duq81 wrote:

CLK wrote:

duq81, coaching at Seaton Hall next year, a little hyperbole no? 

Not really. Kevin Willard is going to get fired after the season. If the Dukes somehow have a true breakthrough season, Ferry will be at the top of their list, and he'll take the job for family reasons.
 

Ah OK. 
 

Dukes2012 wrote:

ElDuque wrote:

I don't get the Powell message .... What'd I miss?

He tweeted "back" last night a few hours after the game. The tweet was deleted an hour or two ago. I was just wondering if it meant that he was back in the lineup. Strange that it was deleted though.

Perhaps the deleted tweet was yet another violation of team rules that will extend the suspension.
 

ElDuque wrote:

I think it's a stretch to go from 3 consecutive losing seasons to the top of anyone's list. Let's win a road game before we get too carried away.

 

Yeah, and how about being able to see the top 4 spots in the league without binoculars for the first time as well.

applecorps wrote:

KenOTR73 wrote:

Absolutely great win. Disappointed at the crowd but 1) what idiot scheduled this game for light-up-night (oh he's gone, sorry) 2) PSU had no one there possibly because they played Michigan at noon today and that might have been too much to ask of their students to double-up. Now some thoughts. If Colter and Mason end up playing over 35+ minutes per game they will be gassed by the end of February regardless of how great their conditioning is. If we were a slow plodding team, maybe. But we are not. Does anyone have any idea of Powell's status? He will be needed when the conference schedule begins. He has been in street clothes at each game and each game I hear that he is out for one more game. 

It seems that the Dukes have stressed conditioning with the players, and I don't see any of the guys who are doing major minutes looking gassed late in games. It seems like a fallacy that when February comes, these young men will be too tired to play.  They are athletes who practice every day!

How many people, much older than college age, run 25, 50 or more miles a week and never get tired?  Not day to day and not after a few months. I have seen too many references to the college basketball players being "ground down" by playing too many minutes. Two games a week? How many of us wish we could play 7 days a week?

Apple, so why sub at all, then? These young men should be able to play 40 minutes every game since they are young and superbly conditioned. It's a cumulative effect. By the end of a game, if a player hasn't had a blow or two, the elevation on the jumper isn't there, the lateral quickness on defense isn't there. And, as a runner who typically logged 30-40 miles per week BEFORE I had to have my left hip replaced at age 49 because of the cumulative effects of running I believe I can speak to this. Coaches do not practice with the same intensity in February that they do in November. Teams with a deep bench are at an advantage at the end of the year. To steal a quote from Game of Thrones..."It is known"!

WEB wrote:

ElDuque wrote:

It's not about the duration of the season, Apple. It's about not having tired legs when you need to stick a guy on defense or elevate for a shot late in the game. And it's about developing other players.

As I said, otherwise, you get lucky this year, then wait for the next crew to become seniors in three years.

That's not my definition of sustainable success.

Doesn't have to be an all senior team. If that's what you are looking for then I'd love to see that plan. How can that even work? You need balance which we have. The days of 8 freshmen signees are in fact over. We saw how that works.

Look at what happened when we got just 3 seniors thru the program?

It takes more than 3-4 years to turn us from 8 signees a season to 2-4 to get the classes balanced.

We are beginning to see the fruits of such strategy in my opinion.

Yes, the classes are very balanced. You never want a situation like St. Louis, where they graduated their top 7-8 players all at once, and went from a powerhouse to an anchor overnight. Gill, and Lewis will be seniors next year, and will be the leaders of the team.
 

applecorps wrote:

Sorry if I gave the impression that I think the starters should play 40 minutes. Obviously, everybody needs some rest, and the bench players will never develop if they don't get significant minutes. Still, the way Coulter was playing, it made sense to keep him in there as much as possible until the game was clearly decided.

In particular, I think Robinson has a lot to offer and needs more game time to get there.

My point was intended to be  much narrower.I was not advocating keeping tired players in the game. I was observing that as a team the Dukes appear to be very fit and can run the floor without appearing droopy after a few minutes.

 

Point taken. The PSU guards played atrocious defense combined with DC's otherworldly shooting. We need to make sure that Steel and Castro are ready to step in. You never know if an injury is going to sideline a starter and woe be to you if a backup hasn't had enough p PT to jump in. Ideally, your starters would play 32-34 minutes. The bulk of sub time would be in the first half unless the game gets out of hand. Now there is no way you will ever get 32-34 minutes out of Lewis. He hustles on every play and burns a lot of energy doing it. So your bigs are a different story. This is where coaches earn their pay.
 

Regarding the criticism of several posters about insufficient playing time being given to non-starters, I believe that it's too early in the season for this to be cited as a serious concern.  As I see it, the Dukes needed to win a game against a school with a big name - not necessarily synonymous with a school with a good basketball team.  Beating Penn State was crucial in demonstrating to the fans, sports writers, and other casual observers that this season's team is a big improvement over what we fans have suffered with for the past three years under Coach Ferry.  Not only did the Dukes beat Penn State, they kicked their a _ _.  The margin of the victory probably surprised everyone.  I think it was a big confidence builder for the team to know that they can put away a team that is not a low D-1 or D-2 team.  I enjoyed it thoroughly.  

It's been reported that this was the last game of the 4-game series between Duquesne and Penn State.  I'm wondering if either team is currently interested in continuing the series.  Frankly, I believe that the Consol should be used sparingly for both non-conference and A-10 opponents.  If the AD is interested in getting a widely recognized solid basketball team to play the Dukes at home, only then can I see changing the venue to the Consol.  Clearly Penn State does not come to mind as a basketball power and a big attraction of its own fans and alumni as demonstrated with the embarrassingly low attendance of 3,520 on Friday night.  The Dukes played Penn State on two other occasions and the attendance has dropped with each game:  7,046 on 12/10/2011 and 5,246 on 12/11/2013.  I don't think that Light Up Night can totally absorb the blame for the significant drop this year.  If Duquesne does continue to play Penn State, the game should be at the Palumbo which provides the Dukes' a far better home court advantage.  I believe that the use of the Consol for three or four home games will only be to the Dukes' advantage in the future should they improve to such a degree as to be the attraction for the average basketball fan and not be solely dependent on the quality of their opponent.

On a side note, Sagarin ranks the men's team at #91, and the woman's team at #96. 

The days of 8 freshmen every year won every year. The brick by brick approach? Not so much.

I'm neither knocking anyone nor flying any panic flags. I simply expressed an opinion. I don't care if he puts four players on the court.

Win, make postseason, sustain it. That's what I care about.

SkepticAl wrote:

Also with Pitt playing at home Friday Night, The Pens at home Saturday Night,  Pitt Football at home Saturday Afternoon and the High School Playoffs for football on Friday Night may have also contributed somewhat to the lower attendance -  While we may not share that many supporters with them - there is only so much time and disposable income for sports for the weekend.

All of that. I know some hate it, but there are non alums who are Pitt season ticket holders who do come to some Duquesne games. Also, I think there is a bit of pessimism with both programs. In 2011 we were winning, even if it was at a modest level. It was the year after the 11 game winning streak, and Penn State was coming off of an NCAA appearance. With Ferry in his fourth year, and Chambers in his fifth, and neither team having really done much since the coaching changes, there wasn't much buzz about either team coming into the game.