• 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!

is this any way to run a program?

Dexter X said:
Hairy Bear said:
I am not a computer nerd who wastes time "correcting", i.e. trying to prove a point by giving us some stat which proves that my allegation that they were not ranked in the top 100, but rather were ranked #86. If you get your jollies doing so, then we all applaud you. My objectivity comes from oberserving the team during live game situations, and using my considerable basketball coaching experience to make these observations. I'll leave the stat nit-picking to you.
Click to expand...

It seems you get your jollies by making up statistics to try to prove your point. So when someone calls you out about making stats up (which turn out to be completely inaccurate), the best way to handle that is to resort to name calling and try to dismiss their post as nit-picking? I see.... Does saying that it's nit-picking, and calling the person who corrected you names make your made up stats any less fictional? Is that your definition of being objective? Hm... OK then.. I think you may have the definitions of "Objective" and "Delusional" mixed up...

My opinion (which isn't based on fake stats pulled out of my ass) comes from observing the team during live game situations too over the past 20 years. I've been a season ticket holder for quite a while now, and have rarely missed a home game. I'm definitely not one who is afraid of criticizing a coach. I was not a big fan of Holst or Taylor as coaches. When Hauck first started coaching the FB team, I was pretty critical of him and the offense over on the old Grizzlyboards.com.

My purpose in pointing out those nerdy factual stats, was to say that the Griz defense was quite a bit better last year than it was the year before. I noticed a pretty significant improvement especially in the 2nd half of last season, and I imagine if you asked most people on this board who attended the games, they'd agree it did improve and was pretty good the second half of the season. This wasn't just something that showed up on the stat sheet... it was pretty obvious when watching the games too.
Click to expand...


I do not "make up stats to prove a point". Unlike you, I use generalizations such as "top 100:, or top 5 in the nation", to make a point. Big difference. But you use stats to try to discredit my observations by pointing out meanigless "errors" that I made, like saying the defense ranked #87 rather than #100. BFD. Who give a sh_t. I think anyone who understands the game gets my drift. Thicken your skin if you want to post on a message board, for God's sake!
 
Simplify this some, maybe it is best to agree to disagree on how well the GRIZ did or did not play defense last year, Tinkle being a good or bad coach, and if the GRIZ program is or is not headed in the right direction or not. Those that are being positive will keep their opinions as is. Those that are negative will remain that. The only way either side changes is if the GRIZ prove them otherwise on the court.

Why do some fans get so worked up over anyone having a different opinion? Granted, I wish some posters could post their side better, without getting into offending people or getting into pissing matches.
 
I don't think it mattered if the griz wound up with some of the best defensive stats, when the going got tough in the games that mattered most, the griz men were nowhere to be found. That is what pisses me off about the men's team the last few years.
 
It is still a little early to draw any conclusions on Coach Tinkle. He will only be entering his 3rd year as a head coach and I'm sure that last year was a learning experience. The Grizzlies definitely have the talent on the team to win the conference.

The lack of information coming out of the program, I'm not totally surprised. Both Coach Hauck, and Selvig keep a tight lid on their recruiting until there is something to announce. Selvig will probably land the three most talented girls in Montana next year without too much effort. It seems to me that Tinkle is taking the approach that if nobody knows who they are recruiting then they can't be robbed by some other team and find "gems" like a Will Cherry.

Coach Binford, Huse, and Ash are doing all they can to get the word out about the Cats to get them to the level that the Griz have obtained in their sports programs.

The Griz had the misfortune of catching the Bobcats at the wrong time. Coach Huse spent all season trying to get a complete team effort out of Cats and it just happened to be against the Griz.

The other major difference is that Griz were very successful team before Tinkle took over so the expectations were obviously high. The AD at MSU has allowed Coach Huse to build back up the basketball program even though the fans were starting to wonder when the wins would come before last seasons playoff push and Will Bynums ESPN Dunk.

If the team has the same kind of season next year then I would start to worry about Coach Tinkle.
 
Hairy Bear said:
I do not "make up stats to prove a point". Unlike you, I use generalizations such as "top 100:, or top 5 in the nation", to make a point. Big difference. But you use stats to try to discredit my observations by pointing out meanigless "errors" that I made, like saying the defense ranked #87 rather than #100. BFD. Who give a sh_t. I think anyone who understands the game gets my drift. Thicken your skin if you want to post on a message board, for God's sake!
Click to expand...

Trust me, it'd take a lot more than a few name calling sessions and insults to get under my skin. However, I seem to have gotten under your incredibly thin skin by merely correcting your made up statistics...er...sorry... your "Generalizations"... :lol: If being corrected like that bothers you so much, take the 30 seconds next time to look up the actual facts. Then you wont have to backpedal so much and claim it was all generalizations.

Anyway, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on how good the defense was last year. I personally think that Coach Evans did a great job in the second half of the season getting the Griz team to play good defense. Peaux is right though that it did seem like in a few of the big games, there were some breakdowns on defense (and offense too) which really ended up hurting the Griz. Hopefully we wont see much of that this upcoming year.

bpcats - I definitely agree with you that it's a little too early to be drawing any conclusions on Tinkle as a coach. If things don't look up after he has the team built the way he wants it to be built, then I'm sure he'll start feeling some pretty serious pressure. I'm really looking forward to seeing what he can do when he has the team put together the way he wants it though. The recruits he's bringing in should be pretty exciting to watch!

I hope we'll have some official news on if there is another recruit, why Digs left, etc etc pretty soon too. Even though I sort of understand keeping silent about some things, I can't help but think that it hurts interest in the program when things are kept under wraps like this for so long with no real official news being released for a very long period of time.
 
I have to say with my lack of head coaching basketball expertise that the defensive improvement that the Griz displayed last year was far greater than I could have expected. The problem was our offense, plain and simple. Bill Evans made a huge impact on the Grizzlies last year and I would expect them to display more of that improvement next year. And with some scorers added to AJ this team should offensively be superior to last years team.

Hairy Bear, how are you able to watch several Griz games and analyze this team when you are apparently coaching AAA HS Players? You are quick to be pointing out that you have head coaching experience but there are no AAA HS in Montana, so something tells me you are not coaching anymore. Just curious, but if your basketball ingenious is so high, why is this?
 
I left high school teaching and coaching over twn years ago, to make more money. I coached at a high school in Ohio. Hope that satisfies your curiousity.
 
I too have coached jr high through hs aged players (boys and girls). I will somewhat agree on your statements from the Tinkl'es start here through mid season last year. Over time there have been some stinker of performances. Last years team did improve drastically defensively and intensity. From what I observed in person and live, and even watching dvr'd games, their downfall last year was offensive consistency when all was said and done. The Defense looked as good as it has the last 20 years.

The teams that beat our defense were ones that got on fire, and simply executed their offenses well. Plus Evans taught different principles than LK and WT did. So there was learning curve for the players. In the end they adjusted well and made for a very tough defensive team. Had last years defense existed the prior years, we would have seen more success.

Offensively we did not have anyone to replace Andrew Strait in the paint. Which to be honest, I still question if we will have that this year. I noted at the end of Strait's career I was concerned about not having any inside scoring. As it turned out, that turned out to be the case. Also teams figured out how to contain Hasquet and make Stauds near nonexistent. Teams figured out to just let Hasquet roam the perimeter and hope he did not get hurt. For reasons beyond us, Hasquet was not a factor inside offensively. Qvale has always been an offensive project, but seemed to improve by year's end. Selvig has great post moves, just a matter of having him use them. I really hope he does more inside offensively than Hasquet did. Hasquet should have been a 18 point per game scorer had we utilized him inside. As for Staudacher, when teams figured out he was our only consistent outside threat they simply played him tight, with and without the ball. Hate to admit it, but we missed the threat of a hot shooting Matt Martin type.

McGillis had a disappointing year offensively too. CET was not expected to ever be a scorer. As things turned out, offensively the pieces of the puzzle just did not fit together. With the leadership we have in AJ, I thoroughly expect a great year from the GRIZ this year. I certainly have no doubts about the team defense coming into this year. That is the least of my concerns for this season.
 
Coaching isn't the problem with our men's basketball program. Coach Tinkle is a good coach and will continue to improve over the next few years. The Big Sky Conference, as a result of deterioration and inept leadership is our problem. Truly talented student-athletes aren't interested in coming to UM to compete against no name schools in a conference such as The Big Sky. Their parents and high school coaches will advise them to attend a school in a quality conference whereby they will have the opportunity to compete against teams made up of more talented athletes. UM is a good school located in a pleasant, friendly town, however, much of the appeal is negated by virtue of a very poor conference affiliation.
 
spanky, that was a direct lift from alice roosevelt longworth, who famously said, "if you don't have anything nice to say about somebody, come sit next to me." meaning, she didn't have anything nice to say about most people either. all of which means, beyond weber's purple palace, i don't have much nice to say about the big sky conference. pretty much a chump conference with no revenue possibilities, basketball courts the size of handball courts, and football facilities not even up to the standard of friday night lights. no use to refute a same-pager.

but just hang on. the younger more aspirational griz fans are on our side, while the nodding/doddering old guard yet suffering psychological traumas from the skyline conference days is slowly dying off--or soon won't remember. it won't be long now.
 
citygriz....I hope that you are right, however, it appears to me that many of the younger fans are brain washed to think that The Big Sky is a good conference. By the way, I'm from The Skyline era, but not part of the old guard, however, possibly nodding/doddering.
 
Yeah the conference stinks. What else is new? But I will tell you this, from 1974 - 1988, the Um basketball program was consistantly one of the top 50-70 programs in the country, year after year. Now, it is not one of the top 150 programs in the country. The conference is almost the same, with a couple of exceptions. Now, please tell me the difference???? Should be good..... :roll:
 
Hairy Bair....are you a youngster? The conference isn't close to being the same. Departed are Idaho, Boise State and Nevada. New member....Northern Colorado. The Big Sky is now a very weak conference which UM has held up for years. UM....top 150..such success, but I see no hope of change or improvement.
 
Spanky said:
Hairy Bair....are you a youngster? The conference isn't close to being the same. Departed are Idaho, Boise State and Nevada. New member....Northern Colorado. The Big Sky is now a very weak conference which UM has held up for years. UM....top 150..such success, but I see no hope of change or improvement.
Click to expand...


O.K., so we lost a few teams. Boise St., Idaho, and Nevada are not exactly Top 20 material. The Big Sky has never been a strong conference. But, Montana and Weber State used to dominate the conference in BB. Now, only Weber has held onto that dominance.

I say that our coaching has dropped of HUGE since those days!.

Heathcote, Brandenburgh, Montgomery, and Morill all went on to become great head coaches at bigger schools. Do you really think that Tinkle has that kind of ability? I mean....give me a break!
 
Two key points to make:

1. Idaho, Boise and Nevada are and even CSN are light years better than their replacements: Sac State, PSU, Northern Colorado. Despite PSU recent developments as a BSC power, their first years were down right miserable. Idaho, Boise and Nevada were top four teams just about every year in teh BSC. Idaho could recruit all sorts of tallent. Boise under Dye could play defense and Reno was good the last four to five years they were in the conference. When the UofM went to the NCAA tournament in 1991, the BSC was a mid teen conference in the NCAA...ahead of now mid major conferences like the OVC and so forth. Not the mid 20's conference. That was because of Idaho, Boise and Reno as well as MSU and UofM being pretty damn legit. ISU and NAU were doormats at the time.

You can be pissy all you want about the direction of this program...but it has been heading this way since MOrril left to go to Utah State. I could go on for hours about this, but I am tired of throwing Tinkle under the bus for issues that are largely not his. Crowds, conference.

2. About the recruits. krysko wanted those name recruits that were fringe D1 guys. Think of the number of guys that have left the program. Second, since we are NOT UCLA or UNC so for us to have a pipeline of players that are sure things completely defies the logic of where we are at and who we are. This is the type of conference the BSC is:

A. One star league (Arcineaux, stuckey, dominguez)
B. Systems team (NAU)...Under Morril, Montgomery, to a degree Taylor we were a systems team. Not sure there was a pattern for Holst, Kennedy or Krsko...It seems to me that one thing is apparent about tinkle is that he is increasing the athletic ability of this program. What that turns into is beyond me, as I am not around this program much anymore, but I am excited. Regardless of what you think,, it doesn't take much to win this league. YI think tinks is giving us the chance to be what Idaho was consistently in the 80 and 90's...an athletic terror.
 
Grizfan-24 said:
Two key points to make:

1. Idaho, Boise and Nevada are and even CSN are light years better than their replacements: Sac State, PSU, Northern Colorado. Despite PSU recent developments as a BSC power, their first years were down right miserable. Idaho, Boise and Nevada were top four teams just about every year in teh BSC. Idaho could recruit all sorts of tallent. Boise under Dye could play defense and Reno was good the last four to five years they were in the conference. When the UofM went to the NCAA tournament in 1991, the BSC was a mid teen conference in the NCAA...ahead of now mid major conferences like the OVC and so forth. Not the mid 20's conference. That was because of Idaho, Boise and Reno as well as MSU and UofM being pretty damn legit. ISU and NAU were doormats at the time.

You can be pissy all you want about the direction of this program...but it has been heading this way since MOrril left to go to Utah State. I could go on for hours about this, but I am tired of throwing Tinkle under the bus for issues that are largely not his. Crowds, conference.

2. About the recruits. krysko wanted those name recruits that were fringe D1 guys. Think of the number of guys that have left the program. Second, since we are NOT UCLA or UNC so for us to have a pipeline of players that are sure things completely defies the logic of where we are at and who we are. This is the type of conference the BSC is:

A. One star league (Arcineaux, stuckey, dominguez)
B. Systems team (NAU)...Under Morril, Montgomery, to a degree Taylor we were a systems team. Not sure there was a pattern for Holst, Kennedy or Krsko...It seems to me that one thing is apparent about tinkle is that he is increasing the athletic ability of this program. What that turns into is beyond me, as I am not around this program much anymore, but I am excited. Regardless of what you think,, it doesn't take much to win this league. YI think tinks is giving us the chance to be what Idaho was consistently in the 80 and 90's...an athletic terror.
Click to expand...


Regardless of what you think, the UM BB program is going nowhere under Tinkle, he will never coach at a higher level as did the 4 I mentioned, because he does not have the ability to lead a team, and the program is a shell of its former self.

I am particularly amused at your points made in #2, where you attempt to state that UM can not recruit big-time college BB players. Well, they recruited them in previous years. To my knowledge, there are no new colleges and universites around now that were not around back then. So, the competition for these kids was just as actute back then. Oh, and did I mention that U.S. population is 50% larger than it was 25 years ago? This means that there are 50% more high school kids to recruit, by the same number of schools as there was 25 years ago. One would think that UM could get their fair sharew of these kids. But no.

Your agruments are weak.
 
You are entitled to your opinion. My point and argument was that TInkle is recruiting. Moreover, difficult to recruit into a confernce that boasts directional schools. Not saying it is impossible, just difficult to get 4 year talent here. Howland proved in his time at NAU you can go find recruits in the same places that everyone else is looking and fit what you are tryin to accomplish.Tinkle in his years here is using the same formula. The era the UofM had a chance to establish itself (much like the football team did) as the class of the conference, we failed to do so and NAU, Weber State and PSU are consistently better. We ran out mediocre recruit after recruit until the end of Kennedy era (I still don't call Criswell a recruit, we were lucky that someone didn't offer him a fully scholly somewhere else).

Looking at the roster...two things jump out at me. First AJ is a legit talent. Second, Selvig when healthy is a game changer. I really belive more than any other new or returing player that will change the landscpae of this team is Selvig getting 25-30 minutes of playing time this year. Really, he is the complimentary player AJ needs to open the floor up. Sharp nor Qvale couldn't provide that last year.

What tinkle needs to refine isn't his recruiting, it is on court stuff. People who criticize him for that are well founded. Teams have struggled for consistency and leadership in his tenure and if things don't change then maybe they need to go in another direction. Offensively, he reminds me of the first years that I started coaching basketball, a lot of offenses but very few of them run really well.


This is the year for me. Things don't work out, then I am open to seeing a potential change down the road. Because i see some if not all of the puzzle pieces could be in place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top