Exile on Waveland

Does Wisconsin have a perimeter defensive ace or two? Michael Flowers is one of the best perimeter defenders in the nation.

I can't believe anybody thought Tennessee would blow out Butler. They're far too disciplined a team for that to happen. Like you astutely pointed out, we couldn't run the full court press because it would have done us no good and much harm. They simply don't turn the ball over enough for us to beat them by much. That was a really good win for Tennessee. Butler is an outstanding team and a tough match-up for the Vols. I wanted Butler to win, but am still very happy for Bruce Pearl (like him from his USI days). I really believe that Pearl's decision to only intermittently press won the game for them; not to mention attacking Matt Howard when he got in foul trouble. If Tennessee is to advance to the Final Four, they will have earned it. I'm not sure what highly seeded team was forced to face such a difficult opponent in the second round -- short of Georgetown. Following that up with probably Louisville and likely North Carolina is a path fraught with peril.

Yeah, Georgetown is my first Elite Eight team to lose too -- Final Four, actually. Still, it's hard not to be excited for Davidson.

Disappointing end for Butler. I don't believe they played their best game today. I've never seen such a good team miss so many easy looks inside. Oh well. Their seniors had great, great careers and Butler will be better than a handful of teams playing next week. I'm still incredulous some on this board thought Tennessee would blow Butler out.

It's too bad they couldn't get the ball to A.J. Graves there. Mike Green is a better one-on-one player but Graves is faster with the ball -- he's a blur with the ball -- and is a better shooter. Oh well, can't complain about overtime when you haven't lead the entire game.

You expected differently from Tennessee? That's how they play.

I would've thought San Diego would win this game. Not that I picked them to get here, but I would've expected them to beat WKU. Not that they won't.

Tennessee not pressing Butler. I think this is a very good coaching adjustment by Pearl. Butler's not the kind of team that succombs easily to full-court pressure. I doubt I would've picked Butler if I knew Pearl wasn't planning on using his press.

If you said that I would argue just as vehemently. The Big Ten was the fifth best conference this season.

What did either of those teams accomplish to have a better resume than Ohio State? Illinois State's best wins were against Creighton twice (RPI #46) and Southern Illinois (#62). VCU's best wins are against Houston (#80) and Maryland (#85). Ohio State has wins over Syracuse (#55), Florida (#73), Cleveland State (#63), Purdue (#45) and Michigan State (#16). Indiana played both Illinois State and Ohio State, and there is no doubt Ohio State is a superior team. Admittedly, I'm a bit biased towards the mid-majors and would prefer to see more of them get in but... Illinois State had a higher RPI (33 vs. 49) than Ohio State and did better against the RPI top-100 (5-5 vs. 6-10). That's a no-doubter as far as I'm concerned. Add to it that they finished second in the MVC which is typically one of the top mid-major conferences. VCU's RPI was a bit lower (54 vs. 49) than OSU's and also did better - though in many fewer games - against the RPI top-100 (3-3 vs. 6-10). And they won the regular season CAA title. I like mid-majors too; I have Butler topping Tennessee in my bracket. I just don't see a whole lot that tells me either Illinois State or VCU is superior to Ohio State. Illinois State and VCU did better against the top-100 because Ohio State played nine games against the top-25. Illinois State played five top-25 teams and lost all five -- three by double figures. VCU played two games against the top-50, losing to Miami (FL) and Arkansas. Ohio State played the 18th toughest schedule in the nation and 13th toughest out of conference schedule. Besides the teams I listed that they beat, they were competitive against UNC (11-point loss), at Purdue (7-point defeat), Michigan State twice (six and seven), at Tennessee (five), Indiana twice (six and three) and Wisconsin (five). While a loss is still a loss, Ohio State proved it was competitive against some of the best teams in the nation, even on the road. Neither ISU nor VCU did. As for where the teams are ranked in the RPI, I don't put too much stock in that besides rough comparisons -- and it seems neither did the committee as Kansas State, Villanova, Kentucky and Oregon all made it with worse RPI's than either ISU or OSU.

What did either of those teams accomplish to have a better resume than Ohio State? Illinois State's best wins were against Creighton twice (RPI #46) and Southern Illinois (#62). VCU's best wins are against Houston (#80) and Maryland (#85). Ohio State has wins over Syracuse (#55), Florida (#73), Cleveland State (#63), Purdue (#45) and Michigan State (#16). Indiana played both Illinois State and Ohio State, and there is no doubt Ohio State is a superior team.

because they assumed it would be Vandy vs. Clemson when they scheduled it An entirely unintriguing(not a word) matchup. This game was originally schedule for 12:10 or 2:40. It didn't have to be now. And, as you said, even if it was Vandy-Clemson, it shouldn't have been the lone game in any time slot. That's not that intriguing of a matchup, nor does it have any big-name (team or player) panache.

Why is Villanova-Siena the only game on at this time slot? This is the game they want to feature nationally? Later games include thoroughly intriguing matchups like Tennessee-Butler, Georgetown-Davidson and Louisville-Oklahoma.

West Virginia didn't handle the victory with class on or off the court. I doubt anyone would argue with that.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/23/sports/ncaabasketball/23duke.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin That's something that shouldn't be said to the media. Oh well. However, he is right. Duke's players often aren't McDonald's All-Americans because they're that good, they're McDonald's All-Americans because they're going to Duke.

I did not know this! What happened?! I was wondering the same thing.

It's fair to give the Big 10 props for playing to the seed (read previous post about 4-5 matchups as tossups)? And yes, Pac-10, Big East and ACC are easily superior to the Big 10 and the Big 12 is a bit better. The only conference the Big 10 is better than is the SEC. The Big 10 didn't get unfairly criticized for anything this year. They were down in both football and basketball and that's what was said about them. In football the best team got killed in the title game after not playing anybody in the regular season (though I know they ususally do) second best team got annihilated by USC in the Rose Bowl and the third best team lost to a I-AA team at home and then got embarrassed by Oregon at home. That came after they got the crap kicked out of them in the Rose Bowl last year as well. I don't see where this criticism was undeserved. I don't disagree with anything you have said. However, I believe Big Ten fans feel, rightly or wrongly, their failings are brought to attention far more often than other conferences. Schadenfreude seems to run rampant among other conference fans and the media. This may be a biased opinion, I'll readily admit. However, before the bowl season you heard people on here saying there was no way the Big Ten could win a game against the SEC. They went 1-2 and Wisconsin easily could've won. Then the Big Ten was laughed at in basketball, and has yet again acquitted themselves nicely in the tournament. Besides the fact that I think Ohio State had a legitimate grip over a couple of the teams that got in the field (e.g., Baylor). The Big Ten hasn't been great in either sport recently, but it hasn't been as bad as some would like to believe. Assuming Indiana doesn't botch their coaching decision, the Big Ten is going to be loaded with really, really good basketball coaches. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the league was the best in the nation very soon.

Man Indiana sure played well in the tournament. And the fifth and sixth place teams, Ohio State and Minnesota, had good showings as well. Oh wait...... Yes, Indiana was awful. But they did lose their coach right at the end of the season. Ohio State probably, or at least arguably, should've been in the tournament. Still, for a conference that is supposed to be horrendous, 5-2 with two Sweet 16 teams isn't too shabby. They still only had four teams in the tournament. Of course a conferences odds of looking good and having a good record are going to improve if they only have their best teams. If the Pac-10 only had four teams in, they'd be 6-1 with three Sweet 16 teams. Instead, Arizona and Oregon both got in, lost in the first round and dropped the overall record down. The Big 10 was down this year and was only better than the SEC. I don't see why some Big 10 homers (I'm looking at Keener, not you) continue to say the Big 10 was good this year when it clearly wasn't. There's no doubt the Big Ten was down this year. There's also very little doubt the Big East, ACC and Pac 10 are superior. The Big 12 has acquitted itself very well in the tournament too -- better than I thought they would. However, the SEC deserved to be chided all year over the Big Ten. They got six teams in, the Big Ten four (I understand the Georgia situation). Still, the Big Ten was supposed to be 4-3 at this point and is 5-2. That's not bad; not great, but not bad. The Pac 10 was supposed to be 5-3 at this point but is only 4-3. That's by my count, I could be mistaken. Not that the Pac 10 isn't better, of course. Edit: I obviously muscounted as UCLA, Stanford and Wazzou are in the Sweet 16 already. I think I meant 7-3 and 6-3, but I wouldn't trust me. I'm not smart.

I have no idea why I picked Notre Dame in the NSBB pool, I thought I picked Wazzou in every bracket I filled out. Oh well.

Man Indiana sure played well in the tournament. And the fifth and sixth place teams, Ohio State and Minnesota, had good showings as well. Oh wait...... Yes, Indiana was awful. But they did lose their coach right at the end of the season. Ohio State probably, or at least arguably, should've been in the tournament. Still, for a conference that is supposed to be horrendous, 5-2 with two Sweet 16 teams isn't too shabby. I ragged on the conference all year, but I said I wouldn't have been surprised if Wisconsin and/or MSU make it just because they're two of the best-coached teams in the land. Both of those teams always find a way to get things done come March. I don't think anyone is going to claim the Big Ten is a great conference this year. It just didn't deserve the crap it caught -- which is pretty typical, for whatever reason.

Man Indiana sure played well in the tournament. And the fifth and sixth place teams, Ohio State and Minnesota, had good showings as well. Oh wait...... Yes, Indiana was awful. But they did lose their coach right at the end of the season. Ohio State probably, or at least arguably, should've been in the tournament. Still, for a conference that is supposed to be horrendous, 5-2 with two Sweet 16 teams isn't too shabby.

So this Brook Lopez kid is pretty good, no? :wink:

CBS kept switching me back and forth from the end of the Xavier game earlier to 1st half play of the Stanford game which I didn't really understand either. I'm stuck watching ND-Wazzou, so it's computer for me to watch Stanford-Marquette.

Truly an awful coaching job by Stanford's acting coach. He had both Lopez twins on the bench -- after they had dominated during a big run to go up by six -- for an extended stretch (probably 3-5 minutes). During that time, I don't believe Stanford scored nor could they get a defensive rebound. Now they're down by one again. Poor, poor job. However, Trent Johnson must take blame for getting tossed in the first place.

I'm shocked the team with perhaps the best coach in the tournament is methodically dismantling an undisciplined team with the worst coach in the tournament. You couldn't have drawn up a team more ill-prepared than K-State to face Wisconsin.