Marquette beating Nova 53-52
- Thread starter ivyhillpark63
- Start date
Villanova is a good team. They are not very good and they’re not great. They just continually find a way to beat the bad teams in the league. 10-1 vs crap or teams with little to no chance of making the tournament.
Two games in a row (Gtwon and Marq) where they missed a ton of free throws. This used to be where they excelled.
Again we see the importance of the 3 point shot. Nova shot a terrible 39% from the field but hit 13 threes to edge Marquette who shot 49% from the field.
Holloway should take note that shooting from distance most always beats quality defense.
Holloway should take note that shooting from distance most always beats quality defense.
I like Sha but I don't think he will EVER agree with that and his recruiting/portal targets will remain unchanged. I would love to be wrong about this.
Especially when our team is totally incapable of returning the favor. They were totally beatable last week, and in many respects, we played well enough to do just that. But the pitiful shooting from beyond the arc damned us.
Well then, it's never going to come together for him here. I also don't believe he's that obstinate, but if he is, then he's screwed. And so are we.
Thats true I really meant we couldnt even do what Marquette could do. Stay competitive vs nova. We couldn't in 80 minutes of play.
Last edited:
According to some here you can teach 3-point shooting so if this is true all he has to do is teach kids how to take and make them. It's really that simple per some of the posters. So don't pay for 3-point shooters just teach them or hire someone to. hahahaha.
I read that exchange and you got your butt kicked in that exchange, not because you were wrong, but because you missed the most obvious points. As players get older, they are more accustomed to speed of the game. They are typically stronger and quicker. Nobody in that debate mentioned the obvious shouldn't a more physically mature player who has been around the block shoot better than a rookie who needed to put on muscle and now sees the game in a more mature way, understands concepts better. As a player develops those things the game slows down for them and they are not rushing. They are also the veterans going against rookies as opposed to rookies going against veterans. Their mindset is different too. They come in and they got 4 yeas to prove themselves, it seems like forever. Then by year 4 they are looking to leave their mark, it's their final go around.
So 3-point shooters are born not made, and there is nothing else you can do about it?
Then all of our mature players according to your point should be better 3 point shooters? So what happened? Rember Kadary Richardson? He was a bad 3-point shooter. Ditto Wasu. Those guys had tons of maturity and experience and it did not help them.
No but if you follow HS basketball you either come to college being able to make them or not. Your development from early on into HS determines for most kids whether they develop the skills, proper form etc. to make 3 pointers. Sure some who can't make them can develop the skills but more often then not there are tons of guards and forwards who suck at 3 pointers in college. we have many examples of great kids at the Hall who could not make 3 pointers. KR, Coleman, Wasu, etc....
I don't remember either of those guys. Both must have been well before my time, yet I've been following since the 3 point line was put into play
Not to mention, being bad and being better are 2 different things.
For every John Morton or Quincy McKnight (who learned to shoot 3's well in their final year) there are 30 guys who will never acquire the skill.
It happens but it's a long odds proposition. McKnight and Morton are the rare exceptions.