Soxbadger

This post is some what mind boggling. Do you have any reason to say this beyond your pure homerism? Wisconsin has had 70+ points scored on them: 3 times Kansas has had 70+ scored on them: 5 times, including 2 times in the last 2 games. The only good defensive teams you have played this season have beat you, yet you think you are going to beat arguably the best defensive team in the big 10? Im sorry but if Kansas had the ability to beat Wisconsin they would have beaten AM or Tech. Does Kansas outside of the Florida win even have a victory against a top 25 opponent outside of the Big 12? Its one thing for you guys to come here and knock Illinois, but come on if KU is in the Big 10 you are fighting for 3-4 spot with indiana. You are no where near OSU or Wisconsin in terms of winning. You may have more McD's etc, but that does not mean that when you show up that they are just going to give you the victory. Its clear that you guys have not watched Wisconsin play, and are still relying on the old "Dick Bennet" style. I think there is a reason most of the national media is saying that Wisconsin is one of the top 4 teams, where as they are not saying it about KU. Oh and on this: GP MIN PTS REB AST Player A: 25 20.9 9.6 2.2 2.8 Player B:25 30.1 10.4 3.0 6.3 Assists TO Steals: Player A: 70 38 14 Player B: 157 52 58 One has played the Badgers, one has not. They are both freshman also, didnt want you crying about how Collins didnt have enough experience.

Sure thing Although i dont want to jinx Wisconsin by dealing with a KU fan and getting some of your first round germs on my team.

KU or Wisconsin?

I really dont understand this: They rely on Tucker to much. If anything they have completely scaled back his role in the offense and generally he gets his points late in the game when the Badgers are rolling. Some times like against Iowa he just cant miss, but lets look at the Badgers marquee wins and who was the biggest contributor: Pitt: Tucker 32, Butch 27 Marquette: Tucker 28 OSU: Tucker 17, Kam Taylor 25 In the Pitt game Butch was the biggest factor eventhough Tucker scored 32. He was the reason the game was broken wide open with his 3-point shooting. Against OSU it was Taylor who really did the job. Its not that concerning that he shoots 2x as many shots as everyone else, because his fg% is at .486 plus he gets to the line a lot. As a side note, Tucker has played less minutes than Taylor

So why would you be confident against a Wisconsin team that makes great line up changes and plays its strengths well? If anything that is a match up nitemare for the Jayhawks.

But with a 10% shooting margin advantage, you should have won by far more points. The reason you did not was because of second chance shots. 29-65 30-56 They shot 9 more times and had 5 less ft's attempts, but still kept it close. Recipe for a loss usually.

You won by 2 points. Also Noah had 17, plus you gave up 17 offensive rebounds. Im not going to lie, if you outshoot the team 54% to 44% Id hope you would win.

Kaun 6-11 Arthur 6-9 Wright 6-8 Jackson 6-8 Considering that Wisconsin plays 3 players with that height at one time, hard to list them all a C's. Butch- 6-11 Steisma 6-11 Chappel- 6-10 -- Krabbenhoft- 6'7 Landry 6'7 Notice how our SF are the same size as 1 of your C's. I defintely think youd have trouble.

So have I, and I think the Big 12 is vastly over rated. Florida also lost to FSU. Wisconsin beat FSU. Wisconsin must be the best by your logic right?

KU would have no chance against Wisconsin. The only type of team that can beat Wisconsin is disciplined on both ends of the court. As for A&M beating KU, thats like saying Indiana beat Wisconsin. Does that mean IU is better than KU? No it just means that: 1) Kansas is not that great of a team. Top 5 teams almost never lose at home, especially when they are the higher ranked team. The only reason for this is because Self is not a very good coach. KU has the talent to go undefeated at home every year, they just do not have the coaching. 2) IU is one of the pre-eminent programs in the last 50 years. 5 national titles, to win at Assembly hall you have to flat out beat Indiana. Wisconsin did not play well enough to over come that. Now who as A&M beaten outside of the Big 12? I see a loss to a bad LSU team, a loss to UCLA, the rest of the ranked teams they have played have been all Big 12 opponents. Does not really address the argument of why Big 12 teams should be getting respect. Its clear you have not watched a single Badger game. Otherwise you would know the answers: Sherron: Mike Flowers Julian Wright: Krabbenhoft, Landry. Both of those guys are not much better than players that Wisconsin has already played and handled. How would you stop the flex offense? How would you keep your players out of foul trouble? Wisconsin has 3-4 guys who can play legimiate C position, hows Sacha Kohn?

Big 10's 2 best teams > Big 12 2 best teams By a pretty sizable margin. Kansas would be 3rd in the Big 10, A&M 4th or 5th (thats including Kansas). Wisconsin and OSU would be 1,2 in the Big 12.

Well correct me if Im wrong but 2 things: A) Since Walker has been out they have done better. B. Walker wont be playing in the tournament, so why should they make it just because they over came adversity? That does not make them a better team, it just makes them a better story. Now I think both K-State and Illinois are at the same place. I just dont understand how 1 win against Texas by 1 point makes K-State a better team. Especially if Texas was in the Big 10 they would be about the 6th best team in the conference (they already lost to MSU) and there only good win was against a vastly over rated LSU. Texas's hype is based on Durant, not on the team being any good. The problem is because the big 10's top 2 teams are so good, the rest of league is getting a bad rap.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/bubblewatch?id=43 Some interesting things: Now lets break down the Illinois record: 18-9 (6-6 big 10) 2 losses to top 5 teams (OSU and Wisconsin) 18-7 And of those 3 were to top 25 teams at the time (2 of them on the road) And lets look at K-State: 18-7 (7-3) big 12 2 of their losses were to top 15 teams away so we can take that out: 18-5 Of those losses, none were against top 25 teams. I just dont understand how K-State is in, and Illinois is not. Unless the Big 12 gets 2 auto bids, one for north/south? So which is a better resume: 18-5 with losses to unranked teams or 18-7 with losses to 3 ranked teams, 2 of them on the road.

Well since there is no where else to put it I guess Ill post it here. http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=193#S=193&a...60&T=110847 Its a link to the Wisconsin scout board, but in the thread there are a bunch of "South Park" pictures of different college head coaches. My favorites are: Saban Paterno Freidgen Stoops

If your unspecific enough you can always just hope to piggy back on some one elses argument.

And since Benson pulled one of those: "I f***ed up so im gonna pretend im injured" The bears went away from the game plan of pounding the ball. Which put even more pressure on Grossman.

Its just really hard to guess what the selection comittee will give more weight to. If Wisconsin wins at OSU, I do not think there is any chance of Wisconsin not getting the 1 seed from the Big 10, barring the Big 10 getting no 1 seed. With 2 wins against OSU, a win against Pitt and Marquette, how could you deny Wisconsin just because they lost in a meaningless tournament? And I do think its possible for the Big 10 to get 2 1 seeds. Had Florida lost to Kentucky, OSU and Wisconsin would have most likely been 1 in 2 in rankings. If Wisconsin and OSU only lose to eachother from here on out, why would they all of a sudden not be one of the top 4 teams? Plus if UCLA or UNC lose again it will make it even harder to keep the second big 10 team out.

I dont think ive ever heard Grossman called: "Fundamentally unsound" It seems like your saying by being short and slow hes "fundamentally unsound" but that would be the exact opposite of fundamentals. If you look at the tape I dont think youll see any fundamental problem with the snap. He didnt back out to early, he didnt flinch, etc. So what exact fundamental is unsound? The growing fundamental?

I dont agree that the Big 10 tournament will have any real impact on the OSU/Wisconsin seeding. First of all the Big 10 tournament ends moments before the selections are made, which gives the committee no flexibility to wait it out and see what happens. Second of all if Wisconsin and OSU split, I would have to say that it would be very hard to deny Wisconsin the 1 seed. OSU's only good victory is at home against Indiana. Wisconsin has beaten Pitt at home, and Marquette on the road. If Pitt goes in as a 2 seed, Marquette as a 3-4, it would be very hard to beleive that Wisconsin would only get a 2 seed. Rock, I agree with you 100%. I think OSU rightfully should be below Florida, UNC, and Wisconsin, until the OSU-Wisconsin game. And at that point everything could be much different. I think there is a serious chance the Big 10 gets 2 1 seeds.

Either Rock is being sarcastic. Or its the fact that OSU has not beat anyone in the top 25 on the road. So far their best win would be, Indiana at home. Not really a resume a top 5 team would generally have. Most of their ranking comes from the hype surrounding their freshman. Im not saying OSU is not a great team, just that at this point (prior to them beating Wisconsin @ OSU) its hard to understand how they are ranked above UNC and Wisconsin who both beat them, albeit on the road but what else can you compare? Also the higher ranked you are the harder the teams play against you. Works out well for Wisconsin because we play PSU and Minnesota, so hopefully they are all excited about taking down 2 ranked OSU, and not 3 ranked Wisconsin.

Bears o-line had difficulty pass blocking all year when they were in forced passing situations. That is why it was so imperative to get the running game going so that they could throw on downs that were not necessarily passing downs. I cant help but think that Olin was trying to get those snaps out a little quicker causing some problems.

Well that is exactly the point. The parent, not the govt, should be telling their kid what to do. See there is a subtle difference there. The parent can say: Johnny you better stand up during the pledge or you will be grounded. The Parent's actions can not be unconstitutional, because they are not govt action. Parents, not the teacher, not the school, not the govt, should be the ones telling their children what is "respectful."

OC called the plays that were int's including one which was a timing pass that came directly from the booth. As to the fumbled snaps, who knows the reason for that. Its not like Rex fumbled a ton of snaps this year, so whatever the reason, be it Kreutz or Rex, it was just a fluke. If the Bears dont fumble the ball with Benson, the whole game plan is entirely different. Thats my opinion.

Just because you do not value the rights of 7th graders, does not mean that they do not value them. How is it not similar? In all 3 cases you have groups who are having a different set of rules placed on them. Case A: Based on color of skin Case B: Based on gender. Case C: Based on age. Unless you can find any sort of rule where adults have to stand up during the pledge. Because I think most would agree that any law requiring adults to stand during the pledge would be blatantly unconstitutional. And quit backpeddling, you used the: "How many teachers have been arrested" As an argument that none have, so therefore its not an issue. When the real reason 0 have is because they could not be. Sorry but if you werent clear enough thats not my fault.

It was clearly 95% the OC's fault. I doubt Rex called for Benson to come in the game and fumble, which I believe was the most crucial moment in the game.