BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Forum rules
"The opinions expressed on this board are property of the poster and do not reflect the opinion of EagleOutsider, Boston College or Boston College Athletics"

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby MattTheEagle on Thu Jan 27, 2011 10:05 pm

BC923 {l Wrote}:
Eagledom {l Wrote}:
BC923 {l Wrote}:
Eagledom {l Wrote}:
MattTheEagle {l Wrote}:I don't know what's happening with Reggie Jackson. He seems to have lost his shot. Is there something that happened in practice or something that caused him to come off the bench tonight? This is really weird but Jackson has really been off tonight.


I think there's more to this story. His performance and his effort SUCKED tonight.

less his effort than his ability. He is trying too hard to find his way into the game.

also we will cover the spread.


his effort was dogshit

explain

Eagledom is right. He didn't seem to bring the intensity. He took bad shots, didn't run, and didn't force turnovers. Additionally, Reggie couldn't get to the line and when he did it almost looked like he didn't care about his free throws (he was really 1-3 if you count the lane violation one). He just didn't look like the same player tonight and yes Duke is a great team, but he definitely wasn't working as hard as the rest of the team was tonight. And yes...there has to be more to this story it can't just be coincidence that Reggie comes off the bench and has one of the worst performances I have ever seen from him (and I am including his two years under Skinner).
MattTheEagle
Campion Hall
 
Posts: 1067
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 12:30 pm
Karma: 23

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby eepstein0 on Thu Jan 27, 2011 10:10 pm

joemack13 {l Wrote}:i think we need some more rubin, he obviously isn't a game-changer but i think we need those 3's to get our momentum going. i feel like since he's become invisible our offense has taken a bad turn


You're nuts...Elmore played great tonight. Rubin is fine playing 5-10 minutes of the bench but there's no way he should be starting and playing 30+ minutes.
User avatar
eepstein0
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 17681
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:35 pm
Karma: -289

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby pick6pedro on Thu Jan 27, 2011 10:12 pm

EagleDave {l Wrote}:
joemack13 {l Wrote}:i felt like i didn't see rubin at all tonight, am i just not noticing him?


He didn't play...no reason given. He was either a victim of the plague that nearly killed Joe Trapani on Saturday or he was benched for playing dog spit the last 2 weeks.


I thought I saw him out there for a very short gig. Maybe not.
User avatar
pick6pedro
Fulton Hall
 
Posts: 11582
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 2:25 pm
Location: A Chalupa Stand
Karma: 2633

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby bcnyceagle on Thu Jan 27, 2011 10:14 pm

pick6pedro {l Wrote}:
EagleDave {l Wrote}:
joemack13 {l Wrote}:i felt like i didn't see rubin at all tonight, am i just not noticing him?


He didn't play...no reason given. He was either a victim of the plague that nearly killed Joe Trapani on Saturday or he was benched for playing dog spit the last 2 weeks.


I thought I saw him out there for a very short gig. Maybe not.


He was there.
bcnyceagle
Cushing Hall
 
Posts: 2067
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 11:13 pm
Karma: 161

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby joemack13 on Thu Jan 27, 2011 10:16 pm

pick6pedro {l Wrote}:
EagleDave {l Wrote}:
joemack13 {l Wrote}:i felt like i didn't see rubin at all tonight, am i just not noticing him?


He didn't play...no reason given. He was either a victim of the plague that nearly killed Joe Trapani on Saturday or he was benched for playing dog spit the last 2 weeks.


I thought I saw him out there for a very short gig. Maybe not.


I think he ended the game with some garbage minutes.
joemack13
Campion Hall
 
Posts: 1099
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 10:40 am
Karma: 127

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby joemack13 on Thu Jan 27, 2011 10:20 pm

eepstein0 {l Wrote}:
joemack13 {l Wrote}:i think we need some more rubin, he obviously isn't a game-changer but i think we need those 3's to get our momentum going. i feel like since he's become invisible our offense has taken a bad turn


You're nuts...Elmore played great tonight. Rubin is fine playing 5-10 minutes of the bench but there's no way he should be starting and playing 30+ minutes.


Elmore had ONE good night. If your argument was for Raji then I could see that. Excluding tonight Rubin should by all means be getting more minutes than elmore. I'm just trying to point out that our consistent offensive performance has disappeared along with Rubin, which might just mean they both went away with conference play. I didn't think Duke's defense was so great, but UVA and especially FSU were challenges, maybe we're just losing our confidence.
joemack13
Campion Hall
 
Posts: 1099
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 10:40 am
Karma: 127

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby GreenvilleEagle on Thu Jan 27, 2011 10:58 pm

Eagledom {l Wrote}:
MattTheEagle {l Wrote}:I don't know what's happening with Reggie Jackson. He seems to have lost his shot. Is there something that happened in practice or something that caused him to come off the bench tonight? This is really weird but Jackson has really been off tonight.


I think there's more to this story. His performance and his effort SUCKED tonight.


:oj
GreenvilleEagle
Campion Hall
 
Posts: 1033
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 9:59 pm
Karma: -31

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby Dirtywater75 on Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:16 am

It wouldn't surprise me to learn that Jackson was under the weather tonight. Team has had a flu bug going around. Flu shots for these guys next year.
Dirtywater75
Carney Hall
 
Posts: 344
Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 10:40 am
Karma: 48

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby Art Vandelay on Fri Jan 28, 2011 6:47 am

Eagledom {l Wrote}:
BC923 {l Wrote}:
Eagledom {l Wrote}:
BC923 {l Wrote}:
Eagledom {l Wrote}:
MattTheEagle {l Wrote}:I don't know what's happening with Reggie Jackson. He seems to have lost his shot. Is there something that happened in practice or something that caused him to come off the bench tonight? This is really weird but Jackson has really been off tonight.


I think there's more to this story. His performance and his effort SUCKED tonight.

less his effort than his ability. He is trying too hard to find his way into the game.

also we will cover the spread.


his effort was dogshit

explain


did you watch? He didn't play with the speed or effort that he normally does. He looked either sick or uninterested. It was obvious to the announcers too.


While I agree his effort and intensity did not seem to be there I don't know if I'd be going to Gminski and Brando for support of my case. Those guys were terrible.
Art Vandelay
McGuinn Hall
 
Posts: 616
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 10:57 am
Karma: 28

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby Art Vandelay on Fri Jan 28, 2011 6:59 am

joemack13 {l Wrote}:
eepstein0 {l Wrote}:
joemack13 {l Wrote}:i think we need some more rubin, he obviously isn't a game-changer but i think we need those 3's to get our momentum going. i feel like since he's become invisible our offense has taken a bad turn


You're nuts...Elmore played great tonight. Rubin is fine playing 5-10 minutes of the bench but there's no way he should be starting and playing 30+ minutes.


Elmore had ONE good night. If your argument was for Raji then I could see that. Excluding tonight Rubin should by all means be getting more minutes than elmore. I'm just trying to point out that our consistent offensive performance has disappeared along with Rubin, which might just mean they both went away with conference play. I didn't think Duke's defense was so great, but UVA and especially FSU were challenges, maybe we're just losing our confidence.


Rubin has not played well the past few games and earned his spot on the bench. When you score 3 points over 4 games averaging 16+ minutes a game you are not getting it done. I think there are a couple of factors at work. 1) increased competition in ACC play. It's no coincidence that his most productive game (14pts, 6 Rebounds) came against Holy Cross. 2) He is a freshman and not used to the rigors of an NCAA season and his body is not holding up. Keep in mind this kid is listed as 6-6 170. A stiff wind will knock him down so it's not surpising to see him slow down a little after 20 games or so. He needs to hit the weight room hard this offseason and he'll be better equipped to handle it. And someone on campus show him where Rakim got his steak and cheese so he can pack on some weight. For now he should come of the bench and try to give them a spark in limited minutes.
Art Vandelay
McGuinn Hall
 
Posts: 616
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 10:57 am
Karma: 28

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby BC923 on Fri Jan 28, 2011 8:58 am

Dirtywater75 {l Wrote}:It wouldn't surprise me to learn that Jackson was under the weather tonight. Team has had a flu bug going around. Flu shots for these guys next year.

yeah, the globe article hinted that he might not have been practicing hard enough to keep his spot. I'll bet there is some kind of illness there.
BC923
Merkert Hall
 
Posts: 3461
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 10:11 pm
Karma: 457

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby Art Vandelay on Fri Jan 28, 2011 9:30 am

TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:two questions -

(1) did anyone see peas and carrot there? i didn't but i was in and out of the game after the blowout started. did they have the stomach flu?

(b) are the half-fullers still predicting 20 wins and 10-6 in the acc with an invite to the ncaa tournament? any of them still interested enough to place a wager on it?


Careful with all that realism or someone will accuse you of not liking BC Basketball.
Art Vandelay
McGuinn Hall
 
Posts: 616
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 10:57 am
Karma: 28

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby eepstein0 on Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:39 am

I will still take 19-11 and 9-7 in the ACC. One win in the ACC Tourney and an invite to the NCAAs. Duke and FSU especially on the road are better than we are. The rest of this crappy conference is not. So yea 20 wins total and 10 in the ACC sounds perfect.
User avatar
eepstein0
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 17681
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:35 pm
Karma: -289

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby twballgame9 on Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:41 am

I still say this is a 20-win team. This conference blows.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 34379
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2489

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby GodofBeasts94 on Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:47 am

[quote="TobaccoRoadEagle"]two questions -

(1) did anyone see peas and carrot there? i didn't but i was in and out of the game after the blowout started. did they have the stomach flu?

(b) are the half-fullers still predicting 20 wins and 10-6 in the acc with an invite to the ncaa tournament? any of them still interested enough to place a wager on it?[/q]

I'm not a wagering man but I'm certainly not tossing in the towel on 20 wins and a POSSIBLE berth in the tourney. I see 9 conference wins as very doable:

Win EITHER UNC or VT at home (5-4);
Lose to Clemson on the road (5-5);
Win over MD at home (6-5);
Lose to UNC on the road (6-6);
Beat Miami at home (7-6);
Win EITHER Virginia or VT on the road (8-7);
Beat Wake at home (9-7)

Then we win one in the tournament and we're 20-12. Losses to Yale and Harvard obviously work against us. But if we finish 4th or 5th in the ACC with a winning conference record -- even in a diminished year for the conference -- we'd have a decent shot.
GodofBeasts94
Carney Hall
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 8:24 am
Karma: -2

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby cvilleagle on Fri Jan 28, 2011 10:51 am

I'm still optimistic that we'll win it all.

And by "it" I mean the NIT.
Image
User avatar
cvilleagle
Devlin Hall
 
Posts: 6639
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 4:14 pm
Karma: 1170

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby Art Vandelay on Fri Jan 28, 2011 12:05 pm

GodofBeasts94 {l Wrote}:
TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:two questions -

(1) did anyone see peas and carrot there? i didn't but i was in and out of the game after the blowout started. did they have the stomach flu?

(b) are the half-fullers still predicting 20 wins and 10-6 in the acc with an invite to the ncaa tournament? any of them still interested enough to place a wager on it?[/q]

I'm not a wagering man but I'm certainly not tossing in the towel on 20 wins and a POSSIBLE berth in the tourney. I see 9 conference wins as very doable:

Win EITHER UNC or VT at home (5-4);
Lose to Clemson on the road (5-5);
Win over MD at home (6-5);
Lose to UNC on the road (6-6);
Beat Miami at home (7-6);
Win EITHER Virginia or VT on the road (8-7);
Beat Wake at home (9-7)

Then we win one in the tournament and we're 20-12. Losses to Yale and Harvard obviously work against us. But if we finish 4th or 5th in the ACC with a winning conference record -- even in a diminished year for the conference -- we'd have a decent shot.


What you are saying above is not unreasonable, but with the ACC what it is this year I don't know that 20 wins overall and 9-7 gets us in. When you factor in bad losses to Harvard, Yale and URI and only one truly good win over A&M I don't see that gettng us there.
Art Vandelay
McGuinn Hall
 
Posts: 616
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 10:57 am
Karma: 28

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby GodofBeasts94 on Fri Jan 28, 2011 12:30 pm

Art Vandelay {l Wrote}:
GodofBeasts94 {l Wrote}:
TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:two questions -

(1) did anyone see peas and carrot there? i didn't but i was in and out of the game after the blowout started. did they have the stomach flu?

(b) are the half-fullers still predicting 20 wins and 10-6 in the acc with an invite to the ncaa tournament? any of them still interested enough to place a wager on it?[/q]

I'm not a wagering man but I'm certainly not tossing in the towel on 20 wins and a POSSIBLE berth in the tourney. I see 9 conference wins as very doable:

Win EITHER UNC or VT at home (5-4);
Lose to Clemson on the road (5-5);
Win over MD at home (6-5);
Lose to UNC on the road (6-6);
Beat Miami at home (7-6);
Win EITHER Virginia or VT on the road (8-7);
Beat Wake at home (9-7)

Then we win one in the tournament and we're 20-12. Losses to Yale and Harvard obviously work against us. But if we finish 4th or 5th in the ACC with a winning conference record -- even in a diminished year for the conference -- we'd have a decent shot.


What you are saying above is not unreasonable, but with the ACC what it is this year I don't know that 20 wins overall and 9-7 gets us in. When you factor in bad losses to Harvard, Yale and URI and only one truly good win over A&M I don't see that gettng us there.


I think it helps that we will have SIGNIFICANTLY over-achieved and we will have done so with Steve Donahue at the helm -- one of last year's darling stories. Picked to finish 10th, with a new system being implemented, with two walk-ons getting regular playing time, transformed from the most boring offensive team in America to one of the more efficient offenses, with a marquis player in Reggie Jackson....there will be people on the committee arguing that we should make it despite our 0-2 record against the Ivies. More, if we finish in the top 5, Donahue may well be ACC Coach of the Year -- I guess that probably won't be announced in time for the selection committee....but his accomplishment (and the team's) will be noted.

It would be different if we were underachieving; then I might agree with you that 9-7 isn't good enough......
GodofBeasts94
Carney Hall
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 8:24 am
Karma: -2

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby pick6pedro on Fri Jan 28, 2011 12:48 pm

GodofBeasts94 {l Wrote}:
Art Vandelay {l Wrote}:
GodofBeasts94 {l Wrote}:
TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:two questions -

(1) did anyone see peas and carrot there? i didn't but i was in and out of the game after the blowout started. did they have the stomach flu?

(b) are the half-fullers still predicting 20 wins and 10-6 in the acc with an invite to the ncaa tournament? any of them still interested enough to place a wager on it?[/q]

I'm not a wagering man but I'm certainly not tossing in the towel on 20 wins and a POSSIBLE berth in the tourney. I see 9 conference wins as very doable:

Win EITHER UNC or VT at home (5-4);
Lose to Clemson on the road (5-5);
Win over MD at home (6-5);
Lose to UNC on the road (6-6);
Beat Miami at home (7-6);
Win EITHER Virginia or VT on the road (8-7);
Beat Wake at home (9-7)

Then we win one in the tournament and we're 20-12. Losses to Yale and Harvard obviously work against us. But if we finish 4th or 5th in the ACC with a winning conference record -- even in a diminished year for the conference -- we'd have a decent shot.


What you are saying above is not unreasonable, but with the ACC what it is this year I don't know that 20 wins overall and 9-7 gets us in. When you factor in bad losses to Harvard, Yale and URI and only one truly good win over A&M I don't see that gettng us there.


I think it helps that we will have SIGNIFICANTLY over-achieved and we will have done so with Steve Donahue at the helm -- one of last year's darling stories. Picked to finish 10th, with a new system being implemented, with two walk-ons getting regular playing time, transformed from the most boring offensive team in America to one of the more efficient offenses, with a marquis player in Reggie Jackson....there will be people on the committee arguing that we should make it despite our 0-2 record against the Ivies. More, if we finish in the top 5, Donahue may well be ACC Coach of the Year -- I guess that probably won't be announced in time for the selection committee....but his accomplishment (and the team's) will be noted.

It would be different if we were underachieving; then I might agree with you that 9-7 isn't good enough......


Based on the above I'm not sure you fully understand the criteria the committee uses. Just sayin'.
User avatar
pick6pedro
Fulton Hall
 
Posts: 11582
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 2:25 pm
Location: A Chalupa Stand
Karma: 2633

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby Art Vandelay on Fri Jan 28, 2011 12:52 pm

GodofBeasts94 {l Wrote}:
Art Vandelay {l Wrote}:
GodofBeasts94 {l Wrote}:
TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:two questions -

(1) did anyone see peas and carrot there? i didn't but i was in and out of the game after the blowout started. did they have the stomach flu?

(b) are the half-fullers still predicting 20 wins and 10-6 in the acc with an invite to the ncaa tournament? any of them still interested enough to place a wager on it?[/q]

I'm not a wagering man but I'm certainly not tossing in the towel on 20 wins and a POSSIBLE berth in the tourney. I see 9 conference wins as very doable:

Win EITHER UNC or VT at home (5-4);
Lose to Clemson on the road (5-5);
Win over MD at home (6-5);
Lose to UNC on the road (6-6);
Beat Miami at home (7-6);
Win EITHER Virginia or VT on the road (8-7);
Beat Wake at home (9-7)

Then we win one in the tournament and we're 20-12. Losses to Yale and Harvard obviously work against us. But if we finish 4th or 5th in the ACC with a winning conference record -- even in a diminished year for the conference -- we'd have a decent shot.


What you are saying above is not unreasonable, but with the ACC what it is this year I don't know that 20 wins overall and 9-7 gets us in. When you factor in bad losses to Harvard, Yale and URI and only one truly good win over A&M I don't see that gettng us there.


I think it helps that we will have SIGNIFICANTLY over-achieved and we will have done so with Steve Donahue at the helm -- one of last year's darling stories. Picked to finish 10th, with a new system being implemented, with two walk-ons getting regular playing time, transformed from the most boring offensive team in America to one of the more efficient offenses, with a marquis player in Reggie Jackson....there will be people on the committee arguing that we should make it despite our 0-2 record against the Ivies. More, if we finish in the top 5, Donahue may well be ACC Coach of the Year -- I guess that probably won't be announced in time for the selection committee....but his accomplishment (and the team's) will be noted.

It would be different if we were underachieving; then I might agree with you that 9-7 isn't good enough......


You really think the committee takes into account the fact that it's a first year coach and we expected to suck more?
Art Vandelay
McGuinn Hall
 
Posts: 616
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 10:57 am
Karma: 28

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby BCEagle74 on Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:03 pm

We will get a bid and make the Sweet Sixteen.

Trapani has to stay within 8 feet of the hoop and Raji and Biko have to ht 3's and Regi has to be spectacularamunodwildman.
FALL 2011 WILL BE THE BEST EVER FOR BC SPORTS AT THE HEIGHTS!

Rettigun leading our Football team to 14-0 and a Title!

The Hoops Freshman starting a new Legacy!
The Icemen returneth for another shot at Title 5!

GO EAGLES!
BCEagle74
Fulton Hall
 
Posts: 13450
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 10:23 am
Karma: -4852

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby twballgame9 on Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:18 pm

GodofBeasts94 {l Wrote}:a marquis player in Reggie Jackson....


I just couldn't let that go. It stood out like a soar thumb.


Image
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 34379
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2489

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby GodofBeasts94 on Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:28 pm

Art Vandelay {l Wrote}:
GodofBeasts94 {l Wrote}:
Art Vandelay {l Wrote}:
GodofBeasts94 {l Wrote}:
TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:two questions -

(1) did anyone see peas and carrot there? i didn't but i was in and out of the game after the blowout started. did they have the stomach flu?

(b) are the half-fullers still predicting 20 wins and 10-6 in the acc with an invite to the ncaa tournament? any of them still interested enough to place a wager on it?[/q]

I'm not a wagering man but I'm certainly not tossing in the towel on 20 wins and a POSSIBLE berth in the tourney. I see 9 conference wins as very doable:

Win EITHER UNC or VT at home (5-4);
Lose to Clemson on the road (5-5);
Win over MD at home (6-5);
Lose to UNC on the road (6-6);
Beat Miami at home (7-6);
Win EITHER Virginia or VT on the road (8-7);
Beat Wake at home (9-7)

Then we win one in the tournament and we're 20-12. Losses to Yale and Harvard obviously work against us. But if we finish 4th or 5th in the ACC with a winning conference record -- even in a diminished year for the conference -- we'd have a decent shot.


What you are saying above is not unreasonable, but with the ACC what it is this year I don't know that 20 wins overall and 9-7 gets us in. When you factor in bad losses to Harvard, Yale and URI and only one truly good win over A&M I don't see that gettng us there.


I think it helps that we will have SIGNIFICANTLY over-achieved and we will have done so with Steve Donahue at the helm -- one of last year's darling stories. Picked to finish 10th, with a new system being implemented, with two walk-ons getting regular playing time, transformed from the most boring offensive team in America to one of the more efficient offenses, with a marquis player in Reggie Jackson....there will be people on the committee arguing that we should make it despite our 0-2 record against the Ivies. More, if we finish in the top 5, Donahue may well be ACC Coach of the Year -- I guess that probably won't be announced in time for the selection committee....but his accomplishment (and the team's) will be noted.

It would be different if we were underachieving; then I might agree with you that 9-7 isn't good enough......


You really think the committee takes into account the fact that it's a first year coach and we expected to suck more?


Absolutely -- and we don't suck at all if we're 9-7 in the ACC with a 20-12 record. Every year the committee ends up with a bunch of teams on the bubble for the last 8-10 at large spots. And the conversations go like this:

Committee Member 1: Let's talk about the bubble teams. Start with BC.
Committee Member 2: Do we have to -- they lost to Yale and Harvard after all?
Committee Member 3: Yeah but that was early in the season with a new coach implementing a completely new system.
Committee Member 4: (who is an ACC advocate): That's true, and they DID finish 5th in the ACC when they were picked to finish 10th.
Committee Member 5 (who is a Big 12 advocate): NC State on the other hand was picked to finish 4th and barely scratched their way to 6th -- I think we can take THEM off the bubble right now --is everybody agreed?
Committee Member 6: (who is a network advocate and looks for good stories): Let's not forget what Donahue did with Cornell last year. He was a tournament darling. Like the Big Red, this team has over-achieved; I wouldn't be surprised to see Steve upset somebody and that would make for good TV.
Committee Member 7: (who is arrogant about the tournament brand and went to Duke 40 years ago): If Al were still coaching I would say "Hell no" 'cause I just couldn't stand to see that offense, but this team actually plays attractive basketball.
Committee Member 2: All right, you guys have won me over. BC's in; the WolfPack is out. Who is next?

There are tradeoffs in the end. They look for key wins, key losses, conference record, stronger performance at the end of the season than at the beginning; and a host of other things including strength of schedule. With a current RPI of 29 and a SOS of 16, we are not the turkey you're suggesting we are if we get to 9-7 with a ACC tournament win.
GodofBeasts94
Carney Hall
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 8:24 am
Karma: -2

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby pick6pedro on Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:43 pm

GodofBeasts94 {l Wrote}:
Art Vandelay {l Wrote}:
GodofBeasts94 {l Wrote}:
Art Vandelay {l Wrote}:
GodofBeasts94 {l Wrote}:
TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:two questions -

(1) did anyone see peas and carrot there? i didn't but i was in and out of the game after the blowout started. did they have the stomach flu?

(b) are the half-fullers still predicting 20 wins and 10-6 in the acc with an invite to the ncaa tournament? any of them still interested enough to place a wager on it?[/q]

I'm not a wagering man but I'm certainly not tossing in the towel on 20 wins and a POSSIBLE berth in the tourney. I see 9 conference wins as very doable:

Win EITHER UNC or VT at home (5-4);
Lose to Clemson on the road (5-5);
Win over MD at home (6-5);
Lose to UNC on the road (6-6);
Beat Miami at home (7-6);
Win EITHER Virginia or VT on the road (8-7);
Beat Wake at home (9-7)

Then we win one in the tournament and we're 20-12. Losses to Yale and Harvard obviously work against us. But if we finish 4th or 5th in the ACC with a winning conference record -- even in a diminished year for the conference -- we'd have a decent shot.


What you are saying above is not unreasonable, but with the ACC what it is this year I don't know that 20 wins overall and 9-7 gets us in. When you factor in bad losses to Harvard, Yale and URI and only one truly good win over A&M I don't see that gettng us there.


I think it helps that we will have SIGNIFICANTLY over-achieved and we will have done so with Steve Donahue at the helm -- one of last year's darling stories. Picked to finish 10th, with a new system being implemented, with two walk-ons getting regular playing time, transformed from the most boring offensive team in America to one of the more efficient offenses, with a marquis player in Reggie Jackson....there will be people on the committee arguing that we should make it despite our 0-2 record against the Ivies. More, if we finish in the top 5, Donahue may well be ACC Coach of the Year -- I guess that probably won't be announced in time for the selection committee....but his accomplishment (and the team's) will be noted.

It would be different if we were underachieving; then I might agree with you that 9-7 isn't good enough......


You really think the committee takes into account the fact that it's a first year coach and we expected to suck more?


Absolutely -- and we don't suck at all if we're 9-7 in the ACC with a 20-12 record. Every year the committee ends up with a bunch of teams on the bubble for the last 8-10 at large spots. And the conversations go like this:

Committee Member 1: Let's talk about the bubble teams. Start with BC.
Committee Member 2: Do we have to -- they lost to Yale and Harvard after all?
Committee Member 3: Yeah but that was early in the season with a new coach implementing a completely new system.
Committee Member 4: (who is an ACC advocate): That's true, and they DID finish 5th in the ACC when they were picked to finish 10th.
Committee Member 5 (who is a Big 12 advocate): NC State on the other hand was picked to finish 4th and barely scratched their way to 6th -- I think we can take THEM off the bubble right now --is everybody agreed?
Committee Member 6: (who is a network advocate and looks for good stories): Let's not forget what Donahue did with Cornell last year. He was a tournament darling. Like the Big Red, this team has over-achieved; I wouldn't be surprised to see Steve upset somebody and that would make for good TV.
Committee Member 7: (who is arrogant about the tournament brand and went to Duke 40 years ago): If Al were still coaching I would say "Hell no" 'cause I just couldn't stand to see that offense, but this team actually plays attractive basketball.
Committee Member 2: All right, you guys have won me over. BC's in; the WolfPack is out. Who is next?


This must be the itty bitty titty committee because the NCAA men's tournament selection committee does not operate this way. Do people actually think this is how bubble selections go down?
User avatar
pick6pedro
Fulton Hall
 
Posts: 11582
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 2:25 pm
Location: A Chalupa Stand
Karma: 2633

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby Art Vandelay on Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:11 pm

GodofBeasts94 {l Wrote}:
Art Vandelay {l Wrote}:
GodofBeasts94 {l Wrote}:
Art Vandelay {l Wrote}:
GodofBeasts94 {l Wrote}:
TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:two questions -

(1) did anyone see peas and carrot there? i didn't but i was in and out of the game after the blowout started. did they have the stomach flu?

(b) are the half-fullers still predicting 20 wins and 10-6 in the acc with an invite to the ncaa tournament? any of them still interested enough to place a wager on it?[/q]

I'm not a wagering man but I'm certainly not tossing in the towel on 20 wins and a POSSIBLE berth in the tourney. I see 9 conference wins as very doable:

Win EITHER UNC or VT at home (5-4);
Lose to Clemson on the road (5-5);
Win over MD at home (6-5);
Lose to UNC on the road (6-6);
Beat Miami at home (7-6);
Win EITHER Virginia or VT on the road (8-7);
Beat Wake at home (9-7)

Then we win one in the tournament and we're 20-12. Losses to Yale and Harvard obviously work against us. But if we finish 4th or 5th in the ACC with a winning conference record -- even in a diminished year for the conference -- we'd have a decent shot.


What you are saying above is not unreasonable, but with the ACC what it is this year I don't know that 20 wins overall and 9-7 gets us in. When you factor in bad losses to Harvard, Yale and URI and only one truly good win over A&M I don't see that gettng us there.


I think it helps that we will have SIGNIFICANTLY over-achieved and we will have done so with Steve Donahue at the helm -- one of last year's darling stories. Picked to finish 10th, with a new system being implemented, with two walk-ons getting regular playing time, transformed from the most boring offensive team in America to one of the more efficient offenses, with a marquis player in Reggie Jackson....there will be people on the committee arguing that we should make it despite our 0-2 record against the Ivies. More, if we finish in the top 5, Donahue may well be ACC Coach of the Year -- I guess that probably won't be announced in time for the selection committee....but his accomplishment (and the team's) will be noted.

It would be different if we were underachieving; then I might agree with you that 9-7 isn't good enough......


You really think the committee takes into account the fact that it's a first year coach and we expected to suck more?


Absolutely -- and we don't suck at all if we're 9-7 in the ACC with a 20-12 record. Every year the committee ends up with a bunch of teams on the bubble for the last 8-10 at large spots. And the conversations go like this:

Committee Member 1: Let's talk about the bubble teams. Start with BC.
Committee Member 2: Do we have to -- they lost to Yale and Harvard after all?
Committee Member 3: Yeah but that was early in the season with a new coach implementing a completely new system.
Committee Member 4: (who is an ACC advocate): That's true, and they DID finish 5th in the ACC when they were picked to finish 10th.
Committee Member 5 (who is a Big 12 advocate): NC State on the other hand was picked to finish 4th and barely scratched their way to 6th -- I think we can take THEM off the bubble right now --is everybody agreed?
Committee Member 6: (who is a network advocate and looks for good stories): Let's not forget what Donahue did with Cornell last year. He was a tournament darling. Like the Big Red, this team has over-achieved; I wouldn't be surprised to see Steve upset somebody and that would make for good TV.
Committee Member 7: (who is arrogant about the tournament brand and went to Duke 40 years ago): If Al were still coaching I would say "Hell no" 'cause I just couldn't stand to see that offense, but this team actually plays attractive basketball.
Committee Member 2: All right, you guys have won me over. BC's in; the WolfPack is out. Who is next?

There are tradeoffs in the end. They look for key wins, key losses, conference record, stronger performance at the end of the season than at the beginning; and a host of other things including strength of schedule. With a current RPI of 29 and a SOS of 16, we are not the turkey you're suggesting we are if we get to 9-7 with a ACC tournament win.


If you think this is actually what happens I don't know what to tell you. None of that conversation would ever happen. You earn your way in or not. Key wins-A&M. Key losses - Yale, Harvard, URI. 9-7 in a weak ACC with no wins against teams at the top of the conference (to date). Last 10 games around .500. SOS is great but you need to win some of those games against good opponents.
Art Vandelay
McGuinn Hall
 
Posts: 616
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 10:57 am
Karma: 28

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby GodofBeasts94 on Fri Jan 28, 2011 11:03 pm

Art Vandelay {l Wrote}:
GodofBeasts94 {l Wrote}:
Art Vandelay {l Wrote}:
GodofBeasts94 {l Wrote}:
Art Vandelay {l Wrote}:
GodofBeasts94 {l Wrote}:
TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:two questions -

(1) did anyone see peas and carrot there? i didn't but i was in and out of the game after the blowout started. did they have the stomach flu?

(b) are the half-fullers still predicting 20 wins and 10-6 in the acc with an invite to the ncaa tournament? any of them still interested enough to place a wager on it?[/q]

I'm not a wagering man but I'm certainly not tossing in the towel on 20 wins and a POSSIBLE berth in the tourney. I see 9 conference wins as very doable:

Win EITHER UNC or VT at home (5-4);
Lose to Clemson on the road (5-5);
Win over MD at home (6-5);
Lose to UNC on the road (6-6);
Beat Miami at home (7-6);
Win EITHER Virginia or VT on the road (8-7);
Beat Wake at home (9-7)

Then we win one in the tournament and we're 20-12. Losses to Yale and Harvard obviously work against us. But if we finish 4th or 5th in the ACC with a winning conference record -- even in a diminished year for the conference -- we'd have a decent shot.


What you are saying above is not unreasonable, but with the ACC what it is this year I don't know that 20 wins overall and 9-7 gets us in. When you factor in bad losses to Harvard, Yale and URI and only one truly good win over A&M I don't see that gettng us there.


I think it helps that we will have SIGNIFICANTLY over-achieved and we will have done so with Steve Donahue at the helm -- one of last year's darling stories. Picked to finish 10th, with a new system being implemented, with two walk-ons getting regular playing time, transformed from the most boring offensive team in America to one of the more efficient offenses, with a marquis player in Reggie Jackson....there will be people on the committee arguing that we should make it despite our 0-2 record against the Ivies. More, if we finish in the top 5, Donahue may well be ACC Coach of the Year -- I guess that probably won't be announced in time for the selection committee....but his accomplishment (and the team's) will be noted.

It would be different if we were underachieving; then I might agree with you that 9-7 isn't good enough......


You really think the committee takes into account the fact that it's a first year coach and we expected to suck more?


Absolutely -- and we don't suck at all if we're 9-7 in the ACC with a 20-12 record. Every year the committee ends up with a bunch of teams on the bubble for the last 8-10 at large spots. And the conversations go like this:

Committee Member 1: Let's talk about the bubble teams. Start with BC.
Committee Member 2: Do we have to -- they lost to Yale and Harvard after all?
Committee Member 3: Yeah but that was early in the season with a new coach implementing a completely new system.
Committee Member 4: (who is an ACC advocate): That's true, and they DID finish 5th in the ACC when they were picked to finish 10th.
Committee Member 5 (who is a Big 12 advocate): NC State on the other hand was picked to finish 4th and barely scratched their way to 6th -- I think we can take THEM off the bubble right now --is everybody agreed?
Committee Member 6: (who is a network advocate and looks for good stories): Let's not forget what Donahue did with Cornell last year. He was a tournament darling. Like the Big Red, this team has over-achieved; I wouldn't be surprised to see Steve upset somebody and that would make for good TV.
Committee Member 7: (who is arrogant about the tournament brand and went to Duke 40 years ago): If Al were still coaching I would say "Hell no" 'cause I just couldn't stand to see that offense, but this team actually plays attractive basketball.
Committee Member 2: All right, you guys have won me over. BC's in; the WolfPack is out. Who is next?

There are tradeoffs in the end. They look for key wins, key losses, conference record, stronger performance at the end of the season than at the beginning; and a host of other things including strength of schedule. With a current RPI of 29 and a SOS of 16, we are not the turkey you're suggesting we are if we get to 9-7 with a ACC tournament win.


If you think this is actually what happens I don't know what to tell you. None of that conversation would ever happen. You earn your way in or not. Key wins-A&M. Key losses - Yale, Harvard, URI. 9-7 in a weak ACC with no wins against teams at the top of the conference (to date). Last 10 games around .500. SOS is great but you need to win some of those games against good opponents.


Yeah, you're right. The criteria are SO objective that the committee never has to engage in this kind of a conversation and they never get a selection wrong or come up with a head scratcher or two. Everyone that has EARNED their way in gets the bid without fail. And everyone else didn't do enough. Bull-frick'n-shit. You really think they're going to leave a team out of the Dance with 20 wins, a top 40 RPI, a top 20 SOS, and a 9-7 conference record? Not going to happen. If it does, I'll wear nothing but a thong to our NIT opener.....
GodofBeasts94
Carney Hall
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 8:24 am
Karma: -2

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby Art Vandelay on Sat Jan 29, 2011 10:05 am

GodofBeasts94 {l Wrote}:
Art Vandelay {l Wrote}:
GodofBeasts94 {l Wrote}:
Art Vandelay {l Wrote}:
GodofBeasts94 {l Wrote}:
Art Vandelay {l Wrote}:
GodofBeasts94 {l Wrote}:
TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:two questions -

(1) did anyone see peas and carrot there? i didn't but i was in and out of the game after the blowout started. did they have the stomach flu?

(b) are the half-fullers still predicting 20 wins and 10-6 in the acc with an invite to the ncaa tournament? any of them still interested enough to place a wager on it?[/q]

I'm not a wagering man but I'm certainly not tossing in the towel on 20 wins and a POSSIBLE berth in the tourney. I see 9 conference wins as very doable:

Win EITHER UNC or VT at home (5-4);
Lose to Clemson on the road (5-5);
Win over MD at home (6-5);
Lose to UNC on the road (6-6);
Beat Miami at home (7-6);
Win EITHER Virginia or VT on the road (8-7);
Beat Wake at home (9-7)

Then we win one in the tournament and we're 20-12. Losses to Yale and Harvard obviously work against us. But if we finish 4th or 5th in the ACC with a winning conference record -- even in a diminished year for the conference -- we'd have a decent shot.


What you are saying above is not unreasonable, but with the ACC what it is this year I don't know that 20 wins overall and 9-7 gets us in. When you factor in bad losses to Harvard, Yale and URI and only one truly good win over A&M I don't see that gettng us there.


I think it helps that we will have SIGNIFICANTLY over-achieved and we will have done so with Steve Donahue at the helm -- one of last year's darling stories. Picked to finish 10th, with a new system being implemented, with two walk-ons getting regular playing time, transformed from the most boring offensive team in America to one of the more efficient offenses, with a marquis player in Reggie Jackson....there will be people on the committee arguing that we should make it despite our 0-2 record against the Ivies. More, if we finish in the top 5, Donahue may well be ACC Coach of the Year -- I guess that probably won't be announced in time for the selection committee....but his accomplishment (and the team's) will be noted.

It would be different if we were underachieving; then I might agree with you that 9-7 isn't good enough......


You really think the committee takes into account the fact that it's a first year coach and we expected to suck more?


Absolutely -- and we don't suck at all if we're 9-7 in the ACC with a 20-12 record. Every year the committee ends up with a bunch of teams on the bubble for the last 8-10 at large spots. And the conversations go like this:

Committee Member 1: Let's talk about the bubble teams. Start with BC.
Committee Member 2: Do we have to -- they lost to Yale and Harvard after all?
Committee Member 3: Yeah but that was early in the season with a new coach implementing a completely new system.
Committee Member 4: (who is an ACC advocate): That's true, and they DID finish 5th in the ACC when they were picked to finish 10th.
Committee Member 5 (who is a Big 12 advocate): NC State on the other hand was picked to finish 4th and barely scratched their way to 6th -- I think we can take THEM off the bubble right now --is everybody agreed?
Committee Member 6: (who is a network advocate and looks for good stories): Let's not forget what Donahue did with Cornell last year. He was a tournament darling. Like the Big Red, this team has over-achieved; I wouldn't be surprised to see Steve upset somebody and that would make for good TV.
Committee Member 7: (who is arrogant about the tournament brand and went to Duke 40 years ago): If Al were still coaching I would say "Hell no" 'cause I just couldn't stand to see that offense, but this team actually plays attractive basketball.
Committee Member 2: All right, you guys have won me over. BC's in; the WolfPack is out. Who is next?

There are tradeoffs in the end. They look for key wins, key losses, conference record, stronger performance at the end of the season than at the beginning; and a host of other things including strength of schedule. With a current RPI of 29 and a SOS of 16, we are not the turkey you're suggesting we are if we get to 9-7 with a ACC tournament win.


If you think this is actually what happens I don't know what to tell you. None of that conversation would ever happen. You earn your way in or not. Key wins-A&M. Key losses - Yale, Harvard, URI. 9-7 in a weak ACC with no wins against teams at the top of the conference (to date). Last 10 games around .500. SOS is great but you need to win some of those games against good opponents.


Yeah, you're right. The criteria are SO objective that the committee never has to engage in this kind of a conversation and they never get a selection wrong or come up with a head scratcher or two. Everyone that has EARNED their way in gets the bid without fail. And everyone else didn't do enough. Bull-frick'n-shit. You really think they're going to leave a team out of the Dance with 20 wins, a top 40 RPI, a top 20 SOS, and a 9-7 conference record? Not going to happen. If it does, I'll wear nothing but a thong to our NIT opener.....


Don't get your panties (or thong) in a bunch. Of course teams that earned it don't get in sometimes, but when you have 65 spots sometimes there are teams that have a legitimate argument to get in that don't. My point is they do measure everyone on merit and while you may disagree with a choice or a seed that is how they approach it and they usually get damn close to right. You want to make the case that 20 wins overall and 9-7 with our SOS gets us in that's fine and a reasonable argument. I happen to disagree only because of our bad losses, lack of good wins and overall weakness of the ACC. Neither of us are right or wrong since it's an opinion. Now if you want to say the fact that we were picked tenth and finished 5th or that Donahue did well at Cornell and is a first year coach is a factor thats where I call bullshit.
Art Vandelay
McGuinn Hall
 
Posts: 616
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 10:57 am
Karma: 28

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby eepstein0 on Sat Jan 29, 2011 3:55 pm

For the last time, 20 wins, 10 in conference and a SOS above 25 gets you in every single time. It doesn't matter how bad the ACC is or the weird losses we've had. It's frankly a dumb argument.
User avatar
eepstein0
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 17681
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:35 pm
Karma: -289

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby Art Vandelay on Sat Jan 29, 2011 5:58 pm

eepstein0 {l Wrote}:For the last time, 20 wins, 10 in conference and a SOS above 25 gets you in every single time. It doesn't matter how bad the ACC is or the weird losses we've had. It's frankly a dumb argument.


It's not a dumb argument. Sure most of the time your right all these factors will get you in but it's not a lock when your conference stinks, you beat no one at the tope of the conference. lose to multiple Ivies and beat only one good team. That is not a combination you see most years. Look at Ohio State back in 08. They had 19 wins and 10 in conference (and the big ten was good that year), RPI of 36 and SOS of 16. They won the NIT.
Art Vandelay
McGuinn Hall
 
Posts: 616
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 10:57 am
Karma: 28

Re: BC/Dook 26 Minute Knockout Thread

Postby eepstein0 on Sun Jan 30, 2011 8:55 am

Art Vandelay {l Wrote}:
eepstein0 {l Wrote}:For the last time, 20 wins, 10 in conference and a SOS above 25 gets you in every single time. It doesn't matter how bad the ACC is or the weird losses we've had. It's frankly a dumb argument.


It's not a dumb argument. Sure most of the time your right all these factors will get you in but it's not a lock when your conference stinks, you beat no one at the tope of the conference. lose to multiple Ivies and beat only one good team. That is not a combination you see most years. Look at Ohio State back in 08. They had 19 wins and 10 in conference (and the big ten was good that year), RPI of 36 and SOS of 16. They won the NIT.


The ACC is the 4th ranked conference right now behind the Big East, Big 10 and Big XII. Sure, there aren't a ton of great teams but we'll still get 5 or so teams in the Tournament. It's not like we're the Big East/ACC of football.
User avatar
eepstein0
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 17681
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:35 pm
Karma: -289

Previous

Return to Conte Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 74 guests

Untitled document