@ Indiana Game Thread?
- Thread starter gigantor1024
- Start date
This team early on was a mirage. And C Viv. hasn't changed a bit on offense. It doesn't exist in her vocabulary.
she was super off balance. She wasn't expecting the shot and had to bring her body backwards to get to 3. Should have just taken the 2
the offense changed once the team began Big 10 play, I am convinced of it....Indiana is no better than some of the teams RU played earlier in the year.
this team has no passion and no confidence and plays with no purpose. CVS blamed the players last week, its time she start blaming herself, she has done a terrible job the last 3 weeks with this team.,.the eye opener should have been Purdue but excuses keep getting made
I expect that apologists will come and start blaming the refs now
this team has no passion and no confidence and plays with no purpose. CVS blamed the players last week, its time she start blaming herself, she has done a terrible job the last 3 weeks with this team.,.the eye opener should have been Purdue but excuses keep getting made
I expect that apologists will come and start blaming the refs now
Maybe so, but if you're not a scorer from that range then give it off immediately to someone who can hit that.
As you know officiating is horrible all around in the women's game. But this disgraceful play in the B1G IMO is ALL on Stringer. I really believe she handcuffs these kids and they press, because if they don't play defense or they miss a few shots they're taken out of the game. Stringer needs to look in the mirror, because IMO she is ruining this season. You can only blame our women so much for not scoring. Anyone with half a brain who has played, coached or watched competitive BB knows Stringer doesn't have a clue how to run an efficient offense. Standing around the perimeter and passing the ball back and forth and not engaging your bigs is NOT offense.
yeah....I normally would completely agree but the team just threw the ball away, made poor decisions, and completely lacked aggressive attack to the rim and just stood around (until the end)...coach can't make those passes/decisions for them out there.
4 of the 5 conference wins have been at home.
3 of the 4 losses have been on the road.
Not excusing this loss, but it seems like road games
turn out bad.
But having 3 losses in a row makes for a good reason to worry if this team can prove to be good enough to make the NCAA and not fall short after looking like a shoe-in before.
3 of the 4 losses have been on the road.
Not excusing this loss, but it seems like road games
turn out bad.
But having 3 losses in a row makes for a good reason to worry if this team can prove to be good enough to make the NCAA and not fall short after looking like a shoe-in before.
4 games against ranked teams coming up
this team would need a major reversal. CVS had done pretty poorly against those 3 programs. Has she beaten Brenda? Hasnt OSU dominated RU lately? Hasnt our old friend Kim Barnes had the best of CVS over history., This team needs one of these 4 if they have any shot of making the ncaa...that would put them at 18-9/6-7 and would then need to win 2 of those final 3...if they are 20-10/8-8 that puts them in play on the bubble needing probably one win but maybe more. I know the rpi overall number is strong but I dont think this team can get in the NCAA with a sub 500 league mark
this team would need a major reversal. CVS had done pretty poorly against those 3 programs. Has she beaten Brenda? Hasnt OSU dominated RU lately? Hasnt our old friend Kim Barnes had the best of CVS over history., This team needs one of these 4 if they have any shot of making the ncaa...that would put them at 18-9/6-7 and would then need to win 2 of those final 3...if they are 20-10/8-8 that puts them in play on the bubble needing probably one win but maybe more. I know the rpi overall number is strong but I dont think this team can get in the NCAA with a sub 500 league mark
Looking long term its rather upsetting that both Rutgers basketball teams have allocated scholarships to so many players that lack the offensive skills to be consistent shooters/scorers in the B1G.Its no wonder that road wins are so infrequent .
Anyone know if CVS ever uses a sports psychologist for the players? She seems to be someone who belives in pulling onself up by the bootstraps, as it were, but she recognized that RU had a terrible time when she was approaching 900 wins. She talked about the pressure it put on the team. This season has offered realistic chances for important milestones and historic turnaround. Seriously, what is going on with the team? Is there a way to support them and get them back to playing freely on court? Anyone have a chance to see practices? What is happening there?
Point well taken. But this kind of poor play has been seen too much in the B1G and IMO a,reflection of Stringer.
We get snubbed by the NCAA because we don’t deserve to be in once the competition improved it was so evident that we are back to the same team we have been the last few years with absolutely no offense which is CVS calling card. She just has no concept of how to run an offense and that has not nor will not change.
Can't argue with RU even with a 21-12 record might not make the Tourney.
But wouldn't call it a snub , because RU lost the right to an invite with the way they collapsed at the end of season.
Going from 17-3 to 21-12 doesn't deserve a reward
Even going into the B1G tourney at 19-11 means
Rutgers went 2-8 since 1/13.
This team must get back to winning, even against the ranked teams that are coming up on the schedule to earn a right to Dance post-season.
Or it will be an WNIT team that might get Vivian her 1000th.
This.
Had the Jenkins pick called a foul. B.S.
and two possessions on opposite ends with the same action.
For Rutgers called an offensive foul and for Indiana called on Rutgers.
These were post players turning into the defender.
Why was the 55 saved for the third quarter?
Last edited:
I have a hard time believing that all these stars we recruited cant score. I think something goes wrong once they get here. If not, then its on CVS and the staff for only recruiting one type of player. Whats clear is to have any chance at scoring enough against good teams, we need to be in the 55 from the opening whistle. Its the only was we get good chances. Once the game slows down to a half court game we are done. This will mean giving up more points, and more easy buckets, but thats the trade-off.
Wow, Rich finally makes an appearance. Not once in 17 wins did we see him, but now that the CViv haters have come out of the woodwork he is back. What a surprise. NOT
RU MAN. Congratulations. That is the 11th post is which you have said exactly the same thing.
BTW: We know you don't like Stringer's offense of 58 points. But what do you think of Pikiell's 43 points today? Inquiring minds want to know.
If Pikiell had the kind of talent that Stringer has but doesn't utilize because she's clueless in how to run an offense, Pikiell would be averaging 70-80 points a game. If you knew ANYTHING about Pikiell and he abilities as a coach in how he knows how to run an offense you wouldn't have made such an ignorant statement.
And if you're going to be honest with yourself, you know darn well that Stringer doesn't have a clue how to run offensive sets. The kids on this team are more than capable of scoring a lot more than they have since they entered B1G play, but C Viv. handcuffs them with her inability to run a real offense. Standing around the perimeter and passing the ball around for 28 seconds on the shot clock and not using high and low screens and getting our bigs involved more in the offense is NOT an offense.
Oh and one last thing. You're very good about criticizing me. Why don't you participate and actually add something as to why our women's program has suffered with this kind of poor offensive play under Stringer?
I can't wait until she gets her 1,000 wins. And we give her a big parade and all of the accolades she deserves for achieving that. I'll be the first in line to congratulate her for what she has accomplished.
But once she achieves that, it will be time to bring in a new and hungry young coach in the mold of a Geno or Brenda who not only know how to kill it on offense but also play suffocating defense. We need a coach who understands that balance on both ends of the court is what's needed to succeed year in and year out. What we saw this year prior to B1G play was a mirage. I really thought when we played South Carolina tough in the beginning of the season, we would see an explosion in offense as well as defense with all of the transfers who we all couldn't wait to see play. Instead, we get this insufferable garbage on the offensive side of the ball where for more nearly the entire 4th quarter we score 4 points. FOUR FREAKIN' points! Whose fault is that Oldtimer? Is it just the kids? Or maybe just maybe it's Stringer's inability to run a decent offense.
Maybe if we came out with the 55 from the start of each game, maybe we wouldn't come out so flat and have trouble scoring. Vivian loves her 55 and when we actually run it, it motivates our kids to get easy baskets on the offensive side of the ball. They don't have to think. They just do it. But when we're forced into half court sets, we struggle mightily.
Last edited:
"I can't wait until she gets her 1,000 wins. And we give her a big parade and all of the accolades she deserves for achieving that." "But once she achieves that, it will be time to bring in a new and hungry young coach"
Sounds good and is fair and hopefully allowed to spend the money to bring in a great staff.
Not saying CVS doesn't have good assistants, just worry once Vivian's gone Hobbs won't be allowed to spend what it takes to bring in a good up and comming HC and assistants that can help make RU a force in College WBB again.
Sounds good and is fair and hopefully allowed to spend the money to bring in a great staff.
Not saying CVS doesn't have good assistants, just worry once Vivian's gone Hobbs won't be allowed to spend what it takes to bring in a good up and comming HC and assistants that can help make RU a force in College WBB again.
See this is where I disagree with you. Hobbs wants all of our programs to succeed. I have no doubt that with a new coach and a modern high octane offense, the women's program will grow once again and will start to have decent turnout at all of their games. Audiences want to be entertained. They don't want to sit through grind it out 48-39 games all of the time.
Please explain what “the original style” means. Do you mean lockdown defense and pass around the perimeter offense? So the up tempo offense isn’t working so we play slow down?
In the OOC schedule, WBB averaged 70.6 ppg. In the Conference they are averaging 60.6 ppg so far. That is a 10 ppg drop in performance. Not so surprising considering the difference in competition.
In the OOC schedule, MBB averaged 68.8 ppg. In the conference they are averaging 56.0 ppg so far. That is a 12.8 ppg drop in performance. Is it surprising?
However CViv changed the WBB offense at the start of conference play, Pike must have changed the MBB offense even more. NO?
Hey gigantor, I'm here(now), sorry I didn't start thread...been sick. Looks like I picked a good day to sleep.
I'm going to agree with some of what you said in your long post. Specifically, CVS's style is what it is, is what it was the last few less than good years, and is what it was back when we were in the final four. I was surprised that folks couldn't see it - or why they would expect more than tweaks on what has - in general - worked for over 40 years. We did well OOC and against South Carolina because the style has always given RU a fighting chance to win against anybody (in the abstract). You hold the opponent down in scoring and hopefully score enough to beat them. As to how well it works, well, its a match-up thing, and talent differential thing and "smart play" thing - and I agree, having watched this game on TV, that we didn't play particularly smart. I don't put that entirely on the coach, though, because we have court seats at a dreadful rebuilding Arizona team, and at the games we have made it to I can personally say I have seen plenty of "not-smart" play. From close up. It happens, it isn't what the coach wants them to do, but teams get in ruts - for AZ it is falling in love with the 3 among other things - and in the end the coach only has the players they have.
The 2 biggest issues I see out there is that the margin for error as the greater game has changed over the years has decreased for the defensive style of play and while I like the team that CVS puts on the floor I'm not sure that they are really as talented as some of the more successful teams.
As to your new coach and modern high octane offense - that's a whole other issue. It just isn't that easy. I expect CVS to ride off into the sunset after her 1000 wins but I am dubious about the future of the team thereafter. It can be very costly to get a good coaching staff. Just saying.
Please explain to me what you mean. The same players play. I find it hard to believe that any Coach after going 12-2 would say, “OK we are starting our conference schedule; I’m going to change the offense now. “
Could the difference be that the players are now facing much better talent? I just don’t understand why the coach is always at fault when a team is not performing well. Please remember that this was a 6 win team last year which was totally reconstituted this year.
Need to make shots to set up the 55. We started doing that in the 3rd quarter. We stopped again in the 4th quarter.
We shot 10/15 in the 3rd quarter for 66.7%. The rest of the game, we shot 14/36 for 38.9%. We made just 12 shots in the entire first half - not a lot of opportunity to set up the 55. We made just 2 shots in the 4th quarter.
Knight Time, very good post. I agree with much of what you stated. I will tell you that many of us long time posters have been bemoaning C Viv's offensive issues for years now and not just recently. Even when we got to the championship game and the Final 4 before that what helped those teams is that we had great players (plural) who would take over a game despite Stringer's static offense. And what made those teams great is they didn't just depend on one player but everyone on the floor.
As to this year's squad, I really like Carey as an offensive stalwart, but I think she's been misused for most of the season. I like when she's playing in the low post and setting screens at the high post. I don't like when she ends up out on the perimeter. I also don't understand why Green doesn't get more touches out on the perimeter, because I really think she can shoot the rock just like the gal (pony tail-can't think of her name) who can come off the bench and knock down 3's and outside 2's. We need those kinds of shooters that will enable us to utilize Stringer's 55 defense. I think being able to score more outside and inside will only enhance the 55 and put even more pressure on other B1G teams. It just seems that as a team prior to the B1G play, we were doing more of that and we were successful at scoring buckets of points. Now I realize some of those teams we played were soft teams, but so have some of the B1G teams. To score only 33+ points against Purdue and 42 against Nebraska is indefensible. And now we have a slate of games that will really test Stringer and our women on whether they're an NCAA team or just another lucky to be in the NIT team. I really think this team has the athletes to compete at a very highly level. I think Stringer's offensive philosophy hurts them and prevents them from using their full potential. I also question some of our women's BB IQ. I will not name names but a few on our team just don't think out there and panic at the first sight of trouble.
I was replying to a statement by Bac that CVS had changed the offense for the conference schedule.
Ok - I can't resist saying this - since I've been on the board since close to the beginning - I KNOW lots of folks bemoan the offensive issues. I never have as criticism, because - like I said - it is a style and it worked and - in those better years - I studied a 10 year period and posted at the time that - by any metric I could use - we were about the 9th best team in the country results wise for those 10 years. In the end, it doesn't concern me how we do it, only that we do. If we do it with a less than robust offense, so be it, because that's what you have. Do I personally wish we had a more robust offense - of course, but again, I only stress during games.
The many issues that led to more mediocre and one awful season than fans were used to have been discussed ad nauseum.
I also never quite know how to respond to the criticism that CVS's offensive philosophy hurts the players. I don't agree, really, they just develop differently. It hurts the number of points they score, in theory, but have you checked out the career numbers list and who they played for? Since numerous folks - who didn't have to say it and whose opinion is respected - have praised CVS's development of players, I'm just not buying it.
The BB IQ isn't developed well at lower levels - even Geno has complained - and I do think that there is an impact from that.
My viewpoint - not about you per se but in general about a lot of folks on the board - is that they really think that RU would have been more successful virtually every year that CVS has been here if there was a different coach. Because of the offense. I simply don't agree. I'm ok with the CVS tenure and results, although last year really had me worried. Quite frankly, CVS's legacy when she retires may help to attract a decent coach, but the landscape (and I follow all of WBB) is littered with coaches that seemed like the answer and weren't.
Similar threads
