Monday, February 26, 2007

Go Back to Ames, Losers!

Yup, went to the game with Aaron again and look who decided to sit right down in front of us. Max Falkenstein and Mark Mangino. Didn't really feel like I could yell "Down in front!".
Aaron and I shook the Coach's hand and I said "you're doing a good job coach, keep it up" He said "I appreciate it." It was swell.
Max had a giant ring on his finger.
Also Florida and UNC lost, if we win out we might have just beaten them out for a #1 seed.


  1. and this from

    The Prime Suspects
    Outside the constant debate of who should be the NCAA tourney's No. 1 seeds are two teams almost lost in the shuffle but are proving to be very real threats to win it all: Georgetown and Kansas. The Hoyas -- winners of a school-record tying 11 in a row behind arguably the nation's best frontcourt in Roy Hibbert (who leads the nation in effective field goal percentage (69.7) and Jeff Green -- weren't exactly perfect in beating Pitt (G'town committed 14 turnovers, was outrebounded 33-29 and attempted 20 fewer shots) but they still won to assume sole possession of first place in the Big East. It helps that the Hoyas are so efficient: They're second in the nation in field goal percentage (52.2 percent) and fourth in points per possession (1.14). That's what makes them so dangerous; that even when they're not at their best, they can still beat a tope team. Georgetown may be riding an 11-game streak, but the Jayhawks may be even hotter. Kansas, who tore apart Iowa State 89-52, and is finishing with a flurry, winning its past six games by an average of 28.8 ppg. It's a testament to the learning curve of a lineup that includes two freshmen and three sophomores, as they didn't miss a beat without point guard Russell Robinson. While Kansas has more than enough firepower with five players all averaging 10 or more points in Darrell Arthur, Mario Chalmers, Sherron Collins, Brandon Rush and Julian Wright, the biggest key for KU has been defense: The Jayhawks are tied for first in the nation in points allowed per possession with 0.84. There may not be another two teams in the country looking more dangerous with Selection Sunday looming.

  2. How could you lie to Mangino like that?

    As I mentioned below, I spotted Aaron on TV at one point but didn't see Scott.

    I almost think we don't deserve the 1 seed regardless of how well we're playing. I've never liked the way the committee tries to gauge "hotness," and I think in a way we deserve to be "punished" with a 2 for our weak scheduling and bad early losses.

    Besides, a 2 is less pressure.

    But I also don't understand these commentators who say we have no chance at a 1. If the teams ahead of us keep losing and we keep winning, well... why not?

  3. What's not to understand about the commentators, Deron?

    95% of them are total whores for the ACC and Big East because they live there.

    Doug Gottlieb is the only guy I've heard that will even mention Memphis as a potential #1 or 2 seed.

  4. Also Deron, they somehow tricked me into switching to the new blogger too, so everybody else let me or yancy know if there are any problems.

  5. #3 Coaches.

    Rightfully so.
    Good posts, fellas; will write more once the grading hangover lifts.

    I think I agree with Deron on the 1 seed, though, despite my pre-season defense of our schedule. We just haven't played the caliber of teams that a 1 seed could/should (not all our fault, of course, what with like 14 new coaches in the Big 12 this year).
    And, as D says, the 2's less pressure anyway. . . .

  6. We're #3 in both polls. So that definitely gives us a leg up in the chase for a #1.

    (Scott, I see Memphis is getting some respect now, ranked even above A&M in one of the polls. It seems to me A&M is really the team that's gettin' no respect at the moment).

    But the more I think about it, the more complicated this 1-2 thing gets for us.

    First of all, the biggest negative about a #2 compared to a #1 is that you potentially have to play a "road game" -- this year, that might be say, UCLA at San Jose.

    But... this year we want the Midwest Regional, which is St. Louis. And since Ohio State and/or Wisconsin seems like a lock for a 1, it's very unlikely Kansas would get to be in the Midwest as a #1.

    Right now on Bracketology, we're a 2 seed under Ohio State, but we're in St. Louis. Compare that to a situation where we're a 1 seed but have to play say, Florida or UNC on the East Coast. I definitely prefer the former...

    ... but of course, this is all wild speculation right now. We need a win at OU tonight, and that may not be easy. Those guys have played with a lot of spirit this year and should be able to put up a fight before our talent wins out.

    KU by 15.

  7. Here are some numbers that show how hard it would be for us to be a 1 seed.

    The following are 1seeds and their RPI's:

    Duke 1
    Memphis 4
    UCONN 3
    Villanova 2

    Illinois 2
    Washington 3
    UNC 6
    Duke 4

    Kentucky 2
    St Joe 3
    Duke 1
    Stanford 7

    Kentucky 1
    Arizona 2
    Texas 4
    Oklahoma 3

    Duke 4
    Cincinnati 3
    Maryland 2
    Kansas 1

    Right now, we have an RPI of 16. I wonder what would happen if Texas beat A&M and we beat Texas?

    Of course, we need to beat OU.

    I'm very happy with a likely 2 seed, but it's fun to be in the conversation for 1 seeds, and it's hard not to get annoyed with the commentary when we're playing better than anyone in the country (regardless of the competition).

    We just have to keep winning and see how it shakes out.

  8. Wow. The committee loves the RPI even more than I thought.

    I guess what it comes down to is that we want to win out so that if we do get a 2, we'll be considered the strongest of the 2s and hopefully they'll send us to St. Louis (or at the very least, San Antonio -- not California or East Rutherford).

  9. BTW, I added a link to ken pomeroy's RPI site.

    It's very good, and most importantly, free.