What makes u think that Battle would have gone "only" 1 for 10? Sort of silly really. He might have did that in the first 10 minutes but then finished with 20 points making making it no contest.The question is whether we would have lost this game if Battle went 1 for 10 and Howard sat.
how can one be in denial of an incident that never occurred?Why is everyone in denial?
People are in denial that we could have lost.
I find it interesting that our exhibition game demonstrated just how vulnerable we were last year. A bad game from one of our big 3 and a medical from another, and we could have been toast to any old scrub team. Washington would have been playing point if this game were played last year and Howard was sitting. Suppose that Battle goes 1 for 10. We were a very vulnerable team. We were lucky that it turned out the way it did.
I mean Washington and Sidibe both scored in double figures last year against Southern New Hampshire in 25 and 20 minutes. They both may have done better if they were given more minutes.
Also Geno Thorpe had not quit yet.
We could beat st rose with battle and 4 board members.
I would have hit 5 threes and bailed him out.But could we do it with Battle shooting 1 of 10?