NCAA Tournament: South Carolina

[jacks1]

Re: NCAA Tournament: South Carolina

After going toe to toe with SC til about 8 min left,their shots rolling on the rim fell in,ours fell off, they gained momentum and confidence, we started struggling and lost confidence ,that's basketball.Do you suppose we might have just had a bad game against SC?.....Hymmmmm!?

We didn't exactly go toe-to-toe until 8 minutes left. We were down 10 with 5:58 to go in the 1st half and down 18 at the half. South Carolina's largest lead was 27.

[filbert]

Re: NCAA Tournament: South Carolina

For the foreseeable future, SDSU's (and other Summit League school's) basketball teams will have to succeed in the NCAA tournament with superior desire and superior execution, since most of the teams they're likely to face in there will probably have better raw talent. If the execution isn't there, it's going to be a long day.

But the fact is that teams with superior talent do get into the habit of relying on that raw talent, and start slacking off on generating that desire and perfecting that execution. This simple fact of human psychology gives an opening for a team with not as much on-court talent to beat the team with better raw ability on any given day. But desire and execution are both extremely hard to sustain for all forty minutes of a college basketball game. How many games do we see where one team comes out like a house afire, builds a big lead, and then spends the rest of the game a bit satisfied and happy with themselves, allowing the other team to build their desire and level of execution up to a high level, and when the first team finally realizes they're in a dogfight, they can't "turn it on" again?

Witness the tournament game of North Carolina-Kansas. It's probably true that North Carolina, from a raw talent standpoint, has (slightly) more on-court talent than Kansas. In the first half, Kansas played with poor desire and even poorer execution, and North Carolina had more of each than Kansas did--Kansas looked lost and confused in that first half, IMHO. That turned completely around in the second half and Kansas blew North Carolina right out of the building.

All things being equal, the team with better talent wins. But desire and execution aren't always (or, really, ever) equal--and those are the two things that teams and players with lesser talent have to work at maintaining at a high level. One team almost always wants it more than the other team, and is executing better than the other one. When both are playing at equally high desire and execution levels, you get flat-out great basketball.

That's where being in the Summit League tends to hurt SDSU--they can let their execution get a bit sloppy (lazy passes? tentative offense?), and their desire level to drop a bit, playing most of the SL teams, because in that league, SDSU's talent really is superior to most other teams. When the SDSU women get up against IUPUI or USD in the league, the talent level begins to even out, and desire and execution become much more important.

So yeah, recruiting better talent would help. But it's only a part of the puzzle, not the one total answer.

[2002jack]

Re: NCAA Tournament: South Carolina

Filbert's comments above make me recall my favorite post game quote from football coach John McKay regarding his Tampa Bay Buccaneers. In response to the question....."Coach, how do you feel about your team's execution?" McKay responded, "I'm in favor of it".

Anyway, I am not in favor of executing any of our student athletes. It is just a game after all. Go get 'em next year!

[OldHare]

Re: NCAA Tournament: South Carolina

Filbert's piece on desire reminds one of the years that ended with the first 2009 Summit League Tourney Championship. During the regular year, the Jackrabbit women would put the game away in the first half. The second half did not stop the effort. We have not seen that putting the game away mentality.. We have seen where the women play to the end and get a win, but there are games that could easily be 30-40 points that do not go there. Of course not all games will be in the view of stomping the opposition in the first half, but it seems we do take our foot off the gas at times which is not a good habit in terms of performance. Then we will need to be able to be comfortable with large margin victories and not worry about the feelings of the opponent. I am sure the Gamecocks did not sign any sympathy cards for the Jacks last weekend. The reloading that the women appear to enjoy ought to encourage competition both defensively and offensively. 6-10 may not be the best competition in the Summit as some claim, but it is still the best 6-10 in the Summit(and watching some big 6 teams over the weekend we are competitive there too).

[rabidrabbit]

Re: NCAA Tournament: South Carolina

Went to the KY-Dayton Opening round final here in Queens at St. John's U. KY stuck a fork in Dayton's bubble. St. John's Carresecca Arena has NOTHING on Frost. By extension Sioux Falls should be a slam dunk in the new arena. IMHO, SF should not be shy about pursuing a WBB regional final 16>final 4.

[jackdaniel]

Re: NCAA Tournament: South Carolina

We didn't exactly go toe-to-toe until 8 minutes left. We were down 10 with 5:58 to go in the 1st half and down 18 at the half. South Carolina's largest lead was 27.

You are right,meant to say toe to toe 8 min left in first half,actually,it was 19-24 South Carolina with 7:21 to go in the fist half.After that, things deteriorated quickly,couldn't get any points.We've had that tendency all through the season,to go for periods of time not scoring,we could get by with it in the Summit,in the NCAA Tournament,not so much.

[rabidrabbit]

Re: NCAA Tournament: South Carolina

St. Johns hosted as an 11 seed, and took Dayton (6) to 2OT before falling in the first round.

LSU hosted the Big 10 champs, Penn St. (top seed at the site), and took them down. Delaware hosted as a 6 seed (#2 seed at site) and took down No Carolina (3).

Jacks best chances will come when Sioux Falls hosts. Just need to project if going to have a team make the tourney.

REALLY LIKE CHANCES TO REPEAT as SUMMIT CHAMPS AGAIN.

[NorCalJack]

Re: NCAA Tournament: South Carolina

I saw Delaware was hosting the Women's NCAA tourney and thought their gym was kind of small. I looked it up and it only holds 5,000. Frost will hold more than that. Why can't SDSU put in a host bid for the Women's NCAA I am sure we could sell more than 5,000 tickets to that event. I know we are waiting until the new Sanford Event Center is built, but not sure why we waited.

[jackdaniel]

Re: NCAA Tournament: South Carolina

I saw Delaware was hosting the Women's NCAA tourney and thought their gym was kind of small. I looked it up and it only holds 5,000. Frost will hold more than that. Why can't SDSU put in a host bid for the Women's NCAA I am sure we could sell more than 5,000 tickets to that event. I know we are waiting until the new Sanford Event Center is built, but not sure why we waited.

I don't think we have the media darling like Delaware has in Ellena Delle Donne(sp?)I think that's the main reason they got to host in such a small venue.The NCAA probably see's the " value" of exploiting (wrong word) ,getting the most out of their star players and having them in the media spotlight ($$) as long as possible.

[yoteforever]

Re: NCAA Tournament: South Carolina

I don't think we have the media darling like Delaware has in Ellena Delle Donne(sp?)I think that's the main reason they got to host in such a small venue.The NCAA probably see's the " value" of exploiting (wrong word) ,getting the most out of their star players and having them in the media spotlight ($$) as long as possible.

Individual players and "star power" have nothing to do with site selection. There are several factors that would limit, maybe not deny, SDSU's chances to host. Among the most glaring would be motel rooms available within a certain distance of the arena. Secondly, hosts sites bid to host, and I doubt you would put up the kind of money it takes to have such an event. It's feasible, and more likely, that SDSU and USD could host in Sioux Falls with the sports authority fronting the tab, backed by the chamber. I would bet Brookings won't ever host, and I would bet USD coud never host because of the motel situation.

[NoVaJack]

Re: NCAA Tournament: South Carolina

Individual players and "star power" have nothing to do with site selection. There are several factors that would limit, maybe not deny, SDSU's chances to host. Among the most glaring would be motel rooms available within a certain distance of the arena. Secondly, hosts sites bid to host, and I doubt you would put up the kind of money it takes to have such an event. It's feasible, and more likely, that SDSU and USD could host in Sioux Falls with the sports authority fronting the tab, backed by the chamber. I would bet Brookings won't ever host, and I would bet USD coud never host because of the motel situation.

So the fact that Auburn Hills was chosen and its proximity to two of the perennial powers in the country, one with one of the top coaches in the country and the other with one of the top point guards, had nothing to do with it being chosen, or nothing to do with the fact that the point guard got matched up in an opener with a team with another great point guard? Nothing to do with it?

[Nidaros]

Re: NCAA Tournament: South Carolina

Individual players and "star power" have nothing to do with site selection. There are several factors that would limit, maybe not deny, SDSU's chances to host. Among the most glaring would be motel rooms available within a certain distance of the arena. Secondly, hosts sites bid to host, and I doubt you would put up the kind of money it takes to have such an event. It's feasible, and more likely, that SDSU and USD could host in Sioux Falls with the sports authority fronting the tab, backed by the chamber. I would bet Brookings won't ever host, and I would bet USD coud never host because of the motel situation.

Donot say never. We might surprise everyone.

[yoteforever]

Re: NCAA Tournament: South Carolina

Donot say never. We might surprise everyone.

Read my words Nidaros. Vermillion, never. I said I would bet Brookings won't host. Sioux Falls has a chance. The problem with SF, is who is the "host" school? Don't assume it would be SDSU. The NCAA doesn't have the bias we all do. That's not being disrespectful to you or your school, that's the way it is. Now I can anticipate the amount of bias that will be heaped on me because I am a Coyote.

[yoteforever]

Re: NCAA Tournament: South Carolina

So the fact that Auburn Hills was chosen and its proximity to two of the perennial powers in the country, one with one of the top coaches in the country and the other with one of the top point guards, had nothing to do with it being chosen, or nothing to do with the fact that the point guard got matched up in an opener with a team with another great point guard? Nothing to do with it?

I know you don't respect any opinion I have, I get that, but in this case, I do know more about the subject matter than I'm guessing you do. I have a friend on the selection committee of who hosts, and who doesn't. Locations are picked farther out than you might guess. They have to be in order for the support industries to prepare.

[sdsu_drake]

Re: NCAA Tournament: South Carolina

I think that a hyped player can get more butts in the seats of and allow for a bigger bid. I think that local interest in basketball in general goes up when you have a hyped player or team. that is probably the big influence of a hyped player.