Make them play half court and limit offensive rebounds.
Very simple as Holly has no offensive game plan except to try to punch inside and if that fails.......anyone can shoot........and then make an all out effort to get the rebound and try to lay it in. Offense is to score off rebounds......that is it. Trouble is.......Lady Vols does not have the dominating rebounders. So Holly does not try to work around the problem by installing an offense that exploits the opponent's weakness, but instead sees the lack of rebounding as a lack of effort. :horse:
For many, many years, under Summitt, offensive rebounding WAS our offense. We had some big players, nobody in women's basketball was very good at scoring, and it was almost assumed that shots would be missed. We would get the rebound and put it in and score. THAT WAS the PS OFFENSE. Mostly for that reason, PS had no clue how to really coach offensive sets--move without the ball, quick passing. She was obsessed with defense and rebounding--and for offense she either tried to jam the ball inside or the plan was to throw it to a superstar--Catchings, Parker, and hope for a score.
That was all well and good for a long while--but then the game changed and teams got better offensively. That is when the game started passing by Summitt and UT; that is when Geno and Ct. started passing Summitt and UT--because Geno could coach defense like PS AND he was a very good offensive coach. I remember watching Ct. play UT 20 years ago--one of our first/early games against the huskies, and while we had more talent and won that game, what was IMMEDIATELY noticeable in the game was how much better coached offensively they were--how much better they were at moving the ball with inferior talent. We see what has happened since....
Twenty-twenty five years later, we still play pretty much the same offense. We try to jam it inside--and if that doesn't work (and it won't because teams will double Harrison), Warlick is left hoping that a perimeter player can beat her defender and make a shot. Everybody else sort of stands around and watches. This is why we have so many turnovers. And we don't get offensive rebounds the way we used to because, for one thing, Warlick has spread the floor to try and get the ball to Harrison, so if she or somebody else shoots, there are only one or two players close to the basket.
What's scary is that Warlick doesn't seem to get how bad our offense is. If she were aware of the problem, she would have made changes to the staff, to the schemes, two years ago. Instead, we slog on game after game, year after year, with poor shooting, weak passing and too many turnovers. Mostly what she does is talk about defensive effort, as if it were still 1985. Defense is important--but it is HALF the game! You have to score--and be efficient. If you want to know why Ct. is so good, it is their offense more than anything.
We don't have great 1v1 players, and that is why the team so often looks tentative instead of playing offense with a purpose. And Warlick herself seems to lack command and sophistication and confidence. She called last night's victory a "great win." She sounds more like the coach of Wichita State than Tennessee. I'm tired of railing against Warlick and our offense, but it never gets better and, meanwhile, the program struggles.