Messages

Was at this game.  First time that I saw Valpo play Mo State.  Hopefully, highlights for upcoming game against Mo State are just as fun to watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuONFC6eEqU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tCktnwwffc

Yeah the down side of attending most home games and streaming the road games is not hearing Todd much anymore

I always listen to Todd while watching the stream live.  It sometimes takes a little time to sync the video with the tune-in stream, but the effort is well worth it.

I do the same!  He's worth the listen.  Sometimes I prefer the home games when he gets relegated to the radio.  Maybe it's just me, but his tv partner is not my favorite.

I REALLY enjoy Todd.  I think he does a great job.

However, I do want to give kudos to the students.  While they're understandably not at Todd's level, I think they do a good job.  Note that I attend the home games, so I only hear them in the post-games.  I think that what drives my admiration of the students is that I compare to myself when I was in undergrad - I never would have contemplated doing anything like that.

I'm glad that they get the opportunity.  Hopefully, it will help them after they graduate. 

This is a little bit off-subject, but along the same lines,

I've wondered why Valpo's homerun play seems so successful, and so hard to stop.  Surely, opposing coaches have seen it on film.  I recall questioning in a post-game conference several years ago, and when the player started to answer, Bryce cut him off. 

I've also seen the larger schools simply keep someone back, which seems to me to be the obvious solution.

Nonetheless, I'm wondering whether the players make adjustments just before the play starts or mid-play that cause some sort of defensive preparation difficulty. 

A couple of years ago, I thought one thing was really funny.  VU ran the play to perfection against RI.  Since I was at the game, I didn't hear the TV PbP, but apparently the announcers (Todd?) noted that it was coming.  The fans on the RI fan board were really miffed because the announcers new the play was coming, but the coaches apparently didn't.

[kock]

1314, liked your post, however, there is one thing that you should prepare yourself for: transfers.  I forgot the exact math figures, but the bottom line is that, on average, 3-4 players from every team in the NCAA will transfer.  If Valpo has two transfers (ones that hurt), it will be doing two better than the average, and we can't complain.  But, the transfers will at first be painful. My only point is that we, as fans, should be mentally/emotionally prepared for that. I only point this out because of your pointing out what VU will have next year.

I don't see anyone on the roster pouting this year. Team is more cohesive. Bench warmers know they should be bench warmers and will wait their turn. None of the chaos or drama coming from team members as there was last year. I just don't see any transfers this year unless there is a catalyst of some kind creating some kind of major problem, not this team.

You are more optimistic than me. There may not be pouters and fighting inside the team, but I bet there are those that are unhappy with playing time, see they may not have an opportunity to play much next year and will look for another situation. EFV - Not playing much to date, but shows a lot of upside in my opinion. Could look elsewhere if he doesn't think he is getting an opportunity Lorange - Same as above Morgan - Not seeing the floor too much. As a 5th year I could see him looking. Gordon - He should be playing more than he is IMO. I bet he feels the same way. As a 5th year I could see him looking. And there could be some surprises as well... Krikke could want to be more of a center piece. Not sure where McMillian is at in terms of graduating, but if he does early you never know. Robinson may want to move up. Not to say they will or should. But there will be some transfers. Hopefully only 1 or 2 and as long as it's not JFL or Clay, I think we are fine.

I'm typically pessimistic and don't put my neck out too far on the kock-eyed ( kock: to get past censor. geesh) optimistic side. A pessimist is rarely disappointed. But EVG and Lorange are freshman and should expect some pine time. Don't see either one leaving. We've seen players in the past who left because they thought they should be playing more. (Who was that guy who tr. to SEMO cause he and his dad thought he wasn't playing enough?)  And they didn't do much better on their new team. Some players transferring are a good thing, like most of the players last year. They didn't buy into the team approach to basketball and too often their attitudes sucked for the most part.


I don't see Morgan leaving. His shooting numbers and playing time are down significantly from his time at UNLV. Valpo this year: [2-12 FTs(16.7%), 5-14 2pt%(35.7%), 0-5 3pt%(0%)]  And he wasn't happy there apparently. Where's he going to go with those numbers? He needs to realize that the grass in not greener on the other side and he needs to improve his value to the team, listen to the coaches and  work on his game rather than get on the transfer merry-go-round. You take your demons with you wherever you go.


I think Eron is doing fine and he knows that he is valued on this team. I see him working hard to get even more minutes rather than thinking the grass will be greener on the other side. Heck, even JFL realized the value of staying at Valpo eventually after leaving for greener pastures.

I'd be shocked if VU loses less than 2.  However, I think the thing that would help would be a lot of wins, especially in March.  I would think that the players would sense that it could be even better next year if they stay.  Let's hope that they get a lot of wins, and my "shocked" comment turns out to be unwarranted negativity. 

1314, liked your post, however, there is one thing that you should prepare yourself for: transfers.  I forgot the exact math figures, but the bottom line is that, on average, 3-4 players from every team in the NCAA will transfer.  If Valpo has two transfers (ones that hurt), it will be doing two better than the average, and we can't complain.  But, the transfers will at first be painful.

My only point is that we, as fans, should be mentally/emotionally prepared for that.

I only point this out because of your pointing out what VU will have next year.

I think that the job that Scott is doing is awesome.  Not too many coaches can have teams be consistently successful, as are the Baylor Bears.

However, I think that his really great accomplishments took place right after he took over at Baylor.  Under crushing sanctions, they went from ashes to a solid team in a very short amount of time.  Some big name coaches could likely walk in and do that, based on their abilities and name recognition bringing in solid talent.  But Scott was a one-year head coach from a mid-major with very little name recognition.  I think that the turnaround was amazing, and is being forgotten about as time goes on.

One aspect that I'd like to see Sackey focus on is leadership, because I think it is an intangible strength that he brings.  My impression from last year and early this year is that he has some natural leadership skills.  However, in the past couple of home games (I can't comment on away games), I have not seen as much.  I have not seen him communicate like he has in the past, nor direct traffic, nor pick up others' spirits. 

With a team with a lot of young and new faces that will inevitably be inconsistent, I think that leadership could be a great asset.

My impression is that it has waned slightly, and I'd like to see him get it back, and as a point guard, further develop it.

I couldn't listen or watch the game.  Looking at box score, Mileek fouled out?  In 11 minutes?  Is that right?

Last time I checked, a bag of chips is a bag of chips, not nachos.

This is the funniest thing I've read on this board in a long time.  Thanks for making my day.

Great post. We  (Valpo) are scrambling to establish an MVC MBB identity at the same time we are trying to establish an institutional identity there as well. Our goal should be the Duke approach. I believe the Duke undergraduate population is among the smallest in the ACC (don't know about Wake).  Their student section rocks. They make Camron a pit in the eyes of people across the country. That's the goal Valpo should strive for in the ARC, cuz it brings in coverage. BOTH end lines should be set up as student sections. An intense indoctrination (probably a poor term)  program needs to be institutionalized that puts pressure on students to attend and support MBB ( and all sports, actually) with gusto.

Why?  All kids enroll in schools that they want to be proud of when they are there and after they graduate. A rep in music or meteorology goes only so far. A national rep in sports transcends all of that, because people around the country RECOGNIZE THE FREAKIN NAME -  musicians and business grads etc. can fill in the specific details about how good their programs are after people outside the central midwest say, "Oh, yeah, Valpo, great school."

The university has to get its head out of their "ivory towers" (euphemism alert) that they are stuck in and recognize that the bigger the brand, the bigger the pride. The bigger the pride, the bigger the profile. The bigger the profile, the bigger the application pool.  Yaddah, yaddah.

I monitor multiple news feeds from all over the country every day. Many strings, but one string alarms me:  there is a declining college enrollment crisis across the country.  Valpo has got to be proactive and MBB is the only vehicle they have left.

62, I agree with you, but would phrase what you're saying a little differently.  I would say it as the University needs to establish a stronger culture that can give students and the community something to rally behind.  People like to be a part of something bigger than just themselves.  If the University establishes a stronger culture, then it will lead to greater student and community turnout and enthusiasm at all events (athletics, arts, academic clubs, community service, etc.).  The upshot is that establishing strong culture doesn't cost much.

I agree with that.

Speaking of culture, I learned of the haka in the videos that I posted from the book "Legacy", which is about the culture of the New Zealand All Blacks.  I suggest it as a good read for anyone who is a leader, or who wants to be.  In reading that book, it's easy to see some parallels, and contradictions, between the very successful All Blacks and last year's VU team.

I thought that the student attendance and enthusiasm was better at the Toledo game than it has been in a while.  Some of the cheering from the student section was directed toward the Crusaderettes, which I thought was nice.

Last night's game was pretty exciting.  Hopefully, those in attendance will pass along to their classmates and friends. 

Attached is a link to a youtube video showing student ritual (haka) at the beginning of a New Zealand rugby game.  Apparently, the haka is ingrained in New Zealand culture.  The New Zealand national rugby team (the All Blacks, which is an exceptionally successful organisation) perform this, to wide acclaim.  I've also attached a video showing their version, just for kicks.

It would be nice if our student section could do an abbreviated version like the NZ students do.  Would be different.  I would volunteer my chairback colleagues, but I think we would just look weird.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zP_LSAD8N8A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgF8IVPeR48

One thing that I think makes this team work better is the speed of Sackey.  He seems to have matured since last year in how to capitalize, and make it a weapon.  Sackey seems to be able to cause the opposing team defensive issues because he can get past or move away from his defender so quickly that other players need to be able to adjust in order to account.  Sometimes they have to fall off of their man to help even while the ball is just then moving over the half court line.  Also, he simply moves to a vacant spot so that he has a moment to collect himself and then restart the attack or simply take an open jump shot.  Basically, everyone on the other team needs to worry about him while also worrying about Fazekas and Javon.

Paul, I just wanted to send a short note thanking you for running this contest.  In the past, I've done things like what you're doing, and I know it's a lot of work.  So, thanks for taking the time to do it.

I'm gonna go pretty optimistic:
2019-20 Over/Unders
Javon Freeman-Liberty: 63.5 steals UNDER
Siggy Lorange: 27.5 3-point field goals OVER
Zion Morgan: 16.5 games with more assists than turnovers OVER
Daniel Sackey: 3.2 assists per game UNDER
Donovan Clay: 3.8 rebounds per game OVER
Eron Gordon: 7.5 points per game OVER
Emil Freese-Vilien: 10.5 blocks UNDER
Mileek McMillian: 44.5 field goal percentage UNDER
Ben Krikke: 5.8 points per game OVER
Nick Robinson: 10.5 points per game OVER
John Kiser: 11.5 3-point field goals UNDER
Ryan Fazekas: 42.5 3-point field goal percentage UNDER
Matt Lottich: 1.5 technical fouls UNDER

Wins: 17.5 OVER
Arch Madness wins: 1.5 OVER
MVC Finish: 6.5 (Over means 1-6, Under means 7-10) OVER
Postseason victories (NCAA, NIT, CBI, CIT): 0.5 UNDER
Conference win streak: 2.5 OVER
Conference loss streak: 2.5 UNDER
Attendance: 2,800 UNDER

Tiebreaker: Combined season points from Brock Pappas and Luke Morrill 8

This thread is for the 2019-2020 season, and I'm simply glad that the season is finally here.  Really excited, and can't wait to see tomorrow's game. 

I think that it's kind of a testament to the enthusiasm of the fan base in that we're already 20 pages into this thread before the first game is even played.

4k, 5k 6k whatever, the goal has got to be comfort AND appearance (uh, like a college arena and not a glorified HS gym).  It is my belief that cannot be done using the existing footprint - squeezing 10 lbs. of apple sauce into an 8 lb. can. The north side must be developed to facilitate any major makeover in order to have the ground floor space for additional rest rooms, concessions, and to reduce the overcrowding in the locker area on the south side. By expanding to the north all of the other suggestions below can be more easily accommodated.

I could be sold on adding some sort of promenade on the north side behind the Chairbacks that would add different things.  For me, the other important changes/improvements would be adding chairbacks to the south side, and adding some close parking. 

I'm not sure that the improved parking thing is going to happen, since good parking part of fundraising - I doubt that the university is going to change the business model for that.

UNI's McLeod Center cost $26M when it was built, which would be about $32M in today's dollars. Gonzaga built a similar 6000 seat stadium and it was roughly the same price in today's dollars, so we can assume that a similar stadium would be about $32M for Valpo. What is the business plan that would justify a capital spend of $32M to replace the ARC? If you were investing your money, do you think that this would be a good investment versus other options (renovation of the ARC) and needs (old dorms and business building)?

Good info 84.  Thanks for that perspective.  It certainly skews thinking towards an ARC renovation.  And even that will be costly but more justifiable and in line with other campus facilities demands.  A conversion to a  comfortable 5K-6K capacity arena (assuming that the north side will be expanded on the ground level for athletic support facilities, additional restrooms, concessions,  etc., etc., and a second level would add some more seating above) would IMO be the ultimate goal.  In the meantime, there are still incremental, non-capital construction improvements that would transition well toward that goal, e.g,  new sound system and AC (both sized to support the future expansion) and improved LED court lighting.

I'm not so sure that the University should strive to have a larger facility, but should strive to have a nicer facility.  Attendance across all sports is on a downward trend.  If the trend over the last 10-15 years at VU continues, then average attendance per game for MBB in 10 years will be around 2000.  If VU isn't selling out a 5000 seat arena, why increase capacity, even if downward trend levels off?  Seems to me that the effort should be toward improving.  For example, additional restroom facilities, additional concessions, and better parking.

Paul, I posted the questions below regarding non-con scheduling on another thread (which probably wasn't the best place).  Hoping that you can address in one of the podcasts, or here.  Thanks,

pgmado,

I finally got to listen to the podcast with Coach Gore, and had a couple of questions, and hopefully you already know the answer without having to go back to the staff.

By the way, I really do enjoy the podcasts.

1.  Coach Gore mentioned a couple of times something about posting for games.  I assume that non-conference scheduling is a combination of MTE's, conference match-ups (e.g., ACC BG10 challenge), networking, and some sort of board posting.  My question is on the last item.  Is there some sort of community board that the coaches interact on?  If so, what does that look like?  Seems like this is a no-brainer that there would be such a thing.

2.  When two teams agree on a home-and-home, are both dates set when the contract is signed?  Seems like it would be more of a range.  Seems like they would use a standard form contract of some sort where the teams simply fill in the blanks for dates and buyout amount - is that right?

Thanks,

MarchArchPod, I just listened to the pre-season rankings.

Simply wondering whether you might allow yourself for an adjustment on the eve of conference play, such that revised predictions are based on some demonstrated play.

What players are Valpo bringing? My guess is Ryan and Javon.

That's a really solid guess, can't argue with those two if that's the case.

Seems that they would have a hard time leaving Sackey at home.  He's on the intro page for the web-site, and seems (to my outside eye) to be team leader.

You make a good point.  Sometimes a pick isn't about leadership as much as it is inclusion of different leaders at different times.  Sackey is not a threat to defect next year.  Keeping Javon tied into the program and feeling like a visible team leader may be a reason enough.

Good point as well.  Seems that they have a nice problem to have in that they have several good choices, but could only choose two (if they were so limited - I don't know).

However, in arguing against you, wasn't Golder somewhat of a centerpiece at the event last year?  If it didn't help his retention, are we sure that it will help in Javon's case.  Fazekas is a senior, so retention for him is not an issue.

Still, I think you're right, but it's a close one.

What players are Valpo bringing? My guess is Ryan and Javon.

That's a really solid guess, can't argue with those two if that's the case.

Seems that they would have a hard time leaving Sackey at home.  He's on the intro page for the web-site, and seems (to my outside eye) to be team leader.

Let's put this in a little perspective here, especially about how tough MVC is and how Loyola did in its first years in the conference. Over the last six years, if a team finished 10-8, it would have ranked as follows (inclusive of ties):

3rd (2018-19)
3rd (2017-18)
3rd (2016-17)
6th (2015-16)
4th (2014-15)
3rd (2013-14)

Over the same period, if a team finished 8-10, it would have ranked as follows (again, inclusive of ties)

8th (2018-19)
6th (2017-18)
5th (2016-17)
6th (2015-16)
6th (2014-15)
6th (2013-14)

What that says is that the league is tough and balanced, as a slight winning record likely puts that team into third place, even as a slight losing record means that team could finish 6th to 8th.

Consider Loyola's first four years in the conference, compared to Valpo:

Loyola   year                      Valpo
8-10   (2016-17)                  n/a
7-11   (2015-16)                  n/a
8-10   (2014-15)                7-11     (2018-19)
4-14   (2013-14)                6-12     (2017-18)

All of that to say that if Valpo goes 7-11 this year and next year, it would have the exact same record as Loyola in their first four years in the conference. I think most fans would be disappointed in that outcome, yet most would expect them to win more than 14 conference games over the next two years. I see the potential for finishing in the upper half of the conference if the current trajectory continues.

With all of the roster changes and comparative inexperience of several of the players, I'm thinking that a 8-10 finish this year would show reasonable growth in a competitive conference. Next year a 10-8 or 11-7 finish would be achievable. Is that disappointing? Perhaps, yet it is realistic given the level of competition.   
   

I disagree with your approach.  VU was better than Loyola when Loyola joined the MVC.  In Loyola's final 6 years in the HL, VU's win-loss record against Loyola was 7-5.  The record was 6-2 over the final 4 years.  So, had VU joined the MVC at the same time, VU should have expected a better record.  Since that time, Creighton and WSU have left.  Over the VU's final 10 years in the HL, VU was 7-1 (excluding record against Loyola) against the MVC.  If Loyola's time in the HL is included, then VU's record was 14-6 against MVC teams.

VU's record against the MVC, coupled with the departure of Creighton and WSU tell me that VU should have expected a better win-loss percentage in its first year.  If each year should produce an incrementally better win-loss record, then in year 3, the reasonable expectation, as measured by history, should be better than .500. 

I don't think we should be setting our expectations based on Loyola's performance at the time of its entry.

Not unexpected. Not a reason in the world anyone would choose us over Loyola right now.

The only thing that will change it will be a VU win/loss record against Loyola in the MVC like VU had against Loyola in the HL.  Ideally, building that record starts soon.

So I thought it interesting to resurrect this thread on the eve of the season, and ask the question again: What does success look like for this season?

For me it's three things:

1. Finishing near or above .500 in overall record and in conference
2. No more than one major contributor transferring at the end of the season
3. An announcement of fundraising and/or concrete plans to renovate the ARC within a five year time period

These three things set us up very well going into the 20-21 season, and would speak well to the overall health of the program going forward.

Valpo was 7-11 in the MVC last year, so my guess is most fans won't be happy unless the team finishes in the top half of the league this year. Also, most schools don't announce renovation plans until they've got the funding for it and the work is going to happen in the very near term, so I'd shrink that 5 year window to 1 or maybe 2 depending on the renovation plans.

I do think this team has plenty of potential, particularly at the guard and wing positions. Will be interesting to see how the Center position develops over the course of the year.

Once the transfers were gone, and the new faces showed, I made the comment that I'd rather see the newcomers finish 10th than watch the incumbents finish 9th (which is where they finished last year).  That's still true.  In terms of measuring success, that comment may be misplaced, and could be a reminder to myself that expectations and wishes should be measured in long term perspective.  However, long term perspective should not measure year 3 in comparison to year 2.  "Success" in Year 3 in the short term perspective could be defined as finishing 7th or 8th, since it's better than the previous two years.  However, Year 3 should be where VU wanted it to be on the day that it accepted.  I don't think that sub-500 in year 3 should have defined "success" on that day. 

So, with that being said, I agree with the three comments above, except, in No. 1, I'd delete the words "near or" as a measure of success.  I suspect that this team will have extreme inconsistency due to youth and newness.  But, even with the inevitable ugly moments and embarrassing dumb losses, there should be enough solid play and thrilling victories to advance.  At year 3, as measured by long term perspective, "success" should not be sub-500.

pgmado,

I finally got to listen to the podcast with Coach Gore, and had a couple of questions, and hopefully you already know the answer without having to go back to the staff.

By the way, I really do enjoy the podcasts.

1.  Coach Gore mentioned a couple of times something about posting for games.  I assume that non-conference scheduling is a combination of MTE's, conference match-ups (e.g., ACC BG10 challenge), networking, and some sort of board posting.  My question is on the last item.  Is there some sort of community board that the coaches interact on?  If so, what does that look like?  Seems like this is a no-brainer that there would be such a thing.

2.  When two teams agree on a home-and-home, are both dates set when the contract is signed?  Seems like it would be more of a range.  Seems like they would use a standard form contract of some sort where the teams simply fill in the blanks for dates and buyout amount - is that right?

Thanks,