|
Post by apaladino on Dec 10, 2009 0:54:26 GMT -6
If we are referring to Milwaukee, Lights out is over 45%! As for writing the season off, have you seen this team play? Not to much to brag about or even look forward to. The concerns began when we struggled against D2 schools and nothing they have done nothing to make me feel any better.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2009 1:00:10 GMT -6
If we are referring to Milwaukee, Lights out is over 45%! As for writing the season off, have you seen this team play? Not to much to brag about or even look forward to. The concerns began when we struggled against D2 schools and nothing they have done nothing to make me feel any better. Actually yes I have. I have been to 4 regular season games (had to work during the Hillsdale game) both exhibition games and the pre-season scrimmage. I'm also going to Saturday's game up in Fargo. So yeah, I have seen this team quite a bit so far this season. I have also seen the depths (06-07) they are coming from and the highs (05-06) they are trying to get back to. I am so far from writing this season off, its not even funny.
|
|
|
Post by buppie05 on Dec 10, 2009 3:04:00 GMT -6
Yeah the panthers shoot poor but maybe coaching has a lot to do with that. In our case it is almost certain that better offensive players are sitting on the bench in favor of better defensive ones AND WE SUCK At DEFENSE. To me that says coaching is off
This game and the Marquette 2-1 deals are a sign of things to come. Basically its the beginning of very competitive basketball that will be played by our in state teams, that will be our own BIG 5 like Philly has (only we have the big 4), and right now GB and Marquette have bragging rights. Also, GB now makes the case for 1 or possibly even 2 at large teams coming out of the conference if they continue to win. Wisconsin's RPI will be inflated all year with that win against duke, and GB will benefit from both those teams winning. Make no mistake this was a big win
|
|
|
Post by nohopspanther on Dec 10, 2009 4:14:50 GMT -6
5 years is a long time, not a short stint. ANY good coach, an actual good coach will be able to win by year 3 of his tenure. Case closed unless you'd like to argue with Bob Knight about coaching. How long did it take to build the program up after Ric Cobb? Yes Bo left after 2 seasons but it still took 5 years to get to the NCAA tournament and win at least a game (and yes they were a layup from winning against Notre Dame but they didn't). While I agree that Coach Knight was one of the greatest coaches ever, he didn't exactly coach at mid-majors. He never really faced any of the same problems that face mid-major programs. Bo turned the team into a winner in his first year. The team continued to go up after that, there was no roller coaster. 5 years to achieve major success, 1 year to turn the team into a winner.
|
|
|
Post by uwm97 on Dec 10, 2009 8:05:08 GMT -6
Remember, the key to the undersized but tenacious Phoenix this season is its 3-point shooting and extended fullcourt defense. Why does that sound so familiar?
|
|
|
Post by uwmfutbol on Dec 10, 2009 8:22:59 GMT -6
Yay. I'm glad to see we're a distant fourth in our own state again.
|
|
|
Post by uwm97 on Dec 10, 2009 8:39:16 GMT -6
The problem this program is having is quite simple: we have the wrong players for the system we're trying to run. We have guys who can't shoot well playing in an offense predicated on shooting a high percentage. If you have a team constructed of scorers and not shooters, you need to play up-tempo and quick. You need to shoot more shots if the percentage is lower, it's simple arithmetic. What is going on the last four years is just the opposite - poor shooters taking fewer shots. Square pegs in round holes doesn't work too well, does it?
|
|
|
Post by uwm97 on Dec 10, 2009 8:45:55 GMT -6
5 years though in a program is pretty short also. The Horizon IMO is a lot tougher overall now than it was than during UWM's 02-03 - 05-06 run. It could be from sitting from where UWM has been the last 4 years but the Horizon has been fighting for respect for years and it's actually pretty balanced these days (for the most part). If you are willing to give up on a program after an up and down 5 years (especially at the mid-major level), then don't jump back up during those 5 years when its at the top. Mid-major programs go in cycles. 06-07 was a darn sharp bottom after the pretty large highs of 02-06. For as quickly as it takes it come back down from a high, it takes a bit more time to come back up from a bottom. Milwaukee's program history, especially of the last 20 years, shows this pretty well. Unfortunately a lot of fans are not willing to take the bad with the good, as evidenced by the programs attendance through its history and the Brewers and Bucks for example. What? We went from a laughinstock in Cobb's last year to nearly upsetting UW in two years. As a matter of fact, we gave UW a very good game at the Kohl Center in Bo's first year. We went from a loser to a winner in ONE year. It doesn't take five years to rebuild a program at all. Pearl turned Tennessee around in one year. There's plenty of talent just in this state to run a solid program in the Horizon League. You need a good system and players who fit that system. It goes across all sports; look what Alvarez did in Madison in three years, and that program was an utter joke when he took over. Honestly, if people are going to make excuses for the state of this program, at least make good ones.
|
|
|
Post by gman2 on Dec 10, 2009 8:47:30 GMT -6
5 years is a long time, not a short stint. ANY good coach, an actual good coach will be able to win by year 3 of his tenure. Case closed unless you'd like to argue with Bob Knight about coaching. How long did it take to build the program up after Ric Cobb? Yes Bo left after 2 seasons but it still took 5 years to get to the NCAA tournament and win at least a game (and yes they were a layup from winning against Notre Dame but they didn't). While I agree that Coach Knight was one of the greatest coaches ever, he didn't exactly coach at mid-majors. He never really faced any of the same problems that face mid-major programs. Four years after Cobb left to get to the tournament. Pearl made it to the tournament in his second season. Also, contrary to what Dennis Krause said, Pearl didn't only have Ryan's recruits he also had two Cobb recruits in Clay Tucker and Ronnie Jones.
|
|
|
Post by PantherU on Dec 10, 2009 9:05:25 GMT -6
Bo turned the team into a winner in his first year. The team continued to go up after that, there was no roller coaster. 5 years to achieve major success, 1 year to turn the team into a winner. Bo and Rob came in with different situations.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2009 9:06:17 GMT -6
Rob came to UWM with a stacked program.
At least I am no longer the lone Debby Downer.
|
|
|
Post by uwmfutbol on Dec 10, 2009 9:11:34 GMT -6
Rob came to UWM with a stacked program. At least I am no longer the lone Debby Downer. Jeter couldn't have asked for a better incoming situation in my opinion (regarding what's realistic for a mid-major).
|
|
|
Post by JG Panthers on Dec 10, 2009 9:22:13 GMT -6
Rob came to UWM with a stacked program. At least I am no longer the lone Debby Downer. Um, yeah, freak? Sorry I called you a Debbie Downer... I hate when people are frequently negative...unless it's warranted. I was wrong about you...never again.
|
|
|
Post by PantherU on Dec 10, 2009 9:23:23 GMT -6
The players Bo got from Ric were with him until he left is what I mean. All of Rob's impact players that he inherited from Bruce were gone after one year, that's all I'm saying. It's a different situation.
|
|
|
Post by uwm97 on Dec 10, 2009 9:23:52 GMT -6
Bo and Rob came in with different situations. Yes. Bo came in with a long track record of winning games. So did Bruce. Both of those guys win with their players, and players they inherit.
|
|