I think you got some bad advice. I would change representation immediately.

You're forgetting the landmark case of Bullshit v. ahunte1, which was dismissed with extreme prejudice.

Besides, didn't Bush v. Gore stop the recount?

_________________
MBB Scholarship Chart

In the interest of preserving Ramblermania unity, I will not press my legal defenses and will pay my wager at the next game.

Let the healing begin!

But, while I may have lost the wager, I believe my larger point was vindicated. Without the unexpectedly large turnout of Shocker fans (1000 or more by my estimate) attendance would have been in the 3000 range, which was my original guess.

I agree that response was good. It made me chuckle.

You're both ignoring the most important case to reference: U.S. vs Fishbien

Whereas a visiting competitor successfully attempts at least 96% of his shots in a 2 year period, the opposing coach is entitled to the visiting coach's suit. It's an obscure ruling, but a very important one. To me.

Seriously though, good game. You guys have some good young talent to go with a little experienced play too. Size is tough, but many of the youngsters are long so I think that difference is a bit overrated. St. Louis is going to be a lot more competitive this year. A lot more. Good luck the rest of the way.

I was mostly heartened by the game the Ramblers played. The Shockers are more talented, bigger, and have a much longer history of playing together. Those advantages came to bear in the second half. I liked our defensive strategy. Doubling down in the post forced turnovers in the first half, and gambling off Cotton was the right move. He's only shooting 32% from three this year. Yesterday, he just decided to drain four. When you're outgunned, you gotta decide what you're willing to live with and that seemed like a reasonable choice.

I still have misgivings on the offensive end. Our movement often looks stiff and seems aimless. Watching Jeff White get yanked out so suddenly after a turnover and then spending much of the second half on the bench brought the problem into focus. Everyone, with the exception of Milton, plays like they're focused on not getting benched rather than scoring the ball. Every decision is a safe one. I'm not advocating reckless play, but the Ramblers could afford to be more creative. But creativity risks turnovers and Porter has shown no patience with potential creators. So we get that terrible second half when our offense seemed to be 30 seconds of the weave and then an iso play from whoever ended up with the ball at the top of the key.

With a young team playing better teams, I would like to see more tolerance for the sake of creativity. Not every moment has to be a tough-love teaching moment. It just leads to tentative offense, which will lead to troubles closing out teams. Does anyone else sense this? I just hate watching a team with basically nothing to lose playing so conservatively.

Hello, been lurking all season but haven't posted in a while. I'm inclined to agree--we shot ourselves into the game with creative drives and kickouts (10 for 18 from 3!), but it seemed like we came out in the second half just trying to pass it around the arc until forcing it inside. It seemed like we opened up the half with three or four straight possessions resulting with Christian Thomas getting blocked in the post. I understand the impulse--with the lead going into the half, it might make sense trying to possess the ball and play slow and inside. With how good our shooting has been, I think we can afford to play a high-risk high-reward run and gun. Mike D'Antoni 7 seconds or less, anyone?

I've seen a couple comments about the ESPNU broadcast, but does anyone who watched on TV have any other insights? We seemed loud inside Gentile, did that carry over on TV? How full did Gentile look, and did they really mostly focus on Shocker fans? How did the analysts treat us--unknown underdog vs a powerhouse? A young, on the rise team? Two random midmajors slugging it out?

It was a comparatively huge spotlight for us, so I'm curious how we came off. Regardless, fun game and a treat to be at.

_________________
Founder and Chairman, Swaggy T Fan Club*

*Swaggy T Fan Club is not associated with Loyola University Chicago or Devon "Swaggy T" Turk; it is not owned or operated by employees or representatives of the entities mentioned.

I agree with your comment about the defense. We can't guard them everywhere, and our plan worked in the first half. They just shot the lights out in the second half. Props to them for finding open guys and knocking down shots.

I'm not so on board with your discussion of the offense.

"Our movement often looks stiff and seems aimless." It's subjective, I guess, but I think our offense usually has good flow. We run into trouble when we try to force the ball inside against a team that is bigger and stronger. Doyle's injury didn't make it easier for us to play the inside-out game.

"Watching Jeff White get yanked out so suddenly after a turnover..." I love Keke, but he deserved to get pulled out. He made two really bad passes in a row, and he isn't a young player. You can't afford sloppy plays like that.

"It just leads to tentative offense, which will lead to troubles closing out teams." Did you mean to post this a year ago? We've closed out many games this year very well.

"I just hate watching a team with basically nothing to lose playing so conservatively." To me, it's not about being conservative or tentative or whatever. Look at Doyle's drive and spin move or Earl getting into the paint or Turk shooting it or Knuth playing with no fear taking open shots and driving when a defender flew at him. They aren't playing afraid, they are just trying to find a way to win against a team that is better and stronger. I'd love it if we had guys slashing to the hoop every possession too, but nobody does that against Wichita.

_________________
MBB Scholarship Chart

I'm not pressing for an inside-out game. We don't have enough size to establish a real presence inside. In light of our personnel shortcomings, I would like to play that takes more advantage of who we have rather than expose what we lack. Why Loyola is not at least experimenting with a college version of the 7-seconds-or-less Suns teams. Why slow the game down to expose our weaknesses when buckets in transition are easier? I don't see lack of flow as the problem either. They have flow. It just doesn't do anything. The ball moves around the three-point arc, gets stuck, and Milton then goes to work. What's frustrating is that there is no sign that Porter will try different things. He has a normative sense of what his basketball team should look like, personnel be damned. It's the anti-Belichick. Rather than fitting a system around your personnel, he chooses a system that he is thoroughly committed to, no matter what.

Two sloppy plays? Maybe I'm just a big softie, but that seems harsh. Especially when this isn't Kentucky. "Next man up" is a great philosophy to have if you have the talent on the bench to back it up. Instead, Porter just pulled our starting point guard to make some sort of point. Struck me as chopping off your nose to spite your face. I'd rather keep my most talented players on the floor and suffer the consequences if it doesn't work out. At least I lost with my best players.

We've closed out games this year. No doubt and I do not wish to see that change. But if the offense remains 30 seconds of the weave and 5 seconds of hero-ball, then the trouble with closing out games will re-emerge.

And no, they're not afraid in the sense that they're intimidated by the other team. It's a fear of losing playing time--of having what happened to Keke happen to you. Knuth played without fear but he also only shot the ball three times. Turk is a willing shooter who Porter has no problem yanking if he shoots just a little too much or puts up a shot Porter doesn't like. Milton's spin move in the paint came at the end of a poor offensive sequence where the onus to create within a short period of time once again fell on his shoulders.

The offense scored a paltry 25 points in the second half. Did you realize that 11 of those points came from the 4:08 mark to the end of the game? Which is just the part of the game when desperation took over. With the desperation came liberation from the system. Then we started to see threes fly without worry and lo-and-behold they went in. Toss in the halfcourt bomb, and that's 14 of the 25 second half points. That's not all on Wichita. We made it easy for them to guard us. I'd love to see more imagination.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Our offensive efficiency per Kenpom is 77th in the nation, and most people on this board would agree that Porter has changed his coaching quite a bit to adjust to both our smaller team and our greater depth. We obviously struggled in the second half yesterday, but is the solution to get into a run and gun game with Wichita State? That's nuts. Let's not forget that we are 12-4.

Edit: White played 20 minutes yesterday, and he's averaging 19.5.

_________________
MBB Scholarship Chart

I'm kind of looking at it from a different angle. Our offense has been solid all year, and this is in my opinion the best passing team Loyola's had in recent memory. We've done a great job moving the ball, and getting the open shot.

But isn't Wichita the exact type of team you'd want to try to run and gun against? On paper, we can't hang with them. Slowing the game down and just trying to go toe-to-toe is certainly going to favor the Shockers. So why not speed the game up, bust out of transition, and keep chucking? Our shooting was hot, and let's face it, as far as we've come this season we're going to need a little luck to beat a team like Wichita. That's how little guys beat big guys. David didn't post up Goliath.

Again, this isn't an indictment of the season as a whole. The way we play Drake shouldn't necessarily be the way we play Wichita.

_________________
Founder and Chairman, Swaggy T Fan Club*

*Swaggy T Fan Club is not associated with Loyola University Chicago or Devon "Swaggy T" Turk; it is not owned or operated by employees or representatives of the entities mentioned.