As a postscript to this game, I'll be curious about the size of the TV audience for this year's game on ESPN2 compared with last season on Fox Sports 1. Obviously played at a different points in the season, but I have to believe viewership on the deuce would far exceed FS1.
(01-28-2017 12:22 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote: Two things:
1) Did anyone view Mick's and Chris Mack's post game interviews that I posted earlier in the thread? According to Mack, he's pissed about his team's lack of toughness inside that allowed UC to win the rebounding edge and in particular the ones that created second chance point opportunities for UC. He stressed, you can't win just shooting from behind the arc - you have to board the ball to give your team easy buckets and/or prevent the easy buckets. He knew going in that this was a strength of UC and Ex's weakness.
Mick said the stat that stood out for him was in the second half Ex shot only 27% from the field. So, UC did a much better job on the perimeter and he admitted they blew some coverage for open trey looks in the first half.
Translation: There was a hell of a lot more to this game than Bluett shooting the ball the way he did that led to the final result. If perimeter DEE becomes a consistent issue moving forward then that is a problem worth getting worked up over.
2) 18-2. What the hell do you guys want more from Mick and the players to quit being so obsessed with one aspect of one game? THEY WON THE DAMN GAME. Try enjoying it for a few moments. Sheesh!
(01-26-2017 11:13 PM)glacier_dropsy Wrote: Sorry, our 3 pt defense has been troubling for years, have to shore that up. We have the bigs inside to not worry about driving guards as seen tonight in X's shooting inside the arc. We let Bluett get hot tonight with uncontested 3's and then he starts making contested 3's...not the first time this has happened.
We let him get hot?
Yes we did. Uncontested 3's to start the game and he gets locked in, pretty simple I think.
I've been watching NBA 3 point contests for decades, and I rarely saw anyone make 9 in a row. And they didn't have any hands in their face either. It wasn't the D...it was Blueitt. Can't believe this has to be explained to anyone.
Maybe you should have Mick explain it to you as he did at half time and after the game. Can't let someone get locked in early.
I'm not a basketball guy, but the few times I tune in for a full game, over the past 8-10 years, the opposing team always seems to have a guy go completely nuts from three land. No matter the opponent, no matter if it's their star player or a schmuck from the bench, a UC opponent will have someone get hot from 3. At what point is it a problem and not some coincidental string of instances? I mean, people in threads on this board before the game were calling that a guy would get hot from 3.
This is the first thing I've posted on the game, and I don't want it to come off that I'm upset or in anyway unhappy. I'm thrilled we beat X, and in fact, a little sad X doesn't have a football team that we could've stomped this year too, but other than that I'm still ecstatic over last night. A wins a win.
My observation is that our real weakness has been to allow open 3s from the corner baseline. Instead of covering the wing our player is usually too packed in towards the lane. It is like we dare teams to beat us from deep - and they often take advantage of that invitation. Last night was simply a sureal example of the problem. The three at the end of the first half was ridiculous leaving the guy open.
(01-28-2017 12:22 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote: Two things:
1) Did anyone view Mick's and Chris Mack's post game interviews that I posted earlier in the thread? According to Mack, he's pissed about his team's lack of toughness inside that allowed UC to win the rebounding edge and in particular the ones that created second chance point opportunities for UC. He stressed, you can't win just shooting from behind the arc - you have to board the ball to give your team easy buckets and/or prevent the easy buckets. He knew going in that this was a strength of UC and Ex's weakness.
Mick said the stat that stood out for him was in the second half Ex shot only 27% from the field. So, UC did a much better job on the perimeter and he admitted they blew some coverage for open trey looks in the first half.
Translation: There was a hell of a lot more to this game than Bluett shooting the ball the way he did that led to the final result. If perimeter DEE becomes a consistent issue moving forward then that is a problem worth getting worked up over.
2) 18-2. What the hell do you guys want more from Mick and the players to quit being so obsessed with one aspect of one game? THEY WON THE DAMN GAME. Try enjoying it for a few moments. Sheesh!
(01-28-2017 12:22 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote: Two things:
1) Did anyone view Mick's and Chris Mack's post game interviews that I posted earlier in the thread? According to Mack, he's pissed about his team's lack of toughness inside that allowed UC to win the rebounding edge and in particular the ones that created second chance point opportunities for UC. He stressed, you can't win just shooting from behind the arc - you have to board the ball to give your team easy buckets and/or prevent the easy buckets. He knew going in that this was a strength of UC and Ex's weakness.
Mick said the stat that stood out for him was in the second half Ex shot only 27% from the field. So, UC did a much better job on the perimeter and he admitted they blew some coverage for open trey looks in the first half.
Translation: There was a hell of a lot more to this game than Bluett shooting the ball the way he did that led to the final result. If perimeter DEE becomes a consistent issue moving forward then that is a problem worth getting worked up over.
2) 18-2. What the hell do you guys want more from Mick and the players to quit being so obsessed with one aspect of one game? THEY WON THE DAMN GAME. Try enjoying it for a few moments. Sheesh!
I don't think anyone is obsessing over one aspect, and everyone is ecstatic over the win. Nothing wrong with a little debate over certain facets of the game. I get bent when someone responds with are you retarded? Are you stupid? Or the that is false and never should have been posted.
(01-28-2017 12:22 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote: Two things:
1) Did anyone view Mick's and Chris Mack's post game interviews that I posted earlier in the thread? According to Mack, he's pissed about his team's lack of toughness inside that allowed UC to win the rebounding edge and in particular the ones that created second chance point opportunities for UC. He stressed, you can't win just shooting from behind the arc - you have to board the ball to give your team easy buckets and/or prevent the easy buckets. He knew going in that this was a strength of UC and Ex's weakness.
Mick said the stat that stood out for him was in the second half Ex shot only 27% from the field. So, UC did a much better job on the perimeter and he admitted they blew some coverage for open trey looks in the first half.
Translation: There was a hell of a lot more to this game than Bluett shooting the ball the way he did that led to the final result. If perimeter DEE becomes a consistent issue moving forward then that is a problem worth getting worked up over.
2) 18-2. What the hell do you guys want more from Mick and the players to quit being so obsessed with one aspect of one game? THEY WON THE DAMN GAME. Try enjoying it for a few moments. Sheesh!
I don't think anyone is obsessing over one aspect, and everyone is ecstatic over the win. Nothing wrong with a little debate over certain facets of the game. I get bent when someone responds with are you retarded? Are you stupid? Or the that is false and never should have been posted.
/
Xavier vs. Cincinnati Game Thread
