After the scrimmage, I assumed you would be checking marquettehoops non-stop which is why I did not post anything until now. My impressions:
Being an early scrimmage it was sloppy at times, but there were still some great moments. James had a nice ally oop in the beginning of the scrimmage.
Mbakwe was bigger than I expected. He does not look like a freshmen and should serve as a great threat off the bench. He has some pretty sweet up's, so between him and Hazel I see no room for D-Burke Da Star. Hazel impressed me too with his dunking abilities.
We should be very deep at the 1 position this year. Acker hit some nice 3's and had some good penetration, although his height will certainly be an issue over the course of the season. hopefully he makes up in speed for what he lacks in height. Cubillan seemed to be very sharp just coming from playing in his home country of Venezuela. James also looked good hitting some deep shots.
All in all I was impressed with the performances for the night. This team is going to be so deep I can't decide on the starting 5 quite yet. Here is my prediction:
James
McNeal
Matthews
Fitz/ Hayward
Barro
I truly beleive Mbakwe will add some great talent to the table as well. What does everyone else think. I also predict we will be losing James, McNeal, and Matthews to the NBA after this season once we reach the final four.
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
What the deuce?
Just thinking of the scrimmage helped me get through the day yesterday. Images of sugar plumbs and Justin's promised video of the event made me feel like having a pants party. But when I get home, no details on the scrimmage from you guys! Now it's noon ...
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Dominic James
Today was the first day of class for sports and society, and already we touched on Marquette Basketball. I am hoping we focus on MU basketball or atleast college basketball the entire semester, since we all know that it is the most important, exciting, and enlightening sport of all. One topic today was on Dominic James. More specifically the question was asked, "Why is James such a poor free-throw shooter." Being the fanatic I am, I had to calm myself before I shot out the first thing to come to mind. Luckily for me some other fool had spoken before he thought and the teacher simply ignored his response. Dr. Jones explanation was very interesting, which is why I wanted to share it will all of you. He explained the reason James was such a poor free-throw shooter was due to him leaning back before each shot. We can all picture this in our heads, as James does this every time. James also flicks his wrist more than most on his free-throws which causes inconsistent spin on the ball after each attempt. The professor went on further asking why do you think James leans before each shot? I think the biggest reason is due to his shorter height on the court. Any shot he takes while being defended he will have to create some room between him and the defender, so he almost has to lean to get an open shot. But, this should not be part of his form during a free throw. Another reason can be due to the more agrresive play on the playgrounds in which James grew up? I think we would all agree that playing defense was not the most important part of the pick up games we were part of growing up. It was more about the offense and more specifically the shooting( remeber white men can't jump, but they can shoot damn well...thank you Travis and Steve). I strongly hope Prof. Jones speaks with Crean and explains to him the bad habits James has picked up from his childhood such as leaning back before each free-throw, a shot that is the only guaranteed un-defended shot during the game. There is no reason for him to lean back as to be moving away from a defender. All in all, I think Dr. Jones gave a pretty interesting explanation as to why James is not the best of free-throw shooters. Let's go Marquette!
Friday, August 24, 2007
Time Magazine feature on Rudy
The President of 9/11 knows what will get him elected.
Whole store here
First page to get you started:
"Islamic terrorists are at war with us," Rudy Giuliani told about 300 people at a synagogue in Rockville, Md., one evening in July. He likes to say it that way — that they are at war with us, not the other way around. "They want to kill us," he warned a group in New Hampshire the same month. "They hate you," he told a woman in Atlanta.
Giuliani says he understands terrorism "better than anyone else running for President," and he certainly talks about it more than anyone else. "Basically, what he's selling is, 'As dangerous a world as this is, I can make it safer,'" says G.O.P. pollster Frank Luntz. So far, it seems to be working. Giuliani has been the consistent front-runner of the Republican candidates in most national polls through August.
By framing his campaign this way, Giuliani has raised an interesting question. What does it actually mean to understand terrorism? His supporters might find the question absurd. He owns terrorism, they say. The entire world watched on television as Giuliani led New York City through the aftermath of a terrorism attack. To his opponents, the answer is equally plain: he has no foreign policy experience, and he talks about terrorism as if it's an enemy country on a continent only he knows how to find.
But being a victim of terrorism, or the steely leader of a recovery, is not necessarily the same as understanding terrorism. Nor is foreign policy experience all that matters. So how would Giuliani actually prevent, contain and respond to the next major terrorist attack in the U.S.? What is his vision for what he considers the existential challenge of our time?
This much is indisputable: Giuliani knows what it means to be a victim of terrorism, to lose old friends in an avalanche of violence and spit the dust of a skyscraper out of his mouth in a new, blackened world. He understands the urgency of speaking to the American people after an attack — and not circling above the ruins in Air Force One. He knows how to grieve and go to work at the same time.
But before 9/11, Giuliani spent eight years presiding over a city that was a known terrorist target. A TIME investigation into what he did — and didn't do — to prepare for a major catastrophe is revealing. In addition to extraordinary grace under fire, Giuliani developed an intimate knowledge of emergency management and an affinity for quantifiable results. On 9/11, he earned the trust of most Americans; one year later, 78% of those surveyed by the Marist Institute had a favorable impression of Giuliani. This magazine also named Giuliani its Person of the Year in 2001. Assuming he can keep it, trust is a priceless resource in psychological warfare.
The evidence also shows great, gaping weaknesses. Giuliani's penchant for secrecy, his tendency to value loyalty over merit and his hyperbolic rhetoric are exactly the kinds of instincts that counterterrorism experts say the U.S. can least afford right now.
Giuliani's limitations are in fact remarkably similar to those of another man who has led the nation into a war without end. Some of the Bush Administration's policies, like improved intelligence sharing between countries and our own agencies, have made the U.S. better at fighting terrorism. But others, from the war in Iraq to the treatment of detainees at Guantánamo Bay, have actually made the task much more difficult. The challenge for the next President will be focusing on and adapting the good tools and jettisoning the bad. Whether you conclude Giuliani can win this war depends ultimately on whether you think we are winning now.
Whole store here
First page to get you started:
"Islamic terrorists are at war with us," Rudy Giuliani told about 300 people at a synagogue in Rockville, Md., one evening in July. He likes to say it that way — that they are at war with us, not the other way around. "They want to kill us," he warned a group in New Hampshire the same month. "They hate you," he told a woman in Atlanta.
Giuliani says he understands terrorism "better than anyone else running for President," and he certainly talks about it more than anyone else. "Basically, what he's selling is, 'As dangerous a world as this is, I can make it safer,'" says G.O.P. pollster Frank Luntz. So far, it seems to be working. Giuliani has been the consistent front-runner of the Republican candidates in most national polls through August.
By framing his campaign this way, Giuliani has raised an interesting question. What does it actually mean to understand terrorism? His supporters might find the question absurd. He owns terrorism, they say. The entire world watched on television as Giuliani led New York City through the aftermath of a terrorism attack. To his opponents, the answer is equally plain: he has no foreign policy experience, and he talks about terrorism as if it's an enemy country on a continent only he knows how to find.
But being a victim of terrorism, or the steely leader of a recovery, is not necessarily the same as understanding terrorism. Nor is foreign policy experience all that matters. So how would Giuliani actually prevent, contain and respond to the next major terrorist attack in the U.S.? What is his vision for what he considers the existential challenge of our time?
This much is indisputable: Giuliani knows what it means to be a victim of terrorism, to lose old friends in an avalanche of violence and spit the dust of a skyscraper out of his mouth in a new, blackened world. He understands the urgency of speaking to the American people after an attack — and not circling above the ruins in Air Force One. He knows how to grieve and go to work at the same time.
But before 9/11, Giuliani spent eight years presiding over a city that was a known terrorist target. A TIME investigation into what he did — and didn't do — to prepare for a major catastrophe is revealing. In addition to extraordinary grace under fire, Giuliani developed an intimate knowledge of emergency management and an affinity for quantifiable results. On 9/11, he earned the trust of most Americans; one year later, 78% of those surveyed by the Marist Institute had a favorable impression of Giuliani. This magazine also named Giuliani its Person of the Year in 2001. Assuming he can keep it, trust is a priceless resource in psychological warfare.
The evidence also shows great, gaping weaknesses. Giuliani's penchant for secrecy, his tendency to value loyalty over merit and his hyperbolic rhetoric are exactly the kinds of instincts that counterterrorism experts say the U.S. can least afford right now.
Giuliani's limitations are in fact remarkably similar to those of another man who has led the nation into a war without end. Some of the Bush Administration's policies, like improved intelligence sharing between countries and our own agencies, have made the U.S. better at fighting terrorism. But others, from the war in Iraq to the treatment of detainees at Guantánamo Bay, have actually made the task much more difficult. The challenge for the next President will be focusing on and adapting the good tools and jettisoning the bad. Whether you conclude Giuliani can win this war depends ultimately on whether you think we are winning now.
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
New Marquette Eagle
http://www.cstv.com/auto_pdf/p_hotos/s_chools/marq/genrel/auto_pdf/gr_goldeneaglegraphic
Marquette has officially reworked the Golden Eagle graphic (see link above). In my opinion this is somewhat of an improvement over the old eagle graphic, however after so much logo/mascot/nickname discussion, I am wore out. Yet another change provides little excitement for me. Although, it is still better than this:
http://pressthebuttons.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/goldbar.jpg
Marquette has officially reworked the Golden Eagle graphic (see link above). In my opinion this is somewhat of an improvement over the old eagle graphic, however after so much logo/mascot/nickname discussion, I am wore out. Yet another change provides little excitement for me. Although, it is still better than this:
http://pressthebuttons.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/goldbar.jpg
Monday, August 20, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)