Quote from: stoutguy on February 01, 2009, 06:08:20 PM
I know you EC guys don't like to pull for us "Stoutguys" much, but how about on Wednesday night?  I am looking forward to watching a great battle.  I predict Stout catches Point looking ahead and pulls the upset.  Julia scores at least 26 for the 4th straight game and the bus pizza tastes the best that it has tasted all season.

I doubt Point will be looking ahead to Superior, their Saturday opponent.  I understand that some teams get caught looking one game ahead, but I have never heard of a team looking TWO games ahead.  By looking at box scores Point hasn't looked ahead all season.  I think Hirssig is going to get hers, but might not be enough.  I mean other than her, even though she is great, how many all-conference players do they really have?  As for the Pointers, they haven't lost a conference home game in two years.   

Quote from: buf on February 01, 2009, 04:18:18 PM

Englund explained some reasons on why they are playing the South Dakota game:

- Englunds former coach from when she played at Wyoming coached at South Dakota (he retired before this season).  It was scheduled last season when he was coaching.  Englund wanted to make it a commitment to play the game.

-A good opportunity to test her team.  Very good competition.

-To show what D3 has to offer.  How far is the gap between D1 and D3?

Coach Englund is a great coach.  She has great teams every year.  I think that they originally scheduled the SD game to test themselves.  Everyone knows she has a good team.  They have been ranked in top 10 for most of the year.  It was just unfortunate that it got pushed back to early Feb instead of mid December when it was supposed to be played.  Truth be told, this game is most likely going to hurt them more than help them. 

Looking at the Player of Week for this past week.  I am thinking it is between Hunter and Witt if they are nominated.  I gotta go with Hunter.  I am sure there will be other thoughts. 

Quote from: closetothechest on February 01, 2009, 10:36:04 PMShe has great teams every year. 

It's only been a few seasons ago that EC went 8 - 8 in back to back seasons (03-04 and 04-05).

Going .500 in back to back seasons in the WIAC does not constitute greatness.

Maybe I should have used good teams or said almost every year.  She has good teams almost every year.  Point taken.

I've seen pretty much every team now this year, and I have to say if I had a vote, Hirssig would be my POY, hands down. Maybe I'll change my mind with another look at EC Wednesday, but not sure who would impress me more.

Quote from: The Champ on February 02, 2009, 07:44:11 AM

Quote from: closetothechest on February 01, 2009, 10:36:04 PMShe has great teams every year. 

It's only been a few seasons ago that EC went 8 - 8 in back to back seasons (03-04 and 04-05).

Going .500 in back to back seasons in the WIAC does not constitute greatness.

EC was 12-4 in 03-04.  They went 8-8 in 04-05 and 05-06.  I think they struggled in 05-06 because Burns was injured most of the year.  She was only able to see the floor in 15 games.  I mean think about how it hurts to have your best player off the floor.  Is Stout, LC, or WW a .500 team with their best player only playing 15 games?  It isn't a stretch to say no. 

Quote from: The Champ on February 02, 2009, 07:44:11 AM

Quote from: closetothechest on February 01, 2009, 10:36:04 PMShe has great teams every year. 

It's only been a few seasons ago that EC went 8 - 8 in back to back seasons (03-04 and 04-05).

Going .500 in back to back seasons in the WIAC does not constitute greatness.

No, but having its last two coaches with .743 and .824 career winning percentages at UWEC constitutes a great D3 women's basketball program...

stoutguy - having a Blugold root for a Stout team? I don't know - that's like asking a Green Bay fan, especially some who live in GB, to root for the Chicago Bears! Not gonna happen! Ever!  Ha. 

(Sorry all you Minnesota or GB fans on the west side of the Wisconsin who think the Vikings are the Packers chief rivalry. They aren't, and never will be. It will always be Da Bears.)

Quote from: Usuallywrong24 on February 02, 2009, 12:51:46 PM

Quote from: The Champ on February 02, 2009, 07:44:11 AM

Quote from: closetothechest on February 01, 2009, 10:36:04 PMShe has great teams every year. 

It's only been a few seasons ago that EC went 8 - 8 in back to back seasons (03-04 and 04-05).

Going .500 in back to back seasons in the WIAC does not constitute greatness.

EC was 12-4 in 03-04.  They went 8-8 in 04-05 and 05-06.  I think they struggled in 05-06 because Burns was injured most of the year.  She was only able to see the floor in 15 games.  I mean think about how it hurts to have your best player off the floor.  Is Stout, LC, or WW a .500 team with their best player only playing 15 games?   It isn't a stretch to say no. 

That year La Crosse went 19-8 with their best player playing the first game and a half. Lindsay Wahl was out for the year as well. Obviously it's a big factor; but it can't really be an excuse.

At the same time, I think it was either that year or the year prior where Duoss missed a game for a wedding and Stout got beat by Point by about 30. Then Schulz I believe missed the game at Stout and they returned the favor with a beating; and their absences were obviously KEY reasons.

So I just contradicted myself

But I'll also say if two .500 years take away greatness; that's a tough pedestal to reach without falling off.

Quote from: Usuallywrong24 on February 02, 2009, 12:51:46 PMEC was 12-4 in 03-04.  They went 8-8 in 04-05 and 05-06. . 

I stand corrected...

Quote from: bulk19No, but having its last two coaches with .743 and .824 career winning percentages at UWEC constitutes a great D3 women's basketball program...

Which has nothing to do with my post in regards to TE not having "great teams every year" - unless you consider an 8 - 8 team great.

Quote from: billysBut I'll also say if two .500 years take away greatness; that's a tough pedestal to reach without falling off.

Two .500 years don't take away greatness from the overall program, but as stated above, an 8 - 8 team is not a great team, at least not in my opinion.

Just on Stevens Point's website.  First congratulations to Shirley Egner on earning her 350th collegiate win against the Falcons last Wednesday.  Great accomplishment!   

Also, it looks like they are raising quite a bit of money for their Pink Zone campaign.  Assistant coach Megan Wilson is going to shave her head if she can raise $2500 and is already a little over $2000.  Looks like she is going to get the last $500 and shave that head.  In addition to this, they have raised over $1800 for their charity, the St Michael's Hat and Wig Program, through fundraisers and silent auctions.  Looks like they are great people in addition to a great team. 

Quote from: closetothechest on February 03, 2009, 12:07:44 PMAssistant coach Megan Wilson is going to shave her head if she can raise $2500 and is already a little over $2000.  Looks like she is going to get the last $500 and shave that head. 

That's showing great commitment to a very worthwhile cause!  Kudos to her!!!

WIAC Top 25 teams:

Point is #2
UWEC is #5
UWW is #11
UWL with 11 receiving votes

Congrats to Heather Witt for making the D3Hoops team of the week and WIAC player of the week. Also congrats to Julia Hirssig for her continued fantastic play. JH could/should be a first team all american choice. 

Quote from: JMM on February 03, 2009, 09:24:33 PM
Congrats to Heather Witt for making the D3Hoops team of the week and WIAC player of the week. Also congrats to Julia Hirssig for her continued fantastic play. JH could/should be a first team all american choice. 

Well I will once again disagree with POW with Witt winning it over Hunter, not that it matters    .  Even though they played the same two teams and Hunter had better numbers, Witt got the honor.  Any thoughts?  Just a good discussion question.

                                  FG      3PT     FTS   ORB  DRB     RB     Fs      PTS     Asts    TOs  Blks   Steals     Minutes

30 Hunter, Mackenzie... * 11-17   2-2    8-16   1        6        7       3       32        4       1       1        4           35  W @ Sup
30 Hunter, Mackenzie... *   8-16   1-2    2-2     2        4        6       2       19        2       5       0        3           36   W @ WW

22  Witt, Heather  *           3-8      2-6     0-0    0       3        3        0        8         7       3       0       5           26  W vs Sup
22  Witt, Heather  *        11-21     2-5     4-4    0       4        4        2       28        3       2       0       4           34  W vs WW

Well, it's for sure that Hunter outscored Witt from the numbers, but...

Witt had 10 assists to Hunter's 6

Witt had only 5 turnovers to Hunter's 6

Witt had 9 steals to Hunter's 7

Witt shot 100% from the charity stripe to Hunter's 56%

Just sayin...

Maybe points scored isn't the only criteria used...