Thoughts on the SC beating

#26
#26
And, we could only be so lucky if Swipersuck would transfer. Then maybe we could find an SEC caliber player that Stephen Pearl wouldn't be capable of beating out.
 
#27
#27
Yes because playing defense against UGA and USC is the same as playing defense against Vandy and UK.

Spin all you want but their lines have been basically the same with Woolridge playing against two top 20 teams on the road and Pearl playing against two teams fighting to make the NIT (one at home and the other on the road).

I guess the only mystery is who will go higher in the NBA draft next year, Patterson or Muldrow. HAHAHAHAHAHA!
 
#28
#28
Wise-Vol said:
Yes because playing defense against UGA and USC is the same as playing defense against Vandy and UK.

Spin all you want but their lines have been basically the same with Woolridge playing against two top 20 teams on the road and Pearl playing against two teams fighting to make the NIT (one at home and the other on the road).

I guess the only mystery is who will go higher in the NBA draft next year, Patterson or Muldrow. HAHAHAHAHAHA!
Click to expand...

You're right. Look at the pansy frontcourt that Georgia has. Anybody could guard Thompkins, right?
 
#29
#29
Wise-Vol said:
Yes because playing defense against UGA and USC is the same as playing defense against Vandy and UK.

Spin all you want but their lines have been basically the same with Woolridge playing against two top 20 teams on the road and Pearl playing against two teams fighting to make the NIT (one at home and the other on the road).

I guess the only mystery is who will go higher in the NBA draft next year, Patterson or Muldrow. HAHAHAHAHAHA!
Click to expand...

If you're stupid enough only to look at the lines, there is real easy solution for you. Woolridge shoots significantly more than Pearl and takes horrible shots yet they score basically the same.

For example, Swipersuck was 1-6 against UK and Pearl was 0-0.

Also, the line doesn't show the pathetic post defense that Swipersuck plays.
 
Last edited:
#30
#30
LawVol13 said:
And, we could only be so lucky if Swipersuck would transfer. Then maybe we could find an SEC caliber player that Stephen Pearl wouldn't be capable of beating out.
Click to expand...

Wise-Vol, without seeing who started this thread, I thought your observations were really on the mark. Then, when I saw who wrote them, I was not surprised. However, I cannot agree with you on Pearl. Every team needs players like Pearl who come in and play hard, regardless of talent. Bradshaw made money doing it (although his wrist injury made him look worse on offense than he really was).

Woolridge has been the biggest disappointment this year, to me (Hopson is next). He has the ability, but I sense that he is not putting in the time and effort necessary, and if he does not step it up, I would agree with Law who said it might be good if he gave back his scholly. I am not against him, and I am pulling for him, but at this point, it just seems like wasted potential.
 
#31
#31
As I've mentioned before, I still think Woolridge is a year away from being a solid contributor and throwing away a scholarship player with potential after his sophomore year isn't very smart. We've had enough turnover. Renaldo needs to get mentall tougher if he is to reach his potential.
 
#32
#32
Unimane said:
As I've mentioned before, I still think Woolridge is a year away from being a solid contributor and throwing away a scholarship player with potential after his sophomore year isn't very smart. We've had enough turnover. Renaldo needs to get mentall tougher if he is to reach his potential.
Click to expand...

I disagree. He doesn't have the ball skills to play wing. And he has shown absolutely no improvement playing post. His only ability is shooting the three, which he has continuously become more inept at. I think he needs to go, and I'd like to see Abraham Moses or Cothron come in and take his place.
 
#33
#33
Unimane said:
As I've mentioned before, I still think Woolridge is a year away from being a solid contributor and throwing away a scholarship player with potential after his sophomore year isn't very smart. We've had enough turnover. Renaldo needs to get mentall tougher if he is to reach his potential.
Click to expand...

That remains to be seen ad the mental toughness thing is just hard to imagine. Either way, Wise one saying that Woolridge and Pearl will remain at the same level because Woolridge hasn't been or won't be given a chance is dead wrong.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#34
#34
Wise-Vol said:
One thing is certain -- a sophomore will not realize any potential sitting on the bench. Next season Pearl and Woolridge will still be roughly equivalent because Pearl isn't ever going to get better and Woolridge isn't going to be allowed to get better. But at least Stephen's coaching resume is getting a boost.

No, wait. Woolridge and Pearl won't be roughly equivalent next season, because Woolridge will likely transfer after this season and I don't blame him. There are a lot of Sophomores in the SEC who have struggles and who get better, but not when a mid-major player is on the team and his Dad let's him have that sophomore's minutes.

Woolridge got benched after "poor play" on the road at Vandy and at Kentucky, the two best teams in the SEC. Stephen is crowned a "champion" after equally mediocre play at home against UGA and on the road at USC, two of the SEC's worst teams (perhaps the two worst).

The only thing this discussion proves is that there are too many fans that think with their emotions instead of their minds. Tanner Wild use to hit three pointers when he got in the game at the end and it made every feel all fuzzy inside as well.
Click to expand...

This post should require you to change your screen name. If he transferred it wouldn't hurt anything. Two more years of him is about more than I can handle. There are some people that say Pearl can't coach but everybody knows he gets them to play hard. Well with Woolridge he can't get him to play hard so he sat him. S Pearl shows that you can contribute a little without being a scorer but Woolridge hasn't found a way of doing anything to help.
 
#35
#35
Pearl at least gives us some of the intangibles. I've seen nothing positive from Woolridge of late. From my perspective, Pearl playing and Woolridge sitting has nothing to do with nepotism and a lot to to with one guy showing hustle and fire while the more talented one looks lost and distracted.
 
#36
#36
Yeah Pearl and Woolridge may have similar stats but woolridge avg 9 more minutes per game. My vote is for Pearl right now based on performance.
 
#37
#37
I like Woolridge and I really would like him to play well but Pearl is playing better right now. He finds open spots in zones and plays pretty good D. I am one of the few on here who think at some point he will realize his potential and be better but I do believe it will be at the 3 and not the 4. Getting beat up by the big guys underneath might be hurting his shooting a bit also.
The way things are looking we wont need him at the 4 next year but will at the 3 so I hope he dont leave.


Rusty
 
#38
#38
I don't mind being disagreed with. The mystery is why some want to say I'm "clueless" or "stupid" because I don't agree with them. I guess that is because they aren't capable of disagreeing with reason; that is generally the type of folks who try to disagree by insulting.

So, it's nice to see a poster like you who disagrees with some thought behind it.
 
#39
#39
LawVol13 said:
You view Pearl wrong. He played excellent defense while he was in, and that's all we need him to do. The ball came off long on the free throw and he knocked the ball out of bounds. I thought he gave us excellent minutes and is doing what he's supposed to do.
Click to expand...

plus he scored 4 points which included a non called "and 1". so he was 2-2 with 4 points. i'd call that gettin 30.
 
#40
#40
Wise-Vol said:
I don't mind being disagreed with. The mystery is why some want to say I'm "clueless" or "stupid" because I don't agree with them. I guess that is because they aren't capable of disagreeing with reason; that is generally the type of folks who try to disagree by insulting.

So, it's nice to see a poster like you who disagrees with some thought behind it.
Click to expand...

Or what's more likely is that your statements are void of any reason.
 
Last edited:
#41
#41
My favorite Pearl intangible was in the Kentucky game when he picked up the loose ball at the defensive end, spun back toward the goal, let go of the ball and let it fly under to the Kentucky guy for a dunk.

Woolridge shoots 3s because that's what Bruce wants him to do; and his % is almost identical to McBee's, plus he outshoots Skyler on 2s. (He also wants Goins and Maze shooting 3s, when they should be driving, driving, driving...)

Pearl and Woolridge are both defensive liabilities (and McBee too for that matter), and to Pearl's credit, he doesn't shoot very often, but if you figure their rebounds out to per 40 minutes you get Pearl at 4.7 / 40 and Woolridge at 8.8 / 40.

Bruce thinks that life isn't right without somebody in the doghouse. It was always Ramar when he was here. Right now it alternates between Woolridge and Maze. (Skyler has hit 7 of his last 28 3s, and yet Bruce has declared that "he will not lose his minutes".) It's hard to play your best knowing that every mistake could put you back with Smokey.
 
Last edited:
#42
#42
LawVol13 said:
You view Pearl wrong. He played excellent defense while he was in, and that's all we need him to do. The ball came off long on the free throw and he knocked the ball out of bounds. I thought he gave us excellent minutes and is doing what he's supposed to do.
Click to expand...

Yeh I agree about the nuetral part. But I think the OP had it backwards, he gives a few hustle plays on d or loose balls and on the O side imo he should pass immediately, pump fake, jab step, pass. Lol
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#43
#43
papatomany said:
My favorite Pearl intangible was in the Kentucky game when he picked up the loose ball at the defensive end, spun back toward the goal, let go of the ball and let it fly under to the Kentucky guy for a dunk.

Woolridge shoots 3s because that's what Bruce wants him to do; and his % is almost identical to McBee's, plus he outshoots Skyler on 2s. (He also wants Goins and Maze shooting 3s, when they should be driving, driving, driving...)

Pearl and Woolridge are both defensive liabilities (and McBee too for that matter), and to Pearl's credit, he doesn't shoot very often, but if you figure their rebounds out to per 40 minutes you get Pearl at 4.7 / 40 and Woolridge at 8.8 / 40.

Bruce thinks that life isn't right without somebody in the doghouse. It was always Ramar when he was here. Right now it alternates between Woolridge and Maze. (Skyler has hit 7 of his last 28 3s, and yet Bruce has declared that "he will not lose his minutes".) It's hard to play your best knowing that every mistake could put you back with Smokey.
Click to expand...

Bruce wants this....Bruce says that......Bruce thinks this....You speak as if you are at practice daily and with the team on a regular basis. If so, that post just ended that, lol. And if not (the more likely) then what information do you have that will adequately support your claims?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#44
#44
papatomany said:
My favorite Pearl intangible was in the Kentucky game when he picked up the loose ball at the defensive end, spun back toward the goal, let go of the ball and let it fly under to the Kentucky guy for a dunk.

Woolridge shoots 3s because that's what Bruce wants him to do; and his % is almost identical to McBee's, plus he outshoots Skyler on 2s. (He also wants Goins and Maze shooting 3s, when they should be driving, driving, driving...)

Pearl and Woolridge are both defensive liabilities (and McBee too for that matter), and to Pearl's credit, he doesn't shoot very often, but if you figure their rebounds out to per 40 minutes you get Pearl at 4.7 / 40 and Woolridge at 8.8 / 40.

Bruce thinks that life isn't right without somebody in the doghouse. It was always Ramar when he was here. Right now it alternates between Woolridge and Maze. (Skyler has hit 7 of his last 28 3s, and yet Bruce has declared that "he will not lose his minutes".) It's hard to play your best knowing that every mistake could put you back with Smokey.
Click to expand...

You seem to be using a defense attorney technique for Woolridge. Can you also put his percentage for 3 point shots on here as well? I think we both know, even though 25% isn't special, his is lower.
 
#45
#45
Orangekush423 said:
Bruce wants this....Bruce says that......Bruce thinks this....You speak as if you are at practice daily and with the team on a regular basis. If so, that post just ended that, lol. And if not (the more likely) then what information do you have that will adequately support your claims?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I agree and would also add that players like Ramar Smith occupied Pearl's doghouse for good reason. You don't have to be an insider to know that.
 
#46
#46
LawVol13 said:
Or what's more likely is that your statements are void of any reason.
Click to expand...


Could say the same about yours.

You poke fun at Woolridge's shooting percentage in defense of Pearl. Yet, Pearl is shooting an impressive 23% from the line. It's impressive because I don't think I've ever seen a lower percentage. Add to the fact that we are assured of seeing Pearl getting blocked on lay ups two times a game.

I for one would play Woolridge. He isn't any worse and he at least has potential.

When your father is a really good college coach and you can't even shoot free throws... you have no potential. His best attribute is taking charges and voluntarily fouling to keep others out of trouble. You could place a 220lb box by the paint and get just as much production.

That's my take on Pearl.
 
#47
#47
The_Orange_Pearl said:
Could say the same about yours.

You poke fun at Woolridge's shooting percentage in defense of Pearl. Yet, Pearl is shooting an impressive 23% from the line. It's impressive because I don't think I've ever seen a lower percentage. Add to the fact that we are assured of seeing Pearl getting blocked on lay ups two times a game.

I for one would play Woolridge. He isn't any worse and he at least has potential.

When your father is a really good college coach and you can't even shoot free throws... you have no potential. His best attribute is taking charges and voluntarily fouling to keep others out of trouble. You could place a 220lb box by the paint and get just as much production.

That's my take on Pearl.
Click to expand...

Yet, Pearl shoots it about twice a game at the most while Swipersuck shoots every time he gets a crack. He plays absolutely pathetic defense as well.

Pearl plays adequate defense and doesn't take moronic shots 6 or 7 times a game. The difference between Pearl and Woolridge is that Woolridge's only strength is shooting, and he's about 1 for his last 50.

No one expects Pearl to score; he's in the game to play defense and hustle.
 
Last edited:
#48
#48
The_Orange_Pearl said:
Could say the same about yours.

You poke fun at Woolridge's shooting percentage in defense of Pearl. Yet, Pearl is shooting an impressive 23% from the line. It's impressive because I don't think I've ever seen a lower percentage. Add to the fact that we are assured of seeing Pearl getting blocked on lay ups two times a game.

I for one would play Woolridge. He isn't any worse and he at least has potential.

When your father is a really good college coach and you can't even shoot free throws... you have no potential. His best attribute is taking charges and voluntarily fouling to keep others out of trouble. You could place a 220lb box by the paint and get just as much production.

That's my take on Pearl.
Click to expand...

That statement shows your grasp of the game of basketball.
 
#50
#50
FittyElevem said:
You seem to be using a defense attorney technique for Woolridge. Can you also put his percentage for 3 point shots on here as well? I think we both know, even though 25% isn't special, his is lower.
Click to expand...

Yes I can. It's 30.4 compared to 31.6 for McBee, 30.5 for Goins 30.5, and 25.0 for Maze.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top