• 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-Maryland Game Thread

The team is better this year, if for no other reason they're playing hard and look more together. The things that are going to hurt us in conference play is rebounding and scoring droughts.
 
deacvision7 said:
Jeff [Redacted]'s conference road game record since his first year at Air Force in the 2005/06 season (entering the 7th season now):

8-45. 8 wins, 45 losses. 26 of these losses have been by double digit amounts.

Average points scored for teams coached by Mr. [Redacted] in these games: 60
Average points scored for teams opposing Mr. [Redacted] in these games: 72

Broken down further...

At Wake Forest
0-9. 8 of the 9 losses by double digits. Average final score: 62-76

At Colorado
1-23. 13 of the 23 losses by double digits. Average final score: 61-75.
Broken down further:
Year 1: 0-8, 4 losses by double digits. Average final score: 57-73
Year 2: 0-8, 4 losses by double digits. Average final score: 57-73
Year 3: 1-7, 5 losses by double digits. Average final score: 70-81

At Air Force
7-9, 4 losses by double digits. Average final score 59-61
Broken down further:
Year 1: 4-4, 2 losses by double digits. Average final score: 56-57
Year 2: 3-5, 2 losses by double digits. Average final score: 61-65
Click to expand...

How is this relevant to this discussion? Did someone ask about Buzz's record? If not, you are an ass for injecting it into this thread - we are talking about one game - last night's game in which our team played poorly for one half and then showed tremendous heart and improvement in almost stealing a win against all odds.

We all know how you feel about Buzz and his record. Believe me, we have heard about it ad nauseum. I suggest you give that a rest for a while and discuss this team, these players, these games as they occur. If you disagree with Buzz's coaching decisions, his strategy, the player development we are seeing (or not), his recruiting , whatever - tell us about it. But, with each passing game his historic performance and the logic of his hiring becomes less and less relevant. What matters is how he is doing NOW with THIS team.

If he does poorly, he will be fired - almost certainly not after this year, but in a year or two. If he does well, he will be retained. Simple as that. It's like anyone else getting a job. Once you get your first job, your transcript doesn't matter anymore, just your performance. Once you get a new job, your resume doesn't matter anymore - just your performance.

Believe me, I am with you on the strangeness of the hire and am not convinced yet that Buzz can achieve the success here that we expect and deserve. But, for the sake of our collective sanity we must move on from that and deal with the here and now.
 
We dug too big of a hole to dig out.

Good comeback effort, but the fact of the matter is that we win that road game if we're not down double digits at the half.
 
scooter, it's relevant because if we make The Dance next year and the year after DV7 and the vitriolic Buzzouters will look like morons.
 
morrison2951 said:
We dug too big of a hole to dig out.

Good comeback effort, but the fact of the matter is that we win that road game if we're not down double digits at the half.
Click to expand...

Not true at all. Did you watch the game?
 
DCDeac said:
Not true at all. Did you watch the game?
Click to expand...

A more apt opinion from my perspective is: we would have won the game if during our second half comeback run the refs hadn't bent us over and treated us like a 19 year old sorority girl.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
A more apt opinion from my perspective is: we would have won the game if during our second half comeback run the refs hadn't bent us over and treated us like a 19 year old sorority girl.
Click to expand...

True, I just mean it was a 4 point game with 8 and a half minutes left, so it's ridiculous to say we couldn't overcome the first half deficit, when we completely did overcome it.

A lot of things led to not getting over that 4 point hump, but it wasn't because the deficit was simply insurmountable.
 
DCDeac said:
True, I just mean it was a 4 point game with 8 and a half minutes left, so it's ridiculous to say we couldn't overcome the first half deficit, when we completely did overcome it.

A lot of things led to not getting over that 4 point hump, but it wasn't because the deficit was simply insurmountable.
Click to expand...

Yep. We cut the deficit beyond half of a 16 point deficit in the first eight minutes of the second half. That game was winnable.
 
Typically, however, teams that get down big and make a comeback run out of gas.

But I agree that it is a baby steps thing. We were not competitive in any road game last year in the ACC. We were very competitive in this game.
 
ChrisL68 said:
Typically, however, teams that get down big and make a comeback run out of gas.

But I agree that it is a baby steps thing. We were not competitive in any road game last year in the ACC. We were very competitive in this game.
Click to expand...

Yep- with our lack of depth and a double digit deficit to overcome, we just could not get over the hump. And yes, I did watch the game.
 
morrison2951 said:
Yep- with our lack of depth and a double digit deficit to overcome, we just could not get over the hump. And yes, I did watch the game.
Click to expand...

Well then you realize that "we dug too big a hole to dig out" makes no sense (beyond the fact that it's climb out of). 4 point game = back in it. That was with over 8 minutes left.

Last year when we would get down by 30+ and never get within 15 the rest of the way - that's digging a hole too big to climb out of. This team actually plays defense.
 
Twice we cut it to four and MD missed a shot...the first was a missed FT that they rebounded and put back in...the second was a FG attempt they rebounded and put back in...then the third time they missed a shot with the lead only four they called that shit foul on McKie. We finally had the ball down four in the last minute and Tony took a bad shot. He will learn.
 
We'll have to agree to disagree on the overalll effect of the double digit deficit and a winnable road game ending in a loss.
 
Attacking morrison's reasonable comments here are silly.

How many times have you seen a team down 20 at the half cut the lead to 4 or 6 and not get over the hump and the announcers say "They just got too far down in a hole to come back tonight"?
 
ChrisL68 said:
Attacking morrison's reasonable comments here are silly.

How many times have you seen a team down 20 at the half cut the lead to 4 or 6 and not get over the hump and the announcers say "They just got too far down in a hole to come back tonight"?
Click to expand...

At the 8 minute mark of a game that never got to a 10 point lead again?

Never.

It's called blowing a lead at that point. The story here is that Maryland blew an 18 point lead but held on to win. Just like we blew an 18 point lead against Yale and held on to win.

The entire point of the phrase digging a hole too big to climb out of means you never got back in the game. It refers to a team that gets crushed early and makes a run at the end that is basically pointless because they're down by too much.

To label this game in such a manner discredits the comeback and dismisses the outcome as if it was never in doubt. ChrisL, I know your job is to support every poster who can spin any positive signs into negative ones, but even for you defending this game as non-competitive is pathetic. It's just as pathetic as calling Ty's performance overrated because he didn't hit double figures in points, rebounds, or blocks.
 
ChrisL68 said:
Attacking morrison's reasonable comments here are silly.

How many times have you seen a team down 20 at the half cut the lead to 4 or 6 and not get over the hump and the announcers say "They just got too far down in a hole to come back tonight"?
Click to expand...

A couple of things happen in that situation. The team trying to come back expends a lot of energy trying to come back, this is especially tough on the road because the home crowd isn't behind them pumping them up to dig even deeper to get over the hump. Also, the team that had the big lead will often "wake-up" and realize they're back in a game and start playing better. The positive I got from last night was at least this team will fight, last year's team would've lost by 25 or more after being down 16 on the road.
 
We were down by 3 with 9 minutes left. The next few minutes had a bunch of questionable calls which all seemed to go against us.
 
21 offensive rebounds for 17 points?
34 FT's to 13?

Wow. If we hold our own on the boards and get something close to reasonable foul calls, we win by 20. It is truly amazing the game was even close at all with those two stats.
 
DCDeac said:
At the 8 minute mark of a game that never got to a 10 point lead again?

Never.

It's called blowing a lead at that point. The story here is that Maryland blew an 18 point lead but held on to win. Just like we blew an 18 point lead against Yale and held on to win.

The entire point of the phrase digging a hole too big to climb out of means you never got back in the game. It refers to a team that gets crushed early and makes a run at the end that is basically pointless because they're down by too much.

To label this game in such a manner discredits the comeback and dismisses the outcome as if it was never in doubt. ChrisL, I know your job is to support every poster who can spin any positive signs into negative ones, but even for you defending this game as non-competitive is pathetic. It's just as pathetic as calling Ty's performance overrated because he didn't hit double figures in points, rebounds, or blocks.
Click to expand...


That's even more nonsensical than your usual posts (which is really saying something). Nice job building strawmen over what he and I said. I am very positive on how we played last night and the fight we showed getting back into the game, I just don't subscribe to your bizarre logic.

I have heard it millions of times. "Nice job by team A getting back into the game, but they just dug themselves too big of a hole to overcome".
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top