Boston College Eagles Look to Soar Against Demon Deacons in Rematch
The Boston College Eagles, fresh off a gut-wrenching 62-61 loss to Duke, will look to earn their third win of the year in league play when they host the Wake Forest Demon Deacons Wednesday night.
If the Eagles are dwelling on coming ever-so-close to taking out Coach K’s Blue Devils, they certainly shouldn’t need much motivation to pay back Wake for a three-point loss, 75-72, back in January.
This season has been a trying one for coach Steve Donahue. His Eagles have dropped seven of their last eight contests. The lone bright spot was a 75-68 home win over Clemson.
BC is one of the youngest teams in the Atlantic Coast Conference. They have a total of 11 freshmen and sophomores on the team; the youth movement is underway for the Eagles. This will be a good test for the Eagles. We will see if they can correct some of their flaws from last time against the Deacons.
The first area BC needs to shore up is taking better care of the ball. The Eagles finished with 17 turnovers last time, compared to only 11 for Wake Forest. That is far too many extra possessions to give up, especially when playing a road game. Guard Joe Rahon had five by himself.
In addition to cutting back on the turnovers, BC needs to play better defense. They allowed the Deacons to shoot 51 percent from the field, whereas they knocked in only 42 percent of their shot attempts.
Rahon contributed to the Eagles’ shooting woes by missing all seven of his field goal attempts. The freshman finished with two points on the day. He averages 10 points per contest. BC will need a much better game out of Rahon the second time around.
One area where the Eagles excelled in was at the foul line. BC made 25 of its 33 shots. Guards Lonnie Jackson and Olivier Hanlon sank a combined 14-of-16 free throws. For the game, Wake converted only 10 of its 18 attempts. If BC wants to repeat its advantage from the charity stripe, Jackson and Hanlon will need to continue driving to the basket.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?