Exhibition game

[UA66]

Some thoughts after last night's game:

 

First: keep in mind the level of competition. This game was not reflective of the competition ahead so one has to temper the enthusiasm a bit. MaGill was not a very good team (40-13 at half time) though they played aggressively and physically.

 

The rookies: I was impressed by all four. All played aggressively when they were in the game. I liked their attitudes. They seemed very attentive when Brown addressed them. Siggers is the most polished and skilled. He's very quick and has a nice touch with his shots. He'll get the most playing time of the newbies. Covington is a bull - very strong. I love the way he attacked the hoop for shots and rebounds. He'll probably be the first rookie off the bench. The tempo definitely picke dup when he spelled Zoellner. Graham is smooth, quick and a good leaper - put in a nice hook shot. Connelly has the furthest to go. Though he played aggressively, he looked a little confused at times and seemingly lacked in confidence. Actually, he reminded me a little of Brent Wilson early on last season before he began to feel confortable. I don't think Connelly will see a lot of playing time but he has the tools - aggressive and smart - to become a good player.

 

Returnees: Jamar Wilson - well, if there is a better and more exciting player in the AE this year, I would be very surprised. I was especially pleased to see that he didn't force as many things as he did so often last year. He doesn't have to with this team. He is just outstanding, clearly a leading candidate for POY.

 

Brent Wilson was a monster. Forget about concerns over his ability to play inside. He attacked hard inside and grabbed quite a few rebounds, played great defense, and still managed to play the outside game as well, sinking one 3 pointer from Washington Ave. I was most impressed with his leadership and confidence level - almost cocky, but more a result of having tons of confidence. Even when he was on the bench, you could see that he was totally involved in the game, talking to teammates and coaches. I predict he'll be a captain next year.

 

Levi is Levi but not in the vain of "Manny is Manny." Levi played the complete game: shooting, defense, rebounding, running the court. I feel that he and Brent are the most complete players on the team - may have to add Lillis to that category when he gets back.

 

Jordan didn't play too much, especially in second half. He is hurting, but played well when in the game. He's a gamer.

 

Iati is back. Whoever it was on the AE Board that suggested Iaiti wouldn't see much playing time this year was guilty of wishful thinking, or is smoking something he/she shouldn't be. Got the most playing time except for Jamar, I believe. Iati is Mr. Automatic. He made threes when open and when under pressure - sunk a long fade away trey at one point. He's back and better than his ROY.

 

Zoellner annoyed the hell out of me early on. Slow afoot, letting his man beat him repeatedly, got boxed out or was out of position for rebounds, missed a slam dunk, and three layups - one uncontested. Just as I was ready to give up on him, he showed some stuff in the second half: blocked some shots, got rebounds, and I don't think he missed a put back in that half. I was surprised to see that he had 11 rebounds for the game, but most were offensive on his own missed shots. I didn't really see that he has improved that much from last year but this was only one game. Zoellner will start but Covington and Graham will get a lot of playing time in the middle.

 

Overall, the outside game was super. We've got some shooters, really good shooters. The inside game got better as the game went on and I think that will get even better as Covington and Graham develop.

 

Everyone played except for Baumann. Brown rotated mostly with 9 players and I didn't notice much drop off if any with any substitutions. When Lillis returns, I can see 10 players getting a lot of PT. There should be no reason why anyone should get tired.

 

There is reason for optimism.

Edited November 5, 2005 by UA66

[UA66]

I just jumped over to read the Times Onion report on the game. Not much there - short article. However, Brian Ettkin's column focused on the poor attendance last night. I thought of mentioning that in my review above but chose not to. However since Ettkin addressed it, I'll throw in my thoughts. Yeah, one of the first things that crossed my mind when the game started was "where in hell are the fans?" Ettkin said that most of the people in attendance were other UA athletes, but if that was true, then UA teams are recruiting a lot of kids who are either prematurely bald or gray haired. It was an older crowd, so where in hell were the students?

[UAalum72]

As we in section 200 predicted, Brian Ettkin's column on how few fans were there Top teams could use a few fans. Of course there were 350+ at the volleyball match (a mostly younger crowd than hoops), and the crowd couldn't have been all the UA athletes, since the field hockey and men's soccer teams were on the road at conference playoffs.

 

Good things come in threes for Danes - Times-Union story on game.

[UA66]

I went over to the volleyball game during halftime of the basketball game, as you apparently did Alum 72, and also noticed that it was a younger crowd. I was thrilled to see the turnout for the VB game since this team is exciting to watch.

 

While I don't agree with Ettkin's assessment of the age of the crowd at the BB game, I do agree with him that the attendance was dismal considering that we have a very good team that should make history this year, and one that is fun to watch. I think the first regular season home game will be a better barometer of fan support than last night's game.

[Dane Pound]

It seems fitting to recall that he did a "Nobody cares about UAlbany football" column before that season began also. Then we had over 6,000 people at the first game.

 

I'm of UAlum72's opinion that at least some of the 350 watching volleyball would have been at the RACC were that game not going on at the same time. In terms of importance the conference game against UNH was probably more important than the exhibition basketball game. I'm not sure Ettkin knew about the volleyball game. It's unfortunate he didn't take the short walk over because he probably would have been surprised at how good the atmosphere has become over there. He also probably could have talked to one of the many ticket people in the RACC to find out that season ticket sales are doing really well.

 

As far as the game went I second a lot of what UA66 said. I've really been impressed with Siggers the two times I saw him. What really surprised me last night was that he lead the team in assists. Seems like a heady player. I think he might be the first guard off the bench at least until Lillis gets back.

 

I was also surprised about Zoellner's rebounding numbers (11). He did get a bunch of offensive rebounds on his own misses. I'll live with offensive miscues because his presence makes the team better and removes the opponets post game. I'd like to see him rebound more aggressively. I was really impressed with Brent and Covington's rebounding and would hope at least one of them will be on the floor most of the times. They really excelled grabbing the tough ones in traffic.

[UAalum72]

What's amazing is that Bing had 4,600+ for their exhibition vs. Mansfield St.-PA last night.

[alum73]

Someone told me there were no classes for a muslim holiday, so many students had left for a long weekend. The game certainly wasn't advertised much. As it was free, it was a great opportunity to get the community to the raac to sample the entertainment. VB might have dragged some fans away, but not too many. Although had there been a lot of fans, there were no concessions the parking lot doors weren't open, so we might not havemade a good impression.

[B9j2j6s]

I'm not worried about last nights game. It wasn't really advertised the home opener will be heavily and I expect to see around 4,000 for that game, after all 6000 showed up for the first football game. If we do not hit between high 3 and a sellout then someone needs to be fired in our advertising department.

[Oldtimer]

Was Ettkin at the game? If so he has a vision problem and needs those glasses changed. Students did not make up the crowd. Many were at the volleyball game as they should have been. Part of the UA problem is the TU and editors like Ettkin. We have a exhibition game and get two lower page columns. Siena gets three lower page columns next to UA for an inter-sqaud scrimmage that hasn't even happened yet. Watch tomorrows column coverage for their inter-sqaud and call Ettkin. Why the TU knocks a team that could result in increased paper sales and advertising is beyond me. Someone at the publishers level should take those sports writers to the woodshed.

Added note: No coverage of our volleyball team except a line score is a joke!!!!---and wouldn't happen in any D-I local paper in the country except the TU!!!

[Patch]

Some interesting info regarding attendance .......

 

900 from an avg attendance of 6,400 showed for Siena's Green and Gold game (the only time they can be seen before playing PENN) or 14% of last years fan base.

 

 

427 showed for Albany's exhibition from last years avg attendance of 2040 or 21%.

 

Etkin should be writing about the erosion of the Siena faithful.

 

When you think of it 427 with almost an equal number next door watching an excellent UA Women's Volleyball team. There were a good number of sport fans at UA that night especially when many students had left Thursday for a long 3 day week end.

Edited November 6, 2005 by Patch

[alumni '92']

in fairness to siena and etkin ... if you take into consideration that their actual attendance (fans in seats) was only about 4,000 (inflated by the UA game), 900 for their exhibition (22.5%) would exceed our 427 (21%) ... you just need to read between the lines

[GODANESGO]

I'm not sure if anyone else noticed it (and am not sure why in the world I did) but Zo's name on his jersey during the game against McGill was spelled "Zollner" instead of the correct "Zoellner." Kinda rough there..lol.

[olddog71]

I'm not sure if anyone else noticed it (and am not sure why in the world I did) but Zo's name on his jersey during the game against McGill was spelled "Zollner" instead of the correct "Zoellner." Kinda rough there..lol.

10298[/snapback]

 

If the powers-that-be want to fix it and do it without purchasing a new jersey, they can just add two dots above the "o." The umlaut is the same thing as a vowel (a, o, or u) followed directly by an "e."

 

Yeah, that's still bad.