Again, why did we not call timeout for a play?!

#26
#26
CCM in-game coaching is awful. And even though it wouldn't have changed the call, he should have lit up the ref for the no call. It's easier for them not to give you the call if they know you're not going to get in their face & he has never argued anything that I recall!
I don't understand how this team can be so non challant 1/2 the time about playing. That's coaching!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#29
#29
bleedingTNorange said:
And you don't think stallings would've defended for that, cmon.

We got a point blank look, that's as good as you can ask for. And fwiw, Josh had been very good offensively the entire game.
Click to expand...

I guess I'm giving Cuonzo too much credit thinking he could draw up a play to give Jordy a look.

Stallings drew up a beauty slightly earlier for a nice three that essentially sealed the game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#31
#31
jcv0010 said:
I guess I'm giving Cuonzo too much credit thinking he could draw up a play to give Jordy a look.

Stallings drew up a beauty slightly earlier for a nice three that essentially sealed the game.
Click to expand...

Like I've said, stallings is smart enough to know where that ball would be going.

We got a much better look than we would've had we called a timeout IMO.

Anyone that says otherwise is saying cuonzo is a great schematic coach, and can draw up a hell of a play during a timeout. Take your pick.
 
#32
#32
bleedingTNorange said:
Like I've said, stallings is smart enough to know where that ball would be going.

We got a much better look than we would've had we called a timeout IMO.

Anyone that says otherwise is saying cuonzo is a great schematic coach, and can draw up a hell of a play during a timeout. Take your pick.
Click to expand...

So I guess Cuonzo wasn't smart enough to know where the ball was going on the play Stallings set up?

Cuonzo shouldn't be a coach at all then.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#33
#33
bleedingTNorange said:
Like I've said, stallings is smart enough to know where that ball would be going.

We got a much better look than we would've had we called a timeout IMO.

Anyone that says otherwise is saying cuonzo is a great schematic coach, and can draw up a hell of a play during a timeout. Take your pick.
Click to expand...

Yep. Kind of a damned if you do, damned if you don't. As I said above, I feel much better about our team rushing the ball up court and getting a decent shot against a scrambling defense than I do off a time out and Vandy setting up.

Plus, even though it didn't happen, the chances of getting an offensive rebound are better in a transition opportunity.
 
#35
#35
bleedingTNorange said:
Did you watch the game?

Fuller abused him on offense, he was living in the lane.
Click to expand...

No I didn't. But he is a freshman that is gonna happen.IMO

Only listened to second half but it sounded like we stayed in man too long in the first half, and should have come out of the 1-3-1 sooner in the second.

yup they just threw another ooop. lol
 
#36
#36
bleedingTNorange said:
Wtf?

What does my "love" for Cuonzo have to do with my post?

If you'd get your head out of your a$$ you'd actually realize if anything my post is critical of Cuonzo, not complimentary.

I'm basically saying, do you think given CCMs x&o ability that he could draw up some great play with 5 seconds left that would have resulted in a better look than what we got?

I sure as f*** don't
Click to expand...

%2B_2d07aa2c894ede9a8ea8bc09f54f7097.jpg
 
#37
#37
cbbowlingmd said:
%2B_2d07aa2c894ede9a8ea8bc09f54f7097.jpg
Click to expand...

He has a point actually. You're insinuation about his "love" for Cuonzo (however true it may, or may not be) is really irreleveant to his point.

He's saying that out of a timeout, how can you expect us to get a much better look than what we actually got without calling a TO. I happen to agree with him. We got a point-blank shot and missed, foul or not.

Defending the notion to not use a TO there really isn't affected by one's like or dislike for CCM.
 
#38
#38
I have been an avid SEC basketball fan since 1970. Since that time , this is the worst Vanderbilt team I have seen personnel wise. No depth. Little talent. It's a shame Stallings can still beat Cuonzo with half a team. This guy has got to go.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#40
#40
jcv0010 said:
No, that possession decided the game. With the game on the line, I want to make sure that the ball is in my best player/scorer's hands, not in the hands of my fourth best guy who is more known for his defense.

99% of all coaches would make sure their best guy has the rock in that situation.
Click to expand...

That poseesion didn't decide the game. It was the 25 other possessions where we passed the ball around the outside of the zone until someone jacked one up.
 
#41
#41
cncchris33 said:
He has a point actually. You're insinuation about his "love" for Cuonzo (however true it may, or may not be) is really irreleveant to his point.

He's saying that out of a timeout, how can you expect us to get a much better look than what we actually got without calling a TO. I happen to agree with him. We got a point-blank shot and missed, foul or not.

Defending the notion to not use a TO there really isn't affected by one's like or dislike for CCM.
Click to expand...
Exactly. I think Cuonzo is in over his head, but I don't think a timeout could've yielded a better look than what we got.
 
#42
#42
Rudy123 said:
Not me!


I anticipate another new coach search that lasts for three weeks and with us getting the last candidate on Hart's list.

the new coach won't be able to do much anyway. McRae, Maymon & Stokes will be gone and the roster depleated. You can't win much with next years roster.
Click to expand...

How, exactly, did our roster get pleated to start with? :)
 
#45
#45
NYC Vol said:
Yep. Kind of a damned if you do, damned if you don't. As I said above, I feel much better about our team rushing the ball up court and getting a decent shot against a scrambling defense than I do off a time out and Vandy setting up.

Plus, even though it didn't happen, the chances of getting an offensive rebound are better in a transition opportunity.
Click to expand...

Yup. We got literally the best look you can get, and got fouled which is what you're hoping for, just didn't get called.
 
#46
#46
Lefteye said:
No I didn't. But he is a freshman that is gonna happen.IMO

Only listened to second half but it sounded like we stayed in man too long in the first half, and should have come out of the 1-3-1 sooner in the second.

yup they just threw another ooop. lol
Click to expand...

Were getting beat regardless. Zone they solved, man they destroyed, neither defense was overly effective.

Martin would've preferred to stay man, but Thompson's inability to keep fuller out of the lane made that near impossible.
 
#49
#49
Not calling a TO in these kind of situations is obviously part of CCM's philosophy. Either he is worried about inbounding the ball off the timeout or just think that letting the game continue flowing and not giving your guys time to think about the shot gives them a better chance of being less nervous and it being a good shot.

Idk his reasoning, I'm grasping here, but it's happened so many times that it is obviously done on purpose.
 
#50
#50
Like others have said, lots of coaches don't call a timeout there, they like their chances in a transition push without a defense getting a timeout to change up their look.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top