MSU gets swept

[CelticCat]

WBB lose, men collapse in one of the most epic collapses I've witnessed by any team at any level. Blow a double digit lead in the 2nd half and will probably lose by double digits.

[CatBlitz]

WBB lose, men collapse in one of the most epic collapses I've witnessed by any team at any level. Blow a double digit lead in the 2nd half and will probably lose by double digits.

Yep. Pretty sad performance in the second half. I don't know how a team can be so Jekyll and Hyde as this one.

[grizzh8r]

WBB lose, men collapse in one of the most epic collapses I've witnessed by any team at any level. Blow a double digit lead in the 2nd half and will probably lose by double digits.

Yep. Pretty sad performance in the second half. I don't know how a team can be so Jekyll and Hyde as this one.

Is it any different that ANY Bobcat teams we've seen in the last decade? Nope. One thing about it, they're consistent. Consistently inconsistent.

[MSU01]

Is giving up 36 points in the last 10 minutes bad? I'm no basketball expert but that seems a bit high.

[ilovethecats]

[John K]

WBB lose, men collapse in one of the most epic collapses I've witnessed by any team at any level. Blow a double digit lead in the 2nd half and will probably lose by double digits.

What is the deal with the women? They're taking a page directly out of the men's book, having now lost 4 straight after starting out 8-1. Although their declines haven't been as dramatic as the men's, or as well publicized, it' seems like the women's team is also becoming known for falling off during the 2nd round of confernce games. It seems like this is about the 3rd straight year that they've struggled the 2nd time through the league, after being at or near the top of the BSC after the first half of the conference schedule.

[MSU01]

WBB lose, men collapse in one of the most epic collapses I've witnessed by any team at any level. Blow a double digit lead in the 2nd half and will probably lose by double digits.

What is the deal with the women? They're taking a page directly out of the men's book, having now lost 4 straight after starting out 8-1. Although their declines haven't been as dramatic as the men's, or as well publicized, it' seems like the women's team is also becoming known for falling off during the 2nd round of confernce games. It seems like this is about the 3rd straight year that they've struggled the 2nd time through the league, after being at or near the top of the BSC after the first half of the conference schedule.

The women's team has gone 4-4 the second time through conference play in both of the past two seasons, after starting 6-2 last year and 7-1 in 2011. The two years before that, they improved the second time through. So not as dramatic as the mens' collapses but not very encouraging - it is hard to fathom how a team can just flat out drop off a cliff that quickly without any injuries or other seemingly major events occurring.

[BelgradeBobcat]

Can't make either one this week-probably a good thing. Men's team had no chance without their two best inside players. The lead was fool's gold-it wasn't going to last. That being said, Huse's teams have historically blown big leads-I cringe when they get a big lead because I know it's a prelude to disaster.

They'll back into the tournament again. That's the best we can hope for.

[John K]

WBB lose, men collapse in one of the most epic collapses I've witnessed by any team at any level. Blow a double digit lead in the 2nd half and will probably lose by double digits.

What is the deal with the women? They're taking a page directly out of the men's book, having now lost 4 straight after starting out 8-1. Although their declines haven't been as dramatic as the men's, or as well publicized, it' seems like the women's team is also becoming known for falling off during the 2nd round of confernce games. It seems like this is about the 3rd straight year that they've struggled the 2nd time through the league, after being at or near the top of the BSC after the first half of the conference schedule.

The women's team has gone 4-4 the second time through conference play in both of the past two seasons, after starting 6-2 last year and 7-1 in 2011. The two years before that, they improved the second time through. So not as dramatic as the mens' collapses but not very encouraging - it is hard to fathom how a team can just flat out drop off a cliff that quickly without any injuries or other seemingly major events occurring.

And if I remember correctly, they actually started out 7-0 in 2011, which means they went only 4-5 after that. At least the men had the excuse of being shorthanded tonight (plus we've come to expect their annual late season swoon), but you're right...there's no obvious explanation for the dramatic shift in the women's fortunes.

[Colter_Nuanez]

WBB lose, men collapse in one of the most epic collapses I've witnessed by any team at any level. Blow a double digit lead in the 2nd half and will probably lose by double digits.

What is the deal with the women? They're taking a page directly out of the men's book, having now lost 4 straight after starting out 8-1. Although their declines haven't been as dramatic as the men's, or as well publicized, it' seems like the women's team is also becoming known for falling off during the 2nd round of confernce games. It seems like this is about the 3rd straight year that they've struggled the 2nd time through the league, after being at or near the top of the BSC after the first half of the conference schedule.

The women's team has gone 4-4 the second time through conference play in both of the past two seasons, after starting 6-2 last year and 7-1 in 2011. The two years before that, they improved the second time through. So not as dramatic as the mens' collapses but not very encouraging - it is hard to fathom how a team can just flat out drop off a cliff that quickly without any injuries or other seemingly major events occurring.

And if I remember correctly, they actually started out 7-0 in 2011, which means they went only 4-5 after that. At least the men had the excuse of being shorthanded tonight (plus we've come to expect their annual late season swoon), but you're right...there's no obvious explanation for the dramatic shift in the women's fortunes.

Oh yes there is. The women struggle for one reason: they can't shoot a lick. The first time through league, all the coaches were too prideful to straight up zone them. Now everyone is zoning them and Montana State can't shoot to save its life.

After tonight's 3-of-19 performance from downtown, MSU's women...ready for this? are 70-of-300 from beyond the arc. They are 44-of-184 in league play. That's 22 percent. When your two best players are post players — Ashley Brumwell, Rachel Semansky — and you surround them with players like Rechel Carter (25 percent) Kalli Durham (25 %), Jackie Elliott (21 percent) Latisha Adams (19 percent) Emily Allen (17 percent) and Peyton Ferris (12 percent), you're doomed against the zone.

[Helcat72]

WBB lose, men collapse in one of the most epic collapses I've witnessed by any team at any level. Blow a double digit lead in the 2nd half and will probably lose by double digits.

What is the deal with the women? They're taking a page directly out of the men's book, having now lost 4 straight after starting out 8-1. Although their declines haven't been as dramatic as the men's, or as well publicized, it' seems like the women's team is also becoming known for falling off during the 2nd round of confernce games. It seems like this is about the 3rd straight year that they've struggled the 2nd time through the league, after being at or near the top of the BSC after the first half of the conference schedule.

The women's team has gone 4-4 the second time through conference play in both of the past two seasons, after starting 6-2 last year and 7-1 in 2011. The two years before that, they improved the second time through. So not as dramatic as the mens' collapses but not very encouraging - it is hard to fathom how a team can just flat out drop off a cliff that quickly without any injuries or other seemingly major events occurring.

And if I remember correctly, they actually started out 7-0 in 2011, which means they went only 4-5 after that. At least the men had the excuse of being shorthanded tonight (plus we've come to expect their annual late season swoon), but you're right...there's no obvious explanation for the dramatic shift in the women's fortunes.

Oh yes there is. The women struggle for one reason: they can't shoot a lick. The first time through league, all the coaches were too prideful to straight up zone them. Now everyone is zoning them and Montana State can't shoot to save its life.

After tonight's 3-of-19 performance from downtown, MSU's women...ready for this? are 70-of-300 from beyond the arc. They are 44-of-184 in league play. That's 22 percent. When your two best players are post players — Ashley Brumwell, Rachel Semansky — and you surround them with players like Rechel Carter (25 percent) Kalli Durham (25 %), Jackie Elliott (21 percent) Latisha Adams (19 percent) Emily Allen (17 percent) and Peyton Ferris (12 percent), you're doomed against the zone.

Absolutely! They've got a lot of athletes...but not many shooters. Trish has to think about that when she goes recruiting this next off season. They need a shooter or two and some physical front line players. I don't see a lot of hope to turn things around this year because the problem is not systemic or correctable....it's like an Achilles heel....it just wasn't discovered until just lately. Now everyone is taking advantage of it!

[Gidal Kaiser]

Stolen victory: Montana State can’t hold on to 14-point lead, falls to North Dakota in Big Sky men's basketball http://www.bozemandailychronicle.com/sp ... 1a4bcf887a

[John K]

WBB lose, men collapse in one of the most epic collapses I've witnessed by any team at any level. Blow a double digit lead in the 2nd half and will probably lose by double digits.

What is the deal with the women? They're taking a page directly out of the men's book, having now lost 4 straight after starting out 8-1. Although their declines haven't been as dramatic as the men's, or as well publicized, it' seems like the women's team is also becoming known for falling off during the 2nd round of confernce games. It seems like this is about the 3rd straight year that they've struggled the 2nd time through the league, after being at or near the top of the BSC after the first half of the conference schedule.

The women's team has gone 4-4 the second time through conference play in both of the past two seasons, after starting 6-2 last year and 7-1 in 2011. The two years before that, they improved the second time through. So not as dramatic as the mens' collapses but not very encouraging - it is hard to fathom how a team can just flat out drop off a cliff that quickly without any injuries or other seemingly major events occurring.

And if I remember correctly, they actually started out 7-0 in 2011, which means they went only 4-5 after that. At least the men had the excuse of being shorthanded tonight (plus we've come to expect their annual late season swoon), but you're right...there's no obvious explanation for the dramatic shift in the women's fortunes.

Oh yes there is. The women struggle for one reason: they can't shoot a lick. The first time through league, all the coaches were too prideful to straight up zone them. Now everyone is zoning them and Montana State can't shoot to save its life.

After tonight's 3-of-19 performance from downtown, MSU's women...ready for this? are 70-of-300 from beyond the arc. They are 44-of-184 in league play. That's 22 percent. When your two best players are post players — Ashley Brumwell, Rachel Semansky — and you surround them with players like Rechel Carter (25 percent) Kalli Durham (25 %), Jackie Elliott (21 percent) Latisha Adams (19 percent) Emily Allen (17 percent) and Peyton Ferris (12 percent), you're doomed against the zone.

OK...I'lll buy that, but as was mentioned earlier in this thread, this isn't the first year that the women have stumbled during the 2nd round of conference games. Counting this season, they are 21-5 in the first half of BSC play, and 8-11 in the second half, over the past three seasons. Even if you throw out this season, they were 13-3 in the first half in 2011 and 2012, and only 8-8 in the second half. Again, the women's second half performance has not been as abysmal as the men's (and they at least have won a few games in the tourney in recent years), but they've still had a substantial drop-off for three straight seasons now, so what's happening this season is not really anything new. And of course in the previous two seasons, we had Katie Bussey, who could shoot it from the outside.

[Helcat72]

WBB lose, men collapse in one of the most epic collapses I've witnessed by any team at any level. Blow a double digit lead in the 2nd half and will probably lose by double digits.

What is the deal with the women? They're taking a page directly out of the men's book, having now lost 4 straight after starting out 8-1. Although their declines haven't been as dramatic as the men's, or as well publicized, it' seems like the women's team is also becoming known for falling off during the 2nd round of confernce games. It seems like this is about the 3rd straight year that they've struggled the 2nd time through the league, after being at or near the top of the BSC after the first half of the conference schedule.

The women's team has gone 4-4 the second time through conference play in both of the past two seasons, after starting 6-2 last year and 7-1 in 2011. The two years before that, they improved the second time through. So not as dramatic as the mens' collapses but not very encouraging - it is hard to fathom how a team can just flat out drop off a cliff that quickly without any injuries or other seemingly major events occurring.

And if I remember correctly, they actually started out 7-0 in 2011, which means they went only 4-5 after that. At least the men had the excuse of being shorthanded tonight (plus we've come to expect their annual late season swoon), but you're right...there's no obvious explanation for the dramatic shift in the women's fortunes.

Oh yes there is. The women struggle for one reason: they can't shoot a lick. The first time through league, all the coaches were too prideful to straight up zone them. Now everyone is zoning them and Montana State can't shoot to save its life.

After tonight's 3-of-19 performance from downtown, MSU's women...ready for this? are 70-of-300 from beyond the arc. They are 44-of-184 in league play. That's 22 percent. When your two best players are post players — Ashley Brumwell, Rachel Semansky — and you surround them with players like Rechel Carter (25 percent) Kalli Durham (25 %), Jackie Elliott (21 percent) Latisha Adams (19 percent) Emily Allen (17 percent) and Peyton Ferris (12 percent), you're doomed against the zone.

OK...I'lll buy that, but as was mentioned earlier in this thread, this isn't the first year that the women have stumbled during the 2nd round of conference games. Counting this season, they are 21-5 in the first half of BSC play, and 8-11 in the second half, over the past three seasons. Even if you throw out this season, they were 13-3 in the first half in 2011 and 2012, and only 8-8 in the second half. Again, the women's second half performance has not been as abysmal as the men's (and they at least have won a few games in the tourney in recent years), but they've still had a substantial drop-off for three straight seasons now, so what's happening this season is not really anything new. And of course in the previous two seasons, we had Katie Bussey, who could shoot it from the outside.

In a word....PHYSICALITY...they wear down late in the season from all the physical play they absorb through the season!

[aucat]

Yep, no physicality and the lack of it helps explain the absolute horrendous shooting % from the perimeter. Pretty simple to D the Cats as has been reported. Just surround the post players and invite the team to shoot to their heart's content. Coach Binford said she liked the "fight" in this team. I love fight too, but it pays more dividends on the football field. You still have to throw the rock in the can with hoops. There just ain't no substitute for that. THey don't give points for getting it close.

[John K]

I guess my point is that the women have stumbled in the 2nd half of conference play for three straight years now, just like the men have been doing throughout Huse's tenure (although the women's slides haven't been quite as drastic, at least up until this season). Yet while Huse has been the subject of much criticism, with many fans feeling that he should be fired at the end of the season, it seems like the fans have given Binford a pass. People have cited a couple of reasons for the women's struggles, and those reasons may very well be valid. But regardless of the reasons, it's alarming when teams consistently start out strong, but then fall apart during the 2nd time through the conference schedule. Are we not recruiting the right type of players? Most fans seem to think that Binford has done a good job of recruiting, and that we have plenty of talent on the roster. Yet, people have been posting that we arent' physical enough, and don't have any good shooters. So tell me, if our players aren't physical and can't shoot, what exactly is it that makes them so talented then? It must be that either our talent is overrated, or that the coaching staff isn't doing a very good job of gettng the most out of the players, i.e. playing a style of ball that emphasizes their strengths and minimizes their weaknesses.

[Colter_Nuanez]

I guess my point is that the women have stumbled in the 2nd half of conference play for three straight years now, just like the men have been doing throughout Huse's tenure (although the women's slides haven't been quite as drastic, at least up until this season). Yet while Huse has been the subject of much criticism, with many fans feeling that he should be fired at the end of the season, it seems like the fans have given Binford a pass. People have cited a couple of reasons for the women's struggles, and those reasons may very well be valid. But regardless of the reasons, it's alarming when teams consistently start out strong, but then fall apart during the 2nd time through the conference schedule. Are we not recruiting the right type of players? Most fans seem to think that Binford has done a good job of recruiting, and that we have plenty of talent on the roster. Yet, people have been posting that we arent' physical enough, and don't have any good shooters. So tell me, if our players aren't physical and can't shoot, what exactly is it that makes them so talented then? It must be that either our talent is overrated, or that the coaching staff isn't doing a very good job of gettng the most out of the players, i.e. playing a style of ball that emphasizes their strengths and minimizes their weaknesses.

In 21st-century Division I basketball, THE most important component to being a D-1 player if you are a man is having Division I athleticism. Everything else follows, but even in mid-major D-1, you must be a Division I caliber athlete if you want to compete.

On the women's side, THE most important factor is being a D-1 caliber competitor. Everything else follows.

[John K]

I guess my point is that the women have stumbled in the 2nd half of conference play for three straight years now, just like the men have been doing throughout Huse's tenure (although the women's slides haven't been quite as drastic, at least up until this season). Yet while Huse has been the subject of much criticism, with many fans feeling that he should be fired at the end of the season, it seems like the fans have given Binford a pass. People have cited a couple of reasons for the women's struggles, and those reasons may very well be valid. But regardless of the reasons, it's alarming when teams consistently start out strong, but then fall apart during the 2nd time through the conference schedule. Are we not recruiting the right type of players? Most fans seem to think that Binford has done a good job of recruiting, and that we have plenty of talent on the roster. Yet, people have been posting that we arent' physical enough, and don't have any good shooters. So tell me, if our players aren't physical and can't shoot, what exactly is it that makes them so talented then? It must be that either our talent is overrated, or that the coaching staff isn't doing a very good job of gettng the most out of the players, i.e. playing a style of ball that emphasizes their strengths and minimizes their weaknesses.

In 21st-century Division I basketball, THE most important component to being a D-1 player if you are a man is having Division I athleticism. Everything else follows, but even in mid-major D-1, you must be a Division I caliber athlete if you want to compete.

On the women's side, THE most important factor is being a D-1 caliber competitor. Everything else follows.

So, what does that say about the 2013 MSU women'e BB team? For some reason were they better competitors during the first half of the BSC schedule, than they've been during the 2nd half? And if so, is that more of an indictment of the players, or of the coaching staff?

[Hawks86]

Somebody email Binford when you get this figured out. I'm sure she is scratching her head just like we are.

[grizzh8r]

I guess my point is that the women have stumbled in the 2nd half of conference play for three straight years now, just like the men have been doing throughout Huse's tenure (although the women's slides haven't been quite as drastic, at least up until this season). Yet while Huse has been the subject of much criticism, with many fans feeling that he should be fired at the end of the season, it seems like the fans have given Binford a pass. People have cited a couple of reasons for the women's struggles, and those reasons may very well be valid. But regardless of the reasons, it's alarming when teams consistently start out strong, but then fall apart during the 2nd time through the conference schedule. Are we not recruiting the right type of players? Most fans seem to think that Binford has done a good job of recruiting, and that we have plenty of talent on the roster. Yet, people have been posting that we arent' physical enough, and don't have any good shooters. So tell me, if our players aren't physical and can't shoot, what exactly is it that makes them so talented then? It must be that either our talent is overrated, or that the coaching staff isn't doing a very good job of gettng the most out of the players, i.e. playing a style of ball that emphasizes their strengths and minimizes their weaknesses.

In 21st-century Division I basketball, THE most important component to being a D-1 player if you are a man is having Division I athleticism. Everything else follows, but even in mid-major D-1, you must be a Division I caliber athlete if you want to compete.

On the women's side, THE most important factor is being a D-1 caliber competitor. Everything else follows.

Notice how neither of these says anything about being a D-1 caliber SHOOTER. That's a huge part of the problem in all levels of amateur basketball right now is that kids aren't working on shooting the ball (other than from behind the arc). I was watching some hoops this weekend, and Jimmy Dykes alluded to this when asked why scoring is down in CBB. He said part of it is the football-mentality they use on defense now, preaching athleticism over shooting ability, etc.