Messages

Wow, that looks much better.

I wonder if he'll bring some of his recruits with him. They'll probably get busted for cocaine possession anyways.

That's my guess. There simply isn't enough room in the spot the rendering is, unless they removed a transformer and the round observatory stand. This thing is oval and takes up some space. It's on the east end of Gellerson, which was just an open field. I could be wrong, but a lot more work would be needed to put the solar furnace in the location of the rendering, and the location I mentioned obviously could start right away.

This oval thing is going up next to Gellerson.

The speed at which these buildings are put up is astonishing. I swear they literally put up the second floor in one day.

UCLA. They'd be smart enough to foul Buggs each time he touches the ball. Don't think this one would be close.

[having practiced the last four minutes of the game with a six point lead or the last four plays of the game when down by 6 points is beneficial]

From Coach Carlson's football blog:

Our team period each day will focus on certain key game day situations. This gives our players a feeling of "being there" when they confront them in a game. Practice simulations are never exactly like a true game. However, having practiced the last four minutes of the game with a six point lead or the last four plays of the game when down by 6 points is beneficial.  The players can develop the confidence that I have practiced this situation and I am ready to execute and be successful.

I really think they should worry about not getting blown out first. They lost all but one game substantially, so they are rarely in a situation that they blow a lead or can't come from behind. Practicing close game situations are pointless when you can't get the basics down to make a non-d1 game close.

Technically, we aren't the last team to win an NCAA game...when Oakland won their "play-in" game, they officially won an NCAA game, and got an extra "full share" of money for it.

If it doesn't count in bracket-pools, it doesn't count as a legitimate tournament win 

Woo number 103!

[Top 100 RPI Wins:]

Went over and re-introduced myself to the False Prophet's Board as they were entertaining the idea of Valpo possibly playing at the Mabee Center in a later round of this tournament.  They are just as uptight as ever . . . 

Yeah, I looked at that and found it odd they were tearing Valpo for joining the Horizon League. The Summit League is terrible; we're the last team to win a NCAA tourney game for the conference (1998).

As far as Iiona:
Top 100 RPI Wins:

• 42 - Richmond
• 78 - Long Island
• 88 - Hofstra
• 98 - St. Peters (2 of 3)
• 99 - Fairfield

Sub-200 RPI Losses:

• 253 - Bryant
• (199 - Sienna)

And Valpo's for comparison:

Top 100 RPI Wins:

• 36 - Butler
• 40 - Missouri St.
• 44 - Cleveland St
• 51 - Oakland
• 97 - Milwaukee

Sub-200 RPI Losses:

• 337 - Toledo
• 202 - Loyola

And for fun's sake, lets do Oral Roberts:
Top 100 RPI Wins:

Sub-200 RPI Losses:

• 240 - North Dakota St.

And they wonder why we joined the Horizon?

Do the big conferences not accept CBI and CIT bids, or does the CBI and CIT not go after those teams?  I'm thinking about Baylor and Minnesota.  I'm sure there are others.

The CIT is mid-major only, so they don't invite power conference schools. This way they're getting teams with a higher winning percentage, so a post-season birth actually makes sense. As for the CBI, they actually do invite power conference teams, but many of them turn it down. Even Drexel said "NIT or nothing". I know Ole Miss said they wouldn't bother with the CBI, as well as Maryland. I'm sure Baylor said the same thing.

Valpo's RPI (71) the 18th best team out of those who did not go dancing. Above 15 teams who are in. 4th best not in NIT. 3rd best in the CIT. 2nd best of CBI teams.