Brew City Ball forum..

[PGsHeroes32]

I was on the Creighton boards and they have a listing of all the BE team forums(really handy wish I saw it sooner) I didn't even know this BCB forum existed. Sure enough, I got an instant shoutout of there lol.

"Wow, you'd think we lost. They are really unhinged. I am convinced Badgermaniac and HaywardsHeroes are the same guy, equal amount of MU hate."

I don't think I was even in the top 50 of irrational posters yesterday lol questioning Ox sitting was the only remote negative I said. If that's unhinged I hope to lord they didn't see me after the Butler LOSS.

And I didn't even know there was a badgermaniac on this board...But I guess were 1 in the same!!

[4everwarriors]

Fook the other boards.

[🏀]

So you're going to post there exclusively now and you're bringing Nevada, Chris Columbo, The Sultan of Silly and setyoutsightsnorth with you?

[PGsHeroes32]

So you're going to post there exclusively now and you're bringing Nevada, Chris Columbo, The Sultan of Silly and setyoutsightsnorth with you?

Nope I'm gona keep the party rolling here!!!

[ChicosBailBonds]

http://www.brewcityball.com/forums/showthread.php?6363-MU-Scoop

I don't visit there often and won't sign up because I don't want to give IWB a heart attack  .  His place, he should run it as such.

However, didn't realize how many folks there truly think there are Badger trolls on here.  Not what I have seen, anyway.

I was glad to see that board call out the 3 point defense at the end of the game.  Not much talk about it here on Scoop.  I will never understand why we don't foul in that situation, but Buzz doesn't like to.  Letting that guy take a wide open 3 was really something.   

Still prefer this site to the Scout site which I find to be incredibly boring, no discussion, and group think on steroids.  

For that I might get a phone call of reprimand...  LOL

[Coleman]

Browsed over there a bit tonight and it looks pretty vanilla, no thanks.

[brandx]

Browsed over there a bit tonight and it looks pretty vanilla, no thanks.

Same thought here.

[PGsHeroes32]

Browsed over there a bit tonight and it looks pretty vanilla, no thanks.

Yeah almost as bare as scout.

This board may get extreme following games at times but at least its interesting with lots of topics being brought up.

[Eldon]

nm, damn video wont embed!

[mhendrick]

who cares about creighton. they will be irrelevant in 2 years after the loss of both Mcdermotts next year.

[Hards Alumni]

http://www.brewcityball.com/forums/showthread.php?6363-MU-Scoop

I don't visit there often and won't sign up because I don't want to give IWB a heart attack  .  His place, he should run it as such.

However, didn't realize how many folks there truly think there are Badger trolls on here.  Not what I have seen, anyway.

I was glad to see that board call out the 3 point defense at the end of the game.  Not much talk about it here on Scoop.  I will never understand why we don't foul in that situation, but Buzz doesn't like to.  Letting that guy take a wide open 3 was really something.   

Still prefer this site to the Scout site which I find to be incredibly boring, no discussion, and group think on steroids.  

For that I might get a phone call of reprimand...  LOL

I agree, I was yelling at the TV for them to do it... and then discussed it with one of my friends after the game.

Oddly enough, Buzz didn't hear me from where I was sitting.

[GGGG]

Didn't help that Steve Taylor let his arms drop by his side like he was protecting from the drive. 

[MerrittsMustache]

I agree, I was yelling at the TV for them to do it... and then discussed it with one of my friends after the game.

Oddly enough, Buzz didn't hear me from where I was sitting.

On Saturday, Nova didn't foul up 3 against St. John's and it worked out. Memphis didn't foul up 3 on Temple and it worked out. Were Wright and Pastner still "wrong" for not fouling? Different coaches view that situation differently. Some feel that there are too many negative variables to fouling (off rebound, foul on their team after the miss, foul as player chucks up a 3, extends the game, etc) while others believe that the low odds of a team executing a make-then-miss on FTs and scoring are worth the foul. It can often depend on the team and the opponent. There's no clear-cut right or wrong. If your strategy works, it was right. If it doesn't, it was wrong.

[NersEllenson]

My signature says all that needs to be said about the resident expert outside of IWB at BrewCity Ball.  Was funny reading their site, and seeing BrewCity77 still obsesses about me.

Much better to be a part of a forum here that has a lot of post activity, varying opinions, fanboys, trolls, and every thing in between - than a board that is largely pollyanna and cannot allot for any negative viewpoints toward ANYTHING related to MU hoops.

And just because someone won't or doesn't post anything negative about MU hoops makes them no less of a fan, or better fan than those who do raise issues with decisions/personnel/strategy etc.

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

My signature says all that needs to be said about the resident expert outside of IWB at BrewCity Ball.  Was funny reading their site, and seeing BrewCity77 still obsesses about me.

Much better to be a part of a forum here that has a lot of post activity, varying opinions, fanboys, trolls, and every thing in between - than a board that is largely pollyanna and cannot allot for any negative viewpoints toward ANYTHING related to MU hoops.

And just because someone won't or doesn't post anything negative about MU hoops makes them no less of a fan, or better fan than those who do raise issues with decisions/personnel/strategy etc.

Meh, I could honestly do without the trolls.

[tower912]

There have been some posters this year on scoop that have made me seriously question the value of a MU diploma.   

[NersEllenson]

On Saturday, Nova didn't foul up 3 against St. John's and it worked out. Memphis didn't foul up 3 on Temple and it worked out. Were Wright and Pastner still "wrong" for not fouling? Different coaches view that situation differently. Some feel that there are too many negative variables to fouling (off rebound, foul on their team after the miss, foul as player chucks up a 3, extends the game, etc) while others believe that the low odds of a team executing a make-then-miss on FTs and scoring are worth the foul. It can often depend on the team and the opponent. There's no clear-cut right or wrong. If your strategy works, it was right. If it doesn't, it was wrong.

Many basketball analysts suggest the right play is to foul if there is less than 5 seconds left in the game...and the opposition has to bring the ball in full court.  You execute the foul at roughly the 2-2.5 second mark (or right before halfcourt) as player is unlikely to shoot the ball 2 seconds before buzzer (which eliminates potential risk of fouling a player when in the act of shooting.)

Many games have been tied hitting the 3 at buzzer like DePaul did.  Rarely do you see the 3 things that need to go right for the fouling strategy to burn you:  Guy makes first free throw, misses 2nd and team fails gather defensive board, and if they don't, the opponent not only getting rebound off FT, but then making the 2 point shot to tie.  Rarely recall seeing highlights of such a sequence of events taking place, compared to highlights showing exactly what happened to us against DePaul.

[NersEllenson]

There have been some posters this year on scoop that have made me seriously question the value of a MU diploma.   

I'd agree with you, but, MU doesn't offer a diploma in Basketball 101 - if it did, I'd have some serious concerns too...given some of the perceptions and opinions shared as to what they feel ails this MU team.

[CTWarrior]

Whether you foul or not, what I don't understand is why we have so many defenders inside the arc.  At that point in the game only a three pointer can hurt you.  I'd think you'd want all the defenders around the arc with hands up to push the shot out as far as possible.  Nobody ever does that.  I guess the fear of the quick layup and subsequent foul on the inbounds pass is the concern.

[MerrittsMustache]

Many basketball analysts suggest the right play is to foul if there is less than 5 seconds left in the game...and the opposition has to bring the ball in full court.  You execute the foul at roughly the 2-2.5 second mark (or right before halfcourt) as player is unlikely to shoot the ball 2 seconds before buzzer (which eliminates potential risk of fouling a player when in the act of shooting.)

Many games have been tied hitting the 3 at buzzer like DePaul did.  Rarely do you see the 3 things that need to go right for the fouling strategy to burn you:  Guy makes first free throw, misses 2nd and team fails gather defensive board, and if they don't, the opponent not only getting rebound off FT, but then making the 2 point shot to tie.  Rarely recall seeing highlights of such a sequence of events taking place, compared to highlights showing exactly what happened to us against DePaul.

Since DePaul inbounded with 8 seconds left and Garrett pulled up from 30' with 5 seconds left, does that mean that Buzz did the right thing by not fouling? Not questioning you specifically. Just asking.

[MerrittsMustache]

There have been some posters this year on scoop that have made me seriously question the value of a MU diploma.   

I thought the same thing for a while but then I realized that I know some very intelligent people who are very "sports stupid." In fact, I'd venture to guess that a vast majority of sports fans do not have very high sports IQs.

[Archies Bat]

Many basketball analysts suggest the right play is to foul if there is less than 5 seconds left in the game...and the opposition has to bring the ball in full court.  You execute the foul at roughly the 2-2.5 second mark (or right before halfcourt) as player is unlikely to shoot the ball 2 seconds before buzzer (which eliminates potential risk of fouling a player when in the act of shooting.)

Many games have been tied hitting the 3 at buzzer like DePaul did.  Rarely do you see the 3 things that need to go right for the fouling strategy to burn you:  Guy makes first free throw, misses 2nd and team fails gather defensive board, and if they don't, the opponent not only getting rebound off FT, but then making the 2 point shot to tie.  Rarely recall seeing highlights of such a sequence of events taking place, compared to highlights showing exactly what happened to us against DePaul.

I'm not sure how this applies to Saturday.  I don't have the video queued up, but the clock stopped on the Garret 3 at 2.6 seconds.  Given that, I suspect the shot was taken at somewhere around 3.5-4.0 seconds, and halfcourt would likely be around 5 seconds.  Since fouling Garret at 2-2.5 seconds was not possible, are you suggesting we foul at 5+ seconds near halfcourt?   Seems to me too much clock left.

[g0lden3agle]

brewcity77 - Et tu, Brute?

[Archies Bat]

Since DePaul inbounded with 8 seconds left and Garrett pulled up from 30' with 5 seconds left, does that mean that Buzz did the right thing by not fouling? Not questioning you specifically. Just asking.

Beat me to it.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

My signature says all that needs to be said about the resident expert outside of IWB at BrewCity Ball.  Was funny reading their site, and seeing BrewCity77 still obsesses about me.

Much better to be a part of a forum here that has a lot of post activity, varying opinions, fanboys, trolls, and every thing in between - than a board that is largely pollyanna and cannot allot for any negative viewpoints toward ANYTHING related to MU hoops.

And just because someone won't or doesn't post anything negative about MU hoops makes them no less of a fan, or better fan than those who do raise issues with decisions/personnel/strategy etc.

So in the first part of this post you make fun of someone for having a different opinion then you.

Then in the second part you criticize others for not allowing other opinions?

The issue the "Pollyanna" posters have with the negative posting is not the content, it's the delivery. It's "we suck," "Jake wouldn't start for a D2 program," "Derrick is the worst PG in Marquette history." In most of the posts, there are no stats, no objective analysis, no reason. It's mostly just angry venting that turns into unnecessary bashing of 18 year old kids. Now, when pressed, the negativos will find stats to back up their opinions, but not without, and also after the bashing.

You, are a special case. You make intelligent, well reasoned arguments to back up your assertions. But you ruin it by posting it over and over and over and over and over...often in threads that don't have anything to do with the point you are trying to make. You also have been known to make things up like "Derrick has shown no improvement from last season."