Mike Hopkins talks about succeeding Jim Boeheim, his love for Syracuse, and much more.

[jordoo]

Eh, I think it's all relative. I honestly think our FF appearance in 2013 was a testament to the parity of college basketball, in the same way that UConn won the whole thing. Getting to the FF certainly is not easy no matter the context, but having to beat Marquette in the elite 8 to punch our ticket? College hoops is broken.

OK so again you have taken the evidence I offered to counter your point and changed the subject. I don't necessarily disagree with the opinions you are offering when changing the subject but IMO you are using them as excuses to your original statement that you can't win the NC playing strictly 2-3 zone. I think you can and have offered some good evidence to back that up.

 

[skurey]

Kansas scored 43 points against us in the 1st half. I don't think the zone was too great in that game.

 

[cuseattle]

Well you have changed the subject and dodged the question. I made the point, which you actually backed up for me above, that you absolutely can win the NC playing strictly 2-3 zone. If such an offensively challenged team like the 2013 squad can get a game away from the NC game which would have been against a team that they had beaten on the road earlier that season then it certainly can be done.

I agree that we have lacked the transition game in the past few years. Especially 13/14 with Ennis and 14/15 with Joseph.

I miss the run and gun.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

OK so again you have taken the evidence I offered to counter your point and changed the subject. I don't necessarily disagree with the opinions you are offering when changing the subject but IMO you are using them as excuses to your original statement that you can't win the NC playing strictly 2-3 zone. I think you can and have offered some good evidence to back that up.

Kentucky , Michigan St., UNLV, SU have all won NCs playing zone

 

[FrancoPizza]

OK so again you have taken the evidence I offered to counter your point and changed the subject. I don't necessarily disagree with the opinions you are offering when changing the subject but IMO you are using them as excuses to your original statement that you can't win the NC playing strictly 2-3 zone. I think you can and have offered some good evidence to back that up.

To answer the question directly, I don't think you can win it all playing exclusively 2-3 unless you're offense is pretty darn efficient. Problem is, there's a limited sample size to evaluate that statement, seeing as SU is still the only team that plays it exclusively. Other teams play zone but will also employ other looks and wrinkles.

Like I said earlier, I don't care what defense we play as long as it's not porous and gives us an opportunity to get out and run.

 

[jordoo]

To answer the question directly, I don't think you can win it all playing exclusively 2-3 unless you're offense is pretty darn efficient. Problem is, there's a limited sample size to evaluate that statement, seeing as SU is still the only team that plays it exclusively. Other teams play zone but will also employ other looks and wrinkles.

Like I said earlier, I don't care what defense we play as long as it's not porous and gives us an opportunity to get out and run.

Can you do it playing exclusively m2m? Championship teams in general other than outlyers have been pretty darn efficient on both defense and offense. Picking one defense and saying they can't do it without good offense is almost meaningless. I do think an excellent 2-3 team has a better chance with a poor offense than an excellent m2m team does with a bad offense simply because the opponents are going to be less familiar with that style of defense. I also think teams with dominating shot blocking man or zone have a better chance to overcome poor offense.

I would love to see us run more as well. I also would like to see college bball move back toward a more free flowing up and down game.

 

[RF2044]

Kansas scored 43 points against us in the 1st half. I don't think the zone was too great in that game.

And we scored 52 on them. It was a shootout.

 

[HOFCeluck]

Are we really having a debate as to whether or not you can win a title playing zone?

 

[Brooky03]

You cant win Championships with " the zone", I am sorry did you sleep through the entire 2003 run, our zone embarrassed the field that year, we are " The Zone" it is feared by all and it should be. If I am not mistaken I think our National team, Team USA, won some games because of "The Zone" and Jimmy b so,... Hop better stay strictly zone, that's who we are.

I think you might have missed the sarcasm in my post. It's one of the hazards of written communication.

 

[Brooky03]

Are we really having a debate as to whether or not you can win a title playing zone?

I feel like this was indirectly my fault haha.

 

[sinceseven]

Franco apparently you watched a different 2003 NCAA tournament then I did, not one team shredded that defense, our team didn't get good that year until we jellied in the zone, moving as a unit, we where spectacular during our run, only to be out done by melo's crazy offense games of being unstoppable(still is) and the true hero GMAC!!. BUT our Zone wins championships, unless you want to take that banner down you cant deny it.

 

[sinceseven]

WE WON GOLD BECAUSE WE PLAYED ZONE!!,..... go U.S.A

 

[BlackKnight76]

I think that statement lacks context. I honestly think our FF appearance in 2013 was a testament to the parity of college basketball in the same way that UConn won the whole thing. Getting to the FF certainly is not easy no matter the context, but having to beat Marquette in the elite 8 to punch our ticket? We were a very flawed much like the 1995-6 Wallace-led team. The only difference is there was no UK or UMass powerhouse waiting. College hoops is broken and dying a slow death in this 1-and-done world.

We beat No. 1 IU, maybe the favorite in the whole tournament, to get to the Marquette game...who cares how we got there?

 

[igor]

WE WON GOLD BECAUSE WE PLAYED ZONE!!,... go U.S.A

we won the gold medal because we had melo and everyone else didn't. we actually won playing man

 

[jordoo]

we won the gold medal because we had melo and everyone else didn't. we actually won playing man

Yep! K is lucky he has had Melo otherwise that old school man would have never worked.

 

[igor]

Yep! K is lucky he has had Melo otherwise that old school man would have never worked.

i was talking nc, not olympics

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

I think that statement lacks context. I honestly think our FF appearance in 2013 was a testament to the parity of college basketball in the same way that UConn won the whole thing. Getting to the FF certainly is not easy no matter the context, but having to beat Marquette in the elite 8 to punch our ticket? We were a very flawed much like the 1995-6 Wallace-led team. The only difference is there was no UK or UMass powerhouse waiting.

College hoops is broken and dying a slow death in this 1-and-done world.

Marquette. Don't look at the name, look at the players. Far more successful NBA guys in the last 5-8 years than SU.

 

[igor]

Marquette. Don't look at the name, look at the players. Far more successful NBA guys in the last 5-8 years than SU.

and they're successful because of the style they play, not the name on their chest

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

and they're successful because of the style they play, not the name on their chest

No, they are successful because of the NBA athletes in the floor. They would win regardless of style.

 

[44cuse]

Are we really having a debate as to whether or not you can win a title playing zone?

Trust me...it's better than the alternative: the debate regarding how bad things are going to get and the hatred for [EDIT: "from" to "for"] Hop because he made a positive Coach K reference. That's got to have some people boiling here.

44cuse

 

[Dave85]

60% of the time, it works every time

1/2 the time I learn by making mistakes. The other 1/2 of the time I just get lucky.