ADVERTISEMENT

No leadership.

I think there's a difference between "wanting" to be the man and "being able" to be the man. For so many years we haven't had a single player who had THE ABILITY to create his own shot, make a shot in the clutch, or score when the clockshot is running down.

With the exception of Devonte Green who could blow up offensively in any given game (and, unfortunately, do many negative things too), we just haven't had many players who could score the basketball. At many, many points in a game, the offense breaks down, the sets are well defended and you just need somebody to make a shot. We, unbelievably, just can't seem to find anyone to do that.
 
I think there's a difference between "wanting" to be the man and "being able" to be the man. For so many years we haven't had a single player who had THE ABILITY to create his own shot, make a shot in the clutch, or score when the clockshot is running down.

With the exception of Devonte Green who could blow up offensively in any given game (and, unfortunately, do many negative things too), we just haven't had many players who could score the basketball. At many, many points in a game, the offense breaks down, the sets are well defended and you just need somebody to make a shot. We, unbelievably, just can't seem to find anyone to do that.

You have made a case for why motion offense works for teams without a bunch of 5-stars.

But Texas simply had a better defensive game plan today than IU had offense. The trouble is, Texas probably isn't much better than Michigan, Rutgers, Iowa, Wisconsin, etc.
 
I think there's a difference between "wanting" to be the man and "being able" to be the man. For so many years we haven't had a single player who had THE ABILITY to create his own shot, make a shot in the clutch, or score when the clockshot is running down.

With the exception of Devonte Green who could blow up offensively in any given game (and, unfortunately, do many negative things too), we just haven't had many players who could score the basketball. At many, many points in a game, the offense breaks down, the sets are well defended and you just need somebody to make a shot. We, unbelievably, just can't seem to find anyone to do that.
Maybe Galloway, some day?
trey_galloway-3-2.jpg
 
You have made a case for why motion offense works for teams without a bunch of 5-stars.

But Texas simply had a better defensive game plan today than IU had offense. The trouble is, Texas probably isn't much better than Michigan, Rutgers, Iowa, Wisconsin, etc.
It helps to have players that can [1] create their own shot (especially guards), [2] an offense that consistently creates good looks, and [3] players that can consistently hit open shots. IU has lacked 2 and 3 during Archie's tenure, and there haven't been consistent 1's during Archie's tenure. Offense has been the major issue under Archie: if he can't get it figured out, we need to bring in somebody else who can. IU isn't going to win diddly poo if they can't score.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IUgradman and iulb
This is definitely not the case! You only have to wait till Saturday at Wisconsin.
Well...,at least they give max effort and don’t roll over and play dead like this other program. I’ll watch that every day and Sunday too over this garbage. Right?
We shall see.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT