bukie

Also, A-Sun regular season champ Lipscomb lost in the quarters of the A-Sun tourney, so they're automatically placed (at least briefly) into the consideration group.

For reference, here is the official selection procedure as described by the NCAA.

At this rate I'll be able to make my first pick by the opening of training camp. :P

Season suspension, minimum. Same as the Oregon football player should have gotten. I'd probably include the postseason too, considering how late in the season that happened.

Fifth in the Big Ten, 10th all time. 8 of the top 15 are Big Ten teams, also.

It's all factored into the calculations. Your team is already assumed part of your locks list.

Really, though, the freshmen this year haven't been bad, they just haven't been as good as hoped for. Paul looked good early but wore down as the season went along (and struggled when the level of competition ramped up). He'll adjust, and now likely stay 4 years instead of 1-2. He's prone to bad shots and bad passing, and didn't give much defensive effort early on, but has improved as the season has gone on. Richardson is a good shooter, not as good passer. Probably the best freshman performance overall. Griffey has looked good in spurts, but not sure why he doesn't get more play, especially with Davis struggling all year. Plus, there's Bertrand, who never got to play this year due to injury. Coupled with Richmond, Leonard and Head, it should be a good young core next year, if only one of them can become a good passer.

I'm curious how much judgment is clouded from watching Miller, Luongo, Vokoun, Kiprusoff and Nabokov for 2 weeks. Sure, Huet isn't in their league, but he's perfectly serviceable, especially for a team that generally plays defense as well as the Hawks do. Even last night's soft goals were partially the result of awful defensive play. Some nights your goalie just isn't going to have it, especially after a 2 week layoff.

The officiating in the game has been absolutely terrible.

Illini may want to consider guarding that Diebler guy at the 3 point line.

the first 2 goals for NY were off TERRIBLE turnovers from seabrook and then johnsson and i've said this before, but i don't like how this team packs it in when they go down multiple goals. with the high scoring offense we have, you'd think they'd be able to come back from 2 or 3 down pretty easily,. but they don't. they fold. very concerning. Actually, on the contrary, they've shown repeatedly they can come back from almost any deficit.

Minnesota getting embarrassed tonight in MIchigan, virtually assuring Illinois gets the 4-5 game in the Big Ten tournament (I say "virtually" because I guess they could technically win out and move up, but then they're in the NCAAs regardless).

I think there's one logical exception to this. If a person's roster is illegal prior to a trade, but the trade itself would make the roster legal (for example, a player is one above the limit but would be trading two players for one) then I think it should be allowed.I disagree - it encourages people like me to hoard talent that I can then use in 2-1 or 3-1 trades. Yeah, that sounds a lot more like the reason for the rule than an exception.

You really think MSU is a better coaching job than Michigan? Sure, MSU has had much more recent success and Michigan has been in a bit of a mess, but I still think Michigan is the more prestigious position

I'd probably go more along the lines of Indiana Illinois Michigan Michigan State Ohio State Purdue Wisconsin Minnesota Iowa Penn State Northwestern

Also, I'll be updating this thread regularly with conference tournament results, as the tournaments start today.

Read the directions. It will take however long it takes you to fill out all of that. This is not like the actual committee where we sit an debate. We submit blind ballots and they get added up. It's sort of like a ranking poll that then slots them into the tournament. I did read the directions. Based off the quote below I was lead to believe that there would be some times where it would be live discussion and I didn't want to agree to be part of something if I wasn't available for that part of the process. I'll try to describe the whole process in as brief a manner as possible (read: long post incoming...) Step 1 - Each potential member sends me 2 lists by Wednesday: Locks (up to 34) and Potentials (as many as you like, really). From those lists, I will generate a list of teams that are "in the field" (75% representation in the Locks lists) and "in discussion" (everyone else in Locks and Potentials). There is also a third list of automatic qualifiers that win their conference tournaments. Step 2 - Fill the field - Each member sends me a series of two ranked lists - top 8 "in the field", and top 8 "in discussion" - From there we'll start ranking teams at the top and putting more teams in the field. If the process becomes too slow/tedious, we can move to top 16 lists instead of top 8 (so there are fewer lists to be submitted). There'll also be one ranking list of all the automatic qualifiers that didn't make the discussion board (the "one-bid" leagues), so they can fill out the S-Curve, a 1-65 ranking of all the teams in the field. Step 3 - Bracketing - Once the S-Curve is pretty well set, we can start putting teams into a bracket and pods according to NCAA rules (nobody can play at home, higher seeds not at a home field disadvantage in the first round, avoid rematches, BYU has to be a Thurs-Sat pod). Generally, we don't get this far anyway, but it's a goal to shoot for.

I'll take Anthony Rizzo, 1B, Red Sox, and move Alcides Escobar to my major league roster.

Let's just finish this up. Brian, go ahead, and Karen can make a pick later when she has time.

It's that time of year again. Time for the 7th annual mock tournament selection committee, during which we'll do a mock version of the tournament selection process. Anyone is free to participate if they are able, but please make sure you'll be able to participate regularly between Wednesday and Sunday of next week (during the actual selection process), or at the very least be able to submit 1-3 lists of teams per day during that period. The actual committee consists of 10 members, so if we can get close to that number, the process will more closely resemble reality (rather than the combined feelings of a couple folks). To participate, by next week Wednesday, March 10 (let's say, Wed morning at 8 CST), send (PM) me 3 things: 1) Your favorite team (the team you'll "represent"). During the selection process, you will not be allowed to include this team in any lists, to maintain as much of a sense of fairness as possible. This mirrors the real committee, as a committee member may not be involved in any discussion for a team in his conference (we'd do that here, but 95% of the populace is Big Ten, so nobody would ever be able to discuss them) 2) A list of cold, hard locks for the tournament, no further discussion needed, no matter what they do in the remainder of their games. This can be any number of teams up to a max of 34 (there are 34 at-large bids, no more than that can be locks, right?) 3) A list of teams that deserve consideration for the tournament, besides the locks. Some good resources: Pomeroy ratings Sagarin ratings RPI Basketball State (costs money after a few page views, but tons of info) Basketball Prospectus S-Curve (1-24 and 52-65, 38 teams placed): Rank Team W L top25 26-50 51-100 101-200 200+ SOS NCSOS R+N ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 Kansas 29 2 8-0 2-2 10-0 5-0 4-0 32 138 11-2 2 Syracuse 28 3 6-0 3-3 9-0 5-0 5-0 27 258 8-6 3 Kentucky 29 2 0-0 7-1 10-1 9-0 3-0 62 199 11-2 4 Duke 26 5 4-3 4-1 12-1 3-0 4-0 4 73 9-5 5 West Virginia 24 6 5-3 3-2 8-1 6-0 2-0 1 39 12-4 6 Ohio State 24 7 5-4 1-1 6-2 7-0 5-0 48 231 7-6 7 Kansas State 24 6 5-3 2-2 8-1 4-0 4-0 6 96 11-3 8 Purdue 26 4 4-3 4-0 6-1 8-0 4-0 31 177 12-2 9 Villanova 24 6 5-3 4-2 5-1 6-0 4-0 8 163 12-4 10 Wisconsin 23 7 6-3 0-1 8-2 5-1 4-0 22 120 7-6 11 New Mexico 28 3 4-0 3-2 1-0 11-1 9-0 98 129 11-2 12 Baylor 24 6 5-3 2-1 8-2 3-0 5-0 37 228 9-5 13 Michigan State 24 7 2-4 2-1 9-2 7-0 4-0 34 170 9-5 14 Pittsburgh 24 7 4-3 1-1 8-2 7-1 3-0 33 221 7-6 15 Butler (HOR) 28 4 2-2 0-1 5-1 13-0 8-0 91 4 13-4 16 Tennessee 23 7 2-2 3-3 7-2 6-0 5-0 45 130 8-6 17 Georgetown 20 9 3-5 4-2 5-1 4-1 3-0 2 63 8-5 18 Temple 26 5 2-2 2-1 6-1 10-1 6-0 27 258 8-6 19 Maryland 23 7 4-4 2-1 7-1 3-1 6-0 27 258 8-6 20 Vanderbilt 23 7 1-2 6-0 8-4 5-1 2-0 29 94 9-5 21 Texas A&M 22 8 4-5 2-3 7-0 4-0 4-0 11 140 7-7 22 BYU 28 4 0-1 5-3 3-0 10-0 9-0 125 188 13-3 23 Clemson 21 9 4-4 1-3 6-2 3-0 7-0 15 245 7-7 24 Texas 23 8 2-6 3-0 9-2 4-0 5-0 39 204 8-6 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 Oakland (SUM) 26 8 0-4 0-1 0-0 6-3 18-0 191 13 13-7 53 Montana (BSky) 22 9 0-0 0-1 0-0 11-4 9-4 310 131 8-7 54 SL (Sam Hou St) 24 7 0-1 0-0 1-1 5-2 14-3 235 92 11-6 55 Houston (CUSA) 19 16 0-0 2-2 5-5 6-4 5-3 102 124 9-10 56 MAC (Ohio) 19 14 0-0 0-1 2-4 7-6 8-3 164 159 6-10 57 BW (Long Beach) 17 15 1-5 0-1 0-0 5-4 8-5 210 131 9-12 58 Vermont (AE) 25 9 0-0 0-0 0-2 8-3 17-4 308 312 15-7 59 North Texas (SB) 24 8 0-1 0-1 0-0 5-2 16-4 155 128 12-6 60 Morgan St (MEAC) 25 9 0-1 0-2 0-1 3-3 22-2 304 171 14-8 61 E Tenn St (ASun) 20 14 0-0 0-2 0-3 8-5 11-4 206 30 11-9 62 Rob. Morris (NEC) 23 11 0-1 0-1 0-3 6-5 17-2 310 131 11-8 63 Winthrop (BSth) 19 13 0-1 0-1 0-3 2-4 15-5 306 88 7-11 64 Lehigh (Pat) 21 10 0-0 0-2 0-0 1-3 20-5 328 346 7-8 65 SWAC (Ark PB) 15 15 0-2 0-4 0-2 0-3 15-4 301 1 7-14 Teams not yet placed (27): Team W L top25 26-50 51-100 101-200 200+ SOS NCSOS R+N ------------------------------------------------------------------------- UTEP 26 6 0-1 1-1 10-3 5-1 10-0 139 263 11-4 Cornell (Ivy) 27 4 0-2 0-0 2-1 10-0 13-1 218 78 14-3 Florida 20 11 2-4 2-4 7-2 4-0 5-1 58 215 7-7 Florida State 22 8 1-6 4-1 8-1 3-0 6-0 24 222 9-5 Georgia Tech 19 11 2-5 1-3 6-3 3-0 6-0 12 161 5-9 Gonzaga 26 6 1-2 1-1 9-1 4-1 11-1 111 40 12-5 Illinois 18 13 3-7 1-1 5-3 6-2 3-0 13 119 6-9 Louisville 20 11 2-5 1-2 6-2 7-2 3-0 23 176 5-7 Marquette 20 10 2-6 1-2 8-1 3-1 6-0 51 294 7-6 Missouri 22 9 2-5 2-2 9-1 1-1 8-0 56 300 6-7 Murray St (OVC) 30 4 0-1 0-0 2-1 4-2 22-0 297 307 15-4 MWC (UNLV) 23 7 1-2 3-2 2-1 7-2 9-0 97 137 9-4 Northern IA (MVC) 28 4 0-0 1-0 8-1 13-2 5-1 114 162 14-4 Notre Dame 21 10 3-2 1-1 6-5 5-2 6-0 70 342 4-7 Oklahoma State 21 9 4-5 0-0 5-4 8-0 4-0 49 298 6-8 Old Dominion (CAA)26 8 1-1 0-2 4-3 8-1 13-0 112 33 11-8 Pac-10 (Cal) 21 9 0-3 3-2 4-2 13-2 1-0 20 10 6-8 Richmond 24 7 1-1 4-1 3-3 9-2 7-0 85 92 10-6 San Diego State 22 8 0-2 2-3 1-0 9-1 8-1 83 107 8-7 Siena (MAAC) 27 6 0-1 0-3 1-1 18-1 7-0 167 104 10-6 St. Mary's (WCC) 26 5 0-0 3-3 3-2 7-0 12-0 155 128 12-3 Virginia Tech 23 7 1-3 2-1 10-3 2-0 8-0 66 330 8-6 WAC (Utah St) 25 6 1-0 0-1 4-1 12-4 7-0 154 171 8-5 Wake Forest 19 9 3-3 2-2 7-3 1-1 6-0 9 162 6-7 Washington 21 9 2-2 1-1 3-4 14-2 1-0 57 125 4-7 Wofford (SC) 26 8 0-1 0-1 2-2 8-4 15-0 207 86 15-7 Xavier 23 7 0-4 3-3 4-0 11-0 5-0 61 19 8-7 Still under consideration, but currently out (7): Team W L top25 26-50 51-100 101-200 200+ SOS NCSOS R+N ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Arizona State 22 9 0-5 2-1 2-2 12-1 6-0 64 161 6-6 Dayton 20 11 1-3 2-3 0-3 13-2 4-0 74 78 5-9 Minnesota 18 12 3-6 0-0 4-5 6-1 5-0 47 246 4-9 Mississippi 21 9 1-3 1-3 8-3 4-0 6-0 69 196 9-5 Mississippi State 21 10 0-1 3-4 7-5 5-2 6-0 86 256 9-7 Rhode Island 22 8 0-1 2-3 3-2 13-2 4-0 89 82 9-6 Seton Hall 19 11 0-6 3-3 5-2 5-0 6-0 52 323 6-7

:yahoo: Being named best forward in that tournament is a huge honor.

Olympic Hockey All-Star Team Goaltender: Ryan MILLER (USA) Defenceman: Brian RAFALSKI (USA) Defenceman: Shea WEBER (CAN) Forward: Pavol DEMITRA (SVK) Forward: Jonathan TOEWS (CAN) Forward: Zach PARISE (USA) Most valuable player: Ryan MILLER (USA) Tournament Directorate Best Player Awards Goaltender: Ryan MILLER (USA) Defenceman: Brian RAFALSKI (USA) Forward: Jonathan TOEWS (CAN)

Seriously. I sent it two weeks ago. I can resend it again. I think he means he got yours, but anyone else that hasn't been listed yet needs to contact him.

Must be some game. Still no commercials? ;)

Also, believe it or not, shots on goal are even.