Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

Other than at point guard, I don't think there is that much difference in the talent level at BG and OU. I really don't.

I think it all boils down to coaching and a winning attitude in the program. BG has neither!

BG has some talent. The problem is all the talent is either rotting on the bench, or the same position as Calhoun. Orr should have tossed Kraus and Erger to the curb and developed the freshman last year. Orr should have told Black to take a back seat to Holmes and Sealey. Orr knows he is in trouble, and Kraus is more safe than throwing Henderson, Clarke, Parker to the wolves this year to better the program. Orr also uses a certain position has a certain back up rotation, which is the just laughable. Oh, and add in wasted scholarships on Erger, Rorie, and Gomez and you have 19 loss team with a player like Calhoun in a conference like the MAC. The pg position for next year will be a mess.

Rollo83 wrote:Other than at point guard, I don't think there is that much difference in the talent level at BG and OU. I really don't.

I think it all boils down to coaching and a winning attitude in the program. BG has neither!

I 100% disagree. We have one player who would start for Ohio (Calhoun) and two who would come off the bench (Holmes and Crawford). Guys who start for use us like Black and Kraus would never see the floor for OU. We could play that team 20 times and I give us not shot at beating them once. I do agree with the statement about coaching and attitude though.

On the front line, we do well with Holmes, Calhoun, Sealey, and Parker. However, the talent difference at guard is huge. With Crawford and Kraus at guard, we were at a severe disadvantage. Also, Orr's complete lack of explosiveness also puts us at a disadvantage against decent teams. (Towards the end, did you notice how OU opened up the game when we took our athletes off the floor and had Crawford, Kraus, Orr, and Black playing at the same time???) We were clearly more effective as a team with guards like Clarke and Henderson on the floor.

With Crawford, you have quickness, but not enough quickness to compensate for his size. With Crawford, you have a good dribbler who is still prone to turnovers. With Crawford, you have poor court vision and consistently bad decision making. With Crawford, you have a very mediocre shooter who arrogantly over-asserts himself late in the shot clock. Crawford should have never been anything other than a spark off the bench.

With Kraus, you have a guys may play hard on defense, but could never play hard enough to compensate for his lack of talent. With Kraus, you have a zero-tool guy on offense - he doesn't penetrate, shoot, or make great passes.

BGSU33 wrote:

Rollo83 wrote:Other than at point guard, I don't think there is that much difference in the talent level at BG and OU. I really don't.

I think it all boils down to coaching and a winning attitude in the program. BG has neither!

I 100% disagree. We have one player who would start for Ohio (Calhoun) and two who would come off the bench (Holmes and Crawford). Guys who start for use us like Black and Kraus would never see the floor for OU. We could play that team 20 times and I give us not shot at beating them once. I do agree with the statement about coaching and attitude though.

Calhoun, Sealy and Holmes have just as much raw talent as Keely, Baltic and Kellogg. Maybe more. Its just that the OU players have been in a system for four years that develops talent and fosters confidence. I would like to see what Calhoun would have looked like as a player after four years at OU or Akron?

Granted Offutt is better than anything we have at the two guard but how would we know with how Coach Orr has handled Henderson, Orr and Clarke?

The talent level isn't that much different. The state of the program is!

I think there is a difference in talent and coaching and combined gives us NO chance!

The biggest difference today was Ohio's ability to hit outside shots including 3's.

I think Holmes should have played more but Black was finally used in a way that allowed him to get some open shots which he struggled with. I think the talent is ok but we simply don't have the shooters.

On a side note why hasn't Parker gotten more minutes. He gave them some offensive options.

Parker hasn't played because of Erger. The same reason Chauncey didn't play last year.