Ramblermgr9599, Thanks for the nice post. I appreciate your point, but I do disagree with some of your reasoning. Some CBI winners have peaked because of graduation, players leaving that school, etc. Losing CT was big and I may have underestimated the impact. I thought the CBI was the beginning of a 2 year great run and this year would be even better. I love CT, but I thought we'd be able to compensate. joe Crisman also graduated but I felt that was a negligible loss (Love Joe but I felt we could fill in with our team full of guards).

Several times this year I have stated we're awful and every time several people jump in and say that's not true. Instead, we're talented but not playing so they contend. Well...I refrain from quacking duck analogies, but we are just terrible. How many games do we need to see Milton be ineffective before we get it? Ingram, too. We get killed on the boards and inside. Our once good defense is now often suspect, certainly against good teams (yes, I saw the N. Iowa game).

Btw, I don't know what the deal is with Milton. I certainly thought he was supremely talented but something is up. Injury, mental, better schemes against him? I have no idea.

Any way Ramblermgr, I'm sticking with my statement but I hope your right. IMO, we do not have MVC level talent at this point. I hope that changes in the years to come.

Sammy !! That makes two of us ~~ You have out the situation MUCH better than I have--but it can be fixed IF (big if) School leadership FINALLY decides to join the Big Leagues. As Jessie Royce Landis told Cary Grant in Charade---" Son, pay the two dollars". No more half way measures. I thought when Gentile was expanded and we joined the Valley, that it was the start of things, especially in view of our fine record of last season. It has not.

"Good" teams do not lose at home to a Bradley team whose only other win on the year was by one point on their home court to Ball State. They don't lose at home to Cleveland State in a wholesale rebuilding year, or lose at home to a 7-13 Missouri State team in a vital conference game. Good teams don't lose by 24 at New Mexico, or look as thoroughly outclassed as we did against Notre Dame and Wichita State. A "good" team might lose those games, but not getting blown out of the building against mostly bench players.

Say what you will about being really talented, not "gelling," etc. Last year we had some players who served as "tent poles" to stay in games-- both Christian Thomas and Joe Crisman had a fierce work ethic and senior experience. They kept the team from sinking into funks when shots didn't fall, kept the guys from making silly mistakes to further compound things, and kept the rest of the team from slacking off or straying from the game plan. Last year's team was athletically competent, like this year's team. The players were nothing really spectacular physically or athletically, but they were experienced hard workers that were disciplined at staying with the game plan. That game plan was new then-- using help defense, controlling tempo, working very hard for good, high-percentage shots, etc. It got us a lot of wins over less disciplined and hard working teams (the win at Evansville, the wins over the CBI teams, the win at Kent State), and got us some wins against teams we managed to play at the right time (Boise State with their two big injuries, Indiana State in St. Louis when we had Doyle playing). Otherwise, if you look at what we did last year, we got swept by WSU, UNI, and ISUr-- the three teams in the NCAA/NIT. We had a losing conference record in a league where more than half the teams had a losing record overall, and four teams won 11 games or less on the year-- we only had one win, by one point, against a fellow MVC team with a winning record on the season.

Our style and tendencies are less novel and more well-known this year-- we aren't very good against a zone or a good full court press. We're going to pass a lot before we get a shot, and if you really work on denying the inside game it ties us in offensive knots for large chunks of the game. We don't have much leadership, we let down when we get a lead, and we make a lot of lazy mistakes-- just like we did a lot BEFORE last year. We've been beaten twice this year by coaches who knew us from the HL (Waters at CSU and Wardle at Bradley), even though they're both coaching horrible rebuilding teams.

I think we probably could have won the games against Cleveland State, Bradley, and Missouri State with better effort and discipline. I thought the effort, game plan, and attention to detail was pretty solid in the 2-point loss to Illinois State-- we just lost a close game to a pretty good team on the road. The Creighton game shows what our ceiling is with solid execution and effort. The two losses in Alaska both came from giant 2nd half meltdowns after we were playing pretty well earlier in the game, so I don't really know what to attribute it to.

If we worked harder and had more discipline this year, it's a pretty easy claim to say we could be 11-9 overall and 4-5 in conference (wins over CSU, Bradley, and MSU-- a total of 7 points deciding those games). If we were at that point, I'd like our chances to avoid Thursday. But the hole is too deep now. Last year we avoided the let-downs (except maybe the Tulane game), and that was really all we needed to escape Thursday. This year we let up, and it bit us again and again. That's an issue of culture, motivation, and (probably) attendance/fan support.

JCT, as usual, terrifically said. The Joe Crisman comments we interesting and correct. I always loved Joe's steadiness and maturity, but never felt we'd miss him that much. I was wrong. In fact, here's an incredibly controversial and probably ridiculous thing to say. Last year, Joe was more valuable than Milton has been this year. Only our devotion to all that is Loyola prevents us from saying that Milton has been horrible. Rarely effective in scoring or creating opportunities and his turnovers have made him more of a negative than a positive. Only the fact that he has had brilliant moments at LUC combined with our limited scoring threats makes us hope he's the guy. We have been sold a bill of goods. I will be the first to say it (and again, maybe he's hurt). Milton Doyle is not a very good player. I admit that he would be better on a team with more support, but I've seen lots of really good and great players, Milton is neither. I will admit, I am clueless as to why he has taken such a step backwards.

For what it's worth, KenPom now has us 12-18 heading into the tournament.

_________________
MBB Scholarship Chart

Sam,
You are correct that teams do use the CBI as a springboard. However I would bet that just as many do not. That is all I was saying. Last year's CBI did not guarantee anything. It was easy to think CBI -> NIT -> NCAA but that progression is very hard.

Loyola's goal should be to some how avoid Thurs. in St. L and get hot and win a few games.

Think of this though, 7th place may extend our season longer than 6th place (assuming the same record--say 8-10) because the 6th place team will likely have 1 less win because they have 1 less tourney game. If you are chasing .500 like Loyola that extra game helps that. 15-15 would be the record with a 8-10 conf. season. A win Thurs. would give you 16 and puts you over .500, a loss Fri. puts you back at .500 16-16. Playing only on Friday with a L puts you at 15-16 (losing season). Talk about OVERTHINKING!

JCT reports well again of course--What it says to me--and maybe to him--is that this miserable season is on PM.. Why ?? --
--Too predictable
--Reins too tight
--NO bench leadership
--poor recruiting--not much emphasis on BIGS
--constant injuries---conditioning regimen ??
John in a way aims at the players , while actually HIS recruits are failing --not so much because of lack of talent , but mainly his recruitment tastes, his uneven talent and perhaps his stubbornness

It is what it is , Gang ! He is proving it each and every game. BUT I have a hunch our AD will be soon making changes--He was brought in to improve things.
Problem is PM IS a good man , really is a Gentleman as was Whitesell, but he has attained the best he can attain. Time for a change.

Ramblermgr, I agree with all your points. Even the CBI one. For me, I didn't take last year as evidence of an impending NIT bid. I felt we would still be bit shy of that. I was hoping for a better conference record, a stronger showing against good teams and who knows, a repeat of the CBI crown? I just felt that last year was the beginning not the end. I am very dejected by this year. Last year's first round thumping of Indiana State was one of the highlights of my sports watching career. I was simply hoping and expecting more of that this year. It won't happen.