Welcome to Miami Hawk Talk!

This website is a fan-operated and fan-oriented site primarily about athletics at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio.

This website is not affiliated with Miami University, the Mid-American Conference (MAC), the National Collegiate Hockey Conference (NCHC) the NCAA, or any other collegiate or professional organization.



Last Active
  • Lipscomb-NC State

    The argument is that lower seeded P6 teams stole bids from mid-majors and were "less deserving".  By winning over higher seeds, they justify their selection and place there.  The best outcome to potentially to get more consideration for mid major at larges is under-performing from "borderline" P6 at-larges.  Buffalo and Wofford went out and got big wins in non-con and rampaged through their conferences and got undeniable NET rankings.  Thats not good justification for inclusion of someone like Lipscomb, who while clearly a good team, couldnt claim the same.

    They won @ Liberty, @ TCU, vs. Vermont, and they won three times against 22 win NJIT. They didn't have any bad losses. They were ~40 in NET. If you don't think that should be enough to get in over a St John's team that went 8-10 in a down Big East and finished 73rd in NET, I don't know what to tell you.

    NJIT?  Come on man, they finished 5th in the ASUN and their best win is, umm, Fairleigh Dickinson maybe?  Thats not a feather in a cap.  (Only Ohio and Western had worse NET rankings in the entire MAC than NJIT.)  And they lost late in the season to Dunk City who was BAD.  225+ in NET.

    Lipscomb finished 50th I think.  I don't think St Johns should have been in either, but they had 3 wins (Marquette x2 and Nova) that were better than any wins Lipscomb had.  NC State should have been in over either of them, ironic given the result the other night.

    One mid-major that has a legit argument to make it in over a P6 is just a standard bracket debate, not a "this system needs to be re-evaluated", especially since they just did.
    Lower seeds winning a 1st round game don't justify their selection, it only means they beat the other team in what was probably a favorable matchup for them.  There wasn't much of a difference in the quality of teams seeded between 6 and 12 since only 1 seed higher than a 5 made it to the Sweet 16.

    Lipscomb had a better case than NC State.  Non-conference strength of schedule:  Lipscomb 19, NC State 353 (that's last in Division 1).  Lipscomb's best win was at TCU, NC State's best win was at home vs. Syracuse (when they beat Auburn, they were banged up).  Their best win away from home was their ACC tourney win vs. Clemson.  And they only scored 24 points in a conference game, at home.
  • 2019 NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournament

    It takes a real effort to get outcoached by Fran McCaffery and outtoughed by an Iowa team, the weakest team in the BIG, but Mick and his team managed to do both.
  • [POLL] If You Could Have Any 5 Year Span

    Miami athletics 2002-07

    1 MAC football championship, 1 AP Top 10 ranking, 2 bowl games
    1 NCAA men's basketball tournament, 2 NIT bids
    1 CCHA regular season championship, 3 NCAA hockey tournaments
    1 NCAA baseball tournament, 1 MAC regular season and tournament championship
    1 NCAA women's soccer tournament (1 victory)
    1 NCAA softball tournament, 1 MAC softball tournament championship
    1 NCAA volleyball tournament
    2 MAC East women's basketball championships, 1 WNIT

    Among others.
  • Miami men at Ohio tonight at 7:00

    11 guys played tonight, five of them played less than 10 minutes. Out of the 200 game minutes, 35 minutes were allotted to Harouna, Abrams, Eli, Precious and Jovic. Ringo played 27 minutes. How would you have preferred the minutes to be distributed? Unfortunately, it's not a deep team.

    I think Owens gets an unfair amount of heat for the job he's done in two seasons. Last year, on a team loaded with true freshmen, sophs and a transfer jr, they almost were .500 and played postseason basketball. Did anyone expect that in year one? This year, as a team, the progression is not what any of us had hoped for compared to last year. However, on the day Owens was hired, if we were told we'd have give or take a .500 team in year two, I think people would think that's a reasonable expectation. Now, if this is a .500 team next year, I'm singing a much different tune...
    I don't think anyone is criticizing him for the job he did in his first year.  You correctly made all of the points in which why he should and isn't getting criticized.  But I think it's right to critique what's happened this year, especially with the inconsistent effort the team has put out.  Yes, some of that is on the players, but with still such a young team, the coach can coach effort to some extent by using the bench as a big motivator.  And I think it's right to question why Lairy isn't in there late in the game if Ringo, poor 3 point shooter, is going to shoot 3s?  And why are Ringo and Abrams out there together, which means the other team can play 5-on-3 essentially?  Every time down the floor, Coach Ritter holds up the white board with the play/formation we're going to run, yet the offense stagnates quite often.  I think it's right to wonder about things.  The lack of a jump between freshman and sophomore years isn't unexpected, but the way in which it's happened, inconsistent effort and immature play has been a surprise.  The best thing Coach Owens did last year was get everyone to play together, especially defensively, which was remarkable for such a young team.  For whatever reason, that hasn't happened all the time this year.
  • Issues

    Only because it's easier for me, I'm going to take Blues's points one-by-one.

    1. I agree (easy enough)

    2. I'll agree with Dick in that I think Sibande's improved during the 2nd half of conference play, though I'd like to see him become a better defender.  He definitely lacks.  Brown started the year red hot but has really flat lined as the year's progressed.  Obviously, Bowman made the biggest jump and is our MVP.  

    3. If you would've said we'd be 15-15, 7-11 in the league, I wouldn't have been surprised.  What would've surprised me is how up and down the year has been and how inconsistent our effort's been.  Opposing coaches have a year-plus of tape on our players and system, so we're easier to scout.  I actually expect the biggest jump to be made between the sophomore and junior season.  Next year is an important year.

    4. Lairy has actually bucked the trend of a mid-major recruit:  started really well, fell off in the middle of the year, but has picked it up in recent games.  McNamara is a typical mid-major recruit and I agree with Dick, should've been redshirted.  I would expect some minutes from him next year and hopefully some kind of jump in 2 years time.

    5. If we're going to shoot a lot of 3s, a lot of 3s better be shot over the summer.  But at the same time, I hope we're going back and watching tape of what works, what doesn't, and what could work.  I'd love to work with Adaway in the summer because I think he's willing to put in the work and he has the most upside.  I would have him shoot at least 500 one dribble pull-ups, using a guide hand to shoot a more conventional jumper versus his one-hand push jumper.

    If we get anything from next year's incoming freshmen, I would consider it a bonus.  The bulk of our production should come from our core returners.

    6. The best teams are player-led.  Who will be that guy for us?  I can see ICL and Adaway being our leaders.  If someone else wants to step up and provide good leadership, that's fine too, but someone needs to.