If the result was different, would you like the "system"?

[tweeterhawk]

If this system -- what appears to be a deliberate and controlled half-court offense relying heavily on the three-ball, just enough inside play to keep the D from cheating out, defense played aggressively half-court but with virtually no full or half-court press -- consistently produced 6- to 8-point Iowa wins in low-scoring games, would you like it any better?

 

[woodyk1]

If we would win, it would be OK. With that said, I like the options of playing zone and/or press on defense as well as more off the ball screens on offense.

I felt the same under Tom Davis. The press didn't always work, so I wanted him to call it off some times. I also didn't like the pass wround the outside and let Woolridge try to score at the end of the clock for them as well.

Overall, winning is best.

 

[busabus114]

Yes

All i care about is wins

 

[HawkeyeNTexas]

This system will never be good enough to allow them to win consistantly.

 

[ibahawkeye]

Winning isn't everthing.... its the only thing!!!

 

[blkngoldUofI]

Winning and executing the offense would make things better. There are times when the offense is flowing but it isn't as consistent as it should be. If Iowa had a true center along with Fuller on the post it would be a different look for sure.

 

[1977Hawkeye]

Wins = a happy 1977Hawkeye.

 

[burky247]

Nope. I would hate it. But at least I'm honest.

 

[ibahawkeye]

I've used this analogy in another thread but I don't think there were many hawk football fans complaining after winning the orange bowl that we aren't running the spread offense.

Although UNI is in the valley, I doubt many of their fans are complaining that they only average 65 or so PPG.

If Lick would start to win the complaints about the system would quiet, wouldn't go silent but at least would quiet down a bit.

 

[TCCsuper]

After the last decade I just want wins and tourney appearances again, however I prefer a little bit more up tempo basketball

 

[hawkeye12345]

If the system was different we would have more wins.

 

[nhrahawk2]

Its not the system... its the lack of experienced and athletic players running the system that's the problem. You can win in any 'system' if you have the players that can take advantage of it.

It starts and ends with recruiting. We wouldn't be conistently jacking up threes if we had a point guard or two whom could break down a defender and get into the lane on a consistent basis. We need players - multiple players - that are quick enough to create their own offense. i.e. Jake Kelly, Tyler Smith, etc...

 

[DDThompson]

It's all about the W's.

But I don't particularly like offensive schemes that rely heavily on on-ball screens. Especially when a team doesn't have players capable of creating off the dribble.

Defense is about attitude so it doesn't matter to me whether it's full, 3/4 or 1/2 just as long as the attitude is there.

 

[FreddyBrown]

If I had a choice between winning at this pace and winning at a more entertaining pace, I'd much prefer the latter.

If the choice is between losing at this pace and winning at this pace, I'll gladly take winning.

However, as applied to this coach and this system, this is the very definition of a hypothetical question.

 

[1977Hawkeye]

If I had a choice between winning at this pace and winning at a more entertaining pace, I'd much prefer the latter.

If the choice is between losing at this pace and winning at this pace, I'll gladly take winning.

However, as applied to this coach and this system, this is the very definition of a hypothetical question.

Or if it was a choice between winning at this pace and losing at a more exciting pace, I'd take the W's. But losing at this pace is particularly brutal.

 

[AZmess]

Re: If the result was different, would you like the "system"?

Nope. I would hate it. But at least I'm honest.

so the old sidney dean syndrome then?
________
new developments in Prathumnak

 

[HeneryHawk]

It wont happen, so why even consider answering?

 

[burky247]

so the old sidney dean syndrome then?

LOL. It took me a second but I finally got the reference.

The answer is no by the way. I'm not interested in losing with exciting basketball either. I want to win with exciting basketball. I want to be entertained and I want to see dunks and up tempo ball. I'm not talking about hiring Paul Westhead or anything. I don't think I'm any less of a fan because I would like to see some action on the court.

But that wasn't the original question. We were asked if we were winning would we "like" the system. I will never like this style of ball. I will tolerate it if we win.

 

[TChawk]

If this system -- what appears to be a deliberate and controlled half-court offense relying heavily on the three-ball, just enough inside play to keep the D from cheating out, defense played aggressively half-court but with virtually no full or half-court press -- consistently produced 6- to 8-point Iowa wins in low-scoring games, would you like it any better?

No it is a very boring system that is not going to get the crowds into games at all.

 

[Hawke]

If this system -- what appears to be a deliberate and controlled half-court offense relying heavily on the three-ball, just enough inside play to keep the D from cheating out, defense played aggressively half-court but with virtually no full or half-court press -- consistently produced 6- to 8-point Iowa wins in low-scoring games, would you like it any better?

Yes because I enjoy watching that style of basketball.