Who else hates our slow it down, run the clock offense?

**ISUCyclone06** · 01-09-2011, 08:04 AM

Seems like everytime we try and do this the ball ends up turned over or a hurried terrible shot is taken. The last 3 minutes of last nights game was painful to watch. That was a meltdown and the refs should not have been in a position to make a game changing call.

**ISUAgronomist** · 01-09-2011, 08:08 AM

Think of it this way. We were up by 4 for the first time in the game. Each possession we can drain some clock on offense = less time on defense. Less time on defense = less opportunities to foul and put them at the line (they were shooting 2 at this point). It was perfect game clock management at that point.

**ISUCyclone06** · 01-09-2011, 08:12 AM

I agree that it was best option, but we aren't very good at it. We seem to be a team that is better off going after it the same way that put us in that situation.

**Rickybaby** · 01-09-2011, 08:14 AM

I agree with aggie, this was the right thing to do and a good coaching move. Yeah, it was painful to watch and it could have been better executed too although it was effect so wasn't executed too poorly. My theory is that like everything you do, the more you do it the better you become at it. We rarely (thank god) do this slow it down and milk it out sort of thing so aren't particularly good at it. Do you want to do this all the time like MD's teams so we become good at doing it? Didn't think so.

**CLONE22** · 01-09-2011, 08:21 AM

there has to be another way, isolating DG four straight times down the floor and coming up empty clearly did not work, not to sound like im bashing on DG tho he had a nice sencond half to get us back in the game

**ISUCyclone06** · 01-09-2011, 08:26 AM

Originally Posted by CLONE22

there has to be another way, isolating DG four straight times down the floor and coming up empty clearly did not work, not to sound like im bashing on DG tho he had a nice sencond half to get us back in the game

This is exactly the point i'm going after. It clearly didnt work same thing every possession, empty handed every possession. I like our odds had we just played our game and played to win and not just played not to lose so to speak. I know people are gonna say I'll let fred make that decision but I'm writing in a message board so I obviously have more knowledge.

**Oldgeezer** · 01-09-2011, 08:31 AM

Nothing wrong with the strategy, we just don't have the personel to make it work. Nursing a 4 point lead, the last 5 possesions, we come up empty 4 times. Our PG nearly matched the Husker team in TOs, 5-7, not all in the last 2 minutes, however. Still, he's all we have for that position. Live with it, and die with it. I think they would do better just playing the game, after all, that is how they managed the comeback. Can you imagine the screaming heard here if they did not "work the clock"?

**kilroy** · 01-09-2011, 08:34 AM

Ill agree, PAINFUL, but remember last year thats how ALL of our possessions looked!

Whats frustrating is you have to come up with point when you clock manage because the other team is almost guaranteed to draw a foul or get point. Simply put for what ever reason we didnt.

Its frustrating because it was there for the taking...

**Nihawk** · 01-09-2011, 08:38 AM

I didn't totally disagree with it but it was painful to watch. Did SC touch the ball during the slow down game. A loss like this can have a hangover effect.

**CylentButDeadly** · 01-09-2011, 08:44 AM

Said this about 100 times already, but instead of going 4-low and bouncing the ball for 20 seconds, we need to do what Duke does and run 4 corners with constant movement and attack the open seam when it comes.

**fatkid1974** · 01-09-2011, 08:53 AM

Originally Posted by CylentButDeadly

Said this about 100 times already, but instead of going 4-low and bouncing the ball for 20 seconds, we need to do what Duke does and run 4 corners with constant movement and attack the open seam when it comes.

Duke has 4 guys that can dribble, we have one, plus a guard with a bad wing, another guard thats an average ball handler, a freshman, and a 6'11" guy. I'm not crazy about the four low, but for what we have for ball handlers, I believe it's about our best/only option in a slow down offense. Do agree that the best thing to do is keep doing what you do best and not change it down the stretch. Once the talent gets here that'll change.

**CyCloned** · 01-09-2011, 09:03 AM

I don't have a big problem with what happened last night, except for the results. ISU really only has 7 guys that can play, one had fouled out and SC was playing hurt, so then you only have 5.5 guys to play a whole game. This reminds me of GMac's teams. There were/are so few guys that can play that the team is whipped in the final 5 mintues. How many games slipped away in the last 5 minutes under GMac? I don't know the number, but it was a lot. Holding the ball gave ISU a chance to rest. I was surprised that NU let them do it, although they did start to come out on DG at the end. The problem I have is start the offense with 15 seconds left on the clock so you have a chance to throw a couple passes and get someone else a chance to score. I know DG is the green light guy, but he still needs to get other people involved or everyone will drop back into the lane to stop him. It is somethink to work on, and I am sure Fred and his coaches are doing that.

Let's try to remember how limited this team is, and how they managed to almost win a conference game on the road.

**ISUFan22** · 01-09-2011, 09:07 AM

Originally Posted by isuaggie

Think of it this way. We were up by 4 for the first time in the game. Each possession we can drain some clock on offense = less time on defense. Less time on defense = less opportunities to foul and put them at the line (they were shooting 2 at this point). It was perfect game clock management at that point.

Correct. In addition, our guys were completely exhausted. Had to take breaks when we could.

**ISUFan22** · 01-09-2011, 09:09 AM

Originally Posted by CylentButDeadly

Said this about 100 times already, but instead of going 4-low and bouncing the ball for 20 seconds, we need to do what Duke does and run 4 corners with constant movement and attack the open seam when it comes.

Um - we have no where close to the personnel Duke has. Why do fans constantly think "just do what (insert successful team name here) does and we'll be fine"?

Obviously we would love to do that, our staff/players are not dumb - we just don't have the talented to be a top team!

**kilroy** · 01-09-2011, 09:09 AM

Originally Posted by CyCloned

... It is somethink to work on, and I am sure Fred and his coaches are doing that.

Let's try to remember how limited this team is, and how they managed to almost win a conference game on the road.

CFH sound really disappointed in the 'coaches corner' last night. The lose probably hurt him worse than any of us and I really hate that lose.

No doubt they will.