Revisionist History?????

[EQguy]

I get a little disturbed each week reading the game threads after a loss especially by the schizophrenic nature of several of the posters on this thread. So, I thought I would go back and peek through some of the preseason threads and see what the prevailing wisdom was at that time.

Now, I am a little lazy (deep research was never my passion) so I stopped at the first one I found that I felt dealt with the overall opinion I get from reading some of the post loss threads. I am not calling out Doc specifically, just using him as as example of the overall prevailing attitude of many of the posters on this board.

Last Night this is what Doc wrote...

It is what it is. Jacks will play in the post-season tourney. It is likely this team will continue to underachieve. They have proven a couple of things this year. The ability to lose games they should and the ability not to win games they could. I'm sure I'll get dinged for saying it but facts are facts. Anyone who thinks just qualifying for the post-season by other teams losing as a positive outcome is not living in the moment in my opinion. We aren't a very good team right now and the NCAA tourney is not in our near our distant future.

and from the preseason prediction thread

As for the men's team this year, as I said before, focus on the conference season. I think qualifying for the post-season tourney is a great and realistic goal. Once they are in the talk about a birth in the big tourney can begin.

Now, if we don't have a very good team right now how could it be that they made and met a great and realistic preseason goal? Backing in is revisionist, they have won enough games to qualify for the postseason tournament. Everything else is just fluff that has been built up by expectations based on what people have seen during the season.

Now, is that a bad thing? No, many people's vision for what is possible has changed during the year as we have seen several glimpses of what may be possible from these guys. But in the end they are who we thought they were. They have done what we expected them to do.

[Jacks-02]

Re: Revisionist History?????

Great post EQguy!

[EQguy]

Re: Revisionist History?????

Give credit to LakeJack last night for this beauty...

Want to know how the last three D-II Men's Basketball National Champions that moved up to D-I are doing?

Kennesaw State - 2004 D-II National Champion is 7-17 with a RPI of 337. They are 1-11 on the road. '04 was our last year in D-II and the NCC.

Cal State Bakersfield - They won 3 D-II National Championships in the '90s. They are 6-18 with a RPI of 321. They are 1-13 on the road.

UC Davis - They won the '98 D-II National crown and have been D-I the longest. This season they are 11-14 with a RPI of 255 and a road record of 4-7.
Moving from D-II to D-I is a huge jump in Men's Basketball.

[Nidaros]

Re: Revisionist History?????

I have no idea what I posted last fall and I dont get how the term "Revisionist history" applies now.

I do recall going to sleep during one of the Bracket Buster games with Commonwealth of Virginia. We were down a few points and when I woke up, we were still in the game. That game started change my outlook of this year's team. We hung with a very good ball team so the talent was there to win games. Maybe not the Virginia one, but others.

I have never denied that this team has made progress, but I do think we seem to be on a plateau when it comes to close games. Cal Poly is a prime example. We had our chances, but we seem to let down in allowing offensive rebounds and protecting the perimeter and it leads to a costly result, namely the final score on the board at the end of the game. These are things we need to work on but, yes progress has been made. The bb team like all of us in daily life can always do better.

[EQguy]

Re: Revisionist History?????

ok, so I don't label things well. If that is what you got out of this then you missed the point entirely.

The whole point was that goals and expectations from the start of the season have evolved. Going back to the start all would have been happy just to see this team make the tourney and have a chance to make some noise. Now they are in the tournament and even have an opportunity to finish as high as 4th (though likely somewhere between 6 and 7). Yet, now, that isn't good enough as we have seen things they are capable of.

[Jacks-02]

Re: Revisionist History?????

Here are some statistics I pulled for the 5 years of our transition. In looking at the stats, this is our best year ever in number of DI wins, tied for most 5pt or less losses, and fewest 10pt plus losses and also the best scoring margin at -1.2.

This the first year since our transition that we have had an upper classmen lead the team in scoring and also the first year we haven't had a freshman in the top 4.

The offseason after 2005-2006 was where things went south. We were set to have all 5 leading scorers back but instead lost Beran to family reasons, Holdren to Illinois, and Berte and Gilbert to legal matters. This lead to the 2006-2007 washout and eventual loss of Cadwell.

From 2006-07 to today Williams and Callahan have grown from freshman to juniors, Sargent and now Cordova and Moss are all important contributors as Sophomores and we have increased our wins and scoring margin against DI competition in every season. We will qualify for the postseason conference tournament and not lose a single major contributor in the offseason.

Next year we add Tony Fiegen and Chad White in addition to James Rader who red-shirted this season, Dwight Pederson and possibly Anthony Davis from injury. With these players returning we should be a top 3 team in the conference next season.

2008-2009
12-17 Record, 10 DI wins
10+ pt losses, 6
5- pt losses, 7
Scoring Margin -1.2
Leading Scorers
JR Callahan 16.3, SO Sargent 14.2, SO Cordova 11.4, JR Williams 10.1, SO Moss 6.2

2007-2008
8-21 Record, 7 DI wins
10pt or greater losses, 8
5pt or less losses, 7
Scoring Margin -5.3
Leading Scorers
SO Williams 14.0, SR Beran 12.3, SO Callahan 12.3, FR Sargent 8.4, SR Loney 4.1

2006-2007
6-24 Record, 6 DI wins
10pt or greater losses, 17
5pt or less losses, 5
Scoring Margin -10.8
Leading Scorers
FR Williams 12.1, SO Cadwell 11.7, FR Callahan 8.3, JR Loney 7.2, JR Frias 7.2

2005-2006
9-20 Record, 8 DI Wins
10pt or greater losses, 15
5pt or less losses, 2
Scoring Margin -10.9
Leading Scorers:
FR Cadwell 15.6, SO Holdren 14.4, JR Beran 12.1, JR Berte 8.5, FR Gilbert 8.5

2004-2005
10-18 Record, 3 DI Wins
10pt or greater losses, 13
5pt or less losses, 2
Scoring Margin -5.4
Leading Scorers:
SO Beran 13.6, FR Holdren 12.5, SO Green 9.6, SR Geiver 8.3

Keep the faith guys, its hard to see sometimes, but things are definitely moving in the right direction!

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

Re: Revisionist History?????

I get a little disturbed each week reading the game threads after a loss especially by the schizophrenic nature of several of the posters on this thread. So, I thought I would go back and peek through some of the preseason threads and see what the prevailing wisdom was at that time.

Now, I am a little lazy (deep research was never my passion) so I stopped at the first one I found that I felt dealt with the overall opinion I get from reading some of the post loss threads. I am not calling out Doc specifically, just using him as as example of the overall prevailing attitude of many of the posters on this board.

Last Night this is what Doc wrote...


and from the preseason prediction thread


Now, if we don't have a very good team right now how could it be that they made and met a great and realistic preseason goal? Backing in is revisionist, they have won enough games to qualify for the postseason tournament. Everything else is just fluff that has been built up by expectations based on what people have seen during the season.

Now, is that a bad thing? No, many people's vision for what is possible has changed during the year as we have seen several glimpses of what may be possible from these guys. But in the end they are who we thought they were. They have done what we expected them to do.

Well said, couldn't agree more.

[Jacks#1Fan]

Re: Revisionist History?????

WOW...Jacks02! I've felt that a history of where things have evolved from, but was too lazy to go do the research. Thanks for taking the time...rep points is all I can give you.

At the beginning of this season, we had a couple of posters saying we had no D-I talent, we had a lousy coach, and we weren't going to get more than 5-6 wins. We also had a lot of posters who said they were hoping for 10 wins and if we would be lucky to make the tournament.

If we hadn't won the games we did (including beating Oakland, which gave us the tiebreaker against WIU, if it was needed) we wouldn't be in the tournament. We are, and we earned it...did we get help, well sure, a lot of teams get help when somebody beats somebody they are in competition with for a tourney spot. I understand the tendancy to run hot/cold on a team during the season...it happens to me too on occasion.

Saturday's loss was a tough one...but as far as I'm concerned...it didn't mean a thing. It meant we had to go on a long journey to play one team right when we are trying to concentrate on doing our best in the league and at the tournament. See you all in Sue Foo!

[JackJD]

Re: Revisionist History?????

Excellent points by EQguy and Jacks02. We have had enough improvement that we're starting to forget where we've been. We see proof of talent and ability and, at times, flashes of great basketball. It's all coming together but it's taking time much like everyone seemed to understand just a few years ago.

[Jacks-02]

Re: Revisionist History?????

One other thing that people always forget is that we are down in assistant coaches from nearly every team we face and budget wise are nowhere close as well. This is nearly exact opposite from DII when we probably had one of the bigger budgets and best facilities.



According to http://www.midmajority.com/ we are 308 of 340 in basketball funding at $681,782 and in comparison Oral Roberts is 109th at $2,054,121. That makes a difference folks

[Nidaros]

Re: Revisionist History?????

ok, so I don't label things well. If that is what you got out of this then you missed the point entirely.

The whole point was that goals and expectations from the start of the season have evolved. Going back to the start all would have been happy just to see this team make the tourney and have a chance to make some noise. Now they are in the tournament and even have an opportunity to finish as high as 4th (though likely somewhere between 6 and 7). Yet, now, that isn't good enough as we have seen things they are capable of.

Thanks, now I get it. If the shoe doesnt fit, then throw it away.

[zooropa]

Re: Revisionist History?????

One other thing that people always forget is that we are down in assistant coaches from nearly every team we face and budget wise are nowhere close as well.

Although, let's be honest: A considerable portion of the BCS athletic budget goes to one guy.

Also, consider tuition & room and board costs for a BCS school vs. SDSU. The value of a fullride at SDSU is, say, half what it is at the U of M.

So, if you figure 13 scholarships with a $10k difference in each scholarship, plus two assistantships for the two grad assistants (call that $20k apiece, maybe), and you're looking at $170k right there due to tuition.

Then, you've got the program's share of the operating costs of a facility that's twice the size of Frost. That can't be cheap. And you're possibly having to pay for a separate practice facility.

Then there's the guarantee money for the two D-2 patsies you bring in for exhibition purposes, as well as the 2 or 3 D-1 patsies you bring in during the non-conf season.

Plus the larger guarantee to bring in a marquee BCS program (I can guarantee you, we are getting a lot less to go to Nebraska than USC, and it's not just because we can take the bus).

---

As far as what the student athlete sees/experiences, I think SDSU is getting to the point where they can go toe to toe with any other school in BB.....

However, SDSU can't provide the degree of exposure and competition that a BCS school can.

---

So I guess what I'm saying is, apart from charter flights and that extra assistant, I don't see where budget is as much of a factor as conference affiliation and the team's overall place in that conference.

[Nidaros]

Re: Revisionist History?????

In reference to dollars spent by SDSU and ORU in terms of a budget, we have to remember ORU is a private college and I suspect the cost for one full ride at ORU is close to 30k. At SDSU is it now 13K, so right there you have a big difference and no doubt Scott Sutton does not work for peanuts either. So I tend to think the budget difference between ORU and SDSU can be attributed to the cost of a full ride and head coaching salaries. Also we have one less assistant. I suspect too, Sutton's assistants are making much more than Klink and Austin Hansen. Some of the difference are real and some might be related to the tuition costs.

[jackmd]

Re: Revisionist History?????

This team is going to be about where I figured they would as far as conference tourney and seeding at the beginning of the year. In fact, the are better some nights than I thought they would be. I'm certainly no expert and don't ask that my posts in reaction to bad performances be judged in that fashion.

What do we know, the identity of this team is of one that loses close games. A team that sometimes doesn't come out to compete from the tip to the final buzzer. A team that doesn't know who to look to at the end of the game. A team that doesn't seem to have that desire/ability (not sure which one) to play shut down defense and dominate the boards.

So, we are finishing about where I though we would in the standings but not by playing to the level I think they can and I'm guessing Coach Nagy and the players would agree, perhaps not. If you are someone who is satisfied with the current effort and results than we will disagree. I'll expect more based on what I've seen from the team on certain nights.

If you have a problem with that philosophy I can deal with that.

[sdsurulz08]

Re: Revisionist History?????

This team is going to be about where I figured they would as far as conference tourney and seeding at the beginning of the year. In fact, the are better some nights than I thought they would be. I'm certainly no expert and don't ask that my posts in reaction to bad performances be judged in that fashion.

What do we know, the identity of this team is of one that loses close games. A team that sometimes doesn't come out to compete from the tip to the final buzzer. A team that doesn't know who to look to at the end of the game. A team that doesn't seem to have that desire/ability (not sure which one) to play shut down defense and dominate the boards.

So, we are finishing about where I though we would in the standings but not by playing to the level I think they can and I'm guessing Coach Nagy and the players would agree, perhaps not. If you are someone who is satisfied with the current effort and results than we will disagree. I'll expect more based on what I've seen from the team on certain nights.

If you have a problem with that philosophy I can deal with that.

I agree, we look like a top 3 team at home at times and a botom 3 team on the road most of the time. A seson filled with what ifs? yes we missed a lot of last minute shots but playing tough defence and good ball control from the start of the game until the end could have made a big differnce in the teams standings.