I'm a week late to the discussion but the powers-that-be at the University of Oregon decided being a mid-major program is acceptable. It was fairly shocking to me since Pat Kilkenny held coaches of sports that no one cares about accountable for winning. Considering basketball is one of two sports that pays all of the bills I figured a lengthy track record of being mediocre was enough to turn the page.
The best part of the whole thing is that Oregon fans that trust what their eyes see and think a new coach was needed are supposed to feel better because a high-priced assistant was brought in. In what universe should fans be so excited about an assistant coach? This isn't football where coordinators are in charge of one side of the ball. This is basketball where there are only five players on the court at any given time. Only at Oregon would they be able to convince the fan base and local media that "an excellent assistant coach hire" is the perfect answer to the program's worst season ever. I challenge any basketball fan to name more than one assistant coach that isn't coaching his/her alma mater. The sport of college basketball is all about the head coach. It's not about the players, assistant coaches or team managers. How else do the same coaches no matter where they are coaching make teams successful?
If nothing else, the decision to keep Kent will mean next year's season tickets should be sold at a severe discount. There will likely be one road game, one "neutral" site game (Pape Jam), and 13 or so home games against some of the least talented D-I teams. The naive fan base will get excited and think the genius assistant coach has pushed all the right buttons. If this sounds like something you have heard before, it is. I feel sorry for the players that the administration has bought into the coach's theory that one trip to the tourney during their careers is the definition of success.
Showing posts with label college basketball. Show all posts
Showing posts with label college basketball. Show all posts
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Is Oregon A Mid-Major?
Among die-hard Oregon fans the topic of who should coach the basketball team is a hotly contested one. It seems half the group thinks the current regime is just the one for Oregon because even sporadic success is better than what it used to be. The other half realizes Oregon may have never been this good before but it's obvious the team needs to consistently win. I am obviously on the side that says the current coach doesn't have what it takes to make Oregon a consistent winner. Because of that one sentence many people may not continue reading but if you do you will be enlightened, I promise.
One of my good friends is a University of the Pacific alum so we went down to Stockton and watched them play a couple of weeks ago. It was my first non-Oregon college game in a long time. Needless to say, watching both teams run actual plays and appear as though they had an actual offensive game plan was not something I had grown accustomed to seeing. I then checked out the banners on the wall of the gym. The banners show that UOP has been a pretty good team over the last 10 to 15 years. A few NCAA berths, a year or two when the national media takes notice and some appearances in postseason tournaments that mean nothing. When all is said and done UOP is a pretty good mid-major program.
It was then that I realized in its current state Oregon is a mid-major. In the last ten years the team has made folks east of the Rockies take notice in two of those years. The current coach has made fans think he is a miracle worker for earning a bid to the NCAA Tournament. There are even some fans that think NIT appearances are a big deal. As I took the 'Oregon is a mid-major' theory further it really seemed to fit. Many times a mid-major team makes noise because the roster is dominated by upperclassmen that have spent quite a few years playing together. Does that sound familiar?
On the flip side, when a mid-major has a young team they usually have no chance of competing for a league title because someone else in the league is senior dominated. The end result of not competing for the league title with a young roster is something an Oregon fan is all too familiar with. However, these days many BCS teams are young so my brain tells me the reason Oregon's success is dramatically cyclical is a direct result of having one of the two worst coaches in the Pac-10. Thankfully for Ernie Kent the jury is still out on Johnny Dawkins. Though having a winning record with a team that did not have the Lopez twins shouldn't be overlooked.
In the coming days Pat Kilkenny is going to make one final decision before stepping down as athletic director. To a lot of people his decision will be about who should coach the basketball team. In my eyes his decision is deeper than that: At this time it is clear Oregon basketball is a mid-major program. Is that acceptable?
One of my good friends is a University of the Pacific alum so we went down to Stockton and watched them play a couple of weeks ago. It was my first non-Oregon college game in a long time. Needless to say, watching both teams run actual plays and appear as though they had an actual offensive game plan was not something I had grown accustomed to seeing. I then checked out the banners on the wall of the gym. The banners show that UOP has been a pretty good team over the last 10 to 15 years. A few NCAA berths, a year or two when the national media takes notice and some appearances in postseason tournaments that mean nothing. When all is said and done UOP is a pretty good mid-major program.
It was then that I realized in its current state Oregon is a mid-major. In the last ten years the team has made folks east of the Rockies take notice in two of those years. The current coach has made fans think he is a miracle worker for earning a bid to the NCAA Tournament. There are even some fans that think NIT appearances are a big deal. As I took the 'Oregon is a mid-major' theory further it really seemed to fit. Many times a mid-major team makes noise because the roster is dominated by upperclassmen that have spent quite a few years playing together. Does that sound familiar?
On the flip side, when a mid-major has a young team they usually have no chance of competing for a league title because someone else in the league is senior dominated. The end result of not competing for the league title with a young roster is something an Oregon fan is all too familiar with. However, these days many BCS teams are young so my brain tells me the reason Oregon's success is dramatically cyclical is a direct result of having one of the two worst coaches in the Pac-10. Thankfully for Ernie Kent the jury is still out on Johnny Dawkins. Though having a winning record with a team that did not have the Lopez twins shouldn't be overlooked.
In the coming days Pat Kilkenny is going to make one final decision before stepping down as athletic director. To a lot of people his decision will be about who should coach the basketball team. In my eyes his decision is deeper than that: At this time it is clear Oregon basketball is a mid-major program. Is that acceptable?
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
My Bracket Baby
My daughter was born on the second day of the 2008 NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Tournament (March Madness) and for that reason alone loves basketball. Early research shows that her affinity is for the men's version alone but only time will tell. Well, on Sunday my daughter filled out a bracket. My wife and I put the logos of the two teams for each game on the monitor and had her pick the winner. Sometimes she pointed at the logo, other times she stared at the logo and occasionally she would try to grab the keyboard. Needless to say it took a long while for us to put the bracket together.
We filmed the entire selection process and if my wife ever decided to get a PhD (I'd love to be a stay-at-home dad but she has no interest in going back to school) she should use it. There is likely a lot of rich data that some dork would love to see. Did she prefer logos on the left or right? What colors were chosen the most? Did she hate logos that had text in them? All I can figure out is that my daughter loves bears, no matter how scary they look.
My wife's family has a bracket set up on a website that shall remain nameless and I wasted no time posting my daughter's bracket on there. Since I have lost to my wife every year we have been married I had to guarantee myself not finishing last. Without further ado, here are the bright spots of my daughter's bracket:
- East Tennessee State, Radford, CSU Northridge, Cornell, American and Mississippi State will at least win one game.
- Mississippi State and Cornell will meet in the Elite Eight.
- Western Kentucky and Siena will make it to the Elite Eight.
- Kansas, Cornell, Clemson and UCLA will be in the Final Four. (I picked all four to lose in the first round.)
- Kansas will defeat Clemson to repeat as champions.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Being Average Is Frustrating
The UO basketball team is 0-8 in Pac-10 play right now. Perhaps when you read this they are 1-8 or 0-9, it really does not matter. Given the team's track record over the last nine years (the amount of time I have followed the team) one cannot be the least bit surprised that they would not be very good this year. Would one expect them to be one of the worst BCS conference schools? Doubtful. But hey, when the coach is able to set expectations at the beginning of the year and the local media and fans find that acceptable then an epically bad team is what you get. Just so you know, when it comes to most things in life I am not big on excuses. If you find this post infuriating, then you probably love to find excuses when things go wrong and will therefore not agree.
My assertion: Over the last nine years the Ducks are nothing more than an average Division I college basketball team. If being average is acceptable then I think the team and its staff is constructed in just the right way. If one aspires to be better than average then, well, it's not brain surgery.
Let's start with indisputable facts. Most of the historical information was found at Pac-10.org.
Okay now that the basic facts have been laid out there, some analysis is needed.
1. The last nine years of UO basketball have proven one thing: The Ducks are consistently inconsistent. The team has finished in the bottom half of the conference five out of nine times. The Pac-10 is nowhere near the strongest conference. My sources tell me the Ducks have had more talent during this run than at any other time in the program's history. My eyes tell me talented players have worn the jersey but really spotty team play has characterized the on-court performance.
2. I have not really seen a legitimate offense too often. Watching exceptionally fast-paced play is a lot of fun but it seems only a select few can actually thrive in that system. This year's offense in particular has been an abomination. My junior high team ran some set plays that required a bit more creativity than high post screens at the three-point line and long range three-pointers. I'm far from an expert but when Mike Montgomery puts Yao Ming's cousin in the game just to shove it in the Ducks' faces that he is one helluva coach that would be a good time to get the ball to the only good post player I have ever seen wear the green and gold.
3. I was unaware that freshmen players have to suck for the first few years. If I have to hear or read about a the Ducks having a young team one more time I will cry. Just last year I had to hear that the experienced Ducks were at a disadvantage because all of the good players were freshmen. This year, it is the exact opposite story. It simply makes no sense. Michael Dunigan is routinely talked about in the paper as very young and in need of a lot of seasoning. The best way to get that done is to play the guy, though it seems foul trouble does get in his way. I'm not sure he was in foul trouble at Cal but I think he was pulled out of the game for displaying a phenomenal post move, the drop-step daddy dunk. Perhaps he wasn't taken out immediately after but that play alone should have warranted a few more touches.
4. The coaches seem to be in complete denial. After every loss the team is "really close to getting over the hump" and "didn't quite execute the game plan." Am I the only one that actually watches the game? When multiple teams shoot their season-high field goal percentage it probably is not a reflection of really lucky shooting. When a team loses by 15+ points that is not a positive thing. It does not matter if things looked good for 18 minutes, the game is 40 minutes in duration. By the same token, a "close loss," anything less than ten I suppose, may not be that close. Last week's Cal game being a perfect example. At no point were the Ducks out of the game but at no point did it seem they had a chance to win. It is a hard feeling to describe but if you have felt it you know what I am talking about.
5. There also seems to be a lot of weird finger pointing. I remember when Aaron Brooks was a struggling junior I heard it was Luke Ridnour's fault because he left early and did not tutor Brooks. Really? Then last year the team did not meet expectations and it was because Brooks decided to enter the NBA draft after playing four years. How selfish could one be? The talk about having a really young team and making that an excuse is pathetic. When a team has a ton of seniors it is reasonable to expect that the team the following year will be young. As far as I can tell that is the only thing that can be assumed. Assuming that a team has to be awful because it is young seems like a bit of a stretch for me. Those are general themes, if you read a game report you can find numerous excuses for why something did not happen. Personally, I find great joy in trying to guess what those might be. If you want to try it, my only advice if you want to be correct is to try and be outlandish in your guesses.
6. The UO needs to offer a night class on how to properly arrange a team schedule. For the last eight years the preseason schedule has been chocked full of teams that are rated less than 250 in Ken Pomeroy's ratings. As much as I would love to see teams of lesser quality than those invited to the Les Schwab Invitational, a college gymnasium is not where I want to see them. Then what do you know, this year the schedule could be classified as ambitious and the team is full of freshmen (see above). Again, another point of bewilderment for me. Last year's team had all seniors and played very weak teams, this year's team has all freshman and plays decent teams. It should be fun watching a paper tiger in the early part of the season next year as the experienced bunch plays cupcakes. If history is any indicator of things to come then the opening of Matt Court should be hosting such heavyweights as: North Florida, Furman, Dartmouth, Sac State, Army, and Longwood. Should be easy to pay off the state bonds with those Final Four favorites. I don't know who is to blame for the scheduling but one would think the coaches and administrators are the culprits.
7. I was not aware that if a team recruits good guys that graduate then it means they cannot be good for the duration of their career. It is not a bad thing that the Ducks have good guys but I doubt they are the only team with good guys. Very few times do I hear about college teams rampant with jerks on the roster. For the most part it seems the vast majority of college players are guys you wouldn't mind your kids being friends with. There also is not a problem with players graduating but I don't think that is an excuse for bad on-court performances. Unless things have changed drastically since I graduated, the UO would never be confused for an Ivy League school. When all is said and done I do not think responsible men and consistent winning are mutually exclusive.
8. This does not necessarily reflect poorly on the basketball program but the local newspaper is an enabler. I get that there is only one show in town and if that show does not want to talk then one is screwed. I don't think that means the Register-Guard has to be an extension of the UO SID. After every failed weekend, you can count on a heartwarming off-the-court tale just like you can count on clouds in the sky. You can go to the paper's basketball blog and easily confuse it for goducks.com. There is a weekly update on players from the past and how well they are doing on and off the court. I suppose that is good but let's have a little bit of accountability. My favorite was when LeKendric Longmire (who did redshirt) was asked if he thinks all freshmen should be required to redshirt. This was clearly a question to placate the "there should not be any expectations placed on freshmen" crowd. Given the success of countless freshmen every single season, that is one of the worst questions ever asked.
I suppose this is as good a place to stop as any. If after reading this you think my expectations are that the Ducks should win Pac-10 Championships year after year and routinely make the Sweet Sixteen, then you are not a very good reader. I simply believe that the Ducks have the potential and should be a better-than-average program. Routinely finishing in the top half a respectable conference and therefore going to the NCAAs more times than not does not seem too ridiculous. I am okay with baby steps as long as they are forward. When Washington State is better equipped at rebuilding after having tremendous success it is time something happen. Oh wait, you're to tell me they are not having an epically bad year this year? And playing down to the level, or even comparing oneself to Oregon State, is a place I never thought the Ducks would be. If this is acceptable to you then you will leave a nasty comment on here and I am fine with that. I will leave you with one question to consider before commenting: Is there such a thing as a good coach or program that is by definition average?
My assertion: Over the last nine years the Ducks are nothing more than an average Division I college basketball team. If being average is acceptable then I think the team and its staff is constructed in just the right way. If one aspires to be better than average then, well, it's not brain surgery.
Let's start with indisputable facts. Most of the historical information was found at Pac-10.org.
- According to Ken Pomeroy, who is a math guy that tries to approximate the RPI, the Ducks are 139 out 344 (as of 11:20am on an 31, 2009). That really is not that good. There are all of 5 teams from BCS Conferences rated lower.
- Over the last nine years the team has had an average (mean) finish of 5.5 in the Pac-10 Conference. So that nothing gets past anyone, the Pac-10 only has ten teams. From 2000-01 to 2008-09 the Ducks standing in the Pac-10 has been (6, 1, 5, 4, 8, 7, 3, 6, 10).
- Since the Pac-10 Tournament returned the Ducks have been 10-4, with two titles. They missed the tournament entirely one year but that will never happen again since all teams are invited now.
- The Ducks have been to the NCAA tournament four out of nine years, advancing to the Elite Eight twice and losing the first game twice.
- The Ducks have been to the NIT a couple of times. For me, the NIT means absolutely nothing. All that is needed is a .500 record, which this day and age (30+ games and a ton of nonconference cupcakes) is not a big deal.
Okay now that the basic facts have been laid out there, some analysis is needed.
1. The last nine years of UO basketball have proven one thing: The Ducks are consistently inconsistent. The team has finished in the bottom half of the conference five out of nine times. The Pac-10 is nowhere near the strongest conference. My sources tell me the Ducks have had more talent during this run than at any other time in the program's history. My eyes tell me talented players have worn the jersey but really spotty team play has characterized the on-court performance.
2. I have not really seen a legitimate offense too often. Watching exceptionally fast-paced play is a lot of fun but it seems only a select few can actually thrive in that system. This year's offense in particular has been an abomination. My junior high team ran some set plays that required a bit more creativity than high post screens at the three-point line and long range three-pointers. I'm far from an expert but when Mike Montgomery puts Yao Ming's cousin in the game just to shove it in the Ducks' faces that he is one helluva coach that would be a good time to get the ball to the only good post player I have ever seen wear the green and gold.
3. I was unaware that freshmen players have to suck for the first few years. If I have to hear or read about a the Ducks having a young team one more time I will cry. Just last year I had to hear that the experienced Ducks were at a disadvantage because all of the good players were freshmen. This year, it is the exact opposite story. It simply makes no sense. Michael Dunigan is routinely talked about in the paper as very young and in need of a lot of seasoning. The best way to get that done is to play the guy, though it seems foul trouble does get in his way. I'm not sure he was in foul trouble at Cal but I think he was pulled out of the game for displaying a phenomenal post move, the drop-step daddy dunk. Perhaps he wasn't taken out immediately after but that play alone should have warranted a few more touches.
4. The coaches seem to be in complete denial. After every loss the team is "really close to getting over the hump" and "didn't quite execute the game plan." Am I the only one that actually watches the game? When multiple teams shoot their season-high field goal percentage it probably is not a reflection of really lucky shooting. When a team loses by 15+ points that is not a positive thing. It does not matter if things looked good for 18 minutes, the game is 40 minutes in duration. By the same token, a "close loss," anything less than ten I suppose, may not be that close. Last week's Cal game being a perfect example. At no point were the Ducks out of the game but at no point did it seem they had a chance to win. It is a hard feeling to describe but if you have felt it you know what I am talking about.
5. There also seems to be a lot of weird finger pointing. I remember when Aaron Brooks was a struggling junior I heard it was Luke Ridnour's fault because he left early and did not tutor Brooks. Really? Then last year the team did not meet expectations and it was because Brooks decided to enter the NBA draft after playing four years. How selfish could one be? The talk about having a really young team and making that an excuse is pathetic. When a team has a ton of seniors it is reasonable to expect that the team the following year will be young. As far as I can tell that is the only thing that can be assumed. Assuming that a team has to be awful because it is young seems like a bit of a stretch for me. Those are general themes, if you read a game report you can find numerous excuses for why something did not happen. Personally, I find great joy in trying to guess what those might be. If you want to try it, my only advice if you want to be correct is to try and be outlandish in your guesses.
6. The UO needs to offer a night class on how to properly arrange a team schedule. For the last eight years the preseason schedule has been chocked full of teams that are rated less than 250 in Ken Pomeroy's ratings. As much as I would love to see teams of lesser quality than those invited to the Les Schwab Invitational, a college gymnasium is not where I want to see them. Then what do you know, this year the schedule could be classified as ambitious and the team is full of freshmen (see above). Again, another point of bewilderment for me. Last year's team had all seniors and played very weak teams, this year's team has all freshman and plays decent teams. It should be fun watching a paper tiger in the early part of the season next year as the experienced bunch plays cupcakes. If history is any indicator of things to come then the opening of Matt Court should be hosting such heavyweights as: North Florida, Furman, Dartmouth, Sac State, Army, and Longwood. Should be easy to pay off the state bonds with those Final Four favorites. I don't know who is to blame for the scheduling but one would think the coaches and administrators are the culprits.
7. I was not aware that if a team recruits good guys that graduate then it means they cannot be good for the duration of their career. It is not a bad thing that the Ducks have good guys but I doubt they are the only team with good guys. Very few times do I hear about college teams rampant with jerks on the roster. For the most part it seems the vast majority of college players are guys you wouldn't mind your kids being friends with. There also is not a problem with players graduating but I don't think that is an excuse for bad on-court performances. Unless things have changed drastically since I graduated, the UO would never be confused for an Ivy League school. When all is said and done I do not think responsible men and consistent winning are mutually exclusive.
8. This does not necessarily reflect poorly on the basketball program but the local newspaper is an enabler. I get that there is only one show in town and if that show does not want to talk then one is screwed. I don't think that means the Register-Guard has to be an extension of the UO SID. After every failed weekend, you can count on a heartwarming off-the-court tale just like you can count on clouds in the sky. You can go to the paper's basketball blog and easily confuse it for goducks.com. There is a weekly update on players from the past and how well they are doing on and off the court. I suppose that is good but let's have a little bit of accountability. My favorite was when LeKendric Longmire (who did redshirt) was asked if he thinks all freshmen should be required to redshirt. This was clearly a question to placate the "there should not be any expectations placed on freshmen" crowd. Given the success of countless freshmen every single season, that is one of the worst questions ever asked.
I suppose this is as good a place to stop as any. If after reading this you think my expectations are that the Ducks should win Pac-10 Championships year after year and routinely make the Sweet Sixteen, then you are not a very good reader. I simply believe that the Ducks have the potential and should be a better-than-average program. Routinely finishing in the top half a respectable conference and therefore going to the NCAAs more times than not does not seem too ridiculous. I am okay with baby steps as long as they are forward. When Washington State is better equipped at rebuilding after having tremendous success it is time something happen. Oh wait, you're to tell me they are not having an epically bad year this year? And playing down to the level, or even comparing oneself to Oregon State, is a place I never thought the Ducks would be. If this is acceptable to you then you will leave a nasty comment on here and I am fine with that. I will leave you with one question to consider before commenting: Is there such a thing as a good coach or program that is by definition average?
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Ready To Explode
Let this post serve as a warning. There is a Pac-10 basketball team that is one loss away from making me lose my mind. For the life of this blog I have been holding my tongue but things have gotten so pathetic I may have to let loose. Here is one clue as to which team I am referring to: They are two games behind Oregon State in the conference standings. That my friends, is the definition of pathetic. The same Oregon State team that did not win a single Pac-10 game last year and whose coach took a vacation for part of this week. Perhaps the unnamed school might want a similar schedule next week for its coach.
Saturday, July 19, 2008
More Job Security
Sometimes you have to wonder if smart people run college athletics. Imagine this scenario in the real world. A manager leads a group of people to great success one year. Then the next year he leads nearly the exact same group with another year of experience to considerably less success. Those people that led the group the last two years have no other option but to leave so the manager is starting with an entirely new group this upcoming year. Recent history suggests this manager takes a few years to achieve any type of success with a young group. Would that manager get a contract extension and raise in the business world? I seriously have my doubts.
Well, if my Internet is working correctly it appears the UO has done just that with the men's basketball coach. All of the followers of this coach may counter that adding a year does nothing except make it easier to recruit. If that is so, why in the world did the UO decide to increase the buyout? Good luck to whoever has to live with that decision. Paying the debt service on a new arena with a team that is good every now and then and a coach that puts together an abomination of a home non-conference schedule shouldn't be too hard.
Well, if my Internet is working correctly it appears the UO has done just that with the men's basketball coach. All of the followers of this coach may counter that adding a year does nothing except make it easier to recruit. If that is so, why in the world did the UO decide to increase the buyout? Good luck to whoever has to live with that decision. Paying the debt service on a new arena with a team that is good every now and then and a coach that puts together an abomination of a home non-conference schedule shouldn't be too hard.
Monday, March 31, 2008
Pure Athlete
I am just now getting over the fact that last weekend's NCAA Tournament games were incredibly boring. Only the last game (Davidson vs. Kansas) had any type of drama. I have never been one to follow Bill Self's teams but after watching that game it was obvious why he had never been to the Final Four before now. He is not very good. Without question he coached that game "not-to-lose" as opposed to trying to win it outright. It made for a dramatic ending so I suppose I should thank him for finding a way to coach his absurdly talented team in a way that nearly left them out of a star-studded Final Four. As sad as it is to admit, the most entertaining part of the weekend was in the very first game of the weekend, Washington State vs. North Carolina. Aside from the fact that this game was over within the first 15 minutes Jay Bilas was able to provide some phenomenal insight.
You see, Washington State is not the sexiest or most athletic team in the world but they are well-coached and play smart basketball. Pretty much the exact opposite description of an Oregon basketball team but that's not the point. One player on Washington State who fits the "not-the-most-athletic-looking-guy" mold is Taylor Rochestie. He is white, has floppy hair and wears knee-length socks. Over the last couple of years I have found him to be a pretty effective ballplayer though and Bilas agrees. At one point in the first half Bilas said about Rochestie, "A much better athlete than he gets credit for. He can dunk off two feet with two hands with ease." Well, there you have it. Rochestie is a modern day Bruce Jenner. You're to tell me a college basketball player can do that and be a student at the same time? I need to see footage of Rochestie pulling off the miraculous feat to believe it myself.
Bilas' comments were not outlandish but I was waiting for something really good to nail home the point that Rochestie is quite an athlete. In my mind I was waiting for Bilas to say something like he can dunk off two feet from near the free throw line and put it between his legs. That would have made the suspense worth it. Instead he told me that Rochestie can dunk, which makes him far more athletic than I but a likely reason why he wears his socks so high.
You see, Washington State is not the sexiest or most athletic team in the world but they are well-coached and play smart basketball. Pretty much the exact opposite description of an Oregon basketball team but that's not the point. One player on Washington State who fits the "not-the-most-athletic-looking-guy" mold is Taylor Rochestie. He is white, has floppy hair and wears knee-length socks. Over the last couple of years I have found him to be a pretty effective ballplayer though and Bilas agrees. At one point in the first half Bilas said about Rochestie, "A much better athlete than he gets credit for. He can dunk off two feet with two hands with ease." Well, there you have it. Rochestie is a modern day Bruce Jenner. You're to tell me a college basketball player can do that and be a student at the same time? I need to see footage of Rochestie pulling off the miraculous feat to believe it myself.
Bilas' comments were not outlandish but I was waiting for something really good to nail home the point that Rochestie is quite an athlete. In my mind I was waiting for Bilas to say something like he can dunk off two feet from near the free throw line and put it between his legs. That would have made the suspense worth it. Instead he told me that Rochestie can dunk, which makes him far more athletic than I but a likely reason why he wears his socks so high.
Monday, March 10, 2008
The Danny Green Dunk
After posting the picture I figured it would be appropriate to learn how to embed YouTube video on this here blog. I figure having a Duke player, Greg Paulus no less, getting dunked on at home would be the perfect one to start start.
More Replays Please
I was one of the many college basketball fans that watched Duke and North Carolina battle on Saturday night. I could not have been the only one that wanted to see multiple replays of Danny Green putting his twig and berries on Greg Paulus' forehead. It was a very impressive dunk and usually those types of plays are replayed over and over. What did ESPN do instead? Beat the Duke student in a Speedo story to death. I would much rather see a pompous and overrated Dukie get two black eyes while getting dunked on then see a college student give the sophomoric 'suck it' gesture while wearing only a Speedo. The only replay I saw of the impressive dunk was from the camera stationed behind the square on the backboard. Come on! I cannot actually confirm that Paulus was in a position that would even make a wrestler blush form that angle.
If this were FSN and UCLA doing the dunking (I see their relationship to be similar to Duke and ESPN's) we would get to see that play from 9 different angles and enjoy each one. Russell Westbrook has managed to put his junk in two players' faces this year and every camera angle in the building was at our disposal. I do not want to further emabrass the guys that were foolish enough to try and take the charge but they play for California-Berkeley and Oregon. I can't believe I just complimented FSN. Everything it does is pathetic and worthy of its own post. ESPN usually does a great job but in this case they did not practice journalistic integrity. All networks should remember that a dunk where another man puts his area on another man's head needs to be shown from multiple angles. It does not matter if the player being humiliated is from an adopted school.
(Photo from Deadspin.)
Saturday, March 1, 2008
Ducks Have To Win
I have serious concerns over the state of the Ducks basketball team. They have a ton of good players but are not winning games. It makes no sense to me. Some of the folks that like to think the coach is not in any way at fault attribute it to lackluster players. My response to that is very simple. You're to tell me Washington State's players are better athletes and have more skill than the Ducks? Didn't think so. I certainly have far more to say on this matter but will keep it to myself for now.
What is of interest to me is that the Ducks could have the lamest coach ever (I don't think they do) and the most pathetic players (I know they don't) and still win the Civil War. Oregon State is one of the worst teams in major college basketball history as far as I can tell. For this reason I know the Ducks will win. If for whatever reason that does not happen this will turn into a Beavers blog for seven days. Provided hell freezes over tomorrow night, I will spend the next week posting about the Beavers at least once a day for an entire week. Now that is the Oregon cockiness the rest of the Pac-10 has come to love!
What is of interest to me is that the Ducks could have the lamest coach ever (I don't think they do) and the most pathetic players (I know they don't) and still win the Civil War. Oregon State is one of the worst teams in major college basketball history as far as I can tell. For this reason I know the Ducks will win. If for whatever reason that does not happen this will turn into a Beavers blog for seven days. Provided hell freezes over tomorrow night, I will spend the next week posting about the Beavers at least once a day for an entire week. Now that is the Oregon cockiness the rest of the Pac-10 has come to love!
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Excuses Are Like…
When I astutely observed that the trip to Oregon was the easiest in the Pac-10 I didn’t think it was that easy. Again, it’s obvious the presence of Oregon State makes the trip one of the easiest in the country but I was not prepared for the happenings at Mac Court, the pathetic and embarrassing Pit Crew not withstanding. By Sunday a home team from Oregon will have a recent home win though. There is no doubt in my mind the Ducks will win. If at any point in time the outcome is in doubt someone will have a lot of explaining to do.
It sucks when the Ducks lose but being the ‘glass half full’ guy that I am there is one good thing that comes out of a loss: Excuses. I watch every minute of every game because I want to be able to guess what the excuse might be the next morning. Let’s see, the UW loss was because they were 0-3 and really needed a win, the WSU loss was a result of unlucky bounces and the inevitability of winning streaks coming to an end. Those excuses were weak but nothing compares to the last two games. We lost to UCLA because one of our seniors came down with cramps in the second half. Then the USC loss was attributed to a clock malfunction and a blown call on the overtime tipoff. Now you know why I am so confident the Ducks will beat OSU. These excuses keep getting more outrageous. There is no way the most ardent Duck fan will be able to believe the next one.
It is appropriate to quickly breakdown the clock malfunction and overtime tip excuse. As I see it, attributing a sluggish overtime start to Mac Court being older than God is stupid. If I remember correctly USC had to wait to play. They had to sit and stand around just like Oregon, and they had to do it in hostile territory.
Now, the tip excuse has a bit more merit but not much. If the result of a tip truly did decide the outcome of a game then a lot of 7-foot stiffs would be starters. So the refs appeared to blow the call on the tip, who cares? There were still 5 minutes remaining and the score was still tied. It’s not as if USC received 10-points for getting the ball. It is true that USC made some outrageous 3-pointers in OT but you have to give them credit. A freshman and sophomore suffering from cramps (Mayo took an IV after the game) hit some big shots on the road.
It is incredibly ironic that some Duck fans are blaming the refs for the loss. Short memories perhaps? Just over a year ago Duck fans went nuts claiming their intellectual superiority to Oklahoma fans for blaming refs for a loss There is no person that could argue the blown tip call was as crucial to the final outcome as the onside kick call. Thankfully I have not heard anyone suggesting a boycott of the Pac-10 but you get the point. Blaming the refs for a blown call at the start of overtime is asinine. The Ducks had plenty of time to overcome the ‘tragic’ call they just did not do it. Blame losses on the refs, clocks, the next day’s snow, consecutive Sundays on national TV and whatever else. Just know that the Pac-10 standings and NCAA bubble don’t buy any of it.
It sucks when the Ducks lose but being the ‘glass half full’ guy that I am there is one good thing that comes out of a loss: Excuses. I watch every minute of every game because I want to be able to guess what the excuse might be the next morning. Let’s see, the UW loss was because they were 0-3 and really needed a win, the WSU loss was a result of unlucky bounces and the inevitability of winning streaks coming to an end. Those excuses were weak but nothing compares to the last two games. We lost to UCLA because one of our seniors came down with cramps in the second half. Then the USC loss was attributed to a clock malfunction and a blown call on the overtime tipoff. Now you know why I am so confident the Ducks will beat OSU. These excuses keep getting more outrageous. There is no way the most ardent Duck fan will be able to believe the next one.
It is appropriate to quickly breakdown the clock malfunction and overtime tip excuse. As I see it, attributing a sluggish overtime start to Mac Court being older than God is stupid. If I remember correctly USC had to wait to play. They had to sit and stand around just like Oregon, and they had to do it in hostile territory.
Now, the tip excuse has a bit more merit but not much. If the result of a tip truly did decide the outcome of a game then a lot of 7-foot stiffs would be starters. So the refs appeared to blow the call on the tip, who cares? There were still 5 minutes remaining and the score was still tied. It’s not as if USC received 10-points for getting the ball. It is true that USC made some outrageous 3-pointers in OT but you have to give them credit. A freshman and sophomore suffering from cramps (Mayo took an IV after the game) hit some big shots on the road.
It is incredibly ironic that some Duck fans are blaming the refs for the loss. Short memories perhaps? Just over a year ago Duck fans went nuts claiming their intellectual superiority to Oklahoma fans for blaming refs for a loss There is no person that could argue the blown tip call was as crucial to the final outcome as the onside kick call. Thankfully I have not heard anyone suggesting a boycott of the Pac-10 but you get the point. Blaming the refs for a blown call at the start of overtime is asinine. The Ducks had plenty of time to overcome the ‘tragic’ call they just did not do it. Blame losses on the refs, clocks, the next day’s snow, consecutive Sundays on national TV and whatever else. Just know that the Pac-10 standings and NCAA bubble don’t buy any of it.
Monday, January 21, 2008
Willamette Valley Is Easy
After polling the founder, writer and chief editor of this blog it is official: The easiest trip in the Pac-10 is the trip to play the Oregon schools. With all of the talent in the southern portion of the conference, the two Northwest trips were in contention for the honor. After Oregon and Oregon State had a brilliant 0-4 weekend in Washington there really is no argument. I could care less how scary Mac Court is, the Willamette Valley is the friendliest place in the Pac-10 for visiting teams. Let’s rundown the two teams to see why that is.
First up is the squad that guarantees every team at least one win on the Oregon trip. The Beavers are by far the worst BCS Conference school. I don’t have the exact number but I believe OSU is in the low 200s in RPI. There are just over 300 teams that make up Division I. (If you do visit the RPI sites you’ll recognize that a fair number of Oregon’s non-conference opponents from the last couple of years are the only ones below OSU.) With a team that is so bad it’s no wonder that head coach Jay John was fired yesterday. He didn’t even make it halfway through the conference season. In addition, the ESPN scroll is telling me that they have dismissed the walking foul, C.J. Giles. Giles was kicked out of Kansas for a myriad of reasons but John needed something so he brought on Giles. It obviously didn’t work for either guy. Without a conference win it’s not too far-fetched to think they could go winless in the conference and be one of the worst Pac-10 teams ever.
Then there is the UO basketball squad. For whatever reason they are 3-3 in conference play though they have 3 senior starters. NBA teams wish they had that kind of continuity in their rosters. You’d think the Ducks would be able to use their vast advantage in experience to jump to the top of the conference rankings but it seems as though they are heading in the opposite direction. If you read about a Ducks’ win you’ll read that their freshman point guard is following in the footsteps of Luke Ridnour and Aaron Brooks. Then when the Ducks lose, it’s all of a sudden the fault of the young point guard making bad decisions (see loss to Washington). I guess the coach can have it both ways but I think it would be more productive to blame the seniors that can’t seem to come through in the clutch. Bottom line, three starting seniors is not four? Another problem could be that the Ducks don’t seem to care. They let a chance slip away against WSU last night and the coach chalks it up to fate and a few unlucky bounces. (That’s funny, I don’t remember that being the explanation last year when 3-pointers off the backboard in the same gym were a credit to an excellent game plan.)
There you have it. If one had to pick the easiest trip in the Pac-10 you would have to say visiting the Oregon schools is the easiest one. Having the worst team in the conference by a mile makes it so. Then you add in the enigma that is Oregon (one night a contender for the Sweet 16 due to good coaching and senior leadership then the next night a NIT team due to one player’s inexperience) and you might leave with two wins. That is something that cannot be said about any other trip in the conference.
First up is the squad that guarantees every team at least one win on the Oregon trip. The Beavers are by far the worst BCS Conference school. I don’t have the exact number but I believe OSU is in the low 200s in RPI. There are just over 300 teams that make up Division I. (If you do visit the RPI sites you’ll recognize that a fair number of Oregon’s non-conference opponents from the last couple of years are the only ones below OSU.) With a team that is so bad it’s no wonder that head coach Jay John was fired yesterday. He didn’t even make it halfway through the conference season. In addition, the ESPN scroll is telling me that they have dismissed the walking foul, C.J. Giles. Giles was kicked out of Kansas for a myriad of reasons but John needed something so he brought on Giles. It obviously didn’t work for either guy. Without a conference win it’s not too far-fetched to think they could go winless in the conference and be one of the worst Pac-10 teams ever.
Then there is the UO basketball squad. For whatever reason they are 3-3 in conference play though they have 3 senior starters. NBA teams wish they had that kind of continuity in their rosters. You’d think the Ducks would be able to use their vast advantage in experience to jump to the top of the conference rankings but it seems as though they are heading in the opposite direction. If you read about a Ducks’ win you’ll read that their freshman point guard is following in the footsteps of Luke Ridnour and Aaron Brooks. Then when the Ducks lose, it’s all of a sudden the fault of the young point guard making bad decisions (see loss to Washington). I guess the coach can have it both ways but I think it would be more productive to blame the seniors that can’t seem to come through in the clutch. Bottom line, three starting seniors is not four? Another problem could be that the Ducks don’t seem to care. They let a chance slip away against WSU last night and the coach chalks it up to fate and a few unlucky bounces. (That’s funny, I don’t remember that being the explanation last year when 3-pointers off the backboard in the same gym were a credit to an excellent game plan.)
There you have it. If one had to pick the easiest trip in the Pac-10 you would have to say visiting the Oregon schools is the easiest one. Having the worst team in the conference by a mile makes it so. Then you add in the enigma that is Oregon (one night a contender for the Sweet 16 due to good coaching and senior leadership then the next night a NIT team due to one player’s inexperience) and you might leave with two wins. That is something that cannot be said about any other trip in the conference.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
