• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Wake-Clemson

Knowing how to win = having better players. Wake is not more talented than Clemson. Much of the analysis like taking ill advised shots, not extending the lead etc... is nothing more than needing to have better players. It's not, as many seem to think, flawed play by a more talented team leading to a loss.
 
So much to say, but I'll stick to current topic. I give Manning the benefit of the doubt on how he's handling our bigs. After Thomas, everyone else has flaws. Dinos, Leonard, and even Washington all have to play minutes. Adding Collins and Moore to replace Leonard will help. In the meantime, it's tough to fault Manning for how he rotates the bigs he has.
 
Why is anyone surprised that our players have to "learn how to win" after four years of Buzz.? It does not happen overnight. I believe that they will, just like they had to learn how to win after Staak. Learning how to win will take time because the players infected by "Buzz loser syndrome" just don't know how to do it, and the new players are too inexperienced and lack the sort of dominant talent that can overcome the lack of experience.

Our lack of offense (both skill and brains), especially during the last 15 minutes, cost us the game at Clemson.
 
To paraphrase Rick Pitino... Tim Duncan isn't walking though that door. Darius Songaila isn't walking in that door.

The fact that we've improved so much in rebounding year over year is amazing. Should get even better with incoming personnel.
 
EagleDeac said:
Knowing how to win = having better players. Wake is not more talented than Clemson. Much of the analysis like taking ill advised shots, not extending the lead etc... is nothing more than needing to have better players. It's not, as many seem to think, flawed play by a more talented team leading to a loss.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Think Wake is slightly more talented than Clemson. Obviously playing on the road was part of the difference today.

I also am pretty sure that Danny's timeout usage is going to be something that bothers a lot of people throughout his time here. Kind of like Roy and Carolina fans on that issue.
 
Well, oddly it's nice to see 21 pages on the game.
 
socaldeac said:
CMM - Somone needs to tell him he is not allowed to shoot in the last 3 mintues of a game. He has lack of court vision and low BB IQ has lost us four ACC games this year. I don't get why he continually looks for his shot at the end of games as oppose to pass to players who can shoot.
Click to expand...

+1
 
Harpua said:
TAKE CODI OFF THE FLOOR IN THE LAST FEW MINUTES. HE'S NOT A CLOSER. Can't believe we gave that fucking game away. God damn I hate Clemson and we just handed them a victory. Fucking hell. Fuck fuck fuck
Click to expand...

+1
 
Yeah, there's no way Clemson is more talented than Wake. Clemson is near the bottom of the league with BC, GT, and VT in terms of pure talent.
 
MichDeac25 said:
Other than Devin the non-freshman play like a bunch of wusses. Codi with the jump shot in the lane (?) and then turns it over after Devin got him the rebound with the game on the line. I'd like to see Manning take a time out there. But still, you can't play like a pussy. This is why this team can't close these games out. They don't have the psychology of winners.
Click to expand...
+1
 
Our games this year have reminded me how much Moto could have helped this team. He wasn't All ACC obviously but he could compete physically and was pretty good at drawing fouls from opposing big men last year.
 
PhDeac said:
Does this game address the debate about "knowing how to win?"
Click to expand...

EagleDeac said:
Knowing how to win = having better players. Wake is not more talented than Clemson. Much of the analysis like taking ill advised shots, not extending the lead etc... is nothing more than needing to have better players. It's not, as many seem to think, flawed play by a more talented team leading to a loss.
Click to expand...

This is simply wrong. Are is much better than Clemson. Not close. We suffer from brain issues.
 
Crawford , Cobb( if we sign him)and Wilbekin should be our top 3 guards next year as far as playing time. The hell with experience factor of CMM and MJ--it's all LOSING experience . We need a lead guard who can take the ball in end of game situations and make a play, whether it be a great pass, drive or jumper. We need a leader who wants the ball and can do something with it. Guard play counts most in the NCAA tournament and in close games. We won't win until we have such a player or players. We will continue to fold like a cheap lawn chair when the going gets tough( Louisville, Duke, Syracuse, Clemson ).
 
FlaccidDeac said:
Our games this year have reminded me how much Moto could have helped this team. He wasn't All ACC obviously but he could compete physically and was pretty good at drawing fouls from opposing big men last year.
Click to expand...

I was wondering if we could have one of our transfers, that would still be eligible this year who would have helped this team the most?

- Moto
- Cav
- Chase

I'm also assuming DM would have gotten them into the system to be more effective than they were under the previous regime.
 
This may have been our most damaging loss psychologically. The staff will face a stiff challenge in getting the team up for the remaining schedule, IMO.

We have no confidence that we can pull out close games at the end and so we play tentatively. We do not have a ball-handler that we can trust with the game on the line and neither do we have anyone that we can trust to knock down the must have shot. Fundamentally it's a talent issue complicated by the habit of losing.

An interesting question might be: who would you most want to take the last shot if we were down 1 and time running out?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top