63 replies to this topic

[BSLChrisStoner]

Chris, I disagree about there being "unexpected ups and downs". This team has done nothing the past couple of years to make me believe there are "unexpected ups" in our future. They've been fairly consistently mediocre. 

 

They beat Duke twice last year. On a given night, they will be capable of beating Duke, Syracuse, UNC...  look good against Notre Dame, UVA, Pitt....  but then there will be a game at home where you expect them to win against the middle-to-bottom of the league... and they just fall flat.

[You Play to Win the Game]

They beat Duke twice last year. On a given night, they will be capable of beating Duke, Syracuse, UNC...  look good against Notre Dame, UVA, Pitt....  but then there will be a game at home where you expect them to win against the middle-to-bottom of the league... and they just fall flat.

 

Duke is the arch rival, so yeah, I think we may hang in vs. them... but we lost to unranked UNC 3 times, FSU twice, Virginia twice and Miami the only time we played them. It seems the only time we've had "unexpected ups" have been against Duke (which admittedly is a good time to have them, but it's not enough).

[BSLChrisStoner]

Duke is the arch rival, so yeah, I think we may hang in vs. them... but we lost to unranked UNC 3 times, FSU twice, Virginia twice and Miami the only time we played them. It seems the only time we've had "unexpected ups" have been against Duke (which admittedly is a good time to have them, but it's not enough).

 

I think we basically agree. MD is going to be right around the bubble come Selection Sunday.  Should they beat GW, Tulsa, and Boston University... they will have those 3 games, + Northern Iowa, and Providence. That would be 3 wins on a neutral floor, and 5 possible RPI Top 100 wins.. likely 5 RPI Top 150.

 

18 games in-conference... going to be right around .500.   At 10-8, they'd be in good shape, especially with a big win or two. 9-9 or below, they will have work to do in the ACCT.

 

Lose to GW, Tulsa, or Boston University... forces you to do that much more in conference play.

 

Right now, I don't expect MD to get the Tournament.... but it's doable, and basically a coin-flip in my eyes.

 

 

 

 

Ultimately though, I'm looking forward to the days when we're not only talking about what is necessary to get back to the NCAAT, but when MD is going to look capable of doing some damage. If we aren't having that conversation next year, that's a problem.

[Oriole85]

They beat Duke twice last year. On a given night, they will be capable of beating Duke, Syracuse, UNC...  look good against Notre Dame, UVA, Pitt....  but then there will be a game at home where you expect them to win against the middle-to-bottom of the league... and they just fall flat.

That's one team and they beat them at home and a neutral site (and yes I know the neutral site was in NC, but that's still not Cameron). Do you really expect this team minus Allen to go into Cameron, the Carrier Dome, or the Dean Dome and compete with those teams? Could they play up, sure, but I don't think it's too likely.

[Oriole85]

I think we basically agree. MD is going to be right around the bubble come Selection Sunday.  Should they beat GW, Tulsa, and Boston University... they will have those 3 games, + Northern Iowa, and Providence. That would be 3 wins on a neutral floor, and 5 possible RPI Top 100 wins.. likely 5 RPI Top 150.

 

18 games in-conference... going to be right around .500.   At 10-8, they'd be in good shape, especially with a big win or two. 9-9 or below, they will have work to do in the ACCT.

 

Lose to GW, Tulsa, or Boston University... forces you to do that much more in conference play.

 

Right now, I don't expect MD to get the Tournament.... but it's doable, and basically a coin-flip in my eyes.

 

 

 

 

Ultimately though, I'm looking forward to the days when we're not only talking about what is necessary to get back to the NCAAT, but when MD is going to look capable of doing some damage. If we aren't having that conversation next year, that's a problem.

I'd say right now, it's not really a coin-flip IMO, losing to Oregon State was bad and they needed some wins to compensate. I think they get Allen back, they could play themselves back into position but as currently constructed, I'd say it's definitely less than a coin flip.

 

I agree in your assessment for next year, things have definitely changed in CP from the days it was a question of how far they were going instead of would they be good enough to make it. Turgeon as others have said is in the same position as Edsall I'd say in you want to see improvement this year, but it's next year that really matters.

[BSLChrisStoner]

That's one team and they beat them at home and a neutral site (and yes I know the neutral site was in NC, but that's still not Cameron). Do you really expect this team minus Allen to go into Cameron, the Carrier Dome, or the Dean Dome and compete with those teams? Could they play up, sure, but I don't think it's too likely.

 

Well, Allen is back in 3 weeks...before any of those games are played.

[BSLChrisStoner]

I'd say right now, it's not really a coin-flip IMO, losing to Oregon State was bad and they needed some wins to compensate. I think they get Allen back, they could play themselves back into position but as currently constructed, I'd say it's definitely less than a coin flip.

 

I agree in your assessment for next year, things have definitely changed in CP from the days it was a question of how far they were going instead of would they be good enough to make it. Turgeon as others have said is in the same position as Edsall I'd say in you want to see improvement this year, but it's next year that really matters.

 

If Selection Sunday was today, sure. They would be out.  That wasn't my point though.

[glenn__davis]

Well, Allen is back in 3 weeks...before any of those games are played.

 

We hope he is, at least.

 

I mentioned it in another thread a few weeks back, but I think it's important to note that the committee does take how you finished into account.  If Allen comes back strong, and the Terps look like a different team with him, and they finish well down the stretch, I truly do not think that loss against Oregon State will have much of an impact.  I think fans tend to over-emphasize the early season performance a bit sometimes, at least in terms of the impact it has.  Not that it has no impact, just that I think how you finish the season is far more important than how you start it.

 

Not unlike the BCS standings, actually.

[Miller192]

I just don't see any semblance of an offense out of Maryland.  I think they'll have better days defensively but the offense looks under coached to me.

[BSLChrisStoner]

We hope he is, at least.

 

I mentioned it in another thread a few weeks back, but I think it's important to note that the committee does take how you finished into account.  If Allen comes back strong, and the Terps look like a different team with him, and they finish well down the stretch, I truly do not think that loss against Oregon State will have much of an impact.  I think fans tend to over-emphasize the early season performance a bit sometimes, at least in terms of the impact it has.  Not that it has no impact, just that I think how you finish the season is far more important than how you start it.

 

Not unlike the BCS standings, actually.

 

Where the game last night matters is their OOC resume.  They didn't beat UConn, and they didn't beat Ohio State... so their entire OOC resume is Northern Iowa, Providence, and hopefully GW, Tulsa and Boston University.  Those wins could help MD's profile, but they obviously don't jump off the page like UConn or OSU would have.

So, MD's ability to get to the tournament becomes almost solely what they do in ACC play.

 

 

Allen and Turgeon have been quoted several times about him being on-track for a return the last week of December. So, even if it is a week later.. looking at early January.

 

Do agree with the point that the Selection Committee will take into consideration how MD plays after Allen returns. That was a point that both Patrick Stevens, and Matt Norlander made on BSL Radio yesterday.

[SportsGuy]

Norlander was on our show last night.

 

He isn't as high on them as he was preseason.

 

Thinks they will miss the tourney.

 

He did say that he thinks OSU isn't getting enough national love right now and that they are a sleeper final 4 pick...So, this loss may not look so bad later in the season.

[Oriole85]

We hope he is, at least.

 

I mentioned it in another thread a few weeks back, but I think it's important to note that the committee does take how you finished into account.  If Allen comes back strong, and the Terps look like a different team with him, and they finish well down the stretch, I truly do not think that loss against Oregon State will have much of an impact.  I think fans tend to over-emphasize the early season performance a bit sometimes, at least in terms of the impact it has.  Not that it has no impact, just that I think how you finish the season is far more important than how you start it.

 

Not unlike the BCS standings, actually.

I do agree here. That said, if they are a real bubble team, as one of those that could really go either way, not just one that people call for dramatic effect, then that game could be the one that keeps them out. Generally speaking people make too much of a single game, they aren't going to make you go up or down anymore than than one seed in nearly all cases. I do think they need some good wins to compensate for their losses this year especially Oregon State, but that's doable.

[BSLMattJergensen]

Can't say I was very surprised at last night's outcome. On the road against a team that I would also agree is a potential Final Four team.

 

There is no reason to panic just yet. A game like last night only illustrates just how far UMD is from the nation's top teams. In the college game it's all about guardplay and last night we saw why the Buckeyes will be in the mix come March. If you love basketball you love watching Aaron Craft. A fiesty hustler who provides suffocating ball pressure on the handler, can hit the open shot and is always looking to make his teammates better. Imagine if the Terps had a player like him running the offense?

 

Instead Turge was forced to play Wells out of position and Roddy Peters was simply outclassed as he turned it over 5 times. Maryland lack of offensive execution was more about OSU's defense. They dictated what the Terps could do and as a result Turge's team reverted to old habits and poor decisions. MD did a nice job early of getting to the basket but were most times unable to finish. Now add in a horrendous night from deep (2 for 18 from behind the arc) and you are probably wondering how they only lost by 16. OSU made adjustments and rotated better cutting off driving lanes. The Terps inability to hit deep shots didn't loosen things up enough. You also saw the offense bog down because of a lack of ball and player movement.

 

Wells had a decent second half to make up for a very rough first stanza. Getting picked by Craft at the end of the half wasn't a highlight. Faust was terrible, making poor decisions most of the evening. He often totally forgets his mid-range game. Layman, who I had hoped would be a difference maker was terribly off as well. MD did get production inside as Mitchell and Smoz provided some bright spots.

 

I'm still not pleased with MD's defensive intensity. Ball pressure is weak and that's why you saw several alley-oops. Act, don't react.I'd like to watch one game where a Terp defender takes a charge for a change.

 

MD will get many more tests this season to be sure. Pitt, Syracuse and Notre Dame to name a few. It remains to be seen if this trend continues against good to very good teams or if MD can continue to improve.

[BSLZackKiesel]

That someone would bash Turgeon and praise Edsall is beyond baffling to me. What bizzaro world am I living in here.

First of all, I wasn't 'bashing' Turgeon. I don't like his offense. Never have, probably never will. As a fan, I like to see progression from year to year from a coach. Despite crazy numbers of injuries, Edsall's teams have improved each year. They got better at tackling, catching, running, etc. The only thing that has gotten better from year to year under Turgeon has been recruiting. The mental mistakes are still at the same level, free throw shooting is still very bad, and the defense has gotten worse this season.

 

I think we all expect this basketball team to be held to a higher standard than the football team. This is labeled as a basketball school. Comparatively, the basketball team has more talent on paper than the football team, and gets better recruiting classes. In most people's opinions, Turgeon and his staff are better than Edsall and his staff. So why has there been more improvement in 3 years on the football side than the basketball side? 

 

I like Turgeon. I think he can coach some very good teams here. I like giving coaches 5 years as long as they can reach the postseason by Year 3 or Year 4. So I'm more than happy to let Turgeon build his program. Randy Edsall reached the postseason in Year 3 with a very injured team. We'll have to wait and see whether Turgeon can turn things around this season and get to the postseason in Year 3. The team definitely has the talent to get there this year and for years to come. But they have to start capitalizing on that talent, because right now they're playing some very bad, sloppy basketball.

[Mackus]

Turgeon's teams have been as good or better than the team Gary left him with. 

 

Edsall's teams have not been worse or WAY worse than the team Fridge left him with.

 

Edsall may have made more improvement since his first year to his third, than the basketball team has but that's only because he shit the bed his first two years.  Turgeon's teams haven't improved, but they also didn't fall off the cliff in the first year from where they were before.

[BSLChrisStoner]

Edsall now through his 3rd year.  Turgeon only beginning his. Let's see where Turgeon and MD is at the end of the year.

 

Both Edsall and Turgeon have the players returning, and recruits coming in to be very competitive (Football 7-8 wins & a bowl, Basketball with a Top 4 finish) in their first year in the Big Ten.

 

Expectations will be raised for both, and results will be needed.

[Mackus]

Randy Edsall reached the postseason in Year 3 with a very injured team. We'll have to wait and see whether Turgeon can turn things around this season and get to the postseason in Year 3.

 

If you're giving credit to Edsall for whatever worthless bowl MAryland is going to as "reaching the postseason" then undoubtedly Turgeon should get the same credit for reaching the NIT Final 4 in his second year.

 

70 of 125 teams in FBS made bowl games this year. 

 

There are 350 Div 1 college basketball teams.  68 make the NCAA and 32 make the NIT.

[glenn__davis]

If you're giving credit to Edsall for whatever worthless bowl MAryland is going to as "reaching the postseason" then undoubtedly Turgeon should get the same credit for reaching the NIT Final 4 in his second year.

 

70 of 125 teams in FBS made bowl games this year. 

 

There are 350 Div 1 college basketball teams.  68 make the NCAA and 32 make the NIT.

 

Of course, the basketball program is (and should be) held to a higher standard.

 

And round and round and round this argument goes.

 

I will say that I do not agree that the basketball program was in much worse shape than the football program.  That is really only true if you look at the season immediately prior to the new coaches' arrival, which I think we would all agree is not a prudent way to judge a college program.  If you go just one season back the football team won 2 games and the basketball team was ACC co-champs.

 

I agree with Chris, ultimately.  LIttle early to judge Turgeon on this year.  Let's finish it out and see where he stands. 

[Mackus]

I'm a Turgeon fan, I think he was a great choice and will do great things here, even if he's done a poor job so far.

 

I'm not an Edsall fan at all.  I think he was a bad choice and has gotten even worse in his time here.

[You Play to Win the Game]

I'm a Turgeon fan, I think he was a great choice and will do great things here, even if he's done a poor job so far.

 

I'm not an Edsall fan at all.  I think he was a bad choice and has gotten even worse in his time here.

 

The issue with this stance, is that it's, so far, unsubstantiated. It's opinion, but not fact. The facts tell a different story so far, that's the bottom line.

 

BTW, I feel the same way... but I'm not really beating on that drum right now because I can't back it up.