whitesoxfan101

QUOTE (fathom @ Mar 19, 2010 -> 09:35 PM) Looking good so far for my prediction. I think Cal can and will beat Duke. They'll have to shoot really well to do it with the size disadvantage. Cal is certainly capable of doing that though.

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Mar 20, 2010 -> 12:05 PM) Yeah, Turner really shouldn't complain. Weber wanted to get his stars in before secondary players. Who could blame him or anyone else really? If you had a shot at Rose and Gordon or Evan Turner, you would go after the two studs first. It could be debated if they ever really had a shot at Rose, but yeah, it's more hinsight to blame Bruce for the Turner thing, I admit it. But it's still a reason to hate on Weber, so I do it anyways.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Mar 19, 2010 -> 05:39 PM) You are simply incorrect on this. Moore didn't want to play with Gordon but Illinois recruited him hard. And Illinois recruited Turner very hard. He got an offer early in his junior year when he visited with Peoples (who is at ND). Turner was a backup plan. Just because you get an early offer (and junior year is practically a late offer nowadays) doesn't mean you are particularly wanted. I am not as knowledgable about the Moore situation though, so I'll take your word for it there. I usually refer to him more in the form of hearsay I heard because it's nice fodder to rip on Bruce.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Mar 19, 2010 -> 05:36 PM) They would have been ridiculous with those two and McCamey. Turner was though of as a defensive specialist, so its not a surprise they didnt go after him hard. Yeah, Derrick Rose and Eric Gordon were the reasons Turner and Moore were largely ignored. In hinsight though, that obviously doesn't look too good for the Illini.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Mar 19, 2010 -> 05:24 PM) Illinois was the last school to offer him, he was waiting. Ryan was by far the leader for his services until Thad snatched him up. The father stuff isnt true though. His mother LOVES Thad, and she's the king in that family. http://www.cleveland.com/osu/index.ssf/201...d_a_buckey.html http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/sport...at=&sid=101 Yeah Illinois' interest in Turner was lukewarm at best, as it was in E'Twaun Moore. They would have been in good shape with both of them had they wanted to be. Oops.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Mar 19, 2010 -> 04:45 PM) Im not saying Wofford is good or bad, just if Wisconsin had the 5 seed they probably dont beat Cornell the way they played today. As for "overcome lack of talent", Im not exactly sure thats a fair statement. Leur was a pretty highly regarded recruit, same with Nankivil. Bohannon was Mr. Basketball in Iowa, Taylor was Mr. Basketball in Minnesota and Jarmusz was Mr. Basketball in Wisconsin. Sure a few of them werent Bo's first choices (Ryan was close on Evan Turner and Manny Harris) but Wisconsin has some solid talent, and (imo) 2 players who may play in the NBA (Leur and Taylor). (Edit) They lost by 2 to Purdue @ Purdue with out Leur. They lost to OSU with out Leur. Its hard to really say what Wisconsin would have done on the road with their best player. You could make a point they aren't generally overcoming lack of talent (although I still think they are when they play good teams,) but they would definitely have to do that to beat Kentucky if they do actually get to play them. Then again, Kentucky has noticeably more talent than every team in the country except maybe 3 or 4 at most.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Mar 19, 2010 -> 04:35 PM) But they've overcome it plenty enough. Wins against Maryland, Duke, Purdue with Hummel, Ohio State, Marquette, Michigan State...that's about as good as a profile as anyone in the country. Now are any of those teams as good as Kentucky? I'm not sure. The Wildcats have yet to beat a top tier team. They surely haven't even played a team like Wisconsin, whether that be stylistically or statistically. Every one of those wins were at home except Maryland. If the game were at the Kohl Center, I'd certainly give Wisconsin a chance to beat Kentucky. But I'd give them a chance to beat anybody there.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Mar 19, 2010 -> 04:24 PM) I know its odd to say that Purdue was my sleeper pick, but Ive got them going to the sweet 16. Prior to the tournament no one gave them a chance even though they are a 4 seed. They got a great draw because that Siena team sucks (no idea how they even had the record they did this season,) and neither group of Aggies is overwhelming either. I still think Purdue is useless without Hummel, but this tournament is so bad depth and talentwise that they can make something happen anyways.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 19, 2010 -> 01:38 PM) No Minnesota winters? That'd be worth it to me. No Minnesota winters, plus the SEC isn't all that hard to win in at the game of basketball since it's not that good at it, even with Kentucky back until Calipari gets caught cheating again. Additionally, the upper midwest does produce some good basketball players out of HS, but it's not really a fertile, natural recruting ground.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Mar 19, 2010 -> 04:28 PM) Do I believe they would be favorites? No. But Kentucky has yet to play a team even remotely close to being as good as Wisconsin. They are definitely vulnerable. Wisconsin could perhaps frusterate Kentucky/put them to sleep, but the Wildcats still have immeasurably better players, and that's hard to overcome.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Mar 19, 2010 -> 04:25 PM) Thats how the Wisconsin Buzzcuts roll. Slow, methodical, then BOOM 3 pointer. They do what they do very well, and it's a great way to overcome lack of talent. But it's still absolutely unwatchable.

Good Lord, the way Wisconsin plays basketball is absolutely unwatchable. Bo Ryan is a great coach who gets everything he can out of limited talent, but basketball would not have many fans if everybody played that style. I would think Cornell has a great opportunity to win again on Sunday if they can just hit some shots like they are capable of. QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Mar 19, 2010 -> 04:23 PM) Wisconsin will/would be computer favorites against Kentucky. I wouldn't sleep on them, even given a poor performance today. A classic example of why you shouldn't always believe computers. Good luck slowing down Kentucky's pace, going to be tough to turn a game against a team with multiple 1st round draft picks into a pitchers duel.

Hawks sighting on Leno. Looks like most of them are at the show.

Late singer, Cubs fan Goodman could get post office honor I know the above story is going to piss somebody off, so go ahead and fire away!

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Mar 15, 2010 -> 04:55 PM) And I'm still a fan of going back to 2 division in each league with 2 wild card teams. I'm not sure I've ever heard that idea, but I actually like it. Makes it far more likely that the 4 best teams in each league are actually the ones in the playoffs, and at minimum, 3 of the 4 would be.

QUOTE (Felix @ Mar 14, 2010 -> 05:54 PM) I don't get not wanting to watch your team when they're playing, regardless of whether it's the NIT or they're playing some s***ty mid-major that has no chance of winning. When the Gophers made the NIT a few years ago, you bet your ass I watched our only game in it and I most certainly rooted for the Gophers. I'm not in the business of ignoring my team while they're playing, EVEN IF the games ultimately mean nothing. I'd compare my team in the NIT to White Sox spring training games. Yeah, they are playing, but it really doesn't count and doesn't matter, so watching it really isn't something I consider to be relevant. And at least spring training games aren't a constant reminder of failure, plus there are often things like roster spots which are determined in some part by what happens in those games.

QUOTE (Felix @ Mar 14, 2010 -> 05:48 PM) That sounds an awful lot like entitlement. I go to NIU, and if they made the NIT, I would not watch a second of it. I wouldn't be mad about them in the NIT since that'd be a big step up for that crappy basketball program, but i still wouldn't watch. So I don't buy entitlement.

QUOTE (knightni @ Mar 14, 2010 -> 12:14 PM) Do people know what "reviled" actually means? Sammy Sosa is reviled, Barry Bonds is reviled. AJ is reviled by Angels fans. Think it that vein. Yeah, I think the only Sox that is truly reviled right now is Scott Linebrink. The most reviled White Sox in recent memory has to be Javy Vazquez. Or, at least that's the case for me.

QUOTE (Felix @ Mar 14, 2010 -> 05:31 PM) So what you're saying is that you're spoiled? I really have nothing against the Illini program. I rooted for them throughout high school, as my brother went there and I was hoping to go there. But your sense of entitlement is ridiculous, and frankly, annoying as s***. It reminds me way too much of Kentucky fans when they had Tubby Smith, which I never really understood. It sucks to miss the tournament, but why not support your team as they try to win the NIT? I don't care if it's a 'meaningless tournament,' your team is still playing games and you should still support them. It's not a sense of entitlement as much as logic. Illinois is a school that has the resources to where two years out of the NCAA Tournament out of three is embarassing and unacceptable, especially considering the run it was on beforehand. It shows Bruce Weber is doing a lousy job, and the program is in a decline that hopefully people like Jereme Richmond can turn around. Illinois isn't nearly Duke or Kansas, but for it to be in the NIT is an embarrassment. It feels far worse than two years ago, where at least they didn't have to bother playing in waste of time postseason games. Additionally, I don't see why playing for the right to be the 66th best team in America should be considered relevant or worth the two hours to watch.

QUOTE (danman31 @ Mar 14, 2010 -> 05:33 PM) That's the opposite trend than what we had seen recently. The mid-major teams had been getting crushed the last few years. Can't complain this year. I'd rather have a mid-major that makes their careers get in than a big program on a down year. I don't know if they tried to get more mid majors in as much as there were more upsets in mid major leagues. Teams like UTEP and Utah State took at large's and turned 1 bid leagues into two bid leagues by not winning their league tournaments. Additionally, San Diego State got the Mountain West a 4th bid it might not have gotten by making it's big run to win that league tournament, and St. Mary's would have been very close had they not won their way in during the WCC Tournament. The "mid major" at large bids went from 4 to 8 this year, but that's the only reason why IMO. Had such upsets not occured, it would have probably been the same story this year and mediocre teams like Virginia Tech, Illinois, and Mississippi State probably get in.

QUOTE (Brian @ Mar 14, 2010 -> 05:29 PM) I don't mind the NIT. I like having games to watch on Monday, Tues, and Wed when the NCAA is on break. Its the CBI and others that need to go. The NIT is just as irrelevant as the other ones, it's just been around longer.

QUOTE (zenryan @ Mar 14, 2010 -> 05:29 PM) [/b] $$$$$$$$$$$$$ Probably. But if that's the case, just have the balls to admit it. Other than money, there isn't a single good reason for expansion. However, money is usually the only reason needed, so I am resigned to the fate that expansion is coming.

QUOTE (Felix @ Mar 14, 2010 -> 05:24 PM) Your team didn't make the NCAA tournament.. it sucks, I know. There's nothing fun about missing the field of 65. However, does that mean you shouldn't give a s*** about playing in the NIT? It's still college basketball, and it's still one of the best sports around. I know it's tough to play in a tournament that supposedly doesn't matter, but god damn.. there's no reason you shouldn't be supporting your team still. There is not a single good reason anybody at Illinois should be supporting, paying attention to, or even watching their NIT games. Illinois won or shared 4 Big Ten Championships in 5 years to start the last decade (and lost a streak of 5 in a row by less than a second at Wisconsin), and now they've missed 2 big dances in 3 years and are in the NIT. Supporting these NIT games is supporting meaningless games, mediocrity, and a program which has had a shocking dropoff since Bruce Weber recruits took it over. There is absolutely no reason to do it, and nothing that happens next year, good or bad, can be traced to these games unless somebody suffers a terrible injury.

QUOTE (Heads22 @ Mar 14, 2010 -> 05:18 PM) Jay Bilas made a great point, it's not like any teams that missed is someone that you could call "deserving". Even with the shrinking bubble in recent days, not only did no blatant snubs occur (although I could almost see sort of why Virginia Tech and Mississippi State might be upset, and I suppose Illinois could make a case for being angry in some ways), but some very questionable teams got in. Makes you wonder what the people who want to expand the tournament are thinking.

QUOTE (Palehosefan @ Mar 14, 2010 -> 05:16 PM) ?? It's not? I don't think practice is nearly as relevant to a basketball team, who only has 12 or 13 players and over 30 games, as it is to a football team, who has 12 games and 85 guys on scholarship to decipher between. Not even comparable. QUOTE (Felix @ Mar 14, 2010 -> 05:21 PM) Illinois fans are hilarious. How so?