Page 1 of 1

Wofford @ Furman

PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 10:50 pm
by GoldandBlack
I just got back from Timmons Arena- I don't know if I can stand to see any more games this year. Once again, our guys fought hard and kept it close, but lost 68-65 at the end.

Couple of observations:
1. FU had an inside game - we didn't. They made adjustments and took
away many of our perimeter looks in the second half. The only offense
we had in the paint consisted of drives from the perimeter, mostly Drew

2. We had one critical breakdown with 2:30 left in the game. We were
down 58-56, FU in possession. They hit a 3-pointer, we missed one on
the other end, then they hit another 3 on their next trip down. We went
from 2 down to 8 down in about 20 seconds, and never recovered.

It's harder after watching it in person, I suppose. Good coaching at the end of the game, and good execution, made the score close at the end, but we were too far behind. The problem is that when you're 0-7 in the conference, there are no moral victories.:cry:

On the bright side, we had a great student turnout, and Wofford fans actually made more noise than FU fans in their house.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 12:41 am
by Eyes of Old Main
Looks like Furman has our number in basketball too. One of these days we're going to win one of these games.

I know Furman's not a top program in the conference, but at least we didn't get blown out like some previous games. Maybe it's the opponent, maybe it's progress. I'll hope for the later.

I'm going to be in Columbia this coming weekend and am thinking of making the trip up for the Chattanooga game. Haven't seen the Terriers play basketball in person since I was a student (shameful, I know, but it's the downside of living over 500 miles away). Win or lose, it'll be good to catch a game and cheer for the T-Dogs.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 10:15 am
by Ruckus
I was there too. Absolutely no post play - offense or defense. We got SLAUGHTERED on the boards. Not very good defensively (FU had way to many back door cut layups). Too many turnovers. Too many missed foul shots (my pet peeve). I can see why we want to speed the game up and play in transistion because we can't defend in the half court. I thought Young should have been fouling at the end of the game to stop the clock, but what do I know. Furman is not very good; we are worse. We have a few players, nichols, marshall, and gibson, who can create their own shots. No one else can. Marshall is a warrior and very versatile. I'd take a team of him. But other than that we are a very poor team. Kids played hard but just ain't got it. We may not win another game this year. Sorry to sound so bleak but I don't see many positives other than they play reasonably hard and Nichols, Gibson, and Marshall make some nice plays on their own. May be the worst team we've had on the floor since the '80s. I hope with the post players coming in next year we can get better. We'll see.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:28 am
by GoldandBlack
I agrees with Eyes that it's much better to be able to go see the games than be 500 miles away- I got to experience that for 3 years, including the '03 SoCon football championship season, and that is a true bummer. I plan on staying in SC so I can catch the games whenever I can.

After a night's sleep, I can say that while we were outrebounded 42-29, we did have 11 steals and forced 15 turnovers against Furman. I'd rather us play close than get blown out, and our guys keep finding ways to keep games like this fairly tight, even when they are outmanned. If FU had been more disciplined on offense, and we hadn't played with the intensity that we did, it would have been much worse.

Physically, we just aren't matching up well with most of the SoCon teams this year, and that is going to continue to be a problem. I hope we'll continue to fight like we have so far the rest of the season. We may not win, but these guys still deserve our support.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 1:55 pm
by terriers
I appreciate you fellows giving me your analyses of last night's game
and of our team. Not much Wofford news is available down here in the
lower state. You pretty much told me what I already thought about
our team. Since the days of "Daddy" Neal it seems we have always
had trouble recruiting big people. Looks like we have enough returning
next year to be competitive if we can bolster the post position with
Dahlman. the good news is that we did invade the "Purple Palace"
with a lively crowd and they knew they were in a fight. GO DOGS!!

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 6:02 pm
by Ruckus
I am sorry but I see no consolation in playing a team, which is at best middle of the pack, "close". They had NO home court advantage as the only sound was the Wofford crowd and they just aren't very strong. I am tired of us losing and can't understand why we are year in and year out the doormat of the conference. I am glad our kids never quit but I am not happy about the status of our program at this point. I hope next year will be better. I know we are outmanned in the post but why is that? Other schools seem to be able to recruit big men. I know we are short on funds but so is Furman and they are just flat out better than us. I know weare somewhat rebuilding this year, but last year we supposedly weren't and still lost. WHY? WHY? WHY?

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 7:45 pm
by GoldandBlack
Question, though- is it really any wonder given Wofford's financial commitment to the basketball program? Football is our signature sport, and we're WAY behind the curve in the SoCon:

2005 SoCon Basketball budgets (Source:Mid-Majority):

Chattanooga- $1,349,522
College of Chas.- $1,085,532
Furman- $1,082,246
Davidson- $1,036,838
UNC-G- $ 816,202
Citadel- $ 778,133
Western Carolina- $ 729,965
Ga. Southern- $ 684,573
Elon- $ 626,546
App State- $ 605,817
Wofford- $ 279,505

Not to mention the 3rd lowest Men’s Sports Recruiting Budget for 2005 ($72,294), only ahead of Western Carolina and College of Charleston. Those budgets for Furman and Citadel were $171,000 and $181,000, respectively, for men's recruiting.

We also got a bargain in 2004-2005, with a cost of $19,964.64 per win (14 wins), which was the lowest cost, by far, per win of any team in the SoCon, as well. Next lowest was App State at $33,656 per win.

Looks like App State is getting the most bang for their buck in the SoCon, or at least they were a couple of years ago, and if anyone has a real gripe, it's Furman fans.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 10:09 pm
by Eyes of Old Main
Ruckus wrote:I know weare somewhat rebuilding this year... WHY? WHY? WHY?

Rebuilding YEAR? We're into our second decade of rebuilding. No winning seasons since 94-95 (my senior year at Wofford).

I try to avoid criticism that won't accomplish anything in the grand scheme of things, but I am starting to believe that we need a "regime change".

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 10:24 pm
by Eyes of Old Main
GoldandBlack wrote:Question, though- is it really any wonder given Wofford's financial commitment to the basketball program?

2005 SoCon Basketball budgets (Source:Mid-Majority):

Furman- $1,082,246
Davidson- $1,036,838
Citadel- $ 778,133
Elon- $ 626,546
Wofford- $ 279,505

Not to mention the 3rd lowest Men’s Sports Recruiting Budget for 2005 ($72,294), only ahead of Western Carolina and College of Charleston. Those budgets for Furman and Citadel were $171,000 and $181,000, respectively, for men's recruiting.

I will pre-apologize for this rant, but this makes me FURIOUS.

If we are this strapped for cash that we can't even put forth a comparitive effort, then I think we need to seriously consider doing like Birmingham-Southern and dropping down to D-III or something. What is the glory in being OK in football and a joke in everything else?

I am APPALLED at these disparities. No wonder we are non-competitive in virtually every sport we field a team in. Last time I heard, it took about $100,000 to endow an athletic scholarship. To me, it looks like we need to "endow" some recruiting budget and budgets for some other sports before we worry about getting to 63 scholarships for football.

I hate to be so negative about our athletic department, but this "Golly gee, we're small and don't have the resources, but we sure do try hard" routine can only go so far. I will forever support Wofford College, both academically and athletically, but if this is the result of the course our leadership has placed us on over the last 10-12 years, then we need to do something different.

If these stats are true, we are basically living in a $500,000 home on a $10,000 income, paying the mortgage only, and living with no utilities. Someone more "in the know" please tell me that the situation is better than this. Being in this position just seems so out of character for an institution that has traditionally been so successful at everything it does.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:10 pm
by terriers
I had no idea there was such a financial discrepancy in our budget as
compared to the other schools. Maybe this accounts for our failure to
compete. Regardless, there are several other things that bother me.
1. We have lost seven games by six points or less and
we seem the lack the ability to make the big play when
the game is on the line.
2. Even though we lack talent at the post position, why do we
not play defense?
3. Last year we had strong physical guys in Tyler Berg and
Howard Wilkerson and we still lost.
I somehow feel that this team lacks the fire to win. At any rate, its
obvious we need to re-evaluate things at the end of this season.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:27 am
by GoldandBlack
terriers wrote: 1. We have lost seven games by six points or less and
we seem the lack the ability to make the big play when
the game is on the line.

I think this probably hits the nail on the head for most of us. It does seem that we tend to play to the level of our competition, whether up or down. That can lead to a number of close losses, as we've seen for several years.

Let's face it, there's a wide spread this year between The Citadel, Davidson and Furman, and all three were close losses, two of them at home.

No matter how you cut it, that's a coaching issue.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 3:09 pm
by tdog
Responding to terriers last post:
Part of the defensive problem is lack of size in the post. In the Davidson game last week, one of Davidsons post players, Boris Meno, had 25 points and 14 rebounds, while being gaurded most of the time by Marshall, who was giving up 4 or 5 inches. Is that really his fault? Meno simply put up a hook shot right over top of Marshall. Also, I really dont think you can doubt this teams will to win, they play extremely hard. Bigger issues to me are untimely missed free throws and a lack of organization on the offensive end late in games. Sounds like more of a coaching issue than a lack of fire.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:08 pm
by GoldandBlack
I have seen no lack of fire from this team in the games I've attended. Period.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:21 pm
by Ruckus
"Fire" is a relative term. The team is not very emotional in an outward fashion in my opinion, but they do play hard. I just think on the talent scale we are very light in the post which puts pressure on other facets of the team. We made a lot of turnovers v. Furman and missed key free throws. We did seem to be at times struggling on offense but that may again be a reflection of our talent level in the post. Our perimenter guys can play. "Coaching" is difficult one in that we seem to have a good class coming in next year and Mike Young seems to be a good knowledgeable guy. But the results speak for themselves and we just have not had any success. Maybe we are doing the best we can do given out budget, but I still don't like it.