one former Lady Vol schooled another former Lady Vol

#1

Darth_Vol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
5,560
Likes
8,234
#1
Guess which one is which?

If this game was at Wichita St. or even a neutral court I have no doubt the result would have been different. Adams might be one to keep an eye on if Hollyball continues to flounder....
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2
#2
Guess which one is which?

If this game was at Wichita St. or even a neutral court I have no doubt the result would have been different. Adams might be one to keep an eye on if Hollyball continues to flounder....

The one whose team won the game schooled the one whose team did not win the game.

Duh.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#3
#3
The one whose team won the game schooled the one whose team did not win the game.

Duh.

from the coach who has a lot more talent than the coach who had less and won by 3. yea Holly has this team rolling.
 
#6
#6
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:
 
Last edited:
#7
#7
Holly got lucky. We suck. We might be the 6th best team in the conference, maybe not even that good, and we darn sure do not have one of the top coaches in the conference. I just watched her post game interview this morning on SEC Nation and you can tell see is in way over her head. I was not sure one way or the other till I saw this interview. She is going to be to women's bball what Dooley was to the fball program. She is just starting from a higher point so the fall will seem worse. Flame away all you Holly lovers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#8
#8
It is always important to win even when you play ugly. The future does not look bright were not going anywhere this season. We'll win 20 games but were not a final four team and I doubt we win either of the SEC Tourney or the regular season. We'll finish around 15th in the poll if we can't find a way to win the next two games. You have to be able to beat a good team on your home floor.
 
#9
#9
I doubt we win either of the SEC Tourney or the regular season.

That was unlikely to happen anyway, since South Carolina was the favorite going into this season anyway.

Realistically, I think they can beat Stanford and TAMU. I think they can also beat ND, who gave up 93 points in a 1 pt win vs. DePaul that was won only because DePaul missed like 6 free throws in the final minute of regulation when they were ahead. They're not finishing lower than 3rd in SEC, and will probably finish 2nd with a chance at 1st depending on whether or not guard play improves as the season goes on.

An ugly win in a throwaway game in between two big tests (RU and Stanford) is IMO not something horrible. In fact, I kind of like the fact that it was an ugly game so that the players won't have a false sense of security heading into Stanford.
 
#10
#10
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:

Adams' team completely dictated the tempo of the game and made Holly look completely clueless. Maybe Hollyball should let the players call the offense as well, couldn't do any worse....
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#11
#11
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person

VN Store



Back
Top