COLUMN: Loses don't matter now

From Lee Goldsmith's "Standing Room Only," Fall '95 It's kind of strange that as I exit stage left, the Penn basketball team is 0-2. After three years of awe-inspiring highlights and scintillating victories, you see, that just doesn't have much of a ring to it. Such is life, however, in the constantly-turning world of college hoops. It's easy to search for reasons. And in the wake of Penn's losses to Southern Cal and St. Louis, plenty of Quakers fans have begun to do just that. As far as I can tell, the search has not been especially difficult. There are plenty of explanations out there for Penn's early non-conference woes. The inexperience. The inability to execute in crunch time. The lack of depth. All of these are certainly factors. And in various situations, each became evident against USC last week and the Billikens Saturday. But let's keep things in perspective. Penn's primary concern this year -- the Ivy League schedule -- has not started yet. Sure, it would have been nice to open with a win at home or steal a road victory on ESPN. But in the big picture, neither loss is devastating. In fact, it's entirely possible that all three of the aforementioned problems will become less severe before Penn kicks off the Ancient Eight season at Princeton's Jadwin Gymnasium Jan. 6. The first two are in many ways linked. With only two players (senior co-captains Tim Krug and Ira Bowman) having received legitimate floor time before this season, inexperience was bound to be an issue. Despite their talents, Quakers like Jamie Lyren and Paul Romanczuk will need time to adjust to their new roles. It may take some time, but those adjustments will come. The Quakers are going to lose some December games in the process, but they'll be better because of that come February. Inexperience will haunt this bunch all season -- that's a fact. But as time goes by, its consequences will become less tragic. Simultaneously, of course, Penn's younger players will become more comfortable with each other and with Bowman and Krug. And then the costly crunch-time mistakes -- like Penn's critical defensive breakdowns late against USC and its frustrating turnovers late against St. Louis -- will become less frequent. Again, the problem may not go away. But it will get less severe by Ivy season. Then, of course, there is Penn's bench. This is a weakness that probably will not ameliorate itself -- if a team's roster lacks depth, then it lacks depth. But the simple truth is, in the Ivy League this will be the rule and not the exception. If Dunphy can get just a tiny contribution from his Bill Guthries and Frankie Browns, then the Quakers should fit right in against the likes of Brown and Yale. Wins won't come easy, but they'll be within reach. Despite its apparent stagnation, then, Penn could be just fine in the Ivy League. There is, however, one problem that will need fixing. Dunphy must find someone -- check that, anyone -- who can hit from behind the arc. Maybe it's Brown. Maybe it's Lyren. It might have been George Zaninovich. The most likely candidate will be Donald Moxley. But it better be someone. In their first two games, the Quakers have shot 12-for-47 from downtown -- good for a paltry 25.5 percent. With this team's level of talent, numbers like that just won't get it done. Maybe Penn will find the range, and maybe not. Someone else can write columns about it. Either way, I'll keep on cheering as loud as I possibly can. This basketball program has given me memories for a lifetime. And with one Ivy season left, I'm goin' nowhere fast.