Minnesota @ #24 Ohio State

• thedynasty1998

  

  I am thrilled with the win. I think it's the best OSU has looked this season. And the point isn't whether the guys are content being on scholarship, it's about rewarding guys who do what is asked of them.
  
  Believe me, I understand how bad the OSU bench is and why it's bad. And I didn't say you clear your bench, but what is hurt if you put in the 7 footer instead of Madsen, or spell Diebler a few minutes with PJ Hill?
• thedynasty1998

  

  But it is a GOOD thing when we are complaining about how Matta should handle a blowout win.
• centralbucksfan

  I personally have seen BIG leads dwindle very quickly when teams have cleared the bench. Even yesterday, Minn cut a 28pt lead, to 18 with over 3 min to go. That was with most of the OSU starters on the floor yet. Can you imagine if Matta would have cleared the bench what "could" have happened?
  Like it or not...a 20pt win over a decent opponent looks MUCH more impressive then a 10 or less win. Especially when the game was on NATIONAL TV.
  All coaches are naturally insecure people...and there is no worse feeling then having a big lead, and trying to decide WHEN to put the bench in. I don't know one coach who wouldn't want to get everybody some playing time. But again, coaches at this level are paid BIG DOLLARS, are under a HUGE amount of pressure to WIN. And that is all that really matters at this level. Again, this is basketball, its a numbers game and not everyone is going to get time.
• thedynasty1998

  

  Who said anything about "clearing the bench"? I thought you were smart enough to realize the difference from clearing a bench and working someone into the rotation.
  
  And what good coach have you met that is insecure? All good coaches are confident and ego driven, not sure why you would think they are insecure?
• bulldog8

  vball10set.....It doesn't take an Einstein, a rocket scientist, or a person with extensive coaching experience to realize that you take your starters out when you are up by 25+ points. Anyone who has played any sport in their life understands that when you're up big, you not only get the other guys some minutes for their future development as players, but you log them some minutes for their hard work and dedication to the team. Your intransigence regarding this matter fully illustrates your inability to see the other side of a debate. Granted I understand that there is a huge dropoff in OSU's bench, but do you really think the Buckeyes are going to blow a 25 point lead if PJ Hill steps in for Turner to give him a break? I assume that with Hill, Buford, Diebler, Lighty, and Lauderdale on the floor, this group would still be competitive against a very average Minnesota team. Similarly, what if the Bucks substituted Hill and Simmons in for Diebler and Buford/Lighty? Granted this would be a much smaller unit, but Matta could then incorporate some full court press and traps with Turner since Hill and Simmons are both very quick and aggressive on the defensive side of the ball. I think this would be a great change of pace to let Hill and Simmons come in and run around like maniacs a bit, force some turnovers, and keep the opponent guessing with what's coming. I don't know more than Thad Matta - hell i've already indicated that i'm just a college chemistry student about to graduate and pursue my PhD. However, I did play sports my whole life and I didn't know that just because I don't have basketball coaching experience, that I revoke my right to provide my opinion. I have done nothing more than provide my opinion on this thread, yet no one except thedynasty can understand where i'm coming from. It's no skin off my back, the only thing achieved by all this arguing is that it has fully depicted deficiencies in several of your educational backgrounds in that you cannot appreciate another's opinion. Yes, I understand that Matta wanted to blow Minnesota out for what happened years ago and what happened earlier this year when tempers flared at the conclusion of Minnesota's win. Yes, I understand that OSU's bench is not THAT good. Yes, I understand that you don't want to pull your starters because you might blow the lead. All i'm saying is that we really couldn't get two more guys a little more involved for the sake of our starters' legs?
  
  CBF.....That's great that you would act properly in that situation and allow your lack of playing time to provide motivation for you to work harder instead of pout, but you must remember that not all college student-athletes carry this same strength of character. Unfortunately, this is a time in sports where athletes expect everything to be handed to them and often get very upset when they don't get playing time. It's a very selfish point of view and focuses more on "I" than "team", but it's an unavoidable truth in today's world. People are selfish, they get upset, and their effort then reflects this mentality. It's unfortunate that sometimes coaches have to play moderator to keep morale high throughout the season, but it happens everywhere. I'm sure some of the young men on OSU's bench are fine with the lack of playing time, but if you mean to tell me that the thought of "why didn't I see the floor a little more" didn't cross at least one player's mind yesterday, then you are ignorant to the truth that is college athletics.
  
  Wooball....Granted 5 minutes in a Minnesota game doesn't prepare some 2nd string players for the tournament, but getting Simmons and Hill 10 minutes a game by rotating them in with the proper personel groupings and surrounding them with 3 of our other solid guards will get them the necessary experience so that they don't look like deer in the headlights come tourney time. You say that if the Bucks get in foul trouble in the tournament that they are done, but why not try and prepare yourself to avoid this situation if possible? Why not have some guys who have seen the floor and are comfortable playing with the starters so that if someone gets in some foul trouble, some damage control can be taken to help weather the storm and keep us in the game until that starter can get back in the game and maybe contribute to make a run for the W. I know that our 6-8 players aren't the best, but sometimes you have to make the best of the situation you are given....quite frankly I think that rotating these guys in to contribute minutes and rest the starters's legs will help tremendously come March. As thedynasty mentioned, i'm not saying put PJ Hill or Simmons in when the game is on the line against MSU or Purdue. All i'm proposing is to work these guys in one at a time for a couple minutes at a time from the opening tip. If the game gets tight down the stretch, you obviously stick with your studs. However, rotating them in also allows you to make adjustments and keep someone in if they get hot toward the end of the game.
  
  Thedynasty.....Hats off to you for being able to see both sides of this argument.
• centralbucksfan

  thedynasty1998 wrote: Who said anything about "clearing the bench"? I thought you were smart enough to realize the difference from clearing a bench and working someone into the rotation.
  
  And what good coach have you met that is insecure? All good coaches are confident and ego driven, not sure why you would think they are insecure?

  Well then, what would you call Madsen and Simmons doing in the game? Lauderdale and Buford were on the bench. Then bring in Hill? Who as of late, has been nothing short of crap. Simmons, Hill and Madsen ...together would be an average JUCO team. As mentioned, that lead went from 28-18 quickly with starts. I can only imagine if all three were in at sametime.
  But what do I know, I am not near as smart as you think you are.
• ytownfootball

  

  How many pages of repeating the same things over and over again is it going to take to realize no one is changing the others mind?
• centralbucksfan

  ytownfootball wrote: How many pages of repeating the same things over and over again is it going to take to realize no one is changing the others mind?

  Ha, good point. All agree to disagree. Although I am siding with a guy who has been a VERY successful college basketball coach at the highest level. Which IMO, mean a heck of a lot more then the armchair coaches on here.
• tiger1990

  How cool was it to see the 1960 National Championship squad again? Got to meet Jerry Lucas last summer at my brother-in-law's house in Middletown. What an impressive individual...!
• bulldog8

  ytownfootball wrote: How many pages of repeating the same things over and over again is it going to take to realize no one is changing the others mind?

  Apparently it takes about 7 pages for someone to possibly realize that getting some other guys involved won't blow a 25 point lead.
• thedynasty1998

  

  It's just that some people are so stubborn and so blind to another's opinion.
  
  CBF just can't comprehend the difference from clearing a bench and working guys into a rotation. As bulldog said above, you can keep Turner and Diebler on the court and sub in maybe PJ Hill and Simmons. Or maybe just one.
  
  It's just mind boggling to me sometimes how stubborn people can be in their opinions and the pedestal they put these coaches on.
• thedynasty1998

  

  bulldog8 wrote: Unfortunately, this is a time in sports where athletes expect everything to be handed to them and often get very upset when they don't get playing time. It's a very selfish point of view and focuses more on "I" than "team", but it's an unavoidable truth in today's world. People are selfish, they get upset, and their effort then reflects this mentality.

  For as much coaching as CBF has done and how involved he is with OSU with going to practices and all, its amazing how out of touch he is with todays student athletes.
• Wooball

  

  bulldog8 wrote:
  Wooball....Granted 5 minutes in a Minnesota game doesn't prepare some 2nd string players for the tournament, but getting Simmons and Hill 10 minutes a game by rotating them in with the proper personel groupings and surrounding them with 3 of our other solid guards will get them the necessary experience so that they don't look like deer in the headlights come tourney time. You say that if the Bucks get in foul trouble in the tournament that they are done, but why not try and prepare yourself to avoid this situation if possible? Why not have some guys who have seen the floor and are comfortable playing with the starters so that if someone gets in some foul trouble, some damage control can be taken to help weather the storm and keep us in the game until that starter can get back in the game and maybe contribute to make a run for the W. I know that our 6-8 players aren't the best, but sometimes you have to make the best of the situation you are given....quite frankly I think that rotating these guys in to contribute minutes and rest the starters's legs will help tremendously come March. As thedynasty mentioned, i'm not saying put PJ Hill or Simmons in when the game is on the line against MSU or Purdue. All i'm proposing is to work these guys in one at a time for a couple minutes at a time from the opening tip. If the game gets tight down the stretch, you obviously stick with your studs. However, rotating them in also allows you to make adjustments and keep someone in if they get hot toward the end of the game.
  argument.

  
  In my opinion you are going to get the same out of PJ Hill if he gets to play 10-15 minutes every game, or if he only plays every other game due to fouls or injury. He is an energy guy that doesn't create any offense for anyone and on defense is consistently out of position when we are in zone. He leaves his zone far too often to help when it is not needed, leaving a shooter uncontested.
  
  Jeremie Simmons is a guy I don't mind seeing on the floor and he is a shooter that would benefit from the extra PT (which he did get in the game against Minny). He has been battling through an injury which cost him some minutes lately, but is a guy that consistently will get about 10 minutes of burn. He is also a guy that brings little to the table besides a jump shot. Jon Diebler gets killed on these boards for just being a jump shooter (which he does a lot more in my opinion) yet people are clamoring for Simmons to be playing more minutes.
  
  We don't really know what the two Euros bring to the table because of their limited opportunities, but I think it is pretty telling of their current abilities that they can not steal some of Kyle Madsen's minutes.
  
  I think everyone will agree that our bench has pretty much been trash the last 2 years. Do we beat WVU if Hill, Simmons and Big Z or Kecman played 5-10 minutes in that game allowing Turner and others so rest. IMO, absolutely not, in fact I believe the score would have been worse. When this team gets beat in the tournament, it won't be because Thad didn't go to the current bench players for some extra minutes. It will be because OSU struggles to rebound out of the zone, struggles to stop good post players, doesn't get out on shooters (@ Minnesota, @ Purdue 1st half, @ WVU 2nd half).
  
  Now if you just want to argue that Thad owes it to a couple of these guys to get some minutes in a game that appears to be over in the 2nd half, that's fine and I probably agree with that. But some coaches leave their starters in longer than others in blowouts and obviously Matta is one of those coaches.
• bulldog8

  Wooball wrote:

  bulldog8 wrote:
  Wooball....Granted 5 minutes in a Minnesota game doesn't prepare some 2nd string players for the tournament, but getting Simmons and Hill 10 minutes a game by rotating them in with the proper personel groupings and surrounding them with 3 of our other solid guards will get them the necessary experience so that they don't look like deer in the headlights come tourney time. You say that if the Bucks get in foul trouble in the tournament that they are done, but why not try and prepare yourself to avoid this situation if possible? Why not have some guys who have seen the floor and are comfortable playing with the starters so that if someone gets in some foul trouble, some damage control can be taken to help weather the storm and keep us in the game until that starter can get back in the game and maybe contribute to make a run for the W. I know that our 6-8 players aren't the best, but sometimes you have to make the best of the situation you are given....quite frankly I think that rotating these guys in to contribute minutes and rest the starters's legs will help tremendously come March. As thedynasty mentioned, i'm not saying put PJ Hill or Simmons in when the game is on the line against MSU or Purdue. All i'm proposing is to work these guys in one at a time for a couple minutes at a time from the opening tip. If the game gets tight down the stretch, you obviously stick with your studs. However, rotating them in also allows you to make adjustments and keep someone in if they get hot toward the end of the game.
  argument.

  
  In my opinion you are going to get the same out of PJ Hill if he gets to play 10-15 minutes every game, or if he only plays every other game due to fouls or injury. He is an energy guy that doesn't create any offense for anyone and on defense is consistently out of position when we are in zone. He leaves his zone far too often to help when it is not needed, leaving a shooter uncontested.
  
  Jeremie Simmons is a guy I don't mind seeing on the floor and he is a shooter that would benefit from the extra PT (which he did get in the game against Minny). He has been battling through an injury which cost him some minutes lately, but is a guy that consistently will get about 10 minutes of burn. He is also a guy that brings little to the table besides a jump shot. Jon Diebler gets killed on these boards for just being a jump shooter (which he does a lot more in my opinion) yet people are clamoring for Simmons to be playing more minutes.
  
  We don't really know what the two Euros bring to the table because of their limited opportunities, but I think it is pretty telling of their current abilities that they can not steal some of Kyle Madsen's minutes.
  
  I think everyone will agree that our bench has pretty much been trash the last 2 years. Do we beat WVU if Hill, Simmons and Big Z or Kecman played 5-10 minutes in that game allowing Turner and others so rest. IMO, absolutely not, in fact I believe the score would have been worse. When this team gets beat in the tournament, it won't be because Thad didn't go to the current bench players for some extra minutes. It will be because OSU struggles to rebound out of the zone, struggles to stop good post players, doesn't get out on shooters (@ Minnesota, @ Purdue 1st half, @ WVU 2nd half).
  
  Now if you just want to argue that Thad owes it to a couple of these guys to get some minutes in a game that appears to be over in the 2nd half, that's fine and I probably agree with that. But some coaches leave their starters in longer than others in blowouts and obviously Matta is one of those coaches.

  Finally some solid feedback. I understand where you are coming from and agree that we will be beat on the boards come tourney time. Let's hope that for some strange reason, Turner will decide to come back and benefit from a solid bench in his senior year with the arrival of three very good freshmen.
• thedynasty1998

  

  Wooball wrote:
  

  Now if you just want to argue that Thad owes it to a couple of these guys to get some minutes in a game that appears to be over in the 2nd half, that's fine and I probably agree with that. But some coaches leave their starters in longer than others in blowouts and obviously Matta is one of those coaches.
  [/quote]
  
  That's my sole argument. I agree that PJ Hill playing in March doesn't help this team. I understand the lack of depth and would be scared to death if anyone on the bench has to play more than 8 minutes in a meaningful game, because there is a HUGE dropoff.
  
  And I appreciate you understanding both sides of the argument.
  
  I get it if people don't care about seeing the bench guys. But the excuse some are using that the game wasn't in hand or Matta didn't have enough confidence in the lead with 10 minutes left is BS.
• HeathAlum21

  I don't know...I like PJ Hill in for 4-5 minutes a game. I think his energy brings something to the table despite his flaws.
• Big Gain

  bulldog8 wrote:

  Big Gain wrote: There are normally 14 scholarship players on a D1 basketball team. You people are espousing the theory that any one of the 9 non-starters could be a cancer to the team if they don't get the minutes they think they deserve in every game? You're talking about the selfish, I before team, attitude of this generation, which will lead to the downfall of society.
  
  Why basketball?? Is there a substitution pattern in Baseball, Softball, Volleyball and Soccer? The only football players that play, other than the last couple minutes of a game, are the ones that are almost the equal of the starters. Tennis, Golf, Cross Country, Track, Wrestling, Swimming and Gymnastics there is ZERO substitution.
  
  WHY only in basketball is there a chance of a cancer developing Because an unknowledgeable FAN thinks there should be substitutions??

  I was going to let this go, but after rereading this comment, I couldn't help but realize how illogical your thinking is. You've done a great job of comparing apples to oranges. Apparently you forgot that basketball is not the same as those other sports you've mentioned. If substitutions aren't important, then why do we rarely see a team win a national championship in basketball who only focuses on their starting 5. Sorry, but I don't know many players that can endure a 30 game season, conference tournament, and then the NCAA tourney without much of a break. I guarantee this team will look dead come March because of their lack of depth.

  Compare apples to oranges???? You're illogical. I listed the next 12 most highly visible varsity sports. ONCE AGAIN.....WHY????? is basketball the ONLY sport where a coach MUST substitute what a ?fan? thinks is required to keep bench players happy. Why is it that in ALL 12 of the listed varsity sports no one thinks a non-starter, or non top tier scholarship athlete, or not to be letter winner MUST play/compete/take part in/earn a letter in so as not to be a cancer in their sport? Why aren't the athletes in those other sports going to be "dead" by end of the season championship time, because they aren't substituted for/ relieved/given time off/held out of competition???
  
  Your apple and orange comparisons are idiotic. If Ohio State plays Hill, Simmons and Z more minutes you're guaranteeing Ohio State will go further in the post season? The guaranteeing basketball GOD of of freehuddle has spoken!!!!
  
  Surely you aren't such a complete fool to think that 5-10 minutes in 1 or 2 games will make a huge difference in Turner, Buford, Lighty and Diebler not being "dead". The Minnesota game is the only Big Ten game thus far in which Ohio State has had a 20 point lead. PLEASE give us you estimation of how many more Big Ten games Ohio State will have a 20 point lead. We await your omnipotent brilliance. My estimation is there will be ZERO.
  
  Another very important question for Mr Know It All. If you were the coach of this team, knowing the lack of abilities of your bench, how big of a lead would you need to FIRST of all give Hill, Simmons and Z, enough minutes to keep them happy? Secondly, how big of a lead do you need to give Hill and Simmons significant minutes so that the Big Four gets enough rest to keep from being "dead"? AND ALSO, be 100% sure not to jeopardize winning the game? AGAIN, waiting to hear from your vast knowledge of what a top D1 coach thinks on the subject.
• Big Gain

  bulldog8 wrote: Big gain.....Your a clown and I don't give a hoot about what you think. 1) i'm not an unknowledgable teenager. I'm actually a well educated adult with more mental capabilities than yourself. 2) if you're a coach and you're more worried about gaining revenge over an event that happened 40 years ago, you're obviously not in it for the right reason. You're acting like I want Hill and Simmons to log 20-30 minutes each. All i'm proposing is that they cycle them into the rotation to get the studs some rest. It's a long season and relying on 5 guys all the way through March isn't going to get it done. I'm sure Matta could have sent an equal message and beat the Gophers by just as much if they rotated Hill and Simmons in each at a time with 3 of OSU's better guards
  
  CBF. I don't care if you're coaching pee wee, middle school, high school, college, or pro basketball - it's a grueling sport and very demanding on the players physically. If you don't reward your second string players every now and then, how motivated do you really think they will be at practice? I played college football and many years under coaches who don't care for their players - motivation to work hard fades quickly when you don't get a pat on the back occassionally.

  bulldog, it's much more embarrassing for a 30 something to sound and act like a teenager.
  
  You have WAY WAY to high of an opinion of yourself if you thank ANYONE on here gives a hoot what you THINK. I KNOW Matta knows more about his team and players than the sum total of all the Matta whiners on here know about his team. I KNOW Matta knows 100 times more about basketball than than anyone on here. I agree with Matta, you disagree. It's your right to have a differing opinion, I don't. It's your right to think your basketball knowledge is superior to Matta's. I'm not so silly. The Matta doubter/whiners are always saying, "I think..... ", Matta KNOWS. Please continue, it's comedic relief.
  
  I DID NOT say I knew the Minnesota Massacre had a bearing on the substitutions in this game. I did nothing more than throw out an example of the type an occurrence that could possibly be an influence in some small way. You have heard what Woody once said about going for a 2 point conversion at the end of a game with a big lead against Michigan haven't you?
  
  Do you see all of Ohio State's practices? Do you know all of the Ohio State players? How do you know what specific players think about their playing time? How do you know what specific players think about the roles they've been asked to perform for the good of THE TEAM? Who is more versed in the reasons each bench player plays the minutes they do? Who is more knowledgeable about basketball in general and this team and it's players specifically, YOU or Matta??
  
  We all await your answers to these pertinent queries.
• thedynasty1998

  

  I always thought you were a moron, but if you can't understand why comparing mens basketball is different than baseball, volleyball and soccer, you are even dumber than I could have anticipated. Even the most illogical of fans can understand the difference.
  
  I'm beginning to think you just like to argue no matter what common sense tells you.
• bulldog8

  Big gain.......Well for 1) I meant you were comparing apples to oranges because you were saying substitutions don't need to be made in basketball because they aren't made in the other mentioned sports. But yet you have failed to answer my question of how many bball teams have won a national championship relying only on 5 guys. 2) How about you learn to read because in every one of my posts i've said that I don't know any more than Matta does - just merely providing my opinion, which obviously is unacceptable to you. I understand the drop off on our bench, all i'm saying is get some guys in for experience and morale purposes, which i've already discussed numerous times and in detail on the previous 7 pages. Maybe if you actually "listened" to what I was saying instead of just getting all pissed off and going off on your tantrum, you would actually understand. 3) You don't care what I have to say, fair enough....I don't care what you have to say. You just made two posts asking a bunch of questions i've already addressed. Go back and read if you are so inquisitive. I understand that actually reading and understanding what someone is trying to say is too hard for you....You are obviously more worried about taking someone's opinion and belittling it. Shame on me for voicing my opinion.
• bulldog8

  Evidently you haven't read anything i've said thus far because I haven't mentioned Z in ANY of my posts. This is simply you manipulating what I say. And when have I EVER guaranteed that if OSU plays a few more guys that they will go further in March? However, I did guarantee that these guys will be drained come tournament time. If you think that these young men can play 35+ minutes a game for 30 games, conference tournaments, and then through the field of 64 without showing signs of fatigue, then you obviously have never played any competitive sports or you are completely ignorant to reality.
  
  Also, if you read what i've said, my proposal is not to get these guys pointless minutes at the end of the game. Do I think it's a nice gesture to get your second string guys some time when you are blowing another team out? Of course. But more importantly, I think that Simmons and Hill can be efficiently rotated in from the opening tip with other combinations of our top 4 guards to help limit some of the mileage on our top players' legs. Yes, I think our starting 5 is very good, but I don't foresee a huge dropoff with Hill surrounded by Diebler, Buford, Lighty, and Lauderdale. The talent of our starting 5 is obviously far superior than our bench, but what's more important to you, winning season games by 25+ points or preparing your guys so that they peak at the right time in March and are best prepared for a run in the tournament?
  
  Finally, you're looking too far into what i'm saying. What does it matter if I know the players on the team? I'm making a general opinion based on the mentality of most college athletes of this era. Once again, if you don't think at least one player on that bench is questioning why he didn't see the floor a little more, you're crazy.
  
  I appreciate your support of Matta. The guy is a great coach. You make it appear like i'm a true hater and don't believe in what he is trying to accomplish with these young men. I simply asked on Sunday during the game why we can't get a few more guys involved to save our legs. I swear everyone on here is all roided up or something because everyone just explodes and freaks out. I didn't think that getting TWO more players involved was such an outlandish request. Irregardless, Matta has this team playing well and i'm happy that all we have to argue about right now is the playing time of our bench guys. We could have a lot bigger issues to worry about - for example, the issues UNC is having this season Listen, i'm no basketball genius or else I would be coaching somewhere and making much more money than I am as a student. Is OSU successful playing just 5 guys? Yes. Do I think the team would benefit from getting a few more guys some minutes? Sure. That's not my decision to make. The one thing that does impress me about Matta's coaching though is that he seems to have the same agenda as Tressel does in football - teach the kids lessons that will pertain to life in general, not just X's and O's about the game.
  
  Oh, and just to prove myself wrong and show i'm not completely biased towards my side of this debate, I calculated what OSU is averaging in the first half versus the second half of their 22 games thus far this season. On average, they score 37.2 points in the first half and 37.7 points in the second half. Therefore, it doesn't appear that they are tiring out too much towards the end of the game like I previously indicated. It will, however, be interesting to see if this trend changes at all as the season wears on
• Big Gain

  thedynasty1998 wrote: I always thought you were a moron, but if you can't understand why comparing mens basketball is different than baseball, volleyball and soccer, you are even dumber than I could have anticipated. Even the most illogical of fans can understand the difference.
  
  I'm beginning to think you just like to argue no matter what common sense tells you.

  Imbecile, non-starters in baseball, volleyball and soccer don't covet a modicum of playing time? You're the dumbest if you think they don't want to see the field.
• Big Gain

  bulldog8 wrote: Evidently you haven't read anything i've said thus far because I haven't mentioned Z in ANY of my posts. This is simply you manipulating what I say. And when have I EVER guaranteed that if OSU plays a few more guys that they will go further in March? However, I did guarantee that these guys will be drained come tournament time. If you think that these young men can play 35+ minutes a game for 30 games, conference tournaments, and then through the field of 64 without showing signs of fatigue, then you obviously have never played any competitive sports or you are completely ignorant to reality.
  
  Also, if you read what i've said, my proposal is not to get these guys pointless minutes at the end of the game. Do I think it's a nice gesture to get your second string guys some time when you are blowing another team out? Of course. But more importantly, I think that Simmons and Hill can be efficiently rotated in from the opening tip with other combinations of our top 4 guards to help limit some of the mileage on our top players' legs. Yes, I think our starting 5 is very good, but I don't foresee a huge dropoff with Hill surrounded by Diebler, Buford, Lighty, and Lauderdale. The talent of our starting 5 is obviously far superior than our bench, but what's more important to you, winning season games by 25+ points or preparing your guys so that they peak at the right time in March and are best prepared for a run in the tournament?
  
  Finally, you're looking too far into what i'm saying. What does it matter if I know the players on the team? I'm making a general opinion based on the mentality of most college athletes of this era. Once again, if you don't think at least one player on that bench is questioning why he didn't see the floor a little more, you're crazy.
  
  I appreciate your support of Matta. The guy is a great coach. You make it appear like i'm a true hater and don't believe in what he is trying to accomplish with these young men. I simply asked on Sunday during the game why we can't get a few more guys involved to save our legs. I swear everyone on here is all roided up or something because everyone just explodes and freaks out. I didn't think that getting TWO more players involved was such an outlandish request. Irregardless, Matta has this team playing well and i'm happy that all we have to argue about right now is the playing time of our bench guys. We could have a lot bigger issues to worry about - for example, the issues UNC is having this season Listen, i'm no basketball genius or else I would be coaching somewhere and making much more money than I am as a student. Is OSU successful playing just 5 guys? Yes. Do I think the team would benefit from getting a few more guys some minutes? Sure. That's not my decision to make. The one thing that does impress me about Matta's coaching though is that he seems to have the same agenda as Tressel does in football - teach the kids lessons that will pertain to life in general, not just X's and O's about the game.
  
  Oh, and just to prove myself wrong and show i'm not completely biased towards my side of this debate, I calculated what OSU is averaging in the first half versus the second half of their 22 games thus far this season. On average, they score 37.2 points in the first half and 37.7 points in the second half. Therefore, it doesn't appear that they are tiring out too much towards the end of the game like I previously indicated. It will, however, be interesting to see if this trend changes at all as the season wears on

  Why discriminate against 7-footers? Why only lobby for short people to get playing time. Tall players can't be a cancer due to lack of playing time?
  
  This was the first game anyone complained about substitutions, because Ohio State led by 25 points. In order for Turner, Buford, Lighty and Diebler not to be "drained", then the vast majority of the remaining Big Ten games the Big Four will again have to shoot 70% from the field in nearly every game and get a 20 point lead by half time in almost every game. That is unlikely to happen once, if ever again. Even if it should happen once or twice, there is no way sitting the Big Four 5 or 10 minutes in a couple of games is going to keep them from getting "drained". If Hill and Simmons are rotated in and out for EVERY ONE of the Big Four when Ohio State is behind or leading by 5 or 10( the ONLY way to assure the Big Four from being "drained"), Matta would be jeopardizing winning games. Matta obviously doesn't trust Hill and Simmons to be on the floor together(the best way to rest the Big Four) when the game is on the line.
  
  One of the Big Four will get in foul trouble in a future game. When that happens Hill and or Simmons will be counted on to hold the score differential in place until the stater can return to the game. THEIR ROLES. Which they would much prefer, as opposed to mop up playing time.
  
  You might be right, Matta might have lost his only chance during the Big Ten schedule to keep a few bench players happy and give the Big Four 5-10 minutes of rest to keep them from being "drained".
  
  If you are REALLY perplexed by Matta's lack of subbing in the Minny game and REALLY need an answer to why Hill and Simmons didn't get more minutes, then this is the last place on earth to pose the query or seek an answer. You should e-mail Matta, or show up at practice and ask him why.
  
  If Matta had pulled a Bobby Knight freak out and threw a chair or choked a player, then that WOULD be worthy of discussion...... but the number of minutes of playing time for a couple of bench players in one game??? EIGHT FREAKING PAGES of bitching and moaning over trivialities?????
  
  BTW, a basketball team winning a National Championship riding the backs of 5 players? Lucas, Havlicek, Siegfried, Nowel and Roberts, Ohio State 1960. Five NBA players, of which 2 are in the NBA Hall of Fame. Bobby Knight was always asking for more playing time. Not even Bobby knight could be a cancer to a basketball team.
• bulldog8

  Well I thought the whole purpose of the huddle was to discuss things of this matter. Hell if we let people just do things and not question why they're doing them, we wouldn't really gain any ground in life. I'd much rather argue with you folks about this stuff than waste Matta's time with this discussion - remember, I am an OSU fan and wouldn't want to distract him from improving this team I completely understand where you guys are coming from in that the lineup is not as strong with Hill and Simmons in - it's hard to say if they would be able to hang. I just thought a 25 point lead might be a good opportunity to see what these guys have got.
• centralbucksfan

  bulldog8 wrote:
  Oh, and just to prove myself wrong and show i'm not completely biased towards my side of this debate, I calculated what OSU is averaging in the first half versus the second half of their 22 games thus far this season. On average, they score 37.2 points in the first half and 37.7 points in the second half. Therefore, it doesn't appear that they are tiring out too much towards the end of the game like I previously indicated. It will, however, be interesting to see if this trend changes at all as the season wears on

  I am not so sure that would even be accurate IF OSU was scoring less in second half to be honest. So many other variables could affect this, such as foul trouble, coaches adjustments at half, halftime scores, etc, etc.
  And no offense, but chances are, your going to be on here in March, when OSU does lose, claiming you were right...because it "looked" like they were worn down. When in fact, you nor anyone except the players/coaches will truely know this...even if they will. Odds are, OSU isn't going to make a run, as they are not as good as you think they are. As I said, they have a fine team that on any given day, could beat anyone. But to expect them to shoot and play very well, for 4-6 straight games, is not being realistic. Their margin of error is less then others that have better teams. The lack size and physicality on the front line will probably be their downfall IMO. If OSU doesn't shoot well, they are in trouble as thats their strength and they don't have an option to go to the post for easy buckets.
  Saying a team looks "tired" is an easy assumption. But its also only going to be an opinion at best.
  Could it happen? Certainly. But again, I personally don't buy into 18-21yrs olds getting that tired playing 2 games per week, with 2/3 days in between. We are talking about elite athletes who are conditioned year around.
  Does a bench help? Absolutely it does. When you have one or more of your starters not playing well/shooting well...to have another option is a thing of beauty. If your a team that likes to press, then obviously you do need fresh legs in the last 5 min when exerting that much energy. But other then that...I don't guy into being worn down. As I said, I have no doubt, because of the lack of depth, that Matta isn't pushing too hard, if at all during practices at this point in the season. Just my two cents.
  
  BTW, Simmons had been dealing with a nerve/eye issue the past few weeks. Thus the reason he hasn't been seeing the floor much.