89 replies to this topic

[Mike B]

Wasn’t a fan of a comment made during the game. Announcer said they asked Willard about losing by 35 and Willard said it’s better than losing by two. It still counts as one loss.

Ummm. Losing by two means you’re competing. You have to do a lot poorly to lose by 35.

I get that sentiment as a fan, sometimes it’s a lot easier on the blood pressure to just be disinterested for two hours then to be up and down, on the edge of your seat, only to have a dagger stuck in during the closing seconds. But rule number one of any coach, in any sport. Don’t be a fan.

I heard that too, but it really did not bother me.  I think announcers relay quotes and stories, without giving you the context they were said in.

Watching Willard on the sideline last night, leaves no doubt, he is a competitor.  

I know some will disagree, but the team lacks talent.  

There is not a scorer on the team, meaning someone whho can take the ball night after night and be counted on to put up numbers.

There is not a D1 quality big man on the team.

There seems to be a lack of leadership.  This really disappoints me, because Scott and Hart have been at Maryland for 4 years and Young and Carey are veterans.  Someone step up.

[Mackus]

Reese has been pretty disappointing this year.  I didn't expect anything close to a Bruno or Sticks level sophomore ascent, but did expect him to be doing a lot more than he's doing.  He's improved quite a bit on being able to defend without fouling, but don't think he's made any offensive improvements.  He doesn't have a single move with his back to the basket, being good on the glass to score putbacks is the only way he influences the offense.  And his inability to keep his cool pops up all the time.  If he gets a foul call he doesn't like or into a minor scuffle with an opponent, its almost assured that another bad foul is quick to follow.  

 

Its gotta be tough being literally the only competent big man, but don't think it was asking too much to have seen more from him so far.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

Didnt watch a min of the game. Obviously the turnovers are huge and that has to be fixed. Ignoring that and the fact they cant shoot worth a lick would you say they ran solid offense? Im really grasping for some silver lining

[Mackus]

Didnt watch a min of the game. Obviously the turnovers are huge and that has to be fixed. Ignoring that and the fact they cant shoot worth a lick would you say they ran solid offense? Im really grasping for some silver lining

 

They couldn't even get into the offense more often than not.  Rutgers defense was impressive.  Quite frequently they'd not even let the ball inside the 3-point line until very deep in the shot clock.  Even the turnovers, they typically weren't unforced mistakes like we often saw with Turgeon's teams.  Rutgers smothered the Terps entirely.  I think they were able to extend their pressure defense even further than usual because of the total lack of an inside presence for Maryland.  Aside from really rushed shots late in the clock, I didn't think there were many bad shots taken.  Just couldn't find enough good looks because of the defense and the lack of anyone who can score on their own.

 

The players played hard and weren't doing anything particularly dumb or frustrating (aside from Reese losing his cool in the 2nd half), it just didn't really look like a fair fight.  They had no answers offensively for what Rutgers was doing.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

They couldn't even get into the offense more often than not.  Rutgers defense was impressive.  Quite frequently they'd not even let the ball inside the 3-point line until very deep in the shot clock.  Even the turnovers, they typically weren't unforced mistakes like we often saw with Turgeon's teams.  Rutgers smothered the Terps entirely.  I think they were able to extend their pressure defense even further than usual because of the total lack of an inside presence for Maryland.  Aside from really rushed shots late in the clock, I didn't think there were many bad shots taken.  Just couldn't find enough good looks because of the defense and the lack of anyone who can score on their own.

 

The players played hard and weren't doing anything particularly dumb or frustrating (aside from Reese losing his cool in the 2nd half), it just didn't really look like a fair fight.  They had no answers offensively for what Rutgers was doing.

So then my next question is this. Talent seems to be an issue and Willard mostly gets a pass there for obvious reasons. Are you concerned with his coaching ability as far as teaching, installing an effective O and in game strategy? Or is it too soon to say and or we cant know with the lack of talent on the team

[You Play to Win the Game]

Hard to make that evaluation when he doesn't have the right ingredients, or any depth for the ingredients he does have. The weaknesses being what they are, and in this conference, not a good combination.

 

We saw the upside of his system, when legs were fresh and the kids naively bought in (one of the things I love most about NCAA competitions). But there was always going to be a crash back to reality when the weaknesses were more exposed. Through fatigue, through it being on film, through tougher conference play, etc. 

 

I would say I think slightly higher of Willard than I did before the season began. And I'm prepared for the worst as far as the remainder of this season, so I don't think that'll change. Love what they showed in the OOC slate until Tennessee and UCLA. Could also see them going on a similar run or two in conference play once they wrap their arms around all this.

[Mackus]

So then my next question is this. Talent seems to be an issue and Willard mostly gets a pass there for obvious reasons. Are you concerned with his coaching ability as far as teaching, installing an effective O and in game strategy? Or is it too soon to say and or we cant know with the lack of talent on the team

 

They played great early on against some real competition, so I don't think its an overall coaching strategy problem.  I think its a mish-mash of players and coaches who largely don't know each other and because they don't have much underlying trust they are struggling to deal with adversity.  Combined with a roster that is weak in the exact places that the conference is always strongest.

 

Willard was using his timeouts early and often yesterday to stop runs.  He had a good feel for how quickly things could go south if he let it, so was doing everything he could to stop it.  No complaints from me on the in-game stuff yet. 

[CantonJester]

Wasn’t a fan of a comment made during the game. Announcer said they asked Willard about losing by 35 and Willard said it’s better than losing by two. It still counts as one loss.

Ummm. Losing by two means you’re competing. You have to do a lot poorly to lose by 35.

I get that sentiment as a fan, sometimes it’s a lot easier on the blood pressure to just be disinterested for two hours then to be up and down, on the edge of your seat, only to have a dagger stuck in during the closing seconds. But rule number one of any coach, in any sport. Don’t be a fan.

 

 

I heard that too, but it really did not bother me.  I think announcers relay quotes and stories, without giving you the context they were said in.

Watching Willard on the sideline last night, leaves no doubt, he is a competitor.  

I know some will disagree, but the team lacks talent.  

There is not a scorer on the team, meaning someone whho can take the ball night after night and be counted on to put up numbers.

There is not a D1 quality big man on the team.

There seems to be a lack of leadership.  This really disappoints me, because Scott and Hart have been at Maryland for 4 years and Young and Carey are veterans.  Someone step up.

 

 

I'd need to know more about the context of the quote, because frankly, unless the qualifiers were about fans would rather their team get blown out of the gym than lose a thriller? Eh, I don't agree with that, but I can at least understand that point of view. But generally speaking, this isn't something a leader of men should ever be espousing. 

[BSLMikeLowe]

Despite the lack of drama and heartbreak over the outcome, I don't see how your team being completely uncompetitive in a game is better than being competitive. If I wanna lower my blood pressure, watching a sporting event is one of the last things I'll do.

 

Willard definitely comes across as genuine and unfiltered, but he seems to occasionally say things without really thinking first....like when he talked up Shaheen as his replacement at SH before 1) he officially took the MD job, and 2) Shaheen's team was still competing in the tournament. It's not a huge deal, I guess, but it's sometimes just weird and in the case of Shaheen pretty inappropriate.

[Mike in STL]

I'd need to know more about the context of the quote, because frankly, unless the qualifiers were about fans would rather their team get blown out of the gym than lose a thriller? Eh, I don't agree with that, but I can at least understand that point of view. But generally speaking, this isn't something a leader of men should ever be espousing.

Almost no context. Just the typical announcer filler. “We talked to Kevin Willard earlier today and he said…”. That kind of stuff.

At least he’s not throwing his own kids under the bus like Turdge.