Cookie Miller Wasn't Dirty

For all we know, Rasmussen was exhausted so when a reporter asked him a question on his way to his car, he gave a brief answer that doesn't encapsulate the whole truth.

Someone on Red Sea Scrolls says they know a guy that's high up in the Creighton Athletic Department, and that he says we're in. Of course, it could be a Jaysker trying to get our hopes up.

Well none of them are tournament teams. I'm sure the Minnesota win will be discussed, but even if they deem it a win against a "tournament" team, we still only have two. And both were at home.

Bad news is that none of those three criteria compare to any of the major conference bubble teams.

Yikes.

I'm not writing him off as a transfer yet. But if the rumors that his family was pressuring him to leave mid-season were true, I think it's entirely possible they'll try to do the same during the offseason. I do think Jordy looked happy since his return, so I hope he does come back.

So I know next season isn't really the focus of Nebrasketball over the next two hours... but does anyone have an idea what we do if Jordy transfers? We'll have no bigs outside of Tanner, who doesn't appear to be big or talented enough to be a true Big Ten player, and Heiman, who will need a couple years before he's physically ready. I felt like our team was at its best this year when Jordy only played 10 minutes and Duby didn't play at all. We actually defended and rebounded better with Cope and Roby at 4-5. But I still think we could use an actual big man to contribute 10-15 minutes a night.

Alright, here's my attempt at challenging Lunardi. I've probably spent about 1% of the time he has on it. 1 - UVA, Nova, KU, Xavier 2 - UNC, Duke, Cincy, Purdue 3 - MSU, Michigan, Tenn, Arizona 4 - Auburn, Kentucky, Houston, West Va 5 - Wichita, Gonzaga, Tex Tech, Clemson 6 - Florida, tOSU, TCU, Arkansas 7 - Miami, A&M, Mizzou, Butler 8 - Bama, Va Tech, K-State, Nevada 9 - URI, Seton Hall, Providence, Creighton 10 - UCLA, USC, NC State, Texas 11 - ASU, Cuse, FSU, L'ville, NMSU, Loyola-Chicago 12 - So Dak State, San Diego State, Buffalo, Davidson 13 - Marshall, Murray St, Charleston, Montana 14 - UNCG, Bucknell, Wright St, Penn 15 - Lipscomb, Iona, SFA, Georgia St 16 - CSFU, UMBC, Radford, Tex Southern, LIU Brooklyn, NC Central

Well we'll have a chance to find out. I'm pretty sure the committee releases their First Four Out, and those four are automatically the one seeds in the NIT.

1. Arizona State 2. Baylor 3. Florida State 4. Louisville 5. Marquette 6. Middle Tennessee I see ASU, FSU, and Louisville in over us, and I have us as the first team out. Thanks Rhode Island. So basically if three of the above teams are announced to be in, I will not be feeling good. My only hope after that would be either Syracuse or Texas is left out, but by then we'll obviously know whether or not we're in.

Crap. I honestly think that just knocked us out.

I've heard that the Nebraska pep band has been approved for a funds request for a trip to Dayton. Take that FWIW.

The final game of importance.... Rhode Island is not doing us any favors. Down 8 with 11 minutes left. I'm guessing the committee has the field set by now with these exceptions: 1. Will Davidson beat Rhode Island? If so, the last team in (maybe us?) is now out and IMO Rhode Island drops from an 8 to a 9 seed. 2. Seeding Tennessee and Kentucky. I think Tennessee is a 3 seed no matter what. I'm going with a 4 for Kentucky if they win and a 5 if they lose. 3. Seeding Cincinnati and Houston. Although I think Cincy is a 2 and Houston a 4 no matter what. Just my opinions. Except the Davidson part. Them winning really does knock someone out!

Thanks, I appreciate that. Maybe we can chalk it up to bias, but I just have a good feeling about it. It's pretty hard for me to justify getting in over the other four I bolded, but I believe we have a strong case against the others. Safe to say I'll be on the edge of my seat tomorrow for that Rhode Island game.

So heading into the last day, here's what I've got. The following 19 teams are fighting for 10 spots (nine if Davidson beats Rhode Island tomorrow): Group 1: I'd be surprised if any of these teams gets left out. Obviously USC is an auto-bid if they win tonight. Alabama, UCLA, NC State, USC, Florida State Group 2: I see these 11 teams vying for the final five spots (four if URI loses) - I predict the bolded get in Texas, Louisville, Syracuse, Arizona State, Nebraska, St. Mary's, St. Bonaventure, Penn State, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, Baylor Group 3: I'd be surprised if any of these get in, but maybe it could happen Oklahoma State, Marquette, Middle Tennessee

Initially I thought the same thing you did. But here's how many teams from each major conference that were .500 or better: ACC: 9 - Eight are getting in the tournament; Louisville at 9-9 is on the bubble; 2 bubble teams are below .500 (Cuse & ND) Big XII: 5 - All five are getting in; 4 bubble teams are below .500 (OU, OSU, Texas, Baylor) Big East: 7 - Six are getting in; Marquette at 9-9 is on the bubble Big Ten: 7 - Four are getting in; Nebraska & PSU on the bubble; Indiana not getting in Pac-12: 7 - Arizona is the only guarantee right now; USC & UCLA likely in; Utah, Stanford, Oregon, & Washington are likely out; ASU below .500 SEC: 8 - Seven are getting in; Miss State at 9-9 is on the bubble; Alabama is below .500 and on the bubble So really, if you implemented this rule, you'd only have to eliminate Syracuse, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, Okie State, Texas, Baylor, Arizona State, and Alabama from bubble contention. You'd still have 8+5+6+4+1+7 = 31 locks. Add in the six mid-major locks: Cincy, Houston, Wichita, Nevada, Gonzaga, Rhode Island. That brings us to 37 locks, consisting of 10 conferences, which brings us down to 27 at-large locks. So you'd have to fill out the final nine spots with the following 14 teams: Louisville, Marquette, Nebraska, Penn State, USC, UCLA, Utah, Stanford, Oregon, Washington, Mississippi State, St. Bonaventure, Middle Tennessee, and Saint Mary's To me, the tournament wouldn't be watered down at all. You're really just eliminating some bubble teams in favor of other bubble teams based on the criteria. I actually think it'd be a fair rule to implement.

I side with her views as well. One thing I'll say, though, is that it really annoys me when people say, "The athletes are the ones bringing in the money." That's totally discounting all the work that goes into organizing a league, organizing a team, coaching a team, running marketing promotions, televising the event, etc. I get that the basis of all of these functions is the game itself, which is being played by the players. But obviously, without everyone else doing their job, the players wouldn't have anyone to watch the games and give them money (or in the NCAA's case: give them scholarships, food, clothing, publicity, etc). So clearly everyone deserves a piece of the pie, whether you're talking professional or college sports. Then the debate is about how big a slice each group gets, which in my opinion should be determined by the groups themselves, not the government. And when an athlete decides to put pen to paper and sign with an NCAA-affiliated organization, they're agreeing to a contract that pays them in scholarships, food, clothing, publicity, etc. Nobody forced them to do that. In a free market, anyone can create any league they want, and if the NCAA wants to create a league where the payment doesn't involve a paycheck, that's their right. It's the job of the free market to create a "better" option if the athletes feel like they aren't getting an appropriate portion of the pie. And even if the NCAA were forced by the government to pay their athletes... the NCAA made $105m in 2017. If we divided that up between ONLY the FBS scholarship football players, that would come out to about $10k per person (130 teams x 85 players = 11,050 players). First of all, the benefits they receive are far greater than that. Second of all, that ignores all the FCS, D-II, and D-III players, and we haven't even addressed any other sport yet. And what about the walk-ons? It simply wouldn't work.

Fair enough. I mean to me it’s pretty much no chance any would make it, so just want to clarify for those that don’t follow as closely so they don’t end up wasting emotional investment in any of those games lol

Here’s a funny quirk in Lunardi’s bracket... yesterday he had MTSU as a 12 seed, which was below every at-large team. To me, that implies they’d be on the outside-looking-in if they were subject to at-large status. So, they lose to Doc’s horrible So Miss team, and suddenly they’re an 11 seed that would be in as an at-large team and bumping Louisville out. If he thought their resume was better than Louisville’s before last night, shouldn’t he have seeded them as a 10 or 11 instead of a 12? Amazing that this is his job and he doesn’t think of this stuff.

@HuskerFever Louisiana, Western Kentucky, Buffalo, and New Mexico State will not be receiving at-large bids. We don’t need to worry about them winning their tournaments.

If there’s one thing I’ve learned over the years, it’s that the amount of basketball I watch has no correlation to how I do in my bracket. If anything, it has a negative correlation. It’s why March Madness is so fun... it’s unpredictable.

http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2018/team-sheet?team=Middle-Tennessee If this resume gets MTSU in over us... wow what a joke that would be. Best wins are Murray State and Western Kentucky. Seven losses and four of them are bad. Their reputation from the past two tournaments is the only thing giving their chances any weight.

This Nevada game is massive and they aren't doing well so far.

And KSU ends up wining. Drat. They were probably in anyways. More importantly, need Alabama to lose this one. They're up 1 with 3 mins left.

TCU buzzer beater to send it to OT vs K-State!