the green team

I thought I've been told at nauseum that "everyone in their fanbase has moved on" hmmmm

The Idaho State buyout debacle was set up by the Bunning administration. Um, I'm pretty sure buy-outs have been pretty common for longer than the last few years. That is a funny statement.

So what you are saying? You have 1st hand knowledge of players feeling slighted of a coach's attention? That's what you are saying. Meaning a player is telling you this. I guess my question is, exactly what players feel this way? Because it makes obvious sense that Oliver, having been a ballhandling guard to work with....balhandling guards (Anderson&Webb). It wouldn't make much sense for him to dedicate his time working with bigs or wings. Does it to you. Also, I can honestly say that I don't know anyone that actually gets their name listed on the roster- player or coach...so this is just conjecture... but it would seem to me that if a player wants more attention or wants to work more with a coach all they need to do- is ask. That's why I listen to games even when I'm at them because I'm able to glean a few more details, such as it was pointed out that Anderson has been the one to put in the extra time and has wanted more individual film breakdown. He's been the one seeking it, according to radio. It sounds like he was the one to go the extra mile. If other players are having issues with that, it would be their problem not Andersons or Coach Oliver. I don't know if there is or isn't team chemistry issues- but if this one of them, this is just silly, and we apparently need to grow up.

I know during the broadcasts that one of the new coach's that has been talked about is Coach Oliver- where it's been mentioned he has played in the NBA and professionally overseas, and has really worked a lot with Anderson & Webb. I would venture to say that has been very apparent as those 2 players appear to be making strides in their games. If you watch any college or pro basketball games. Rarely, do the assistants do a lot of coaching during the game. Coach Moody, I believe was an exception- especially vocally-- although I see Coach Martin is the next vocal after Jones during games I've seen- plus he's always saying things in Coach Jone's ear (this is as it should be as he is the Associate Head Coach). From there I think the other assistants are relatively quiet but I'm not entirely sold that it's any different than most college programs. Most of those guys are far more hands on during practice time. I do want to point out that the SDSU loss was embarrasing. I have a feeling that they are a very good team, but we had better be improved the next time we play. I did not see it, but from the way it sounded we were outclassed in every category. One area that I hope we get better is effort. Effort is evident in rebounds and defense. That is always something you can control. And despite our offensive defeciencies at times there is no reason to take of plays off defensively. I think we can get alot better in that area. I hope that happens on Thursday. We may not win the game, but let's at least make them have to play their very best to eek out a win. I never like to lose, but if the effort and commitment is there, I will likely give the team the benefit of the doubt.

What about Idalski, then? I just watched the Women's Hockey team this weekend, and if you ask me they are greatly underachieving from what we've been sold. Women's hockey, in my mind, it shouldn't take much to get to the top of the heap and yet we've lost 3 times this year to a barely mediocre UMD team. I do agree that coaching can be a problem but in this instance of getting blown off the floor by SDSU- I would say that it was the players not showing up. Now the coach should shoulder some of the blame but not all. I will admit that if we don't get to a minimum of 15 wins this year, I will be severly dissappointed. I'm not going to call for a coach's firing right now, but I'm going to watch the remainder of the season and evaluate from there.

I'll re-state. It is not easy to win on the road. That being said, this was a tough one to lose, considering how well we were playing in the first half at one point. In regards to the Huff question. He was 6 of 16 from the floor, and I can only go with what I heard on the broadcast as I was only listening, but it sounds like- from what I counted that he forced 3 shots. So he forced 3 shots, at least he was trying to do something. I will ask this. So we are being critical about Huff but yet we are not being critical of players who are coming off the bench- many of whom are not even looking to score. No offense but you have to be a threat to score in order to be difficult to defend. The one bench player that does that is Schuler but after that I would say that we have guys that won't even look at the basket. It's easy to be critical of Huff sometimes but at least he's going towards the basket- trying to draw contact, drawing defenders etc. Believe it or not at home games I have seen him dish it out after a drive only to see the person who receives the pass to completely pass up on a wide open look. If I'm the guy that just drove it and swung it to you- you should at least try bury it. Otherwise, what is the point? Listen we lost the UMKC game- but they are not a bad team. They are an ok team. Who lives and dies by the 3. Listening to Coach Jone's comments following the game he indicated that guarding the 3 was at the top of the list on their scout in what they conveyed to their team repeatedly in the lead up to the game. Apparently, players chose to either ignore or not give it enough weight, because the Kangaroos hit 12 3's at a 65% clip. That's why we lost- that and free throws. We didn't hit 2 foul shots on a trip to the line until late in the game---the person to do it...yup you guessed it- Huff. Offensively, I think we will be fine if we continue to be better in scoring off the bench, but we had better start defending better, that will lead to wins--and yes to wins on the road. If there is one thing I know about SDSU coming up it's that they like the 3 point shot too, and we had better have a desire of stopping it. Individuals did not lose the UMKC game, we lost it as a team. Every team has place where they need to grow, the question is will they? Go Sioux!

Actually, Star- I don't mean to call you out, because goodness knows I'm wrong far more often than I am right. But the UND at Idaho St. game was played at Holt Arena, the same arena that the Football team played in. It was mentioned a number of times during the broadcast and it's listed on the box score.

4 Ag School starters had at least 4 turnovers against The Leathernecks. Goes to show you that team knows how to play D. I hope we start to show some pride in our D,  It really could be a good way to win some games by working our tails off on D. I guarantee it will lead to a lot of easy baskets with our bunch- but they got to commit to working their butts off on the defensive end.

Hey Bud-you bet I am going to defend Webb, as I explained, as you apparently are too dense to do some actual looking into his numbers, maybe that shouldn't surprise me. As I explained and I will again- his turnovers have only recently increased significantly because of the Montana & Western Illinois game. One game we won- the other we lost. I would say the game that we won (Montana) was largely due in part of his play despite his turnovers. Actually, he is averaging 3.3 turnovers a game-having 20 total through 6 games considering that PG's handle the ball the majority of the game- that is not an outrageous number and also, let's remember that he had back to back games of 6, which significantly raised his average. Since you claim that is such a horrible number for a point guard let's check another school- in this case, Kansas a team we play New Years Eve, Tyshawn Taylor is their point guard he has 22 through 6 games a 3.6 TO avg per game. Honestly, if your point guard turns it over 3 or less times per game- your doing quite well. We just need him to avoid having those 6 per game and we'll all be fine. I know he's capable of it. Let's also remember that he rebounds better than most point guards and every rebound over a 2 per game avg. is a plus in that column from that postition against the national avg. My goodness it's awefully easy for you to be sooo critical, of this team- especially certain individuals. Do you even like them? Certainly, this team needs to get better, needs mature- but I think that criticism is way way off base.

Actually, Webb had 3 turnovers last night (boxscore). One of those he got fouled trying to score underneath but got no-call and ended up losing the ball. I don't know if that qualifies as a turnover machine...at least last night? I would say that you would have an argument with 6 each in the games versus Montana & W. Illinois. He had 0 against Bradley and at that point of the season was at a 2:1 assist to turnover ratio which is what you want from a point guard. Now not so much. If want to talk about turnovers the worst two of the game happened on successive plays when Archer turned in over just short of the half court line followed by Mitchell who dribbled into a double team and promply gave it up for an easy lay-up...that sequence changed the game. Jamal Webb is a good player and an important player...I believe he will be fine and will continue to learn and improve. Anderson, after starting off on a tear, he's had in my mind, 2 very average to bad games. He needs to pick it up again. He's dribbling into bad spots or not getting anywhere on the dribble. I believe Anderson is still young and will have far more strong performances than weak ones. I think we need to feed the post earlier. Often times the post will flash open- we will miss it then try force it in when they are being really harassed. Result: turnover or a forced tough shot. I just think we need to use our vision- if we get a post touch early, we don't have to score on it but we can get reversals and the defense to move. Which result in better scoring looks.

Hey I'm just relaying what I heard the coach's called it. Apparrently, it has all of us baffled- with so many opinions and takes on it. So maybe Molinari (WIU, Head Coach) is the defensive genius people say he is. Because none of us can come to a consensus of whether they were playing zone or man, and our players couldn't decipher it frequently enough to be successful against it either.

Also, they haven't mentioned anything on the injury front in recent broadcasts, but I think it was about 4 games ago that they mentioned on the radio that Goodman had a setback with his previous injury and at that time there wasn't any time table for his return. That's all I've heard and there hasn't been an update that I've heard of. Has anyone else?

Actually, they said during the radio broadcast the only defense that W. Illinois plays is a man to man that switches everything and once they close off the drive, they sag off you so they can take away any pass to the post. I give W. Illinois credit, they definitely know how to defend- it was proven against us and I believe they held Michigan to just 59 points. As much as we struggled with our offense against their defense though I was more discouraged with our defensive effort. That's a reflection on our guys not taking the opponent seriously. As coach remarked in his comments after the game that the staff can tell the guys until they are nearly blue in the face that they had better respect the opponent, but it's the actual players that have to carry out the message. They didn't do that in this one. It's a maturity thing and a tough lesson to learn. But hopefully it's been learned. Also, I request that our team start valuing possesions a little more. That doesn't mean you have to use the entire shot clock it just means take care of the ball. Quit giving the ball away especially with unforced turnovers- that is frustrating. I don't care if the best scoring opportunity comes in the first 10 seconds of the shot clock or the last 10, but quit turning the ball over so at least you get a shot.

I love this. People are having differing opinions about Sioux Men's Basketball. That is awesome. This is a good sign- in regards to interest in the program. I fall more on the side that Schuler is one of our more poised players when it get's down to it. Any player is susceptible of having bad moments with turnovers. Look at Webb, he had a couple of doozies in the 2nd half against that zone, BUT he made some of the biggest plays down the stretch-including the ball steal & score in ot- (while being held mind you). My feeling is that the key to being a good D1 basketball player is having a short memory. Schuler did, yes have a couple of bad turnovers, but there was a couple of really suspect no-calls there too. But then when they did blow the whistle, he became at that point and time our most poised player at the line. Listen, 5 & 32 for Montana were monsters as players. Tremendously good in-fact. But I take this away from the Montana game- when Montana tried guarding our guards in Man to Man during the 1st half--they were losing that battle. That includes Schuler as well. That's the important thing. This team still has a long ways to go but this was a great win and again it has added another infusion of hope that they are building something for the Big Sky.

TV- Fox College Sports Central. Direct TV- 623

BYU is definitely an institution of arrogance personified. That's why I'm always thrilled when Utah knocks the cocky right out of em, no matter the sport. And I don't even have a dog in this fight. I can't believe that HBU got into the Southland considering their facilities. So exactly where does the Big East stand in regards to membership in the next few years? They want to keep the BCS football money flowing in but in all honesty they don't really have the teams for it. If there is one conference that gets a lions share of the basketball money it's been the Big East. And even with the teams that moved out they still would have plenty of teams getting to the dance and taking a chunk of the pie.

I'm sorry, let me get this right. The students? the students? We don't get students at basketball games- their choice I guess. Why would this be any different? You set the schedule when you can get the game in. After all you are working within the framework of the other teams schedule as well. That includes the NDSU game on a Tuesday. Kansas has played Missouri and Texas and all others-big rivals plenty of times on Monday nights. Do you think they are complaining- because it's at the beginning of the work week? Really? I would give those who use this argument a little leeway if indeed we were playing double-headers on these nights...but we are not. It's about 2 1/2 hours of time if you arrrive 15 minutes prior and leave immediately following. My goodness we have become great excuse makers around here. I'm not under any illusion that this game will be packed- (thats unfortunate_, but it just fails to make sense at minimum that we won't be able to get over 2000 for this one. That would be dissappointing, but there's no reason to think any differently if you use this past weekends football game as an example and guage of what interest is like towards other sports other than hockey right now. Which is baffling to me considering it appears most are on the upswing, and we are at the very tail end of the transition.

Great win for the team. Madi Buck has the potential to become a monster player for us. The reason I like her is not for the obvious of scoring which is great, but she will just out compete her opponent. That's awesome. About the zone. It was very effective in the first half. The numbers for this team coming in showed that except for one player they weren't a great 3 point shooting team. And in the 1st half they weren't- chalk a win up for the zone there. In the 2nd half they shot the 3 way better, the zone obviously was going to look worse. But I think the zone was necessary for this team. That Agunbiades, (sp?) was a phenomenal player. She really was fun to watch. Had we just manned up for a good portion of the game she would have just taken over from 15 feet and in from around the hoop. I really enjoyed watching her. With the zone we were able to help early on her defensively. Plus, by playing zone the whole game, it led up to the play of the game which is when we switched to man, it threw Duquense into dissarray- led to a turnover and the easy lay up that sealed the win. Great call by the staff on that one. This team is building, and I like it. Rothfusz and Lauck both had nice games hopefully they and the team can continue to build on it.

I agree, I never like to lose. But I take away the fact that despite some lapses we showed the ability to get back in the game a number of times- and make a go of it. It's tough to win on the road. No matter who and where you play. I think despite our deficiencies, I think they can all be corrected and improved upon. It's one loss, on the road and it pointed out areas where we need to do better. If we use it as a positive teaching and learning opportunity- I believe we will become a better team. Let's just get better, that's my philosophy with this team from one game to the next- if we do, we'll have a very good team by the end of the season.

Amen to that- don't know how much tailgating were going to do today- maybe a little. But, definitely going to be at the game. Go Sioux!

Ok let me get this straight--from your marketing standpoint. You say that football & basketball haven't been marketed. Uh, I believe they've received a lions share of the marketing, why? Because even the marketing department knows that hockey needs very little if any in recent years. It markets itself and resources can be used elsewhere. ie the other sports. The great thing about UND is that you can visit with many of the integral figures involved as they are easily accesible walking around at tailgating, sioux boosters. I visited with Lisa Persuiti (sp?) about this very subject a few years ago, and she pretty much said the same thing. Now to your point of marketing to the Greater Grand Forks area and the Red River Valley as opposed to the rest of the state. Well, I hate to tell you this that I travel the state for my job and I do hear radio spots promoting UND Athletics. And perhaps UND has the biggest leverage in that they have the Fighting Sioux Sports Network that reaches a vast majority of viewers throughout the state. What better advertising then to showcase product and oh yeah, they have promotional ads during those broadcasts too. I do have to argue as a business man about your logic of spending more further away from the region. Let's say you spend a lot of money marketing in Bismarck, Minot and Williston as opposed to the Red River Valley. Do you think that is a good business decision? If your trying to sell tickets- many are going to discount the opportunity on the distance that it requires to come to a game for that reason alone- those that want to come are already coming. Not say you don't need a presence but in my mind they already do and to recklessly spend on foolish marketing campaigns further and further away from the base won't necessarily equal ROI- return on investment. Your other point about the commercials is an argument about creative. That's 6 of one, a dozen of the other when it comes to personal preference. I will say this... that the simple message is often times- the most effective.

Ok so you are all over Faison for scheduling South Dakota School of Mines. But do you then raise him to the rafters as he was instrumental for getting us into a big time conference (Big Sky) where we are getting a full conference schedule and not just 4 games like the the Great West? It would seem a bit hypocritical not to. As has been pointed out many of our esteemed on here (the likes of RD and Sica) many of the big FCS schools schedule a lower tier school just as many FBS schools schedule an FCS school. It's one game. Our Big Sky schedule along with our FBS game is going be way better than anything we've had in over 6 years. I'm refuse to get worked up over School of the Mines. Hopefully, our schedule will continue to get better as we become a full fledged D1 member.

I'm curious as to where UND Athletics marketing is failing you. Everytime I turn on the tv at home I see a promo for some upcoming game. Evertime I turn on the radio- ah yes another promo. There's facebook and twitter. And according to my daughter who attends, the students are constantly inundated to the point that there is chalk on the sidewalk when they walk to class. Not to mention the Herald basically caters to them by writing story after story about the sports programs day after day. I'm a little surprised that a took a phone call of all things to give them kudos in marketing. I guess my point is I find it hard to believe that they've been doing a bad job. A simple phone call isn't going to sway it one way or another. It's another nice addition but I think they have utilized many avenues.

Yes I'm sure it will be lack of effort when it comes to scheduling. If I know our athletics department,they want as many home quality oppenents as they can get. I'm curious as to why you feel differently? When did Faison pee in your cereal?

Whoa- Hold on here, I have never flushed Huff. He is a tremendous talent who hopefully will continue to develop into a a well rounded team player. To go down as the best in UND Basketball would be quite an accomplishment but pardon me for not giving him that crown yet. My concern is only what has been reported here- that was about a tweet. I felt, if true- the tweet indicated a lack of maturity. Doesn't make him a bad person, but I would hope that if indeed he tweeted that, that he would eventually grow up a little here and see that there is the bigger picture than just his stat totals. We need him- but maybe-- just maybe... the player needs his team too. I don't think thats too out of line. If he continues to have success and the team does as well, I don't see how he wouldn't see his stat totals increase. I've never said we didn't need him, we do need him and for you to interject otherwise, well, that is just plain reckless and inaccurate. Also, this is a fan board- there is no reason to get supersensitive about anything. It seems my criticism is geared towards more of the alleged tweet- that is a maturity issue. I appears that your maturity issue is that you need to get negative about everyone else on the team. I really don't think that is necessary. My observation right now is that there is too much of the "Me" in culture right now. The "I've got to get mine". Whatever, happen to the "We"? That's all I'm saying. I hope that the whole team embraces "We" because in the end they can be something special. Notice, I said- they- that's team and individuals alike, including Huff.