Exile on Waveland

Don't like them, but UCLA is #1 in my book.

So nice of you to say that. The ad hominem attacks continue on this board without challenge. you might draw less fire if you used words like "personal" rather than "ad hominem." Dem big ole words is mighty frightenin'

Shouldnt you be at the Staples Center? lol. I really hate you. Deng isnt playing tonight by the way, at least thats the last I heard. If I get to catch the Illinois game Ill let you know, but this Big Ten Network crap sucks. Oh, cool. I do get the Big Ten network so I'll Tivo it. I really liked Harden in the LA high school scene. Bulls-Lakers game is in 4 hours. Go figure the guy in California gets the Big Ten Network, but the guy in the heart of Big Ten country doesnt. Yea that makes sense. By the way Kobe is going to drop 50 on us tonight. Not having the Big Ten Network blows.

Yup I do. Do you really want Floridas D to face 1 of the top rushing teams in the country? We can keep your offense off the field. You arent ranked number 1 in points scored, rushing yards, or passing yards. Please put your magical numbers out there that show Florida is the best offense in the nation. Cause the stats disagree The stupid stats disagree. Points Per Game - Schedule Rank - Team 1. 48.0 - 153 - Hawaii 2. 45.8 - 101 - Kansas 3. 44.2 - 122 - Boise State 4. 43.4 - 69 - Oklahoma 5. 42.9 - 9 - Florida Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Running up the score heavily affects PPG. Can you just admit you hate Florida and the SEC. Margin of victory this year: Hawaii: 24.5 Kansas: 31.6 Boise State: 25.9 Oklahoma: 25 Florida: 17.6 And you're accusing Florida of running up the score. I don't know if Florida runs up the score or not, but those stats prove nothing. Florida plays in the SEC, and, thereby, won't get the opportunity to run up the score many times. They'll play close games and lower their margin of victory. Heck, they have three losses to lower their margin of victory. You can only run up the score when you're up big, and, generally, you're not up big against fellow SEC teams. florida dropped 59 on tennessee and 51 on south carolina Yes, I know. But in the SEC they've won by six points (at Ole Miss), eight points (Kentucky), and lost by three (Auburn), four (at LSU) and 12 (Georgia). All those outcomes hurt their overall margin of victory -- it certainly doesn't make them a bad team, they're in my top-10. Their scoring margin is actually more impressive than the four teams ahead soccer10K listed. But that doesn't mean they don't run up the score. Not saying they have, but you have to look at what's happened when they've won/had a chance to run up the score.

I'm less than sold on K-State.

Believe me, I think IU is going to be good, but the way Raw puts it in his posts is pretty comical right now. Yeah. I'm glad they won easily, but beating Longwood doesn't do much for me. They should play Xavier next Saturday and then they play Georgia Tech the following Tuesday. While neither team is great, we should have a better idea of where IU is at after those two. So far, including exhibitions, three of the four teams they've played are complete crap.

Yup I do. Do you really want Floridas D to face 1 of the top rushing teams in the country? We can keep your offense off the field. You arent ranked number 1 in points scored, rushing yards, or passing yards. Please put your magical numbers out there that show Florida is the best offense in the nation. Cause the stats disagree The stupid stats disagree. Points Per Game - Schedule Rank - Team 1. 48.0 - 153 - Hawaii 2. 45.8 - 101 - Kansas 3. 44.2 - 122 - Boise State 4. 43.4 - 69 - Oklahoma 5. 42.9 - 9 - Florida Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Running up the score heavily affects PPG. Can you just admit you hate Florida and the SEC. Margin of victory this year: Hawaii: 24.5 Kansas: 31.6 Boise State: 25.9 Oklahoma: 25 Florida: 17.6 And you're accusing Florida of running up the score. I don't know if Florida runs up the score or not, but those stats prove nothing. Florida plays in the SEC, and, thereby, won't get the opportunity to run up the score many times. They'll play close games and lower their margin of victory. Heck, they have three losses to lower their margin of victory. You can only run up the score when you're up big, and, generally, you're not up big against fellow SEC teams.

:( part of racial equality involves firing incompetent black people as well as incompetent white people We learned this the hard way in Bloomington with Mike Davis. If you're going to hire an African-American coach (or likely any minority) you better hire a good one. Because, if you hire a bad one, you can't fire them without someone calling it racist. There are both good and bad black coaches, just as there are good and bad white coaches.

IU looked good, but, personally, I'm ready to see them play a real opponent. (Although UTC isn't terrible).

Yay Hoosiers! Big win for them; wow, gave up a 24-3 lead only to win it on a FG. Now I have to regroup so I can go party later.

I wondered the same. Illinois won the Big Ten in 2001, but the Rose Bowl was the National Championship game (Miami over Nebraska). So the Illini would've gone to the Rose Bowl in a normal year. Michigan has been to the Rose Bowl three times since then, while Ohio State actually hasn't been since 1997 (though they've played in two National Championship games). So, if there was a three way tie this year, it would be an odd situation for both Illinois and Ohio State: both have recently won the Big Ten but not gone to the Rose Bowl. So would Ohio State actually win that tie break? Personally, I think the title game/Sugar Bowl should count as the Rose Bowl. The rule is clearly meant to reward/favor a team that hasn't been good recently and doesn't often get the chance to go to a major bowl. Ignoring other BCS bowls seemingly ruins this rationale. Edit: Off to tailgate for the IU-Purdue game. GO HOOSIERS!!! Take the Bucket back!!!

Exactly. This game should be a concern for the Illini. This is the defintion of a trap game. Told you. Thankfully, they were able to come back from a 12 point deficit and pull it out. I think this game will really help them in the long run. I think it already showed Weber that DMac has to play the bulk of the minutes. Meachem is just not good enough to play at this level. I think that's a big win for the Illini. It's not sexy, and Hawaii likely won't be high in the computer rankings. However, they are extremely tough to play at home (especially for out-of-conference teams) and the time difference from traveling makes things difficult. It's not necessarily a resume builder, but it's a game that a lot of teams lose -- and have. IU got smoked there awhile back when UH had Anthony Carter.

I've always thought Wisconsin would have a very good, and perhaps surprising year to some. They still have a lot of talent left over, and, in my estimation, the best coach in the Big Ten. I think they finish third (give or take depending on schedule) and are a top-25 team.

One would hope.

Ha ha. "Taking 20 shots a game on a bad NBA team." Yup, that's pretty much Mayo's future.

Not good. Not good at all. I think Rice will be better in Indy, but he isn't going to come close to replacing Freeney.

Game turned, again, when Gordon was switched defensively onto Chattanooga's primary ball-handler. Defense was awful in the first half, better in the second. Still porous.

Except for adjusted efficiency. Really my intent wasn't to say that Indiana wasn't a good defensive team last year. All I was trying to say was that it was a surprise their offense ranked a lot higher in the Big Ten than their defense, especially considering Sampson's resume. That's all. Yeah, I know. This devolved into an unnecessary argument, I think. It was very surprising how IU finished in those stats, I agree. It won't be this year.

You would think so, but last year was a bizarro year for Sampson. They were toward the bottom of the league in defense but they had the best offense in the conference. I would guess whether that repeats itself or not will depend on their freshmen because their offense will be damn good. Those stats are a lot more indicative of the way the Big Ten plays than IU's lack of defense. How so? Everyone in the Big Ten plays good defense. Right, but among those teams they ranked 7th in defense, 1st in offense. I'm not saying they played terrible defense overall, it was just a twist on what you would have expected from Sampson. Everyone in the Big Ten plays good defense. The more you score, the more you give up. The quicker you shoot, the more possessions the other team gets. Ohio State was only seventh in scoring defense, think they weren't good defensively? In overall games, IU gave up 61.8 ppg, allowed opponents to shot only .416, and allowed only .310 shooting from 3 (best in the Big Ten). Those are good numbers. IU's defense wasn't as good as Illinois, but it was good. I do agree the offense was surprisingly efficient, but it wasn't great. It should be much, much better this year, though. That's why I'm judging them based on points per possesion. They were first in the conference in points per possession at 1.12. Ohio State was 2nd at 1.10, Wisconsin was 3rd at 1.07, Iowa was 4th at 1.05. Everyone else in the league was at 1.02 or lower. Defensively they were 7th in the league at 1.03. The top 5 teams in defense were at .98 per possession or lower. Ohio State whom you referenced was at .94, almost a tenth of a point per possession better than Indiana. http://kenpom.com/sr.php?team=Indiana&y=2007 Indiana was 44th nationally in defensive efficiency, 29 in adjusted efficiency, 37th in effective FG %, and 25th in 3-point %. Their offensive numbers trail in almost every category. Indiana was a solid defensive team last year, especially relative to the rest of the nation. Part of the problem is that they had nothing inside beside D.J. White, but Sampson got all he could out of the team defensively (and offensively, for that matter).

Sagarin ratings: Florida #7 overall, with the #2 schedule. The Gators are 3-3 against the top-30 (LSU is 5-1, Oregon 3-1). And Auburn, Florida's "bad loss," is #24. A loss to a top-30 team is not a bad loss. Florida has lost to the #2, #12 and #24 teams, while beating the #17, #19 (by 39 points) and #30 (by 20) teams. As for South Florida, they are #15 overall with the #16 schedule. They are undervalued in the human polls, no doubt, but three straight losses will do that to a team. If Florida shouldn't be in the top-10, please find 10 teams that have done more.

They should try losing less games if they want to be in the top ten then. They should be in the top ten. They're in mine. Is Notre Dame in your top 25? Oh, nice comparison. 7-3 against a great schedule versus 1-9. Yup, you got me.

They should try losing less games if they want to be in the top ten then. They should be in the top ten. They're in mine.

With Tim Tebow, Percy Harvin and Zook's players. I feel obligated to bring this up anytime Meyer's title is mentioned since Weis has been absolutely roasted for only winning with Ty's players (ignoring that a good portion of the ND depth chart is still Ty's, would be more if he'd bothered recruiting for his last two offseasons). Speaking of, Ty's only good season at ND's helm came with Bob Davie's players, yet another thing that is conveniently ignored when this discussion comes up. I'm not trying to say Weis deserves outlandish praise or anything of the sort. I'm just saying anyone who says ND is hypocritical for firing Ty and keeping Weis is ignoring about a hundred other facts. I agree. Also, this is often ignored too: Super Ty at Washington: 2-9 (1-7), 5-7 (3-6), 3-7 (1-6). I know they were pretty bad when he took over, but the record certainly doesn't indicate much improvement. *This is not a Notre Dame homer opinion. I hope ND starts every season 1-9 for the rest of eternity. I'd feel a lot more comfortable that they'd continue to stink if Ty was still there.

Last night's game doesn't concern me at all, either. Except that they now have the same record as Pittsburgh and are only one game up on Jacksonville and Tennessee. I am, however, deathly afraid of Freeney's injury. To me, the last two weeks have been pretty encouraging (albeit also devastating emotionally). They'll win the next two weeks, then hopefully start getting some players back for Jacksonville. The schedule is much easier from here on out. Oh, how about the play of Michael Toudouze and Clint Sessions? Both were outstanding.

I don't know, I seem to remember the Colts beating up on the Bears in the "elements". The Colts are actually built pretty well for bad weather, and, honestly, moreso than the Patriots. They run the ball better and rely less on vertical passing than the Patriots do. Funny to think, but it's true. I would worry about a speed defense in the cold or rain, but they've played very well in the elements recently. And, historically with Manning, the Colts have actually been very good in the snow and rain. That's contrary to popular opinion, but only because of two famous struggles against the Patriots in the playoffs -- but I'd argue that was more the Pats being a superior team than the elements. The elements didn't affect the Colts last night, it was injuries, shoddy special teams play and a poor game from Manning and the backup WR's and offensive linemen. Finally, I am NOT saying the Colts beat the Pats in the playoffs. Who knows if they'll even play? Especially since the Colts will almost certainly have to beat the Steelers to get there. But, if they do meet, the elements won't beat the Colts, though the Pats very well might.