Sorting Out Possible Reactions from the Maryland-Clemson Game
This is an interesting post for me, because there are a whole number of unknowns in this equation. First off, one thing that needs to be said: no one needs to "pick a side" in this, so to speak. I honestly don't think that either extreme is correct - Maryland isn't suddenly one of the worst in the conference, nor did this loss not mean anything. The real state of this team is somewhere in between.
Anyway, people are flying left and right after this game. Some are vehemently defending Maryland's status. Others are saying that this loss is unacceptable. Is either side really right?
This was a loss on the road in a hostile environment against a good ACC team that is likely headed to the NCAA tournament. With about two minutes to go, Maryland would've been down just 2 points after playing perhaps the worst game of their lives - certainly their ugliest - had it not been for a horrendous offensive foul called on Greivis Vasquez. The entire game was atrociously called - on both sides, though it just so happened that a lot of Maryland fouls were game-changing - and Maryland won't face another team that plays like Clemson until they play Clemson at home later in the year. Clemson, too, was a team utterly desperate and hyped up to get a win.
So, no, the sky is not falling.
At the same time, the ugly truth of the matter is that this team rests squarely on the bubble after the loss, and I do think you have to take something out of this loss.
Before anything else, please don't call Clemson a ranked team. Yes, they checked in at 21st in the Coaches' Poll, but that was before they lost on the road to BC and would've almost surely fallen far had the poll date been the 30th instead of Feb. 1st. Also, I'm fairly certain that Demontez Stitt's presence helped them climb up those polls, and he was absent last night. Even if they were ranked, it was undeservedly so, and that argument doesn't hold up.
How many Maryland fans would've bet the house on the Terps had someone told them that Clemson would be missing their starting PG and Trevor Booker would only make two shots on the night? Those two stats illustrate just how bad this offensive breakdown was. 26 turnovers is a little stunning and, frankly, unacceptable for a team with two senior PGs.
It's also scary to look at Maryland's record against good teams. They're 1-4 against the Top 50 RPI. Ditto for KenPom ratings. Yes, they're very close to being 3-2 (Clemson and Wake losses), but close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades, and the committee won't care if they were almost good enough. It's tough to fault a team for road losses to top 50 RPI teams, but that doesn't make the record any easier to swallow.
They don't have anything resembling a signature win, either, and have exactly two more tries to get one: at Duke on Feb. 13, and Duke at the Comcastle on March 3rd (Pe'Shon Howard will be in the house for that one). ESPN recently had a piece on the importance of the signature win, and it's something Maryland should know well - it's what got them into the tournament last year.
And yet, it's still not certain that Maryland will be on the bubble - every team has a down game occasionally. Duke lost to N.C. State on the road - does that mean that Duke is no longer a tournament team? Of course not. Maryland has played better than this all year, and to assume that this is how good this team really is a little ridiculous. They were just off tonight, and that will happen occasionally.
Here's the thing: Maryland doesn't have any incriminating losses. Nor do they have any particularly encouraging wins, outside of the home win against FSU. We really don't know just how good or bad this team is yet. That's partially what makes the upcoming FSU game so important.
And there's the perfect segue: the Terps will get back on the horse on Thursday for that upcoming FSU game in Tallahassee. Should they win, they'll probably climb off the bubble, having proved their worth and moved to 2-4 against the Top 50. Remember, too, that in my ACC Contention Roadmap only one win in this road trip was necessary. They can still get that, and, though I wouldn't go so far as to say it's a must-win, a loss could be the start of an ugly, trademark Maryland slump. It's a very important game, now much moreso than the Clemson game just before it. I have a feeling it will be a very long four days.
7 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I'll look on the bright side...
…the Terps played a horrible game and somehow were in a tie game with 5:30 left.
That’s either a good sign for Maryland, or an indication of just how bad Clemson is.
http://newyorksportsjerk.blogspot.com/
by New York Sports Jerk on Feb 1, 2010 10:56 AM EST reply actions
At least UNC lost to UVA at home
the bigger they are, the harder they fall
Not a big loss
Losing to a good ACC opponent on the road is not a huge deal. A game like that is a free roll – a win is a big positive, a loss is a small negative. We do need to pick off a team on the road to get to 10 ACC wins, but we’ll have a few other good opportunities.
Terps looked horrible for stretches, but the ball bounced the wrong way all game, and it wouldn’t have taken much to pull off a win. Not pleased, but I think it’ll be easy to move past this one. A win against FSU will quickly wipe away any concern.
I cant say either side would've been happy with how that game was played
even if it had turned out opposite scorewise.
Neither of us played well, it was an ugly hard-fought game.
While this wasn't a 'bad loss'...
because you have to give Clemson’s interior D credit, I was disheartened by our lack of ability to close it out. Despite how sloppy we were, we had every opportunity to close this thing out down the stretch. Missed layups, poor decisions etc led this to unravel. A good team finds a way to get a few must have baskets in a close game. That’s all it would’ve taken here.
GV - a great player?
not worried about the loss, but GV disaapears at big moments. I know he was amazing against UNC last year, but this year he was horrible when we had 3 straight possessions to tie Nova. He could have beaten WF at the end of reguulation or OT. Last night he missed a 3 footer when we were up two and then he missed another short shot when the game was tied. To be a great player he needs to shine in big moments.
We have to improve on offense and rebounding to win on the road
The team is doing well at Comcast. Our three seniors and Sean have scored at will at times and we’ve needed Jordan mostly for rebounding and D. We can rely on 3s and mid-range jumpers to carry the day. Whatever inside scoring we get is a bonus. However, we can’t do the same thing on the road. Looking at the Clemson and Wake games, there are three areas where we have to change and improve on offense. First, we have be aggressive in receiving passes. Clemson did a great job of stopping Greivis and Eric and making them start our flex from near mid-court. It made their first passes long and easier to intercept. Instead of coming up to receive passes and even blocking out their defenders to be in a better position to receive a pass, the wings hung back and forced Greivis and Eric to throw pinpoint passes. In wasn’t just limited to starting the flex. We were not aggressive in receiving passes in breaking the press nor in running the flex. We’re going to see the same kind of defense from Duke, UVA, FSU, and some others. We need to recognize that we have to work hard to complete passes in road games. Second, we can’t rely on perimeter and mid-range shooting to carry the day on the road. Fighting to just run the offense takes anyone out of rhythm which makes shooting more difficult. The lighting and backgound is different. No crowd support means you can feel tiredness more. So, shooting percentages just go down on the road. An inside game makes a huge difference especially if it can get us to the foul line. That means getting Jordan more directly involved with the offense. Plus, when Landon is matched against someone like Grant or Aminu, it becomes even more important. Landon just can’t score against taller, quicker players like them. Jordan will make mistakes but he is coming on strong and looks like he is ready to do more scoring. Third, we need to improve our rebounding. Jordan is definitely getting better. Plus, when he or Sean get both hands on the ball, they can bring it down. By comparison, Landon is not getting the job done and Dino doesn’t do much better. It is not lack of effort. Physically, Landon is just overmatched at times. I don’t know the answer. Does James need to get more minutes playing alonside Jordan, i.e., Jordan would do our frontline scoring and James would be there for D and rebounding? Should GW try Landon at the 3? I think we can improve our passing and get more scoring from Jordan. I don’t see a simple solution to improving our rebounding problems.

by 











