Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="NineOneSeven, post: 4574117, member: 871"]
Let me first say, there is an opponent on the court for a reason and their job is to play defense and disrupt what their opponent (us) is doing. As Bills reporter Sal Capaccio often says during his weekly call in show- those guys on the other side of the field are also getting paid for a reason (ironically that same sentence could be applied to college athletics now).

However, the play that really got me against Duke was after our timeout at the 13:44 mark when Duke went up 53-37. The game was still in striking distance (based on score and time, maybe not in actuality). After the timeout, we ended up with a Copeland missed 3. There is absolutely no chance in hell that in that huddle, the design was for Copeland to shoot a 3. But what was the design? We simply cannot differentiate whether it was a poor play 'design', poor execution, or simply a case where the opponent won the possession [Duke played well on defense, not taking anything away from them], but too many times we simply cannot run good sets out of timeouts.

We know our offense at times lacks structure. We know we put a lot on the shoulders of the guards in particular to make plays. But that possession really got me.

I don't have the ability, but I'd like to re-watch that particular sequence.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?