Omens
- Thread starter go_iu
- Start date
The emphasis on the 3 point shot has made the 2-3 zone a less than desirable defense in this day of age. When you have 3-4, sometime 5 guys who can all stretch the floor, it just becomes impossible to guard regardless of what kind of length and athleticism you possess. The goal of the 2-3 zone is to keep drivers out of the lane and restricts interior passing and cutting lanes; it's design forces teams to shoot from the perimeter. It worked in the 90's and 2000's when the emphasis on 3 point shooting wasn't nearly as high as it is today and teams just didn't have the personnel to shoot over it.
Tom Crean forgot you were supposed to utilize an offensive player in the middle of the zone.
Plus that 2-3 was lined up further out than most. You could put your Big behind it. Watched them get burned the very next game by that. Our guys dribbled right into it.
I thought they played zone out front and mtm against the other 3 . . . Alford was guarded by Douglas, Coleman was on Thomas and Seikely was on Garrett.
In any case, you're right . . . they didn't play a straight up 2-3 zone . . . . Douglas had Alford mtm and the guards played zone while the guys underneath matched up mtm or match up zone.
Who was IU's #44? I know the other players and their numbers. Was that Hillman?
good clock management also hit the shot with 4 seconds left.
As I recall the original 3-point line was the same distance as the top of the key. I think it has been moved back twice since then.
Jim runs different zones. I just assumed the 87 game was 2-3. He always zones though.
I agree . . . but not the '75 team with Green and Laskowski. The '81 team was deeper than the '76 team. The '75 team was as deep as the '81 team . . .
. . . Wilkerson on Wittman, Buckner on Isiah, Turner on Benson, and May on Kitchel . . . and vice versa. Tolbert on Green/Abernethy is where it all breaks down. It's a mismatch favoring '75 IMO . . .
. . . but I dunno. It'd have been a helluva match up.
Last edited:
Bobby's a New Yorker . . . also, everybody had it in for IU back then . . . we were the odds-on favorite to win the BiG every year and a perennial contender for the national championship.
We just thought it was the way it was supposed to be. Entitlement personified. We didn't know what we had . . . .
Last edited:
Oh, definitely more talented, but we played well. I think what bothers me most about our current state of things is that even on our best day, either of these teams would annihilate us with just solid play. The passing and ball handling, shooting is just night and day better then
Wisconsin has become what we used to be. not at the level of Knight teams but just good fundamental well coached teams
. . . and I think that is a direct product of the stranglehold Knight's Indiana teams had on Wisconsin during those years.
RMK was supposed to take over the Wisconsin program the year he was hired at IU, but Wisconsin's AD dawdled in hiring Knight. IU swooped in and scooped him up . . . and the rest is history . . . .
Yeah, but conversely, when we don't have a coach that understands it, and I'm thinking of somebody in particular, it becomes our downfall.
I disagree with that. Indiana had a lot of athletes on those teams.. Wisconsin not soo much
look at Indiana's roster that won it 87 and compare it to some of the other championship teams of that decade.
Garrett and Smart were freak athletes we don’t see those dudes at Wisconsin.
It was 83 and Big 10 line was deep it was the ACC that the line was inside the FT circle
Likely would have. 81 had an all time NBA great on it plus 5 others that got drafted. I know Landon's was honorary but if not for the accident he was maybe the #1 pick so he would have been.
Similar threads
