bukie

This game is going to be unwatchable. And I mean that literally.

They're not going to quite be able to run it all the way out.

Cutler was technically out 4 games. He was just physically taking snaps for 2 of them. Which was still better than Todd Collins.

lolkenpom. So much for that 10 point Pitt victory, I guess. Hey, another person that doesn't understand what 83% means.

Starting to feel a little better about that Oakland result.

Well, the Bulls got through their brutal opening 21-game stretch 2 or 3 games better than I was even hoping for (way back on page 1 of this thread). So, I don't think they'll have any trouble clearing the 46 win mark and getting a top 4 seed in the East (and thus, home court advantage in the first round). The Bulls are also just about halfway done with their entire Western Conference schedule at 10-4, having played the Lakers twice, Thunder twice, Nuggets twice, Rockets twice (who, despite struggling, are better than their record and projected to sneak into the 8 spot in the West), along with games at Dallas, San Antonio and Phoenix (other 3 games were home vs. GS and Portland, and @Sacramento). Their other 7 games (yes, that's 14 games against the West, 7 against the East) included both games @ Boston for the year, and home "games" against Orlando and the Knicks (other 3 games: vs. Detroit/Washington, @Cleveland). They've managed to look terrible in games only twice (both losses at home, oddly enough). They gave Dallas what happened to be their last loss to this point, in Dallas. They took San Antonio, Boston (once), OKC and the Lakers down to the wire on the road. Now the challenge will be to make some of these games against lesser competition look easy (they only have one win by more than 12 points), and build up a record to see if they can try to challenge Boston, Miami or Orlando for a top 3 spot, or if they'll be stuck in the 4-5 matchup with Atlanta or some upstart. Also, wow, that 8 spot in the East will be terrible, unless Milwaukee somehow gets their act together.

And even the Frazier years, the Illini finished 4th in the Big Ten and blew a late lead to Va Tech, finished 10th in the Big Ten (but 40th in Pomeroy ratings overall) and made the conference tourney finals, and finished 2nd in the Big Ten (where a disastrous Frazier injury with 2 games to go killed the postseason). All 3 of those years, Weber was lauded for how well he coached despite inferior talent. Out of those years the only one that was decent was two years ago. We were one lucky break of getting the benefit of the doubt as a 12 seed from missing the tourney 3 out of 4 years. At Illinois. That team wasn't lucky to get a 12 seed. They were a better team than the Va. Tech team they played. If you're going to continue to use revisionist history every time you bring up Weber, though, there's no point in continuing this conversation.

Looks like, among experts, almost everyone is taking the Pats, except Simmons, who thinks the combination of short week, talking up the Pats, poor field conditions, bad matchup, and potential letdown week are enough to swing to the Bears.

And even the Frazier years, the Illini finished 4th in the Big Ten and blew a late lead to Va Tech, finished 10th in the Big Ten (but 40th in Pomeroy ratings overall) and made the conference tourney finals, and finished 2nd in the Big Ten (where a disastrous Frazier injury with 2 games to go killed the postseason). All 3 of those years, Weber was lauded for how well he coached despite inferior talent.

Wait, are you serious? What he did to the program? Yeah, getting to the national championship was a black eye for the program. Oh you know, not winning a tournament game in 5 years. Acting like a total ass bag cry baby over the Eric Gordon situation. Allowing Jamar Smith to remain on the team. Bruce has done PLENTY to give the program a bad name. His tenure has been troubled and controversial to say the least. Its about wins and losses and if he doesn't start winning soon, he needs to be gone. The Gordon situation was crap. Gordon screwed the program in 07-08. Jamar Smith got booted from the team soon after Bruce gave him a last chance. Bruce has done PLENTY to give the program a fantastic name, and is now recruiting as well or better than practically anyone before him, especially from Chicago. His tenure has only been troubled and controversial if you completely ignore 2005, the coaching he did with little talent from 2007-2009, and the talent he's been able to bring in since.

Wait, are you serious? What he did to the program? Yeah, getting to the national championship was a black eye for the program. What has happened since then? Besides that huge win over Air Force? Struggles in recruiting, inexplicably finishing 2nd in the Big Ten the following year with just Dee, finishing second in the Big Ten in 2009 with just about nobody talented on the roster. It's inexplicable, Weber was a fantastic game coach for 5 years, and now that he's actually recruiting, the meatheads think he can't coach.

Wait, are you serious? What he did to the program? Yeah, getting to the national championship was a black eye for the program.

To give a general gauge, Oakland is about IU/Iowa good this year, maybe a little better. Best team in the Summit by far, but a likely low 13/high 14 seed.

It would be nice if the Bulls played a 3rd quarter on the road with a bit of effort one day.

Copenhagen is the best case, no? Don't the group winners get drawn against the second place finishers across the board? Copenhagen finished second to Barcelona. On another note, Tottenham is sitting in a good spot, winning the group and can't draw Inter or Arsenal in the round of 16.

We aren't measuring the team that they'd be if they were fully healthy. We're measuring who the best team is now. Correct. If you're going to incorporate W-L record, you have to consider injuries in those losses if those players have returned (like Matthews vs Miami). UMfan brought up GB's winning streak. I was pointing out that Atlanta's is longer. During their streak they had 4 wins against playoff contending teams (TB Twice, GB and Baltimore). During GB's, they played 2 winning teams...and lost one...to Atlanta. Again, I'm not saying that GB is a bad team. But I think Atlanta has done plenty to earn the benefit of the doubt, imo. It's not like I put Atlanta 10th or anything, though.

Fine, openly hoping.

I'm secretly hoping GB loses this week, which greatly increases the Bears' chances of winning the division.

Yesterday, Jerry Palm noticed that the final BCS rankings were actually wrong. One of the computer ratings (Colley, the only one that publishes it's data and formula publicly) missed a game, which was enough to swap Boise State and LSU in the overall rankings. There are also rumors that Billingsley's ratings are improperly using information from the previous year to calculate, which he denies. Now, I'm all for more emphasis on objective measures, but these measure need to be more transparent to the public to be trusted. Right now, the BCS just assumes they're right. If this had happened to the #2 and #3 teams, today would be an absolute disaster.

At home, by 3. Basically a toss-up game, and Green Bay looked better than Atlanta last week. Well I would hope so...GB played a 4-8 team, while Atlanta had to contend with a team that is trying to get a wild card spot in the playoffs. I don't think that's comparing apples to apples. It's never comparing apples to apples. That is why it's a subjective process. I think Green Bay is better on a neutral field. EDIT: As far as real justification: the Packers have just 3 wins by 7 or fewer points, and have not lost a game by more than 3. The Falcons have just 3 wins by more than 7 points (and 2 against the NFC West...that hardly counts), and lost to Philly by 14.

At home, by 3. Basically a toss-up game, and Green Bay looked better than Atlanta last week.

My totally subjective power rankings: 1. New England 2. Green Bay 3. Atlanta 4. Pittsburgh 5. Baltimore 6. Chicago 7. Philly 8. NY Giants 9. NY Jets 10. New Orleans 11. Kansas City 12. San Diego 13. Tampa Bay 14. Indy 15. Minnesota 16. Miami 17. Cleveland 18. Dallas 19. Washington 20. Jacksonville 21. Detroit 22. Houston 23. Tennessee 24. Oakland 25. St. Louis 26. Cincinnati 27. Denver 28. San Francisco 29. Seattle 30. Buffalo 31. Arizona 32. Carolina

I'm pretty sure Prisco was drunk when he put those together. Tennessee up 2 this week after losing their 5th straight and looking awful, and Minnesota down 5 after their most dominating performance of the year.

iowa will be favored against both uni and isu? I think he means according to Pomeroy. Currently a 71% favorite against UNI and a 58% favorite against ISU (both helped by playing at home).

Last night's game pushed NE up to #2 in Sagarin predictors (behind GB), and dropped the Jets down to #9 (below the Giants).