The difference is that Howard excels with his back to the basket! That is extremely important in being able to run the ball inside. If WE can develop a big mans game I'd be impressed. He likes to face the basket or shoot a fade-away more times then not. Defensively WE I'm not sure what he can do but get bigger and learn to position himself a bit better. This was only his 2nd year after all and between this year and his Fr. year he did improve a ton.
-
Welcome to BradleyFans.com! Visitors are welcome, but we encourage you to sign up and register as a member. It's free and takes only a few seconds. Just click on the link to Register at the top right of the page, and follow instructions. If you have any problems or questions, click on the link at the bottom right of the page to Contact Us.
Butler - Syracuse game
- Thread starter SFP
- Start date
As I said in a previous thread, WE is the wild card for next year's team assuming we don't land a talented big who can contribute immediately. You are right about WE, but you are also right that he improved a lot once, he can do it again. Maybe I'm being overly optimistic thinking he will become just that it the post, but I think he can and will improve a lot in that area.
JP is said to be a back to the basket guy and is 6'8 like Howard, maybe he can be that type of guy for us if WE can't. I'm not expecting Matt Howard his first year on the court, but then again I don't think we need Matt Howard. I expect a combination of WE/JP/AT could get the job done, assuming we don't get a big, if they really work on it. Again maybe I'm overly optimistic, but that's what I see.
ser_solace
New member
Heh. Yeah, that's what I meant. An all mid-major final four.
Not according to some local sports talkers in Chicago, one in particular.
The Score's mid-afternoon personalities Terry Boers and Dan Bernstein are entertaining to listen to and at times very intellectually spot-on with their discussions. At other times they are very silly, Boers in particular. So it is not at all surprising to hear Boers the other day saying that he did not want any of these smaller schools in the Elite Eight and Final Four, thinking that these spots should be reserved only for the teams with the best athletes!
I have news for him. Boers needs to realize that teams with blue chip athletes are not the only ones permitted in the tournament, AND these teams are not the only ones that have a God-given right to win! Teams that play fundamental basketball according to a proven system can overcome shortcomings and beat the more athletic teams on any given night. Granted teams that are stocked with better athletes most certainly have the advantage, but that doesn't mean having great athletes is the only way to win. A team like Cornell has as much right to make the Final Four as Kentucky and Duke, and I find it shallow that someone like Boers can make a stupid statement like that without apparently much thought. And that goes for the Diggers of the world too!
I for one hope the mid-major "uprising" continues. Then maybe one of these days people like Boers and Digger realize that the smaller schools have broken the "code" for good!
Yup. It's too bad though that more in the media don't seem to understand that, or somehow equate this to "bad" basketball. They could not be more wrong.
BUSongwriter
New member
I was thrilled to see Butler win and knock Syracuse out of the tournament. It really irritated me when Syracuse lost its opening round of the Big East tournament and still got a No. 1 seed. How does that happen?
If UNI would have lost in the MVC opening round, how many of the talking heads -- and committee members -- would have said the Panthers should not even make the tournament, or should be dropped to a 12 or 13 seed?
There are many examples of bias toward the power conferences, but this was a glaring one. Bye, bye, Orange!
If UNI would have lost in the MVC opening round, how many of the talking heads -- and committee members -- would have said the Panthers should not even make the tournament, or should be dropped to a 12 or 13 seed?
There are many examples of bias toward the power conferences, but this was a glaring one. Bye, bye, Orange!
DeltaBrave03
New member
Yeah right after the game when they went to the studio Greg Gumbel turns to one of the other analysts and says "well what happened" basically the only way Butler won is because something happend to the orange. As if there's no way Butler could just be a better team. It just gets so old.
It was the same when UNI beat Kansas. The announcers acted like Kansas "lost" the game, UNI did not "win" the game.
GO UNI and St. Mary's!
