KZRider

Dyslexia is murder isn't it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-Ln_rqPpPk

I've been following the team since the early 60s and don't have tickets. Really. No, I'm not kidding. Seriously. It's true. Please believe me. DON'T MAKE ME BEG! All right then, I'll beg. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4w454Lape8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SheaMMd8H5g

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xV7ZcVFSWWU

I tell my wife I got grandkids! She's surprised.

I am good with MSU winning. Actually, I just don't like Iowa -- a lot! So I'm good with them LOSING as often as possible. Really the only B1G team I feel that way about.

Just so they stay away from our guy. Can we put up a fence around Miles?

True about how cool it is NOT to be on the list and I love your new signature. PSU is the most Jekyll and Hyde team in the conference. They have pulled off a couple of stunning wins but have laid eggs most of the time. I'm voting for them to sink to the bottom their last two are on the road and the tie breakers don't favor them.

I vote for starting Peltz with instructions to foul immediately after the tip. Then he gets his name on the stat sheet and gives Miles a chance to sub in for him.

True that Terran didn't score a lot but IMO he played very well. Shields was the beneficiary of a good game plan and Terran was all about TEAM not himself to let it work out that way.

Just... no speedos, please.

Nice job all who met them. Wish I could have joined you. For those of us who don't tweet, how did the players react? I hope they are feeling our love.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiQazjMVBMI

Well, for those of us who are older, there were some pretty good teams under Joe Cipriano and Moe Iba. If the NCAA tournament had been seeded like it is now, we would have had several teams earn bids under them. Someone with a better knowledge of it can help out but I think they only took 16 conference champions plus a few more at large. Since you've been following since the late 60s you just missed Cipriano's 65-66 squad. It was, IMO, the best team we ever had. Finished 2nd to Kansas and only lost 2 conference games. That said, I did not see this current season coming at the outset. I thought it would be a good season if we managed an upper half of the bottom finish and an NIT bid. I have more pride in how this team has done than any I recall. The only team in recent memory that come close are the "Mighty Mites" under Doc in 08-09 and all the games Ryan Anderson (all 6' 4" of him) effectively played center. I think they were only a win or two from a bid as well but they didn't get it.

Could they keep him on a medical scholarship and still have a spot open for another player? Isn't that how it worked out for us with Chris Balham?

Turnovers and Rebounds will be the difference. Take care of the ball and don't give them extra possessions and we have a good chance. Lose these two areas of the game and we are in trouble.

Did anyone get a pic of Coach Miles measuring the height of the basket. That would be so fun to see! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ugkzk2l2ZpM

We can play our way in without Creighton's help so I don't mind that they lost. Actually, as I inventory the deep inner workings of my psyche, I LIKE IT that they lost! It is almost on par with how much I like it whenever Texas loses at anything.

In two game win scenarios IMO it all depends on what games we win. Assuming all other B1G games the home teams win, it looks to me like it plays out this way. Ind (W), Wisc (L), 6 seed against Purdue (W) I DO NOT think that gets us in. We would still have to play and beat MSU Ind (L), Wisc (W), 6 seed against Purdue (W) I DO think that gets us in because the Wisc win would be a huge resume builder and we would have showed up in the B1G tournament. We would NOT have to beat MSU. Ind (W), Wisc (W), 4 seed bye against Iowa/PSU (L). UNCERTAIN because the last thing we show the selection committee will be a loss at the B1G tournament. However, they would be in the tough position of having, likely, to take Iowa and OSU but NOT taking the team seeded above them. Would the Wisc win overcome our B1G showing? Depends on how well Wisc does at the tournament. Ind (L), Wisc (L), 6 seed against Purdue (W), Quarter final against MSU (W). I DO think this gets us in because we will have reached the semi-final game of the B1G tournament and beating MSU twice would sway the committee.

This. Especially since one of those wins would be over Wisc which has to count for a lot. First, go beat Indiana!

My apologies for making a wrong assumption. Went looking for the tie breaking rules and found this B1G site. Unless these are not current, it would seem to me that, since our records against Mich are the same (both 0-1) it go to MSU presuming they remain #2 and our victory over MSU would trump OSU's, at best, 1-1 record. I've copied the rules below. Perhaps someone else understands this better. A. Two-team tie: 1. Results of head-to-head competition during the regular-season. 2. Each team's record vs. the team occupying the highest position in the final regular-season standings (or in the case of a tie for the championship, the next highest position in the regular-season standings), continuing down through the standings until one team gains an advantage. a. When arriving at another pair of tied teams while comparing records, use each team's record against the collective tied teams as a group (prior to their own tie-breaking procedures), rather than the performance against the individual tied teams. b. When comparing records against a single team or a group of teams, the higher winning percentage shall prevail, even if the number of games played against the team or group are unequal (i.e., 2-0 is better than 3-1, but 2-0 is not better than 1-0). 3. Won-loss percentage of all Division I opponents. 4. Coin toss conducted by the Commissioner or designee. B. Multiple team tie: 1. Results of head-to-head competition during the regular-season. a. When comparing records against the tied teams, the team with the higher winning percentage shall prevail, even if the number of games played against the team or group are unequal (i.e., 2-0 is better than 3-1, but 2-0 is not better than 1-0). b. After the top team among the tied teams is determined, the second team is ranked by its record among the original tied teams, not the head-to-head record vs. the remaining team(s). 2. If the remaining teams are still tied, then each tied team's record shall be compared to the team occupying the highest position in the final regular-season standings, continuing down through the standings until one team gains an advantage. a. When arriving at another pair of tied teams while comparing records, use each team's record against the collective tied teams as a group (prior to their own tie-breaking procedures), rather than the performance against the individual tied teams. b. When comparing records against a single team or group of teams, the higher winning percentage shall prevail, even if the number of games played against the team or group are unequal (i.e., 2-0 is better than 3-1, but 2-0 is not better than 1-0). 3. Won-loss percentage of Division I opponents. 4. Coin toss conducted by Commissioner or designee.

Guess I assumed the the margin of victory there as opposed to here would be the next tie breaker. What is it?

Well, Nebraska winning out and Wisc losing 1 go hand in hand.

Have to appreciate the positive approach!