Dave in Green

Buffalo outrebounded Can't 39-29 in their 64-53 win last night in Buffalo, and they outrebounded the Zips 32-23 in their 63-61 win in Akron. So it appears that the Zips and Can't may be pretty close in their rebounding deficiencies.I think this game is a close match that comes down to intangibles. Can't has an advantage with Fisher being a proven go-to guy in crunch time. Will anyone step up for the Zips? Is this the game where the Zips move their game up a notch and play closer to their full capabilities?Whoever loses is going to be in a deep hole in terms of avoiding a 4th game in the MAC tournament.

Each one may be different, but a loss is still a loss. I'm not interested in "which of our losses was more impressive." I'm interested in how players and teams respond to different situations. I'm interested in whether or not they show enough potential in close losses that there is reasonable hope that they might grow enough to produce a different result if faced with similar situations later in the season. Teams that are consistently blown out with no signs of improvement are hopeless. There's always hope that a team that plays close games before losing can learn to take the final step and close out close games. But there are no guarantees. All you can do is look for little signs and make your best guess.

CK, I get the point you're trying to make. Setting aside the fact that the Zips fought back from a much bigger deficit and did not immediately collapse in overtime, the end result was the same. Ignoring the concept of progress, the two OT games were virtually identical.Some see shades of gray where others see only black and white.

Where did you come up with that?First, the Zips were outscored in the OU OT 14-9, not 12-4.Second, there was absolutely no comparison with the Miami OT. Miami dominated OT from beginning to end. The Zips took the lead early in OT against Ohio, and led halfway through OT. Only at the end of OT did they fall behind and have to foul to get the ball back.

They didn't win, but they didn't fold. They have to keep improving, and they have to win one of these close ones. All is forgiven if they learn another lesson to be applied in the MAC tournament.

Extremely gutty performance to come back from a big double digit deficit in the last 5 minutes, tie it and take it into overtime. B. McKnight redeems another poor shooting performance by rebounding a missed shot by C. McKnight and putting it back in as the clock expires.Now, do they have anything left, or do they fold as they did against Miami?

No foul problems at halftime. Lots of rebounding and shooting problems.McClanahan has been productive in his 7 minutes: 2 of 4 from the field (1 of 2 on 3s), 1 of 2 free throws, 2 rebounds, 1 assist, 1 steal, 0 turnovers, 0 personal fouls. Not bad for a mid-season converted redshirt.

I can't believe I wasted my time looking for something of substance there, and neither will your attorney. Difference is, your attorney will gladly take your money before saying so.

Skip, I understand where you're coming from. You always point out the worst possible scenarios and then hope for the best. Others logically point out that there are also good possible scenarios.If you've been around basketball in various capacities for your entire life, then you know that all coaching staffs make some good decisions and some bad decisions, and that good coaching staffs make more good ones than bad ones. So if you think the Zips have a good coaching staff, then you know they have carefully thought this out and thoroughly examined all the pros and cons. That will lead to more good decisions than bad ones. So while it's fair to point out what could go wrong, it's also fair to note that it is more likely to go right than wrong.Either that or the Zips have a bad coaching staff that makes more bad decisions than good ones, in which case your worst possible scenarios will likely be more often right than wrong, and all Zips fans hoping for an eventual championship will live in perpetual misery.

The best coaching staffs have multiple contingency plans in place, ready to be activated depending on circumstances. My best guess on McClanahan is that the Zips coaching staff had McClanahan penciled in if one of the top guards was out for an extended period. I think a lot of people have come to the conclusion that not having Steward available greatly diminishes the Zips' chances of pulling it all together at the end of the season and winning the MAC tournament. McClanahan could make a difference come tournament time. There may have been a better option, but I haven't been able to think of it.Good points about Roberts. When you're nursing a small lead at the end of a game and the other team keeps fouling to get the ball back, there's nothing more powerful than a deadly free throw shooter. Inbound the ball to Roberts, foul, bang-bang, 2 points. Roberts is the only player on the team who doesn't make me nervous when he steps up to the free throw line. If Roberts can also consistently drive to the basket and draw fouls, and if he can hit his 3s, he becomes an even more potent weapon.If they all continue to grow, Hitchens, McNees, Roberts and McClanahan have the potential to give the Zips the best deep backcourt in the MAC by the end of the season.

Wouldn't you know the Zips would finally come through right after I lowered my expectations for them. Their play, especially in the second half, is more what I'd been hoping to see all season. They played with intensity and aggressiveness in crunch time instead of being back on their heels. The one caveat is that the TV announcers kept saying that BG's biggest problem is that they fall apart in crunch time at the end of games. But if the Zips can play this way consistently against other teams for a few games, I would raise my opinion of them from average back to above average.It's telling that the end of McClanahan's redshirt immediately follows the statement that no timetable has been set for Steward's return. The Zips style dictates having four strong guards in the rotation -- two points and two shooters. I think the coaching staff is comfortable with McNees' performance at the point in place of Steward, which leaves them short a reliable shooting guard. They need McClanahan playing now to get him ready for the MAC tournament, which will really determine the success of the Zips' season.B. McKnight is not delivering the consistent firepower expected of a pure shooter. The team needs a second threat. Hopefully, McClanahan can deliver. And, hopefully, B. McKnight can develop his overall game (defense, rebounding, passing, etc.) to compensate for the fact that he is not lighting up the scoreboard. Who'd have guessed the Zips could win with B. McKnight shooting 0-6 from the field?Despite the improvement shown by Conyers, he still appears to be tantalizingly short of being able to deliver consistent performances. The fact that the team won with Conyers out of the starting lineup and playing only 5 minutes will probably keep him on the bench a lot more. Maybe he can establish himself as an effective role player at certain times against certain teams. Most good teams have a mix of steady, consistent players and various role players. At mid-season, KD is still moving players around to find the optimum balance.Cvetinovic continues to grow, and could well become the X factor for this team. He needs to focus on channeling his passion and enthusiasm for the game into positive energy, which can be contagious, and is exactly what this team needs. There are times that they get too tentative and back on their heels. Hitchens helps loosen things up, but having a big man playing that way in the paint can have a huge effect on the team. If he can continue to elevate his play to where he earns 20 or more minutes per game, this will become a different Zips team.

Of course Conyers has room to improve. Who on the team doesn't? But he went from riding the bench at the end of last season to earning a starting position this year. He plays tough defense, and is near the top of the team in several individual stats:#2 in field goal percentage (of players averaging more than 10 minutes per game)#2 in total rebounds (#1 in rebounds per minute played)#2 (tied) in steals #3 in blocks (#2 in blocks per minute played)

I don't recall anyone on this forum predicting before the start of the season that Conyers would have such a turnaround from where he finished with the team last year. As KD has said in the past, players get in his doghouse by not playing up to their potential. But KD has also said he doesn't give up on players, and gives them opportunities to get out of the doghouse by demonstrating that they are improving, and can be expected to help the team win games when inserted in the lineup. There's no predicting whether Swiech or Cvetinovic could become the next Conyers.

In the several decades since I was in college, some things have changed and some haven't. For example, it's not uncommon for students at smaller colleges to be fans of the large state university with the great athletic program, just as they cheer for professional teams in the state. The group I hung with in college was like that. We cheered when Our State U beat Other State U. But we also attended every home game for our school, and were pretty darned rowdy. So it's no surprise to me that today's Akron students might also root for that Columbus school. That's something that hasn't changed, and I don't think should be considered a major problem.The biggest difference today is that there are just way more options available to spend one's time, whether one is an adult or a student. For example, back in the days before the internet, I used to spend a lot of time watching TV. Now I spend more time on the internet. There isn't enough time in the day to do all the things I'd like to do from among so many different options. So I can understand how today's students might have a similar problem when it comes time to decide whether or not to go to a game.I think you are on the right track to make AK-Rowdies membership more dependent on game attendance. There are many different ways to accomplish that. But it will require leadership and effort from someone to make it happen.

Cvetinovic boosters will be pleased to learn that an analysis of the play-by-play shows the following:In the 7 minutes that Cvetinovic was on the floor, the Zips outscored Buffalo by 11.In the 33 minutes that Cvetinovic was on the bench, Buffalo outscored the Zips by 13.

Last night's performance was, again, painful to watch. I had hopes that this young team would develop and improve throughout the season. But they appear to be stuck on "almost good enough." Neither the team nor the fans appeared up for last night's game. Neither were the refs, who blew some big calls that hurt the Zips. But the bottom line is that the team is just not strong enough to overcome adversity. They need everything to go their way to win big games, and everything rarely goes one way.It's not just one or two players who are inconsistent, either. It's all of them. It's the way they play together as a team. It was so obvious when compared to the way the Buffalo players worked together. The Zips just do not have good team chemistry. One small example: B. McKnight gets the ball, draws in the defense by faking a move to the basket and hits a wide open Conyers for an easy layup. Beautiful fundamental play. But it never happened again. When Buffalo ran a successful play like that, they simply repeated it over and over. That's the problem. The Zips make nice offensive plays less often than their opponents.So I've now accepted the fact that this is an average team. The defense is a little better than average and the offense is a little worse than average. Their season record is not likely to be many games over .500. This is the rebuilding year that was predicted before the start of the season. I like the coaching style and I like the players and will continue to attend all the home games and scream myself hoarse at the refs. I hope the Zips surprise me by peaking in the MAC tournament. But my expectations for this team have been lowered.

I believe the original prognosis for Steward was that he was expected to be out for at least a month. The fact that "no timetable has been set for his return" is concerning. With a serious medical problem like that, the focus is obviously on his longterm health as opposed to whether or not he misses a few extra games.The effect of the "quick leash" on Conyers is interesting. Some players have "microwave" personalities that allow them to enter a game and immediately heat up. Others are slow to warm up, but can be major contributors once they get going. KD's style dictates lots of substitutions, so those who don't contribute immediately are going to come out of the game before they have a chance to show all they have, and maybe end up out of the regular rotation.Assuming that KD's coaching style is not going to change, there are a couple of things that can compensate for this. First, make "fast starter" a key element of player recruiting. Second, have the coaching staff spend lots of time discussing this philosophy with young players, and help them work on this before they end up in the doghouse without fully understanding why.

There is one critical factor about the regular season -- to earn a first round bye for the MAC Tournament. Without a first round bye, a team would have to win 4 games on 4 consecutive days to make it to the NCAA tournament. Last year, 3 of the 4 teams that won on the first day of the MAC tournament lost the next day. Only Miami won, and they were beaten on the third day.Winning 3 games in 3 days is already a huge challenge. So the Zips really must win enough conference games not to have to play all 4 days of the tournament.

Ohio beats Can't in Athens, 71-65.

Can't argue with the negatives. I was most upset at the number of shots missed in the paint. The Zips worked the ball in pretty well at times, but just couldn't finish, and were outscored in the paint, 34-16. I'd like to see the forwards more focused on their short-to-mid-range shots and McNees shooting more 3s.There are also some positives that could pay off as the season goes on:Zips made 3 fewer turnovers than Miami and are averaging 6 fewer per game than their opponents.Free throw shooting continues to improve over the past (75% vs. Miami).C McKnight played significant minutes, and appears to be recovering well from his injury.B McKnight continues to work harder on non-shooting aspects, leading the team in rebounds with 7 (Conyers had 6).Steward's return might be the key to taking some pressure off Humpty and freeing up McNees to shoot more and play point less.Overall, it's painful to watch the Zips come so close to upsetting higher ranked teams only to fall short by a few points at the finish. But it's better than being consistently beaten badly. They just need to develop that killer instinct at the end of close games, the one Miami demonstrated so well in OT. The Zips need to learn to believe in themselves, and then execute.

The seniors took over in OT, and Miami has more of them.

Game discussion is already going on here:http://zipsnation.org/forums//index.php?showtopic=12236

Buffalo roars back with 52 points in the second half, but Bowling Green holds on for an 86-82 win at home.

Yep, coverage starts at 4:10 p.m.http://www.10tv.com/live/content/onnstatio...n-titan-tv.html

I've known bad kids who grew up to be outstanding adults, and I've known good kids who went wrong as adults. So I find it difficult to pass judgment on an individual based entirely on his past. Giving a second chance to someone to make good is not a bad concept. We would all hope to have the same opportunity if we had made mistakes in our early years.The cynical part would be if the only ones given a second chance are gifted athletes brought in primarily to pump up team records and help bring glory to an institution. My question would be if an institution has similar programs for troubled youth who are not athletically gifted. If they do, then I would respect them for their consistency. If they don't, then they get no respect at all from me.