I love the Ags. I get stupidly wrapped up in how well 18-22 year old boys (wearing my school's colors) do on the court and field.

That said, the difference between what the Spurs do when they have the ball (or Mavs if you love Dallas. It doesn't really matter) and what the Ags do when they've got it is night and day. The Spurs actively work to create good shots. The Ags, on the other hand, seem to base their offense on the idea that, if we pass it around for 35 seconds, eventually the opposing defense will do something stupid and we'll get our shot. We are so, so stagnant.

Anyway, after watching SA-Miami last night and now watching A&M (at home) v. one of the worst teams in the big 12, I can hardly stand it.

the main reason i haven't enjoyed watching the aggies so much this year is the spurs.

The Ags offense would look a lot better if our guards could penetrate and score. When you have that it opens up every option on the floor. It should be noted that they let the college defenders get away with more contact. That being said, Dash Harris has the physical attributes to be a great slasher. He has just never figured out how to score in the lane. Its really baffling to me.

Zone

Grizz coach Lionel Hollins, who son plays for Minnesota expressed his opinion on why he doesn't watch his son much.

Hollins was asked if he was hoping to find a TV to catch some of his son's game.

"I'm not," he said. "I don't watch him play."

Because? "I don't like college basketball," he said.

Hollins paused for a second, and you wondered if he was getting ready to couch that remark. Not really.

"He was my son in high school and I didn't watch him then, either," Hollins said. "When I was out of basketball, I went to every game. I hated it. But I had to do it."

"It's hard to watch college basketball ... There's not a lot of playing," he said. "The pro game, with the 24-second clock, moving up and down the court, you get at least 100 possessions every game.

"In college, especially in the Big Ten ... I watched Wisconsin and Minnesota play down the stretch and I couldn't take it. They just hold the ball and hold the ball, and try to get a shot with 10 seconds on the clock.

"That's the whole game -- not just the fourth quarter."


Note: I don't foresee Hollins winning Father of the Year awards, but I have a feeling most pro coaches feel the same way.

http://www.startribune.com/sports/gophers/115157054.html

I generally like both college and NBA, but our offense is crap even for college.

The difference is in the athletes. The players who are usually capable and athletic enough to penetrate at will and create pretty much any shot they want just don't stick around more than 2 years usually in college... they are all making money in the NBA.

When comparing college football to the NFL, the athlete has evolved greatly in both over the last 20-25 years. The same could be said about the NBA. College hoops though? Nope... not so much.

The Ags downfall is mostly this too... that's why they've fared awfully against teams superior in athleticism so badly this season yet hold a damn near perfect record against teams who don't have that advantage.

[This message has been edited by ATM9000 (edited 3/6/2011 7:47a).]

quote:

---

The Ags downfall is mostly this too... that's why they've fared awfully against teams superior in athleticism so badly this season yet hold a damn near perfect record against teams who don't have that advantage.

---

This thread could probably go the A&M basketball forum, but it'd be crucified by the people there. More athleticism is almost equivalent to more NBA talent (either in quality (Baylor), quantity (KU), or both (sips)). Expecting David Loubeau to stop a young Kevin Garnett (PJ3) is asking him to do something WAY outside of his. limits, for example.

23-7 in THIS conference is a testament our guy's incredible hard work and great coaching by Turg. I'd argue that we'd be more competitive in ANY other conference. No conference packs NBA talent into a few teams like ours does.

As for the whole college game, I'd probably stop watching it if the Aggies were totally non-competitive. Its just a poor product. I think Bill Simmons calls it: "just a bunch of guys standing around shooting threes". Furthermore if David Stern removes the 19 year age limit, then the product worsens even more dramatically; they should ideally make the limit 20.

I'm still shocked that Kentucky didn't win the title last year. We try to explain things after aberration games by chalking it up to "experience" and "heart" which I think are vastly overrated in college basketball compared to talent. Really it was just that WVU had a lucky day shooting, and UK had a very poor day shooting. With a 24 second shot clock, 48 minutes, and 7 game series NO TEAM IN AMERICA could have beaten NBA 15 and 9 John wall, NBA 14 and 8 per 27 minutes Demarcus Cousins, and 3 MORE first round picks.

I didn't even watch the farce of a final 4. KU versus UK would have been a high quality, almost NBA type game. Instead we got some white kids running around shooting threes.

quote:

---

I'm still shocked that Kentucky didn't win the title last year. We try to explain things after aberration games by chalking it up to "experience" and "heart" which I think are vastly overrated in college basketball compared to talent. Really it was just that WVU had a lucky day shooting, and UK had a very poor day shooting. With a 24 second shot clock, 48 minutes, and 7 game series NO TEAM IN AMERICA could have beaten NBA 15 and 9 John wall, NBA 14 and 8 per 27 minutes Demarcus Cousins, and 3 MORE first round picks.

I didn't even watch the farce of a final 4. KU versus UK would have been a high quality, almost NBA type game. Instead we got some white kids running around shooting threes.

---

I don't know why you are shocked, UK had been inconsistent all season. They usually pulled it out in the end, but they won several close ones to crap teams. They had no chance of putting together 6 straight games good enough to beat tourney competition, which is exactly why I picked them to lose to WVU.

The final was a great game. You might not like team basketball, but it was a great game with great college players and some future NBA players. The difference between running around shooting threes and running an offense that incorporates the three is why UK didn't make it and Duke did.

In the WVU game, UK took 32 threes even though they weren't making them. In the final, both teams combined for 35 threes. UK lost because they play bad basketball and take bad shots, period. They did it all season.

great thread, and pretty spot on.

My wife is a HUGE Kansas fan, when we first met she'd buy several college preseason mags and study the hell out of them.

Then we moved to OKC and she really got into the Thunder. Her passion for college hoops has greatly decreased. I was never really into college hoops until I met her in 2007, I am now, but NBA will always top it.

No doubt, what Turgeon and the team have done is outstanding this season. The proliferation of AAU ball and the lack of coaches who know what they are doing on that circuit have hurt college b-ball badly too. I'd say the fundamentals have really started to leave the college game in the last 15 years too which is sad because that's the biggest thing that college hoops had over the NBA for a long time.

I'm a big hoops nut, but if it isn't a big time Big 12 or Big East game, I'm usually not watching it anymore if it's a college game.

quote:

---

I don't know why you are shocked, UK had been inconsistent all season. They usually pulled it out in the end, but they won several close ones to crap teams. They had no chance of putting together 6 straight games good enough to beat tourney competition, which is exactly why I picked them to lose to WVU.
The final was a great game. You might not like team basketball, but it was a great game with great college players and some future NBA players. The difference between running around shooting threes and running an offense that incorporates the three is why UK didn't make it and Duke did.
In the WVU game, UK took 32 threes even though they weren't making them. In the final, both teams combined for 35 threes. UK lost because they play bad basketball and take bad shots, period. They did it all season.

---

I'll argue that the 35 second shot clock really neutralized UK's athletic advantage. And the lack of illegal defense calls made its worse. Team basketball I can appreciate. My favorite NBA finals was the Spurs/Piston 7 games series that no one else really watched. I doubt the 2010 final was anywhere on the same planet as that. And we'll be lucky if anyone who played in that final 4 is pro starter, much less an All-Star.

Once and if A&M losses and few select teams with future stars lose, I'm turning off CBS this year too. My favorite day of college basketball is June 23rd this year. Unless Turg gets the boys to Reliant .

I have a tendency to turn off once my teams are out of the playoffs too... it has more to do with disappointment than anything. I don't get how someone who likes good team basketball doesn't like Duke though, they have the smoothest offense in college ball.

How does the 35 second clock neutralize an athletic advantage? I understand that it gives the less athletic team more time to be deliberate, but UK-type teams still have the option of running them to death. It's not like they are penalized for shooting in the first 24 seconds.

If anything in the college game is an "disadvantage" to better athletes, I'd say it is the shorter three-point range that makes good spacing tougher and NCAA refs not calling as many BS touch fouls.


Personally, I think the biggest reason for the more fluid pro offenses is that pros can work, practice, and learn year round, full time. College athletes are only allowed a certain amount of contact with their coaches and have school as well (some of them).

[This message has been edited by Ulrich (edited 3/6/2011 10:50a).]

i think the spacing in college vs. NBA is a huge deal

quote:

---

i think the spacing in college vs. NBA is a huge deal

---

Somewhat agree, but that goes back to the fact that the grassroots coaching for basketball in this US has really gone to **** since the shoe companies and hype machines have gotten so involved in it. As somebody who actually played AAU ball, mind you years ago, and I was on one of those teams who was on the ass end of a lot of ass kickings by the teams with players who went somewhere, the coaching in that whole system of basketball is just awful. A lot of times the guys coaching the elite teams are guys who never even played ball on a HS varsity level and have no college degree... rather they are hired to coach the team because they understand how to promote for a shoe company and will do so for cheap so long as there's even the slightest promise of a future pay day down the line. And it sucks because the emphasis is going away from school ball to summer league for young guys.

A lot of the teams in the NBA have wised up and actually hired coaches and assistants who know how to teach the game of basketball to raw talent. The NBA was bad at that years ago so in that sense, they've really evened the playing field re: fundamentals w/ college basketball or maybe even surpassed it since college gets really good players usually 2 yrs. at most.

For this and a lot of other reasons (big one being the NBA is actually getting better again), I think college hoops might be in a little bit of trouble. Of course it'll never go away, but I could certainly see a huge decline in popularity if they don't start working with the NBA on getting some sort or system in play where teams will actually keep elite players for more than a yr or 2.

[This message has been edited by ATM9000 (edited 3/6/2011 4:24p).]

I agree with astros, spacing is the biggest difference to me, besides the obvious (better athletes/ better players).

The best slashers get to the basket much easier in the NBA because there is so much more room and pro defenses can't pack it in.

quote:

---

Grizz coach Lionel Hollins, who son plays for Minnesota expressed his opinion on why he doesn't watch his son much.

Hollins was asked if he was hoping to find a TV to catch some of his son's game.

"I'm not," he said. "I don't watch him play."

Because? "I don't like college basketball," he said.

Hollins paused for a second, and you wondered if he was getting ready to couch that remark. Not really.

"He was my son in high school and I didn't watch him then, either," Hollins said. "When I was out of basketball, I went to every game. I hated it. But I had to do it."

"It's hard to watch college basketball ... There's not a lot of playing," he said. "The pro game, with the 24-second clock, moving up and down the court, you get at least 100 possessions every game.

"In college, especially in the Big Ten ... I watched Wisconsin and Minnesota play down the stretch and I couldn't take it. They just hold the ball and hold the ball, and try to get a shot with 10 seconds on the clock.

"That's the whole game -- not just the fourth quarter."

---

Oh My God.....i completely agree with Hollins.

In a nutshell he just explained why Ive never liked college basketball.

The 35 second shot clock is way too long....and the players are just nowhere as good as their NBA counterparts.

Go to an NBA game and the skill level of the shooters is unbelievable.

Its really unbelievable to watch a Dirk, Ray Allen, Steve Nash, Kobe Bryant..type shoot the ball.

These guys can fade away and they can shoot it from anywhere on the court.

You dont see that in the college game at all.

Jimmer Fredete of BYu might be the only college player in America that has those sort of skills.

quote:

---

Grizz coach Lionel Hollins, who son plays for Minnesota expressed his opinion on why he doesn't watch his son much.

Hollins was asked if he was hoping to find a TV to catch some of his son's game.

"I'm not," he said. "I don't watch him play."

Because? "I don't like college basketball," he said.

Hollins paused for a second, and you wondered if he was getting ready to couch that remark. Not really.

"He was my son in high school and I didn't watch him then, either," Hollins said. "When I was out of basketball, I went to every game. I hated it. But I had to do it."

"It's hard to watch college basketball ... There's not a lot of playing," he said. "The pro game, with the 24-second clock, moving up and down the court, you get at least 100 possessions every game.

"In college, especially in the Big Ten ... I watched Wisconsin and Minnesota play down the stretch and I couldn't take it. They just hold the ball and hold the ball, and try to get a shot with 10 seconds on the clock.

"That's the whole game -- not just the fourth quarter."

---

REAL TALK.

College Basketball, and college sports in general, are far superior to professional sports for a variety of reasons. Far superior.

I find the NBA is impossible to watch.

quote:

---

College Basketball, and college sports in general, are far superior to professional sports for a variety of reasons. Far superior.

---

March Madness is the best tournament in sports. Pride in one's school is what makes collegiate athletics so great.

I prefer the pro game on almost every other aspect.

Interesting thread. I've always been a pro-NBA guy. I never understood the people that hate the NBA and claim that college basketball is "pure" or something. To me, the NBA is the best basketball to watch. Next best is college. Next best is high school. Etc... The watchability of the game, for me, is directly correlated to the talent level of the players. (which also means that yes, I will watch 8 year old boys play before I will watch the WNBA. ZING!)

quote:

---

I agree with astros, spacing is the biggest difference to me, besides the obvious (better athletes/ better players).

The best slashers get to the basket much easier in the NBA because there is so much more room and pro defenses can't pack it in.

---

The spacing is also the reason I prefer college football to NFL football. Yes, the NFL has more talent, but unlike basketball, in football, they cramp the athletes together at the highest level of the game. They have narrow hashmarks so the game is always played right in the middle of the field. With no space to operate but elite athletes everywhere, there is less excitement, fewer big plays. (Not to mention the horrid clock rules in the NFL which allow for about 50 plays per game from each team, instead of 70-80 for college teams) In college, the field is wide open due to the wide hashes, and thanks to the talent disparity, there are more plays made in space.

So what works for the NBA and against college in basketball is reversed when it comes to football. The NFL pi$$$es me off... it's like their whole goal is to take away excitement. Fewer plays, less space, and no matter what, RUN THAT CLOCK!!!! HEAVEN FORBID SOMEONE SCORES 40 POINTS! AND WHATEVER YOU DO, IF YOU'RE A COACH, DO NOT TRY ANYTHING INNOVATIVE!!!!

Our lack of offense finally doomed us. Pass it around the 3pt line and occasionally get the ball inside to Loubeau and see if he can take advantage of a 1v1 matchup.

Then I turn on the Spurs-Mavs game and it's night and day. Both teams move the ball around with a purpose. Sure they miss some shots and have cold streaks (like any basketball player), but the ball movement is on another level and the speed of the game is so much higher. Hell I hate Dirk, but after watching the Ags all season and only a couple of Spurs games (I live in AZ so they aren't on TV much and I don't watch many games online), he looked like hardcourt Jesus in nikes.

People keep saying how amazing Turge's coaching job was this season because we were picked to finish 5th-7th and we finished 3rd, but it's hard to watch the NBA and feel like he's doing anything transcendental X's and O's-wise. I'm not saying I expect the Ags to look like the Spurs or Mavs, but wow, 3/4 of the time, it doesn't even look like we're running plays.

PS - I don't mean this as an attack on Turge. He does a great job coaching D & rebounding, and he does a wonderful job getting the guys to buy into the team. But I do think it's obvious that offensive coaching is not his forte

[This message has been edited by atfarmer (edited 3/18/2011 10:25p).]

quote:

---

People keep saying how amazing Turge's coaching job was this season because we were picked to finish 5th-7th and we finished 3rd, but it's hard to watch the NBA and feel like he's doing anything transcendental X's and O's-wise. I'm not saying I expect the Ags to look like the Spurs or Mavs, but wow, 3/4 of the time, it doesn't even look like we're running plays.

PS - I don't mean this as an attack on Turge. He does a great job coaching D & rebounding, and he does a wonderful job getting the guys to buy into the team. But I do think it's obvious that offensive coaching is not his forte

---

Completely agree. The Ags don't run plays on offense. They just play a combination of lots of lazy with a little helter skelter.

I disagree about Turge as far as rebounding coaching. I saw enough standing around without blocking out on free throw attempts this Big XII season to last me a lifetime. It was pathetic how poor our team was at fundamental rebounding situations when it really counted.

And I think most on THIS forum will agree with you, but don't go over to the idiot village that is the A&M basketball board.

Even the bad teams in the NBA run plays. College ball has become sickening to watch. It's a who-can-jack-up-the-most-BS-shots-that-go-in contest.

[This message has been edited by aggie_2001_2005 (edited 3/18/2011 10:42p).]

Another big thing that I wish the college game would implement is doing away with zone defenses. NBA got rid of this when they implemented the defensive 3 seconds. Made the game much more open.

quote:

---

March Madness is the best tournament in sports. Pride in one's school is what makes collegiate athletics so great.

I prefer the pro game on almost every other aspect.

---

This +1. If it wasn't for the tournament, I would never watch college basketball.

Watching college ball after watching NBA ballis brutal. This point can't be made often enough -- the worst NBA team would go undefeated in the NCAA.

There are some guys in college ball who are great shooters when left alone, but EVERYONE in the NBA can knock down open jumpers.

NBA players are bigger, faster, smarter and more skilled in almost every way. Some college players can jump, but that's about it.

Idiots say there's no defense in the NBA. If there was no defense, given the offensive skills of most players, every Association team would score 160-200 pt range.

I watch the Ags as an Ag, but can't stomach much college ball beyond that.

Anybody who thinks Turgeon did anything less than a stellar job with the Ags this year REALLY doesn't understand basketball.

The team had one major crux: they lacked athleticism to be elite. Teams with lesser athletes they were practically perfect against (Nebraska being the only exception). For a team to bring that sort of consistency is outstanding. Especially on the college level. If he had just one big post scorer, they'd be a top 10 team.

Criticizing Turge by saying the NBA games look better is quite a bit off base. The job he did this year with the player he has was very nice. Last time I checked, the goal of the coach is to win and he has maybe one NBA prospect on his team right now. Give him Ginobili and Dirk and I bet his offense would magically look innovative.

The NBA offensive game is based off of exploiting mismatches. You take a guy like Parker who can break down Jason Kidd and that becomes your play. Everything else plays off of that initial advantage. In college, because of the rules and the officiating its very difficult to create mismatches consistantly unless you just have a full team of studs. That's why Kansas, Duke, UNC and Conn are always good... they always have those studs all across the board.

quote:

---

Idiots say there's no defense in the NBA.

---

People that make this remark are typically the ones whom haven't watched a half of an NBA game in 5 years.

No one here is saying he's a bad coach. We're just commenting that college ball sucks in general and nobody runs plays.

I love the Association.