WBB: Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

Started by Andrew Wagner, July 27, 2005, 03:52:04 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

hoops49

Quote from: The Champ on January 25, 2007, 10:09:33 AM
hoops

You're right about the intensity/aggressiveness of the game - which is usually the case when these two teams meet.

As to the offense - Heather Witt's three pointers were a thing of beauty!  Ashley Anderson's presence under the basket was huge.  And Heidi Arciszewski kept throwing the ball up there - and enough of them went in for her team leading 14 points

Michelle Burns looked tired to me last night.  Midway through the first half she really seemed to be "huffing".

Stout was led by Kelsey Duoss with 16 and Julia Hirssig came off the bench to add 13 points - joining Duoss in double figures.

Neither team shot real well - 34.5% for UWEC and 39.2% for Stout.  Both teams threw up some REAL ugly shots at times - totally missing the basket - and sometimes not even coming close to the backboard or the basket. 

Big difference was at the FT line - with Stout having a 12 point advantage.


Yup, I agree with all of what you say.

We just needed about 3 more of our usually productive players to hit those shots.

crazy4hoops

Quote from: The Champ on January 25, 2007, 09:20:38 AM
buf and bulk

What do you mean no EC defense...



That's an excellent hold Brittani Hakanson has on Dani Boese in this shot.  I'm surprised that Dani still has a jersey on... :o

That's hardly an uncontested "bunny" being made by Char Edwards there!

The key to the game was when Stout went on an 11-2 run to close out the first half.   Jenny McDermid scored five points in the run and Julia Hirssig  added four points as we took a 12 point lead into the locker room.  That threw the UWEC game plan out the window, and the Blugolds were never able to make a strong enough run to get closer than 6 in the second half.

Great crowd of over 2,000 people last night.  First WIAC team to break the 2,000 mark all season! ;D

I find it funny that any Stout fan would be displaying pics of holding jerseys and what not considering that any coach in the WIAC that I talk to prepares for Stout in the practices before by have players hold jerseys and play as physical as possible.

Sounds like WW is the big surprise this year....too bad EC didn't make a better showing to make things a little more interesting in the standings.

foul_language

Stoutguy--
No scheit! When did she graduate? I graduated from LUHS--not many people believe there were high schools when I graduated, but by gosh, there were. Where is she from? Is she a Minocqua-ite? I, myself, am from one of the poorer feeder communities.

What a hugely small world!

hoops49

Quote from: foul_language on January 25, 2007, 11:20:47 AM
Sounds like referees all over the conference were not having peak performances last night. Probably not determining outcomes but creating some hostility/confusion on the court, nonetheless.

Our ref-who-blew-the-call is a Minocqua attorney (a unique brand of legal professional). Several years ago, my daughter caught his daughter in the nose with an elbow while rebounding in a practice. Boy, did she bleed! I don't know for sure the nose got broken, but it seems likely. We never really discussed it. I suspect he'd never sue (I'm sure he'd never even have considered it ): it would be one of those blood/turnip situations.



I really think we have a problem with the reffing at the college level in this conference. Not sure what's up, but you can't go to a game and see good reffing anymore. It's really a problem. It almost seems like they just are out there to earn their money. I'm not saying it's all refs, but quite a few.

foul_language

QuoteI find it funny that any Stout fan would be displaying pics of holding jerseys and what not considering that any coach in the WIAC that I talk to prepares for Stout in the practices before by have players hold jerseys and play as physical as possible

Are you sure you said what you thought you said? If you did say what you thought you said, then it's not surprising opposing players are holding jerseys, since that's what they've been practicing. Doesn't seem legal, somehow, but if that's the only way you can stop them, I guess it's a strategy.

badgerwarhawk

I don't know that Stout fouls any more than any other team in the league or that they get away with any more fouls than any other team either.  But I think you misunderstand what Crazy is saying, FL.  They aren't practicing holding because that's the only way they can stop Stout defensively.  They're practicing it because it's the only way they can prepare for the holding that is going to happen to them, not by them.   

I tend to agree with the comments regarding the quality of officiating this year.    I'd quit selling insurance if someone would give me a nickle for every travel that goes uncalled and the women's game continues to get more and more physical.    I used to feel that things would be better if the officials allowed the women to play as physically as the men do.  But now I'm thinking, "be careful what you wish for, it might come true." 

Again, I stress, none of these comments are intended to single out Stout's style.  It's a league wide issue imo. 
"Just think twice is my only advice."

foul_language

I KNOW what he meant to say, but it's not what he said. I know he was implying that Stout women play some dirty form of basketball and other teams have to 'practice' that in order to compete against them. To that I say 'phooey.' I asked my daughter point blank if her team was coached to do all or any of the things they've been accused of, and she said 'no.' Were they coached to play an aggressive, fast game? Yes, they were/probably are. Were they coached to cheat? No.

So, my question AGAIN is why do people not accept in a women's game what they will in a men's game?  Women too delicate to get bumped? Do we still believe that if women particpate in sports that make them jump, fall down, bounce, or tumble their internal organs will get messed up? Do we still buy the "women don't sweat, they glow" thing?

I was at a soccer game where a player was called for a foul, and an older man in the crowd said (and I am quoting directly), "My granddaughter would never foul." Horse-apples. It's perception. You can't tell me that the WIAC teams are either nice or naughty, Stout being the consummate naughty and everyone else the nice. Making Stout out to be a bunch of thugs is neither productive nor realistic. If it makes you feel better to believe the winning team is cheating or playing dirty, so be it, but that doesn't make it so.

Nothing like a good spout-off to clear one's spleen.

badgerwarhawk

Just to clarify...I didn't refer to it as a "dirty form of basketball,"  that anyone was "coached to cheat," or that Stout is a "bunch of thugs."  They are physical and play more aggressively than some other teams do.  That's their style and, as their record clearly indicates, it works for them.

I can't recall the last time I left the gym feeling we had lost because the other team cheated or played dirty.  It certainly wasn't my feeling when Stout outplayed us over the final three minutes and took one in our gym.  Even though a critical traveling call, which many of our people obviously felt was a blocking foul on Duoss (her 5th), went against us and was the rallying point for Stout.  We lost that game because we fell apart after the call and only played 37 minutes of basketball while Stout played the full 40.   A lesson learned.



"Just think twice is my only advice."

foul_language

I apologize for over-reacting. Of course I get defensive; it's what I do best.

jdoug2

First, I hope it's ok if I post over here. My niece plays for Fonbonne. Second, I can relate to how women's ball is changing. My niece played for a very good private school down here in Texas and they were very agressive on both ends of the floor. There were many teams, coaches, parents,  that thought they were too rough. What it generally came down to was, how is the game being called. If the refs had a quick whistle they toned it down. If both teams were willing to go at it, then the refs generally let them go. And since I live in Texas I don't get to see too many of her games at Fontbonne. The ones I have seen it appears as though it's the same. The refs have the ability to control how the game will be played. Even if one of the teams is very agressive the refs can dial it back. Maybe the leagues want more physical play and have informed the refs throughout. Just a thought. And thanks for letting me ramble.
Go GRIFFINS

foul_language

Who doesn't love a Rambler?

I think it's true in any sport: the refs, umps, officials of any stripe, can control the play. sometimes they over-control, sometimes under, sometimes just right. It's the people in the stands that usually have a problem with how the game is played, even when the players on the floor don't.

Voice of the Titans

Quote from: Just Bill on January 25, 2007, 10:09:59 AM
Quote from: voft on January 25, 2007, 10:03:35 AM
Quote from: Just Bill on January 24, 2007, 09:43:43 PM
Point leads Oshkosh 46-45 with 1:02 to play.

UPDATE:  Kranz misses the front end of the bonus for SP with :25.  SP's Webber steals the ball from Knapp on the other end, which leads to two free throws for Houghton with :09.6.  In the middle of Houghton's first free throw the horn blasts, and she misses the attempt.  The refs let play continue, Oshkosh rebounds, rushes down the floor but Knapp misses with a two seconds left.  Point secures the rebound to win the game.

Point scored their last points of the game at the 6:13 mark!

Not the fault of the score table at UWO, the official just gave the ball to the FT shooter before the second horn.
True, that's a referee's error, but a sharp scoreboard operator would omit that last horn if they see that the ball has been put into play (erroneously or not).  I've had to do that myself.

I'm sure he was just doing his job and watching the time tick off for the second horn. But it was the ref's lack of communication with each other. But it was like that the whole game. Heck, a few times they EACH could have counted to three and then drew straws to see who would make the 3-second call. But that didn't happen, either.
We started that WRST Sports sh**.

bulk19

Champ -

A bunny, in my book, and hoops lingo, is an open, uncontested shot, usually a layup or a dunk. The photo you provided isn't an example of the several bunnies the 'Golds defense allowed, so it doesn't exactly refute my statement that Stout had way too many uncontested bunnies last night...

One could probably make a case that there are fouls and jersey holdings on every single play. I'm sure you can find lots of pictures from last night's game of this happening, on both ends, and in any other game. But go back and look at the tape of the game from last night, and you'll see examples of the porpous D the 'Golds played...

You can't always control how well you shoot, or the percentage you hit from the field. You're going to have a bad night shooting wise once in a while. But what do you do to compensate on those nights? PLAY D!

Defense is an attitude and mentality, and wins championships. And that is one thing you, as a player can control - how well you play D, and how much intensity and heart you bring to it. It's something the 'Golds have done very well as a team as of late, and have fed off that and turned it into offense on the other end. But way too many lapses last night...

Stout deserves credit, but some of the success last night wasn't a case of terrific play calling or fast breaks or picks that freed up the lane, or Blugold players being out of position. It was just poor, porous D on EC's point, to allow those bunnies.

And that's what I saw, sitting from my seat in the bleachers...

The Champ

Quote from: crazy4hoops on January 25, 2007, 01:00:51 PMI find it funny that any Stout fan would be displaying pics of holding jerseys and what not considering that any coach in the WIAC that I talk to prepares for Stout in the practices before by have players hold jerseys and play as physical as possible.

Sounds like WW is the big surprise this year....too bad EC didn't make a better showing to make things a little more interesting in the standings.

Well, I find it interesting that you would say that, considering that 2 of the other HC coaches in the WIAC were tutored by Coach T at Stout.  Cindy Hovet of RF played for Mark and is in the UW Stout Sports Hall of Fame.  Keri Carollo of WW was one of Mark's assistant coaches.  And her assistant Amy Zellinger (possibly another Stout HOF member when she becomes eligible) was a star player for Mark also.

Both RF and WW play a very similar style of ball.  I would argue that some of the other teams in the WIAC practice a more physical style of ball in attempt to slow the game down to their comfort level. 

There is a reason behind my avatar and the word "Faster" underneath it - Stout plays a very fast style of ball - which they can do because of their depth.  The whole intent is to wear the opposing team down - and it works much of the time.

Regardless, my point was that EC played more aggressive defense than what was being reported and that there weren't that many "uncontested bunnies".  To be honest, I think Stout gave up as many as they got last night.

I happened to see that photo of Layne Pitt's and thought it was the perfect one to show how things were contested under the basket.  The hold was amusing to me - only because of how Dani's jersey was being stretched to the max...  It was not my intent to condemn the EC team as playing dirty.  Things happen in a BB game.

bulk19

Champ - The 'Golds have played aggressive D the whole season, and quite well, as of late.

But if you've been following them all year, like buf and I have, you'd have seen that they did have several lapses last night. There were far too many plays where Stout players took it to the rack, and the defensive player who got beat had no help. Thus, bunnies. I can think of at least five, and I don't recall any on fast breaks...

I can't speak for buf, but what I think he and I are saying is that we were not pleased with how the defense was, and are in no way trying to discredit the your team or the Stout O. Rather, we, who have most likely seen this team more than you have this year, were disappointed in how the 'Golds played defensively, compared to how they can and have been, and expected a better performance and more than they gave...