|
Basketball off to a nice start
|
|
|
Posted: 11/20/2012 10:50 PM
Basketball off to a nice start
Solid win tonight over St. Francis to push the early record to 3-1. No need to tear your hair out over football for the next two and a half weeks when we have plenty of promising roundball to fill that void.
Last edited 11/20/2012 10:54 PM by GoBlackKnights85
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2012 11:05 AM
Re: Basketball off to a nice start
St. Francis beat Lafayette in Easton by 11 in their opener. Maybe we have something to hope for. Looks like we have a plebe who can light up the scoreboard (Kyle Wilson) to compliment E. Ellis. In addition we out-rebounded them. Unheard of!! In all three wins we have out-rebounded (& scored more points  ) than our opponents. In the loss to AF we were out-rebounded. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2012 12:01 PM
Re: Basketball off to a nice start
Whats great about this team is they can go 15 deep with not a lot of drop off in talent. This team can score without relying on Herbeck and Ellis all the time.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2012 12:24 PM
Re: Basketball off to a nice start
GoBlackKnights85 wrote: Solid win tonight over St. Francis to push the early record to 3-1. No need to tear your hair out over football for the next two and a half weeks when we have plenty of promising roundball to fill that void. Just goes to show that sports can be interesting no matter who you're playing. We have no business playing ACC quality teams in basketball, and anyone who thinks we can compete with teams from the big five football conferences on a regular basis these days is smokinng too much. The Patriot League is an appropriate level of competition for most of our teams. Go Army |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2012 12:47 PM
Re: Basketball off to a nice start
At halftime last night Ellis had 3 points and Herbeck had 3 points. In years past that meant Army was losing 31 - 16....last night they had a 31-30 lead.
This team has some very talented freshmen and they will continue to get better and grow. The next two games are very winable road games then home for Marist who seems to be down this year.
Dare I say a 6 -1 start is possible? |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2012 3:08 PM
Re: Basketball off to a nice start
The Patriot League is a appropriate level for ALL ARMY TEAMS and that includes the football team.
OK, OK, yell at me but the FBS schedule we now have is just WAY WAY too much for us anymore.
Drop a level? Of course we SHOULD. I DON'T WANT TOO but what the hell is the alternative to a 2-9 record?
We stink playing the teams we do which is about as low as you can get. The administration appears not to give a damn. They just want money to fund a gazillion sports at WP (4,400 students does just not warrant an outlay like that- realistically), so we play a schedule far above our present talent ability (only sport at WP who does that) to pay the bills of an FBS program. That is not conducive to winning at anything.
So we will play Stanford, Oklahoma , ND and the like, continue to get blasted, fire the coach, bring in another guy and the 5 year cycle begins all over again with promises from the new guy that "we practice great, we look good, we are ready", then go out and lose by 30 in the first game.
As fans, we have been brainwashed into thinking by all the phony "coach speak" that we are getting-- "better, improving and looking great".
Tell me , ANYONE, how we are progressing on that score? We 'aint.
Just donate more to the A Club again for next year, buy your season tickets early, come and enjoy the atmosphere and go home from Michie with another "scientillating" 2-5 home record and an overall 2-9 record.
There is a sucker born every day and it is us!
Why, then, do we do it over and over again?
Because we are FANS!! (short for fanatical).
We we are fanatics. We are nuts beyond repair. Its a disease that has no cure. We live with it.
Over and over and over and over and.......
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2012 6:02 PM
Re: Basketball off to a nice start
The key difference though, is that FB scheduling occurs 4-8 years in advance, while basketball usually doesn't get nearly that far out into the future. There's no way to account (or even accurately predict) the ups and downs of lots of FB teams over that long of a span. While I agree we're not going to beat SEC/BIG 10 teams routinely in FB, the Patriot League is shooting too low.
Beat 'em!
---------------------------------------------
--- glarson65 wrote:
Just goes to show that sports can be interesting no matter who you're playing. We have no business playing ACC quality teams in basketball, and anyone who thinks we can compete with teams from the big five football conferences on a regular basis these days is smokinng too much. The Patriot League is an appropriate level of competition for most of our teams.
Go Army
---------------------------------------------
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2012 6:45 PM
Re: Basketball off to a nice start
wp1994 wrote: The key difference though, is that FB scheduling occurs 4-8 years in advance, while basketball usually doesn't get nearly that far out into the future. There's no way to account (or even accurately predict) the ups and downs of lots of FB teams over that long of a span. While I agree we're not going to beat SEC/BIG 10 teams routinely in FB, the Patriot League is shooting too low.
Beat 'em!
---------------------------------------------
--- glarson65 wrote:
Just goes to show that sports can be interesting no matter who you're playing. We have no business playing ACC quality teams in basketball, and anyone who thinks we can compete with teams from the big five football conferences on a regular basis these days is smokinng too much. The Patriot League is an appropriate level of competition for most of our teams.
Go Army
--------------------------------------------- I agree with that completely and was not arguing for a drop to FCS level in football at this point in time. The Patriot League has been a good Division 1 level home for most of our sports programs, but we have a few sports that have other conference affiliations such as hockey, rifle, and wrestling. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/21/2012 7:02 PM
For USMA even to consider joining the Patriot League would be,..
IMO a disgrace. If the best that can be achieved is beating non-scholarship teams with no winning football tradition, they might as well abandon the sport entirely. This at a time when Navy and AF are stepping up in class.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2012 8:48 PM
Re: For USMA even to consider joining the Patriot League would
Im puzzled by all the talk of the fact that we set the football lineup four or five years ago and some of the teams we face improve in the time between agreeing to play them and the game.
Are you saying that we should simply schedule teams that we are confident of beating? A sign of a decent or good football team is not beating the other 10 worst schools in the country. It is being good enough so that we can beat schools that actuallly have good football programs.
I still laugh at our record from 2010....Yes, we won six games, but they came against teams with a collective 17-43 record, plus VMI.....wow, we were a great team that year.....and dont tell me that we beat a good SMU team....while I thought Army played okay, SMU did not show up for the bowl game.
It should also be notd that since 2000, we have beaten exactly six FBS teams that finished the year with winning records. Some of you talk about beating a top 25 team, I would just like to consistently beat .500 or better teams.
Navy beat 12 FBS teams with winning records during the same timespan and AFA beat 14....not much better....it should be noted that Notre Dame beat 31 teams with winning records during the same timespan.
We should strive to be a better team that can beat better teams. The AFA win this year was one of those few times we have managed to beat that has a winning record and wins against quality teams like Nevada.
Boy have you guys set the bar low or what.
Last edited 11/22/2012 9:21 PM by palidog
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2012 11:32 PM
Re: For USMA even to consider joining the Patriot League would
plain wrote: IMO a disgrace. If the best that can be achieved is beating non-scholarship teams with no winning football tradition, they might as well abandon the sport entirely. This at a time when Navy and AF are stepping up in class. Just to clarify my position, I was not suggesting that we drop to FCS level in football. I was merely commenting that Patriot League provides a satisfactory level of competition for us in most sports, and that we don't have to compete against the big schools to enjoy Army's success in those sports. I for one, am happy to hear when one of our teams wins a Patriot League championship and don't discount it because it's not the Big Ten. At the same time, you're incorrect in labeling the Patriot League as non-scholarship teams. The Patriot League is a Division 1 level conference, and all the schools offer scholarships in all sports, including football. Other than football, there are no official distinctions between Patriot League and major conference programs. The Patriot League is an FCS level conference in football, which means that they are limited to 65 scholarships rather than the 85 allowed for FBS teams. Our baseball team, tennis, wrestling, etc. compete in the same NCAA tournaments with all the big schools, and if we should happen to win the Patriot League basketball championship, we'd be seeded somewhere around 15th or 16th in the NCAA basketball tournament as well. Theoretically, Army could be the next Butler or Gonzaga, although I don't expect that to happen in my lifetime. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2012 11:43 PM
Re: For USMA even to consider joining the Patriot League would
i believe that Fordham is the only Patriot LEAgue team that offers scholarships in football. Not sure of this, but i remember reading something about this.....anyone else know????
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2012 12:38 AM
Re: For USMA even to consider joining the Patriot League would
palidog wrote: Im puzzled by all the talk of the fact that we set the football lineup four or five years ago and some of the teams we face improve in the time between agreeing to play them and the game.
Are you saying that we should simply schedule teams that we are confident of beating? A sign of a decent or good football team is not beating the other 10 worst schools in the country. It is being good enough so that we can beat schools that actuallly have good football programs.
I still laugh at our record from 2010....Yes, we won six games, but they came against teams with a collective 17-43 record, plus VMI.....wow, we were a great team that year.....and dont tell me that we beat a good SMU team....while I thought Army played okay, SMU did not show up for the bowl game.
It should also be notd that since 2000, we have beaten exactly six FBS teams that finished the year with winning records. Some of you talk about beating a top 25 team, I would just like to consistently beat .500 or better teams.
Navy beat 12 FBS teams with winning records during the same timespan and AFA beat 14....not much better....it should be noted that Notre Dame beat 31 teams with winning records during the same timespan.
We should strive to be a better team that can beat better teams. The AFA win this year was one of those few times we have managed to beat that has a winning record and wins against quality teams like Nevada.
Boy have you guys set the bar low or what. Several years ago, a "blue ribbon" panel on Army football suggested that we adopt a 4-4-4 formula in scheduling opponents, with 4 teams being teams we would not normally expect to beat, 4 being at our level, and 4 being teams that we would normally expect to win against. I believe that formula is an appropriate one for Army, and it's basically the same formula that Navy follows in scheduling as well. What I and other people have noted, is that it's difficult to identify teams in those three different categories 4-8 years in advance. In the Young and early Sutton era, our solution to the bottom 4 category was to schedule 4 Div 1AA teams every year. We had to depart from that approach because the NCAA changed the rules on bowl eligibility to limit the number of FCS level wins one could count. If you look at Navy's schedule this year, their bottom 4 teams were probably Troy, Texas State, VMI, and Florida Atlantic. Their parity level would be us, AF, and probably East Carolina, San Jose State, or Central Michigan. Their top tier teams were ND, Penn State, and Indiana. ND is an annual event, so it automatically takes up one of their four top level spots. As it turned out their schedule came pretty close to following the 4-4-4 pattern this season. Going back 4-8 years ago, when they were putting together our schedule for this season, you'd have to guess that they figured BC, Wake Forest, and Rutgers among the top level teams, and probably Temple as well. Air Force and Navy have to be considered parity level teams by definition, and Stony Brook, EMU, and Kent State were probably teams that we thought would fall in that beatable category, leaving NIU, Ball State, San Diego State somewhere in the mid or lower tier base on our past performances against them. It was a decent schedule on paper that ended up being considerably tougher than anticipated. I don't think anyone here would argue that Army will ever be capable of competing against top level competition on a regular basis anymore. On the other hand, we can hope to upset a Top 25 team once in a blue moon, we can expect to knock off a lesser team from one of the major conferences every year, and I would expect us to be competitive against teams from the Group of Five conferences, providing we don't end up playing the top teams in those conferences every year. We played competitive football against some good teams this season, and I think most of us would agree that we were a better team than our record showed. We just have to learn how to turn that potential into Ws. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2012 8:23 AM
Re: For USMA even to consider joining the Patriot League would
The league will begin football scholarships in 2013. Google it. There is all kinds of info out there.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2012 10:22 AM
Re: For USMA even to consider joining the Patriot League would
glarson65 wrote:
At the same time, you're incorrect in labeling the Patriot League as non-scholarship teams. The Patriot League is a Division 1 level conference, and all the schools offer scholarships in all sports, including football. Other than football, there are no official distinctions between Patriot League and major conference programs. The Patriot League is an FCS level conference in football, which means that they are limited to 65 scholarships rather than the 85 allowed for FBS teams.
1. No PL schools offer scholarships in all sports, although all give them out in basketball, and many (not all) do offer them in soccer and lax. (Some in field hockey as well.) Until this year, Bucknell had no scholarships in any sport other than basketball. 2. As someone else pointed out, at the moment only Fordham has any scholarship football players - which has made them ineligible for the PL title. However, each PL team is now allowed to give out up to 15 scholarships in the Class of 2013 and will eventually be allowed to go up to a max of 60. Georgetown is not planning to offer any scholarships at the moment, and a couple other schools may stop short of 60. BTW, no FCS team can give out 65 - 63 is the max. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2012 2:50 PM
Re: For USMA even to consider joining the Patriot League would
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2012 3:06 PM
it seems the WP brass agree with Rab, that we should drop in...
class and play bottom of the barrel teams which will alllow us to compile a winning record by any means necessary. We'll be ineligible for bowl games, lose TV coverage and Michie will draw 10-12,000 a game excluding the Corps, but so what, those folks say.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2012 7:49 PM
Re: For USMA even to consider joining the Patriot League would
gl65 - I thought the panel's recommendation was 3-3-3, along the categories you mentioned, plus the other 2 SA teams that we're going to schedule anyway? The whole point of classifying them by tier was to pick 3 from each column (like a meal deal at a Chinese restaurant) since we have to develop our entire schedule on our own as an independent.
By the way, even for those PL schools / teams not offering direct athletic scholarships, they have ways of finding financial aid for players when necessary. I cannot say it happens in every case, but it does happen in many examples.
Beat 'em!
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2012 8:36 PM
Re: For USMA even to consider joining the Patriot League would
Bison137 wrote:
glarson65 wrote:
At the same time, you're incorrect in labeling the Patriot League as non-scholarship teams. The Patriot League is a Division 1 level conference, and all the schools offer scholarships in all sports, including football. Other than football, there are no official distinctions between Patriot League and major conference programs. The Patriot League is an FCS level conference in football, which means that they are limited to 65 scholarships rather than the 85 allowed for FBS teams.
1. No PL schools offer scholarships in all sports, although all give them out in basketball, and many (not all) do offer them in soccer and lax. (Some in field hockey as well.) Until this year, Bucknell had no scholarships in any sport other than basketball.
2. As someone else pointed out, at the moment only Fordham has any scholarship football players - which has made them ineligible for the PL title. However, each PL team is now allowed to give out up to 15 scholarships in the Class of 2013 and will eventually be allowed to go up to a max of 60. Georgetown is not planning to offer any scholarships at the moment, and a couple other schools may stop short of 60. BTW, no FCS team can give out 65 - 63 is the max. I stand corrected. After doing the research I should have done before commenting on Palidog's post, I notice that the NCAA limit for FCS level schools is 63 equivalencies, which can be given out as 63 full scholarships or allocated as partial scholarships to as many as 85 football players. Just another example of how things are changing in college football. Lehigh ranked 13th in the FCS and Colgate ranked 24th without the benefit of athletic scholarships. Makes you wonder how they'll do once they can give out scholarships. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2012 8:47 PM
Re: For USMA even to consider joining the Patriot League would
wp1994 wrote: gl65 - I thought the panel's recommendation was 3-3-3, along the categories you mentioned, plus the other 2 SA teams that we're going to schedule anyway? The whole point of classifying them by tier was to pick 3 from each column (like a meal deal at a Chinese restaurant) since we have to develop our entire schedule on our own as an independent.
By the way, even for those PL schools / teams not offering direct athletic scholarships, they have ways of finding financial aid for players when necessary. I cannot say it happens in every case, but it does happen in many examples.
Beat 'em! You might be right about the specific recommendation, although that doesn't add up to 12 games. The principle is the same, and it's a good one if you can figure out four years in advance which teams belong in each category. Even the Ivy's figure out ways of attracting athletes to their programs. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
Army Insiders