scores

GC over Appy 68 to 51

Both GC & Appy looked like they were just going through the motions. The refs let alot slide on both sides. I hope our intensity picks-up considering.

burton dominates the paint & wins by 15-20 against coeburn. don't remember the score.

Come tourn time ,I hope everyone don;t expect the ref's to call it very tight,because if u make it up the road they let u play a whole lot more. So don't be crying about the refs,they don't be u . Most of the time whoever takes care of the ball and rebounds is going to win. What happens teams put themselves in a situation for the ref to make a bad call.And there is where people thinks the refs beat u.

any word on the pound and kelly game??
should be a good game!

I left at the half with Pound up by about 2. Very low scoring game with both teams in the teens.

thanks
does anyone know if it is on the radio or not??

any word in???

Pound over Kelly i think 50 to 41

PV takes Clintwood down rather easily.
Clintwood looked to be going through the ....no saying they went through the motions would be an insult to going through the motions.

As pro-Clintwood as I am, and while I think we have some great kids, I'll go with a comment I heard in reference to the team. Clintwood needs more players and less playas.

Congrats to PV, they played pretty well for the most part.

So now its GC/Pound Burton/PV?

that should be a very interesting burton game. burton is poised to make another patented tournament run.

playas?

with all due respect, Rocky, you haven't a clue to what you're talking about (other than Clintwood having some good kids...you're right, they do).

what they don't have is many "pure" basketball players. they do, however, have a fair amount of pretty good athletes. unfortunately, their athletic ability was squashed by a force-fed offensive scheme in which natural instinct, on-the-court looseness, and the overall enjoyment of the sport was totally taken away from them. they averaged approx. 45 pts. a game by walking it up the court, passing backwards against the press, not trying AT ALL to push the ball, get it to the middle, run their lanes, or score in transition. if they excel at any phase of the game, this is it...using their speed and agility to actually put some pressure on their opponent- defensively AND offensively. a team's scheme and strategy must be dictated by the type of players you have to work with...not by an inflexible, staunch, and massively ineffective ideology endorsed by a young, inexperienced (albeit dedicated) coach. sometimes the key to good coaching and strong leadership is knowing when to let loose of the reins. Clintwood was OVERcoached this year, and, as a result, they UNDERachieved. they actually regressed as the year went on. they need to work on the fundamentals of the game (footwork, bounce passes, blocking out, triple-threat position, breaking down the defense with penetration, etc.), not wasting time and talent by setting up an ineffective offense in which ALL five players are above the foul line slowly passing the ball around the perimeter in an effort to show discipline and patience (not to mention the misguided attempts to run a time-consuming, ball-controlling stack offense with only one true ball handler, and the totally stupid idea of placing ALL potential offensive rebounders back on defense when shooting free throws, thus losing the opportunity to score approx. 8 to 10 more pts. a game). they do not have the players to play like Princeton- Clintwood is better suited for a quicker pace (organized chaos, if you will). they can't turn it over any more playing that type of game than they do now, so what do they have to lose? hell, after a year of looking over your shoulder worrying about the ramifications of improvisation, and having the instinct to "just play" the game without over-thinking it stripped away from them, their confidence and enthusiasm is already gone. so, if, as you say, they "went through the motions" tonight, it's not because they lacked effort or dedication- it's because they lacked enjoyment for the type of game they were being forced to play. simply put, over the course of the season, they became frustrated as hell. this is not just my opinion, many people close to the program share my sentiments.

Clintwood's basketball problems are not caused by the "playas", you just obsessively regurgitate what you hear from other people that you think are "in the know". i talked to a few people from PV tonight that said the same thing that i have been spewing on this thread- Clintwood plays like tentative robots, waiting for their creator to give them a command. it's not their fault, they're just doing what they're told- like you said, they're good kids.

the actual problems are rooted in the fact that a great many coaches (and in Clintwood's case...stat guys and scorekeepers) these days cannot, or will not, connect with kids on their level and understand that it's not all about schemes, unconditional respect, and narrow-minded philosophy, but about allowing kids to do what they love to do- just play...just play the game.

if this happens, the next few years will be much better. if it doesn't, i guess you'll just go on blaming the "playas".

hey, if Clintwood's mediocrity gets to be too much for you, maybe you and a few other vicarious glory seekers should just resign.

This is one of the upsets I suspected might happen. It wouldn't be the first time Pound has upset teams in the district tourney.

Not sure what the attendance was like at GCHS, but I was a bit surprised to see such a small crowd at JIB.

[ QUOTE ]
Pound over Kelly i think 50 to 41

[/ QUOTE ]

With all due respect Beanie,

You're talking what you see, but the kids are told to force it, push it, but if I tell you to post logical, doesn't mean you will, kind of the same point there.

I fully agree with you that they don't have many 'pure' basketball players, but how many teams do? Go ahead, count, because most of the schools at least in the LPD have kids who play multiple sports and to most, basketball is just one sport they play, its not 'the sport'.

I'll agree that their athletic nature and speed should be used for them, but a lot of that at least in my view, comes from people being able to handle the ball, and that was an issue all year.

I've commented before that your best coaches adjust their system to the talent they have, not try to adjust their talent to fit their system. I've also said that at times I think they were way to methodical, and yes, maybe overcoached. I can say that here and have said it to the coaches, I don't sit here and down them in anonymity, and shake their hand at the game and talk good to them there. Its funny though, if you talk to some people or read what some have to say, they will say the coaches didn't coach them enough, and here you go saying they were overcoached, but obviously since its your opinion, I guess you have to be right, huh? I'll agree that they regressed as the year went on, but what great solution did you have? You talk about working on the fundamentals, and you are exactly right, but from what I know, they do work on fundamentals. I can only give you an example I know, because I don't go to the practices. The first play last night, they worked on the exact thing that PV did multiple times on their last practice. They walk on the court and the players did exactly the opposite of what they were coached. You talk about organized chaos, and thats fine and dandy but you also say one true ball handler, so how much organized chaos can you run with that?

And no Beanie, I don't regurgitate what I hear, (which obviously you do since you use the comment many people close to the program), I quote by the actions. A loss should hurt, a loss should bother a player. Even if they like the people on the other team, they should want to win, to be able to be able to 'give a little' to their friends. We take a loss and walk off like oh well, lets get out there and see how many girls are there. I think a lot of that, myself, has to do with being a young team. I'm realistic enough to understand that a team thats heavily sophomore is a bunch thats thinking with the little head, not the big head.

But by all means, go with your philosophy of just play the game, and then of course turn around 10 minutes later and wonder why the coach doesn't coach them and have them calm down and run an offense or a defense.

Mediocrity will be the level they are at, and honestly that will be no matter whomever the coach is. Unless it means something to them. However, I'm sure that there will always be people such as yourself who will blame it on anything and everything else, so shoot, why should they worry about getting better, they already have their scapegoat. I don't worry about relating to the kids, they know that I'll defend them till the end of the day if they are there and trying. I have before (its funny, nobody tries to relate to them this week, and 2 years or 3 years ago its that nobody tries to discipline them, a year later its a coach is trying to relate to them too much, etc) and on this very place get told that I defend them too much.

And yes, you know there is so much glory to sitting there crunching numbers and hardly getting to watch a game. Such glory. It's such glory when I go home, breaking down shot charts, trying to keep accurate numbers, not just for the coaches but for the kids, its such glory to actually try and get a game film to make sure that kids get the credit they deserve. Its such glory to be a nobody sitting on the bench. Maybe everybody should resign and just allow people such as yourself to run things, and handle everything since you have all the answers, huh? Go ahead, continue your wonderful critique in anonymity.

[ QUOTE ]
The first play last night, they worked on the exact thing that PV did multiple times Sunday.

[/ QUOTE ]

hmmm......

I have had the chance to see Clintwood play a few times this year and to be honest, a team this young has got to be taught the basics. They need to know picks, backscreens, downscreens, skip passes, V-cuts, L-cuts and discipline. Not neccessarily in that order. That is the ONLY way Clintwood will ever be good in basketball. They can run when they get a chance and they did some this year but they will always be a team (until they get a playmaker) that should make passes and screens, and cuts.
These are they things they need to learn at the JV level but when your numbers are down and you do not have many kids try out, you have to move your athletic freshman up to varsity. That is why it takes so long to teach an athlete to play basketball at Clintwood. They do not play during the off season, (except for camps), because no one goes to the open gyms that Coach Grear has so they have to learn during the basketball season.
In my opinion, a perfect offense for any team that has a lot of athletic white guys but very little basketball talent is the FLEX offense. You could make as little as two passes or waste a whole quarter waiting until the right time to score.
They should be taught a sagging man-to-man defense like Duke runs and I believe you have to install some type of pressure defense. A half court pressure d would be good for Clintwood. You would not have to bust your butt at a full court press and would not get beat on defense by lack of speed. You can teach discipline, you can not teach speed so a half court d is based on discipline not speed. Someone on here mentioned that Clintwood had speed. No.
Go outside the LPD district and watch other succesful teams and look at their speed.
ALL SUCCESSFUL teams win with defense. Go to the state basketball tournament and watch. I usually do not not see that crap 2-3 zone played out there unless a team has a couple of 6-7" guys.
You will not find a more fundamentally sound coach than Asst. Coach Grear but you can only coach with what you got to work with and try to make it better.

You made some valid points Slobber Knocker. The half course pressure has a lot of merit and makes a lot of sense. The athletic freshmen and/or sophmores are elevated a bit earlier due to lack of turnout, and you're right, that does reduce their learning and becomming more proficient in fundamentals.

I can't really argue with a point you make.

the flex is the most outdated and terrible offense I have ever seen. Its the easiest to defend as well. Sag off your men and clog the middle, mind the short corner and its stopped. Play a zone against it and its over and done as well. The LPD will never learn, your gonna have to make some jump shots, everything cant be scored in the paint by 5'10 and 6'2 post players.

i don't know of any coach that would try to run the flex against a zone...and if the flex is so outdated then why does bruce pearl run it at tennessee...

gary williams and maryland won a national championship with it too.

[ QUOTE ]
the flex is the most outdated and terrible offense I have ever seen. Its the easiest to defend as well. Sag off your men and clog the middle, mind the short corner and its stopped. Play a zone against it and its over and done as well. The LPD will never learn, your gonna have to make some jump shots, everything cant be scored in the paint by 5'10 and 6'2 post players.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. If a team knows how to set screens (most teams don't, most players don't find the defensive person) and use screens (how to come off of them), the flex and all forms of the offense can be used to score easy buckets.