Ironduke81 wrote:

OMG positive comments maybe CLK will reconsider his return as the #1 contributor to this board. MVP for this game was the priest who sat behind the bench. Great to see a collar Roman Catholic style on the bench at a Catholic Institution. Maybe I’m wrong but I have not seen a priest over the last 30 years. If I am incorrect in this observation Duq81 will no doubt correct me😂 I would love to know the padres name. As a long suffering Duquesne fan only an exorcism can stop the curse of Dudley Moore. Go Dukes.

I saw 3 priests at the Dayton game.
 

Ironduke81 wrote:

Duq81 how did I figure🤔Seriously, did you see 3 Spiritans sitting on the bench 2nd row? That would be a step forward. Remember the nun during the Chicago Loyola run? Devine intervention.In order to end the Dudey Moore curse this would indeed require at least three priest🙏 

Nah, they were in the area by the ticket booths. Still was a surprise. It just goes to show you that big games will bring the people out. No one wants to see LaSalle. Even when Pitt was rolling, they had plenty of no shows for Seton Hall, and Providence, only selling tickets for those games because fans felt pressure to buy season tickets to make sure they could see the attractive matchups. I went back and looked at the attendance numbers back in the Red Manning "glory days". Big crowds for Villanova, and Notre Dame, not so much for lesser teams. Hopefully we'll soon be filling the Coop, but we should still try to have one or two big games at PPG every year. The big time atmosphere was great, and it really gives you a chance to pull in some of the casual fans. I actually talked to a couple of Pitt fans at the game. They said Pitt is their team, but they still follow the Dukes, and said that the atmosphere actually felt similar to most of the games at the Pete. It's a shame that our least attractive A10 home games this year are at PPG. Richmond isn't a bad opponent though, and Pitt isn't playing that night. Would be nice to get 5,000 for senior night, but I'm not holding my breath.

Ghost of Walter White wrote:

Thanks for the heads up on the Student Section FAM.
I thought they were still under the basket.
The turnout and atmosphere for the Dayton game was excellent.
Friday night I was at the Kent State-Akron game. Great rivalry, a great game and a sellout.
 I guess I was hoping/ expecting too much for La Salle.
Keep winning. It will happen!
 

Unfortunately, there's a limit to how much fans will get up for lesser teams. You have to hope that with improvement, tickets will become hard enough to get that it spurs season ticket sales, which is how most programs are able to get good crowds for unattractive opponents. The hardcore fans come out to see the team, bandwagon fans tend to love the excitement of the event. I know the hardcore really want to give the middle finger to the bandwagon types, but let's be honest, we're not going to fill the Coop without them, let alone PPG, including some who are regulars at Pitt games. It is what it is.
 

Any thoughts on the last 2-3 minutes of the LaSalle game?  LaSalle fouled early to get to six team fouls then they did not foul when the Dukes were trying to kill clock.  The Dukes failed to score while LaSalle was cutting the lead to the point where fouling was unnecessary for them to get a shot at tying the game.  I noticed that KD wanted the ball in the hands of TDM exclusively during the last minutes of the game rather than Carry.  I know he is a great FF shooter down the stretch; but they weren’t fouling and the Dukes failed to score in any of those possessions. 
I guess it worked out since they won, but that late shooting foul call made things a bit tense.

NapaDuke wrote:

levon1975 wrote:

Any thoughts on the last 2-3 minutes of the LaSalle game? LaSalle fouled early to get to six team fouls then they did not foul when the Dukes were trying to kill clock. The Dukes failed to score while LaSalle was cutting the lead to the point where fouling was unnecessary for them to get a shot at tying the game. I noticed that KD wanted the ball in the hands of TDM exclusively during the last minutes of the game rather than Carry. I know he is a great FF shooter down the stretch; but they weren’t fouling and the Dukes failed to score in any of those possessions.
I guess it worked out since they won, but that late shooting foul call made things a bit tense.

One thing, their full court press was making the Dukes struggle and La Salle was really good at it. I wouldn't be surprised to see La Salle bump off a couple of big teams down the stretch   

I didn't think that game would be such a struggle for the Dukes, and in assessing how our team played, it seemed as though most of the players had pretty good games. LaSalle got a lot of long rebounds and loose balls, and a couple really lucky 4-bounce 3-pointers. But overall, it seems like a maturing team on its way up. I agree that they might surprise a few teams late in the season.

levon1975 wrote:

LaSalle shot mostly jump shots from mid-range and 3-pt range; not much of an inside game; so when their shots fall they can be tough; but when they don’t they won’t have a chance. I would say most of their 18 offensive boards were actually touched by the Dukes initially and then knocked away by LaSalle. It seemed like every loose ball went right to their guys. They were scrappy and played well enough to lose a close one; and that’s just fine with me!

Yes those mid-range shots were pretty good. To pull up and hit like that is hard to stop. They just looked better than their record. 

The problem with the favorable bounces argument is we saw the same thing pretty much in the UMass game (18 offensive rebounds allowed). Rhode Island's second-half surge was fueled by them crashing the boards and scoring on their second chances. The announcers even noted how flatfooted the Dukes seemed. You can say it wasn't an issue in the Dayton game but then Dayton didn't miss many shots. There's a reason we're dead-last in the A10 in offensive rebound percentage allowed. We're not an especially athletic team for this conference. If teams don't respect our transition game, they will take advantage. Something to watch out for in the second half of the conference season, starting tonight against a very good offensive rebounding team. 

DennisC91 wrote:

The problem with the favorable bounces argument is we saw the same thing pretty much in the UMass game (18 offensive rebounds allowed). Rhode Island's second-half surge was fueled by them crashing the boards and scoring on their second chances. The announcers even noted how flatfooted the Dukes seemed. You can say it wasn't an issue in the Dayton game but then Dayton didn't miss many shots. There's a reason we're dead-last in the A10 in offensive rebound percentage allowed. We're not an especially athletic team for this conference. If teams don't respect our transition game, they will take advantage. Something to watch out for in the second half of the conference season, starting tonight against a very good offensive rebounding team. 

The defensive rebounding is definitely been  a weakness that A-10 opponents have & will continue to exploit. The first order of business is vastly improving the boxing out & rebounding fundamentals in general. I have also been waiting for KD to encourage some planned run-outs. A few cheap buckets would discourage opponents from selling out on the offensive boards.