PDA

View Full Version : ACC/Big Ten Challenge



cdash
11-30-2010, 08:28 PM
Crappy Minnesota blew what was considered a gimme game for the Big Ten last night, making this an uphill battle for the Big Ten here. In the early going, Iowa and Northwestern looking good tonight. Iowa might be a tough out this year for the Hoosiers and Boilers. I pegged them as a pushover at the beginning of the year.

Trader Joe
11-30-2010, 09:42 PM
Dude if Iowa is playing well it is just a refreshing change of pace. They are a push over. Easily the worst team in this league.

cdash
11-30-2010, 09:47 PM
I jinxed them. They blew their huge lead and are now down 4 with 4 to go against Wake. I hope they win. It looks like the B10 will get Ws from Northwestern and Ohio State tonight. Hopefully the Illini (sickens me to say that) beat UNC tonight.

Trader Joe
11-30-2010, 09:52 PM
So I was thinking does anyone else think they should play the Big Ten/ACC challenge at two neutral sites over the course of a weekend? Wouldn't that make it feel more conference vs. conference?

Like you'd play 5 games at Conseco Fieldhouse and 6 games at the Bobcat's arena or something, paint the court with the conference logo and do it over the course of a Saturday and Sunday. Wouldn't that be awesome?

cdash
11-30-2010, 10:44 PM
So I was thinking does anyone else think they should play the Big Ten/ACC challenge at two neutral sites over the course of a weekend? Wouldn't that make it feel more conference vs. conference?

Like you'd play 5 games at Conseco Fieldhouse and 6 games at the Bobcat's arena or something, paint the court with the conference logo and do it over the course of a Saturday and Sunday. Wouldn't that be awesome?

I don't know, I kinda like it the way it is. ACC/Big Ten Challenge games are always big on campus. When I was at IU I remember we got Duke to play at Assembly Hall, and it was crazy. That was the year we had Kilingsworth and Monroe, and it is still to this day the coolest sporting event I've ever been to--and IU even lost the game. Killingsworth's dunk to put IU ahead in the second half nearly brought the house down, literally. I thought the balcony was going to fall down. Anyways, neutral sites get their love during conference tournaments and the NCAAs. On campus games like this are neat.

LG33
12-01-2010, 01:56 AM
Good luck to IU tomorrow, but obviously I hope my boys from Chestnut Hill get the W. Judging by how they've played recently, though, they won't.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 12:16 PM
If the Hoosiers win tonight, I'll be very, very impressed and consider it as a sign that we are well ahead of schedule.

Kegboy
12-01-2010, 12:18 PM
I like it the way it is. There's too many neutral site games. Going to a good team's arena and losing isn't a big deal, but if you do and win it really helps your stock come tourney time.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 12:21 PM
I guess, I just don't get the conference vs. conference feel as much as I would at a neutral site. Still just feels like schools vs. schools.

Also having to "root" for Illinois last night was vomit worthy.

Mackey_Rose
12-01-2010, 02:39 PM
I don't know, I kinda like it the way it is. ACC/Big Ten Challenge games are always big on campus. When I was at IU I remember we got Duke to play at Assembly Hall, and it was crazy. That was the year we had Kilingsworth and Monroe, and it is still to this day the coolest sporting event I've ever been to--and IU even lost the game. Killingsworth's dunk to put IU ahead in the second half nearly brought the house down, literally. I thought the balcony was going to fall down. Anyways, neutral sites get their love during conference tournaments and the NCAAs. On campus games like this are neat.

I attended that game as well. That one moment (Killingsworth's dunk) was, without a doubt, the loudest experience I've ever had at any sporting event.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:03 PM
Hoosiers looked completely shell shocked that 1st half.

Not having Guy eligible is going to kill us. BC must have had 10 offensive rebounds or more in that first half.

cdash
12-01-2010, 09:04 PM
**** you Indiana. You ****ing pansies. *******it. What the ****? Now I know why I stopped watching them the last two years. Crean's offense drives me up a ****ing wall.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:18 PM
:chillpill:

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:27 PM
Also you're complaining about the offense? The defense has been at least 10 times worse, and the rebounding has been ten times worse than that.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:30 PM
You get the sense that if we just settle down a little bit we can beat this team.

cdash
12-01-2010, 09:31 PM
The offense is so stagnant. Always. It just bothers me. Creek's shots are embarrassingly bad tonight. Not even close most of the time. Wonder what his deal is.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:32 PM
Creek's still coming back. The lift on his jumper is not all the way there and he's trying to overcompensate with arm movement and all his shots are coming off like shotput tosses. Need to keep run the pick and roll, BC is struggling like hell at defending that.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:34 PM
We really need to make it a team effort on the boards. Expecting Watford and Pritchard to do it by themselves is a recipe for failure.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:34 PM
BC is begging us to make a full comeback.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:38 PM
Verdell should have to spend an entire practice shooting free throws.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:39 PM
That was a bull**** foul on Oladipo! That ball was up for grabs!

cdash
12-01-2010, 09:39 PM
Sissy foul call.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:41 PM
Can't get past this 5 or 6 point barrier frustrating

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:42 PM
Hoosier nation is well represented there tonight, there's no doubt about that. Oladipo's dunk just got a huge cheer.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:43 PM
Also, Oladipo is gonna be a stud two way player. He's built in the mold of the guys that just end up becoming stars at Michigan State.

cdash
12-01-2010, 09:43 PM
I'm into this. Come on Hoosiers!!!

cdash
12-01-2010, 09:43 PM
Also, Oladipo is gonna be a stud two way player. He's built in the mold of the guys that just end up becoming stars at Michigan State.

I was not excited at all about him or Sheehey. Faith in Crean, I now have. I like both of them.

pwee31
12-01-2010, 09:44 PM
Looks like the Big 10 may get this one if Purdue can hang on, b/c Wisconsin is up a lot.

IU showing some fight getting back in the game! Let's go Hoosiers!

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:44 PM
Sheehey's been a shock to me. I had a lot of hope in Oladipo from what I had seen, but Sheehey has shown an incredibly complete game. I thought he was just a shooter, but he's really got some nice all around offensive ability.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:45 PM
AAAAH REBOUND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:46 PM
Reggie Jackson is bailing BC's *** out every time.

cdash
12-01-2010, 09:47 PM
Mr. October is killing us. **** this guy.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:47 PM
Seriously our defense is stifling them in the half court and he's yanked two desperation threes out of his ***.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:48 PM
Our ****ing rebounding is driving me crazy. I can't watch that.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:50 PM
I <3 Jordan Hulls

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:51 PM
All I can say is...we better hope this game does not come down to a rebound.

cdash
12-01-2010, 09:52 PM
They keep hitting huge threes. Zone defense makes me really nervous.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:53 PM
I don't care how many times you hear the Jimmy V speech, it's still ridiculously moving.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:54 PM
Watford is just a beast.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:55 PM
HOW GOOD IS HULLS????

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:56 PM
This is stupid. One point game, then a three...rinse and repeat.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:58 PM
GOD **** OUR REBOUNDING JESUS. It's completely cost us this game.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 09:58 PM
Why in God's name did we go back to the man defense?

cdash
12-01-2010, 10:01 PM
Rebounding and Boston College making all these mother****ing three pointers has killed us. Argh.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 10:03 PM
Well, this loss is just going to ****ing kill me. Stupid ****ing things killing us. Rebounding and wasted free throws...Damn it.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 10:04 PM
Oh and the decision to back to man was ****ing retarded. That is how they got out to a 14 point lead and that is how they are pulling away again now.

cdash
12-01-2010, 10:05 PM
The decision to go back to man wasn't bad. They were busting the zone by knocking down threes.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 10:06 PM
The decision to go back to man wasn't bad. They were busting the zone by knocking down threes.

Dude we can't stick with their wing athletes. When we were in zone this half we outscored them by 12, when we've been in man to man, they've outscored us by 9 in literally 2 minutes.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 10:07 PM
Also they made 3 threes against the zone and they've made 2 against the man to man. Man to man was a bad choice. It was 66-64 when we made the switch from zone to man to man now it's 78-67.

cdash
12-01-2010, 10:09 PM
If a team is knocking down threes, it makes the zone ineffective. Like it ****ing matters anyways. We can't get a mother****ing rebound to save our ****ing lives. And so much for our good defense. Looks a lot better when you are playing terrible ****ing schools.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 10:10 PM
Oh well, I expected us to lose that game, but honestly I felt like we just came out shell shocked. I don't feel like they were more talented than us. Hopefully they figure it out.

Need to get out of non-conference with only 2 losses.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 10:12 PM
If a team is knocking down threes, it makes the zone ineffective. Like it ****ing matters anyways. We can't get a mother****ing rebound to save our ****ing lives. And so much for our good defense. Looks a lot better when you are playing terrible ****ing schools.

The zone was effective though. It cut a 14 point lead down to 2. And was creating turnovers. They were scoring on about 1/4 of possessions against the zone. I would have stuck with it. The man to man hadn't worked all game.

Oh well, I'm not as upset as you are. I think our weak schedule hurt us in the sense that we were a bit shell shocked to see this team being so talented. Just need to regroup, we will be fine. It's still a growing experience, can't get our hopes up too much.

Remember a .500 record this season would still be a pretty good accomplishment.

cdash
12-01-2010, 10:13 PM
I didn't expect to lose that game. That's ****ing horse****. Boston College sucks. We are going to get ****stomped in the Big Ten. If that pussy *** team just outrebounded the **** out of us, just imagine what the bigger Big Ten teams are going to do. Same ****, new season. Cody Zeller can't get here soon enough.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 10:17 PM
BC doesn't suck, they will be a well coached squad this year and we were playing on the road.

I would have been shocked if we won this game.

I think you have to consider moving Creek or Jones to the bench, and starting Oladipo to help on the boards. Either that or when we are playing zone, you can't have Watford up top, where he does wreak a lot of havoc, but seriously hurts the rebounding. So you either have to decide if you want to be a more turnover oriented team or a better rebounding team.

cdash
12-01-2010, 10:19 PM
They lost at home to Yale. They suck.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 10:21 PM
They lost at home to Yale. They suck.

They also smoked Cal, beat Texas A&M, and played Wisconsin tough.

Good teams lose to bad ones in college basketball on a consistent basis. It's just the nature of the beast.

We came out early got shell shocked, dug a big hole for ourselves, and then ran out of game trying to get out of it. We blew some serious chances in that second half to take the lead.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 10:26 PM
We also had to have been much better on the boards in the second because we only got out-rebounded by 6 and most of that if not all of that advantage had to have been in the first half.

cdash
12-01-2010, 11:02 PM
At least the Big Ten won the Challenge. That was our first real test of the season, and we blew it. I commend the guys for coming back, and BC really killed all our momentum with all those threes. Just frustrating. I thought we really had a chance to build serious confidence and it was a golden opportunity to do so. Before the Big Ten season starts, it was this game and the Kentucky game as the opportunities to do so. I'm not hopeful about that UK game.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 11:15 PM
No, but at the very least all this team needs is to win and gain confidence and Crean himself said that's what this non-conference schedule is all about, which is why our start and our finish are pillowy soft.

cdash
12-01-2010, 11:21 PM
Yeah but the players know that they need to beat good teams. Beating the crap out of 10 cupcakes isn't going to do a whole lot for them. They need to know they can beat anyone. We need a signature win on the season.

Trader Joe
12-01-2010, 11:39 PM
I mean we already beat a very good Pittsburgh team last season. One signature does absolutely nothing, we have to build consistency and to me that means we need to start piling up as many wins as we can and try and get in a groove.

cdash
12-02-2010, 12:38 AM
Nobody thought Pitt was any good then. I remember during the game the announcers talking about how neither team would be playing in the tournament. It was only later that we found out they were good.

Signature wins do mean something. I don't understand how you can think they don't. With young teams not used to winning, sure beating crummy teams helps, but at some point, you want to know you can compete and win at a high level. I'm not saying BC would have done that, but you are still undefeated and winning games you are supposed to win, and you start to get that feeling that you can beat anybody. Kentucky would be a monster win if we could somehow pull that one off.

Trader Joe
12-02-2010, 10:12 AM
I think everyone recognized how big that win over Pitt was. If only Creek hadn't gotten injured....

I think we have to remember just how much that changed the outlook of last season and it's still lingering into this season as he tries to fight back.

cdash
12-02-2010, 05:45 PM
At the time, that win over Pitt was not a huge deal. No one thought they were any good at the time.

And we need Creek, but even he won't help our bigs out when it comes to the B10 season. As was the case last year, teams are going to destroy us down low. That's why the Guy Marc ruling hurt so much. Yeah, he might not have been any good, but he's a desperately needed big body down low.