No offense but I don't think ANY of the talk after this game is the sky is falling. What people ARE talking about is a guy who was splintered on the bench all year came in and played well. And people are wondering why he wasn't playing prior especially in light of the coaches comments. Its a discussion about yesterdays game. I think everyone should stop labeling the majority of the board one way or the other. Just creates too much BS
There are two things I'm sure of in my own pea brain and I can not be dissuaded from them:
1) If Marco Godard, Mr. Jones and Felix Unger were getting the lions share of the minutes and we weren't in the midst of a 5 game conference winning streak, our poster base would be clamoring for more minutes for Phil, Amir and the other displaced player of your choice. Why you ask? Because the most popular player on a losing football team is the backup quarterback.
2) A majority white fanbase will show a disproportionate amount of affection for the one white player on a basketball team primarily composed of black players. Why you ask? Several sociological and anthropological reasons.
Ain't human behavior fascinating?
I don't like the reference to the " white fan base". Most fans just want to " win". I have to believe that race discrimination went out the window decades ago at east in this part of the country. I believe that Marco adds much to the team if utilized properly. But if you take a kid who is a great shooter but is not lightning quick and can't create his own shot and put him into Lavins system of one on one basketball, is it not obvious the kid is not going to perform to his potential? Now for all the haters who are ready to jump on me for this tatement, I am not condemning Lavins playing style, I am saying that Marcos style does not fit the staffs offensive philosophy.
Wrong about racism being long gone...but let's move on.
Lavin's system is not one on one. That may be the end result because it is not yet mastered by our players but it is not Coach's philosophy. The biggest problem in the current scheme is that there is no offensive presence inside. If your big doesn't post up, you can't get the ball to him inside. And when you do get him the ball, he's not really able (yet) to do anything with it. CO was a prized recruit with great shot-blocking ability, but a liability on offense. He will develop. I think Lav felt that Gift was going to give us enough on the inside this year and wanted to give him another year to work on that part of his game. A sacrifice this year, in return for bigger dividends next year.
As for Marco, I would love to see him continue to give us what he gave us in the Georgetown game. He looked much better than he had in previous games. I think if he and DLo are on the floor together, one of them will get some open looks.
I always wonder why posters (and this isn't directed specifically at you Linda) think that a coach spends a year or more recuiting a kid, gives him a schollie, and then decides he just doesn't like the kid and will bury him on the bench, even though the coach knows that the kid can contribute. Coaches see more than we do---whether in practice or in games. Even though I record every game and watch it again (except some brutal losses), I know that the coaching staff watches more film and know more than I do (Hell, even Linda knows more than I do). Therefore, while I may not agree with everything they do, I give them the benefit of the doubt that they have a good reason for doing it.