Dave in Green

@GP1, you should write a novel. Seriously, though, painting a detailed picture of why and how something might be happening doesn't rise to the level of proving that it's happened. Separating reality from speculation requires hard evidence.

Really a dominating performance. Hard to believe WVU beat Indiana on the road earlier this season 5-4.

Zips looking great tonight with a 3-0 lead halfway through the second half.

Over the years I've seen a lot of speculation that things like this happen in various conferences. It wouldn't be a total shock if this has happened on occasion. But I don't recall ever seeing positive verification that it's a widespread problem. If conferences deliberately manipulate schedules to benefit favored teams and penalize disfavored teams, then the old speculation about encouraging officials to favor some teams over others would also be in play. Can anyone point to any kind of verifiable documentation? I don't consider fan speculation on sports forums to be verifiable documentation.

Can't find anything on the internet about why Pina is not playing. I see that WMU beat Hartwick 1-0 in the first game.

MTSU is new to Conference USA this season, and is being picked in preseason polls to finish mid-pack in the 16-team conference. The Blue Raiders lost their top two scorers, three starters and five of their top six leaders in minutes played from last season's strong team. While MTSU won't be as tough this year as last, the Zips haven't proven yet that they are as good this year as last. I expect the Zips to come into this game with a chip on their shoulder after being embarrassed by Saint Mary's. The Zips will almost certainly shoot a higher percentage from the field in this game. Progress at the point, better interaction and coordination among the players and protecting the ball better are key things to watch for. MTSU is always tough at home, but this is a winnable game if the Zips play up to preseason expectations.

Oh, I missed the anti-Wistrcill element in my summary. How could I ever forget the incompetent athletic director part of the theory? Anyway, it's pretty easy to formulate a theory and then selectively pick a few specific examples that support the theory. Actually proving a theory beyond reasonable doubt requires a lot more than anecdotal evidence. For example, some conference teams playing others more frequently is explained by the fact that most conferences have an open, publicized policy of "partnering" teams where it's mutually agreed upon that they'll play each other more often than other teams in the conference. To prove the theory that conferences always favor some teams in scheduling and screw others, you'd need to document a long-running pattern involving many teams over many years, and demonstrate how that deviates from random scheduling. Of course you can always find scattered schedule grumbling every season from different quarters. I've heard scheduling complaints as long as I've been following sports. It's a lot like grumbling about the refs. It's always there as background white noise. The problem is that you can't find a major, definitive piece of investigative reporting documenting pervasive unfair scheduling on a national scale. To believe that something is true on the flimsiest of evidence borders on paranoia. I'm open to considering the thought process behind any theory, but I'm not delusional.

@GP1, so let me get this straight. This is a grander conspiracy than just the MAC and UA. This conspiracy spreads across the country through multiple conferences. Every year shadowy figures gather in darkened rooms and deliberately rig schedules to favor some teams and screw others. So the concept of conferences being run by member schools is a sham. The member schools have no say in the scheduling process even though the schools pay the salaries of the shadowy figures making up the schedules. But no one close to the process from any of the schools will publicly admit what's going on. Even the schools that get screwed the most never openly complain about it, and the media pretends like it doesn't exist. Only a few anonymous posters on internet forums have figured it out, and the rest of us are asked to trust that the conspiracy is proven by a few random examples. Have I got that all right?

Toledo beat 0-3 Boston College by 3 points, 95-92. BC had previously lost to Providence and UMass, both top 100 teams. It was a good win that the Zips would have been happy to get. Toledo obviously has its act together and will be a tough opponent for the Zips, especially if the Zips don't get much stronger at the point.

It's standard procedure for those who promote conspiracy theories to always say that you can't get an honest answer from anyone. Therefore, the conspiracy theories can live on forever and the pushers of the conspiracy theories can suck in new believers. So the question to those who would honestly like a definitive answer on this one is, what exactly would it take to make you satisfied that you'd found the truth about whether or not the MAC deliberately tries to screw UA in football scheduling?

There's no issue too big or too small for conspiracy theories. The conspiracy theory that the MAC deliberately screws UA with tough football schedules is pretty simple to resolve. Simply Ask The A.D. if he's satisfied that the MAC gives UA a fair break on football scheduling and if he can share with fans how the MAC determines UA's schedule every season. I'm pretty sure the answer will be that the MAC has a similar system to other college conferences and the NFL.

It happens all the time in most sports where the team that was best throughout the season falters in the championship playoffs and a team that had problems during the regular season peaks at tournament time. Isn't that what we're all hoping for from Zips soccer this season?

Why are football fans always debating who plays QB unless they have a consistent proven winner at the position? It goes with the territory. In any case, I agree with those who say we fans shouldn't panic, and I know that Coach Dambrot isn't going to panic. The point (love that word) is to be prepared for the worst so that you don't have to panic if it happens. In this case, the worst would be that neither Nyles nor Melo develops into a quality primary PG after being given reasonable opportunities to do so during the first half of the season. In that case, a judgment will have to be made if Q at the point is the best primary option for the second half of the season going into the all-important tournaments. We'll continue to talk about it here because that's what fans do -- speculate about what's best for the team. We all want that but just don't always agree on the best way to get there.

Wow. Just when you think the scoring is over. Goodbye 70.

Still racking up lots of yards, well over 1,000. They just stopped scoring. Looks like it stays under 70 with NIU about to win.

Combined total offense at halftime is 546 yards and 30 first downs. With BSU up 24-20, I'd say that 70+ points are guaranteed, but have no idea who's going to come out on top.

If you like to watch non-stop offense, this is great TV. Already 300+ yards total offense 5 minutes into the 2nd quarter, and BSU up 14-10.

Lots of yardage being run up, but still relatively low scoring with NIU up 10-7 early in the second quarter.

@The Hip Zip, you make a good point. A complaint in the past about Coach Dambrot is that he tries to teach too many plays. The reality is that the Zips try to set up a number of different plays on each possession, but break them off when the defense counters. It may look like helter skelter to fans who haven't watched the Zips learning and practicing all the different plays. But they're searching for the play that takes advantage of what the defense is least prepared for. Sometimes they run out of time and have to jack up a quick one. When I watch other teams play I see this happen several times in every game, so it's not just the Zips. I think this will improve as the season goes on and all the players become more comfortable with their roles and understand what their teammates are going to be doing. @Captain Kangaroo, I like your thinking on Q. @GoZips said the same thing about Q here several weeks ago. Another advantage with Q is that he's now a mature man with much greater self-discipline than he had a few seasons ago. He's said that he's willing to play the point if Coach Dambrot wants him to. I can understand how Coach Dambrot would prefer to have one of his younger players step up and become the clear primary PG option as Q will be gone at the end of this season. But I think if Nyles or Melo don't clearly show significant progress, Q could take over and produce good results this season. Another option would be to minimize the PG position from a ball distribution standpoint. Let the PG be responsible for bringing the ball upcourt, but then let one of the other players become the primary ball distributor. It could be a wing, a forward or even a center. Whoever it is would need to be good at maintaining control of the ball and have a low turnover rate. They'd need good court vision and the ability to pass crisply and with smarts. I could even see Big Dog developing into an effective point center. He showed me a lot against Saint Mary's in terms of catching everything thrown to him, protecting the ball and finding the open man. His bounce pass to Nick that produced Nick's only field goal of the game was a thing of beauty. Big Dog appears to have much surer hands than Pat, and I don't think we'll see many balls knocked out of his hands as we used to see with Zeke.

I'm enjoying the ride the Zips are currently providing. It's a lot of fun going to games year after year with confidence that there's a 70% chance of winning and without suffering through down seasons or rebuilding seasons. It's really satisfying to be confident the team will win 22 or more games every season and make it to the MAC tournament championship game. Life is good for Zips basketball fans. But the whole concept of sports is to always try to do better. We know the Zips could be even better, and we want that for them and us. It can get a little frustrating consistently hanging at about the same level, even when that level is pretty high. So I think it's fair to talk about what's "needed" to break through to the next level -- to win more games against ranked opponents, to win NCAA tournament games, to command the same level of national respect as a VCU, Butler or Gonzaga. I just think that we should try to avoid getting upset and angry when the Zips fall a little short of taking that next step forward. Following Zips basketball should give us enjoyment, not make us miserable. We need to have realistic expectations for what the Zips basketball program is accomplishing compared to other programs with similar resources. Personally, I really enjoy the discussions we have here about what the Zips "need" to take that next step up. We all have different perspectives, and I've learned a lot from listening to what others have to say. I feel sorry for those few perpetually negative posters who apparently get no enjoyment from what the Zips are accomplishing and offer no realistic suggestions for improvement. It's OK to want more, but appreciate what you already have.

@GoZips, I like the idea of giving more preference to gym rat recruits. I think they must be the only type of player that Shaka Smart recruits in order to run VCU's relentless havoc defense and still have plenty of energy for offense. I'm interested to see Aaron Jackson play next season because I think he has a gym rat motor. Obviously you can't do it with speed and endurance alone. You also have to have fundamental basketball skills. But what a huge advantage to be able to continue at full speed as your opponents are slowing down with fatigue.

On inbounding the ball, I agree that's another area where the Zips were spoiled by the ease of passing in to Zeke. They should have been more prepared with a viable alternative to not having Zeke, just as they needed to be more prepared for defense without Zeke the rim protector. Those are two priority areas that need work immediately. On the shortage of point guards, I agree that's the head coach's responsibility. Coach Dambrot did a great job of finding a sleeper talent from Puerto Rico in the form of Rico. When he got a tip from Puerto Rico that another sleeper PG was available who was as talented or better than Rico, he signed Melo as Rico's heir apparent. When Melo didn't develop as quickly as Rico, Coach Dambrot signed an experienced JC PG in the form of Nyles. At that point he thought he had one proven PG and two backups to battle this season to replace Rico next season. And then stuff happened. UA is not Kentucky or Duke or Michigan State. We don't get the "can't miss" players. Coach Dambrot has to gamble, and he's done a really nice job of upgrading the wings and bigs. He also did a nice job in finding Rico. The jury is still out on the two remaining PGs. One or both may come around and really surprise us by the end of the season. If not, Coach Dambrot will make the most of what he's got because that's what he does. Maybe Q makes a miraculous transformation into an all-star PG. Who knows? In retrospect there's no way the Zips should have won the MAC tournament last season missing their star PG. But they upset the Sweet 16 darlings from the previous season who returned all their starters and were projected to blow out the Rico-less Zips at the Q. So things don't look so great right now. But as long as Coach Dambrot is steering the ship, things are likely to look better when it matters the most.

@I speak truth, I think your tall lineup could work in rare situations. Big Dog is a pure center who needs to be close to the basket, but Pat has a good outside shot that he never gets to take while playing center. I suggested last season letting Pat pop from the corner while Zeke and Tree controlled the boards. But that never happened. This season I think Coach Dambrot is looking at Kwan to fill the role of the tall, outside popper. But if Big Dog should displace Pat from starting center and get most of the minutes, I'd like to see Pat at least get a chance to show what he can do from outside. Just stick him in the corner, hit him with a pass when he's open and let him shoot over any defender who tries to charge him. Right now I think the Zips' most pressing problem is how to deal with smaller teams with quicker, more athletic players who blow by the defensive coverage. The way the Gaels picked the Zips' pockets and beat them to the rim last night was a big warning flag.

That totally misses the point of my post, which didn't mention the "if" word. The point is that everyone knew the Zips were going to miss Zeke protecting the rim this season, and that it's up to the team to adapt to Zeke's absence with a different defensive scheme that requires everyone to step up and compensate. They didn't do it well in this game, and will suffer the consequences on defense until they do.

Some tend to focus more on the positive points and some on the negative. Nothing new there. Every Zips fan agrees that the final result was negative, so no surprise that there'd be a lot of negative in this thread. Since others are much better at focusing on the negative that I am, I'll try to stick mostly with positive observations even though I can clearly see the negatives as well. Obviously, Tree performed as expected. He's going to get even better as the season goes on. The 4 spot is solid. At the 5, Pat looked a little better on offense, taking the ball to the basket aggressively and hitting 3-4 from the field. He's going to have to overcome the turnovers and fouls, though, because Big Dog is breathing down his neck for the starting position with a performance that exceeded expectations. Big Dog showed that he can effectively block out, establish rebounding position, catch and control passes, feed the open man, make spin moves to the bucket and with his soft touch get the ball to fall better than 50% of the time, all against above average D1 players. He played 19 minutes (same as Pat) including a long stint at the end without tiring out. Together, Pat and Big Dog combined for 19 points on 9-15 from the field and 12 rebounds. That's solid scoring and rebounding at the 5. Add Tree to the mix and the 3 bigs produced 36 points on 15-28 from the field and 24 rebounds. That level of performance will win a lot of games for the Zips as long as the wings and guards are contributing their fair share. At the 2/3, Nick had a bad shooting night ended by what appeared to be a back spasm. Q knocked down 5-5 free throws and had 4 steals, but like Nick was cold from the field along with Jake and Reggie. There won't be many games where these 4 players combined will go 4-20 from the field. At the 1, when you get a total of 0 assists, 5 turnovers and 8 points from your two primary PGs, you're in big trouble. The only thing I'll say is that Nyles looked at least somewhat more comfortable and less lost than the CC game, where he couldn't even knock down his free throws. He's a better shooter than he's shown so far, and I think the ball will start falling as he gets more comfortable and relaxed. I'll be satisfied to see Nyles show progress every game. The speed of his progress will have a major effect on how well the Zips do this season. At his current rate of progress, I see Nyles overtaking Melo for the starting position within the next few games as I don't see a lot of progress from Melo. Kwan is the wild card. He only played 9 minutes and nailed his first 3 but then missed a pair of treys. At times he looked lost on defense, which is typical of true freshmen in their first game against a quality opponent. Like Nyles, the speed of his development will be important to the Zips' success this season. Right now I'm expecting the Zips to have a good but not great regular season. If a few players show good development and they all come together as a more cohesive team, they could peak at tournament time. If they don't, the negativism on this forum will become oppressive.