gbuk

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Feb 21, 2008 -> 11:15 PM) Wonderful -- more of the "It's all James' fault!" crowd. I get enough of that up here. If you've watched even a reasonable amount of Marquette basketball over the past couple seasons, it's clear how much worse of a team Marquette is when James is off the floor. Does that make James a great player? No, not in the least. But I absolutely hate it that the faults of Tom Crean (not having a good gameplan against teams with a zone, among other things) are put on the shoulders of DJ. I think you misinterpreted what I was saying. Not having James is much worse than having a struggling James on the floor. The point is, how he goes, the team seems to go. And down the stretch the last 2 years the team has faltered the same way James has. See where I'm going with this? It's not his fault, and actually think he's a solid player because he can still make things happen when his shot isn't falling. I'm not a big fan of Tom Crean at all, never really have been since DWade left, because he hasn't proven he can do anything without a future NBA stud. General question for you though, what are Crean's faults in coaching, in terms of gameplans and etc.? Because I really do refuse to believe with a backcourt like this one that they should be as erratic as they are.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Feb 21, 2008 -> 11:11 PM) Offensively they've been erratic, sure, but both of them bring it to the defensive end just about every night. That's why -- bringing this back to my original question -- I wouldn't worry about a team that is 'guard-oriented'. I'm fairly confident that our top three can match up (defensively) with just about anyone's in the nation. The issue arises when we face a team with athletic (or just plain talented) #3-4 types -- guys that spring to mind are Alexander at WVU, Adrien at UConn, Singler for Duke (although I'm fairly certain if we didn't get the treatment from the refs -- something like an 11 foul difference between the two teams -- we win that game), Clark for Louisville. Obviously there are other factors at play, but we simply don't have a matchup for those types. Add in a better-than-competent big man -- Thabeet, Mr Facilitator (Padgett), Harangody -- and Marquette is in a LOT of trouble. That's why I'm cautiously optimistic about Mbakwe. He plays much bigger than his 6'7 (?) frame. And fathom's Sweet 16 statement isn't completely off-the-wall. So long as they finish out the season relatively well, they should be in that 5-8 range as far as seeding, so they'll most likely be a first round favorite. Of course, a 5-to-8 seed would make them a second round underdog, but unless it's an 8-vs-2 or 7-vs-3 matchup, they wouldn't be that much of an underdog. My expectations right now are at 1.5 wins -- I think the final four Big East games will determine whether that number goes up or down a half a win. I agree with this. It's more of the tweeners rather than traditional big men that can be killers, especially for an undersize team like you guys. I'm not saying a Sweet 16 is totally impossible, I just don't see it happening, that's all. Didn't mean anything by it really, just came off a little harsher than it was meant to be. The problem with what you're saying about their mismatches is that a lot of teams have exactly what kills Marquette, especially in the seeding range they'll get...but won't even bother discussing that until tourny time and we know exactly where they are.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Feb 21, 2008 -> 10:49 PM) Hah -- thank you for that. That isn't hyperbolic in the least. But hey, I'm glad we have another 'all-every-team, all-every-conference' expert around here -- can never have too many of those. Ever heard of exaggeration to make a point? Clearly they've been out of funks together many times, but I still don't trust either of them. I am absolutely not an expert about everything, but to say they've been anything but erratic over the past 2 years would be wrong. Just look at what James has done in Big East play and down the stretch the last two years and that's really all you need to know about him.

The McDonald's All American game is really a bunch of political s*** now...the amount of great recruits that have been left out, and even moreso this year, in the past is laughable.

QUOTE(fathom @ Feb 21, 2008 -> 08:51 AM) 2, but then face a team with a big man (maybe UCLA in a 1 vs 4 game). At least McNeal and James seem to be getting out of their funk. Sweet 16 appearance, really? A team as erratic as a whole and individually as they are? Lacking a true force down low in the slightest won't allow them to go much of anywhere unless James and McNeal decide to stay out of their funks, which has never happened. I don't see it.

QUOTE(JuiceCruz16 @ Feb 19, 2008 -> 01:03 PM) Some leaks for the McDonalds all american team announcements have surfaced, and it looks like all 3 Carolina recruits made it. Davis & Zeller are no surprise, but Drew is a bit of a shock to me to have madeit. I haven't heard anything about Angel Garcia yet I'll probably run over to the high school and see if he got any word yet. Willie Warren (Oklanhoma) & Jamychal Greene (LSU) have also been reported to have been selected at this point. Green signed with Alabama.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Feb 19, 2008 -> 01:05 PM) Augustin? Really? I didn't catch last night's game, but he's been really up and down this year. I saw Oden and Durant play ISU last year, and Beasley this year. He was by far the most impressive of the three. He good. Even when Augustin is missing shots he can still control the game. That's what makes him so effective.

Your quote "Ive just said if the Big 10 sucks like you claim, then why are teams like Texas losing to them?" pretty much sums up your problem. You have said "anything can happen on any given night", and that's absolutely right, and that's the answer to your question. Since apparently the RPI is null in your view the same way rankings based on writers opinions is null in my view, we just totally disagree. But you're totally disregarding what other teams are doing while showing us what the Big Ten has done out of conference, which really isn't all that much. At all. Your comment about you mentioning Kentucky because of me is funny because I was never in this thread before you put them in there, so don't say that's why you put it there. Either way I think those teams are overrated, and you obviously disagree. Not much else to it I guess.

Oh wait, you're using the polls in all of this? No wonder.

Did anyone mention that in Badger's huge post listing the top wins for the top 4 Big Ten teams he listed 5 out of the total 8 good wins were against each other, 2 against Texas, and one against Kentucky without half their team (and if you're using Kentucky, especially at that point in the season, as a good win, you're reaching)? I guess if we're going to look at quality wins we'll go Top 50 RPI records here. (Top 100 record in parentheses). Indiana - 2-4 (6-4) Michigan State - 4-3 (6-3) Wisconsin - 3-4 (3-4) Purdue - 5-2 (5-3) Other various, apparently overrated teams - Memphis - 8-0 (12-0) Tennessee - 9-1 (11-2) Kansas - 4-2 (10-2) North Carolina - 6-1 (15-2) Duke - 5-1 (14-2) UCLA - 6-2 (11-2) Texas - 8-3 (10-4) But none of these teams have any big wins because they haven't beaten anyone in the top 10 right? You can talk all you want about the Big Ten's wins or whatever, but they don't even touch these other teams wins, which is why all of this is so funny because you've turned such a blind eye to other's accomplishments. But Wisconsin and MSU beat Texas, who beat Kansas, therefore they're not very good. You're right.

QUOTE(dasox24 @ Feb 18, 2008 -> 06:10 PM) How can you say Tennessee hasn't beaten anyone when they have the 2nd hardest strength of schedule and are 5-1 against teams in the Top 25? A little bias. While mentioning all the Big Ten's great wins, and laughably noting the wins in conference play against each other, he forgot to put thought into what the other big time teams have done not in the Big Ten. His only comments on teams like Memphis, Kansas, Tennessee and etc. was (0 Top 10 OOC Wins!!!) when in reality most of these teams haven't even had the CHANCE to play top 10 teams. And since when is it just top 10 or top 15 that really matters? If it's not over a team like that the victory is ruled totally null?

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Feb 18, 2008 -> 06:05 PM) First of all, I'm not saying you are wrong, but I think, if you are going to make a bla nket statement like that, you should make a little wager. Maybe a sig wager? What? That no one from the Big Ten will win it all? Sure I'll make a sig wager, not like I'm here all the time anyways.

QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Feb 18, 2008 -> 02:06 PM) How can the Big 10 be over rated: Wisconsin: Losses: @ Duke (ranked #2), vs Marquette (24), @/vs Purdue (15) Wins: vs/@ Indiana (ranked 14), @ Texas (7) MSU: Losses: UCLA (6), Purdue (15), Indiana (14), @ Iowa (unranked), @ PSU (unranked) Wins: Purdue (15), Texas (7) Indiana: Losses: @ Xavier (12), Uconn (13), @/vs Wisconsin (10) Wins: MSU (17), Kentucky Purdue: Losses: @ Clemson, @ Missouri, Wofford, ISU, @ MSU (17) ( 4 of those losses are 3 points or less) Wins: @/vs Wisconsin (10), MSU (17) Outside of Indiana, every one of those 4 teams has 2 wins against top 15 teams (Wisconsin has 3). Texas has only lost 4 times, the only loss at home its suffered is to Wisconsin. Texas is ranked #7 ahead of both Wisconsin/MSU, but has lost to both of them. Texas has beaten UCLA, KU, and Tenn, yet is 0-2 versus the Big 10. I guess the Big 10 sucks though... So I guess in the end: Texas sucks (it lost both big 10 games it faced.) KU sucks (lost to texas who cant beat the Big 10) Tenn sucks (lost to Texas only beat OSU by 5 @ home for comparison OSU lost by 9 away to Purdue and 6 at MSU) UCLA is average (lost to Texas, but beat MSU) Butler (would be fighting for 5th in the Big 10 for example Bulter was taken to OT by UWM, Wisconsin beat them 61-39 and Marquette beat them 100-65) Stanford (lost to Sienna, have they beaten an OOC team in the top 15?) Georgetown (have they beaten an OOC team in the top 15?) Xavier (beat Indiana) Uconn (beat Indiana) Vandy (have they beaten an ooc team in the top 15?) When you actually look at what the teams have done, its hard to take the opinion the "Big 10 sucks" Wisconsin and MSU both have OOC top 10 victories, checking through the other top 10 teams: Memphis (1 arguable top 10 ooc victory over georgetown) Tenn (0 top 10 ooc victories) UNC (0 top 10 ooc victories) Duke (1 top 10 ooc victory versus Wisconsin must not count because big 10 sucks) Kansas (0 top 10 ooc victories, 0 top 20 ic victories) UCLA (0 top 10 ooc victories) Texas (2 top 10 OOC victories, versus UCLA and Tenn) Butler (0 top 10 OOC victories, have not even played ranked opponent) Stanford (0 top 10 OOC victories, has not even played OOC ranked opponent) So my question is, how can the Big 10 be over rated? The Big 10 owns 2 victories over Texas, who has beaten the top Big 12 team, the top Pac 10 team and the top SEC team. If anything based on the information that I can find, the Big 10 is actually under rated, as its hard to understand how Wisconsin can be ranked lower than Butler, Stanford, or Texas. But lets not let the actual results of this season get in the way: Big 10 sucks, they never beat anyone. Not one of their teams has a top 10 victory!!!! BOOOOO@! Gardner-Webb beat Kentucky, who beat Tennessee. Therefore Gardner-Webb must be better than Tennessee! RIGHT?! Let's not let the results get in the way!

There are no title contenders in the Big Ten. Saying "anyone can beat anyone on a given night" is valid to an extent, but 6 in a row? In that case, I guess everyone in the tournament is a title contender. And you breaking down the Big Ten's best wins is great and all, but you can do that for every league's top teams and use it to argue your point.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Feb 17, 2008 -> 11:11 AM) The Big Tem overall is overrated. There isnt a clear cut top notch team in the bunch. How can the Big Ten be overrated when everyone knows it sucks?

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Feb 17, 2008 -> 01:07 PM) Skiles would never be able to recruit, and I don't see what college connections he has outside of going to a Big 10 school. Not sure why IU would make that hire, they could get much better choices. Dude are you serious?

No one in the Big Ten is worthwhile...the overrated chant applies for IU, Wisconsin, and MSU. With that said, all the overrated chant does is undermine your team's accomplishment, and I absolutely cannot stand it.

Guys, Jack was f'd up on Oxycodon, he clearly didn't know what was going on. The producers have repeated the fact that Christian Shepard is dead...it meant nothing, it was also to reinforce the fact in that episode that it was a flashback, even though it obviously wasn't.

For Illinois fans...article on Alex Legion. http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/pbcs.d...921/1002/SPORTS

QUOTE(retro1983hat @ Jan 29, 2008 -> 08:15 PM) I loved Lost the first year, then hated it, then really hated it, then at the end of last year loved it again. As for the writer's strike, Lost and 24 are the two shows I was totally looking forward to an uninterupted run. Doh!!! How could you hate season two? I know a lot of people don't like it, but it's awesome. All the stuff with the hatch and Henry Gale and etc. was sweet. But yeah, nothing touches the last half of season 3. Not even close.

Shortened season due to the writer's strike...they shot 8 of the 16 episodes in the season and will show them that half uninterrupted...until the writer's strike is over we won't see the rest of them unfortunately. 10/10 on the quiz...I love this damn show so much, I'm not sure my head will be able to handle the beginning of the season. AHHH

Not really sure how it's that hard to understand.

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ Jan 28, 2008 -> 10:36 PM) Take that back. May be a little biased considering I've been so sick of seeing her over the years being a Kentucky fan...I don't know, I've never found her to be THAT special.

LOSSSSSSSSSSTTTT AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Ashley Judd is so overrated.