Rex Hudler

QUOTE (Heads22 @ Jan 29, 2012 -> 09:26 PM) I totally forgot the best part of yesterday's win. Seeing Hoiberg visibly get pissed. Chris Allen did some dumbass Chris Allen s***. Hoiberg goes up to him, grabs his jersey, pushes him back with his fist and verbally berates him. It made Hoiberg even dreamier. Caught the last 10 minutes or so of the Iowa St. - Kansas game yesterday. Great atmosphere. Looked like it would have been a ton of fun!

Watching Evansville is so draining. Having moved away I don't get to see them very often. But having grown up with the program, being friends with many players while in school - including current head coach Marty Simmons - it kills me when they struggle. They have a lot of obstacles to face compared to the other programs they are facing, yet it can be done. It's tough when the proverbial deck is stacked against you and the margin for error is extremely small.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Jan 29, 2012 -> 11:11 PM) Ahh gotcha. Was curious why a non mvc guy would bring up an extremely random valley game. He was thinking of his fellow IU fan on here and knew he would be watching his alma mater on the U since he sees very few games a year. I immediately knew it was all about me, didn't you?? ;-)

Pet Peeve - I hate it when announcers refer to it as first overtime when a second has not materialized (and especially when it doesn't appear imminent). It's not the first OT until a second exists, its just overtime! It's like calling a guy John Doe Sr. that doesn't have a kid or a even a pregnant wife.

Damn, just flipped on the BTN and caught the last minute and a half of the IL-MN game. Not sure what happened the first 58 and a half, but the last 90 seconds were pretty wild. Dumb, dumb, dumb foul at the end by the Illini. Leonard got called for it and fouled out but Paul swatted his arm and could have gotten hit too.

I can see where the Tom Crean bias comes from Badger. No one in Wisconsin not a fan of Marquette must like him. And this guy's top notch analysis includes "Sheehey seems like a punk". Whatever. F'in dumbass. We may not win, but I'll take the first half. I really thought we missed shots we should have made. Wisconsin's vaunted defense didn't seem to stop us from getting to the rim. We'll see how the 2nd half plays out.

Interesting stat to keep in mind during tonight's Indiana @ Wisconsin game. In IU's last 10 trips to the Kohl Center Wisconsin has won all ten. In those ten games.... 3 have been decided by 3 points or less 7 have been decided by 9 points or more 0 have been decided by betweeen 4-8 points I'm hoping IU can hang around and keep it closer to the 3 points and have a chance to win near the end. But if Wisky comes out hot and IU can't fight through it (see @ OSU), it may get ugly.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 17, 2012 -> 08:09 PM) It has nothing to do with the NCAA, it has everything to do with access. In football the big conferences control the access to the games where the most money is paid out. If you create a tournament where "everyone has a chance" you give more teams access and therefore are likely to split the money more. The NCAA being more involved, generally means more access to everyone and thus the revenues being split more. If all bowl revenue was split between all conferences (even if its done by game, because game doesnt take into account whether its the Sunshine Bowl or the NC) the big conferences would get less money in the current system. Hence why they dont want to turn the BCS into the NCAA tournament. Sorry I misunderstood your point. I completely agree with that.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 17, 2012 -> 07:50 PM) Rex, Look at the numbers I posted, "In 2012 the Big10 got over $40 mil from their 2 BCS games and another 10mil+ from other bowl games." http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-0...ball-tournament Total payout for all conferences was 180mil, of which the Big10 received $18.5mil ($240k per game). The Big10 usually receives more money from 1 BCS game than the entire NCAA tournament payout. Yeah, but you made it sound as if the NCAA was pilfering all of the basketball money. Or at least that's the way I read it. The money in football is bigger. When you can sell 60k seats at $150/pop plus the TV contract it adds up. Plus you have fewer schools with their hands in the pie. Maybe I misunderstood your point. What I'm trying to say is I don't think football schools are getting a bigger % of the revenue because the NCAA is not involved. The bowls do quite well for themselves and get a nice chunk of the pie. Maybe the NCAA gets more because the TV money funnels through them?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 17, 2012 -> 11:49 AM) ryanDFischer Bryan Fischer Notre Dame confirms Gunner Kiel has enrolled at Notre Dame. What the golly heck is up with that kid? Why can't he make up his gosh darned mind?

QUOTE (He_Gawn @ Mar 25, 2011 -> 11:37 PM) Actually IU had no returning scholarship players. They brought back 2 walk ons. Thats never happened before in NCAA basketball history, and it happens to one of the bluebloods. Looking back, its kind of a miracle to see what Crean is doing. If I was Painter, I'd bolt for Mizzou. Purdues best run ever = IU locking down the state more than it ever has? What a slap in the face. Actually, I know of one other time it happened.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 14, 2012 -> 02:51 PM) Which is ultimately what I believe happens. No way are the power conferences going to turn football into basketball where they get a pittance from the NCAA. How do you figure they get a pittance? The money goes through the NCAA which covers its expenses and gets its money and then distributes the rest to the schools. In football, the bowls control the money, cover their expenses and gets its money and then distrubutes to the schools, which in most cases is actually distributed to the conferences and then evenly to all schools. The only difference is more teams in basketball waters down the pool. I would venture to guess that the bowls probably take a bigger chunk in football than the NCAA in hoops, though I have zero proof.

QUOTE (danman31 @ Jan 13, 2012 -> 06:20 PM) Yeah, but it's better than cutting everyone off at 4. It allows for more information about the teams because bowl games are generally good matchups so everyone has an extra chance for a quality win and you can't b**** about being left off when you don't win your bowl game. Honestly, I think a 4-team playoff is a mistake and I'm very pro playoffs. And wtf was with the NCAA president saying a 16-team playoff is too many games on the players' bodies? FCS champ North Dakota State played 15 games this year. Somehow their bodies are more able to handle that? They seriously say the dumbest things all to avoid a playoff. 12 game regular season, conference championship, four rounds of playoffs. Two teams would play 17 and four would play 16 in that scenario. Adding the 12th game a few years ago really made it difficult to put together anything more than a final four.

QUOTE (danman31 @ Jan 13, 2012 -> 06:13 PM) Even with just 10 teams the Big 12 is the second best conference in the country. Texas, OU, TCU, Ok State, heck even West Virginia just won a BCS bowl. I'd like to see the bowls return to the way they were before the BCS and then have a title game that picks the top two teams that won bowl games. That's probably more effective at getting the best two teams in the title than a contrived 4-team playoff. That would be no better than what we have now. What happens when there are three teams that win their bowl games and all deserve a shot? Or what about years where there is one clear cut best team? Make them play again? You could at some point have four teams that seem pretty equal or one team that is clear cut and 3 or 4 others with little or any separation behind them. Any plus one simply has to be the top four ranked teams 1 v 4 & 2 v 3.

QUOTE (danman31 @ Jan 11, 2012 -> 01:31 AM) Honestly, I think you read the rivals or scout boards too much if you think stuff like that is a huge problem. It's a problem because of how awful of a thing it is, but I don't think it happens all that often. I think you may be right. lol

Thought some of you may find this interesting, some may not. I did a comparison of Alabama and Michigan's last 5 recruiting classes which would have comprised of the players on this year's roster. I am only guessing that other teams would show similar numbers but I'll leave that up to anyone that wants to check another team. This is in regard to the constant complaints of oversigning I keep reading. Please note I am not saying there are zero situations that I or most people feel would be unethical, but it may be much less than people want to think. The correct comparison for this year's team should be 2007-2011. Alabama signed 133 kids in that 5 yr period, an average of 26.8/year. Note that is under the limit that Michigan can take should they choose. -- of those 133 (Quinton Dial went to JUCO initially so he was signed twice. I counted him once), 82 were on this year's current roster, well under the limit. This is an attrition rate of 38%. Keep in mind that 5 players left early for the NFL. Michigan on the other hand signed 114 kids, an average of 22.8/year. -- of those 114, only 68 were still on the roster this year. This is an attrition rate of 40%. Michigan has had one player leave early for the NFL out of those classes. What those #'s tell me is that Michigan screwed up by not signing enough kids. I don't see a hell of a lot of difference here other than Michigan is way under the limit with players from those classes. These numbers can easily been found on either Scout's "commitment lists" or Rivals, along with current roster.

LSU 20 Alabama 13

QUOTE (Boogua @ Dec 31, 2011 -> 07:14 PM) I underestimated Crean as a coach. He is amazing at gameplanning. To be able to take out potential mismatches out of their game by getting them into foul trouble is pretty special. He effectively took Anthony Davis out of the game with early foul trouble. UKs defensive anchor and a huge energy guy. And now he was able to effectively take Buford, Thomas, and Sullinger out of their game by hampering all three of them with foul trouble. To know that tOSU relies on those three so heavily on offense and then to be able to get all of them in foul trouble. Perfect. tOSU is usually able to hide their lack of depth by staying out of foul trouble. That is a strength of their team. Not fouling. Not against Crean though. Or maybe it was homecourt advantage. Who knows? -- I'm admittedly biased. I'm a huge illini fan, so I hate IU basketball (I hate tOSU too and have watched a lot of their games). Congratulations on IUs two huge wins. I wish Weber could get us wins like that. I just honestly think the game was a bit fishy. A win is a win though. Congrats. There is no rule that says a player with two fouls HAS to sit out the rest of the first half. That is the coaches choice and if it hampers their team, it's his problem. Crean often plays guys with two fouls in the first half. He is careful with their minutes, but he doesn't always eliminate them from the game plan. I remember when coaches used to take a guy out after his 3rd, but hey I'm old.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Dec 28, 2011 -> 03:28 PM) http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/...ing-partnership Sounds like the end of Pac/Big expansion. Probably did the numbers and it just doesnt make sense to add 2 more teams if at least 1 wont be in the top half in revenue. The key to this deal is the Big Ten will stay at 8 conference games instead of going to 9 in 2017 as previously announced.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 20, 2011 -> 02:18 PM) He got what he deserves, that moron could have saved alot of trouble by forwarding some emails. Idiot. This is like the O'brien situation when Matta came in, new era, hopefully cleaner. I hope so. I think a strong Michigan and Ohio State are good for the Big Ten and college football. The conference seems to take a hit nationally when one or both are down. That said, I'm not sure how much faith I have in Meyer being cleaner. It may not be fair, but he has always seemed like a used car salesman to me. I just don't trust him. Granted, he's a good used car salesman in terms of recruiting. If he does it cleanly, I think it's great for the conference.

Thanks Rock. The penalties were about what I expected. Relying on precedent is dangerous because there are always differences in each case. For example, Alabama didn't even get the FTM or LOIC charge and got a two year bowl ban. From a big picture perspective, these penalties aren't something OSU can't work around fairly easily so while they seem harsh, I'm thinking they shouldn't sweat it. In my mind (which is pure opinion) the following are what made OSU's penalties stiffer than what they expected. -- Being a relatively recent previous offender. I'm not sure if they fell into "repeat offender" status, but you can't tell me it doesn't weigh on a committee's collective mind. The committee is made up of humans, not a mysterious beast called the NCAA. -- The feeling there was more but there were people that did not cooperate. I don't think they overtly give stronger penalties for this because they can only go by the evidence in front of them, but I don't buy that it does not affect one's subconsious at least a little. -- Real or not, but perceived arrogance by OSU in the process. Gene Smith's repeated statements about it being isolated and not an institutional problem only to have new stuff come out. I'm not saying everyone in the university knew or participated, but my question is, how could he be so sure? Obviously he was wrong. -- The deception by Tressell. -- A new NCAA President who has already called for harsher penalties. OSU gets caught in the crossfire of bad timing here. Lastly, I wouldn't be so sure that opting out of a bowl this year would leave them free and clear next year. Using this year to OSU's advantage may have been perceived as weak and not substantial enough and a two year ban could have been imposed. It may not have, but I have to think that when a school self-imposes penalties which are deemed not severe or perceived as strategic to lessen the blow, humans will take that into consideration. Now if OSU was 10-2 and going to a BCS game this year and self-imposed, that would be different. All of the above may not be accurate, but it seems reasonable to think it could be.

Looking for clarification. ESPN's story reported 5 scholarships per year plus the 4 Ohio had previously self-imposed. Cleveland paper reads 5 total + the 4 for 9 over three years. Anyone know what the correct total is and how they are to be broken out over those three years?

QUOTE (He_Gawn @ Dec 12, 2011 -> 07:04 PM) Exactly. There isn't one game on the schedule that is a "guaranteed loss" like we have had the past 3 years. We have a stud player (Zeller), a clutch/nails leader (Hulls), a heck of a 2nd scoring option (Watford), and one of the most improved players in the conference (Oladipo). We have the athletes to compete now, and while IU may now be "overrated", they have all the confidence in the world. Add in a top 3 recruiting class next year, suddenly they are title contenders once again. I think it's unfair to call Zeller a stud player. Zeller is a good player, even very good depending on how strictly you define the terms. What makes him very good in my mind is he makes others around him better. He has good basketball skills and is talented. He creates steals and can pass. Not flashy attributes, but ones that help the team. He will allow others to shine. But when I think of stud player, I think of someone like Sullinger who is dominant and NBA ready (or damned close). Zeller is far from a one or two and done player. Which makes me happy. On a separate note, I would have voted OSU number one in the poll this week. Losing to Kansas in Phogg Allen Fieldhouse without your best player is no reason to fall in the polls.

QUOTE (Boogua @ Dec 12, 2011 -> 10:15 AM) It was interesting how the game played out. As one poster in the thread said earlier "the refs let them play". While that is mostly true, it didn't seem all that true in regards to Anthony Davis. If he's able to play 30+ minutes the game wouldn't have been all that close. Also interesting is that Kentucky and Indiana shot the same amount of FTs. This is taking into account the fact that UK was up late and got 4 FTs because IU had to foul. I saw a lot of no calls on Kentucky's end that were resulting in FTs on Indiana's end. Especially early on. With that being said, Terrence Jones cost Kentucky this game. I mean, was the guy shaving points? How does a player of that caliber put up a line of 4 points, 1 rebound, and 6 turnovers? Dude had Will Sheehey on him during points of the game. Doron Lamb missing FTs, Anthony Davis missing the front end of a 1 and 1 late (why did he have the ball?!), and Terrence Jones having, what I expect will be, the worst game of his career. And still Indiana had to shoot 60% from 3 and hit a buzzer beater (while Kentucky was trying to foul in backcourt, but no call) to win. It was a really huge win for Indiana. Congrats on that. But it might be a bit early to proclaim that "IU is back". The refs had nothing to do with Anthony Davis biting on a head fake and landing on top of Zeller inside, nor did they cause Davis to foul Verdell Jones on a 3-point attempt. At minimum two of his four fouls were stupid plays by him so not sure how the refs had much effect on Davis not playing 30+ minutes. It appeared to me that Anthony Davis had quite a bit to do with that. I haven't gone back and read every quote, but I don't think anyone is saying that Indiana is back in terms of being a top 5 or 10 team. But stating that they are back in terms of no longer being a doormat or an automatic win is pretty accurate. Will they have their bad nights? Probably so. But I don't see them going 3-15 in the Big Ten this year.

Weis was know as being arrogant from the moment he stepped on ND's campus. Could he be a nice guy when meeting fans. I'm sure he could. Most people aren't an ass ALL the time. But I believe it was his arrogance that got in his way. A little humility may have given him a different perspective. This recruiting story is true and gives a fair representation on how he handled recruits and their families. The story was told by the father of the player. Michigan OL Michael Schofield is from the Chicago area and was a ND fan his whole life. It was his dream to play at ND. He was recruited by Notre Dame and Michigan, among others. He had visited Michigan and really liked it. But he didn't want to make any commitment until he got to visit ND. He had been to campus and games before, but not on a recruiting visit (I believe it was still unofficial) where he had a chance to talk to the coaches and get a deeper perspective. Michael and his family got the campus tour and talked to various coaches and administrators and really liked what they saw. Then he went into Weis' office to meet with the coach. Weis went on and on about the tradition of Notre Dame and how great they had been and were going to be. Typical recruiting stuff. His father stated he laid it on so thick though that it seemed a little off for some reason. Weis asked him when he was going to commit to Notre Dame. When Michael told him he still wanted to visit Michigan again and possibly another school or two, Weis appeared to get irritated. He went back to how Notre Dame is the perfect place and there should be no reason he would pick anywhere else. His tone was bordering on condescending. Then he looked at him and said (I'm paraphrasing) Michael, can you give me one good reason why you should not pick ND? Why would you pick or even visit anywhere else? He came across as more irritated and condescending the more he talked. When Michael told him that he liked everything ND has to offer but its his life and he wanted to be sure before making a commitment, Weis snapped with something to the effect of... OK Michael that's fine. You do what you have to do. But I'm going to tell you that we fully expect you to be in this Notre Dame class. Then he looked at his father and said I don't see why he won't just commit right now. Mr. Schofield replied "I think Michael just told you why." Weis replied "then go visit the other places that don't hold a candle to this place. And if for some reason you choose another school, I expect you personally to call me and tell me why that school is better than ND. You owe that to me if this is the direction you want to go. With that the Schofield family left. Everyone of them including mom, left not liking Coach Weis much and thinking much less of ND than when the visit had started. Ultimately he visited Michigan again and committed to the Wolverines and never looked back. They never called Coach Weis personally, but when they told one of the ND assistants, his reply was "Coach Weis is going to be really pissed at you if you don't call and that may affect whether ND even looks at your brother (they had a younger son who was a OL also)". Those conversations just cemented that he made the right choice by not going to ND.