Game 15 Hartford: Same Old Rutgers
- Thread starter bac2therac
- Start date
I hear you there. Pikiell has gotten so much props from a lot of people. I still think we are in good hands. He has to get the team back on track for that to be proven strongly, I guess. I think it will happen,though.
TD, Sanders missed a plane flight, again. Still, not enough to warrant not playing him. Last night goes beyond Sanders losing attention in an airport.
The majority of the team lost attention and focus and decided to not do what got them great wins this year. The other team rebounded by commission, wanted it more.
We have one semi reliable rebounder, and another player that is just coming into his role. Williams is playing injured, and does not help out a ton there.
The majority of the team lost attention and focus and decided to not do what got them great wins this year. The other team rebounded by commission, wanted it more.
We have one semi reliable rebounder, and another player that is just coming into his role. Williams is playing injured, and does not help out a ton there.
\
He was one of the best players for Rutgers last night.
Also, this is the second year in a row Sanders missed his flight back from Christmas. The rules are you miss practice, you don't start. He needs to be more careful.
Corey missed the flight and was punished, sure RU could have won despite that , but Corey is very much part of the blame because his actions changed the first 10 minutes and overall he had a solid game but he should be having better than solid games against the weak sisters of the schedule
I was taking more about rebounding as a team, versus what Rutgers had. Williams still has done that more though, so I am wrong there. Rutgers has to get that mentality back next game, and see the benefit of it.
Although Doucoure, Sa, and Doorson are seeing limited minutes, they are not exactly making an impression on the boards. A lot of their play comes from matchups, which makes it difficult to find a groove, and be comfortable out there.
Sanders was not focused there. It seems like a good portion of the team is lacking focus and effort.
I seriously doubt ths first 10 mins of a game decides the outcome. Rutgers regained the lead within a few minutes after he came in...actually went up by 7. I think it was 27-20. They Also went up by 6 again in the 2nd half.
There were bad performances by Freeman, Geo and Eugene....add in the lack of rebounding / bad defense and thats it.
There were bad performances by Freeman, Geo and Eugene....add in the lack of rebounding / bad defense and thats it.
Right. 25% of the game doesn't count toward the outcome. Because in the last 25% of the game, you shoot the red white and blue money ball and that counts for more. Makes sense.
I said it did not decide the outcome....did you even attempt to read what I wrote?
When Rutgers went up 7 that was the time to put your foot on Hartford's neck with the help of the home crowd.....unfortunately, it did not happen. They let them off the hook and it was a 2 point game at the half. When they went up 7....I thought, okay, that's it...it will be a 15 point lead at the half. But, bad play prevented it.
Last edited:
I don't think Rutgers has those kind of offensive weapons to go up 17 on anybody after 13 minutes of play.
Has that happened all year? Maybe once.
After some hours to digest the last 3 games, here are my updated thoughts.
A) Maybe it is a little bit of a foot off the gas, because our staff is pretty much on the road recruiting during these finals and off days while HS games are going on...I don't know what the practice schedule was during finals week or around Christmas, but the opponent probably didn't help.
B) The staff likely dictated the tempo of the team....why??? Because if Mensah barely played against Florida State and didn't play at all vs Seton Hall, that tells me what everyone else sees, that he's not capable or trusted at this level and may never be.
If that is the case, then I think starting him last night, probably gave the overall feel of "yeah, we are OK" or this is no sense of urgency....the result is a 16-8 deficit over the first 9 minutes of the game and while Sanders ultimately triggered the benching, the team immediately played better and we from down 8 to up 7 in a span of 8-9 minutes.
If you start Sanders, you probably send the wrong message, but my guess is, the staff is still experimenting and seeing what players step forward when he's not on the court....we didn't see leadership from Freeman and Baker didn't hit his first couple of shots, which could have placed Sanders on the bench for the entire first half....I think he sat for the 1st 10 minutes at Wisconsin (same issue, but different opponent/ranked/on the road as a 15 point underdog)....This was something where if you outscore a team, perhaps they felt leaving the locker room @half, they would be able to build on the lead and instead, went cold.
C) I think RU has to play through with Sanders and Freeman, because they are the most likely to contribute points and rebounds and it's what the roster was left with as far as capable pieces. While RU is better off with Baker on a learning curve vs less minutes with a Nigel Johnson here, there is no alternative for Sanders......If you landed a Jose Alvarado or a comparable 2017 combo guard/point guard, you can probably coach Sanders differently.
I guess my question is what is different from last years Hartford, Stony Brook and Seton Hall games vs this years games?? Hartford we had no business winning last year, Stony Brook was a battle on the road and we played SHU tough, down 4 with 3 minutes left (just like this year).
Some went our way last year (Hartford/Stony) and against us (SHU) and they flipped this year.....not much difference in my book....we are better this year vs last year.....
A) Maybe it is a little bit of a foot off the gas, because our staff is pretty much on the road recruiting during these finals and off days while HS games are going on...I don't know what the practice schedule was during finals week or around Christmas, but the opponent probably didn't help.
B) The staff likely dictated the tempo of the team....why??? Because if Mensah barely played against Florida State and didn't play at all vs Seton Hall, that tells me what everyone else sees, that he's not capable or trusted at this level and may never be.
If that is the case, then I think starting him last night, probably gave the overall feel of "yeah, we are OK" or this is no sense of urgency....the result is a 16-8 deficit over the first 9 minutes of the game and while Sanders ultimately triggered the benching, the team immediately played better and we from down 8 to up 7 in a span of 8-9 minutes.
If you start Sanders, you probably send the wrong message, but my guess is, the staff is still experimenting and seeing what players step forward when he's not on the court....we didn't see leadership from Freeman and Baker didn't hit his first couple of shots, which could have placed Sanders on the bench for the entire first half....I think he sat for the 1st 10 minutes at Wisconsin (same issue, but different opponent/ranked/on the road as a 15 point underdog)....This was something where if you outscore a team, perhaps they felt leaving the locker room @half, they would be able to build on the lead and instead, went cold.
C) I think RU has to play through with Sanders and Freeman, because they are the most likely to contribute points and rebounds and it's what the roster was left with as far as capable pieces. While RU is better off with Baker on a learning curve vs less minutes with a Nigel Johnson here, there is no alternative for Sanders......If you landed a Jose Alvarado or a comparable 2017 combo guard/point guard, you can probably coach Sanders differently.
I guess my question is what is different from last years Hartford, Stony Brook and Seton Hall games vs this years games?? Hartford we had no business winning last year, Stony Brook was a battle on the road and we played SHU tough, down 4 with 3 minutes left (just like this year).
Some went our way last year (Hartford/Stony) and against us (SHU) and they flipped this year.....not much difference in my book....we are better this year vs last year.....
Yes, I did and as usual I thought your point was "silly". (I'd say nonsensical but that wouldn't be very nice.) We lost by two points. If you don't think benching arguably our best player for 10 minutes and starting a player totally in over his head at this level might have an impact on deciding who wins or loses well then you are out of it. Not sure if you watched the game or not on BTN Plus in Ohio but I was at the game and we were lost without Corey running the show in the first 10 minutes. I think we had like 8 points after the 2nd media timeout. Every minute counts toward deciding the outcome. Not sure how that is debatable.
Last edited:
Sure....that's why you changed my words in your response....come on man.
I think Rutgers was down because they shot 3-19 coming out the gate.
No use arguing with a "silly" poster who always drinks the Kool Aid.
https://www.google.com/search?q=koo...d=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8#imgrc=5VbJchWU5sLecM:
Okay....I agree with you. Rutgers shot 3-19 out of the gate because Sanders did not start.
Dave,
You should have asked him if we started Corey or Mike and went up by 10 instead of 17 if we would have won. Would love how he would have spun that.
Recruiting bad shooters, accepting that they can't be developed, and expecting to be able to compete anyway is a recipe for losing. This has been the formula for failure in this program for over 30 years. Shooters are being recruited and developed everywhere except at RU.
I dont know why you continue with this....I now agree. We lost because Corey Sanders did not start. That's what Rutgers has done all year...build big leads with its offensive firepower in the first 14 minutes of it's OCC games.
We should play all our reserves the first 10 minutes of games to keep our starters fresh since the first 10 minutes don't really matter.
Why are you still trying to convince me? I agree with you guys.
Rutgers would have been up about 17 points after the first 12-14 minutes if Corey Sanders started and played those first 10 minutes of the game.
I don't think these games are the end of the world in the grand scheme of things. I also don't think you can't be critical about them. Pikiell and crew didn't have the best games. I still think he's the right guy and they'll bounce back. In the long run, hopefully this serves as a learning moment for them. Rebuilds are rarely smooth (criminals are, though), but Rutgers should have won one of the last two games.
I know this..Corey is selfish. ( and I like him) ..BUT HE IS DAMN SELFISH for doing that again.
