretch. At a minimum we likely cost ourself a seed last night, and this is the type of loss that can snowball into something worse if this team isn't careful. How's our confidence going to be?
As soon as you call for Tads head or exhibit some other fundamental failure to understand the sport i'll be happy to ridicule you.
Everyone should be and is disappointed in the loss last night, but its college sports, it happens, we did the same thing to Auburn and CSU in their gym.
Deleted member 807
Guest
In summary: Disappointment = expected. No shame there.
Stupid with excessive sandy vag = prepare for ridicule.
I'm good with that.
Stupid with excessive sandy vag = prepare for ridicule.
I'm good with that.
cu62nu36
fascist tool
"I've been saying for weeks, for the team to dance we have to protect home court and steal one on the road. Ziskin on both the BSN podcast and the Rivals podcast has said that the team literally just needs two wins out of their last 5 to be a lock."
So if this is true and I believe that it is then assuming we can beat ASU at home we need 1 win out of these 3 games: @UCLA, vs AZ, or @Utah.
I think the most likely win, sad to say, is the UCLA game at Pauley.
So if this is true and I believe that it is then assuming we can beat ASU at home we need 1 win out of these 3 games: @UCLA, vs AZ, or @Utah.
I think the most likely win, sad to say, is the UCLA game at Pauley.
Good but an addition to this.
Tad - go find one of your coaching mentors and spend some time with them. Break down your losses and take an honest look at what about your coaching needs to change to take you to the next step as a coach.
I want Tad to be here for a long time. He has taken a program that has never consistently won in my lifetime and made it a consistent winner. We used to be happy about the idea of getting an NIT bid, now we are dissappointed.
That doesn't mean he can't and shouldn't get better, he expects his players to improve over time, he should expect the same from himself.
It is great that he has faith in his system and doesn't go chasing every hot trend that comes down the pike. There are however things that have consistently cost his a few games each year. Since he has been here a couple of games a season have been meaningful. We missed the tourney one year because of a couple games, we had bad seeding a couple times because of a couple games. Even in a bad year a couple games would have put us in the NIT instead of the CBI.
I think Tad is starting to figure out that his time out policy is costing him wins, he hasn't done anything with that but he is close. He has some questionable substitution patterns, room for improvement. Biggest issue may be an unwillingness to look at how he attacks zones and a willingness to use a few more zones in situations.
Maybe spending some time with a veteran coach he respects may help his to keep up the many things he does well and evaluate some areas he can improve.
Last edited:
J-R-K
Well-Known Member
Obviously firing Tad shouldn't even be under consideration. I do however think that the glowing perception of him that many seem to have is disproportionate to what he's actually accomplished.
If we're grading on a curve relative to CU's basketball history then Tad's tenure has been great. However in a more general sense it's hardly been anything special. We've still never finished better then fifth in the conference standings and if you were ranking all power conference teams during the nearly six years Tad has been here we would more or less be in the middle of the pack. Certainly things could be and have been worse, but at the same time I don't think it's unfair to expect better.
I think it's also fair to wonder if he's hit his ceiling. It's not like this program has improved year to year; results have been stagnant. And he's not suddenly going to turn into some amazing recruiter or brilliant in-game coach. Obviously there are a lot of unknowns but it doesn't appear the program is on the brink of something bigger. Next year again we'll probably be good but not great and two years from now looks like it could be a rebuilding type season with 5 rotation players graduating.
If we're grading on a curve relative to CU's basketball history then Tad's tenure has been great. However in a more general sense it's hardly been anything special. We've still never finished better then fifth in the conference standings and if you were ranking all power conference teams during the nearly six years Tad has been here we would more or less be in the middle of the pack. Certainly things could be and have been worse, but at the same time I don't think it's unfair to expect better.
I think it's also fair to wonder if he's hit his ceiling. It's not like this program has improved year to year; results have been stagnant. And he's not suddenly going to turn into some amazing recruiter or brilliant in-game coach. Obviously there are a lot of unknowns but it doesn't appear the program is on the brink of something bigger. Next year again we'll probably be good but not great and two years from now looks like it could be a rebuilding type season with 5 rotation players graduating.
Last edited: