Soxbadger

Two weeks ago Texas hadnt beaten A&M and almost beat KU as well. They still have proven nothing outside of the Big 12, but they are for sure a tournament team. And yeah last year with the Big 10 I can only really comment on Wisconsin, and they lost Landry, Steisma to eligibility so the team in the tournament/ second part of the year was not the same as the team that was doing well in the first part. The lack of depth just got them killed against Arizona.

I think the Big 10 will get 6, Purdue and Illinois being the last 2. Id say the Big 10 will get 5 for sure. The argument of the Big 10 being down is vastly over rated.

Well the part that really got me was when they kept going to the stats guy in Toronto. I dont care how many crackpot formulas you can come up with, statistical formulas can not prove anything but chances. I can say that 50% of the people on this board are from Illinois, but that does not mean if I pick 2 posters randomly that I will have to get one from Illinois. In fact I could pick 100 posters and never get one from Illinois. Just like I could flip a penny and have it land tails 100 times in a row. It shouldnt happen statistically but it does. I liked the Dark Ages on History channel better.

Im just hoping MSU some how loses to NU. *Yeah right* After OSU, they are really the team in the Big 10 I was hoping Wisconsin would not have to face. Right now I think they are going to give some one a ton of trouble in the NCAA tournament. Especially if they get a smaller team that they can just physically punish.

I dont know if thats true, but id much rather face Indiana or Illinois than MSU for the 3rd time in 2 weeks. Ugly game and its just annoying have to play Neitzel if the game is close.

Damn already quoted me cause the game show was the 64,000 question not 48,000. Forever shall I be shamed.

Well Jimbo thats the $64,000 question, who of KU, OSU, and Wisconsin will get the STL bracket. I believe that the Midwest 1 is as follows. 1. OSU, if they dont lose to Michigan and win the BTT they are the 1 midwest. 2. Wisconsin, if they dont lose to MSU, and win the BTT they are the 1 midwest. 3. KU, if they win out, win the B 12 tournament, and both Wisconsin/OSU lose KU will be the midwest 1. KU has some what of a screw job because eventhough its in the midwest, its part of the Big 12 which has a large base in Texas. Comparitively, Big 10 has 0 connection to the South, so even if it gets 2 1 seeds, they will almost 100% be going to the East and Midwest. UCLA has the West seed in the bag after yesterday's win.

Well KU is also a 1 and at Chicago on the bracket, so would it atleast mean Wisconsin is considered a higher 1? All these changes to the bracket rules make it difficult to keep up with.

How come Kansas fans still cant understand that regardless of whether they get a 1 or 2 seed that Kansas has a 90% chance of coming to Chicago. It has nothing to do with the seeding or bracket name, and everything to do with protected seeds, pods, etc. SIU at a 3, which is what I was saying in the MVC tournament thread. And since Wisconsin has the play in game does that mean Lunardi has them as the #1, 1?

Why are these arguments exclusive? A good lawyer will make the following argument: Jamar Smith was injured and concussed after the accident. Because of this injury he was no longer capable of making well thought out decisions. In fact, he may not have been able to even answer simple questions like "How many fingers are being held up" or "What year is it?" Due to Mr. Smith's state of mind from the injury he can no way be held guilty for the decisions that he made after the accident, because he was not thinking straight. This includes the decision to drive home a destroyed vehicle, not call 911, and every other stupid thing he did. Not sure why driving home a decimated Lexus in a snow storm falls under the category of "common sense" or "good decision making." He could have easily crashed again and killed them both.

Washington State up 23-22 against UCLA. Little Dick Bennet has Washington State playing some Badger Basketball circa 1999. That point total is something to tip your hat to.

I only think 1 of Kansas or A&M get a 2, the other will be a 3. Also I think that because of SIU's higher RPI that they just might give them the nod over memphis. SIU has a better SOS, 7-2 against top 50 versus 1-2. I just think that the comitte may select fewer MVC teams, but give the best one a high seed. Especially if they win out the MVC tournament. Also a few teams in the top 12 still have 1 more game to lose. (edit) And the UCLA v WSU game tonight could play a huge role. If WSU manages to beat UCLA (not out of the world of possibilities as UCLA only won by a few at home) it would be hard to say that WSU are out of the 2 seed picture. But then again theyd have to beat USC too. Its just hard at this moment, and I think because SIU has a chance to win out that the 2 is still a chance.

Well I dont watch much MVC, but I think SIU will get a 3 seed this year, and that 1 of Memphis or SIU may get a 2 seed as well.

Yeah id take that gaurantee as well. I think self will make sure that they realize the first game is the most important game.

You should first start with a gaurantee that your team will make it out of the first round? Oddly depsite being ranked considerably higher than Wisconsin its KU that hasnt won its first round game in 2 years.... (Edit and haha) Im not saying the Badgers are a lock for the Elite 8, I just believe that they stay in every game until the end. They have veteran players and get to the line often. I think that will add up to wins in close games. And who really knows, they lost Butch so the team that is going to play on Saturday will drastically be different. It may make them a little more explosive, it may sink them.

Well you must not watch closely, because even a Cwsguy (a marquette fan I believe) knows what you are posting is the exact opposite philosophy of the Wisconsin team. Even the standing around watching Tucker. Wisconsin passes the ball with pretty good efficiency, the only thing Tucker does that other Wisconsin players do not is that he has the green light on every single shot.

Jimbo, just so you know here are the stats on 3-point shooting, my question is this: IF Wisconsin relies on 3-point shooting why are they at the bottom of the big 10 for 3 point shots attempted, but at the top for 2 pointers? Only MSU and Michigan shot less 3 pointers. In comparison, Wisconsin has shot the 3 most fg's in the Big 10. That means they shoot a lot more 2's compared to everyone else.

ROFLMAO This is exactly the opposite of the way the Badgers play. They run the "Flex offense" which means that they post every single player. They get to the line because 95% of all their offensive possessions are drives or post up shots. Dude Im gonna ask you an honest question: have you watched the badgers play outside of the OSU game?

Yeah Wiscy is unimpressive thats why the manhandled Pitt who many have going to the FF4. Thats why even after losing their top C at OSU they came within making 2 FT's of winning that game and being the unanimous 1. I really dont understand how you can say Wisconsin is unimpressive. How many teams have more quality wins? And I dont see how Im being "the billy packer of the big 10" when all Im doing is putting 2 teams that have been rated in the top 5 for the last couple of months into the final 4. Thats not really a stretch at all. I mean its one thing to say a team is not going to the Final 4, its another to say that a team is "unimpressive" when they have the following resume: Against the Current Top 25: Wisconsin: 3-1 (Wins against OSU, Pitt, Marquette. Losses: OSU) OSU: 1-3 (Wins agaisnt Wisconsin, Losses: Wisconsin, Florida, UNC) KU: 1-1 (Wins against Floida, Losses: A&M) Florida: 1-1 (Wins against OSU, Losses: KU) Hmm yeah Wisconsin has been unimpressive. Care to make any statements regarding your claim of why Wisconsin has been unimpressive this season? Is it the fact their only losses have come to all tourney teams on the road or at neutral site? And the funniest part, Wisconsin is "soft". Care to explain that one? Seeing as "soft" is usually for a team with no defense, not very good at rebounding, lacks size, which are basically the exact opposite of Wisconsin. Atleast when I talk about your team or other Big 12 teams, I actually talk about what has transpired in the season. I dont just make things up like: "Oh Kansas is soft".

No I just pointed that what seperates teams in my opinion is their ability to win games that they are supposed to win. Florida, Wisconsin, OSU, UCLA have all shown that ability. KU, A&M, not so much. I know your a big 12 guy so Ill take your comments with a grain of salt. You say "slump" when its really hard to say that Wisconsin is in a slump. They lost 2 games, 1 of them to the best team in the nation right now, and the other to one of the most talented young teams in the nation who have a player just starting to get healthy in Raymar Morgan. Slumping would be losing to a team like Colgate, or some outrageous loss that should never happen. Losing away to tournament teams really shouldnt be a "slump." Especially as OSU had the #2 class last year and MSU #17 so they are of course going to be playing better at the end of the year as compared to the beginning. And im not sure how you say "by my logic" with Tennessee. I just pointed out that the 4 teams I chose all have won games that they are supposed to win. That even their losses are not bad losses. Thats a direct to comparison to KU and why even though they may have top 4 talent, I would not pick them to go to the final 4.

And that means... Many people picked A&M who lost last night at Texas. Wisconsin's last 2 losses were to: MSU and OSU. MSU beat Texas. OSU is the #1 team in the nation. Even if Wisconsin beat OSU, your statement would still remain the same as when Wisconsin played OSU, some one had to lose. OSU hasnt lost since they played in Madison. Florida, a team playing for nothing at this point, who went through the exact same stretch of poor play last year right before the tournament. The reason that these losses do not impact me as much as they would for another team, is that Florida has already proven itself. Its much harder for Florida to get up for a game against Tenn or Vanderbilt, than it is for the Tenn or Vanderbilt to get up for Florida. Beating Florida is their season, where as if Florida wins those games no one basically cares. Not to mention they were down 20+ and almost had the ability to come back on the road. Now in the tournament they are going to be playing at neutral/ sites that are close to Florida. Florida has 0 losses at home. OSU has 0 losses at home. Wisconsin has 0 losses at home. UCLA has 0 losses at home. Even if UCLA loses at WSU this week, why it would it really effect anything? Almost no team goes through the entire conference schedule and does not lose more than 1 road game. Right now OSU is there, but they still have to play Michigan which could be a real trap game for them (another team playing for nothing versus a team who's season will be made by this game.) Are you aware that the teams you are questioning, prior to the last 6 games, had only lost 2 games the entire season. So if the schedule was different and Wisconsin perhaps played @MSU and @ OSU earlier in the season, and the last 2 games had been Illinois, Iowa, etc. Would that all of a sudden mean that they were a better team just because they most recently had a better record? No They dont make the schedules, and the reality is that unless your in a powder puff conference like the Big 12, you are not going to get many free passes.

Atleast Paul Maier understands that Jesus's name was not really Jesus Christ. I dont know how many times Ive had to get in that argument in my life. Not many Jews were walking around with Greek names.

NM i think that the Sox at the top just means thats the score from yesterday. Kind of a strange intro for the article.

Three teams I feel the most confident about: OSU, Wisconsin, Florida. The last team I think is a real toss up and dependent on a lot of factors. Well they are all a toss up and dependent on a lot of factors, but the teams that I already listed I believe on 80%+ of the nights will beat teams that they are supposed to beat. That is what seperates them from the other schools, is that in the first few rounds they are least likely to suffer a let down. Now once it gets to the Elite 8, its a whole different animal as the difference in talent is marginal. But the 3 teams I have listed all have either A) beat the best team in their own conference, B. beat the best team in another power conference, c) have only lost to top 5 teams. The 4th selection I guess Ill begrudgingly go with UCLA over UNC. Im gonna go with defense on this one and I think that UNC's youth and run and gun style may lead to them losing. So my 4 as of now are: Wisconsin, OSU, UCLA, Florida. I know Florida hasnt looked great lately, but none of these games have really counted for them. If anything these losses are going to make them more focused and less prone to a letdown in the tourney. I like OSU and Wisconsin because I believe that they have really played tough opponents and shown that the only time they are going to lose is away to a tough opponent. Between the both of them only 1 time have they been blown out (OSU at Florida). The biggest concern I would have with these 2 teams is how the tourney is going to be called. If its Big 10 style, OSU and Wisconsin are going to out physical about 90% of the teams. If they are calling it really tight, Wisconsin and OSU may get some foul trouble. Thats odd to say about Wisconsin who has not had a player foul out this entire year, but Big 10 play is just so drastically different than almost every other conference. The amount of contact is staggering, and with Butch down that is 1 less center to have 5 fouls.

Well thats the problem for Texas, KU can wear down Durant.