A really long, scattered post.

I've been hesitant to write anything about the current situation with our team and the Daniel. I didn't want to comment because in some ways the whole subject is so sensitive. I also, out of respect to Daniel, wanted to wait and hear what he and the club had to say before making any statement of my own. At times like these, I don't know if it is a good or bad thing to have a blog like this one. On one hand, it is nice to have a forum where I can express my feelings and an outlet for all the thoughts that swim around in my head every day, on the other hand, it might not be necessary for others to know how I feel about this.

First thing's first, anything I say about Daniel specifically assumes that the B-sample will also come back positive. Of course, there is always the chance that something got contaminated, but history has proven that this is almost never the case. No matter what I write below, I do believe that Daniel should be punished. I do, however, believe that the punishment should fit the crime and in this case I don't think it does. But I think that will be pretty clear...

Second, I want to state from the beginning that I don't consider this to be a "Doping" case. For me, the term "Doping" connotes someone trying to get a competitive advantage by taking performance enhancing substances. I can't imagine anyone making the argument that this is the case here. Yes, cocaine could hypothetically boost performance in a match, but I just don't buy that someone would choose to use it in this way. It's just not a feasible or believable scenario. No matter what you think about the case, this is the key to everything. Intentionally trying to cheat vs. making a mistake.

So, if it's not "doping", what is it? Well, and I guess this is where I might get in trouble, in my mind it isn't really anything. I think it IS a dumb mistake. And people who claim that it doesn't matter if it was intentional or unintentional - the people who believe rules are rules - are missing the point. I'll be the first to say that anyone who tries to get an advantage on someone else in sports by taking performance enhancing drugs deserves to be punished heavily. However, this is not what happened here. We're not talking about cheating here. We're talking about someone who made a mistake. And as it stands now, someone who is going to pay an incredibly high price for that mistake. There is a HUGE difference between making a mistake and intentionally seeking a chemical advantage. I think we're all paranoid right now because of the prevalence of steroids, human growth hormone and other similar drugs in the sports world. That's why I've been disappointed in the sensational "Doping" headlines that have been flashed across national newspapers and tv screens. It's not right. And it's definitely not "doping".

People have made the argument that it is necessary to protect the integrity of the sports world, that we don't want volleyball to be seen as "dirty". I agree, we don't want that. But how far are we willing to go to uphold that "clean" image? Is it really fair to end someone's career for one mistake?

But, what about the kids? Surely, we don't want to set the wrong example for them, right? True, we don't want to set the wrong example for kids. And no one should make the argument that cocaine is good for you. However, I would argue that it is just as important to show children that there are support systems in place to help them when they make mistakes. Stigmatizing someone and turning your back on them because of one stupid thing that they did is not the way to breed a safe "clean" environment for the future. Yes, sports are about fair play and hard work, but at their best, they are also about teamwork and the way that one player's positive aspects make up for another player's deficiencies. I know that this is an idealistic and perhaps optimistic way of looking at things, but I'm not sure people understand that by casting off our "problem" athletes, we set an example that is just as bad as those that choose to cheat.

Make no mistake, this case is all about societal stigma. It's a matter of what we, as a society, have decided is okay and what is not. Cocaine is attached to all sorts of negative mental images for us. Rightly so. But as far as doping goes, it should not. Is there anyone out there who believes that someone should be given a two year suspension for smoking hash? What about tobacco? What about drinking beer? What about eating French hot dogs? Team Danmark Menu anybody? Cocaine and hash sit right next to each other on the list of banned substances, does that make them equal? Does that make hash equal to HGH or steroids? It's such a pathetic system. We're regulating what our athletes can and can't do in their PRIVATE lives in the name of keeping sports "clean". And I think it's a farce. We do all these things because we want to set a "good" example and the concept just doesn't make sense.

And before people go crazy. No, I don't think that kids should do drugs. No, I don't think it's a good idea for anyone to do drugs. But you know what? I also don't think it's a good idea for people to eat fast food and smoke cigarettes. But they do. It's an ancient argument, but no one has ever satisfactorily argued the case as to why cigarettes, booze and fast food are legal and party drugs are not. What does being an athlete have to do with any of this? When did it become taboo for an athlete to drink a beer and eat a Big Mac? Why can't we teach people to make informed decisions instead of just blacklisting whatever is bad for them?

In order to make all of this more clear, let me explain my understanding of what has happened to Daniel.

1. He made a terrible choice (that clearly did not have anything to do with volleyball) and did something that was against the rules.
2. He got caught.
3. His future as a very good volleyball player has essentially been taken away from him.
4. People feel this is justified as a deterrent/warning to anyone else.

Why is this a good deterrent? The rules were there beforehand and they obviously didn't stop anyone from doing anything in this case. There are numerous current examples of athletes being caught for "doping" and obviously this didn't stop anyone from doing anything. The bottom line is that most people need to experience something for themselves before they can relate to it. People need to think about the extreme nature of the punishment before they judge Daniel. It's not just two years away from the sport. It's two years away from anything physical. No weight lifting. No beach volleyball. Nothing. It's a death sentence for a relatively young career and I can't bring myself to believe that this is justified in any way. It's not about cheating. It's about a mistake. I can't say it enough, a mistake. Yes, a dumb mistake, and a dangerous one at that, but it was not a conscious attempt to cheat. This isn't going to stop anyone from snorting cocaine in the future. If anyone thinks that, they're crazy.

I've always wondered why so called "party" drugs are included in athletic drug testing. It seems to me an unlucky circumstance that they stay in the system longer than other more "accepted" drugs like caffeine, alcohol and tobacco. All of which affect the human system in some way or another, by the way. As was brought to our attention by William on his blog, the metabolites that the body produces to ingest the drug can stay in your system for up to a month. So, why are we testing for those metabolites? Why aren't we testing for the actual drug which stays in your system for 1-3 days? It seems to me that if you want to prevent someone from getting an unfair advantage you'd want to stop them from using the drugs DURING a game - not look as far into their past as possible.

It's funny, this method of testing has actually made the sport look dirtier instead of cleaner. They looked as far as they could into his body history and found something that shouldn't be there. There is absolutely no evidence that he used it to boost his performance. Most indicators point to recreational use, possibly a mistake, possibly the product of someone else slipping something into a drink. But the end result is that the sport looks worse than it did before. For no good reason. The notion, however, that volleyball will be thought of as a "dirty" sport because of this is totally insane. I've played several different sports and I've experienced lots of negatives/positives in each. Just because someone tested positive for a drug doesn't really change my feelings about that sport. Any parent who would be afraid to let their child go to KIDSvolley because of this is daft.

I have another major problem with the system. Why was this made public? Why are we looking for bad publicity for volleyball and adding to the embarrassment of a semi-amateur athlete? I don't understand it. Daniel doesn't make a living from playing volleyball. Why is he being judged as if he does?

Okay, after all that. I'm not afraid to say that I'm possibly more angry with Daniel than almost anyone else. If for nothing else, our team needs him, and he let us down. But, he has apologized and he's taken the negative attention and the punishment like a man. He should be suspended and there should be major consequences. But, two years, essentially ending his career isn't acceptable. It's not an acceptable signal to send to our youth. One strike and you're out isn't right. And I don't know where the line is, three months, six months, maybe a year... Set up a time frame that allows for counseling or whatever else is necessary but let him come back and show that you can make an error and still be productive afterwards. If he tests positive again then he has shown contempt for the sport and for everyone who participates in it, including himself and obviously would deserve a more substantial punishment. But the first positive test does not warrant such a strong response.

The point is that we should be supporting and not blacklisting. We all have an interest in making sure our athletes are clean, but we also have an interest in helping them when they can't live up to our expectations. Athletes are only human and they don't deserve to be treated as examples.

New School/Old School!

I thought I would pass along a few things I found interesting:

I don't know if anyone out there would find this interesting, but for comparison's sake, there are some good quality videos from the boys "18 and Under" level at the most recent US national championships at a site called: www.middlehitter.com. There is a bar running across the top of the page and in the sub-menu under "Video" there is a listing for USAV Junior. Click on 2007 JO Open Championship and let the video load.

Admittedly, these are some of the best players in the country, but I think it is worth a look if there is anyone out there wondering what the difference in level is between Danish/European youth players/teams and those that come from the American system. I understand there are differences in why/how much/how youth sports are built up in the US and Europe, but it might be interesting for some out there to see what kind of level these kids are playing at. I personally think it is pretty impressive. It's also interesting to see the different styles of play. The orange team is from St. Louis (A team from the middle of the country) and they play a more typical, international style. Faster offense, more big, physical players and strong jump serves. The team in white is from the Pacific Palisades (A west coast team close to Malibu that I actually played for a long time ago when I was 16) they play a little bit more relaxed, slower tempo, smaller more ball control oriented players with a better feel for the game. In the US, the west coast has long dominated the volleyball scene, but, in recent years, the balance of power has slowly been shifting. I'm not sure, but this has to be one of the first times that a team from "back east" has won a Junior Olympic national volleyball championship.

I understand this may not interest everyone who reads this blog, but it interests me...

The other thing that I found FASCINATING was a little higher up on the video list, under the FIVB heading. 1981 Cuba vs. USA in the Canada Cup. Download the big file if you can, about 260mb but it is a complete set.

I don't really know how to feel about seeing something like this. I'm not sure if modern volleyball is even the same game anymore. It's just a whole different sport. If you don't feel like watching it on your own, I'll run you through some of the things I thought about while watching, in bullet form:

- It wasn't just Cuba that ran combinations on every play. The US did it also. Was the opposite just not that good/important back then?

-Could they run combinations on every play because they didn't know how to jump serve yet?
-But, then again, the middles were also passing at this point, so they couldn't expect perfect passing all the time right...right?
-Even if they weren't jump serving, those hook/windmill float serves look pretty nasty...

-With a really good hitter, is it better to just set high balls to the outside? The Cubans seemed pretty effective with their outsides.

-Didn't we switch to the colored ball because it was easier to see for the referees to call bad sets and for people watching on television to be able to see the ball? Well, it is easier to see the white ball than the colored ball, and since international referees pretty much don't ever call a bad set anymore, why did we switch?

-If you watch long enough, you'll see Tim Hovland standing in the US huddle during a timeout with an actual glass of water. Not plastic and not a bottle, but an actual glass of water which he then hands to the trainer to be cleaned after the time out.

-The tempo of the game is quicker. I don't mean the volleyball, I mean the time in between plays is shorter. Players run back to the service line and serve quickly. As a result, the game moves faster for the fans watching.

-Everyone plays defense. I miss this aspect of the game.

-I'd give a substantial amount of money to get one of those long sleeved, red, Cuba jerseys. Those things are nice!

-Somehow, I get the sense that these teams were more willing to experiment, and more able to make adjustments on the fly during the game. One of the outside hitters makes a dig on a shirt tip in position 2/3 area and can't get back outside to hit. So, the setter just sets the back row C to one of the middles who crushes it. I feel like in today's game the opposite is such a bigger factor, they hit so many garbage balls out of the back and front row that it effectively kill the creativity showcased by that one play. Not saying it's a bad thing, I just think it is interesting to see how much the opposite position has developed over the years.

-Is it just me, or do most of the Cubans look like Castro?

In any case, I was 1 year old when this match was played. I'm taken aback by the changes in the game during my lifetime. I'm not sure you could argue any other sport has developed as much in that time period...

And yes, that is Tom Selleck (#14) on the left side of that picture.

Ugh.

God that was a great Superbowl. Wasn't it? One transcendent play, lots of tension, an underdog coming back to win, it almost lived up to all the hype. It's just so much fun to watch sports when games are like that. Honestly, and this is a crazy thing to say considering the way he is regarded, but Bill Belichick choked. He turned into Marty Schottenheimer in the game that could have cemented him and his team as the greatest of all time. They got conservative when they had been playing wide open and aggressive all year long. And it cost them.

Besides feeling slightly obligated to write something about the Superbowl, I kind of needed some filler to beef up this match report from ASV. And normally, I try not to be too critical of the teams that we play against. In this case, I feel it's justified to say that ASV was horrible. When two teams step onto a court against one another, they enter into a kind of contract. They both pledge to do whatever they can to win the game and compete. On Sunday, ASV didn't fulfill their end of the bargain.

It's weird because, out of all the teams we've played against this year, ASV has had the most drastic fluctuation in their level of play. Earlier in the year, they looked like a team headed in the right direction. Sunday they played the worst match I've seen in recent memory. Yes, they were dealing with one starter who was out of place, but that does not excuse the absolute lack of emotion, effort or intensity that they brought into our gym. It was slightly embarrassing, and to borrow a thought from recent debate (a debate some might say is still ongoing) - I'm extremely glad that there were no television cameras anywhere near Marienlyst for this one. Airing this match on tv would set Danish volleyball back about twenty years. You could hear people in the stands having conversations from the court.

We played well, but were hardly pressed in any part of the game. All of our players played a substantial amount and as the scores indicate were equally successful in what they did. We've got a nice stretch of home (and close to home) games coming up which we can hopefully use to establish ourselves as the definite first seed heading into the playoffs. It's really important to generate some momentum for the end of the season, especially with Aalborg playing very well and Aarhus also improving. This Friday's game between the two is going to be exciting to follow. If Aarhus loses that one at home, I can't imagine them being able to get it together in time to make it to the playoffs.

Speaking of Aarhus, I watched their Saturday match on Gentofte's new webcam. I think it's an extremely exciting feature and the quality is good enough to follow the action. I might be a huge nerd, but by keeping my own score on a piece of paper I was able to enjoy the game a lot more. It's funny how much knowing the score and the context of each point makes a difference for watching a game. Anyways, thanks to Gentofte for offering the service, it would be great if there were a few more clubs that could set something up like this.

Big match for us this weekend, maybe the last time we see Middelfart this year...

Revisiting the revisiting of the Pokal

As I said before, I had a chance to see the broadcast of the Pokal final the other day and I was very impressed. In fairness to DK 4, they used to do a pretty good job as well, but this was clearly an improvement. Mostly, I think the difference was in the details. The sideline reporters, the pre/post match interviews and the slightly better quality of the technical elements all combined to make the broadcast feel more like an "event" and less of an everyday occurrence. Of course, the solid crowd and the new Odense Idrœtshal also contributed to the excitement.

I thought the announcers did a good job. Admittedly, they said quite a few nice things about me so I might be slightly biased, but generally I think they hit the right level of explanation to analysis. There's obviously been a lot of discussion as of late and I think the most interesting has been in relation to the extent one should inject "expert analysis" into the conversation. As was named in one of the discussions, Handball commentators spend very little time explaining the most basic rules. As a foreigner who had never heard of the sport before I came to Denmark, I feel well qualified to comment on the positive and negative aspects of their approach. On one hand, it is extremely irritating to hear an announcer explain the same rules over and over again. I've experienced this with American commentators doing volleyball and beach volleyball for years now. You can only hear that teams can score on every play now so many times before you go crazy. On the other hand, to bring it back to handball, I still have very little understanding of the basic rules. I find the sport interesting and especially suspenseful, but a lot of the time I find myself frustrated because I don't know why a player is given a 2 minute suspension or why a player is given a penalty shot. So, I can imagine what it's like to be flipping through the channels and see a player with the wrong colored jersey on the volleyball court. It must be confusing. But then again, it might just cause them to sit and watch for a little bit longer while they try to figure it out, or even better, to call someone they know who plays volleyball and ask what the deal is.

I don't think that an expert should "dumb it down" for an audience that doesn't understand the game. Because it doesn't really make a difference. People are caught up in the game by emotion, drama, intensity, athleticism, humor, etc... All the things that make a great story, also things that the announcer can enhance or highlight through insightful analysis. The basic rules are minor details in the bigger picture. I enjoyed watching the EM Handball semi-finals just as much as everyone else and I know a lot more about the sport now than I did four years ago. The fact that I just found out that the defense can't stand inside the goalie area is really irrelevant...

I agree 100% with Morten Piil in that there MUST be more slow motion replays. It's absolutely the only way to see a lot of the really small, but extremely important, things that happen on a volleyball court. Small touches in the block, middles who jump early in block or flinch in the wrong direction, hitters who hit through tiny openings in the block, setters that hide their set direction until the last second... There are a million things to see in these slow motion replays. Personally, I found myself delighted the relatively few times a play was revisited in slow motion. Yes, yes, I know that this is very difficult in relation to volleyball. There is a limited amount of time to setup and execute these replays because no one wants to break the natural rhythm of the game. But, in relation to many other sports, basketball or football (soccer) are good examples, the game is fluid and yet they still find time for replays. I would argue that American football has a huge advantage in being able to show virtually all the replays necessary for each and every play due to the consistent breaks. I think the normal volley viewer could get so much more out of the game if there was a higher priority put on analysis of slow motion replay.

I would be extremely interested if anyone could explain how the whole slow motion replay system works. Do the announcers get to signal somehow to the producers that they would like to go back and see a certain point again? Or do the producers just automatically show some replays that they feel the announcers will want to look at? Of course, live vs. tape delay broadcast also makes a big difference... Can anyone explain why there aren't more replays in a volleyball match?

Overall though, TV2sport and the announcers did a really good job.

I wanted to talk more about something completely different, but as this post is already pretty long, I'll save it for another time...

Aalborg...not in Aalborg for once.

It takes a solid 2.5 hours to drive to Aalborg from Odense. It's a drive that we've already had the pleasure of making a couple of times this year. And conceivably could be making two more times before the season is over.

Luckily, this weekend we got to play them at home.

I don't know if it was the unusual green floor in Hal 2, the setter change, the recent pokal title or the impending team Christmas dinner, but something had us playing well below our normal standard. To me it looked like the guys weren't really that motivated - there was little excitement or urgency in the things we were doing. We gave points away too easily and didn't do enough to score when we needed it. At the same time, for most of the first set we were close enough so as to not be too worried. It wasn't until late that Aalborg put together a run and pulled away from us. Unfortunately, no one looked very worried about losing the set.

The second opened where it ended, with Aalborg scoring points. At some point, the score was 5 or 6 to 1 and things looked bleak for us. But, here the game changed drastically. I think more than anything, we decided to inject a little more effort and emotion into our play and that, in turn, put more pressure on Aalborg. As the score indicates, after their early lead in the second set we essentially played them off the court. 74-45 speaks for itself.

I can't speak from their perspective, but I would definitely say that pressure was the key in the match. As soon as we were able to push them outside of their comfort zone - whether by serving tougher, receiving well against serves that in the first set would have resulted in bad passes or siding out at a much higher rate - they seemed to break down. And significantly, the emotion and fun swung from their side to ours.

Looking forward to at least one more trip up there at the end of the season!

The Christmas dinner afterwards was a success. Very hard to go wrong when you have lots of incredible food, beer, snaps and people. And of course aufguss.

In any case, I got a chance to watch the pokal final again and I have a few comments I'll post in the next couple of days.

POKAL

I think I've sufficiently shaken off the cobwebs of Sunday night's celebration to sit down and write something coherent about the Pokal final. Maybe. By the way, thanks to Fortuna and everyone out there for a great party, it was nice to be able to celebrate together and share the fun. I don't envy anyone who had to work the next day...

I haven't spent very much time analyzing what happened in the finals, I haven't really had the time. One thing that is immediately apparent to me though, is that there was a lot more pressure on us to win than I recognized beforehand. After Middelfart came into Marienlyst on the 9th and beat us so badly, everyone kind of accepted that we weren't the favorites any more. That the two teams were evenly matched. We might have even believed it ourselves - I, for one, was happy to accept not being the favorite. The point though, is that when we got into the match, all of the talking was behind us and somewhere in my brain I felt that we needed to win. Maybe, it was because I felt that we needed to re-establish ourselves and, most importantly, shake off the latent feelings from our recent loss to them. In a nutshell, another loss to Middelfart in such a short time, especially on the bigger stage of the pokal final could have meant huge problems for us for the rest of the season.

The match was a grind. Neither team ever had enough of a lead to feel comfortable at any point. So, we just kept grinding out the sideouts and taking whatever points we could. I haven't seen the match on tv yet (hopefully I'll get the chance at some point) so I don't know exactly how it looked from the outside but my feeling is that it was an okay match to watch. I don't think the level was extremely high, but I also don't think it was without charm. If nothing else, there was excitement throughout and some interesting things to look at.

A reporter asked me afterward what the difference was in the match and I had a hard time coming up with something definitive. At the time, I answered serving and passing (real original, Jordan). Middelfart (judging from their website) seems to think that their players weren't quite prepared to step up on the bigger stage and that we benefited from our collective experience in bigger games. More than anything, I think we were more pro-active, I think we did more than they did and I think the match shows that. We applied the pressure and we were therefore always a step ahead. And honestly, we played a little bit better at every spot. Look through the rosters, position against position, our guys were just that much better. I give them full credit though - we're going to have some battles coming up.

Honestly, I was really surprised to be named Pokal Fighter. And I wouldn't be afraid to write that I deserved it if I really thought I did, but truly it was a surprise. Not that I specifically think someone else should have gotten it, but really, anyone on our team could have received the honor. Shaun and Geo were both exceptional and everyone else contributed in huge ways. Matthias was stable as always, anchoring the passing and defense. Our middles both got big kills at important times and were active blocking, Middelfart was clearly not as effective as last time we played them. And Søe was the definition of what I think of when I hear "Pokal Fighter", in many ways he's our heart on the court. So, I'm extremely proud of the award and I'll have to clear out a big space somewhere around the house to be able to fit the trophy in...

It was great to see all the fans there. I missed it last year, but I don't remember seeing such a big crowd at a Pokal final before. It was nice to see both sides of the gym semi-full with people. I can only imagine what it would be like to play in there with a sold out crowd, it must be insane.

Now, we have to get ready for Aalborg and the rest of the season. And we might actually have an almost full roster - crazy.

ASV

I was a little disappointed that we didn't have a game scheduled this weekend. After the beating that we took last Wednesday, it would have been nice to be able to wash the stink off of us by playing again quickly. As it turned out, we had to wait until Tuesday in Aarhus to get back on the court.

The result of the match was a fairly convincing 3-0 win for us. Fairly typical for us this year, we played one really good set, one okay set and one set where we let the other team hang around much too long. It should be said, we were never really in danger of losing, and we responded when necessary, but besides the first set we didn't play to the top of our abilities.

ASV was weaker than the last time we played them. I'm not sure if it is the loss of the Brazilian middle or the poor play of their opposite, or a general team wide malaise, but they didn't offer very much opposition in this match. Maybe it was because I was so focused on our own side throughout the match that I didn't notice them very much.

In any case, we won and we played a lot better than we did on Wednesday. I'm not sure what it means for the pokal final on Sunday as Middelfart has pretty much dominated in all three of their matches since the Christmas break. We'll probably have to be even sharper in sideout and defense because, from what I can gather, they've done it by blocking a lot of balls and feeding Vandenburg on the right side.

One thing is for sure, they are the favorites heading into this one. They have all the momentum, a completely healthy team, confidence from their win over us and a better recent record. We have our work cut out for us and we know it - hopefully we can figure out a better way to move their block around and challenge them in other ways. Honestly, if I were a spectator, I'd be first in line on Sunday because I think this game has a chance to be really, really good...

Middelfart + Momentum

Well, last night was certainly a kick in the teeth. Sometimes, stats and scores don't tell the whole story about a match, in this case, the scores are VERY representative of how well we played. We didn't do anything well and Middelfart took full advantage of our inability to get any momentum going. They dominated the net, blocking with high efficiency and played solid defense behind it.

Excuses from our side: We were missing several important players. We had a bad day. We are saving ourselves for the pokal finals on the 20th. Blah, blah, blah...

In truth, we did have problems dealing with the absence of a strong opposite presence. For one, we didn't pass well enough to have enough variation in our offense and two, I didn't do a good enough job distributing the ball when I had the chance. Otherwise, there is absolutely no excuse for playing as poorly as we did. I think that the last time I was on the losing side of such a one sided beating was two years ago in the pokal semi finals in Gentofte. That was also a beating for the ages. Luckily, this one didn't mean as much in the overall scheme of things. We still have a decent lead in the standings and, more importantly, we have a chance for revenge in ten days in the pokal finals. Hopefully, by then we'll have some answers for our lack of players.

Last night's game got me thinking about team spirit. I think we've all had the experience of playing against a team that fed off of energy. In other words, a team that was ten times better when they were emotional and energetic. You could catch them on a day where they didn't have that energy and beat them easily, but once they got going it was difficult to reverse that momentum. Some of the HIK Aalborg teams from three and four years ago were like this. You could go up on them 2-0 and still not feel very safe because one or two blocks and all of a sudden the whole team would catch fire.

I mention this because I've often wondered where that comes from. Is it from certain individuals? Is it team chemistry? Is it a particular style of play? Is it based on performance? Volleyball is a peculiar sport in that each set is a whole new opportunity and therefore momentum can swing wildly at any point. Last night, I kept waiting for our team to rebound and to put some pressure on Middelfart and it never happened. It seemed that for every point we got, they got three and we were always behind. How can a team ever get momentum when the game unfolds like this? It's kind of a chicken and the egg debate, how can you get momentum without playing well? Does momentum come from good play or does good play come from getting excited and playing emotionally?

I think about the game last night and I think there are twenty things I could have done differently. I should have been more vocal, I should have been more positive and I should have tried to slow down the bad runs. But my question is, how does one stay positive when everyone is playing terribly, not the least of which, yourself? How do you create and sustain momentum when you are doing nothing right physically? I've never been able to do so, and I would like to get better at it. Anyone got any suggestions?