Our Offense

BearcatTalk

Help Support BearcatTalk:

This is kind of random and doesn't really mean anything but it just came to my mind. In the first 10-11 games I thought this team looked good coming out of a timeout. It seemed like we always got a high quality shot when we needed it. The past 10 games it seems like we don't get a good shot at all and or turn it over. It just seems like its impossible to get an easy look at the basket anymore.
 
For all the posters that want to put the blame solely on Cronin, you will enjoy this article. http://bearcatsnation.com/2013/02/1...woes-its-the-coach-not-the-players/#more-9454

All in all, its a mix of the players and coaches fault for the poor offense. In this article, I don't look at the first few years but the stats from the last couple seasons aren't much different so its troubling. If there is one thing I think we can all agree on is that the scheme/the way our players are practicing offense needs to change during the off season. It starts with the coaches and practice. Then it is on the players to work hard on getting better. There is no reason why we can't put more points on the board because the talent is there (for next year).

Passing around the perimeter and people standing still. Where have I heard that? Good article.
 
c'mon man is your response. Lol. We are 5 games from BE and your unhappy and want to change the offense. Perhaps you should apply for Micks job lol. Our offense and how it applies to our talent has us at 19 wins and if not for Cash being injured I think we would have a couple more. Jeff your a good moderator but I have to question your coaching skills. Mick understands the limitations of his team and coaches accordingly. The debate is part of the fun. Enjoy your evening.

I'm referring to you and the way you stand by this big man theory. Teams with less talented players and comparable bigs run a much smoother offense than this team. It's scheme and players not moving and playing smart. They can't get open the way things are and something needs to change.
 
Last edited:
I agree R2G but I believe it's largely due to lack of player movement. These guys just stand in one place makes it pretty easy to guard.

Agreed.

Its sad that we cant get a group of Division 1 players to move without the ball. Imagine if we had movement and could set screens at the same time. Mind blown!
 
That article pointed out the lack of offense, but where were the solutions? We get it, the offense blows, thanks for clearing that up. Instead of ending there, how about setting forth some solutions?
 
Another interesting article-it's the refs fault now, is it Mick? Mick, I don't think the refs miss many foul calls on horrible 3 point attempts and the crappy shots that follow. That is purely coaching and personnel. While the BE refs have sucked this year, I think our problems are deeper than this. So our offense sucks because of the refs, doesn't seem to be hurting other teams....
Link:http://news.cincinnati.com/article/...d-fouls?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|p
 
Last edited:
I'm referring to you and the way you stand by this big man theory. Teams with less talented players and comparable bigs run a much smoother offense than this team. It's scheme and players not moving and playing smart. They can't get open the way things are and something needs to change.

The Bigs don't need to score more than a few points, but they DO need touches! That spreads the defense and gives the team a few extra looks (and I don't mean 3's). Let Cheik or whoever posts up take a couple of shots inside occasionally to keep the opponents defense honest. Like others have said, no need having 5 of them guarding 3 of us.
 
Another interesting article-it's the refs fault now, is it Mick? Mick, I don't think the refs miss many foul calls on horrible 3 point attempts and the crappy shots that follow. That is purely coaching and personnel. While the BE refs have sucked this year, I think our problems are deeper than this. So our offense sucks because of the refs, doesn't seem to be hurting other teams....
Link:http://news.cincinnati.com/article/...d-fouls?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|p

Everything he said is true. Jay Bilas has been preaching this for a few years now. There's very little freedom of movement in the college game. Last weekend I watched Craft body check a Wisconsin cutter in the lane. Both guys ended up on the ground momentarily. No foul called.
 
There is an epidemic going around with trouble scoring, its not just UC so we are fine...lol oh man. That's what Cronin is saying in a latest Enquirer article. Defenses have learned that they can grab, hand check and foul and get away with it. That's why teams including UC struggle to score.

I am not buying that at all, come on man. I was listening to Cronin last week talk about the refs and how they haven't changed their style to adapt with the more physical style of play college bball has turned in to. The refs really don't have a boss and refs that have been working for 15-20 years haven't changed their style and its hurting teams BC the game has changed. He obviously went in more depth but I think you get the picture. While he has a point to a certain degree, this is not why UC's offense/players struggle to score. If this is the kind of stuff Cronin is going to hang his hat on as to why we suck on offense, its beyond infuriating for us fans.
 
There is an epidemic going around with trouble scoring, its not just UC so we are fine...lol oh man. That's what Cronin is saying in a latest Enquirer article. Defenses have learned that they can grab, hand check and foul and get away with it. That's why teams including UC struggle to score.

I am not buying that at all, come on man. I was listening to Cronin last week talk about the refs and how they haven't changed their style to adapt with the more physical style of play college bball has turned in to. The refs really don't have a boss and refs that have been working for 15-20 years haven't changed their style and its hurting teams BC the game has changed. He obviously went in more depth but I think you get the picture. While he has a point to a certain degree, this is not why UC's offense/players struggle to score. If this is the kind of stuff Cronin is going to hang his hat on as to why we suck on offense, its beyond infuriating for us fans.

I like Mick, but I felt the same way when I read the article. I know a coach has to say certain things to shield his team and keep his players mentally up, but that was just a sorry excuse to me.
 
I'm referring to you and the way you stand by this big man theory. Teams with less talented players and comparable bigs run a much smoother offense than this team. It's scheme and players not moving and playing smart. They can't get open the way things are and something needs to change.
Jeff it isn't theory its fact. Our big men can't provide a option thus it puts the burden on hte offense on the wings. Not a mystery. As for Mick saying the games is being called differently this year. I only have to look at the Fla.vs Mizzou game lastnight to see that. 60-55 by two teams that play uptempo. Scoring is down accross the board in College it isn't theory its fact. jeff this team isn't going to remake the offense in 5 games. Not going to happen.
 
The game has gotten too physical away from the basket, I agree with Mick and Jay Bilas there. Of course that is also the defensive style that Mick preaches and UC gets away with it about as much as any team in the country. I don't blame Mick for that and UC's defense is very good because of that but if they do put the rules in place that Mick wants he is going have to rethink his defensive style.
 
I like Mick, but I felt the same way when I read the article. I know a coach has to say certain things to shield his team and keep his players mentally up, but that was just a sorry excuse to me.

Couldn't agree more, you'd better be careful though with your criticism of Mick. Next thing you know people are going to start calling you a Mick hater and saying you wish Huggins was still the coach.
 
Getting back to our Bigs, has anyone noticed that if they don't dunk, a high percentage of shots they attempt are blocked (as opposed to just plain misses)?
 
Getting back to our Bigs, has anyone noticed that if they don't dunk, a high percentage of shots they attempt are blocked (as opposed to just plain misses)?

When the bigs get an offensive rebound instead of going to the basket with the ball they throw it back outside. The bigs are offensively challenged. They are on the court for defense, not offense.
 
He is a exert from a article i wa reading nd may shed some light on why scoring is down:

It has become fashionable, of course, to assert that Division I college basketball is "in trouble," that it has become so slow and staid and overcontrolled it might ultimately wither into irrelevance. Some of this is hyperbole, since there's an obvious upside to the parity that low scoring engenders, and since the NCAA tournament is still a financial windfall, and since a team like Wisconsin, under Bo Ryan, can drag games into the 30s and still win games and fill seats. But it is impossible not to notice that something is happening, that the balance has been thrown off, and it is silly not to acknowledge that the overarching trend is impacting how people view college basketball. "I'm not a guy who's too concerned about whether the game is popular or not," says Ken Pomeroy, who pioneered the notion of advanced college basketball statistics at his website, "but it certainly hurts the perception of it."

Here is what the numbers confirm: Overall scoring, at slightly less than 68 points per game, is at its lowest level in three decades, and possessions are growing longer and longer. The game, as a whole, is slower and less free-flowing than it used to be. There are distinct lulls, and transition baskets are more and more difficult to come by. Ask why this is happening, and it becomes a Rorschach test: You will hear a dozen hypotheses from a dozen different sources, ranging from the length of the shot clock2 to the increased physicality on the perimeter3 to poor shot selection to the lack of competent post players to the profusion of timeouts to the NBA's one-and-done rule to the spike in coaches' salaries, all of which are entirely speculative, and any of which might be at least somewhat viable. At West Virginia University — the school that has not yet scheduled a game against West Liberty, even after Crutchfield drew a considerable crowd at coach Bob Huggins's camp a couple of years ago — the Mountaineers are averaging approximately 66 points per game, a number that Dana Holgorsen's football team eclipsed twice last season. And I know it is unfair and incongruous to compare college football and college basketball, but since they are taking place on the same campuses and being watched by many of the same people, it inevitably happens, and at this very moment the contrast could not be more stark: One is accelerating, and the other is most certainly not.

"There are teams that gotta do what they gotta to win. Slowing the game down gives teams without the talent a chance to win.
 
He is a exert from a article i wa reading nd may shed some light on why scoring is down:

It has become fashionable, of course, to assert that Division I college basketball is "in trouble," that it has become so slow and staid and overcontrolled it might ultimately wither into irrelevance. Some of this is hyperbole, since there's an obvious upside to the parity that low scoring engenders, and since the NCAA tournament is still a financial windfall, and since a team like Wisconsin, under Bo Ryan, can drag games into the 30s and still win games and fill seats. But it is impossible not to notice that something is happening, that the balance has been thrown off, and it is silly not to acknowledge that the overarching trend is impacting how people view college basketball. "I'm not a guy who's too concerned about whether the game is popular or not," says Ken Pomeroy, who pioneered the notion of advanced college basketball statistics at his website, "but it certainly hurts the perception of it."

Here is what the numbers confirm: Overall scoring, at slightly less than 68 points per game, is at its lowest level in three decades, and possessions are growing longer and longer. The game, as a whole, is slower and less free-flowing than it used to be. There are distinct lulls, and transition baskets are more and more difficult to come by. Ask why this is happening, and it becomes a Rorschach test: You will hear a dozen hypotheses from a dozen different sources, ranging from the length of the shot clock2 to the increased physicality on the perimeter3 to poor shot selection to the lack of competent post players to the profusion of timeouts to the NBA's one-and-done rule to the spike in coaches' salaries, all of which are entirely speculative, and any of which might be at least somewhat viable. At West Virginia University — the school that has not yet scheduled a game against West Liberty, even after Crutchfield drew a considerable crowd at coach Bob Huggins's camp a couple of years ago — the Mountaineers are averaging approximately 66 points per game, a number that Dana Holgorsen's football team eclipsed twice last season. And I know it is unfair and incongruous to compare college football and college basketball, but since they are taking place on the same campuses and being watched by many of the same people, it inevitably happens, and at this very moment the contrast could not be more stark: One is accelerating, and the other is most certainly not.

"There are teams that gotta do what they gotta to win. Slowing the game down gives teams without the talent a chance to win.

Last sentence says it all - just not in our case! We don't win.
 
Last sentence says it all - just not in our case! We don't win.
We do win just not evey game. As I have said, we are a good team not great. Most on here make fun of Bearcatmick because he perdicts a huge win every game. If you think we should win every game your thoughts are the same. When we do win it isn't by enough or exciting enough for some. We are a program on the rise. We are not elite. Hopefully Mick will grow us into that. Right now we do not have the personnel to compete with the elite but we are getting there, Blaming the coach for using the players in roles he thinks than can succede in is not something anyone on this blog is qualified to do. If they were they wouldn't be posting here. Enjoy this team they battle and generally are in every game. The calibre of recruits is on the upswing and that bodes well for the program and its fans.
 
We do win just not evey game. As I have said, we are a good team not great. Most on here make fun of Bearcatmick because he perdicts a huge win every game. If you think we should win every game your thoughts are the same. When we do win it isn't by enough or exciting enough for some. We are a program on the rise. We are not elite. Hopefully Mick will grow us into that. Right now we do not have the personnel to compete with the elite but we are getting there, Blaming the coach for using the players in roles he thinks than can succeed in is not something anyone on this blog is qualified to do. If they were they wouldn't be posting here. Enjoy this team they battle and generally are in every game. The calibre of recruits is on the upswing and that bodes well for the program and its fans.

Agreed with the building process. But there's an old adage that goes something like this: If you've done something repeatedly and you're getting the same results, don't you think maybe, just maybe, you're doing something wrong?!
All I'm saying is get more touches in the post and occasionally put it up instead of kicking it back out. It doesn't matter if it goes in or gets blocked, but it changes the opponents defensive strategy. That's all.
 
We do win just not evey game. As I have said, we are a good team not great. Most on here make fun of Bearcatmick because he perdicts a huge win every game. If you think we should win every game your thoughts are the same. When we do win it isn't by enough or exciting enough for some. We are a program on the rise. We are not elite. Hopefully Mick will grow us into that. Right now we do not have the personnel to compete with the elite but we are getting there, Blaming the coach for using the players in roles he thinks than can succede in is not something anyone on this blog is qualified to do. If they were they wouldn't be posting here. Enjoy this team they battle and generally are in every game. The calibre of recruits is on the upswing and that bodes well for the program and its fans.

Give it up bro, your argument is ridiculous. Our offense is terrible, it has been terrible since Mick has been here. You keep talking about big men, we had Yancy here for 4 years and we couldn't ever figure out how to use him correctly.

Mick has been here long enough that if he doesn't have good enough big men to compete for a conference championship then that is on him.

You die hard Mick supporters are so out of touch with reality it's mind boggling. The guy is doing a pretty good job but he's got a lot of areas where he needs to improve. There is nothing wrong with pointing out the areas that our HC can improve and expecting that he and his teams do that. If the end result of the product Mick can produce is what we've seen from the Bearcats up to this point it's not a shock that people are dissatisfied with it.
 
Back
Top