Musings from the 1st Row

[Shock Top]

Disagree. 2 day of cold shooting doesn't override 2 months of domination.

Tell that to the MVC and to Selection Committee.

I agree with you. Hopefully we aren't proven otherwise on Sunday.

[pie n eye]

Since Landry only played 3 games and did not and will not play again this year his injury will not be a factor. Fred's and to a lesser extent Anton's could. The 3 losses in Florida were without Fred and the Iowa loss was sans Anton. Both were back for the Seton Hall game but neither were close to 100% at that point although whether or not the committee realizes that is questionable.

I think Fred's and Anton's injuries will be a consideration it is just hard to know how much of a consideration.

Of course. I didn't mean the selection committee should take Landry's injury into consideration, just that if he had not been injured we would've won a couple more games that we dropped.

[shocka khan]

Of course. I didn't mean the selection committee should take Landry's injury into consideration, just that if he had not been injured we would've won a couple more games that we dropped.

We would only know that if Landry had actually played. Landry looked good in most of the games he played in, but in the one that counted the most (the Tulsa game) he fouled out rather quickly and had a very meager stat line. Even as bad as the MVC is, no one is on par with Emporia State. Landy's best game was against Emporia State, so there's that, too.

Note I'm a BIG Landry fan, I just don't think we saw enough of him in critical situations to say that he would have been a game changer.

The good news is that we will have him and his leadership for four more years, which bodes well for us.

[im4wsu]

There was no excuse for losing to UNI twice. That eliminates your #1 and #2. Washpun made Fred look bad in both games. Grady played a very good game on Saturday and it hurt us when he fouled out.

#3 I will give you.

#4 gets back to the fact that we don't 'play angry' any more. Perhaps I'm spoiled, but I think the last two or three years we would have willed ourselves to winning most of those games.

We are just going to have to disagree what underachievement means. What I saw against Loyola and UNI was underachievement. We coughed up 10 point plus leads in both games. We got lucky in the first game and lost the second.

Not nearly as bad as you insinuate:

	Wes	Fred
FGM-FGA	11-28	7-17
3FGM-3FGA	2-9	3-6
FTM-FTA	4-6	3-4
OFF-DEF	0-6	0-7
TOT	6	7
PF	6	2
TP	28	20
A	5	11
TO	5	3
BLK	1	2
STL	0	1
MIN	67	73

[pie n eye]

We would only know that if Landry had actually played. Landry looked good in most of the games he played in, but in the one that counted the most (the Tulsa game) he fouled out rather quickly and had a very meager stat line. Even as bad as the MVC is, no one is on par with Emporia State. Landy's best game was against Emporia State, so there's that, too.

Note I'm a BIG Landry fan, I just don't think we saw enough of him in critical situations to say that he would have been a game changer.

The good news is that we will have him and his leadership for four more years, which bodes well for us.

To that I would just say how many minutes did McDuffie play in those games? How good has he been this year since then? Landry wasn't just playing he was playing 20+ minutes per game. We saw him in 3 games whereas the coaches saw him every day in practice for a couple of months.

I won't speak for anyone but myself and I'm regularly proven wrong but Landry would have been a big time help this year.

[Stickboy46]

To that I would just say how many minutes did McDuffie play in those games? How good has he been this year since then? Landry wasn't just playing he was playing 20+ minutes per game. We saw him in 3 games whereas the coaches saw him every day in practice for a couple of months.

I won't speak for anyone but myself and I'm regularly proven wrong but Landry would have been a big time help this year.

The thought has crossed my mind already of what if he came back for the MVC tourney rather than getting the redshirt ...

[shelback]

I'm well aware that they blew out some terrible teams along the way. That said, they never felt like the dominant team from the past few years. There is something very wrong with this current group and I just hope it isn't a sign of things to come. I hope it can just be chalked up to terrible chemistry or something along those lines. I don't know that I was changing facts, as you describe. The two tournament games were awful. They were mirror images of each other, each to teams WSU should have dominated. I don't think I ever felt that this team was ever really "back on track" after FVV returned. They have always seemed to be missing something and the last two games have, again, accentuated this. Their offense has been a concern of many on this board all season. The guys stand, don't move, force bad passes, take poor shots; this is all poor execution and it has been evident all year. I guess the real question is; were the blowouts that led up to the tourney the apparition or were the bad games the apparition? Since they couldn't find a way to win even two games in the tournament, in a very sub par conference, I find it difficult to say that my claim of their poor execution is a changed fact.

I think more than anything the more you play a team tougher it becomes. The Shockers have set the Defensive standard now everyone is playing catch up. Its a defensive league and baskets are tough to come by. Might just be me but it seems our offense looks night and day difference after playing defensive minded Valley teams all season. Most teams we see out of conference have a score more mentality opposed to the hold your opponent to fewer points mentality.

[Kung Wu]

So, I'm willing to ask you, can you name a Shocker team that has had such high expectations, yet failed to deliver?

Of the cuff, the 2006-2007 season was a much bigger flame out. This current squad won the MVC conference by 4 games, an average 19+ points, overcame some SERIOUS adversity early on with three starters out, and is going to the NCAA tournament. Considering the adversity this team has had to overcome, the 2006-2007 flame out was worse. Way worse.

[Play Angry]

I wonder how folks would have characterized 2012-13 at this point in the season, having just **** the bed to blow the regular season crown and suffering our 2nd loss in 3 tries against Creighton.

[shocka khan]

This current squad won the MVC conference by 4 games, an average 19+ points, overcame some SERIOUS adversity early on with three starters out, and is going to the NCAA tournament.

No matter how much both you and I want this to happen, whether we go to the tourney or not will not be determined with certainty until the selection committee makes its decision on Sunday.

[Kung Wu]

No matter how much both you and I want this to happen, whether we go to the tourney or not will not be determined with certainty until the selection committee makes its decision on Sunday.

Ok. Well they sure as heck are going to the NIT, which is a WHOLE lot further than 2006-2007.

[Shoxfan11]

I wonder how folks would have characterized 2012-13 at this point in the season, having just **** the bed to blow the regular season crown and suffering our 2nd loss in 3 tries against Creighton.

McDermott easily outcoached Marshall (he won 2 of the 3 games of course), HCGM demonstrated that he couldn't adjust (Wragge drilled 5 threes and we did nothing to stop it), this team doesn't play angry, we're not going to accomplish anything in the NCAA Tournament if we're lucky enough to make it, etc. etc. etc.

[Kung Wu]

No matter how much both you and I want this to happen, whether we go to the tourney or not will not be determined with certainty until the selection committee makes its decision on Sunday.

It's weird tho. You are saying this season is a bust without having any clue how it's going to ultimately turn out, yet the only point you can make against what I said is that we don't know how it's going to turn out. See the problem there?

[RefChick]

Got back from STL a few hours ago. Had enough time during drive to reflect on events observed, plus the cause and effects.

Those of you on this fine forum who hold HCGM beyond reproach need to switch threads now. You will not appreciate the following.

HCGM's conduct this weekend could be described in two words - arrogant and stubborn.
His arrogance was on full display on Friday against Loyola.
His yapping at Doug Elgin and subsequent stare down at Jack Watkins over his displeasure with the officiating was unprofessional and demeaning.
It was embarrassing to the program and totally undignified. It also will end up hurting the program in the long run (more on that in a bit).

HCGM tried to brush aside by characterizing it as 'Frustration."
Bullshit.

Act the part and be a professional. If your team is stinking up the place, stand up and accept the blame. It goes with the job (and the paycheck).

His stubbornness was on full display during UNI's game deciding run.
While UNI continued to run the same offensive set over and over, he refused to either change personnel or more importantly, change the defensive set. As a result, Washpun continued to run the same set on the high post over and over and over.
I sat on the front row straight across from the UNI bench and could not believe he didn't adjust. I don't think HCBJ couldn't believe it either and was thrilled!

Oh and how did his arrogance come back to haunt him?
As soon as the game ended, Elgin walked right in front of me, turned to Watkins and with a HUGE smile on his face just said "Wow!" He was giddy with the outcome and not because he was thinking that 2 MVC teams would get in the tournament.

Until they have confirmation of a new league landing strip, it is advisable not to piss off your current landlord.

I will post the usual STL Notes, Quotes and Billygoats soon. This will suffice for now.

That is all.

Good grief, I leave ShockRef alone with the laptop for a few hours and look at the havoc he's wreaked!

[shocka khan]

It's weird tho. You are saying this season is a bust without having any clue how it's going to ultimately turn out, yet the only point you can make against what I said is that we don't know how it's going to turn out. See the problem there?

OK we're both right. I'm looking at what's been done and see the glass as half empty. You're looking at potential and seeing the glass as half full.

I hope you're right.