ISU had 2.4 seconds left and got the ball to our best players or attempted too. Like I said before, if we had gotten it to a wing player or Brown had shot the ball from the top of the key and missed, people on here would be ******** why did not get the ball to Crooks, and ripping on Bill for not drawing up a play that got her the ball. We need more movement, but we do not have a girl on the roster that can go up off the dribble and make a shot from 3 point. We have a team of gals that have to get the feet set, catch the ball and shoot. Baylor had two or three players capable and willing to pull up and shoot the ball. We need another athletic big that can rebound and score with Audi is out of the game.
**** WBB: Gamethread - Cyclones host Baylor - 2 pm Sunday ESPN ****
- Thread starter BoxsterCy
- Start date
Not sure who in the Big 12 has the size plus the agility to do what Baylor did.
I do know TCU is the tallest average team in the Big 12, not sure about the agility part. Maybe until TTU adds the 7' girl.
I am actually pretty worried about WVU, they don't have Quinerly anymore, but they still are pretty athletic and play an aggressive D.
We’re kind of beating a dead horse here, but Baylor must have been ecstatic when they saw how we took the floor - no disguising where we’re going with the ball, and they were ready. Many teams in that situation will call a timeout to go over how to defend - Baylor didn’t need to. They were prepared.
I’m not paid $1M per year to design game winning inbounds plays, but I could come up an opening “formation” which made them think about where people were going, maybe four in a straight line at the FT line extended, followed by a couple screens to pop somebody open.
Your mind is made up that this was the only play available - others see it differently.
P.S. I see you dumbed a guy for disagreeing with you…
You’re suffering horribly from hindsight bias, also known as "I-knew-it-all-along", which is the tendency to perceive something that has happened as being more predictable than they actually were.
Nice deflection but no hindsight required on this one - you’re the one who pointed out three of our players weren’t viable options, the two guards in the “corners” and the inbounder. Addy injured and Audi exhausted…
We've got capable shooters IMO Hare Williams Wilson Harris have all hit timely 3 for us this yr I believe. Not on the game ending play, but some inside out action would do wonders whether it is in to Audi and back out or on a drive rotating to where the driver left, anything other than stand around.
There were two potential options that the Cyclones could have chosen on Baylor’s final possession with just over 9 seconds left:
1) the cyclones had a foul to give, and Jada Williams could’ve fouled Scott with about five seconds left long before the screen and the shot was taken that would’ve made Baylor take the ball out of bounds again…
2) if Alisa Williams had been substituted in for that defensive play they could’ve switched everything and hedged rather than use drop coverage which allowed Baylor’s best player to hit the game winner (Scott).
Using the foul to give is a no brainer to have been used and changing it up with hedging and switching on every screen on a 4-5 second offensive play would have made for a much tougher shot or no shot by Baylor. And definitely you wouldn’t allow Scott to be the one taking the shot.
1) the cyclones had a foul to give, and Jada Williams could’ve fouled Scott with about five seconds left long before the screen and the shot was taken that would’ve made Baylor take the ball out of bounds again…
2) if Alisa Williams had been substituted in for that defensive play they could’ve switched everything and hedged rather than use drop coverage which allowed Baylor’s best player to hit the game winner (Scott).
Using the foul to give is a no brainer to have been used and changing it up with hedging and switching on every screen on a 4-5 second offensive play would have made for a much tougher shot or no shot by Baylor. And definitely you wouldn’t allow Scott to be the one taking the shot.
Seems like coaches in college (not just Fennelly) don't like to use the foul to give. Fear of an NBA like player move to try and make it look like they were shooting so they get to the line and just not trusting their players? Didn't both Kansas and ISU have a foul to give in that first Big 12 game and neither used it? I don't get not doing it if a player is out at the logo distance. Make them inbound again with less time than they had to run the play they want. Still, I don't seem to see it a lot unless they are fouling to get the other team on the line in a desperate game extension move.
The not subbing in and out from offense to defense to offense, now that I didn't get.
Last edited:
What I don't get is if you have a foul to give then why not be more aggressive on defense? Try to force a turnover.
JW was tight in the Baylor gal’s grill the entire play. She almost could have exchanged clothes with her.
Here’s my miracle hindsight thought. JW was guarding tenaciously. The shot was made after a great pick took JW out of the play. Crooks isn’t mobile on defense so Baylor went into the gap created between where Crooks was planted and the pick. Wonder if Willie or Paulk would have been better underneath? Or if our post did come out would that just have created an opening for a pass to a Baylor player underneath? Hindsight is a wonderful and useless thing.
Instead of watching her dribble the ball at the halfcourt line for 20+ seconds why not try to steal it. You either:
- cause a turnover
- use up the foul-to-give
- force them into their offense/shot sooner
I agree. I’ve watched it 3-4 times and JW was all over her and the Baylor player did a great job of not creating any openings. But does it hurt to try and reach in? Does taking the foul and cutting the clock then leave zero time for ISU to even attempt anything? Def a bunch of shoulda coulda woulda.
