SECOBuffsFan
Active Member
We don't do enough away from the ball....screen away, flex action, backdoor options....we just seem to do a lot of stand and look.
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!
Wow
- Thread starter Buffnik
- Start date
We don't do enough away from the ball....screen away, flex action, backdoor options....we just seem to do a lot of stand and look.
The big dance is a very different animal. I think Tad understands this now.
Today's game notwithstanding, we aren't that far off. Stuff like today's game happens from time to time. It may be better that we got our asses kicked as opposed to losing a close game. Had we lost in a close game, the necessary adjustments might not be made. I trust Tad to do what needs to be done.
SECOBuffsFan
Active Member
Offense doesn't do anything after the pick and roll...some kind of option that would allow them to have secondary scoring opportunities....its a bad flaw that has bothered me for a while with this group...going back to last year
TDbuff
Club Member
Is that on Tad or the players?
SECOBuffsFan
Active Member
Both I believe...I would really like to go watch practice to know for sure though....what is his emphasis...how much do they drill offensively. He's a defensive minded coach...so does he spend most of his time on that?
BuffaloChuck
Member
It reminds me of a certain 70-3 season... we're playing well (albeit against a pathetic group of div teams) and then go up for an easy win against Iowa State, only to lose. Then get clobbered by Neb in Boulder and then 70-3 shows up.
Even though this blow-out loss is the worst in CU history for NCAA playoffs, at least we stuck with them in the 2nd half.
Even though this blow-out loss is the worst in CU history for NCAA playoffs, at least we stuck with them in the 2nd half.
Not surprising, the most supportive Buff fan, is from another school.
No. The Pac-12 is very strong this year compared to the Big XII North in 2005. And we can take nothing from the second half of the game. We didn't stick with them, they chose not to run it up. The game was over before half time.
dply
Doble hoja
Professor3
Member
Considering we were sitting on a 14 win, 2 loss record when Spencer went down - and that we were ranked 15th in the country - I'm hard pressed to buy into the notion that we lacked offense and leadership during the time that he was on the court. In fact, the only consistent and dependable offense and leadership that we have had this season was when Spencer was playing. Since he hasn't been able to play, we have had spotty and inconsistent offensive execution; on again, off again defensive execution, and very little leadership on the floor. Harsh, but true.
Plus - when he was on the floor, we didn't get beaten by more than twelve (12) points, and that was in the Baylor game; the first game of the season in November. Since he went down in January, we've endured eight losses by double digits (17, 13, 12, 21, 18, 27, 20, and 29 points). His loss has been realized in all phases of the game.
Last edited:
Agree
CVilleBuff
Well-Known Member
We had no business being 15. I really don't see how we do any better than 2 more wins with Spencer.
Completely disagree. Had beaten Kansas and a 10th ranked Oregon. Were undefeated in conference play. Only losses were to Baylor and Okie Lite, which were both Top 10 RPIs at the time.
What strikes me (and I am not a basketball player, only a casual fan) is that team, in general, lacks the handle to make the passes out of a pick and roll/pop. This is true when the guards penetrate as well. If you don't have the skills to make the pass or the receiving player doesn't have the hands to control the pass that's made then it's hard to be effective. Again, my admittedly naive perspective, but I rarely see the nice dish and score in our offense.
CVilleBuff
Well-Known Member
Let me rephrase: We were not going to sustain 15 with Spencer. UCSB, CSU and Wazzu were signs of trouble to come despite being wins. I don't buy for one second we're pushing for a 3 seed with Spencer.
Professor3
Member
Disagree. Not only would we have sustained a Top 15 ranking, we would have continued to climb. The UCSB score at the end of the game was 76-68 (Spencer had 24 points). The ending score in the CSU game was 67-62 (Spencer had 28 points). The Washington State game ending score was 71-70 (Spencer had 6 points). Each game ended with a win. He was stellar in the UCSB and CSU games, and had his worst game at Washington State - yet they still won. It's about leadership. It's about selflessness. It's about taking a game over when it's necessary to do so; and when you cannot (for whatever reason), it's about being the consummate Floor General and getting your teammates to the right spots to create an opportunity for them to score and, ultimately, facilitate the win. Whether it would have ended in a 3 seed or not, we'll never know, but I'll guarantee that it would have been higher than an 8 seed; and the game wouldn't have been as dismal as the game that everybody had to suffer through today.
CVilleBuff
Well-Known Member
We had the same issues on offense even with Spencer. He'd have shown up and willed us to another win or two. Ultimately our offense and lack of vocal leadership would have resulted in a record not much better than this one. We can bring up the ppg numbers, but let's face it: we had numerous non-Pac12 caliber opponents to boost those numbers and the few Pac games we played with Spencer was an easy stretch. We're like a 6 seed with Spencer, not a 3
Sounds about right, we were likely a ways from being a 3 seed even with Dinwiddie
Deleted member 807
Guest
I agree. With or without Spencer, this team is prone to slow starts. The Wazzou game in Spokane, Spencer was uncharacteristically sluggish. We thought he might have been ill, but Boyle said otherwise in the post-game.
The team was also sluggish coming out of the blocks against Okie Lite, Baylor, and Harvard. The Spencer led Buffs lacked the same urgency and killer instincts as the post-Spencer Buffs.
Not to knock this amazing talent, I acknowledge Spencer frequently provided spurts of brilliance where he could draw a foul and kill the opponent at the line. Free throws are SD'd specialty. But it was as common as not to watch a Spenser led team play well for a spurt, but not play a complete 40 minute game.
I value the urgency of Chen and Tomlinson, each pumped up the team with energy that has been missing under Scott, Askia and Dinwiddie.
Last edited by a moderator:
Mercifully, I couldn't watch the game at work today. I have it recorded but that's just going to get deleted. Even though I can't speak to this game, I think the Arizona performances tell me enough about what I need to know for this one. And ultimately, for me, it comes down to XJ and Ski not stepping up when they need to. They'll talk a good game, but both seem to disappear when we need them most. XJ especially bothers me, because he just puts it on cruise control and spends more time complaining to the refs than he does playing when things go bad. I don't hold out a lot of hope for improvement next year for the simple fact that I don't see a teak relying on the leadership of those two making a deep run. Well, that and the lack of any type of offense, but that's for another post.
Deleted member 807
Guest
If I were an NBA scout, I don't wanna hear this.
One other thing that bothers me about the lack of offense is the fact that we don't play an aggressive defense. I think I'd be OK with the offense if Tad would turn those athletes loose defensively, have them pressure the ball, attack the passing lanes, and try to force turnovers. Instead, it's a very vanilla man defense designed to force long possessions and make teams hit from outside. The offensive and defensive systems really get exposed when we take on more talented teams.
I'm not a technical Basketball Expert, but if you guys don't think this was a "crossroads" for the players or the fans, I'm pretty sure that it was for Tad. This was a monumental cluster___k for the coaching staff and the program in general. Look for the new freshman to be given every opportunity to bypass some veterans, difficult though that may be. In my estimation, TB is starting over on whatever level he perceives the program to be. IMO Scott, XC, and Booker have topped out, and it's going to take another level of recruiting to get to the next level. 2-3 years. Experience does not automatically equal improvement. Right now CU is a chronic One and Done dance team with double digit losses and structural flaws, going back 2 years. We're way better than we used to be but have miles and miles to go. Many here need to dial back their expectations. Just IMO.