Is It Just Me?

MWBATL

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,689
I tried watching some college basketball games tonight, including the GT game with Notre Dame.

I found them, by and large, pretty unwatchable. And what I mean by that is that the offensive efficiency....which I define as % of time a team scores on a possession.....seems VERY low to me.

It may be me, but between poor shooting, and turnovers, it sure seems like teams usually only score on about 25% of their set offensive series (once you take fast breaks out of the equation).

Maybe I am just that crotchety old guy in the corner who always says everything was better in the past. But I remember watching Villanova-Georgetown in the NCAA Finals, when it seems like the efficiency was more like 66% or so. Turnovers seemed much more rare back in the day. Shooting...oh, I dunno...maybe it was about the same. But today's teams (not just GT mind you) seem to be much more prone to dribbling the ball off their foot or throwing it out of bounds for unforced errors.

I'd love to know two things...
(1) Is it Me? Am I just romanticizing the teams of the past and thinking how much better they were than what we are seeing now? I mean, I think Lethal Weapon Three would bury our current team by at least 20 points on a BAD night! Or is it true that today's college game is much more ponderous and poor on offense than the past?

(2) If it's not just me, then....WHY? Is it as simple as the best guys are now gone to the NBA early? Is it that AAU ball has encouraged poor playing habits? What is the problem?


I miss the old college game. Maybe I am just an old fool....(entirely possible) but I though I'd ask the wiser folks on this board to enlighten me!
 

BonafideJacket

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
156
Not a hoop-head, but to me, it's a combo of:
  1. Virginia-style defense. UVA won a national title playing a stifling, grind-it-out, defensive style. Other teams are of course trying to emulate to a certain extent.
  2. Lack of a mid-range game. It seems to all be points in the paint and threes. Teams have learned to scheme defenses to cover both of those and force teams to hit 10-20 ft jumpers and a lot of guys are uncomfortable with that.
  3. Piggie-backing on the above, teams are still adjusting to moving the 3P line.
I don't think this is part of a long-term trend, as offense has fluctuated over the last four years: 2015 was a 60 year low in scoring (so they dropped the shot clock to 30 secs), but 2017 was a 20 year high. So it may just be that things are in flux year-to-year, especially with one-and-dones and the transfer market leading teams to remake themselves year over year.

If you subscribe, Ken P. had a fascinating article in The Athletic earlier this season on this topic: https://theathletic.com/1389781/201...oring-games-are-making-an-unwelcome-comeback/ (And if you don't subscribe, what are you waiting for? Easily the best source of sports reporting around - including breaking news and long-form type reporting).
 
Last edited:

OlaJacket

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
192
Location
Ola, Ga.
No it's not you. Players used to be coached fundamentals at the high school level and came to college as more of a finished product. AAU basketball hasn't helped as it is all about athleticism. The mid range game is pretty much gone from the game. Can you imagine what Kenny Anderson would do to these kids that are playing now? You also can't build any offensive cohesion with one and doners, grad transfers, etc as compared to the past when kids would regularly together for 3 to 4 years. I still enjoy college basketball but it has become MUCH harder to watch because of the offensive ineffeciency. Allowing the pro ready high school kids to skip college would help too.
 

lauraee

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,109
I tried watching some college basketball games tonight, including the GT game with Notre Dame.

I found them, by and large, pretty unwatchable. And what I mean by that is that the offensive efficiency....which I define as % of time a team scores on a possession.....seems VERY low to me.

It may be me, but between poor shooting, and turnovers, it sure seems like teams usually only score on about 25% of their set offensive series (once you take fast breaks out of the equation).

Maybe I am just that crotchety old guy in the corner who always says everything was better in the past. But I remember watching Villanova-Georgetown in the NCAA Finals, when it seems like the efficiency was more like 66% or so. Turnovers seemed much more rare back in the day. Shooting...oh, I dunno...maybe it was about the same. But today's teams (not just GT mind you) seem to be much more prone to dribbling the ball off their foot or throwing it out of bounds for unforced errors.

I'd love to know two things...
(1) Is it Me? Am I just romanticizing the teams of the past and thinking how much better they were than what we are seeing now? I mean, I think Lethal Weapon Three would bury our current team by at least 20 points on a BAD night! Or is it true that today's college game is much more ponderous and poor on offense than the past?

(2) If it's not just me, then....WHY? Is it as simple as the best guys are now gone to the NBA early? Is it that AAU ball has encouraged poor playing habits? What is the problem?


I miss the old college game. Maybe I am just an old fool....(entirely possible) but I though I'd ask the wiser folks on this board to enlighten me!
I think LW3 would crush this team by 50. The offense then was so much fun to watch. I really miss that style.
 

lv20gt

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,763
(1) Is it Me? Am I just romanticizing the teams of the past and thinking how much better they were than what we are seeing now?

Yes. For starters the 85 championship game was an all time classic and not exactly a normal game by that era's standards. You're also forgetting that game featured Nova having almost as many turnovers as made shots despite playing so well. Second, 85 was the last year before a shotclock and before the advent of the 3 point line. Those two things combined make it obvious that efficiency as you described it would go up. There was no real pressure for teams to force the issue, and they could just work the ball as long as they wanted. That obviously had a huge impact on how teams approached offense. The shot clock is a huge defensive tool that does lead to some less efficient possessions but it also cuts out a lot of other issues that used to plague college basketball.
 

gte447f

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
448
I second (or third) the lack of mid-range game. Very few players have a mid-range game and nobody cares. It’s all about the 3. Analytics apparently says that 2 point shots other than dunks are a waste of time. I’m exaggerating a little for effect, but analytics does discourage the mid-range shot.

It’s a sign of the times that so many good 3 point shooters are not very good free throw shooters. Used to be that a good 3 point shooter was a guaranteed 80% free throw shooter at least, maybe 90%+.
 

RyanS12

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,453
Location
Flint Michigan
I’m 42 and the late 80’s early 90’s were amazing for college ball. The UNLV runs from 87-91, GT 86, 1990,96 Loyola Marymount 90,91 Duke 88-92 Michigan 89, 92-94 Arkansas 90 The one and done ruined it for me. As a kid in that era, I never missed a game. I’d stay up to 2am watching UNLV/LBSU games, now it’s hard to watch and add to it we’ve been irrelevant since 2004, it makes you really lose ambition to watch.
 

sidewalkGTfan

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,276
I've come to believe that getting rid of the 3 point line would help the game of basketball. The game revolves too much around it and that's why the mid-range game has virtually disappeared. That's my simple solution to improving basketball.
 

Silk3

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
737
I agree. I watch tons of NBA and its hard to watch college bball. Its so sloppy, no one can make shots, and kinda boring unless im watching Tech or a top nba prospect. Its night and day.
 

kg01

Get-Bak! Coach
Featured Member
Messages
11,241
Location
Atlanta
I’m 42 and the late 80’s early 90’s were amazing for college ball. The UNLV runs from 87-91, GT 86, 1990,96 Loyola Marymount 90,91 Duke 88-92 Michigan 89, 92-94 Arkansas 90 The one and done ruined it for me. As a kid in that era, I never missed a game. I’d stay up to 2am watching UNLV/LBSU games, now it’s hard to watch and add to it we’ve been irrelevant since 2004, it makes you really lose ambition to watch.

You are my brother from another mother. Agree and concur with all the above.

My earliest basketball memories were lethal weapon 3 in the tournament. I was like, "Man, theyre awesome! Wait, they're from Atlanta!"

Been a Tech fan since.

Compare that to now. Yikes
 

RyanS12

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,453
Location
Flint Michigan
You are my brother from another mother. Agree and concur with all the above.

My earliest basketball memories were lethal weapon 3 in the tournament. I was like, "Man, theyre awesome! Wait, they're from Atlanta!"

Been a Tech fan since.

Compare that to now. Yikes
I forgot to add the Flyin’ Illini too. Man those were great years of college ball!
 

YlJacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,465
If you are comparing last night's GT game to some of the classic championship games no doubt you will be disappointed. Times last night both teams looked like brick Masons more than skilled bb players.

Overall college BB has lost talent to the NBA quicker than back then and the game is now much more of a finesse game, shooting game. But at the high end it is still a good game. Though GT right now is an acquired taste for sure
 

Buzzbomb

Mello Yellow-Jacket
Messages
7,889
Four years of misery during Pastners tenure doesnt make it much easier to watch. Can you guys believe we're 8-9 with that talent we have lol god
I stated in one of these other threads that we are 3-5 at home, 0-3 in the ACC.
Inexcusable to not defend your home court. This was not a program barren of ACC talent when he took over.

Totally agree about the game today. Fundamentally, including FT shooting, and being mentally involved in the game, are all lacking. I’m so tired of seeing cross court passes from one sideline to the other-low % passes.

I'd rather watch the women play. They are not worried about dunking or tipping it in and fundamentals are in effect for what can be executed.
 
Top