Swan88

From Eric Bossi, today, at Rivals: Finally there is Nebraska. I get it, the Huskers don't have very many impressive wins on their schedule. But, they did go 13-5 in the Big Ten and won 22 games. In my mind that should make them a lock for the NCAA Tournament over some of these teams I see projected to make the field with losing conference records. How far do Tim Miles and the Huskers have to make it to lock up a bid? Would the committee really leave out a team with that kind of record in a major conference?

Yes! And Bill Moos is making the case for Nebrasketball--apparently to good effect. Here's a report from 247 (italics and bold face are added for emphasis): If you hear any griping about the Big Ten men's basketball tournament being moved up a week so that it can be played in New York City, it's not coming from Bill Moos. It's scheduled when it is. Complaining won't change it. Better to take an optimistic view of it, Moos thinks. Better to try to use this setup to your advantage. And that's exactly what Nebraska's athletic director hopes to do. Most years, the Big Ten tournament's title game finishes within an hour of the NCAA tournament selection show. This year, seven days separate the two. Seven days for Husker fans to worry until the hives show up, perhaps. Also seven days for Moos to be on the phone with people who matter, perhaps. So, no complaining from his mouth. "Because it gives me, and others that may be on the bubble, an extra week to work the committee," Moos said Tuesday during a radio appearance on the Husker Sports Network. "And many times they're not answering the phone in another week. But they may be answering it now. And so I'm working on that on a daily basis, and feeling pretty good about things."

Gotta love this:

Check out this article from Land of Ten. Here's what Bill Moos says (quoted in the article) about Nebraska being clean in light of recent disclosures about other programs: "Moos said the Huskers would not be implicated in any recruiting issues dug up by the FBI. . . . Moos said he’d know if there was “even a speck of a chance” of any issues." Here's a quote about the FBI investigation from Bill Moos that he gave on the radio that's transcribed in the article:

That's pretty funny tweeting by Tim Miles. Predictive metrics are almost always wrong. Here are some old and time-honored adages on predicting: --“Prediction is difficult, especially if it’s about the future” (from Nils Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics). --“Those who have knowledge, don’t predict. Those who predict, don’t have knowledge” (from Lao Tzu, ancient Chinese poet). --“I always avoid prophesying beforehand because it is much better to prophesy after the event has already taken place” (from Winston Churchill). --“Forecasting is the art of saying what will happen, and then explaining why it didn’t” (Anonymous).

You are probably right, is my guess.

This will be interesting. You've gotta figure the new disclosures of Arizona phone taps, for example, are intended to get information out to the public on a worst-offender (someone they have dead-to-rights on solid evidence) before the Selection Committee does its thing. This puts incredible pressure on lots of people--not just the Committee, but on colleges as well. Imagine you're the head honcho at Arizona right now. Do you want your team going into the Tournament under this cloud of wrong-doing evidence, facing the prospect of vacating any wins, and also facing potential NCAA penalties without taking self-imposed penalties first? Wouldn't you rather bite the bullet now, fire the coach, withdraw from the Tournament, and begin rehabilitation efforts? Maybe. Maybe not. But such discussions are going on right now in lots of contexts. And what if you are the head honcho, for further example, at a college where wrong-doing has been going on, you know there is a problem, but the extent of the problem is not yet public. What do you do? Lots of people have gotta be sweating this right now . . . profusely.

Leslee Smith was well on his way to being a huge success, when he blew a knee in the summer before his senior year—and he was never the same again.

The Idea, presumably, is to provide an over-all picture of each team. One or two outlier results every now and then for any team (every team has them) will be balanced out over time. However, it seems that a strong bias exits in favor of early season results. In years past, selection committees said they focused on late-season trends over early-season results. Explanation this year appear to be the opposite.

Check out the number of views, likes and retweets on this ESPN tweet:

And how does a team come in at #35 with six losses in their last 11 games, including four blow-out losses by 14, 20, 22 and 23 point margins?

That’s a good sign, this season, for a Husker win!

Here, here! It’s like everyone thinking that Oklahoma is all-world. Turns out they aren’t. But those early perceptions are almost set in stone. And everyone still believes the Big XII is a great conference, based in part on Oklahoma’s no-longer-accurate stature.

Neb. 70 Ill. 60

Some good stuff:

Yeah. And it’s good practice for later to be in a need-to-win mode. Michigan St. today is probably an example of what happens when a team thinks they’ve got things in the bag.

I’d give you an up arrow for your down arrow, if I could.

Wow! My first-ever down vote. Thanks for the honor, Cookie.

He’s bragging to a fan base that has multiple national championships in multiple sports across multiple decades, Against that backdrop . . . brag on!

Ha! Jay on a Husker Board. Many on this board don’t share your gushing. But as long as we’re doing hypotheticals, your school was thoroughly in bed with a guy charged by the FBI with felony misbehavior and total disregard for rules. So, we all might all keep our powder dry for awhile.

Wouldn’t put much stock in any team-specific comments. Acknowledging legitimate arguments a team might have is good information management: if a team is left out, they need to know that all factors in their favor were duly considered.

Assuming Nebrasketball is clean (this seems like a reasonable assumption so far), Tim Miles & Co. have probably achieved this year the greatest level of job security imaginable. Look at it this way: they’ve managed to create a Tournament-level team, while playing by-the-book, in competition with 50 programs who aren’t. That’s a huge achievement and worthy of great celebration and reward! Heck, that’s worthy of the same reward-level as at least a Sweet 16 or even a Final Four appearance.If the scandal plays out anywhere near what the Yahoo article describes, and if Nebrasketball is clean under Miles & Co., the future is very bright for Nebrasketball.If, on the other hand, we aren’t clean, . . .

Assuming Nebrasketball is clean, the Committee might want to make sure we get in. Here’s why. The FBI thing is getting scary for the entirety of College Basketball—up to 50 teams could be affected!!!Here are excerpts from this week’s Yahoo article that created the stir:what’s becoming increasingly clear . . . is that the breadth of potential NCAA rules violations uncovered is wide enough to fundamentally and indelibly alter the sport of college basketball.The soundtrack . . . is essentially a ticking time bomb, which will inevitably explode. It will impact every major conference, Hall of Fame coaches, a score of current top players and some of the nation’s most distinguished and respected programs.“When this all comes out, Hall of Fame coaches should be scared, lottery picks won’t be eligible to play and almost half of the 16 teams the NCAA showed on its initial NCAA tournament show this weekend should worry about their appearance being vacated.”In terms of NCAA rules, multiple sources told Yahoo Sports that the material obtained threatens the fundamental structure and integrity of the sport, as there’s potentially as many 50 college basketball programs that could end up compromised in some way.NCAA officials are staring at the prospect of a tournament with a winner that will likely be vacating its title – and many others eventually vacating their appearances. . . . The most fascinating and tricky variable here is time.

Now we’re doing sectarian religion?