We Suck.
- Thread starter aajohn2000
- Start date
Because we play a gimmick D that is expressly designed to keep us in games with limited talent and almost guarantee we never win those close games. This is not a trend, it is what it is. It doesn't work in the B10 and I'd guess it wouldn't work elsewhere when opponents know what's coming and they know you got nothing else! It might have worked in the A10, when you may have actually had better players usually, but it doesn't work in the B10 or probably any P5 conference. It's tantamount to admitting you can't play man because you suck and your guys can't guard a chair. There is a time and place for it, but not all the time when most of the B10 just laughs at it most of the time. It's like a bad zone
And WTF should we be proud of going into overtime and losing (predictably) to a top 15 team. We're suppposed to be the top 15 team!
Last edited:
I have seen this said several times and I really don’t understand it. The pack line is not gimmicky. 20 years ago, almost every man-to-man defense played with many of the principles of the pack line. With the increased popularity and expansion of the 3 point line it is used in its totality less by teams. So maybe call it dated. Even dated it has been shown to be successful at a very high level recently though so it can certainly still work.
In my opinion the philosophy itself isn’t the issue. I don’t see the aggressive on ball pressure that I expect to see from the pack line from all of our perimeter players. That is perhaps the most important aspect of that defense. On the ball you play much closer to the offensive player than typical. Uncomfortably close if you aren’t used to that type of defense.
Secondly, our bigs don’t do a very good job of helping keep on ball pressure on the pick and roll outside. Even the bigs should aggressively guard the ball on picks long enough for the guards to recover if you aren’t switching. 75% of the time our bigs lackadaisically guard the ball and then recover often before the guard has regained a good guarding position.
The philosophy can work but has to be executed properly.
Umm ... then why do we play this crap, and why is it so hard to learn, and why don't we recruit to it like a Syracuse?. Why does it make 4 and 5 star players look like shit or transfer? Why can't we get good players that just expect to man up or, if asked to do something DIFFERENT based on your opponent
And more so, if we can't even recruit players that fit this shit, garbage and boring brand of basketball, why keep trying to put a square in a peg hole for 3M$? I know Wisconsin used it under Bo Ryan, bug ****in woop, we beat Wisconsin like 50 ****ing time in a row over 20 years ... I don't think we need to adopt their old game plan to play against more talented teams, they've had this formula for a lot longer. We need good players!
Last edited:
PACK LINE IS MAN TO MAN DEFENSE.
That's all that it is. Try to keep it simple for yourself.
A lot of questions. I don’t know that I can answer then all.
I suspect we play it because it is what Coach Miller knows best and he feels like it can work.
We have recruited to it sort of. It isn’t like a Syracuse zone. You don’t really need specific players to play a pack line. You need some speed and athleticism at all the positions, especially the bigs who occasionally will be asked to pressure the ball outside. We have those guys in TJD and Race. Both could play better but it’s not because they don’t fit the system.
Which 4 and 5 star player does the defense make look bad or transfer? If you are referring to Lander it does take time to adjust to the help and recovery philosophy but I don’t think that is his problem. I think at his size and age he would struggle in any defense.
Think of it like Coach Knights man-to-man defense. You are expected to help and understand where to rotate and recover after help. Takes some time to adjust to a heavy help side defense but it’s not overly complicated either. Most of the failures of our defense are in mental or effort lapses.
We and every defense should do different things based on matchups. And we do. If you watch us you will see some perimeter players guarding their man outside of 16 feet when they don’t have the ball. That is an adjust or a mistake.
Because decent mid majors hang with and sometimes upset better teams in the NCAA tourney and season all the time. The refs kept us in the game last night. You gonna make an argument we are a top 25 team next? Want to argue we're remotely held in the same regard as the program was 30 years ago? How have we finished in the Big 10 for the last four years again? How does our recruiting class look?
I’m sure we will be okay.
Once Joey gets out of his back brace and is able to walk, we’ll be immediate top-10!!
Once Joey gets out of his back brace and is able to walk, we’ll be immediate top-10!!
Yeah, for 90% of the principles of what I've heard of packline, could be straight out of RMK talking defense in the 70s/80s. I think there are a couple different points of emphasis, and to me, therein lies the problem. The "rules" are more focused on positioning for help vs covering/closing on the guy with the ball and I think for players that aren't defensive-minded (most players) they have to "think" about positioning vs naturally reacting. And, because what they hear repeatedly in practice is where to be on help, they err on that side (help positioning), which leaves 3 pt shooters open. That's my theory anyway, and I didn't even sleep in a Holiday Inn Express last night.
I just can't bring myself to believe that the unique points of emphasis of pack line are that hard to grasp.
I think the talking point that it takes a long time to master pack line is mostly BS.
Our defensive deficiencies are due to the following:
Our guards, as an overall group, do a poor job of keeping their man in front of them.
We don't have true bigs with bulk to handle a post threat. Brunk would have helped.
We don't have a legit, classic shot blocker.
It's really simple, it's just basketball.
It does seem very similar to me to what Knight was doing, except RMK did pay more attention to guys who could actually shoot the ball if left alone. That is, he adjusted more than does CAM.
I went back and watched CAM's introductory PC when he was hired and he said one thing he would stress would be flexibility on both O and D. I sure don't see that from him.
I agree, but my own theory is that most players only think about offense and aren't defensive minded. They got by in HS by being bigger and more athletic and then they come to college and are getting their ass chewed for defense so they really just start paying attention to it. Think about your own practice... other than exercising and working out, almost 100% of your practice time is spent on offensive skills... maybe a bit on rebounding. I find it on here with posters: when people think of basketball, 90% or more of their thoughts are on offense. Most complain about games in the 50s as boring... not me... I find winning entertaining and enjoy watching a good defensive team like UVA... or IL in the 2nd half of our game. I'd love it if we could hang our hat on great defensive performances, but I just don't believe our guys are defensive minded and it's not intuitive for them for the most part. Probably oversimplified, but I like simple.
I'd love to hear practices and especially game prep for someone like Dosunmu from IL. I just wonder how much CAM alters the approach for a player like that... or a Carsen Edwards? I loved guarding the other teams really good players, but the way I would defend someone like that was opposite of most M2M theory. I'd work very hard to deny a player like that the ball and be on them denying and grabbing whenever they didn't have the ball, especially 1 pass away, with the idea that if I can keep the ball out of their hands, I'm forcing a worse option for the other team to take shots. Once he got the ball, I'd give him an extra step because of his athleticism and driving ability until he showed me he can pull up and make a shot with me closing on him as soon as he picked it up. That doesn't fit with descriptions of packline, but to me is still good defense and the way to defend a player like that. Of course he only scored 10 on us and had a bad shooting night, so whatever we were doing on him worked. Frazier? Not so much!
I’d rather play a 2-3 zone than this packline crap we play that always abandons a shooter at some point. At least the zone keeps the eyes on the ball.
Don't pop a vein man. You've said you're not in good health and getting all riled up like that can't be good for you.
Pack-line is a man to man defense and the defense still isn't our problem. Our problem remains offense - specifically shooting from outside and at the FT line. IU misses too many of their open shots on the floor - and you can't get more open than shooting from the FT line.
Last edited:
I think bad defenders are bad defenders, and good defenders are going to make any defense: zone, man or otherwise tough to play against. Can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.
No, it's not. Why do think it originated in WI?, because they had lesser talent and had to come up with something, because we beat them literally like for 40 years. It's a poor man's man D and with 3 point shooting getting way better the whole premise of it makes no sense. Shit I'm 50, but if you're giving me 10 feet of space unguarded, it's going down. Terrible strategy, designed to defend say Uwe Blab. This is like trying to defend dribble drive offense that was the shit offense that used to work ... ask Kentucky how well that works anymore without elite athletes. I just hate gimmicky shit, get good players and let them play D
Last edited:
If I interpreted that gibberish correctly, you contradicted yourself multiple times there.
Is the problem the Jimmies and the Joes, or is the problem the Xs and the Os?
It is man-to-man and technically you should never be more than 5-7 feet from they guy you are guarding unless the ball is on the opposite side of the court or your man is standing 5 feet off the 3 point line.
All of the weakness show up at end game.
TJD lack of skill moves makes him a poor go to guy. Guards lacking composure and aggressiveness. Poor rebounding overall. Poor play execution especially against set defenses. IU most especially lacks a playmaker on the perimeter.
Those are generally the things a team needs to win close games.
And we pay what every month to have these continuing problems for 3+ years? It's really a matter of talent, but for what we spend on coaching and recruiting, we shouldn't still see the Crean stain here. AM is in over his head
Honestly, I wish we could go back to Mike Davis telling UNC to get them a team
Last edited:
I guess UVA found a lot of teams with Blab clones on their run to the title in 2019? And in the ACC? It's no gimmick when played well. More than one way to slice the cheese...head.
Similar threads
