I might as well chime in here.

I never once thought Belmont would get a higher seed than 13. After watching them play in the conference tournament I realized they were good but I don't think they're quite as good as what etsu fans were saying. I didn't find them to be any better than the old Justin Hare teams.....there's just more of them. And while I guess one could reason that by definition makes them better than the old Hare teams I don't think it makes them significantly better.

Wisconsin is a good draw. They aren't very deep and they aren't overly athletic. At least not on that level. I think Belmont takes this down to the wire but I must disagree with conventional board wisdom....The physicality of the BIG TEN wins the day in what should be a close fought ball game.

(03-15-2011 09:00 AM)bruinator06 Wrote:  

(03-15-2011 07:43 AM)afro4president Wrote:  

(03-14-2011 02:49 PM)bruinator06 Wrote:  I don't really think the teams are that different on the offensive side of the ball. Belmont's average ppg makes it look like they are a high intensity full-court offense that looks to push at every opportunity. It's actually the opposite. Belmont, for the most part, is a half court offense - and really always has been. Sure Rick Byrd has somewhat transitioned in the last few years and has given Ian Clark and Kerron Johnson (and formerly Alex Renfoe) some more leeway in pushing and attacking the basket, but really this team works completely on a half-court, inside-out game. Belmont looks to feed it to the inside and draw a double team on either Mick or Scott so that they can free up shooters on the outside - and they run it to near perfection. It will be interesting to see how effectively we can run this offense against a physical, seasoned Big Ten defense.

The high ppg that I referred to above comes from Belmont's ability to create turnovers - which leads to more opportunities (and we typically like our points in 3's rather than 2's :) We turnovers opponents 28% percent of the time - good for the 2nd best in the country. Which is why this is going to be such an intriguing matchup, Wisconsin turns it over only 13 % percent of the time - top spot in the country. Slow paced offensive against a fast paced defense, should be fun.

This is a good description of Belmont's style of play but we must also add our depth. We are not a "fast break team" but you will never see our guards walking the ball up the court or not having some sort of full court pressure on opponents when playing defense. With our solid 11 man rotation, Byrd subs players in every 2-3 minutes keeping our players fresh and at the same time wearing opponents out. I'm sure our friends from the ETSU boards will agree with me that our style of play is hard to keep up with when opposing coaches play with a very short bench.

Another thing I found interesting is the current Mid-Major Top 25 poll (voted on by mid-major coaches) has us as 2nd behind only Old Dominion (9 seed) but still ahead of George Mason (8 seed), Gonzaga (11 seed), Oakland (13 seed), and Butler (8 seed) who are 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th in the polls. A lot of respect from the rest of the mid-major community but not so much from the NCAA tourney committee.

You are 100% correct. The 13 seed is very bittersweet. I really like the matchup against Wisconsin - and that is soley based on style of play and the personnel that we can match up with. But we're still a 13 seed. And that blows.

The committee has proven time and time again it has no idea what it is doing.

(03-15-2011 07:43 AM)afro4president Wrote:  

(03-14-2011 02:49 PM)bruinator06 Wrote:  I don't really think the teams are that different on the offensive side of the ball. Belmont's average ppg makes it look like they are a high intensity full-court offense that looks to push at every opportunity. It's actually the opposite. Belmont, for the most part, is a half court offense - and really always has been. Sure Rick Byrd has somewhat transitioned in the last few years and has given Ian Clark and Kerron Johnson (and formerly Alex Renfoe) some more leeway in pushing and attacking the basket, but really this team works completely on a half-court, inside-out game. Belmont looks to feed it to the inside and draw a double team on either Mick or Scott so that they can free up shooters on the outside - and they run it to near perfection. It will be interesting to see how effectively we can run this offense against a physical, seasoned Big Ten defense.

The high ppg that I referred to above comes from Belmont's ability to create turnovers - which leads to more opportunities (and we typically like our points in 3's rather than 2's :) We turnovers opponents 28% percent of the time - good for the 2nd best in the country. Which is why this is going to be such an intriguing matchup, Wisconsin turns it over only 13 % percent of the time - top spot in the country. Slow paced offensive against a fast paced defense, should be fun.

This is a good description of Belmont's style of play but we must also add our depth. We are not a "fast break team" but you will never see our guards walking the ball up the court or not having some sort of full court pressure on opponents when playing defense. With our solid 11 man rotation, Byrd subs players in every 2-3 minutes keeping our players fresh and at the same time wearing opponents out. I'm sure our friends from the ETSU boards will agree with me that our style of play is hard to keep up with when opposing coaches play with a very short bench.

Another thing I found interesting is the current Mid-Major Top 25 poll (voted on by mid-major coaches) has us as 2nd behind only Old Dominion (9 seed) but still ahead of George Mason (8 seed), Gonzaga (11 seed), Oakland (13 seed), and Butler (8 seed) who are 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th in the polls. A lot of respect from the rest of the mid-major community but not so much from the NCAA tourney committee.

On playing style, we push most turnovers, but don't try to push off made baskets or most defensive rebounds. Where we play fast is in the halfcourt. We'll take early shots if they are good. We'll play fast on D with at least token pressure the whole game. Wisconsin's lack of turnovers will slow the game down, but I like our halfcourt play as well.

I honestly think Belmont could win this game.

(03-13-2011 11:27 PM)TennTexBruin Wrote:  Penn State is as much a tournament qualifier as Colorado - they just happened to come up heads. (Belmont only has one loss to a non-qualifier.) Two losses to the Nittany Lions doesn't exactly serve as support for the Badgers competence.

Interesting point to those who might care -
Penn St.'s coach, Eddie DeChellis, came to Penn St. from ETSU (where he was quite successful) just before ETSU "shuffled off" to the ASun.

TODAY IS THE DAY.

Great quote from Scott Saunders (about being a trendy upset pick)

"It doesn't put any points on the scoreboard. It's nice to have recognition, but it doesn't count for much tomorrow."

I think it's pretty evident that this team is as focused on the task at hand and have not gotten caught up in all of the media exposure.

I can't wait.

(03-15-2011 09:14 AM)Goldfinger Wrote:  I might as well chime in here.

I never once thought Belmont would get a higher seed than 13. After watching them play in the conference tournament I realized they were good but I don't think they're quite as good as what etsu fans were saying. I didn't find them to be any better than the old Justin Hare teams.....there's just more of them. And while I guess one could reason that by definition makes them better than the old Hare teams I don't think it makes them significantly better.

Wisconsin is a good draw. They aren't very deep and they aren't overly athletic. At least not on that level. I think Belmont takes this down to the wire but I must disagree with conventional board wisdom....The physicality of the BIG TEN wins the day in what should be a close fought ball game.

That's the first game I've ever seen, that I can remember, where an opposing coach adjusted his game plan to take out Rick Byrd rather than Byrd adjusting to take out the other team. That must be what it's like to have a decent coach. Better luck next year....you should make another appearance in the dance.