MBB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[John Gleich]

I just don't see this as that big of a deal.

I agree and I think that's the same thing that the program at UWSP believes as well.

I respect Scott Williams a lot and I think he's done a great job covering the Pointers over the years. But this seems to me to be a bit of sensationalism instead of journalism... trying to make more of the story to get a big headline and sell some more newspapers.

I get, too, that the author of the article doesn't often pick the headline... but referring to Coach Bennett as "Ex-Coach?"

This is the hometown paper for the university that he helped bring to two national championships. His name is on the court. He's in both the UWSP and WBCA hall of fame.

They could have at least said "Former coach" "Past coach" or "HOF coach." Ex-coach sounds far too negative. But I guess it goes along with the tone of the articles as a whole.

[AppletonRocks]

Not sure I agree.  So if Semling knew he was wrong and did it, did he do in prior years when they won NCAA titles?  Should all WIAC school coaches get a "free day" or two to catch up?  Where does all this end?   

[bulk19]

UWEC's been trying to catch up since Ken Anderson left... 

I agree with John G and badgerwarhawk in that this UWSP story doesn't appear to be a big deal... John G may have nailed it - could be the Point Journal's attempt to sell papers and generate some hits on its website...

No harm, no foul... It does sound like some sour grapes, if tomt's account is accurate, a case of an anonymous Rudolph the red-nosed reindeer not being allowed to join in any reindeer games...

[John Gleich]

Not sure I agree.  So if Semling knew he was wrong and did it, did he do in prior years when they won NCAA titles?  Should all WIAC school coaches get a "free day" or two to catch up?  Where does all this end?   

Did you read the article?

Here are the proposed "sanctions" from UWSP:

After finishing its investigation and admitting to the violations, the university proposed a series of self-imposed actions, the chancellor said. Those include requiring additional training for coaches and employees on rule infractions; clarifying job descriptions for future monitoring of athletic facilities; improving the scheduling for the basketball facilities; and following up with the Student Government Association about the situation.

So... additional training, clarifying job descriptions, improving scheduling of facilities.

These penalties sound like they're related to small issues, overlooked things, not for intentional infractions that were done with impunity.

[ShineTime]

I spoke to someone who attended Trevor hass's wedding this past weekend and apparently a lot of people believe point is a legit national title contender with some of the guys coming in which surprised me.  I was thinking even with what they have coming in their looking at 3rd or 4th in Wiac.  La crosse and Oshkosh imo seem to have far more talent and whitewater will reload also.  What are your guys thoughts are the two guards point got via transfer really enough to propel them to a national championship don't they still need a real big man?

[Greek Tragedy]

...don't they still need a real big man?

When Point won the title in 2015, their "big man" was 6'4" Alex Richard. So to answer your question. No.     

[tomt4525]

I spoke to someone who attended Trevor hass's wedding this past weekend and apparently a lot of people believe point is a legit national title contender with some of the guys coming in which surprised me.  I was thinking even with what they have coming in their looking at 3rd or 4th in Wiac.  La crosse and Oshkosh imo seem to have far more talent and whitewater will reload also.  What are your guys thoughts are the two guards point got via transfer really enough to propel them to a national championship don't they still need a real big man?

I really like the makeup of next year's team as of now.  This past year was a 2 man show for the most part, many times it was frustrating for me to watch McGann and Pelkofer take shot after shot instead of playing team basketball.  I'm not saying they aren't good players, because they are very good players.  When the defense keys that much on two guys, you should get open shots for other guys at will.  Point didn't try to do that at all.  The 2015 Title Team shot ridiculously well from 3 point land, that really helped in opening up their offense...then they played lockdown defense for 40 minutes, that is a recipe for success.  I don't know them well, but the 2 transfers, Dodge and Delmore, should bring some very good outside shooting.  Statistically, they lacked consistent outside shooting last season.  This team can have that makeup offensively like the 2015 Team.  You get some shooters on the outside, have a guy or two who can slash to the bucket when they guard you too close....The bigs should be able to go 1 on 1 down on the post which almost always gets you a good shot, can't double team posts if you have guys shooting 40 percent from 3 point land all over the court.

The question mark for me right now will be if they can play that lockdown defense that Point has been known for.  I think they have a couple pieces defensively that play at that level.  I also think they have a few guys that need to make strides in that department over the offseason.

[John Gleich]

The question mark for me right now will be if they can play that lockdown defense that Point has been known for.  I think they have a couple pieces defensively that play at that level.  I also think they have a few guys that need to make strides in that department over the offseason.

See, to me, defense isn't much the issue. Point was 9th in the country in scoring defense last year, and as long as they play the slowest pace in the country, AND play good (not even great, but good) defense, then they'll keep the total score of their opponents at a "beatable level."

What I'm far more concerned about is the scoring. They were literally last in the country at points scored per game (62.2 ppg). I do think that the reliance on two guys was part of that cause, especially because it really seemed to get away of the team concept (ie getting teammates open and passing to the open guy).

[tomt4525]

The question mark for me right now will be if they can play that lockdown defense that Point has been known for.  I think they have a couple pieces defensively that play at that level.  I also think they have a few guys that need to make strides in that department over the offseason.

See, to me, defense isn't much the issue. Point was 9th in the country in scoring defense last year, and as long as they play the slowest pace in the country, AND play good (not even great, but good) defense, then they'll keep the total score of their opponents at a "beatable level."

What I'm far more concerned about is the scoring. They were literally last in the country at points scored per game (62.2 ppg). I do think that the reliance on two guys was part of that cause, especially because it really seemed to get away of the team concept (ie getting teammates open and passing to the open guy).

Good point about the defense John.  Putting stats into the equation, we really shouldn't worry about the overall team defense that Point has been known for.  My concerns are almost all on the offensive end but I feel like the pieces are in place this season for an offensive approach that is based around spreading the ball around.  Last year, you had 2 guys returning that were in the rotation on a National Championship team.  Everyone expected them to carry the scoring load, I didn't expect to what degree Pelkofer and McGann would carry the scoring load though.  I also think that the reliance on getting those 2 guys shots on most possessions really took away from the team's field goal percentage, they ended up taking a lot of tough shots when you could be passing around using all 5 guys until a good shot appears.

This is just me spitballin' and very well could turn out to be completely off mark, in fact last year I was way off as far as the rotation goes.  With that said, my thinking last year is that I didn't like playing 2 posts at the same time that weren't threats from outside the lane.  Semling played Retzlaff and Goedeke or Tauber or Gjertson or a mixture of those 4 on the floor at the same time.  How does that spread out the defense and create driving lanes and cutting lanes when 2 defenders don't need to leave the lane??  This year you have shooters, or atleast capable shooters...like Bublitz, Dodge, Delmore, Zuiker, Fredrickson, Nelson, Unteidt and Freeborn.  I would play the majority of each game with atleast 4 of those guys on the court.  Driving and cutting lanes should be open along with opening up space for a big to post up.  You still have to play match ups against some teams, if another team is really big...you probably won't want to have a small lineup on the court for the majority of game time. 

Like I said, my thought process could be way off...and quite frankly, probably will be....but I would put an emphasis on spreading the floor.  This gives yourself more options on offense. 

[AndOne]

...don't they still need a real big man?

When Point won the title in 2015, their "big man" was 6'4" Alex Richard. So to answer your question. No.     

This, of course, is reflective of the fact that over the last several years the trend in D3 basketball has been away from the traditional, one-dimensional, big man playing a true center/low post (5) position.
While the majority of players who man the 5 spot are taller than 6'4" it is not unusual at all to see a true PF, or even a SF, occupying what is normally thought of as the center position. This tendency has been exacerbated by the virtual disappearance in D3 of the true, back-to-the-basket, big man/center. Many, if not most, teams now play with a lineup composed of 3 guards and 2 forwards, or 2 guards and 3 forwards if they want to "go big." As we know, the 3rd guard or 3rd forward is now often referred to as a "wing." Either combination results in playing with no true/traditional center, as with the 2015 UWSP team.

[AndOne]

The question mark for me right now will be if they can play that lockdown defense that Point has been known for.  I think they have a couple pieces defensively that play at that level.  I also think they have a few guys that need to make strides in that department over the offseason.

See, to me, defense isn't much the issue. Point was 9th in the country in scoring defense last year, and as long as they play the slowest pace in the country, AND play good (not even great, but good) defense, then they'll keep the total score of their opponents at a "beatable level."

What I'm far more concerned about is the scoring. They were literally last in the country at points scored per game (62.2 ppg). I do think that the reliance on two guys was part of that cause, especially because it really seemed to get away of the team concept (ie getting teammates open and passing to the open guy).

Such a team (slow pace, great defensively, no or little low post presence/scoring) being especially vulnerable when facing an opponent who also prefers a slower pace, also plays tight defense, and does have a strong interior game.

[Pat Coleman]

I get, too, that the author of the article doesn't often pick the headline... but referring to Coach Bennett as "Ex-Coach?"

This is the hometown paper for the university that he helped bring to two national championships. His name is on the court. He's in both the UWSP and WBCA hall of fame.

They could have at least said "Former coach" "Past coach" or "HOF coach." Ex-coach sounds far too negative. But I guess it goes along with the tone of the articles as a whole.

As a former newspaper headline writer, I have to say, all three of your suggestions are longer and might not have fit on the page. Often you have to resort to Ex- because it's short.

[John Gleich]

I get, too, that the author of the article doesn't often pick the headline... but referring to Coach Bennett as "Ex-Coach?"

This is the hometown paper for the university that he helped bring to two national championships. His name is on the court. He's in both the UWSP and WBCA hall of fame.

They could have at least said "Former coach" "Past coach" or "HOF coach." Ex-coach sounds far too negative. But I guess it goes along with the tone of the articles as a whole.

As a former newspaper headline writer, I have to say, all three of your suggestions are longer and might not have fit on the page. Often you have to resort to Ex- because it's short.

Fair enough... though "Bennett" is the same number of characters as "Ex-Coach" 

[Pat Coleman]

I get, too, that the author of the article doesn't often pick the headline... but referring to Coach Bennett as "Ex-Coach?"

This is the hometown paper for the university that he helped bring to two national championships. His name is on the court. He's in both the UWSP and WBCA hall of fame.

They could have at least said "Former coach" "Past coach" or "HOF coach." Ex-coach sounds far too negative. But I guess it goes along with the tone of the articles as a whole.

As a former newspaper headline writer, I have to say, all three of your suggestions are longer and might not have fit on the page. Often you have to resort to Ex- because it's short.

Fair enough... though "Bennett" is the same number of characters as "Ex-Coach" 

Is there only one Bennett that could ever be quoted in a story about basketball in the state of Wisconsin?

[John Gleich]

I get, too, that the author of the article doesn't often pick the headline... but referring to Coach Bennett as "Ex-Coach?"

This is the hometown paper for the university that he helped bring to two national championships. His name is on the court. He's in both the UWSP and WBCA hall of fame.

They could have at least said "Former coach" "Past coach" or "HOF coach." Ex-coach sounds far too negative. But I guess it goes along with the tone of the articles as a whole.

As a former newspaper headline writer, I have to say, all three of your suggestions are longer and might not have fit on the page. Often you have to resort to Ex- because it's short.

Fair enough... though "Bennett" is the same number of characters as "Ex-Coach" 

Is there only one Bennett that could ever be quoted in a story about basketball in the state of Wisconsin?

No...

I know of at least four living former UWSP coaches who might have commented and though half of them are named Bennett, half of them are not.

In fact, a gentleman by the name of Bob Parker commented on the initial article itself. And a certain Bob Parker coached UWSP from '88-'96.


So, "Ex-coach" gives you half as much information about who is commenting on the previous article than "Bennett" would.