I've been having a lot of back-and-forth this weekend about Eastern's basketball team and if it's any good. The games themselves have not been high scoring affairs, and the teams that EMU have beaten don't have the best RPI. My counter argument is... who cares? Eastern is winning and is tied for first place in the MAC West. It's not how you win, but if you win.

http://themacdaily.com/?p=351

All you need is one point more than the other team.

Sure, the Eagles are the lowest-scoring team in MAC play (6.2 ppg less than Northern Illinois), but they also have the best defense, holding opponents to just 49 ppg (12 ppg less than Ball State). It's partly pace (60 possessions per game average is the slowest in the MAC) but also tenacious defense (0.82 points allowed per possession is the lowest).

This is deliberate. Coach Murphy knows that this team is not capable of consistently putting up a lot of points, so the goal is to slow the game down and keep opponents from getting into an offensive rhythm. A 4-1 MAC record suggests it's a sound strategy.

(01-23-2012 05:28 AM)cmadler Wrote:  All you need is one point more than the other team.

Sure, the Eagles are the lowest-scoring team in MAC play (6.2 ppg less than Northern Illinois), but they also have the best defense, holding opponents to just 49 ppg (12 ppg less than Ball State). It's partly pace (60 possessions per game average is the slowest in the MAC) but also tenacious defense (0.82 points allowed per possession is the lowest).

This is deliberate. Coach Murphy knows that this team is not capable of consistently putting up a lot of points, so the goal is to slow the game down and keep opponents from getting into an offensive rhythm. A 4-1 MAC record suggests it's a sound strategy.

Maybe the NCAA should outlaw the zone defenses to reduce the number of ugly games.

(01-23-2012 06:32 AM)emu steve Wrote:  

(01-23-2012 05:28 AM)cmadler Wrote:  All you need is one point more than the other team.

Sure, the Eagles are the lowest-scoring team in MAC play (6.2 ppg less than Northern Illinois), but they also have the best defense, holding opponents to just 49 ppg (12 ppg less than Ball State). It's partly pace (60 possessions per game average is the slowest in the MAC) but also tenacious defense (0.82 points allowed per possession is the lowest).

This is deliberate. Coach Murphy knows that this team is not capable of consistently putting up a lot of points, so the goal is to slow the game down and keep opponents from getting into an offensive rhythm. A 4-1 MAC record suggests it's a sound strategy.

Maybe the NCAA should outlaw the zone defenses to reduce the number of ugly games.

Much like the NBA did?

The game at Buffalo should be very interesting. Will EMU's defense and slo-mo offense be able to limit the top scoring offense in the MAC in their own building???

This is the ugliest team in America and its not even close. ONLY a beaten down EMU fan could get giddy over a 41-38 "win." The same EMU fan that was bi***ing all season about Alex Gillett's inability to complete enough passes during a much more entertaining football season.

I've been watching (and playing) basketball my entire life and I am sick of the, "well, Murphy is playing the only way he can to get a win!" Well, to me that is just putting lipstick on a pig. It means his team is not very good and he's not fooling anybody. You may beat some teams along the way--as long as they cannot shoot very well (a bad team). But you'll NEVER beat a good team playing this kind of garbage ball. Low possessions, high turnovers, insanely low shooting percentage, and oh yeah....scrappy ZONE defense.

This team is not making a ripple locally either. Not one mention on the local sportscasts except once which was to chuckle at the low score of the Toledo game. I would argue that it IS how you play the game--in addition to winning.

Of course speaking the truth here only gets you crap. I don't care, I want to see EMU play well AND win. I don't see us winning many more games this way, I really don't.

(01-23-2012 09:15 AM)Bob Wickersham Wrote:  This is the ugliest team in America and its not even close. ONLY a beaten down EMU fan could get giddy over a 41-38 "win." The same EMU fan that was bi***ing all season about Alex Gillett's inability to complete enough passes during a much more entertaining football season.

I've been watching (and playing) basketball my entire life and I am sick of the, "well, Murphy is playing the only way he can to get a win!" Well, to me that is just putting lipstick on a pig. It means his team is not very good and he's not fooling anybody. You may beat some teams along the way--as long as they cannot shoot very well (a bad team). But you'll NEVER beat a good team playing this kind of garbage ball. Low possessions, high turnovers, insanely low shooting percentage, and oh yeah....scrappy ZONE defense.

This team is not making a ripple locally either. Not one mention on the local sportscasts except once which was to chuckle at the low score of the Toledo game. I would argue that it IS how you play the game--in addition to winning.

Of course speaking the truth here only gets you crap. I don't care, I want to see EMU play well AND win. I don't see us winning many more games this way, I really don't.

Bob, did you go to games last year? where you around when Melvin Hicks and Ricky Cottrill were our leading scorers? those teams were horrible, we got blown out and there were WAYYYY fewer people in the stands. it was miserable.

Murphy's done a hell of a job with what he has and he has exceeded most people's expectations. no one is saying this is what we want the final product to look like, but it's a much better first step than many (me included) expected.

My first game was at age 10 back in the Ray Scott days. We weren't very good, but it was entertaining and I stayed with EMU through Jim Boyce, Ben Braun, Milton Barnes, Jim Boone, Charles Ramsey, to now. I've seen it all and I'm only 43! Ricky Cottril actually shot a pretty 3-ball and Ryan Prilman was pretty good inside. I moved back to Michigan last March, so I only made it to the last game--a lopsided victory over Toledo.

All I'm saying, in a rebuilding year, I'd take improved, more cohesive, fundementally sound play over a few ugly, ultimately meaningless wins.

Guys, in six or seven weeks this will all be 'academic' and it will be on to the 'Fast Breaking" Eagles of 2012/2013.

(01-23-2012 09:51 AM)Bob Wickersham Wrote:  My first game was at age 10 back in the Ray Scott days. We weren't very good, but it was entertaining and I stayed with EMU through Jim Boyce, Ben Braun, Milton Barnes, Jim Boone, Charles Ramsey, to now. I've seen it all and I'm only 43! Ricky Cottril actually shot a pretty 3-ball and Ryan Prilman was pretty good inside. I moved back to Michigan last March, so I only made it to the last game--a lopsided victory over Toledo.

All I'm saying, in a rebuilding year, I'd take improved, more cohesive, fundementally sound play over a few ugly, ultimately meaningless wins.

Bob, sometimes you amaze me.

Nobody on here is calling this a good team. NOBODY

But are you telling me, you wont take these wins ? Sure, you would take fundementally sound play over ugly wins. But your points about improved and choesive play are invalid.

In my opinion, these parts of the game HAVE INFACT IMPROVED as the season has went on. And you see it by the WIN column.

Bottom line, you are not going to see very SOUND basketball. HOWEVER, to me it is a GREAT sign if a team of this talent level can still pull off these wins. It bodes well and is a great sign for the future of our program.

Buckle up, you will see some good basketball in the future bud.

(01-23-2012 06:05 PM)Rip20 Wrote:  

(01-23-2012 09:51 AM)Bob Wickersham Wrote:  My first game was at age 10 back in the Ray Scott days. We weren't very good, but it was entertaining and I stayed with EMU through Jim Boyce, Ben Braun, Milton Barnes, Jim Boone, Charles Ramsey, to now. I've seen it all and I'm only 43! Ricky Cottril actually shot a pretty 3-ball and Ryan Prilman was pretty good inside. I moved back to Michigan last March, so I only made it to the last game--a lopsided victory over Toledo.

All I'm saying, in a rebuilding year, I'd take improved, more cohesive, fundementally sound play over a few ugly, ultimately meaningless wins.

Bob, sometimes you amaze me.

Nobody on here is calling this a go

But are you telling me, you wont take these wins ? Sure, you would take fundementally sound play over ugly wins. But your points about improved and choesive play are invalid.

In my opinion, these parts of the game HAVE INFACT IMPROVED as the season has went on. And you see it by the WIN column.

Bottom line, you are not going to see very SOUND basketball. HOWEVER, to me it is a GREAT sign if a team of this talent level can still pull off these wins. It bodes well and is a great sign for the future of our program.


I couldn't agree with you more.

Buckle up, you will see some good basketball in the future bud.

Murphy came in with a rep as more of recruiting coach than an X and Os coach. This season as ugly as it has been (a 15-14 half!) shows me Murphy knows how to coach. Now if he can bring in the recruiting classes.

(01-24-2012 12:22 PM)emu79 Wrote:  Murphy came in with a rep as more of recruiting coach than an X and Os coach. This season as ugly as it has been (a 15-14 half!) shows me Murphy knows how to coach. Now if he can bring in the recruiting classes.

'79, you raise an interesting question:

What do we know about an assistant coach in hoops?

Rob Murphy? Charles Ramsey? Mark Montgomery (now HC at NIU), etc.

How would we know what their bench skills are???

I don't know Steve, but some coaches have it and some do not.

Example Dan Enos CMU head coach great recruiter but the results on the field have been horrible, Ernie Z basketball coach at CMU has always outrecruited EMU's coach in terms of talent but the CMU-EMU games have always been competitve and CMU hoops program has been stuck in low to neutral for a long time.

Murphy can take sub par talent and make it competitive based on what I've seen so far. You wonder what he could have done with a Higgins or a Bowdry or a Medlock on his team.

While reading this thread I keep hearing Whopi Goldberg's quote from the Color Purple in my head:
"... I might even be ugly, but dear God, I'm here. I'm here."

(01-24-2012 01:55 PM)emu79 Wrote:  I don't know Steve, but some coaches have it and some do not.

Example Dan Enos CMU head coach great recruiter but the results on the field have been horrible, Ernie Z basketball coach at CMU has always outrecruited EMU's coach in terms of talent but the CMU-EMU games have always been competitve and CMU hoops program has been stuck in low to neutral for a long time.

Murphy can take sub par talent and make it competitive based on what I've seen so far. You wonder what he could have done with a Higgins or a Bowdry or a Medlock on his team.

CMU really got a couple bad game coaches.

Zeigler appears to be a bad, bad bench coach.

My question is how find a good bench coach a priori - before the asst coach becomes a head coach?

Could JB at 'Cuse say, "I think Murphy will be an excellent bench coach"?

Could Izzo say: "I think Montgomery really understands the game and will be a very good bench coach"?