• 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!

Santa Clara 71 Montana 68

I didn't see the game, but some quick thoughts looking at the box score...

- Perimeter defense still appears to be a weakness for Montana in the Tinkle Era
- Same can be said for FT shooting (although Qvale was the main culprit)
- Out-rebounded by a solid margin (rebounding guards like CET & Johnson could help)
- Turnovers margin was great (15 to 5). Usually a team will win games when this is the case.
- Why does Hasquet jack up at least four 3's each game? He's much more consistent scoring from inside. I wish they would reign him in when it comes to his outside shooting.

Overall...it would appear that the Griz were overmatched, but played a solid game and came up short. They needed a few more bounces their way, like a couple more rebounds in order to pull this one out.
 
If the Griz are going to be as good as we all hope them to be, then we need to beat the Utah Valley's and Santa Clara's of the world (at home). The Griz play absolutely no defense, hense the shooting percentages. A team comes into our gym and shoots that percentage from 3 and the field on a sunday afternoon, what a joke. This team has no leadership, beginning from the head coach. Is this what we signed up for? A 2-4 team that plays no defense and cant shoot free-throws. Can't win any close games?

But, we will be texas-arlington this week and everything will be ok. Everyone has an excuse, get tired of hearing them all!
 
Today's Missoulian has comments from only Anthony Johnson (no Tinkle) about yesterday's game. He says Griz "not tough enough". Hope that doesn't doom him to the bench.

Went to the game yesterday and it just seemed like more of the same. Santa Clara is a pretty good team and had the big center that was hard to stop when he got it down low. Yeah, they were hot from 3 in the first half but that 20'9" arc isn't that tough when wide open. I think they made 6 of 7. Two 3's where we did get a hand up resulted in fouls and three FT's (all makes). Several drives to the hole were not stopped by one-two-or three of our guys. We missed FT's, McGillis couldn't hit anything......but he did use his toughness and athleticism to get one (!!) rebound. Hasquet got the final shot to tie it which was a good look but didn't go down. It should be noted that Hasquest first "stat" (point or rebound) was about 10 minutes into the game. From then on he probably was one of the better players on the court. Too bad he didn't get it going to start the game.

Another interesting observation was the reffing. If you were to watch both teams' coaches, you'd think the refs missed pretty much EVERY call. Tinkle spends more time worrying about the jobs the refs are doing than the job he and his team are doing. On a couple of timeouts, our 5 coach huddle before the team huddle was spent glaring down a ref. Pick your spots, WT. The refs get tired of having you in their ear on every call they make.

My conclusion so far is that we've once again been fooled about our talent, athleticism, and toughness.

On to that N. Dakota game on Tues. night. I think they only lost to someone who beat someone who last year played tough against someone by only 4 or 5 points.

Go Griz!!!! Beat someone!!
 
I'm guessing that Johnson is speaking up and saying what needs to be said because coach isn't. Plus the Griz's continued lousy FT shooting is totally inexcusable.
 
I was able to watch my first Griz game of the season yesterday and, although a loss is never good, I'm not ready to quit on the Griz yet. I, as most of you were, was very impressed with Anthony Johnson. I had a chance to briefly talk to him as my son was getting his poster signed and his comments were that it was a tough loss and it came down to free throws. He is very personable and I am glad he is at Montana.
As far as game strategy goes, it seemed that the Griz D was very focused on SC's post offense early in the game. I noticed guards really stepping in with help on low post screens and they actually held SC's big Center in check for the first part of the first half. Unfortunately we were not closeing out quick enough on the outside shooters leaving them wide open hence the great 3-pt percentage. When the Griz adjusted to protect the outside a little more, SC went inside to there big man where Quale did a good job on him for the most part but, when Quale was out, we did not have an answer for defending him. Early in the second half Sharp got back to back fouls just trying to keep him from getting position and I would have to say that most of the big mans points came when Quale was out. If I had to ask coach one question it would be why he did not get Quale similair minutes to SC's center. On the perimeter we did a good job of forcing SC into some turnovers which off-set SC's rebounding margin.
To me the game came down to toughness and free throws. It's such a small margin between a 3-pt. loss and a victory.
 
Several comments.

I think Johnson's quotes echo what Tinkle has been telling the team, as well as most people who talk to him.

jgilder's comment about UM focusing on the big man early, and its success, is absolutely correct.

While UM gave SC some open 3-pt. looks in the first half, some of the 3-pt. shots were fairly well defended. Our defenders got picked off in screens a few times. Without intending to blame anything on Staudacher, his man hit a number of the 3 pt. shots, altho a time or two there had been a switch prior to the shot.

I don't know how anyone can say that CET is not playing hard. He hustled the whole game. He had no turnovers. He ran the offense reasonably well. He scored some points and shot reasonably well.

Sharp plays hard. The big man was a bit tall and big for him, was tougher to defend and make it hard for Sharp to score.

I think McGillis and Taylor play hard. Selvig played fine, I thought.

After defending the 3-pt. shot better in the second half, the biggest problem was freethrow shooting.

UM needs to hit the boards harder. In the first half in particular, there was no one crashing the boards on most of our shots.

There were very few plays where it looked like someone might not have been playing at 100%. This is an improvement from last year.
 
westsider said:
Thankfully they know how to play football at Montana.
Click to expand...

Just a quick reminder.... the hoops team is Div. 1..... football is not..... so there is no reason for that comment.... trying to compare the two sports makes no sense due to the higher division the basketball program competes in as well as the athletic talent they face..... the hoops team has been battling it out with the Dukes, Boston Colleges, West Virginias and Gonzaga's over the past few years..... while football plays the Fort Lewis' and Southern Utah's of the world..... so please don't compare the two.....from a talent aspect its two completely different classifications....for good reason...... once football jumps up to D-1 and routinely schedules top programs at that level and plays competatively then the floor will be open to make the critisism/comparisons..... until then.... save it
 
68....we are a very good 1AA program....and I mean very good, but different from 1A as you know. I think that is what Baller meant..don't you?
 
But, Spanky, they are both Division I programs, different, yes, but still Div. I -- and I refuse to listen to people who try to put down i-AA, which is exactly what Baller was doing.
 
And Baller refused to listen to the crap that Westsider brought the thread. I think the provoking came from the "football" side this time. Remember, we are in the basketball fourm 68.

The football team ends up ranked anywhere from #80 to #120 in all of Division I on a yearly basis. The basketball team can end up anywhere from #50 to #200 typically. During good years, Montana basketball is technically stronger than what Montana football can even hope to achieve at their current classification.

Unfortunately, the basketball team hasn't been able to brag about that since 2006.
 
you just have to laugh at the delusion of some of our football fans. one of them asks why espn doesn't start a network to televise only fcs football and basketball, but then the pathetic attendance numbers for the first eight playoff games deliver the brutal answer--nobody gives a siht! i have no problem with the fcs or fcks or i-aa or whatever it's now called because it has served montana well. but to say that our football and basketball teams are competing at equal levels prompts outright prolonged laughter. life without illusion is death, which explains why montana's basketball fans will always have it tougher than the football crowd.
 
citygriz said:
you just have to laugh at the delusion of some of our football fans. one of them asks why espn doesn't start a network to televise only fcs football and basketball, but then the pathetic attendance numbers for the first eight playoff games deliver the brutal answer--nobody gives a siht! i have no problem with the fcs or fcks or i-aa or whatever it's now called because it has served montana well. but to say that our football and basketball teams are competing at equal levels prompts outright prolonged laughter. life without illusion is death, which explains why montana's basketball fans will always have it tougher than the football crowd.
Click to expand...

Bravo. The "average" fan really doesnt understand the difference, in fact, the average fan is probably too drunk to remember who won until reading the morning paper. (not that theres anything wrong with that).

The only way average fan gets it is to drop Griz Hoops to Div II and watch them win 25 games a year to teams that could really care less about winning.
 
Yea baller it is "1-AA", but dude Montana is a football school so get over it. I will take 25,000 fans on a Saturday afternoon watching a top notch "1-AA" program over 2,000 fans watching a lower level "D-1" basketball program. Come conference season the opponents are drastically different aren't they baller??? Let's compare conference championships...
 
Sudzilla said:
citygriz said:
you just have to laugh at the delusion of some of our football fans. one of them asks why espn doesn't start a network to televise only fcs football and basketball, but then the pathetic attendance numbers for the first eight playoff games deliver the brutal answer--nobody gives a siht! i have no problem with the fcs or fcks or i-aa or whatever it's now called because it has served montana well. but to say that our football and basketball teams are competing at equal levels prompts outright prolonged laughter. life without illusion is death, which explains why montana's basketball fans will always have it tougher than the football crowd.
Click to expand...

Bravo. The "average" fan really doesnt understand the difference, in fact, the average fan is probably too drunk to remember who won until reading the morning paper. (not that theres anything wrong with that).

The only way average fan gets it is to drop Griz Hoops to Div II and watch them win 25 games a year to teams that could really care less about winning.
Click to expand...

what team's "could really care less about winning?" st. martin's=d2=beat colorado st.=beat the griz. maybe the griz "really care less about winning."
 
westsider said:
Yea baller it is "1-AA", but dude Montana is a football school so get over it. I will take 25,000 fans on a Saturday afternoon watching a top notch "1-AA" program over 2,000 fans watching a lower level "D-1" basketball program. Come conference season the opponents are drastically different aren't they baller??? Let's compare conference championships...
Click to expand...


Here's how this discussion goes:

Football Fan: Let's compare championships. Conference and National Titles.

Basketball Fan: How many Top 25 teams have the football team ever beaten? How many do they play on a regular basis?

Football Fan: Come talk when 25,000 people go to watch the basketball team.

Basketball Fan: Try recruiting against the top competition and see how hard it is to win 80% of your games on a yearly basis.

Blah, blah, blah.....

Back to the football forum where you belong, westsider....
 
Baller1 said:
westsider said:
Thankfully they know how to play football at Montana.
Click to expand...

Just a quick reminder.... the hoops team is Div. 1..... football is not..... so there is no reason for that comment.... trying to compare the two sports makes no sense due to the higher division the basketball program competes in as well as the athletic talent they face..... the hoops team has been battling it out with the Dukes, Boston Colleges, West Virginias and Gonzaga's over the past few years..... while football plays the Fort Lewis' and Southern Utah's of the world..... so please don't compare the two.....from a talent aspect its two completely different classifications....for good reason...... once football jumps up to D-1 and routinely schedules top programs at that level and plays competatively then the floor will be open to make the critisism/comparisons..... until then.... save it
Click to expand...

There are 245 football teams in FBS and FCS combined, and 347 D-I basketball teams. Please tell me how competing in the bottom half of the 347 is any more prestigious than the bottom half of the 245? I think you're dreaming if you think the occasional game with Duke or Gonzaga is any different than the occasional football game with top 15 Oregon or Iowa. Until UM wins one of these games or the other team shows they are peers and belong on the same field/court by coming to Missoula, they are the same, IMO. And mocking the football schedule is a little hypocritical when the basketball team schedules NAIA teams most years (Great Falls?).

I'm not on either side of the fence on the pro-football or basketball issue. I don't think a UM fan has to choose. But criticizing the FCS when both teams are in the same conference really sounds like a reach and makes basketball fans seem insecure about the program and envious of the football team's success. :twocents:
 
No I am not jealous of the football teams success.... I'm a born and raised Missoulian and have followed both sports closely my entire life and have enjoyed the success of BOTH programs over the years..... that being said there is no way you can compare a "Major" Div. 1-AA program with a Mid Major Div. 1 program from a talent stadpoint..... Football and basketball are so much defferent as it is.... a Div 1 basketball team has anywhere from 10-13 roster spots available? and football has how many? its just much easier to find individual athletic success on the football feild because of sheer numbers, combine that with playing in a SUB-Division...... Now I love our griz football team and will always support them..... but we play in a SUB-Division for a reason..... for many of you who have seen Mid to High Major Div. I football played there is just no argument and the difference between FCS and FBS teams is VERY clear just as it its with D-II and D-I basketball....its just a FACT..... The University of Montana competes at a higher level in basketball than it does football..... that is a FACT..... that is all i'm trying to get across in this thread after a cheap shot at the hoops team was thrown out there........ I'm not trying to take away from the success of the Football team..... and for some of you it may be a jagged pill to swollow.... although the football team provides an entertaining game-time atmosphere and winning tradition.... a large majority of the athletes out there on Saturdays are not playing Div I for a reason....just as a majority of the hoops players ARE playing Div. I for a reason.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top