Orlando
04-10-2014, 09:52 AM
Since we have a new coach I figure the value of one vs the other is on the table for discussion since we don't know how he will play it. I know Duke has always done the exhibitions and not the scrimmages so I am curious to see what direction we take.
I can see the attraction of a controlled scrimmage. The coaches have the ability to control what they work on and can point the scrimmages to need areas. However, I prefer the exhibitions. There is a serious difference in playing in NBA style arenas and high school gyms. A poorly attended game for Marquette is probably larger than any crowd the young kids have played in front of. I like playing two games that don't count to get the young kids acclimated to the environment. As we saw last year if the early season cupcake games don't go as planned, you can rob your young players of some important development. Despite what some people think losing the exhibitions does not hurt you at all, so it really gives you the chance to throw your young players into the deep end without taking any risks. Many DI power teams have lost these games and gone on to have great seasons.
The other thing I like about the exhibitions is that they are better for the fans. You get to see what the product looks like. People are chomping at the bit for info and when the team does the controlled scrimmages, the thirst for information inevitably leads to insider leaks that are either too optimistic or too dire. I have never heard somone say the scrimmage went OK. We were either world beaters or we sucked. I would rather just see for myself. I also believe that DII and DIII teams that are playing like it is their Super Bowl provide some pressure that a unviewed scrimmage against another D1 team does not. I really enjoyed the UW-Stevens Pointe game that one year and they gave a very good Marquette team all they could handle.
Lastly, if the gate from the exhibition games allows us to play more home and homes and fewer 300-350 RPI teams that can only help. Anyway, those are the reasons, I prefer exhibitions. Whot does everyone else think.
I can see the attraction of a controlled scrimmage. The coaches have the ability to control what they work on and can point the scrimmages to need areas. However, I prefer the exhibitions. There is a serious difference in playing in NBA style arenas and high school gyms. A poorly attended game for Marquette is probably larger than any crowd the young kids have played in front of. I like playing two games that don't count to get the young kids acclimated to the environment. As we saw last year if the early season cupcake games don't go as planned, you can rob your young players of some important development. Despite what some people think losing the exhibitions does not hurt you at all, so it really gives you the chance to throw your young players into the deep end without taking any risks. Many DI power teams have lost these games and gone on to have great seasons.
The other thing I like about the exhibitions is that they are better for the fans. You get to see what the product looks like. People are chomping at the bit for info and when the team does the controlled scrimmages, the thirst for information inevitably leads to insider leaks that are either too optimistic or too dire. I have never heard somone say the scrimmage went OK. We were either world beaters or we sucked. I would rather just see for myself. I also believe that DII and DIII teams that are playing like it is their Super Bowl provide some pressure that a unviewed scrimmage against another D1 team does not. I really enjoyed the UW-Stevens Pointe game that one year and they gave a very good Marquette team all they could handle.
Lastly, if the gate from the exhibition games allows us to play more home and homes and fewer 300-350 RPI teams that can only help. Anyway, those are the reasons, I prefer exhibitions. Whot does everyone else think.