Pack Wins Opener 69-53

09-10 Basketball General92

RALEIGH — N.C. State wants to win with its offense running through Tracy Smith. The Wolfpack also has to learn to how win without its big man.

With Smith in foul trouble, N.C. State struggled to survive against a Georgia State team filled with ACC castoffs on Thursday night. Ultimately, Smith got on the court long enough to offset a miserable shooting effort and lead the Wolfpack to a 69-53 win over the Panthers in the season-opener.

Smith’s game-high 18 points and 11 rebounds, in only 25 minutes, were enough for N.C. State’s 16th straight season-opening win. A late 18-5 run, capped by a Scott Wood layup at 3:42, brought the previously lifeless crowd of 9,502 at the RBC Center to its feet and allowed them to exhale.

–Link to Statefansnation message board discussion of the game

–Shooting a concern for the Pack

-Box Score

–Link to Gopack story, coaches quotes, and player interviews.

09-10 Basketball General

92 Responses to Pack Wins Opener 69-53

  1. coach13 11/13/2009 at 10:40 AM #

    Dude…he went and finished college so he could get the gig, regardless how it started he wanted the job, damn if I would go back to school if I didn’t want it bad…maybe the idea grew on him after he first said no, and was I wrong in that nobody else worth a crap wanted it as well?

  2. BJD95 11/13/2009 at 10:45 AM #

    He’s another extremely borderline academic case.

  3. TOB4PREZ 11/13/2009 at 10:46 AM #

    The term “playing hard” is normally used to describe a player that isn’t very talented…but is giving all that he has. It’s a sad day when it becomes necessary to use that phrase in describing the starters and key reserves.
    ———————————————————————
    And yet last year’s team was never a threat to be called that.
    I’ll take hustle and guts over big time prospects that mope and whine (see- Costner) all day, every day.

  4. primacyone 11/13/2009 at 10:47 AM #

    VAWOLF 82 SAID “The term “playing hard” is normally used to describe a player that isn’t very talented…but is giving all that he has. It’s a sad day when it becomes necessary to use that phrase in describing the starters and key reserves.”

    I was using the term “playing hard” to describe this year’s team against last years team and not relating it to talent at all. Nothing more, nothing less.

    I see your point, but that’s not the context I intended in my description of playing hard. Like I said I did not walk out of there pissed off due to lack of effort like I did last year. Me not being pissed off however does not mean we are going to win the conference.

  5. packthis2 11/13/2009 at 11:01 AM #

    I hope you are right I am far from Raleigh and rely on packpass which was down again for me last night. The accounts I have heard is that we did not play hard ,I will asume by the score uptempo did not occur as well?

  6. primacyone 11/13/2009 at 11:01 AM #

    “He’s another extremely borderline academic case” with a National Championship Ring.

    FTFY

    If you like the X’s and O’s of Sendeck better than you like the X’s and O’s of Lowe . . . . I don’t what to say. We have seen some serious in game coaching succuss with Lowe in the past – some individaul plays, some complete game plans. I actually think Lowe is the best in-game coach we have had since V. I really do. I’m not saying he’s the greatest on the planet, but the best we have had since V. He’s had some good stuff. The stuff he put on the floor with Engin was some pretty dang good stuff.

  7. BJD95 11/13/2009 at 11:01 AM #

    I don’t know why we have to re-hash this so many times, but the search was the problem (Fowler had no “B list” and was obsessed with getting a name guy), not that nobody would take our job.

    Quite frankly, no other major D-1 program would have hired Lowe, so the premise that he was “the best coach we could get” only makes sense if you somehow believe ours is the worst major college job in the nation.

  8. BJD95 11/13/2009 at 11:05 AM #

    The academic case remark referred to why Cothron didn’t sign – not Lowe.

    I have no idea what Lowe’s academics were coming into NC State in 1980. There’s really no reason to go into any great detail regarding his degree situation.

  9. Thinkpack17 11/13/2009 at 11:06 AM #

    ^^Not sad for me. Oliver Purnell’s squads make a living off of it, I’d love to see us play a game like his kids.

    Maybe that’s why our talented players didn’t play hard. They didn’t want to be confused with one of those untalented players that do (as always Big Ben is the exception).

  10. ldr of the pk 75 11/13/2009 at 11:06 AM #

    Everyone is correct in not reading too much into an opening game. We are young, it showed. Mistakes were made, as is the case in every programs early going. Certainly you don’t think even UNX played flawless against the two inferiors they’ve played to date. And certainly not to the level they will in March.

    Most importantly we won. I don’t care what level you play at, an opening win has positives. I was only able to catch the first half, but was impressed with at least trying to find a way to the paint. Disappointed in 3pt shots, don’t know, first night jitters, poor shot selection? We need to work on shooting percentage all the way around. But again, it was the first game and a win, so a good night all in all.

    This isn’t a comment on the game and may be out of place, but I find it interesting in todays Charlotte Observer, that the lead article is about UNX and Duke laying in wait as another big national recruit makes his decision. Nowhere did I see mention of our Top 25 committment from Ryan Harrow.

    I’ll agree with some previous comments on what may or may not be any ability of Coach Lowe and staff to develop any of our recruits, but by god he’s certainly got a better stable of recruits coming in than anything we’ve recently witnessed. The potential to climb out of the basement is there. Let’s hope it pans out.

  11. primacyone 11/13/2009 at 11:08 AM #

    Gotcha BJD95 and in that case I’m in total agreement.

  12. BJD95 11/13/2009 at 11:13 AM #

    Go back and read our archives if you want some specifics. You don’t have to trust our sourcing or believe us if you want, but we’ve laid out far more than “opinion.”

  13. theghost 11/13/2009 at 11:16 AM #

    I think BJD is right that not too much should be made of the first game either way, but I’ll take being upset with a 16-point win over a CAA school instead of a loss to New Orleans. Hopefully Degand and Howell can continue to improve the situation.

    Interesting to see how the depth holds up with three straight in Tampa next week. Hoping there’s enough left in the tank to kick jeff lebo’s @&& on night 3.

  14. Thinkpack17 11/13/2009 at 11:18 AM #

    Breaking defenses down off the dribble will be a very important aspect of our game. It has been said that Javi felt he could be the guy to do that this year. I hope that’s the case.

  15. Thinkpack17 11/13/2009 at 11:20 AM #

    I never bought into the Rick Barnes argument either. I would have loved to have him…still would, but I just don’t see the evidence.

  16. choppack1 11/13/2009 at 11:27 AM #

    The description I read in the paper today – and one that I read on the forums last night said that the team was basically “listless” for much of the first half.

    To me – that’s a huge red flag. This is the first game of the season – it shouldn’t be too difficult to get “up”. If there’s one thing I’d love to see Sidney work on – it’s getting these kids to play hard on every possession for all 40 minutes.

    Aside from that – it sounds like our D is improved. It also sounds like Vanderberg will be able to help defensively in the post – it’s nice timing that many teams won’t exactly have “beasts” down low.

    We’ll see – like I said on the forums – it’s not a great start, but it’s not a bad one either.

  17. PackMan97 11/13/2009 at 11:28 AM #

    “We are all torn about Lowe. We don’t think he’s a great coach (me included) and we want the Pack to win at the same time. WELL, if they win then Lowe is guaranteed to stay around…the ultimate catch 22. Do we hope the pack fells so Lowe might get fired? or hope the recruits and his coaching improve and we start competing seriously with the rest of the ACC?” -coach13

    Dumbest post in a long time. Just as with Herb…the coach’s fortunes rise or fall with the championships and the W-L column. If Herb had in year 9 won an ACC title and gone to a FF, he’d have been given a hero’s welcome and would likely still be here. As fans we care about winning more than most other things. It’s the same with Lowe. I could care less who is our coach (within reason, no scum) as long as we win.

  18. BJD95 11/13/2009 at 11:28 AM #

    Good to great coaches don’t worry about what happens if they fail. They want the necessary tools to win championships.

    Rick Barnes has said that he will never work for Lee Fowler, and Sean Miller let the same thing be known right before talking the Arizona job.

    And again, you’re perfectly entitled not to believe our sourcing, but to keep spouting YOUR stuff as “fact” and our sourced reports as “opinion” is very tiresome and won’t be tolerated.

    Barnes is simple, although we didn’t get wind of it in real time. He told us to make our best offer first, and we didn’t. We upped the ante later, but he is a man of his word and did what he said we would if we held back on him (negotiated new deal with Texas).

  19. bradleyb123 11/13/2009 at 11:28 AM #

    ^^^ “[Sidney Lowe] SHOULD be fired after this year, but won’t ever be fired as long as Fowler is protected.” — BJD95

    THIS is a prime example of why some of us perceive this website as overly negative. Many of the biggest voices here post this type of comment periodically. Notice there is not even a condition attached to that comment. Sidney’s team is 1-0, and NOBODY knows what will happen the rest of this year. What if we finish in the top-half of the ACC? What if we make the postseason, and in particular, the NCAAT? What if we finish above .500 in the ACC? Should Sidney still be fired?

    I don’t know what will happen with State this year. But these comments are premature and (IMO) uncalled-for at this point. This just adds to the perception by outsiders that Sidney is on the hotseat. I used to be afraid that this kind of negativity from our own fans would hurt recruiting. Thankfully, it appears it has not.

  20. BJD95 11/13/2009 at 11:30 AM #

    Ditto what 97 said. And frankly, no amount of Lowe failure will lead to a coaching change as long as he’s protected by his high-roller golf buddy.

    That’s NC State in a nutshell for you.

  21. BJD95 11/13/2009 at 11:35 AM #

    I should have added the condition “assuming we suck as everyone (Fowler and Lowe included) expects this year.”

    Certainly, if we make the dance this year, I will get off his back, and gladly so. But if Lowe and Fowler are doing everything in their power to play the WTNY card (in public and private), then why should I have to take a “wait and see” attitude?

    Again, if you don’t like the fact that ONE OF MANY moderators of our blog has a strongly negative opinion regarding the state of our hoops program, you don’t have to post here. But don’t waste bandwidth bitching about “negative agendas” when I call ’em like I see ’em.

  22. bradleyb123 11/13/2009 at 11:36 AM #

    As for my thoughts on the game, we ran up a fairly nice lead despite not playing particularly well, blew the lead, but then played well down the stretch. I was glad to see us hang in there and fight through the adversity. Scott Wood was 1-6 from downtown last night. I don’t believe that will happen very often. Keep in mind, we had a LOT of freshmen playing in their very first official game. There was probably more butterflies than we will ever know in their stomachs last night. Quite possibly, some nervous vomiting before the game and at halftime. At least we played AWFUL, and still won by 16 against an arguably veteran team. How often would we have shot 3-for-16 from behind the arc last year and still won the game?

    I’m not being overly optimistic. I was disappointed with the showing last night. But I also know it was the first game for a lot of players. And like the old saying goes, I’d rather play bad and win than play well and lose. Because I believe we’ll have better games going forward. Most nights we’ll hit more threes than that.

  23. bradleyb123 11/13/2009 at 11:39 AM #

    BJD95, I can handle being negative. I just think it should be FAIR negativity. I just thought it was premature to say Sidney should be fired at the end of the season after the season opener, a game in which we played right awful and still won by 16.

    Did Sidney do anything particularly wrong last night? Our guys weren’t hitting shots. We missed several free throws, too. Did something happen that you thought was Sid’s fault?

  24. section2chuck 11/13/2009 at 11:43 AM #

    I also agree the video intro, was pretty terrible. Why can’t the PR and Marketing Dept get anything right? How hard is it to promote free tickets to a game if you bring 5 canned foods? The was only a header on gopack.com about it, and when you clicked on it, all it did was take you back to the home page,wtf? Also the video intro, this is 100th season, and we come off looking so amatuer..why cant you have a montage starting with Everett Case, shots of early Reynolds, Dixie Classic, ACC Titles, then into the 60’s with Press Maravich, then the 70’s with Norm Sloan, DT, Towe, Burleson, the ’74 Titles Run, the ACC titles, the ’73 undefeated season, the upset over 7 time champ UCLA in ’74, then into the 80’s with Jimmy V, the ’83 title game, with the Billy Packer call at the end with the Whittenburg to Charles dunk, and Jimmy V running around, and all the scenes from the celebration, the ’87 ACC title win over UNC, etc. And then find some stuff from the 90’s etc.. How fricken hard would that of been to put together, I mean this is our 100th season.

  25. Thinkpack17 11/13/2009 at 11:44 AM #

    “Again, if you don’t like the fact that ONE OF MANY moderators of our blog has a strongly negative opinion regarding the state of our hoops program, you don’t have to post here. But don’t waste bandwidth bitching about “negative agendas” when I call ‘em like I see ‘em.”

    And I am VERY careful not to use the “N” word when describing posters here. So I would like the same courtesy. If you are truly unbiased I’d like the same moderator backlash when I am called, delusional, “Lee Fowler”, or any of that other crap when I post something positive about the program. I’m just calling ’em like I see ’em.

1 2 3 4

Leave a Reply