zone defense is for losers

Donate To GopherHole
A

andy

Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
413
Reaction score
0
Points
16
You are basically saying to the other team A) we are too slow (or lazy) to defend you on the perimeter, and B) pleeeease shoot the deep ball.

The gameplan for beating the Gophers is simple: attack the gaps in the zone and kick to the open man.

This is just... disgusting.
 

andy said:
You are basically saying to the other team A) we are too slow (or lazy) to defend you on the perimeter, and B) pleeeease shoot the deep ball.

The gameplan for beating the Gophers is simple: attack the gaps in the zone and kick to the open man.

This is just... disgusting.
Click to expand...

It never changes - even the ESPN2 announcers have mentioned that the Achille's heel of the Gophers is 3-point defense. How do they (the coaching staff and players) not get it?
 

Tell Syracuse that.

Zones can be effective. It's not like our man-to-man D doesn't have holes, too.
The zone does seem to be a weak plan B for Tubby, though.
 

goldenboy said:
Zones can be effective. It's not like our man-to-man D doesn't have holes, too.
The zone does seem to be a weak plan B for Tubby, though.
Click to expand...

I think zones can be effective when you have long-armed 6'7" or 6'8" guys on the perimeter (think Carmelo Anthony at Syracuse).

But when your GLARING weakness is three-point defense, it would seem that a 2-1-2 or 2-3 zone would be the last possible option.
 

andy said:
I think zones can be effective when you have long-armed 6'7" or 6'8" guys on the perimeter (think Carmelo Anthony at Syracuse).

But when your GLARING weakness is three-point defense, it would seem that a 2-1-2 or 2-3 zone would be the last possible option.
Click to expand...

A 1-3-1 zone would be nice to see. We have enough long arms that it should be effective. Haven't ever seen it tried on this Tubby team, however. It would be much, much more effective against the 3-point shot than the sagging 2-3 that we usually employ.
 


andy said:
I think zones can be effective when you have long-armed 6'7" or 6'8" guys on the perimeter (think Carmelo Anthony at Syracuse).

But when your GLARING weakness is three-point defense, it would seem that a 2-1-2 or 2-3 zone would be the last possible option.
Click to expand...

(And Wes Johnson at Syracuse)

I'd like to see Gophers run a 3-2 zone.

Put Al, Blake, and Chip or Austin on top with Colton and Trevor down low.
 

goldenboy said:
Zones can be effective. It's not like our man-to-man D doesn't have holes, too.
The zone does seem to be a weak plan B for Tubby, though.
Click to expand...

Sure zones can be effective against a terribly coached team. Syracuse wins with talent, certainly not coaching.
 

andy said:
You are basically saying to the other team A) we are too slow (or lazy) to defend you on the perimeter, and B) pleeeease shoot the deep ball.

The gameplan for beating the Gophers is simple: attack the gaps in the zone and kick to the open man.

This is just... disgusting.
Click to expand...

Tell HOF-er Jim Boeheim to stop playing match-up zone D.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom