Belmont

[RabbitObsessed]

Re: Belmont

At some point you do have to start thinking "this is just who they are." That point is fast approaching.

This.

[jackdaniel]

Re: Belmont

I was bowling tonight, so I missed the entire game. I am glad I did. To come full circle on this right now....the odds of us winning the Summit our worse than the odds of winning Powerball.

lol....love the connection there!

[Grizzled_Jack]

Re: Belmont

[QUOTE=Nidaros;216875]I would agree, the season is not lost or over by any means. I think we have run into a school with a little more tradition and was a D2 power house not so many years ago. Belmont used to be called Belmont Abbey, I believe and I dont think we ever ran into them in the D2 days, but they were very good back then and its carried forward.[/QUOTE.

Still a Belmont Abbey in North Carolina. Al Mcguire's old school and D2. They would have probably beat us tonight too.

[Nidaros]

Re: Belmont

[QUOTE=Grizzled_Jack;216899]

I would agree, the season is not lost or over by any means. I think we have run into a school with a little more tradition and was a D2 power house not so many years ago. Belmont used to be called Belmont Abbey, I believe and I dont think we ever ran into them in the D2 days, but they were very good back then and its carried forward.[/QUOTE.

Still a Belmont Abbey in North Carolina. Al Mcguire's old school and D2. They would have probably beat us tonight too.

Thanks for setting me straight,, yes they might have won over the Jacks tonight too. Not a good night to be a Jack.

[goon]

Re: Belmont

Felt like I was listening to a game during the transition. It was brutal reading it on here and after work had the radio on and good thing I had xmas shopping to do to ease the pain. We just aren't very good. No offense to heemstra but when he is one of the top scores that's not a good thing. White dyksta fiegen all forgot to show up. Nate is having a senior slump injury or not. I'm going to keep my expectations low so when and if they do well will be a plesant surprise but reuslts like this won't hurt as much. I'd rahter have high expectations.

[poppa1]

Re: Belmont

In the second half, I don't know if we were intentionally double teaming the ball or if we didn't switchlike we should have. It seemed like they got a easy basket our defense just isn't working right. Either lack of communication or lack of effort.

[zooropa]

Re: Belmont

The effort

Okay,

1: Belmont is probably a better team than SDSU and should've won that game anyway. If you say that the two are about equal, home court favors Belmont.

2: Belmont's previous game was a blowout loss to Kansas in which their starters logged no more than 28 minutes (26,26,28,28,28), and probably didn't have to play as hard as SDSU did, at least once the game got out of hand.

In the two overtime win at Montana, SDSU's starters logged 43 (Fiegen), 37 (Dykstra), 47 (Wolters), 38 (Carlson), 43 (White). The minute totals were career highs for just about every one of these players.

I can tell you from first hand experience, that strenuous exercise at altitude can knock you out for a day or two, if you're not used to it.

I'm disappointed by the way Belmont ran away from SDSU in the second half, but I think a fair chunk of that 2nd half collapse was paying the piper for the win at Montana.

As far as lumping this game in with the Minnesota game, might I remind you that last year's team lost to UND by a similar margin with far less in the way of excuses. At Minnesota, the Jacks lost Wolters that morning. They barely had time to run the starters with a true freshman backup PG before hitting the court. This time around, you're looking at a motivated Belmont team (lost by 29 to Kansas), an exhausted Jacks team that is not at 100%, and a game that should've been penciled in as a Belmont W anyway.

At least this blowout allowed the Jacks' starters (Wolters excepted) to get a bit of a breather before playing New Mexico. Nagy emptied the bench at the 4:00 mark.

[mitchellrabbit]

Re: Belmont

Okay,

1: Belmont is probably a better team than SDSU and should've won that game anyway. If you say that the two are about equal, home court favors Belmont.

2: Belmont's previous game was a blowout loss to Kansas in which their starters logged no more than 28 minutes (26,26,28,28,28), and probably didn't have to play as hard as SDSU did, at least once the game got out of hand.

In the two overtime win at Montana, SDSU's starters logged 43 (Fiegen), 37 (Dykstra), 47 (Wolters), 38 (Carlson), 43 (White). The minute totals were career highs for just about every one of these players.

I can tell you from first hand experience, that strenuous exercise at altitude can knock you out for a day or two, if you're not used to it.

I'm disappointed by the way Belmont ran away from SDSU in the second half, but I think a fair chunk of that 2nd half collapse was paying the piper for the win at Montana.

As far as lumping this game in with the Minnesota game, might I remind you that last year's team lost to UND by a similar margin with far less in the way of excuses. At Minnesota, the Jacks lost Wolters that morning. They barely had time to run the starters with a true freshman backup PG before hitting the court. This time around, you're looking at a motivated Belmont team (lost by 29 to Kansas), an exhausted Jacks team that is not at 100%, and a game that should've been penciled in as a Belmont W anyway.

At least this blowout allowed the Jacks' starters (Wolters excepted) to get a bit of a breather before playing New Mexico. Nagy emptied the bench at the 4:00 mark.

And just a few days after we got blown out at UND last year, we went to Washington. Not saying we'll got to New Mexico and win but if the world doesnt end tommorrow, there is always a chance.

[SDSUAlum08]

Re: Belmont

Okay,1: Belmont is probably a better team than SDSU and should've won that game anyway. If you say that the two are about equal, home court favors Belmont.2: Belmont's previous game was a blowout loss to Kansas in which their starters logged no more than 28 minutes (26,26,28,28,28), and probably didn't have to play as hard as SDSU did, at least once the game got out of hand.In the two overtime win at Montana, SDSU's starters logged 43 (Fiegen), 37 (Dykstra), 47 (Wolters), 38 (Carlson), 43 (White). The minute totals were career highs for just about every one of these players.I can tell you from first hand experience, that strenuous exercise at altitude can knock you out for a day or two, if you're not used to it.I'm disappointed by the way Belmont ran away from SDSU in the second half, but I think a fair chunk of that 2nd half collapse was paying the piper for the win at Montana.As far as lumping this game in with the Minnesota game, might I remind you that last year's team lost to UND by a similar margin with far less in the way of excuses. At Minnesota, the Jacks lost Wolters that morning. They barely had time to run the starters with a true freshman backup PG before hitting the court. This time around, you're looking at a motivated Belmont team (lost by 29 to Kansas), an exhausted Jacks team that is not at 100%, and a game that should've been penciled in as a Belmont W anyway.At least this blowout allowed the Jacks' starters (Wolters excepted) to get a bit of a breather before playing New Mexico. Nagy emptied the bench at the 4:00 mark.

I understand your points, but it just sounds like more excuses for a team that's underachieving. But like Filbert said, maybe this is just who they are.

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

Re: Belmont

Offensively, we dribble way too much.

I think highly of Tony, Marcus, and Prince, but the team benefits most when their hustle and grit lead to opportunities. Not when they are the release point for a guard that is dribbling 35 feet away from the basket with no where to go with it (White and Carlson). Then its either a 17 foot jumper or starting post moves 15 feet away from the basket - recipe for a turnover or a 5 foot brick.

Belmont was doing pick and rolls all night, when we started to defend it, they started having wide open 3 point looks. They hit post players when the defense got off balance enough to create an opportunity.

Kind of like we did last year.

I'm with others, a little frustrated with coaching. All we've heard is we'll be fine offensively, need to stay humble, defense is where we will win games. We can't even make open shots and our offense is a lot of standing around waiting for a guy to come off a screen. Pretty frustrating when you have a play maker like Wolters and spot up shooters like Dykstra, White, and Carlson are forced to take moving shots or create their own...

[propar80]

Re: Belmont

In the words of "Romeo" the caddy in the movie Tin Cup..."well...you're humble now homes" after Roy MacEvoy shoots a crowd pleasing 84 at the first round of the US Open. I guess my point is go out there a have a little f-ing swagger. There's not a damn thing wrong with that as much as the average south dakotan will tell you otherwise. Go Jacks!!

[jackmd]

Re: Belmont

Perhaps the frank honesty of my posts has created some confusion. I expect and believe that this team has the talent to compete at a much higher level then they are. Therefore, I am very disappointed in the outcome of these games. I am beginning to believe that my expectations are too great but I am not yet willing to admit that. Therefore, the result of games like U of Minn and Belmont, although not season breaking losses and perhaps expected L's, make me feel jaded.

I don't know if this team is not playing up to it potential or if this is "just who they are". I hope its the former.

[Nidaros]

Re: Belmont

I understand your points, but it just sounds like more excuses for a team that's underachieving. But like Filbert said, maybe this is just who they are.

Hold on there, any explanation for a loss is an excuse or underachievement? Little harsh if you ask me, but you might be right about underachiving as a team unit. This excuse talk smacks of NDSU Football arrogance. Where those sh*t head fans never expect to lose. Well Schimdt happens, but I hope our leader Filbert is wrong, about who we are. I did a story for VJ Smith who was the editor for the Rabbit Tracks at that time, about the 1963 team. I spent a lot of time at Briggs reviewing microfilm as details had slipped away and they were not what I had pictured in my own mind. They had lost some games before Christmas that should not have but after New Years they went 11-1 in the NCC and survived a 3 ot match with tiny Nebraska Weselyn in the regional held the barn to go on to the eliete Eight where they took out Fresno State and SIU to get to the finals. My point is that there is a lot of BB left to play. BTW Jim Booher was on the NWU team, and was well familar with SDSU when he applied for the Trainer job moons ago.

[MontanaRabbit]

Re: Belmont

Perhaps the frank honesty of my posts has created some confusion. I expect and believe that this team has the talent to compete at a much higher level then they are. Therefore, I am very disappointed in the outcome of these games. I am beginning to believe that my expectations are too great but I am not yet willing to admit that. Therefore, the result of games like U of Minn and Belmont, although not season breaking losses and perhaps expected L's, make me feel jaded.

I don't know if this team is not playing up to it potential or if this is "just who they are". I hope its the former.

Agree with your post. We just are not playing to the level I believe we are capable. After the MT game I was hoping that they would snap out of their funk, but after last night that's clearly not the case. Maybe last night's @ss kicking from a team I believe we were completely capable of competing with and winning wakes them up. I'm not about to place a bet on it though.

Although I realize this loss is not a "season ender", these losses count. Assuming they can kick it in the @ss, we need quality wins so we are not stuck with a 14, 15, or 16 seed if we make the tournament. At this point, no way we avoid one of those three seeds if we even make it.

[SDSU Dad]

Re: Belmont

Agreed completely.

No way this team (the way it's playing right now, and all signs seem to be pointing towards continued similar play), will beat either NDSU or WIU.

They should just throw in the towel...They aren't better than Oakland either - they beat Valparaso. They aren't better than USD either - WIU had to make a lastsecond shot to beat them. They have no toughness, resolve, grit..we lost Griffin you know.

Do you think these players have no character? The last time i got smacked in the mouth, I came back with both arms swinging. (thanks for letting me get that off my chest)