• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

MBBALL To Be….Or Not To Be……

S

Sport

Well-known member
To be or not to be….that is the question. And the answer is AGGRESSIVE. Watching tonight’s game Cal Baptist (13) vs Kansas (3) CBU lost by 8 pts after being down around 20. The game the other night between Idaho (15) and I forget but that’s not relevant to this post. What is relevant is that both teams, CBU and UI came out and pushed the ball up the floor and drove to the basket repeatedly even though they were undersized and outmanned.
My issue with Travis’s team, and I love the guy, is that does not seem to be part of his philosophy. Maybe his offense is designed that way or he doesn’t/can’t recruit slashers or more aggressive type of players.
I remember last year Whitney was always looking to go to the basket. And for his size he was successful more often than not. I hope when the portal opens Travis goes after an aggressive pt. guard. This years performance was an example of what a good point guard means to the team. No, Money was not nor will he probably ever be a true pt. guard. Money’s skills lie in other areas.
Anyway that’s my opinion and I’m sticking with it.
 
I'll bite--and agree completely.

I love open-floor, fast-paced, high-risk basketball, of the style that I saw last night between Arkansas and High Point. That was a fun game to watch. Back and forth, up and down, full court passes, flying slam dunks, extremely entertaining.

But alas, that is not the style Travis plays. Oh, he promised that when he took the job, but it turns out he's very conservative--play defense first, eliminate the turnovers, run a tightly controlled half-court offense. He has loosened the reins on the three-ball, thank God, but the offense remains rooted in the old-fashioned fundamentals-first philosophy of basketball, a la Mike Montgomery, who himself was slow to adjust to the new era of basketball.

Very much reminds me of the traditional football approach of four yards and a cloud of dust, versus the "grass basketball" approach to offense that Don Read brought to the Griz. Not only did it work, it was fun to watch. It filled the seats at Wash-Griz, the while attendance plummeted at Dahlberg.

For me, basketball became a boring game to watch--behemoth men grinding and bumping in the tiny post area, with the occasional long-distance shot by a "three-point specialist." It wasn't until a Steph Curry came along that we saw the full dimensions of what basketball could be, in all its exciting glory. And it wasn't just his shooting. Google his all-time great passes and you'll see, a la Magic and Pistol Pete, how exciting passing can be in the game of basketball, especially when those passes are made on the run, in fast-paced open-court basketball.

Alas, that's not Travis. Between Woody Hayes and Don Read, his philosophy is closer to that of Hayes. We'll continue to walk the ball up the court, pass it around and around the perimter in a set offense, with little opportunity for the style of basketball that is most captivating to fans. So. Be. It.
 
Last edited:
Just for the hell of it. Note particulary the behind the back pass to Durant--third clip in against the Lakers. Possibly the best single pass in the history of NBA basketball. An aboluste jaw-dropper. Reggie Miller was doing color for that game. He coldn;t believer it.

 
Last edited:
citygriz said:
I'll bite--and agree completely.

I love open-floor, fast-paced, high-risk basketball, of the style that I saw last night between Arkansas and High Point. That was a fun game to watch. Back and forth, up and down, full court passes, flying slam dunks, extremely entertaining.

But alas, that is not the style Travis plays. Oh, he promised that when he took the job, but it turns out he's very conservative--play defense first, eliminate the turnovers, run a tightly controlled half-court offense. He has loosened the reins on the three-ball, thank God, but the offense remains rooted in the old-fashioned fundamentals-first philosophy of basketball, a la Mike Montgomery, who himself was slow to adjust to the new era of basketball.

Very much reminds me of the traditional football approach of four yards and a cloud of dust, versus the "grass basketball" approach to offense that Don Read brought to the Griz. Not only did it work, it was fun to watch. It filled the seats at Wash-Griz, the while attendance plummeted at Dahlberg.

For me, basketball became a boring game to watch--behemoth men grinding and bumping in the tiny post area, with the occasional long-distance shot by a "three-point specialist." It wasn't until a Steph Curry came along that we saw the full dimensions of what basketball could be, in all its exciting glory. And it wasn't just his shooting. Google his all-time great passes and you'll see, a la Magic and Pistol Pete, how exciting passing can be in the game of basketball, especially when those passes are made on the run, in fast-paced open-court basketball.

Alas, that's not Travis. Between Woody Hayes and Don Read, his philosophy is closer to that of Hayes. We'll continue to walk the ball up the court, pass it around and around the perimter in a set offense, with little opportunity for the style of basketball that is most captivating to fans. So. Be. It.
Click to expand...
New president, new AD and athletic dept and new basketball coaches, clean house and start over.
 
citygriz said:
I'll bite--and agree completely.

I love open-floor, fast-paced, high-risk basketball, of the style that I saw last night between Arkansas and High Point. That was a fun game to watch. Back and forth, up and down, full court passes, flying slam dunks, extremely entertaining.

But alas, that is not the style Travis plays. Oh, he promised that when he took the job, but it turns out he's very conservative--play defense first, eliminate the turnovers, run a tightly controlled half-court offense. He has loosened the reins on the three-ball, thank God, but the offense remains rooted in the old-fashioned fundamentals-first philosophy of basketball, a la Mike Montgomery, who himself was slow to adjust to the new era of basketball.

Very much reminds me of the traditional football approach of four yards and a cloud of dust, versus the "grass basketball" approach to offense that Don Read brought to the Griz. Not only did it work, it was fun to watch. It filled the seats at Wash-Griz, the while attendance plummeted at Dahlberg.

For me, basketball became a boring game to watch--behemoth men grinding and bumping in the tiny post area, with the occasional long-distance shot by a "three-point specialist." It wasn't until a Steph Curry came along that we saw the full dimensions of what basketball could be, in all its exciting glory. And it wasn't just his shooting. Google his all-time great passes and you'll see, a la Magic and Pistol Pete, how exciting passing can be in the game of basketball, especially when those passes are made on the run, in fast-paced open-court basketball.

Alas, that's not Travis. Between Woody Hayes and Don Read, his philosophy is closer to that of Hayes. We'll continue to walk the ball up the court, pass it around and around the perimter in a set offense, with little opportunity for the style of basketball that is most captivating to fans. So. Be. It.
Click to expand...
Babylon!
 
EverettGriz said:
Didn't Idaho's lose by like 40? I'm not sure what pushing the ball up the court gained them except tired legs.

TDC's teams have become more willing to push the pace overtime, but this year's team just didn't have that capability. It's hard to run when you turn it over 19 times a game
Click to expand...
Not only turn the ball over 19 times but if you want to run an up tempo game you have to control the boards. It all starts on the defensive end. Travis has always prided his teams on defense. But you have to control the defensive boards.
Rebounding is a state of mind. Classic example would be Joe Pridgen. At 6’4” he was a monster around the boards on both ends of the court. He refused to be denied.
It will be interesting to see who goes, voluntarily or not by choice.
 
Sport said:
To be or not to be….that is the question. And the answer is AGGRESSIVE. Watching tonight’s game Cal Baptist (13) vs Kansas (3) CBU lost by 8 pts after being down around 20. The game the other night between Idaho (15) and I forget but that’s not relevant to this post. What is relevant is that both teams, CBU and UI came out and pushed the ball up the floor and drove to the basket repeatedly even though they were undersized and outmanned.
My issue with Travis’s team, and I love the guy, is that does not seem to be part of his philosophy. Maybe his offense is designed that way or he doesn’t/can’t recruit slashers or more aggressive type of players.
I remember last year Whitney was always looking to go to the basket. And for his size he was successful more often than not. I hope when the portal opens Travis goes after an aggressive pt. guard. This years performance was an example of what a good point guard means to the team. No, Money was not nor will he probably ever be a true pt. guard. Money’s skills lie in other areas.
Anyway that’s my opinion and I’m sticking with it.
Click to expand...
Idaho was aggressive, really? They lost 78-47 and I watched that whole game since my wife is from the Houston area and the game seemed strangely similar to when we went to watch Montana play at Houston 2 years ago when the Griz lost 79-44. Looking over the stats for the two games, scoring is similar throughout.

Idaho 24 23 - 47
Houston 48 30 - 78

Montana 14 30 - 44
Houston 41 38 - 79

Idaho shot 16 of 56, 28.6 %, Houston 31-62 50% Idaho was out rebounded 47-32

Montana had 14 of 43 32.6%, Houston 27 of 58 46.5% Montana was out rebounded 42-30

Not all that different, and Whitney had only 2 points on two free throws and played 24 minutes, yielding mostly to Money Williams who contributed 15 points off the bench. While Houston's entire roster has nearly turned over since the Griz played them on their home court, there is nothing to indicate that Idaho played any differently than what Coach DeCuire tried to do.
 
Griz in Texas said:
Idaho was aggressive, really? They lost 78-47 and I watched that whole game since my wife is from the Houston area and the game seemed strangely similar to when we went to watch Montana play at Houston 2 years ago when the Griz lost 79-44. Looking over the stats for the two games, scoring is similar throughout.

Idaho 24 23 - 47
Houston 48 30 - 78

Montana 14 30 - 44
Houston 41 38 - 79

Idaho shot 16 of 56, 28.6 %, Houston 31-62 50% Idaho was out rebounded 47-32

Montana had 14 of 43 32.6%, Houston 27 of 58 46.5% Montana was out rebounded 42-30

Not all that different, and Whitney had only 2 points on two free throws and played 24 minutes, yielding mostly to Money Williams who contributed 15 points off the bench. While Houston's entire roster has nearly turned over since the Griz played them on their home court, there is nothing to indicate that Idaho played any differently than what Coach DeCuire tried to do.
Click to expand...
I’m not suggesting the aggressive style was successful in Idaho’s game but I’d be interested to know turnovers and shots taken vs the same for the Montana game. No question in both games the talent level was decidedly in Houston’s favor but in conference play I think a more aggressive style of play would benefit the grizzlies. You obviously disagree but I would prefer to see more uptempo play by the grizzlies.
 
Griz in Texas said:
Idaho was aggressive, really? They lost 78-47 and I watched that whole game since my wife is from the Houston area and the game seemed strangely similar to when we went to watch Montana play at Houston 2 years ago when the Griz lost 79-44. Looking over the stats for the two games, scoring is similar throughout.

Idaho 24 23 - 47
Houston 48 30 - 78

Montana 14 30 - 44
Houston 41 38 - 79

Idaho shot 16 of 56, 28.6 %, Houston 31-62 50% Idaho was out rebounded 47-32

Montana had 14 of 43 32.6%, Houston 27 of 58 46.5% Montana was out rebounded 42-30

Not all that different, and Whitney had only 2 points on two free throws and played 24 minutes, yielding mostly to Money Williams who contributed 15 points off the bench. While Houston's entire roster has nearly turned over since the Griz played them on their home court, there is nothing to indicate that Idaho played any differently than what Coach DeCuire tried to do.
Click to expand...

EverettGriz said:
Didn't Idaho's lose by like 40? I'm not sure what pushing the ball up the court gained them except tired legs.

TDC's teams have become more willing to push the pace overtime, but this year's team just didn't have that capability. It's hard to run when you turn it over 19 times a game
Click to expand...
Montana needs good guard play, most of the remaining teams in the NCAA tournament have excellent guards that can create their own shot, can create for others and take care of the ball.

Montana as a team this season had 465 turnovers a 17.9 percent turnover margin. Money had 139 turnovers. As a team had 504 assists with an assist to TO ratio of 1.1 which was ranked 271 out of 365 teams. Even with these numbers Montana was one game from making the NCAAT, is that saying something about the BSC. Money had 160 assists.

Montana's operating budget (Not NIL) was top in the BSC at 3.497 million includes salaries, meals, travel, ect. Montana State was second at 2,778 mil. Take some of the operating budget and put it towards NIL as each game played in the NCAAT gets you 2.1 mil.

BSC should also go to a model like the PAC, and AAC, you get to keep something like 80% of NCAAT money-units so schools in conference start investing more. BSC operating budgets. Montana is spending the most and sharing revenue, should be able to be keep it.

EWU - 2.247
Weber - 2,223
Portland St - 2,172
UNC - 2,133
SUU - 1,812
Idaho - 1,791
NAU - 1,642
ID ST - 1,214
 
Sport said:
I’m not suggesting the aggressive style was successful in Idaho’s game but I’d be interested to know turnovers and shots taken vs the same for the Montana game. No question in both games the talent level was decidedly in Houston’s favor but in conference play I think a more aggressive style of play would benefit the grizzlies. You obviously disagree but I would prefer to see more uptempo play by the grizzlies.
Click to expand...
I didn't pull those numbers out of my ass. go look at the box scores for yourself.
 
MontanaGrizSoccer said:
Montana needs good guard play, most of the remaining teams in the NCAA tournament have excellent guards that can create their own shot, can create for others and take care of the ball.

Montana as a team this season had 465 turnovers a 17.9 percent turnover margin. Money had 139 turnovers. As a team had 504 assists with an assist to TO ratio of 1.1 which was ranked 271 out of 365 teams. Even with these numbers Montana was one game from making the NCAAT, is that saying something about the BSC. Money had 160 assists.

Montana's operating budget (Not NIL) was top in the BSC at 3.497 million includes salaries, meals, travel, ect. Montana State was second at 2,778 mil. Take some of the operating budget and put it towards NIL as each game played in the NCAAT gets you 2.1 mil.

BSC should also go to a model like the PAC, and AAC, you get to keep something like 80% of NCAAT money-units so schools in conference start investing more. BSC operating budgets. Montana is spending the most and sharing revenue, should be able to be keep it.

EWU - 2.247
Weber - 2,223
Portland St - 2,172
UNC - 2,133
SUU - 1,812
Idaho - 1,791
NAU - 1,642
ID ST - 1,214
Click to expand...
Stick to soccer. Guard play isn't going to take the BSC to the level of the ACC.

All of this is mute anyway when the P4 play smaller schools and immediately recruit the players they like, if they even play the smaller schools. The really good coaches have always gone where the money is (with very FEW exceptions) and now the players are able to do the same.

We rarely see talent the level of a Michael Ray Richardson or Damian Lillard to start with, but now they are surely sucked away with NIL money.

I expect this is where the big conferences finally are able to fully separate from Gonzaga at last.

Precisely the reason moving up in football will make Montana fully irrelevant.
 
Griz in Texas said:
Stick to soccer. Guard play isn't going to take the BSC to the level of the ACC.

All of this is mute anyway when the P4 play smaller schools and immediately recruit the players they like, if they even play the smaller schools. The really good coaches have always gone where the money is (with very FEW exceptions) and now the players are able to do the same.

We rarely see talent the level of a Michael Ray Richardson or Damian Lillard to start with, but now they are surely sucked away with NIL money.

I expect this is where the big conferences finally are able to fully separate from Gonzaga at last.

Precisely the reason moving up in football will make Montana fully irrelevant.
Click to expand...
The Montana Schools Basketball programs would actually benefit if the schools moved to a Mountain West type conference. More bids in Basketball, and better pay-out from March Madness games (as the conference would have a better shot at winning a game in it every year). Question is, do the Montana schools try and put more emphasis on Basketball, and less on Football?
 
SACCAT66 said:
The Montana Schools Basketball programs would actually benefit if the schools moved to a Mountain West type conference. More bids in Basketball, and better pay-out from March Madness games (as the conference would have a better shot at winning a game in it every year). Question is, do the Montana schools try and put more emphasis on Basketball, and less on Football?
Click to expand...
Not sure how true this will be moving forward.
 
SACCAT66 said:
The Montana Schools Basketball programs would actually benefit if the schools moved to a Mountain West type conference. More bids in Basketball, and better pay-out from March Madness games (as the conference would have a better shot at winning a game in it every year). Question is, do the Montana schools try and put more emphasis on Basketball, and less on Football?
Click to expand...
Obviously you don't know anything about the basketball program from the 70's and 80's when it was more highly emphasized than football. The crowds were bigger, the play was more competitive, and even with the smaller tournament field, we could argue the BSC deserved more than one bid.
Now there is NIL, and the MW is about to be rendered insignificant. Just look how many teams the SEC got in last year because this is going to be the new norm, particularly with Texas in the sweet 16 they will point to the success of the lower half of their league and win the arguement.
 
Griz in Texas said:
Obviously you don't know anything about the basketball program from the 70's and 80's when it was more highly emphasized than football. The crowds were bigger, the play was more competitive, and even with the smaller tournament field, we could argue the BSC deserved more than one bid.
Now there is NIL, and the MW is about to be rendered insignificant. Just look how many teams the SEC got in last year because this is going to be the new norm, particularly with Texas in the sweet 16 they will point to the success of the lower half of their league and win the arguement.
Click to expand...
I was born in Bozeman in 1976, so I know all about that. Isn't your statement proving my point? Basketball was king, and people showed up to watch great teams. Sure NIL has something to do with that, but you can also look at the drop-off of fans at the Basketball games, to the rise of fans at the football games.
 
SACCAT66 said:
I was born in Bozeman in 1976, so I know all about that. Isn't your statement proving my point? Basketball was king, and people showed up to watch great teams. Sure NIL has something to do with that, but you can also look at the drop-off of fans at the Basketball games, to the rise of fans at the football games.
Click to expand...
Sure Coach Dale, you and your Huskers shall rise again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top