25yearstreak wrote:One of the assistants should know the foul situation (one to give) and remind the coach and players.
ToledoRambler wrote:I’m going to start by saying I love Loyola basketball. I first saw the campus when I was 12 when my brother was 16 looking at colleges. Loyola was was his safety school, but when we went and visited I got to go to a game with my dad, and I fell in love with everything about it. The campus, the city, and even the team. At the time, I was playing CYO basketball and had delusional dreams of playing for Loyola. My brother ended up at U of C. I never lost focus on going to Loyola. I caught the tail end of David Bailey and finished watching Kou and Blake schilb. I know I haven’t been around as long as a lot of people on here, but I still care as much about seeing Loyola win as everyone else. Probably more. I’m mad. But I’m not giving up on the program.
I truly bought into this years team. I thought we had the pieces to get back to the NCAA even when a lot of us counted this as a rebuilding year. I didn’t play college basketball, and I don’t claim to be an expert, but one of the things we always hear about Porter is he wants kids who have won before, and who have that special drive. I understood that we had new pieces and it was gonna take some time to develop into a cohesive unit. But here’s what I don’t get.... we all saw what Uguak was last year. He was a disappointment, but we had three stars in Custer, Townes, and Krutwig, so it was easy to look past his offensive deficiencies. But this year? He did not get better offensively. Everyone knew it. And honestly - that’s a product of him not putting in the work in the off-season to get better. We knew he was going to be a liability 10 games into the season.
I said it at the beginning of the conference season –the team is good but Aher was ultimately going to cost us. I said that he shouldn’t be starting and should be used off the bench - then people said “starting is for high school.”. That’s bullshit and not true. If that was the case, why not start Skokna for the first minute of the game after he dedicated four years to us, away from his family and friends? Starting isn’t for high school - it’s for players who have the ability to get us an early lead. And if you don’t believe that, you’re an idiot.
We drew an exhausted Velpo team. All we had to do was run them ragged out of the gate. We chose to start Uguak, out of 3 other guys that are capable of scoring immediately. What we got was four straight missed free-throws. Krut didn’t even touch the ball until the 16 minute mark and we’ve got Aher out there bombing a three and tanking four shots with nobody in front of him but the rim. Does he get yanked? No. We kept him out there to 2 for 8 from the field, with three turnovers, and 3-9 from the line. 3 for 9. We lost by one point. We were up by 18 points. You can preach his defense to me, and I get that ... but if you’re only good at defense, you can’t be bad at offense AND free throw shooting!
This loss is on Porter because he refused to stop betting on Uguak and give someone else a chance.... the whole season. You give Pipkins as long of a leash as Uguak and I bet you’d if seen results. But now you’ll never know, because we bet 37 minutes on a guy who can’t go 50 percent from the line. Pipkins should leave - he deserves better. Maybe I’m wrong and he’s another Adarius Avery, but even if that’s true - certain people got held to different standards this year.
I still love Porter. I still love Loyola. I’m still on board for next year - but this one leaves a sour taste because of how we lost. It wasn’t refs, it was stubbornness.
If we are gonna do the CBI or CIT, fine. But for the love of god, if we do it - play Uguak as he’s meant to be played - 16 minutes. If you’ve got a guy with no offensive production all year, don’t have him on the court with 3 minutes left.
Also - you’ve got fouls to give. Use them. It’s the simplest concept and you blew it.
Blers42 wrote:ToledoRambler wrote:I’m going to start by saying I love Loyola basketball. I first saw the campus when I was 12 when my brother was 16 looking at colleges. Loyola was was his safety school, but when we went and visited I got to go to a game with my dad, and I fell in love with everything about it. The campus, the city, and even the team. At the time, I was playing CYO basketball and had delusional dreams of playing for Loyola. My brother ended up at U of C. I never lost focus on going to Loyola. I caught the tail end of David Bailey and finished watching Kou and Blake schilb. I know I haven’t been around as long as a lot of people on here, but I still care as much about seeing Loyola win as everyone else. Probably more. I’m mad. But I’m not giving up on the program.
I truly bought into this years team. I thought we had the pieces to get back to the NCAA even when a lot of us counted this as a rebuilding year. I didn’t play college basketball, and I don’t claim to be an expert, but one of the things we always hear about Porter is he wants kids who have won before, and who have that special drive. I understood that we had new pieces and it was gonna take some time to develop into a cohesive unit. But here’s what I don’t get.... we all saw what Uguak was last year. He was a disappointment, but we had three stars in Custer, Townes, and Krutwig, so it was easy to look past his offensive deficiencies. But this year? He did not get better offensively. Everyone knew it. And honestly - that’s a product of him not putting in the work in the off-season to get better. We knew he was going to be a liability 10 games into the season.
I said it at the beginning of the conference season –the team is good but Aher was ultimately going to cost us. I said that he shouldn’t be starting and should be used off the bench - then people said “starting is for high school.”. That’s bullshit and not true. If that was the case, why not start Skokna for the first minute of the game after he dedicated four years to us, away from his family and friends? Starting isn’t for high school - it’s for players who have the ability to get us an early lead. And if you don’t believe that, you’re an idiot.
We drew an exhausted Velpo team. All we had to do was run them ragged out of the gate. We chose to start Uguak, out of 3 other guys that are capable of scoring immediately. What we got was four straight missed free-throws. Krut didn’t even touch the ball until the 16 minute mark and we’ve got Aher out there bombing a three and tanking four shots with nobody in front of him but the rim. Does he get yanked? No. We kept him out there to 2 for 8 from the field, with three turnovers, and 3-9 from the line. 3 for 9. We lost by one point. We were up by 18 points. You can preach his defense to me, and I get that ... but if you’re only good at defense, you can’t be bad at offense AND free throw shooting!
This loss is on Porter because he refused to stop betting on Uguak and give someone else a chance.... the whole season. You give Pipkins as long of a leash as Uguak and I bet you’d if seen results. But now you’ll never know, because we bet 37 minutes on a guy who can’t go 50 percent from the line. Pipkins should leave - he deserves better. Maybe I’m wrong and he’s another Adarius Avery, but even if that’s true - certain people got held to different standards this year.
I still love Porter. I still love Loyola. I’m still on board for next year - but this one leaves a sour taste because of how we lost. It wasn’t refs, it was stubbornness.
If we are gonna do the CBI or CIT, fine. But for the love of god, if we do it - play Uguak as he’s meant to be played - 16 minutes. If you’ve got a guy with no offensive production all year, don’t have him on the court with 3 minutes left.
Also - you’ve got fouls to give. Use them. It’s the simplest concept and you blew it.
I agree that Uguak should not be a starter and have all year but this loss is also on the players. They shouldn’t need porter to beat a tired Valpo team, it’s a joke. Nobody showed up aside from Clemons, how can you be a D1 player and not practice free throws enough to get better? It’s maddening.....They don’t deserve to be in the tournament this year, and we all knew this would be the downfall. Free throws are free points, I’m so tired of talking about it.
ToledoRambler wrote:We knew it 20 games ago on the free throws. THAT is on the players. My issue is Uguak on free throws. There’s no way this guy doesn’t know he sucks as a scorer. But if you know you suck at that, you can develop other aspects of your game on your own time to be an asset to the team. Free throws are the great equalizer. All you need is a basket, a ball, and gym time. Me or anyone else on this message board can’t drive the lane like Marcus Townes or Kennedy. We never will be able to. BUT - for a 30k+ scholarship a year, I’ll tell you what I could do - consistently go 7 for 10 from the line. If you’ve got the balls to fire up a three pointer when you’re 3 for 18 of the year in the first two minutes of a tournament game, you better be able to go 70 percent from the free throw line. Or 60%... or 50%.... or hell, even 40%. But if you’re getting a free education and you’ve got 5 talented other guys on the bench wishing they could play 37 minutes a game for their team, you take it seriously and at the very least, control the things you have complete control over. D1 basketball is about focus. If you’re sitting on 6 days rest, and you give up 4 free points in the first five minutes of the game - you’re not focused, and you don’t deserve to be out there. Put that slogan on your wall of culture.
01grad wrote:ToledoRambler wrote:We knew it 20 games ago on the free throws. THAT is on the players. My issue is Uguak on free throws. There’s no way this guy doesn’t know he sucks as a scorer. But if you know you suck at that, you can develop other aspects of your game on your own time to be an asset to the team. Free throws are the great equalizer. All you need is a basket, a ball, and gym time. Me or anyone else on this message board can’t drive the lane like Marcus Townes or Kennedy. We never will be able to. BUT - for a 30k+ scholarship a year, I’ll tell you what I could do - consistently go 7 for 10 from the line. If you’ve got the balls to fire up a three pointer when you’re 3 for 18 of the year in the first two minutes of a tournament game, you better be able to go 70 percent from the free throw line. Or 60%... or 50%.... or hell, even 40%. But if you’re getting a free education and you’ve got 5 talented other guys on the bench wishing they could play 37 minutes a game for their team, you take it seriously and at the very least, control the things you have complete control over. D1 basketball is about focus. If you’re sitting on 6 days rest, and you give up 4 free points in the first five minutes of the game - you’re not focused, and you don’t deserve to be out there. Put that slogan on your wall of culture.
You know what, screw (politely said) these hits on Aher, and a lot of the talk about him on here...especially compared to the rest of the team. That kid hit some huge shots at the line at times over the course of the year, specifically late in the Bradley game. We would NOT have won that game without him. I get it, he didn’t have a good game, but neither did anyone else in the second half. This was a team loss, in a lot of respects.
01grad wrote:
You know what, screw (politely said) these hits on Aher, and a lot of the talk about him on here...especially compared to the rest of the team. That kid hit some huge shots at the line at times over the course of the year, specifically late in the Bradley game. We would NOT have won that game without him. I get it, he didn’t have a good game, but neither did anyone else in the second half. This was a team loss, in a lot of respects.
