No question, Vandy will use this same tactic

[CannonVol80]

There seems to be a common misconception that Izzy "threw an elbow". Two reasons why I say this is a misconception. First, the refs, after significant video review did not assess a Flagrant 1 or 2 common foul on Izzy, as they would have if they called the foul for an elbow. Second, our seats are in a vantage point where we are looking down on the play from an angle different from any of the video replays, it appeared to me that Izzy tried to go up for the rebound and the MO player, Robinson, was pulling on her arm making it appear that she moved her elbow back. Izzy pulled away and turned essentially throwing Robinson, who hadn't let go of Izzy's arm, forward. At that point Robinson got up in Izzy's face. The "confrontation" is what resulted in the double technical and the ejection of Izzy and Robinson.

In fact, Robinson was apparently called for a foul on Izzy, resulting in the two free throws taken by Alexa Middleton (who, by the way, missed them both)

Jim

 

[Smallvol#1]

There seems to be a common misconception that Izzy "threw an elbow". Two reasons why I say this is a misconception. First, the refs, after significant video review did not assess a Flagrant 1 or 2 common foul on Izzy, as they would have if they called the foul for an elbow. Second, our seats are in a vantage point where we are looking down on the play from an angle different from any of the video replays, it appeared to me that Izzy tried to go up for the rebound and the MO player, Robinson, was pulling on her arm making it appear that she moved her elbow back. Izzy pulled away and turned essentially throwing Robinson, who hadn't let go of Izzy's arm, forward. At that point Robinson got up in Izzy's face. The "confrontation" is what resulted in the double technical and the ejection of Izzy and Robinson.

In fact, Robinson was apparently called for a foul on Izzy, resulting in the two free throws taken by Alexa Middleton (who, by the way, missed them both)

Jim

AFTER she was iced by the Misery coach who went over to the table (AFTER her player shot her free throws) and had an extended conversation with enterline - who allowed her to get away with the ploy. :banghead2:

 

[armchair]

Warlick's indifference to offense is the height of stupidity. Why do we struggle to win games against mediocre opponents so often? Because we are often terrible on offense. Also, Warick's philosophy that we play better offensively when we are playing well defensively is mostly nonsense. That is sometimes the case, yes, as it is with all teams---you get turnovers and turn them into scores. But UT very often plays pretty well on defense and sux on offense--see the first half against texas. We played good defense in the first half; the problem was were terrible on offense. And, yes, 40 percent is the shooting percentage that we need to achieve consistently. We have this pattern of being borderline embarrassing on offense /in the first half/--see Missouri, falling behind, and then we improve in the second.

The bottom line is that we need to develop players and a playing style capable of beating UConn--they are the standard--and if Warlick thinks she will ever beat UConn or good teams by scores of 51-50 or somesuch, she is delusional. If she thinks we can score 20-25 points in the first half and beat anybody good, she is delusional. If it were possible to hold UConn to, say, 50 points, we'd lose 50-30. There are two parts to basketball performance--offense and defense. Warlick, with her out-of-date mindset, thinks there is only one. This is why we have stumbled as a program.

 

[Sudden Impact]

There are two parts to basketball performance--offense and defense. Warlick, with her out-of-date mindset, thinks there is only one. This is why we have stumbled as a program.

Agree. These girls are painful to watch. CPHS spoiled us and this has been a big adjustment for me. I blame it on coaching. There is no spunk.

 

[madtownvol]

Warlick's indifference to offense is the height of stupidity. Why do we struggle to win games against mediocre opponents so often? Because we are often terrible on offense. Also, Warick's philosophy that we play better offensively when we are playing well defensively is mostly nonsense. That is sometimes the case, yes, as it is with all teams---you get turnovers and turn them into scores. But UT very often plays pretty well on defense and sux on offense--see the first half against texas. We played good defense in the first half; the problem was were terrible on offense. And, yes, 40 percent is the shooting percentage that we need to achieve consistently. We have this pattern of being borderline embarrassing on offense /in the first half/--see Missouri, falling behind, and then we improve in the second.

The bottom line is that we need to develop players and a playing style capable of beating UConn--they are the standard--and if Warlick thinks she will ever beat UConn or good teams by scores of 51-50 or somesuch, she is delusional.

Holly is maintaining the LV tradition of defense and rebounding win championships. Yes, you have to score but getting into a track meet type scoring competition with UCONN, will not end well (maybe next year with DeShields we would have a little more offensive fire power). But, it is not fair to blame all the offensive woes on Holly. Against Missouri, the LVs had almost endless series of wide open mid range jumpers and a fair number of high percentage shots in the the paint, that they MISSED. No offensive scheme is going to compensate for 20% shooting. Well, you say, have them work on shooting in practice! Problem is that practice time is limited (by NCAA rules) and a team has to work on more complex issues than just basic skills. Its up to the players to get extra practice on their own time.

From all accounts, players like Carter, who have been mired in a slump, have been working on their shots (with some sign of pay-off in the second half).

The reality is that the LVs are in a really good run of form with quality wins over Rutgers, Standford, OSU and now Missouri. Let's worry about UConn if and win the match arrives.

Earlier in the season, the LVs defense was porous; now they are turning teams over and getting crucial stops. I say that is nice and much needed transformation.

 

[madtownvol]

Agree. These girls are painful to watch. CPHS spoiled us and this has been a big adjustment for me. I blame it on coaching. There is no spunk.

How long have you been following the LVs. A constant complaint about CPS teams was that they were strong defensively and suspect on the offensive end, particularly in the half court. During the last championship run, the primary half court offense was get the ball the Parker.

The team looked much better offensively when Holly took over as full-time coach than they did under the last 2 or three seasons under the CPS.

Holly may not be the greatest coach in the game but some of these criticisms just don't bear up....

 

[VollyParton]

Holly is maintaining the LV tradition of defense and rebounding win championships. Yes, you have to score but getting into a track meet type scoring competition with UCONN, will not end well (maybe next year with DeShields we would have a little more offensive fire power). But, it is not fair to blame all the offensive woes on Holly. Against Missouri, the LVs had almost endless series of wide open mid range jumpers and a fair number of high percentage shots in the the paint, that they MISSED. No offensive scheme is going to compensate for 20% shooting. Well, you say, have them work on shooting in practice! Problem is that practice time is limited (by NCAA rules) and a team has to work on more complex issues than just basic skills. Its up to the players to get extra practice on their own time.

From all accounts, players like Carter, who have been mired in a slump, have been working on their shots (with some sign of pay-off in the second half).

The reality is that the LVs are in a really good run of form with quality wins over Rutgers, Standford, OSU and now Missouri. Let's worry about UConn if and win the match arrives.

Earlier in the season, the LVs defense was porous; now they are turning teams over and getting crucial stops. I say that is nice and much needed transformation.

It's a progression. The coaches put in more defenses as well as offenses as the season goes along. It's always been this way. They get the team prepared for the upcoming opponent, with the longview of the tournament in mind. When the team buys in, it all comes together and we win.

 

[teacherdean]

While the defense is outstanding,I do not believe that defense alone will get us to the final four. The top five teams are not one trick ponies. If you commit to the inside, they burn you from the outside and visa versa. I hope what we saw from Carter is a sign of things to come. We need Izzy in more one on one situations and not three on one. I still believe Middleton is outside offense waiting to happen. This team has potential as long as we have the right personnel on the floor.

 

[Sudden Impact]

How long have you been following the LVs. A constant complaint about CPS teams was that they were strong defensively and suspect on the offensive end, particularly in the half court. During the last championship run, the primary half court offense was get the ball the Parker.

The team looked much better offensively when Holly took over as full-time coach than they did under the last 2 or three seasons under the CPS.

Holly may not be the greatest coach in the game but some of these criticisms just don't bear up....

Since CPHS arrived, and yes the team did sage a little offensively during the last years of CPHS but it was by her design. CPHS always had balance scoring on offense and got the most out of her players. There was always a Candice Parker type player that could take over a game. With "The Meeks" any one of them could take over a game.

I am not use to this style of offense there seems to be no dominate players nor one single player that can take and put the game on their shoulders. This has been missing since HW took over as HC.

 

[volcrazy89]

The team looked much better offensively when Holly took over as full-time coach than they did under the last 2 or three seasons under the CPS.

It's interesting you point this out, because I thought the offense did indeed look very good in Holly's first year. So that begs the question: what the ever lovin' hell has happened the last season and a half?

 

[Volfan2012]

I wonder where former Tennessee players now coaches found their offense. LSU is horrible. I expect Caldwell gets fired after this season. She has taken LSU to the bottom of the SEC.

 

[madtownvol]

Since CPHS arrived, and yes the team did sage a little offensively during the last years of CPHS but it was by her design. CPHS always had balance scoring on offense and got the most out of her players. There was always a Candice Parker type player that could take over a game. With "The Meeks" any one of them could take over a game.

I am not use to this style of offense there seems to be no dominate players nor one single player that can take and put the game on their shoulders. This has been missing since HW took over as HC.

I don't understand the statement that "the offense sagged but it was by her design" as though that excuses the situation.

But, really how long have you been following the Lady vols? Do you remember the team before Parker arrived (and including her redshirt year). In those days, one night Zolman might get hot, another it might be Shyra Ely and on many nights the team would struggle mightily to put points on the board. Before that, in the Kara Lawson-Michelle Snow era, there were many not so pretty offensive nights. And while all these players were good ones, none were a Gordon, Holdsclaw, Catching, Parker game changer. And again, more recently, the Glory Johnson, Shekinna Stricklen group had many anemic scoring nights.

 

[madtownvol]

It's interesting you point this out, because I thought the offense did indeed look very good in Holly's first year. So that begs the question: what the ever lovin' hell has happened the last season and a half?

Good question. It may be that Simmons, Spani, and Williams were all very good (albeit inconsistent) offensive players and seniors who understood their roles very well. And I think they helped Massengale since could focus on running the point, rather than playing her current hybrid shooting point guard slot.

I think Middleton may be able to somewhat fill the Spani role as the season goes on. I still think Carter is going to get a lot better; her 2nd half against Mizzou I hope bodes well of things to come.

 

[Sudden Impact]

I dated one of the players in 75-76 season. That's how long. CPHS 2nd Year. Other than tours abroad although media was catching up I followed them as much as I could in those years.

They were awesome and I remember the days of Holly Playing. You must remember we had Ernie and Bernie back in those days and the football team was beginning it's 9 year Hiatus. The men's basketball program was dying a slow death. We had fairly strong Track and Field and a strong Swimming team, but Women's basketball was on the rise. I was good friends with the Local HS Girls Coach in the 3 on 3 days and he was always talking about CPHS all the time.

For many years and during the bad years with the other sports, you knew you were going to have women's basketball to fall back on to see a winner. I served with a referee of women's games when I worked in Atlanta. He would call Women's Games some of Tennessee games and come back and tell me how they looked. He also said CPHS would ride you but a majority of the officials truly respected her and what she had done for the Women's game. I can't ever remember her being called for a technical Foul

I also served with sever SEC Football Officals, most are gone now but I have not checked it out yet, if a SEC crew called the Oregon FSU Game one of old friends was the sideline official for the game. I laughed when I saw him.

So I have been following the Lady Vols before the NCAA was formed. It was the AIAW before the NCAA.

 

[Sudden Impact]

I don't understand the statement that "the offense sagged but it was by her design" as though that excuses the situation.

But, really how long have you been following the Lady vols? Do you remember the team before Parker arrived (and including her redshirt year). In those days, one night Zolman might get hot, another it might be Shyra Ely and on many nights the team would struggle mightily to put points on the board. Before that, in the Kara Lawson-Michelle Snow era, there were many not so pretty offensive nights. And while all these players were good ones, none were a Gordon, Holdsclaw, Catching, Parker game changer. And again, more recently, the Glory Johnson, Shekinna Stricklen group had many anemic scoring nights.

I remember them all and to be honest I don't think CPHS was fully coaching this team in her last 2-3 years. Please don't take that wrong, but at times during her last year CHW was in charge.

I do remember the distribution of players and the ability to pick up the slack. Kelly Jolly is another one that comes to mind she really kept the team on track and was a great floor leader for this team. I am sure some of it is role playing but this team does not seem to function like that someone has an off night and none seem to pick it up.