|
Post by wh on Jan 4, 2011 1:34:20 GMT -5
Butler has been exposed for who they really are - a team that is hard to beat, but not unbeatable. It's too bad it took Milwaukee to do the exposing instead of us.
|
|
|
Post by agibson on Jan 4, 2011 5:15:24 GMT -5
Have we lost to anybody by 24?? Kansas?? We lost by 35 to Kansas. 79-44.
|
|
|
Post by agibson on Jan 4, 2011 5:21:28 GMT -5
Fairly or not, this one game rewrites all perceptions. That said, Milwaukee is just plain hot right now. Red hot since... Saturday? Milwaukee lost by 24 at Wright State just last Thursday. Don't get me wrong, wins at Detroit and Butler anywhere are very good wins. But, I think it's going to take more than a two game win streak for me to consider Milwaukee "hot" rather than just "erratic, with flashes of brilliance". That said, I wouldn't want to be Green Bay on Saturday. I almost didn't believe Stevens when he said that Butler was 3-7 in their last ten games at Milwaukee. But, I guess this game is consistent with that record. (They lost 63-30 in 2009! The game after losing to Loyola.)
|
|
|
Post by agibson on Jan 4, 2011 5:47:54 GMT -5
I almost didn't believe Stevens when he said that Butler was 3-7 in their last ten games at Milwaukee. But, I guess this game is consistent with that record. (They lost 63-30 in 2009! The game after losing to Loyola.) David Woods' (Butler's beat reporter) comment ahead of the Milwaukee game was blogs.indystar.com/butler/2011/01/02/butler-lands-another-from-florida/"With Friday’s showdown looming between Butler and Cleveland State for the Horizon League lead, Monday night’s game at Milwaukee could be trap for the Bulldogs. On the other hand, the Bulldogs have played poorly there so often that Stevens probably has their attention. Butler is 3-7 against the Panthers in the past 10 games at Milwaukee. Butler teams better than this 2011 version have lost (or nearly lost) to Milwaukee teams that aren’t as good as this one." That said, in his next (and latest) blog entry he admits that he didn't see this performance/defeat coming.
|
|
|
Post by zvillehaze on Jan 4, 2011 9:12:42 GMT -5
Finally someone knocked these pr--ks off their high horse. Thank you Milwaukee!! Have we lost to anybody by 24?? Kansas?? finally someone knocked thes pr Thanks for the kind words, 72.
|
|
|
Post by vu72 on Jan 4, 2011 10:33:57 GMT -5
Well haze, I guess I should have been more charitable. Nonetheless, remind your pal Title that he said that Valpo and Butler "aren't remotely close in talent" and it did rub me the wrong way. Someone else said that comparing our Ball State performance to Butler's made us about 17 points worse. So I guess if we can keep the margin of loss to 41 when we play Milwaukee we won't disrupt the analysis. We all need wakeup calls from time to time.
|
|
|
Post by stlvufan on Jan 4, 2011 12:14:42 GMT -5
We all need wakeup calls from time to time. Like Toledo, right?
|
|
|
Post by dylanrocks on Jan 4, 2011 13:09:50 GMT -5
It goes without saying that this was the best performance Milwaukee has mustered so far this season. But it's an injustice to say that the team is "mediocre," as I've seen on the UIC board. This seems to imply that the team's talent level is average at best. To me, this is like calling Butler's myriad accomplishments the product of overachievement or like calling Cleveland State's brand of basketball "playground." Instead, I would say that Milwaukee to the aggravation of most of its fans once again has taken half the year to find itself. As I've said before many times in regards to Detroit, its personnel is decidedly not without talent or mediocre, though the results often are.
|
|
|
Post by vu72 on Jan 4, 2011 14:45:25 GMT -5
We all need wakeup calls from time to time. Like Toledo, right? Exactly, or even Butler or Purdue for different reasons. The Toledo game was embarassing for the players, coaches and fans. We are a lot better and just came out flat and never recovered, even losing in OT. If you ask Homer or the players they clearly thought the Purdue game was in reach--maybe a big reach, but still on reach. Playing as well as we did in the first half led to all sort of possibilities and left the players with a "wakeup" call of sorts to say: "if you really think you can compete with the big boys you can't do it for one half, it takes the full game" In the same way the Butler game gave us a "wakeup" call via making us aware that if we really think we can compete for a title then we can't do it getting down by 19 and then fighting back. We need to be competitive throughout and then close then deal at crunch time. So all three games, Toledo, Purdue and Butler served asd "wakeup" calls for different reasons. Ask the players or coaches. I would expect a much better and complete effort against Youngstown and particularly against CSU. If we think we can play then we must hold serve on our court.
|
|
|
Post by wh on Jan 4, 2011 16:17:45 GMT -5
It goes without saying that this was the best performance Milwaukee has mustered so far this season. But it's an injustice to say that the team is "mediocre," as I've seen on the UIC board. This seems to imply that the team's talent level is average at best. To me, this is like calling Butler's myriad accomplishments the product of overachievement or like calling Cleveland State's brand of basketball "playground." As the one who called Butler "overachievers" I totally disagree with your assertion. Calling a team "mediocre" is a slap in the face, plain and simple. My calling Butler "overachievers" was intended to be a compliment, and I stated as much. They took it as an insult because it's not how they want to be perceived. They want to be perceived as having both more talent than everyone in the HL and having all the positive intangibles that none of the rest of us have through the all powerful and mystical "Butler Way." Their fans are completely blinded by it all, and who wouldn't be after what they accomplished last year (when they did have more talent than everyone else). What I find disappointing is that some of our people who should know better have also bought into it - hook, line and sinker. People who think we lost on Saturday because they are SO SO much more talented than us that we would have to have played completely mistake-free basketball just to even have a chance. That is complete nonsense. Thankfully, Milwaukee proved it last night. The difference between Saturday and Monday - we bought into the Butler hype and clutched; Milwaukee didn't. All of this said, Butler undoubtedly will still have an excellent season. Why? Because they do have very good Mid Major talent, but more so because they perform closer to their full potential than most everyone else in college basketball (last night excluded). Call it "The Butler Way," call it "the little engine that could" or whatever warm and fuzzy term you want to use, but it is classic "overachieving" at its finest. And that is a good thing that we should all strive for.
|
|
|
Post by stlvufan on Jan 4, 2011 16:45:27 GMT -5
The difference between Saturday and Monday - we bought into the Butler hype and clutched; Milwaukee didn't. We know some fans bought into the hype, but that's separate from whether or not the players and coaches bought into the hype. I don't think we know the latter. I'm afraid your "we" might be conflating the two.
|
|
|
Post by wh on Jan 4, 2011 17:49:39 GMT -5
The difference between Saturday and Monday - we bought into the Butler hype and clutched; Milwaukee didn't. We know some fans bought into the hype, but that's separate from whether or not the players and coaches bought into the hype. I don't think we know the latter. I'm afraid your "we" might be conflating the two. Obviously, I was referring to the team when I said we bought into the hype and clutched. From beginning to the end, we looked mechanical, herky-jerky, telegraphing passes, missing bunnies, short-arming shots, clutching on free throws, panicking in double teams, etc. Butler didn't play particularly well either, then again they didn't have to. We were beaten mentally before the game began. Homer said as much in his postgame comments with his "we didn't come prepared to play" comment. As for talent differential, not enough of it was on display on either side to be able to measure.
|
|
|
Post by crusaderjoe on Jan 4, 2011 18:37:13 GMT -5
Exactly, or even Butler or Purdue for different reasons. The Toledo game was embarassing for the players, coaches and fans. We are a lot better and just came out flat and never recovered, even losing in OT. If you ask Homer or the players they clearly thought the Purdue game was in reach--maybe a big reach, but still on reach. Playing as well as we did in the first half led to all sort of possibilities and left the players with a "wakeup" call of sorts to say: "if you really think you can compete with the big boys you can't do it for one half, it takes the full game" In the same way the Butler game gave us a "wakeup" call via making us aware that if we really think we can compete for a title then we can't do it getting down by 19 and then fighting back. We need to be competitive throughout and then close then deal at crunch time. So all three games, Toledo, Purdue and Butler served asd "wakeup" calls for different reasons. Ask the players or coaches. I would expect a much better and complete effort against Youngstown and particularly against CSU. If we think we can play then we must hold serve on our court. You are dangerously close to making the term “wake up call” generic. IMO, all three of your different “wake up calls” are in essence of the same theme--that is, VU needs to play hard for a full 40:00 minutes in order to win games, no matter the opponent. I thought the Ohio game would have served as the classic “wake up” call in this regard but I guess not. The Butler loss was not a “wake up” call by any means in my view because this lesson should have been learned in Athens. And I still stand by what I said before--IMO, at this stage of the season, BU is at least 14-17 points better than Valpo. Butler got beat last night and somehow that is supposed to magically erase the fact that with the exception of about 30-40 seconds in the second half, Butler essentially had control and flow of the entire game against Valpo, not to mention the fact that VU had a double digit deficit or near double deficit to contend with for nearly 95%+ of the entire game. I want Valpo to win as badly as anyone else on this board but the fact of the matter is that ole mo’ was wearing blue and white a hell of a lot more than brown and gold on Saturday. You cannot dominate momentum and flow of a sporting event for as long as Butler did on Saturday by fluke. At some point, the talent level has to be superior to maintain momentum for that length of time. And it my view, right now it's at least 14 points better.
|
|
|
Post by vu72 on Jan 4, 2011 19:53:02 GMT -5
Exactly, or even Butler or Purdue for different reasons. The Toledo game was embarassing for the players, coaches and fans. We are a lot better and just came out flat and never recovered, even losing in OT. If you ask Homer or the players they clearly thought the Purdue game was in reach--maybe a big reach, but still on reach. Playing as well as we did in the first half led to all sort of possibilities and left the players with a "wakeup" call of sorts to say: "if you really think you can compete with the big boys you can't do it for one half, it takes the full game" In the same way the Butler game gave us a "wakeup" call via making us aware that if we really think we can compete for a title then we can't do it getting down by 19 and then fighting back. We need to be competitive throughout and then close then deal at crunch time. So all three games, Toledo, Purdue and Butler served asd "wakeup" calls for different reasons. Ask the players or coaches. I would expect a much better and complete effort against Youngstown and particularly against CSU. If we think we can play then we must hold serve on our court. You are dangerously close to making the term “wake up call” generic. IMO, all three of your different “wake up calls” are in essence of the same theme--that is, VU needs to play hard for a full 40:00 minutes in order to win games, no matter the opponent. I thought the Ohio game would have served as the classic “wake up” call in this regard but I guess not. The Butler loss was not a “wake up” call by any means in my view because this lesson should have been learned in Athens. And I still stand by what I said before--IMO, at this stage of the season, BU is at least 14-17 points better than Valpo. Butler got beat last night and somehow that is supposed to magically erase the fact that with the exception of about 30-40 seconds in the second half, Butler essentially had control and flow of the entire game against Valpo, not to mention the fact that VU had a double digit deficit or near double deficit to contend with for nearly 95%+ of the entire game. I want Valpo to win as badly as anyone else on this board but the fact of the matter is that ole mo’ was wearing blue and white a hell of a lot more than brown and gold on Saturday. You cannot dominate momentum and flow of a sporting event for as long as Butler did on Saturday by fluke. At some point, the talent level has to be superior to maintain momentum for that length of time. And it my view, right now it's at least 14 points better. Well you have changed your tune. Yesterday you came up with the 15-17 point differential via the results from the Ball State games played on our respective home courts. Now, somehow, the result from the game yesterday has nthing to do with it. If we beat Milwaukee on their home court, after Butler got drilled by 24, are we somehow better than Butler? I think you know the answer. Now on to your next observation as highlited above. The reality is the game had several different levels of "domination" Valpo let Butler get way out in front but then "controlled" next part. Let me explain: In the first half Butler controlled the first 9 minutes going up by 16. The next 9 were a push and Valpo only controlled the final 2 to get to down 11 at the half. In the second half Butler controlled the first 4 to get to up 19 and Valpo controlled the next 8 to get to down 5. The next 5 were a push ad Butler won the final 3, based on fouling etc. It wasn't a normal part of the game. So the idea that Butler controlled all but 30 or 40 seconds is silly. Please explain how you go from down 19 to down 5 in 8 minutes without "controlling the play? We made big mistakes to start off both halves and put ourselves in a deep hole. Did we rollover and die? No. Were they so dominant that they just keep going and blew us out like they did to Ball State? No. Were they the better team and by about 10-12 points--on balance? Absolutely. Can we beat them? Absolutely. Witness Milwaukee. wh hit it on the nose. We just need to play like we can and forget whose name is on the other teams uniform. They have got into our heads, for sure.
|
|
|
Post by jerome1 on Jan 4, 2011 22:33:47 GMT -5
We just need to play like we can and forget whose name is on the other teams uniform. They have got into our heads, for sure. Sounds something like what a "naysayer" would say about this Valpo team. How dare you, 72. :-)
|
|