Bulls vs. SMU in Game Discussion

[chapelbull]

22 minutes ago, JTrue said:

I did a little digging on FT shooting across the NCAA just to see where we finished up the regular season.

334. UCF

336. USF

351. Manhattan

Our FT shooting is definitely atrocious, but it's not the achilles heal people keep wanting to make it

[usfgrad84]

20 hours ago, feardabull said:

Maybe we should go ahead and lose this game and take our chances with uconn.  We cant beat a ****** undermanned SMU team

They're even talking enough **** on the floor to get teched up.  They know they're shorthanded and still owning us. Whatever pride we have left is gone now

I don't know who he was jawing at, but that T was on Macmurray, who played his first two years here.  He was talking crap to someone on the bench

[JTrue]

1 hour ago, chapelbull said:

Our FT shooting is definitely atrocious, but it's not the achilles heal people keep wanting to make it

Yup.

[abochner]

This team over-performed most of the season, with the only real under-performances against the Citadel and SMU.  The defensive effort was poor yesterday given the game plan, which was to crash the boards.  USF did their usual great job of offensive rebounding, but the failure to get points off the offensive rebounding led to many easy baskets going the other way for SMU.  Yes, it was disappointing, but we all know there are still a few glaring weaknesses.  We don't have any forwards who can score off the dribble.  Our poor outside shooting makes us vulnerable to teams that can play a good match-up zone.  The future is bright, but we are still a couple of weapons away from being a tournament team.  Still, let's not forget we were picked for last in the conference.  This has been a year to develop a "professional" and disciplined approach and, for the most part, it has been successful.  We can be expected to finish among the top six next year and will have only two seniors among the top eight players.  No reason to believe we won't again be the best or near the best rebounding team in the league and that's a good start.  Sure would love to beat Connecticut and win our first ever game in the AAC Tournament.

[Apis Bull]

1 hour ago, chapelbull said:

Our FT shooting is definitely atrocious, but it's not the achilles heal people keep wanting to make it

Don't know if I agree.  The whole game dynamic would have changed if we were better at FTs.  Defenses would have not been as aggressive against us.

[chapelbull]

5 minutes ago, Apis Bull said:

Don't know if I agree.  The whole game dynamic would have changed if we were better at FTs.  Defenses would have not been as aggressive against us.

 

2 hours ago, chapelbull said:

Shot 71.9% from the line in the SMU loss

 

2 hours ago, JTrue said:

I did a little digging on FT shooting across the NCAA just to see where we finished up the regular season.

334. UCF

336. USF

351. Manhattan

 

[Apis Bull]

@chapelbull clearly UCF was able to overcome it.  We don't have the shooters to do that.  You can't tell me that teams don't play defense differently against good FT teams vs. bad FT teams.  

[Basketball Jones]

21 minutes ago, abochner said:

This team over-performed most of the season, with the only real under-performances against the Citadel and SMU.  The defensive effort was poor yesterday given the game plan, which was to crash the boards.  USF did their usual great job of offensive rebounding, but the failure to get points off the offensive rebounding led to many easy baskets going the other way for SMU.  Yes, it was disappointing, but we all know there are still a few glaring weaknesses.  We don't have any forwards who can score off the dribble.  Our poor outside shooting makes us vulnerable to teams that can play a good match-up zone.  The future is bright, but we are still a couple of weapons away from being a tournament team.  Still, let's not forget we were picked for last in the conference.  This has been a year to develop a "professional" and disciplined approach and, for the most part, it has been successful.  We can be expected to finish among the top six next year and will have only two seniors among the top eight players.  No reason to believe we won't again be the best or near the best rebounding team in the league and that's a good start.  Sure would love to beat Connecticut and win our first ever game in the AAC Tournament.

The team did not over-perform. They beat the teams that they should have beaten except for The Citadel. But, thanks to the man who sits next to me at games, I was not shocked when the Citadel beat USF and set a new record for most 3's made in Yuengling Center.

Look at who USF lost to in conference games. The top four teams in the conference plus a lucky shot at the buzzer at Tulsa and Sunday to SMU.

That is not over-performing. Not with the talent they have on this team.

[Basketball Jones]

5 minutes ago, Apis Bull said:

@chapelbull clearly UCF was able to overcome it.  We don't have the shooters to do that.  You can't tell me that teams don't play defense differently against good FT teams vs. bad FT teams.  

UCF was able to overcome it because they are one of the best defensive teams in the country. Also UCF free throw percentage was weighted down tremendously by Takco. He only made 36% of his free throws. USF had multiple players shoot low percentages: Rideau, Durr, Kiir, Yetna, Castaneda were all below 70%. Rideau, Durr and Kiir could not make 60%

[abochner]

I agree that the team has some talented players.  But the consensus was they would finish last.  One of the reasons one can say they beat the teams they were supposed to beat is that's how it looks now, because they beat them.  At the start of the season, this team was not expected to beat Wichita State or Memphis or to lose narrowly to Temple twice and to Cincinnati or to beat SMU on the road (a place they lost by 50 last year).  Perhaps over-performed is the wrong word.   They won 2 conference games last year, 8 this year.  A gain of 6 games surely has to be considered something beyond expectations.  If they don't win 10 games in conference next year, we'll likely be disappointed.