1-0 in the MAC

Metz · Post by **Metz** » Sun Jan 02, 2005 9:23 pm

Germainefitch1 wrote:How wre the anderson animals? Or is that next game?

That was this game...but I can't really say how we were since I am one of them. Maybe other fans there can answer that!!

hammb · Post by **hammb** » Sun Jan 02, 2005 9:35 pm

orangeandbrown wrote:Let me say this, John Floyd is not a role player. He's the glue to this team. He played poorly in Oakland, and the team gets killed. Moon starts, and we're down 6-0. Floyd had 19 today, they were big baskets, and did his usual hustle and diving. With him at the helm, we are much tougher to beat, and having him at 1 and Wright at 2 is the biggest difference between this year's team and last year's team.

I'm not going to deny this. Floyd is really doing a great job running the offense. He really reminds me of Brandon Pardon. He doesn't make the spectacular passes that BP did, but he sure does a good job making the smart, PG decision.

That said, he is still a liability on defense. He does hustle, which is worth a lot, but he's just too slow to guard the quicker guards. The guys Floyd was guarding were getting open a lot today, but they missed a lot of open looks.

I like Floyd way more than I ever thought I would, but he is still not a perfect player. I do know that he's doing a heckuva job running the offense though. We don't seem to have those 5:00 stretches where we cannot buy a good look at the basket like we did last year. (Oakland game, excepted. That was brutal).

Metz · Post by **Metz** » Sun Jan 02, 2005 9:41 pm

It's a bad cycle too hammb. If we put Moon in there to keep up with the guards, we lose the PG experience to run our style of offense IMO. Both have their strengths and I think they are both doing great, but they both definitely need some work.

Rollo83 · Post by **Rollo83** » Sun Jan 02, 2005 10:35 pm

That said, he is still a liability on defense. He does hustle, which is worth a lot, but he's just too slow to guard the quicker guards. The guys Floyd was guarding were getting open a lot today, but they missed a lot of open looks.

Ingram....Haynes....Stovall.....We got to have somebody at the point that can guard these guys.

orangeandbrown · Post by **orangeandbrown** » Sun Jan 02, 2005 11:09 pm

Can we have Wright guard the point guys?

Metz · Post by **Metz** » Mon Jan 03, 2005 1:02 am

orangeandbrown wrote:Can we have Wright guard the point guys?

He did play point last year but is more of a scoring point guard. In other words, he seemed to rather want to score than run the offense which is why I rather have him at the 2 spot. Of course Lewis was at the 2 then and everyone took the shots they could get so maybe he isn't as much of a scoring PG as I think

orangeandbrown · Post by **orangeandbrown** » Mon Jan 03, 2005 7:22 am

Metz, I know that. But, on defense, you could still have Wright guard their point guard, even if he plays 2 for us.

BGorDeath · Post by **BGorDeath** » Mon Jan 03, 2005 8:20 am

McMetz811 wrote:
Germainefitch1 wrote:How wre the anderson animals? Or is that next game?
That was this game...but I can't really say how we were since I am one of them. Maybe other fans there can answer that!!

I wasn't really that impressed. Five or six guys just standing there goofing on each other is what I saw. Plus, isn't the use of Animal a copyright infringement? You know, the Muppets are owned by Disney and they go after elementary schools for using Mickey. Did you get permission?

Dayons_Den · Post by **Dayons_Den** » Mon Jan 03, 2005 10:16 am

orangeandbrown wrote:Can we have Wright guard the point guys?

I like this idea.

bacn3 · Post by **bacn3** » Mon Jan 03, 2005 10:48 am

Bgordeath, i'm not sure what you were looking for. Being that the students are on break i thought it went really well, and so did a lot of other people. Its kind of hard to try and get 6 year old kids and their parents into the game. If you look close its not really animal. Not really sure what you ment by goofing on eachother? we are fans not players pretty soon you'll tell us that we don't have any heart or something we put a lot of work into this and i for one am proud of how it turned out.[/quote]

BGorDeath · Post by **BGorDeath** » Mon Jan 03, 2005 11:01 am

Someone posted they wanted to know thoughts of how it looked. That is what I saw. Guys in shirts that could have copyright infringements from Disney because it looks alot like Animal of the Muppets. Not to get nitpicky here, but I'm sure Disney would say that its infringement because it resembles their character. Just my thought. Go ahead and use it.

Still, it looked like five or six guys goofing on each other. If you don't want to hear what people actually thought, then don't ask. Maybe my thoughts will change once students are back. Just reminded me of kids at a high school game.

bacn3 · Post by **bacn3** » Mon Jan 03, 2005 11:11 am

what is goofing on eachother we are friends we talk to eachother just wanted to know what you ment by goofing?

BGorDeath · Post by **BGorDeath** » Mon Jan 03, 2005 11:29 am

Maybe I'm showing my age. Have fun at the games. Cheer on the team. You guys are great for the school, team and games. I'm not saying anymore. Just don't ask what someone thinks and get all defensive when someone doesn't think much of it.

Done. Finished.

hammb · Post by **hammb** » Mon Jan 03, 2005 11:30 am

I have it on good authority that permission was asked for, and granted by the copyright owner, before the printing of the shirts.

The shirts look great, and the there were quite a few of them already. We also had a couple people around us asking where we got them and how they could get them. We pointed you out Metzger

The idea of the Animals is NOT to be a cheerleader section, IMO (although I'm not a founder). We have cheerleaders, when they choose to show up. The idea is to be a bunch of fans who show up at least 45 minutes early for the games, are there for every game, and are loud during the game cheering. I know Metzger, et al, and I'm sure they were loud for the game. I know Grant & I were yelling our asses off.

Metz · Post by **Metz** » Mon Jan 03, 2005 1:26 pm

orangeandbrown wrote:Metz, I know that. But, on defense, you could still have Wright guard their point guard, even if he plays 2 for us.

I followed you, but who will guard their 2 guard is what I'm asking I guess. Floyd is only an inch shorter than Wright but I still think the height of Floyd and Moon would lack against the normal 2 guard (consider jumping ability too). I guess you could move some of the others out of position and leave our 2 main PG's out of the lineup when the opposition has quicker PG's in but I'm sure the coaching staff will figure something out.