UW-L's schedule isn't posted yet for next year however a little bird told me this week that they are playing UWGB next November.  That should be interesting.  Anyone want to post what they think Warner (and company) will (or won't) be able to do against the Phoenix?

Quote from: mab on February 27, 2006, 07:46:31 PM
Every team that got in deserves to be there, and good luck to them all, but the NCAA might need to reevaluate their criteria that allowed UWL to leap frog over UWSP for a bid.  UWL did real well with their non-conference games in Nov and Dec, but non-conference games are always going to be an uneven playing field.  For example, with a new coach and a lot of new players, UWSP needed to focus more on building for the conference season than just winning games at the beginning of the season.  UWSP was the better team once it really mattered in Jan and Feb, finishing ahead of UWL in the standings, and beating UWL in both head to head games.  There seems to be too much weight put on non-conference games.  Here is my modest proposal, for what it is worth.  Come up with some formula for rating conferences based on their performance in recent NCAA tournaments, and their performance in the current season's non-conference games.  Then assign at large bids to the conferences base on those ratings.  Then decide which teams get the conference's bids based on conference standings.

I rarely post on this site but sometimes a post is silly enough that I need to.  I give the coaches, players a lot of credit at Point because they did a lot this year with a lot of question marks in the beginning of the season.  But Mab, if you're looking into conference, even if LaX couldn't get Point... what about LaX getting Stout once, Osh 2/3 times and losing "close" in the one loss to them and then Point playing arguably "defenseless" at Oshkosh earlier in Jan/Feb when Point was supposidly BETTER than LaX.  Your argument isn't very good with all due respect.  There always seems to be win/loss triangles in the WIAC-its the way this conference is, so you really do need to go to Old schools argument as follows to figure it out.

In terms of the formula, you are arguing for the same thing that's been "asked for" on this site for years.  Good luck getting it.

Quote from: Old School on February 27, 2006, 08:24:02 PM

Re:  Pointers

Though Point swept La Crosse during the year, La Crosse didn't lose to Clarke, Edgewood or Lakeland...all in-region nonconference games they should've won.

Quote from: stoutguy on February 02, 2006, 08:50:46 AM
I have always felt that Ed Andrist has not had as much respect in this league as he deserves, but this year his coaching has been special.  This team is better this year because they play with discipline, patience, and have learned to be in control when things are not going well.

Open to discussion, but I (and many of us) have always considered the WIAC to be a league based on the principles mentioned in your second sentence.  Probably the reason for the reduced respect because of Stout's tendency to shake those principles up the last few years prior.  What can us WIAC'ers say... we are stubborn and don't like change .  I for one also think Eddie has done a nice job.

Quote from: Old School on January 29, 2006, 03:23:50 PM
One last note, I think Jason and Brad Kalsow's dad said this at the game (my friend can confirm this)...he made a comment about the 5th starter sitting in his dorm room back in Point.  I believe he was referring to his son, Brad, who is not playing basketball this year.  From his comment, I would translate that into something like it was Semling's fault.  But, from what I've heard is that Brad only wanted to play with his brother last year and actually likes football better.  Not sure if that's the truth or not.  Just a little interesting tibit my friend and I heard at the game.  Thoughts Point fans?

Quote from: BanditUWSP on January 29, 2006, 04:51:42 PM
From how the article was written, it didn't sound like there were any underlying problems.  Maybe his dad just meant that he might have been a starter if he'd have played this season.  I think a lot of us had figured him to be a starter this year.  I hope he considers basketball next season.

Don't both of you think if there was some Kalsow/Semling issues that Jason probably would not be sitting on Semlings bench regardless of who's accordance it fell under?  Just a thought.

Figured I'd start some discussion... who's the next WIAC team to potentially crack the top 25?  If La Crosse gets WW on Wednesday, is it possible they get a look?  With only three losses, they can't be far off.

I guess I probably haven't seen Warning enough over the years to have a good idea what's good or bad for him.  Just know I was impressed to see something different then right shoulder fake, come back left shoulder.  Good game nonetheless.

I think I was guilty a few months back of being critical of a post"er" who was complementing the contributions of Pete Warning.  I had replied how he has NEVER gone right shoulder on a post move and is a very predictable player.  I then challenge any poster to let me know if they see him go right shoulder on a post move the rest of the season.  Well I was at the Osh/LaX game and saw Warning stick it to me and make a right shoulder move (he still shot the ball with his right had directly next to the defender and ended up getting fouled).  Anyway, he played a solid reserve role in their win the other night and has noticeably worked on his game.

Quote from: jdowney on January 04, 2006, 07:44:25 PM
I noticed the Superior mens and womens coaching jobs are both open. Maybe I didnt search enough in the latest conversations but what happened?

If I remember correctly, the Superior men's job was hired on an interim level this past summer/fall.  Same deal as what happened at Point but UWSP finalized theirs before the season and Semling received the head coaching job outright.  Its just a posting of the position so an official search can happen after the season.  Don't know about the women's position but I'm going to take an educated guess and say its the same circumstances.

Quote from: benoitwi on December 13, 2005, 08:02:05 PM
I see that UWW Plays some school from Michigan on Wednesday night.  Does anyone know anything about these guys. 

I know their head coach is Kurt Soderberg, brother of Brad, former coach at Northland and Marquette High.  That's about as much help as I am.

I would like some help here... I saw Nate Severson's name in the Osh/Stout box score.  Wasn't he off the team last year for one reason or another and I guess he is back now?  Anyone have the story?

Quote from: cubs on December 01, 2005, 09:34:03 PM

Quote from: Champ99 on December 01, 2005, 06:15:17 PM
I took it that Oshosh fouled too more than in shooting  or bonus situations and Point subsequently went to the line more than Oshkosh. 

Huh???  Please clarify......

Cub:
His quote of the game made it sound that Oshkosh simply committed more fouls than Point and Point subsequently went to the line more than Oshkosh.  It wasn't on the officials but on Oshkosh for fouling too much.  Keep in mind I was not at the game, just giving you another side of how I interpreted the post.
I realized after I posted that last night it sounded funny and I didn't take the time to fix it.  Sorry.

Quote from: cubs on December 01, 2005, 04:37:58 PM

Quote from: Mr. Downtown on December 01, 2005, 01:17:52 PM
When I look at the stat sheet between UW-Stevens Point and UW-Overated, I noticed one big thing.  Difference in free throws.  But when the other team takes 15 more free throws then you, and you lose around that amount, you really have to look into that number. I mean, Doedens even fouled out!

I'm so sick of hearing that as an excuse!!!!!  Say what you want about TVD, but he will never blame an outcome on the refs, regardless of whether it's a 2 or 20 point game. 

Cubs: I could be wrong and please let me know if I am, but I didn't take Mr. Downtown's comment to mean one sided officiating... I took it that Oshosh fouled too more than in shooting  or bonus situations and Point subsequently went to the line more than Oshkosh.  Just thought I would throw that in as a possible clarification.

Quote from: laxeagles1 on November 27, 2005, 02:23:47 AM
right, i agree I never questioned his recruiting but he was a terrible coach the last few years..........hopefully he has it turned around........will take more for me to get on the Koelbl bandwagon......always have been on the LAX bandwagon, and never have been detrimental to the players, just the system........

I was not a big fan but I drew the line after they lost to superior or river falls at the end of last year in a game they should have won.......It's a good thing he can recruit..........

I am not surprised at the success.......the players are awesome, i am very surprised the coach has finally put the talent together in the right way........sometimes it takes awhile for someone to 'get it' and unfortunately it took koelbl 3 years to figure out how to properly utilize his talent, better late than never!

Trust me I am byfar not the only fan who feels this way, many others do I am just not afraid to say what I wanna say........always said i would give credit if, and a big if, he showed competency and turned it around and it looks like he might have finally turned the corner

Most fans, posters and readers of this site won't argue NCAA D3 basketball being a special thing because of its humbleness, blue collar image compared to its scholarship counterparts in the NCAA.

When you, Laxeagles and others on this site choose to discuss coaching and coaches need to exhibit some patience and here's  a couple out of many reasons why:

1) The NCAA Division III philosophy states that it "...is primarily concerned with the student athlete experience and the completion of all academic programs by the student athlete."  Why does this matter?  Simple.  New coaches come into programs with previous players at all levels, HS on up through NBA.  The difference is, at High School and D3 (and some D2's) its not possible to wipe you roster clean and recruit 15 of the best players "unsigned" in the country like you can in NCAA D1.  DIII athletics are there for the students and their college experience (which is why we love it) and therefore, rosters often stay in tact a little more in comparison to higher levels.  There's not always much a coach can do initially but be patient with himself and the team he inherited.

2)  This matters a ton at UW-L because of 4 coaches in 5 years.  You're trying to tell me LaXeagles that Koelbl should meet all these winning expectations in one or two years with players who were either recruited by (or not recruited and showed up on the doorstep of) the previous 3 coaches?  I've heard your replies about "I just wanted them to make the playoffs and win a few more games... I wasn't looking for a league title."  The truth is I don't think you realize how tough of a job and how LONG the road is to take over a D3 program, let alone in the WIAC.  Most will agree, despite the high level of talent the WIAC has, it is a systematic "quality of program" type of league.  Where coaches focus on execution of small details versus who has the better players.  Point arguably has had some of the best talent.... but if you watch two seperate game tapes from either championship season, I would bet you would see a very high level of consistency in the execution of Bennet's philosophy in his players.  That didn't happen overnight or with just a great couple of years recruiting.

3) Most state D3 schools provide their coaches with 3-5 year initial contracts.  I am confident this is because that is the "expected window" for them to get the pieces in place to provide a good experience FOR THE PLAYERS, not impatient fans.

With all due respect, Laxeagles, since I know you're a fan like the rest of us, my point to you and everyone else, is sometimes you need to look into things a little bit more before making rediculous comments about a program.  Save that "immediate results" talk for the succeedor to Coach K at Duke (when it happens) or when the Wisconsin Badgers football team maybe fumbles around a little next year... no pun intended!

Quote from: kluch on October 20, 2005, 06:53:50 AM
As a side note to Warning, it's almost impossible to replace a guy like that. He is a force in the post and a guy that is very tough to muscle out in the box, he compares to Nick Smith in size with a tad more touch around the basket. 6-7 250lb. athletes that can run the floor are hard to come by and Pete deserves the big senior year he'll get playing opposite to Kerry Gibson.

Hello everyone... LONG time reader, 1st and maybe last time poster.  This one dug at me, well after I was finsished laughing.  I like Pete Warning... I do.  I think he plays hard and does a lot of the things the WIAC is known for from a blue collar point of view.  However, we're talking about a guy who played 11 minutes a game in 04-05, and averaged 4 pts and 1.7 rbs per game... hardly stats for a guy how isn't "replaceable."  I want anyone who watches UW-O play this year to let me know if they EVER see him do anything in the post beside going over his left shoulder.  He will either go with a move directly to his left shoulder or fake right shoulder and go left.  If he was more than one dimensional, you may see his numbers jump.  With that reply in place, I hope the best for Warning and the Titans.  Go Oshkosh and WIAC.