we wouldn't have been fed to Kentucky, we would have been a 12 or 13
I posted twice so that people would not take me literally. OK, with which of the following would we have been competitive this year - North Carolina, Louisville, Maryland, Georgetown? By the way, I don't think we were a 12 or a 13. You saw what the committee did to the MAAC champ - a 69 seed.
Under no circumstances should anyone ever be glad we didn't make the NCAAs. The NCAAs are the goal, whether we win 26 games beforehand or we win 10 and get hot in Albany.
Guy its been over two weeks now, what's the ETA for when you're "back"
I still support the program and am happy Cluess got extended. Now I'd like him to recognize the flaws in the system and address them.
The greatest poster in the history of the MAAC as determined by THREE separate polls.
we wouldn't have been fed to Kentucky, we would have been a 12 or 13
I posted twice so that people would not take me literally. OK, with which of the following would we have been competitive this year - North Carolina, Louisville, Maryland, Georgetown? By the way, I don't think we were a 12 or a 13. You saw what the committee did to the MAAC champ - a 69 seed.
Not sure y we would think 2x is a joke but ok. I don't think we can play this style and win against any top program, they have better athletes, will always play better defense, will always play more than 6 guys and wil run us off the court
I posted twice so that people would not take me literally. OK, with which of the following would we have been competitive this year - North Carolina, Louisville, Maryland, Georgetown? By the way, I don't think we were a 12 or a 13. You saw what the committee did to the MAAC champ - a 69 seed.
Not sure y we would think 2x is a joke but ok. I don't think we can play this style and win against any top program, they have better athletes, will always play better defense, will always play more than 6 guys and wil run us off the court
+1
The greatest poster in the history of the MAAC as determined by THREE separate polls.
I posted twice so that people would not take me literally. OK, with which of the following would we have been competitive this year - North Carolina, Louisville, Maryland, Georgetown? By the way, I don't think we were a 12 or a 13. You saw what the committee did to the MAAC champ - a 69 seed.
Not sure y we would think 2x is a joke but ok. I don't think we can play this style and win against any top program, they have better athletes, will always play better defense, will always play more than 6 guys and wil run us off the court
Actually, I was poking fun at myself - for my OT-like move of a double post.
I have no problem with our style; to the contrary, I like our style. I do have a problem with "6 guys", and I really have a problem with our lack of size. I was at the KU game last year, and we lost that game because we only had "six guys" and DL was on an island - same with the Arkansas game this year, plus the arena was about 90 degrees. We were competitive in both until the legs gave out. At KU, DL was short-arming his FT's in the fourth quarter. In Arkansas, DL did not have the legs to convert lay-ups after schooling Portis for most of the game. I am not talking about beating up on these teams, but I want to see us competitive and not be the door-mat at the entrance to the big dance.
I don't think I am saying anything different than many other posters here. Our style needs more bodies, plus our style is unmasked with our lack of size - Manhattan last year and this; URI a mere week or so ago, and I will add St. Peters with Marvin Dominique et al beating us up inside.
Again, I like our style a lot; I think Coach Cluess is on the brink of putting us a level unequaled in Iona's history. So far, we don't have to go through our day wondering when the other shoe will drop with our players.
Not sure y we would think 2x is a joke but ok. I don't think we can play this style and win against any top program, they have better athletes, will always play better defense, will always play more than 6 guys and wil run us off the court
Actually, I was poking fun at myself - for my OT-like move of a double post.
I have no problem with our style; to the contrary, I like our style. I do have a problem with "6 guys", and I really have a problem with our lack of size. I was at the KU game last year, and we lost that game because we only had "six guys" and DL was on an island - same with the Arkansas game this year, plus the arena was about 90 degrees. We were competitive in both until the legs gave out. At KU, DL was short-arming his FT's in the fourth quarter. In Arkansas, DL did not have the legs to convert lay-ups after schooling Portis for most of the game. I am not talking about beating up on these teams, but I want to see us competitive and not be the door-mat at the entrance to the big dance.
I don't think I am saying anything different than many other posters here. Our style needs more bodies, plus our style is unmasked with our lack of size - Manhattan last year and this; URI a mere week or so ago, and I will add St. Peters with Marvin Dominique et al beating us up inside.
Again, I like our style a lot; I think Coach Cluess is on the brink of putting us a level unequaled in Iona's history. So far, we don't have to go through our day wondering when the other shoe will drop with our players.
Yes, agree. The style in and of itself is not the problem, it's how it's approached. You can't just say you don't trust your bench. Your bench is your bench. And nobody said they all gotta be out there at once, either. But any random setup where we had 3 of our starters and 2 of our subs out there this year resulted in only a slight dropoff.
In a perfect world, we can be more "Manhattan-like" on defense. At times we did this this year, where we'd come out and put lots of pressure on you and speed up the game. I thought what we did vs Monmouth was EXTREMELY WELL DONE. And the reason we could not take the same approach vs Manhattan is a lack of depth. Teams that press don't like to be pressed. Iona-Manhattan HAS to be turned into a track meet--it takes the edge off their press if they are not as press, and it limits the impact of Pankey. Instead, because we had no juice, we just went fetal and let Amayo and Laury try to play 2-on-5 all game.
And when I say "depth", I'm not trying to even set up a situation where we have starters playing 25 minutes and reserves playing 15. 30 and 10 would work. But 35+ doesn't cut it--not every night. Hell, if Iona had even done this the first two nights, THEN tried to go 38 minutes or whatever for the starters, that could have produced results. If we can't beat Siena with Bebis getting minutes and if we can't beat Monmouth with Ibn getting minutes, we were truly a paper tiger.
I hope we can land a true low-post presence inside to complement Bessick, whose skill set is nice but he's not the brawler we'll need. Again--it doesn't have to be a superstud. A 6-10 raw brute who can run a little, will rebound and will defend like a warrior is what this team needs. And with Ibn, Bebis, Hines and the new players, there's enough there to take the next step provided Cluess doesn't fear playing those guys. And to connect with a point someone made a way back, maybe it IS worth it to "sacrifice" an OOC game or even a league game at the expense of making sure our bench can do something for us next March.
The greatest poster in the history of the MAAC as determined by THREE separate polls.
Actually, I was poking fun at myself - for my OT-like move of a double post.
I have no problem with our style; to the contrary, I like our style. I do have a problem with "6 guys", and I really have a problem with our lack of size. I was at the KU game last year, and we lost that game because we only had "six guys" and DL was on an island - same with the Arkansas game this year, plus the arena was about 90 degrees. We were competitive in both until the legs gave out. At KU, DL was short-arming his FT's in the fourth quarter. In Arkansas, DL did not have the legs to convert lay-ups after schooling Portis for most of the game. I am not talking about beating up on these teams, but I want to see us competitive and not be the door-mat at the entrance to the big dance.
I don't think I am saying anything different than many other posters here. Our style needs more bodies, plus our style is unmasked with our lack of size - Manhattan last year and this; URI a mere week or so ago, and I will add St. Peters with Marvin Dominique et al beating us up inside.
Again, I like our style a lot; I think Coach Cluess is on the brink of putting us a level unequaled in Iona's history. So far, we don't have to go through our day wondering when the other shoe will drop with our players.
I hope we can land a true low-post presence inside to complement Bessick, whose skill set is nice but he's not the brawler we'll need. Again--it doesn't have to be a superstud. A 6-10 raw brute who can run a little, will rebound and will defend like a warrior is what this team needs. And with Ibn, Bebis, Hines and the new players, there's enough there to take the next step provided Cluess doesn't fear playing those guys. And to connect with a point someone made a way back, maybe it IS worth it to "sacrifice" an OOC game or even a league game at the expense of making sure our bench can do something for us next March.
Agree!
I have not seen Bessick, so I have no comment there other than we don't want to see him on an island. While I like the 6 - 10 raw brute; I'm not sure that he has to be 6 - 10 (Rhamel Brown), but he has to be a brute and cloning him would not hurt either.
