MBB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[badgerwarhawk]

The WARHAWKS lost last night 70-64 to 10th ranked Augustana in Rock Island.  Three point baskets were the difference with Augustana going 10-21 and the WARHAWKS connecting on only 4 of 22 attempts.  The WARHAWKS never led in the contest as Augustana started hot shooting 56% from the floor including 7-12 from beyond the arc and had leads as big as 17 points before the WARHAWKS cut the difference to 10, 36-36, at the half.  Antone Bryd finished with 21 points and Chris Davis had a double-double 14 points, 14 rebounds.  Alex Edmunds (10) and Cody Odegaard (10) also scored in double figures.  DJ Danzler and Phil Negri each had 4 assists.

[badgerwarhawk]

LaCrosse's Tony Mane was selected for this week's D3hoops.com team of the week.

[bulk19]

Manor's definitely is more spectac, partly bcuz of his "hang time" afterward, and partly bcuz the camera is closer to the action. And uwrf is right--his block may be even more attention getting.

But why so much excitement about dunks?To me, the most spectacular, and difficult, feat in basketball is the "needle thread" bounce pass, the one that hits the cutter, in traffic, from a distance. I don't see You Tube shots of great passes, or even hear annoouncers give credit to assists most of the time. Why is that?

Amen and amen, Fred. The beautiful pass that catches the defense unawares and creates an easy basket is the best play in basketball to watch, because it involves two teammates rather than just one player (hey, does anybody remember that this is a team game?); the degree of difficulty is higher; the guy who does the spectacular end of it isn't the guy who gets the glory; and it involves the fundamental skill of passing (sorry to say it, kids, but dunking is not a fundamental basketball skill).

Hey, get off of my lawn, you damned kids!

Hey - who hijacked this conversation?  I believe the topic was about dunks right? Not about fundamental basketball skills.    Now don't get me wrong, I love the backdoor cut & bounce pass as much as any old timer, but I'm new school enough to love a good resounding dunk.  I'll take two more Mr. Tillema, Mr. Manor.  

I did!  And if you come in my neighborhood, there ain't no freebies here. You ain't dunking on me! I'm sending you to the line, to the stripe, to see if you can capitalize on that charity! We'll see if you are good enough to make a pair while I talk trash before you toe it up. (I won't talk while you are shooting, but I might stick out my toungue and whisper "Noonans." 

[East Beast]

Part of me wanted to ask how much of it really fell on the coach's shoulders as opposed to the players... but when you look at what appears to be necessary in terms of depth, that comes from recruiting.  And yes, to some extent the really good programs over recruit... but that's necessary on this level because of the nature of non-scholarship athletics.

I think this is one of UWO's biggest downfalls.....  It seems like they "target" a certain number of kids, (let's just say 8 for example.)  Well out of those 8, they lose 3-4 to other schools that were recruiting them as well.  Then with the remaing 4-5, 2-3 of them aren't willing to put in the time needed and either hang it up after a year.  That leaves you with only 2 or 3 kids to build around, and that doesn't even take into consideration the kid who doesn't develop much.

With that recruiting philosophy, you'll get a solid group every once in awhile, but not often enough to sustain any long-term success.  When you do get a solid group, you really have to "make hay!!!"

Thanks for making my point for me.  I couldn't have said it better myself. 

I think Capelle, Gibson and Jahnke had the support needed to go a long way.....and they went nowhere.  They just didn't get it right likely for all the reasons above.   Again, my opinion, we can differ, I am not interested in a protracted argument about the ability of coaches.  If the UW-O administration is willing to accept mediocrity, who am I to expect more?  I got a great education there which allows me to attend 60 plus games a year--I am just more choosy about that.

Hope they prove me wrong. 

If they had the support they needed, then it's on the players, not the coach.  If they didn't (i.e. recruiting deficiency) then it's on the coach.

I know that we all want our teams to be "up there" and playing in late February and March, but the fact of the matter is that not every team can do that. 

But it isn't like Oshkosh hasn't had recent success.  They've been the farthest of all conference teams not named Stevens Point since Eau Claire lost the championship in 1999-00. 

I have mentioned that before, but since that would be viewed as a positive for both UWO and Coach Van Dellen, East Beast chooses to ignore it instead.....   Just like someone else who used to frequent the boards......

We were talking about what might have been, not what was achieved.  I know that is difficult for many of you.  I asked to end this conversation a lot of posts ago and I will no longer participate even if cubs baits me to do so.  Again, I hope the Titans prove me wrong and live up to their potential.

[cubs]

We were talking about what might have been, not what was achieved.  I know that is difficult for many of you.  I asked to end this conversation a lot of posts ago and I will no longer participate even if cubs baits me to do so.  Again, I hope the Titans prove me wrong and live up to their potential.

Silly me, here I thought what actually happened on the court held more weight than hypotheticals.....  

Anyway, in response to the bolded part, let's see if you can make it at least a day before you take your next shot at UWO or TVD.  The last time you told us you were dropping it, you didn't even make it 24 hours before you came back with a "I wish my alma mater would do that" statement.....  

[John Gleich]

We were talking about what might have been, not what was achieved.  I know that is difficult for many of you.  I asked to end this conversation a lot of posts ago and I will no longer participate even if cubs baits me to do so.  Again, I hope the Titans prove me wrong and live up to their potential.

OK, fine, if you're done, then you're done.  But I think you've got delusions of grandeur if you think that those Oshkosh teams should have been winning national championships.  If we're going to talk about what might have been, then let's talk about the UWSP juggernaut that has won the national championship each year for the last decade... if they played their best game, every single game, then I could easily forsee that happening!

Or swap SP with Whitewater.  These have been the two programs of the last decade.

Sound like an outlandish statement?  It's no more outlandish than you saying that Oshkosh should have done more with their personnel.  Sure, if they were on, then they could have done better than 2nd in conference... but even the year they took second, they were 3 games behind SP. 

Everybody else has risen and fallen.  La Crosse, Stout, and Platteville have all made it to the NCAA tournament, RF has won a conference title.  Only Eau Claire and Superior have stayed in the bottom half of the conference for the entire decade, and Superior is on the rise.  Even EC is above .500 in conference right now (though I don't think that will last).

Everybody has talent.  That's what makes this the best conference in the land.  It isn't just flowery language.  It is a fact that on any given night, any team can beat another team.  We see it year after year... the bottom tier teams playing with or beating the top tier teams.  Anybody can do it... at least on one night.

But the depth that it takes to win a conference title and or to make a deep run in the NCAA tournament is very rare.  Oshkosh had it for a bit, but they HAVEN'T had it since.  There was no way they could play "up to their potential" when they were as thin as they were.  Sure, they could have some great games and maybe even knock off a top team or two... but the season is a grind.  It's long and this league is physical.  Even the best players in the peak physical condition will wear down over time, especially when other teams have more guys who are more fresh.

Look, nobody is demanding that you accept mediocrity (if, indeed, mediocrity is what is occurring).  As an aside, I downplayed Oshkosh's NCAA history earlier... they made the NCAA tournament 5/8 years between 95-96 and 02-03, culminating in the Elite 8 appearance in 02-03.  You want to deal in what might have been... but those are the facts. 

Any team that plays as well as it can possibly play every game will play better over the season than if they play well in some and not so good in others.  That's a no brainer.  But it's also naive.  This is life, man, as the saying goes, poop occurs, and nobody plays 100% each game out.  It's been over a decade since Platteville went undefeated and I don't see that happening from anyone in the country any time soon, let alone from the WIAC again.

[East Beast]

We were talking about what might have been, not what was achieved.  I know that is difficult for many of you.  I asked to end this conversation a lot of posts ago and I will no longer participate even if cubs baits me to do so.  Again, I hope the Titans prove me wrong and live up to their potential.

OK, fine, if you're done, then you're done.  But I think you've got delusions of grandeur if you think that those Oshkosh teams should have been winning national championships.  If we're going to talk about what might have been, then let's talk about the UWSP juggernaut that has won the national championship each year for the last decade... if they played their best game, every single game, then I could easily forsee that happening!

Or swap SP with Whitewater.  These have been the two programs of the last decade.

Sound like an outlandish statement?  It's no more outlandish than you saying that Oshkosh should have done more with their personnel.  Sure, if they were on, then they could have done better than 2nd in conference... but even the year they took second, they were 3 games behind SP. 

Everybody else has risen and fallen.  La Crosse, Stout, and Platteville have all made it to the NCAA tournament, RF has won a conference title.  Only Eau Claire and Superior have stayed in the bottom half of the conference for the entire decade, and Superior is on the rise.  Even EC is above .500 in conference right now (though I don't think that will last).

Everybody has talent.  That's what makes this the best conference in the land.  It isn't just flowery language.  It is a fact that on any given night, any team can beat another team.  We see it year after year... the bottom tier teams playing with or beating the top tier teams.  Anybody can do it... at least on one night.

But the depth that it takes to win a conference title and or to make a deep run in the NCAA tournament is very rare.  Oshkosh had it for a bit, but they HAVEN'T had it since.  There was no way they could play "up to their potential" when they were as thin as they were.  Sure, they could have some great games and maybe even knock off a top team or two... but the season is a grind.  It's long and this league is physical.  Even the best players in the peak physical condition will wear down over time, especially when other teams have more guys who are more fresh.

Look, nobody is demanding that you accept mediocrity (if, indeed, mediocrity is what is occurring).  As an aside, I downplayed Oshkosh's NCAA history earlier... they made the NCAA tournament 5/8 years between 95-96 and 02-03, culminating in the Elite 8 appearance in 02-03.  You want to deal in what might have been... but those are the facts. 

Any team that plays as well as it can possibly play every game will play better over the season than if they play well in some and not so good in others.  That's a no brainer.  But it's also naive.  This is life, man, as the saying goes, poop occurs, and nobody plays 100% each game out.  It's been over a decade since Platteville went undefeated and I don't see that happening from anyone in the country any time soon, let alone from the WIAC again.

I said I am out.

[Just Bill]

Yes, we wouldn't want any discussion on a discussion board.

[nca11]

does uwrf have one loss or two losses?  i thought they had two, but the top 25 poll says they only have one.  either way, a great start to the season for the falcons.

[East Beast]

Yes, we wouldn't want any discussion on a discussion board.

Sorry. 

[stoutfan1]

does uwrf have one loss or two losses?  i thought they had two, but the top 25 poll says they only have one.  either way, a great start to the season for the falcons.

River Falls has 2 losses St. Thomas(MN) and St. Thomas (TX)

[chmarx]

Yes, we wouldn't want any discussion on a discussion board.

Sorry. 

One more post about not posting.   

[John Gleich]

We'll let EB talk about how he's not talking anymore if he wants... but let's talk about something else.

From over on the fantasy board... is Mahlon Thomas honestly done?  And unless he's ineligible based on this last semester, I don't know how he can be ineligible.  People said he had been enrolled 10 semesters, but I didn't think that D-III had a clock the same way the scholarship divisions did.

[Just Bill]

We'll let EB talk about how he's not talking anymore if he wants... but let's talk about something else.

From over on the fantasy board... is Mahlon Thomas honestly done?  And unless he's ineligible based on this last semester, I don't know how he can be ineligible.  People said he had been enrolled 10 semesters, but I didn't think that D-III had a clock the same way the scholarship divisions did.

Really, PS???  You thought you could just keep playing forever?  D-III certainly does have a 10-semester clock, just like every other division.

[John Gleich]

We'll let EB talk about how he's not talking anymore if he wants... but let's talk about something else.

From over on the fantasy board... is Mahlon Thomas honestly done?  And unless he's ineligible based on this last semester, I don't know how he can be ineligible.  People said he had been enrolled 10 semesters, but I didn't think that D-III had a clock the same way the scholarship divisions did.

Really, PS???  You thought you could just keep playing forever?  D-III certainly does have a 10-semester clock, just like every other division.

No, I didn't think you could keep playing forever.  If I did, then I'd still be playing!

Unless I'm understanding what 10 semesters that people are talking about...

Let's say that somebody starts college and doesn't play sports for the first two years of college.

Does this then mean that, when they start playing their third year, they aren't able to play four full seasons?  That doesn't seem right.