Discussion in 'Colorado Basketball Message Board' started by DBT, Dec 4, 2010.
He gets credit for keeping Burks here. This mess of a post-situation is almost completely on Bzdelik. Even so, losing in a blowout to Harvard is inexcusable, and the only good game played seems to have come against the worst team in the SWAC (Alcorn).
Seems like a D to me.
Definite D (and that doesn't stand for defense)
Recruiting is a B.
I'll give the early-season coaching a D. That's up from where I would have had it following the Harvard game. Tonight is huge. As is CSU on Wed.
D. Only thing that saves him from an F is his recruiting.
How exactly was it a "mess"? Expectations were pretty high if I remember correctly. People were talking about the NCAA Tourney.
Not trying to call you out here. Just curious.
Definitely a D. This doesn't need to be a wasted season, but Boyle certainly has us on that path at the moment. This team should be 5-1. You can make the excuse for a last second overtime upset at SF, but you can't excuse a blowout loss to Harvard.
Luckily for Boyle it's a long season. There's plenty of time to save the season, a loss at home tonight might put the writing on the wall
Right CVille. There is time to correct the ship. Just surprising to see this team struggle like this. Even with the coaching change.
I'm pretty much the opposite on the SF / Harvard analysis. Harvard's 5-1 (undefeated at home) and won over 20 games last year. They're even with a pretty good Michigan team on the road about halfway through the 2nd half today. It shouldn't have been a blowout and we should not have been flat, but that was a very lose-able road game. Tommy Amaker is doing a good coaching job there.
San Francisco, however, is going to be about a .500 team this year in a top-heavy mid-major conference. We easily blew them out of our gym last year. There is absolutely no excuse for us losing that one.
I don't care how good Harvard's coach is, we should've handled those guys.
I don't disagree. It's just not that bad of a road loss (especially for RPI). San Fran was a terrible loss for us.
I guess. I'm just pretty upset with the whole situation.
I just can't get past taking into account that the loss to SF occurred at the last second in OT. Close upsets like that happen frequently in college basketball. Against Harvard, the Buffs simply got crushed.
You guys are a laugh riot. How about we let Boyle at least coach one full season before we start grading him?
Yes, "people" were talking about the tournament.......those people happen to be typical idot fans who don't know basketball and don't know what the **** they're talking about.
This is a progam that has made the tournament twice in 40 years, but somehow we were gonna make it with a first year coach, when we didn't even make ANY postseason last year??? LOL
They've made strides from where they were 2 years ago, but they still have a ways to go. If Bzdelik had stayed and SHT stayed healthy *maybe* this was a tournament team this year, though I'm not even convinced of that. Factor in a new coach bringing in a totally new offensive philosophy, and there was bound to be an adjustment period....
games thus far: D-
pretty sloppy start against Or State.
I think he's talking about the situation in the post. Which was a mess all the time under Buzz, and got worse once Harris-Tunks went down.
I always thought the tourney talk, if it was realistic at all (and I think it was), was pretty much always in spite of the 4s and 5s Buzz left behind...
I'd give him a C. Had two very winnable road games (UGa and SF) go the wrong way, haven't played "D" as well as we would have hoped, and losing H-T was a big hit. Not having much of an inside game will make the Big XII schedule even harder. Still think we'll see steady improvement in the team play as the year goes on. Don't see this as a tourney team at this time.
C-. Good start to recruiting, less than stellar start to the season. This team was built for the Princeton system, and not the up-tempo style that Boyle wants. Defensively we're soft, which will happen when you play match up zone almost exclusively for 3 years. Boyle and staff just have to recruit the bigger bodies that Bzz never seemed concerned about. It sucks to say it, but we have to stay patient and let these guys adjust to a new coaching staff and system.
Was at the game tonight and it looks like both Higgins and Relphorde are starting to understand their roles. Burks was working harder on defense, still looks awkward on offense imo, but it'll come. All 3 are perfect for Boyle's system in that they can drive the lane, draw a crowd, and kick it out to the perimeter like they did with Knutson all night.
Some insight on why Higgins didn't have a great night against San Francisco:
"He is a kid that is tough as nails," Boyle said of Higgins. "A lot of people don't know that he had a bruised kidney after the Georgia game and played through it, had some blood in his urine; really toughed it out at San Francisco. Tonight, he goes to the bench and comes back and he wasn't full strength but he is a guy that is so important to us on a lot of different levels. I thought his toughness really showed up tonight."
Unfortunately, his teammates didn't pick him up.
Last night was encouraging. I think a new coach with a completely new system needs some time to get things going. I really like Boyle and am keeping the faith.
The hopes were high, yes...but those of us who were paying attention without black and gold glasses on saw that there was basically a complete lack of any proven post presence (No, Harris-Tunks does not count. Keyword=proven.). It's nearly impossible to succeed in the Big 12 without post players-you may pull off some upsets, but not sustained success. And the position was nearly ignored, as a whole offense was schemed towards making the post player a non-factor aside from the ability to pass and hit jump-shots, under Boyle's predecessor.
Edit: what Junction said rings true.
I think I'll abstain from rating the coach/team at this point since all I've witnessed is highlights.
Before the season started I believed a trip to the nit would be a good thing. Still do. Most teams will be better and more talented than the beav's, but if this team can tighten the D and hold teams to 60-65 points, I think the nit is definite.
We won't truly know about this team until the "bigs" are ready - HT and Mills - and that should be next year.
I give him an "I". Incomplete.
As ridiculous as it is to grade ANY first year coach, I think you have to wait until the end of the season to make any sort of determination on Boyle's "grade."
:lol: It's an internet message board.
I give this poster an "I". Incomplete.
I give this poster A-rep.
Separate names with a comma.