November 8, 2007

Kentucky Oops? Just Par for the Course

It is probably hard to miss these days. When a team from one of the smaller college upsets one of the big boys, on their home floor, none the less, it is big news. We saw it in football, with Appalachian State taking down Michigan.

Last night, we saw it in Kentucky as they lost to Gardner-Webb, 84-68. As far as we now, no one was calling Tubby Smith up in Minnesota to see if he would come back. The era of Billy Gillispie is off to a rocky start.

There are lots of moans on the message boards today about the state of the program. Some can't believe that Tubby Smith left the cupboard as bare as it looks. Some can't believe that Saint Billy wasn't able to turn the tide so quickly.

But should we really be worried? It is rare that a loss this early in the season will derail a team that should still make it to the NCAA tournament. And a loss this early is difficult to judge. While this is a huge win for Gardner-Webb - anytime you have a victory over Kentucky on your resume, it is a good thing - this isn't going to hold Kentucky back from success this season, if the team is really the 22nd best team in the country.

This is not a new thing. Last year, Butler (while not as low down the rankings as G-W) ran through to a pre-season NIT championship. Two years ago, Sam Houston took down Missouri, and Drexel made it through to the pre-season NIT Final Four and almost pulled upsets over both Duke and UCLA, programs which had pretty good seasons.

Probably the one that stands out most to me was in the 2004-2005 season. North Carolina lost their opening game to Santa Clara. That didn't stop them from winning the next 14 in a row on their way to beating Illinois for the National title.

So why are these things happening? The most obvious reason is that the big boys are no longer the big boys. Players in some cases are seeing kids from smaller schools get drafted. They would rather go to a smaller school, play for four years, and make an impact, rather than sitting on the bench for two years and not getting the chance to show what they can really do on a stacked team. Some of this dispersion of talent was due to scholarship restrictions which had been put into place and now have been relaxed. Part of it is the expansion of the internet and television to include many of the smaller conference which in the past would never see the light of day.

The second reason is the capping of the exhibition games which can be held. Teams can only get in two games which won't count on their schedule. While Kentucky played one junior college, and one worthy opponent in Seattle, they did not have the chance to play two or three more games like in years past where teams would play multiple traveling all-star teams in order to tune up. Those all-star teams were mostly ex-college players, a better test for a Kentucky than a game against a junior college.

Finally, games are starting earlier and earlier in the season. It seems like Midnight Madness was only two weeks ago. While this should be more than enough time to get ready for Gardner-Webb when you are Kentucky, it does cause trouble. Imagine preparing for three teams with less than the normal amount of film. Add to that being a rookie coach at the most passionate basketball school in the country where your margin for error is a little slim. Add to that having to convince players you didn't recruit that you are now the man that can take them to the next level.

It is a lot to deal with. Most teams couldn't do it. We saw Memphis struggle. We saw Connecticut struggle. And we have seen others in the past struggle too.

This loss won't mean a thing come tournament time. Here's hoping that Kentucky is in a 4-13 match-up with the winner of the Atlantic Sun conference.

Posted by bmiraski at 1:50 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 7, 2007

Over Expansion? You Bet

I made mention of it in the MRI Says article for today. There are now 341 teams ranked in the MRI for basketball.

This is the eight year of the MRI for basketball, and in that time, the list has grown from 320 teams in that first season. That is a 6.5% increase in the number of teams all trying to get a small piece of the pie which is the NCAA basketball tournament.

That is just the net increase overall. Remember we had that nice team from Birmingham Southern who came and left in a flash when after making it to Division I, the athletic department decided to head back to Division III and actually shut down their basketball program for a length of time. (The basketball program is back now. If you think you are good enough, you can fill out a questionnaire to be considered for the team.) It was strange timing. Birmingham Southern finished second in the Big South to Winthrop that season, and their coach was named the conference coach of the year.

Don't think this is going to stop in the years ahead. Over the next few years, expect to see seven more teams added to the list, including the return of Seattle University and Houston Baptist to the Division I ranks.

However, when the final seven finish their transition, there will be no more, at least for four years. The NCAA Division I committee was so worried about teams jumping into Division I for more exposure and more money, they suspended reclassification in August. They will not accept any more applications until 2011.

The MRI and my hands thank them. I don't have an issue with teams with success at the Division II level making the jump. That is Seattle University. That is UC Davis. I do have an issue when teams come from nowhere, without the same competition level and think that they can make it at the top level. There is a reason so many of them clump at the bottom of the MRI standings. They aren't ready.

At least until 2012 my prep for each season will take a little less time.

Posted by bmiraski at 5:50 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

October 19, 2007

I Thought Stanford Was One of Those Smart Schools

You need to be smart to get into Stanford, but apparently all those academics can fry your brain while you are there (well, academics, or the other stuff that is fairly prevalent in the San Francisco Bay area).

Case in point, sophomore center Brook Lopez. Last season, Lopez made the PAC-10 All-freshman team, after averaging 12.6 points and 6 rebounds a game for the Cardinal (18-12, last season).

However, earlier this month, Lopez was suspended from the team for failing to meet academic standards. He responded saying that he was taking full responsibility for this and apologized to his team and the school.

Apparently, sometimes these things don't sink in.

Lopez was suspended indefinitely today for skipping two days of classes and a practice during the last week.

I could be wrong, but usually you improve your academic standing by going to class. And here I thought Stanford was a smart school.

Posted by bmiraski at 3:40 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

October 17, 2007

Kelvin Sampson = Teenage Girl

Woah, a basketball story? Yes. In the middle of all those football upsets on Saturday, there was a small little event called March Madness.

And less than a few hours later, there was the first big shocker of the season.

Kelvin Sampson is apparently no better than a teenage girl, forever on the phone, forever talking when he should be doing homework. In case you missed the story, Sampson is being punished by Indiana for recruiting violations related to phone calls that he participated in, despite being under probation by the NCAA.

New details about the phone calls were released today, which slightly changes the initial story around Sampson's involvement. However, the $500K dent in his checkbook remains.

You have to look at Sampson and say, "What are you thinking?" to even come close to being involved in something like this. Sampson's own personal friends can't believe that a coach with this much experience, this much time under the NCAA system, would be so careless as to let him be caught for the same offense that got him in trouble at Oklahoma.

Yes, Sampson, can't stay off the phone, no matter what the consequences.

Reading the comments across the nation, there is a very divided camp within the Hoosier faithful. Some, who were wary when Sampson arrived are even more on edge after this. Those who stuck with Sampson even when there were question's about Eric Gordon's sudden change of heart from Illinois to Indiana, are even starting to wonder.

And then there is the faction which tries to pass off this repeated offense as no big deal. This is a group which believes that the media is just trying to stir things up and that those outside of the Indiana basketball community shouldn't even have the right to question the actions of the coach. We apparently don't understand Indiana basketball, so we can't understand this. I can't agree with that logic.

If that were the case, would you ever criticize your coach for doing something that would be, in the end, beneficial for the team? No, you would only ever say something when you were hurt. Sure, look the other way now, but when the sanctions come in, you will be the first to complain that he should have been fired when this first occurred.

You need an outside source to shed the light on what is going wrong inside your program. That's the media's job, and you should probably thank them in this case. Maybe now you won't be surprised when something else comes up which might make you question your support of the coach who finally managed to win again at Indiana. Now, you know how he did it, with a little tarnish on all those trophies in the display case.

I am not saying that this is the worst offense in the world, but it is one that Sampson himself called "sloppy".

Sloppy just doesn't cut it in big time college basketball.

Ben Miraski writes for MRISports.com and is a featured blogger on FanIQ. Readers can contact Ben at bmiraski@mrisports.com

Posted by bmiraski at 1:50 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

March 18, 2007

Thoughts on Saturday's Second Round

I didn't know we had to get through the first round for the excitement in the tournament. From the opening tip of the Ohio State-Xavier game, well into the night, we were treated to some close exciting games for a change. 4 Overtime periods; last second shots to tie or win; great, gritty basketball, leaving everything on the court.

These are the games we are used to seeing in the opening round as teams want to prove they are Cinderella. These are the games we take off work to watch. These are the games that make the tournament "THE TOURNAMENT." And we finally got them.

1. Every team that makes the Final Four, or wins a championship, needs a game that they struggle in and is almost an upset. This could be Ohio State's game. I give a lot of credit to Ohio State for not losing focus despite trailing in the game. Ron Lewis was magic with his game tying three point shot at the end of regulation. This is especially so since the entire Xavier team knew the ball was going to him. And then Ohio State did what it did quietly for the first ten games of the season - just win. Without Greg Oden that is. The Buckeyes almost looked more comfortable without him on the floor. Perhaps it was the release of the pressure of trying to get it to the large man inside.

2. One side note on Oden. Despite his size, I for one would like to see him play another year in college. While he has the size and the ability to make it in the NBA, I think he would very much benefit from another year of banging inside, fully healthy, against the Big Ten, a conference known for its physical basketball. Why do I say this? I think we could see that another big man on the floor can frustrate the large Oden. He is not used to having other players of size against him. And that will be a problem in the NBA where he will no longer be a man among boys out on the floor. A little polish to his skills, especially his movement in the post against a larger defender, will make him the sure fire success that everyone thinks he is.

3. So how about Butler? They have now likely set up a game with Florida, similar to the one back in 2000 which I am sure none of us will forget the ending on. Florida rode that victory in the first round to a National Title game appearance. They are "expected" to make another run like that this season. However, with the way Butler is playing, I think little David, albeit with a lot more respect this season, could stop them. This is especially true if Florida suffers from the line like Maryland did against the Bulldogs. Down the stretch was especially painful for the Terrapins. The other area where Butler can force the Gator hand? Turnovers which have been known to get Florida off their mental game. And finally, AJ Graves needs to have another game like on Saturday to take down what should be the heavily favored Florida.

4. I give Boston College a lot of credit. I didn't think they would be able to play at all with Georgetown. They stayed with them very well though. In the end it was Georgetown's significant size advantage that gave them the win. That size advantage should again help them against Vanderbilt, although they will need to come up with some good perimeter defense to stop the Commodores, who seem destined right now.

5. Vanderbilt was the team I said reminded me of West Virginia from the past two years, and they continue to live up to it. They struggled from three for the first half of the game against Washington State, but they picked the right time to get hot against the Cougars. The Commodores just kept knocking them down from the start of the second half, including a 9-0 run at one point to close the gap. And in overtime, it was Vanderbilt looking like Washington State with some tough defense that was the Cougars claim to fame over the season. Give a lot of credit to Derrick Low from Washington State, their leading scorer in the game, who refused to lose and made some key baskets to extend the game. I look forward to seeing this Vandy team take on the tough Georgetown next weekend.

6. I know we all wanted Virginia Commonwealth to be George Mason from last year. This was especially so after they pleased about 98% of the country by beating Duke. But the truth is that while Virginia Commonwealth had a lot of the attributes of the George Mason squad from last year, this was not the balanced team that the Patriots had put on the floor. There is no doubt that they gave Pittsburgh all they could handle. The tough defense that helped them win the turnover battle against Duke was still there, although it came on too late to get them the win. However, what really did them in was the lack of size to bang on the boards. That was something that George Mason was continually able to trot out last season. OF the teams left, do we have a George Mason type team? Maybe Winthrop, but they will need to be hot from long range in order to think that Craig Bradshaw and his size will be the difference.

7. "Psycho T" Tyler Hansbrough lost his mask for the game against Michigan State, and I think Michigan State was hoping later that it would come back. Give Tom Izzo credit. Playing with a team that was in most cases less talented, he game planned well for the big man and the rest of the Tar Heels. Say what you want about Michigan State's record, but this was a quality team that deserved its tournament place, and they performed very well all season. The problem is that they ran into the buzz saw that is North Carolina. I know there are a lot of UNC-haters out there, much like Duke-haters, and that North Carolina was the pick for most to be the first #1 seed to go down, but the computer really likes this team, and despite their youth, they have a chance to make a big story in this tournament. Back to Hansbrough though. You can't fault 33 points and nine boards. His shooting touch look much improved without the big plastic blinder on his head also. Everyone should root for Texas today so that we can see Hansbrough and Kevin Durant on the same floor next Friday in East Rutherford.

That's all for now. If I can come up with something interesting after that very sloppy game between Indiana and UCLA, I will throw that out there later. The only thing that sticks in my mind is that it was very reminiscent of the game between the Bruins and Memphis last season. Thank goodness that this one came a few rounds earlier, and was almost a side note on what was a great day of basketball.

Enjoy the games.

Copyright 2007 by MRISports.com. Ben Miraski writes for MRISports.com and is a featured blogger on FanIQ. Readers can contact Ben at bmiraski@mrisports.com

Posted by bmiraski at 9:15 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

March 17, 2007

Thoughts on Friday's First Round

Given the lack of non-chalk in the first day of the tournament, we had to hope for something on Friday to save our collective tournament watchability. Not that there haven't been games that made us fear for a while, but this season has severely been lacking in the gut wrenching first round endings.

By far, my favorite game of the day was watching Wisconsin get down big to scrappy little Texas A&M-Corpus Christi. As we were reminded again and again, this was a school that didn't even have an athletic program 8 years ago. And on Friday, they scared a good portion of the country as they jumped out to a 19-4 lead on Wisconsin and then were still hanging strong with a 27-19 lead at the half.

Of course, by that point, Wisconsin had adjusted and were on their way back, but it was nice to see the little school that no one thought could do it come close for a while. The announcers even over reacted at one point wondering if Wisconsin coach Bo Ryan should put in injured center Brian Butch to provide a little spark.

In the end, Ronnie Arrow and the Islanders couldn't do it, but it made for some great drama and some bracket scrambling among those watching.

Other thoughts on the day:
1. Memphis just toyed with North Texas. Anyone who thinks that Friday's game was proof that Memphis isn't that great and excels based on weaker competition doesn't know the Tiger team. Part of what ailed Memphis was early foul trouble for leading scorer Chris Douglas-Roberts. Losing him for the final 10 minutes of the first half gave North Texas some life, but it was obvious by the late flurry of scoring by Memphis that they were not going to let a little set back worry them. They are still the toughest out that no one is looking at.

2. Virginia was hot, which was key to them winning any game. Sean Singletary was at one point outscoring the entire Albany team. This should probably give Virginia some lift, but knowing that they are now going to be facing Tennessee who put up 121 on Long Beach State probably worries them a little bit.

3. UNLV was hot when they could actually be the "Running Rebels", but Georgia Tech was able to adjust and stop them in the end. I think Wisconsin's quick guards should be able to slow them a little bit. In addition, the already mentioned Badgers have to take advantage of size better and not get clogged up on the floor as they did against the Islanders.

4. Notre Dame, our upset defeat of the day, didn't take advantage of its combined size inside. While Winthrop does sport 6-10 Craig Bradshaw, Notre Dame should have had the personnel to deal with that. Sometimes just having the greater number of big men is what is important. Look at how much better Wisconsin played Greg Oden and Ohio State when they can put multiple big men on the floor at once against them. The same concept should apply here. And when the Irish big men got into foul trouble, that just opened the way for a long run by the Eagles.

5. Speaking of Winthrop, I think they are prime for a run to the Sweet 16, especially after watching how Oregon played against Miami (Ohio). The Ducks were totally hit and miss on defense and they won't be able to play that way against Winthrop. Oregon, whose run through the PAC-10 tournament made them a hot favorite for many entering this tournament have sure changed a lot of minds after Friday.

6. Dumb announcer moment of the day? Greg Gumbel, taking the nation to the end of the Creighton - Nevada game said "Creighton not yet ready to call it a game yet." At the time, Creighton was down by 3 with 30 seconds remaining in overtime. If the Blue Jays had given up at that point, I would have been shocked.

7. It is a shame that Creighton lost. One of the most explosive players, and important to his team, in the tournament is Anthony Tolliver who was again a stud against Nevada. It is too bad that we will not get to see him play one more game this season.

8. How difficult is preparation for a tournament game? Kentucky started freshman guard Dwight Perry instead of normal starter Bobby Perry because an assistant coach turned in the wrong line-up to the official scorer. Perry, the Dwight-version, fouled three seconds into the game so that he could be replaced by Perry, the Bobby-version. More funny was how relieved Dwight Perry looked once he sat on the bench.

9. Contrary to popular opinion, Miami (Ohio) head coach Charlie Coles is not the Crypt Keeper from Tales From the Crypt. He is only 65.

10. Despite Illinois's lead early in their 12-5 contest against Virginia Tech (no guaranteed upset in that game this year. There goes all those bracket rules, like Duke always wins their first game), you could tell they were headed for a little trouble. For starters, their defense was over-committing on every shot that Virginia Tech took. Brian Randle showed his "guns" on an early dunk, but then later couldn't hit a free throw which normally requires a bit less strength. One was even an air ball. The poor free throw shooting has been a trend in this tournament, and was the killer for the Illini.

11. Holy Cross and Southern Illinois may have set the progress of basketball back about 20 years based on their game Friday. I really thought Holy Cross had the ability to beat Southern Illinois, based on the similar style of play. Too bad the smaller team from the smaller conference tired down the stretch.

Enjoy Sunday, when these teams play again. Look for their winning percentage chances Sunday morning.

Posted by bmiraski at 4:12 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

March 16, 2007

Demise of Duke Overblown

It is no secret that Duke is hated across the country. Success breeds contempt and no one has had greater success even in down years than Coach K and the Blue Devils.

Last night's win by Virginia Commonwealth over Duke, therefore, was met across the country with numerous cheers. No, this wasn't the great Duke teams of old. This team had problems like almost every other team this season, but it was still a good team. And Virginia Commonwealth was not the easy first round opponent that Duke is used to facing. Truthfully, VCU probably got too low a seed for the success that they had this season, including a regular season and conference tournament victory in the CAA.

However, there is no reason to believe that Duke has collapsed like the headline which greeted us all on CBS Sportsline this morning:

Freeman: VCU exposes downfall of mighty Coach K Put a fork in the old Duke. The Rams add a little spice in what's a lackluster first round, handing the now-ordinary Blue Devils their first opening-round defeat since 1996.

Did I read that right? The downfall of the mighty Coach K? Coach K is destined to pass his mentor Bob Knight as the all-time wins leader in men's college basketball. He will likely be the first coach to pass 1000 victories. And yet, Mike Freeman thinks that Duke has lost its luster.

The real truth is that Duke hasn't lost its luster. This was just a down year.

No one outside of Lexington, Kentucky talks about the demise of the Wildcats (although they might when they lose to Villanova later today). No one spoke this season about the demise of Connecticut. They all gave the excuse that they were a young team. No one spoke of the demise of Syracuse, although the Orange had trouble winning at home for the first time in my memory (I spoke of it, but did anyone listen?).

So why does one loss signal the end of a Duke dynasty which will likely be right back on top next season.

Let's not forget that over the past four years, Duke has seen an exodus of players to the NBA unlike any it has seen in the past. Last year, the team had to count on JJ Redick and Shelden Williams almost exclusively when they should have still had players like Luol Deng still roaming the floor as a third option. You don't think it would have been nice to have a senior Deng this year? Or if Eric Boateng hadn't transferred, maybe Duke would have had a more flexible inside game?

The core of this team is still young. They managed to win games with a majority of their core team being underclassmen. They have great size coming in next season to help shore up the middle. So why should we worry about this Duke team?

The truth is we shouldn't. And we shouldn't exaggerate a single loss like Freeman did.

Embarrassing was the word of the night as this was one of the worst losses in modern Blue Devils basketball history.

One of the worst losses? They lost by two to a very good team that didn't get any publicity at all. They didn't play well, but there is no shame in losing to this VCU team who was in the final top 25 of the MRI for this season. Should Duke be embarrassed? Maybe, considering some of the play on the court, but not because of this loss, a loss to a team which was primarily built from the sweat of a former Duke player, Jeff Capel, now the coach at Oklahoma.

Here was Mike Krzyzewski getting thoroughly out-coached by Anthony Grant

No one out-coaches Coach K. His players might have been outplayed, but no one coaches a game more fiercely and intelligently today than Coach K. Period.

Now, the Blue Devils dynasty is officially done after suffering its first opening-round loss in over a decade. Goodnight, Dukies. You're not much better than Rutgers.

Rutgers? Really? I think Duke deserves a little more credit than Rutgers. And the dynasty is not over. Every dynasty has an off year here and there. The Chicago Bulls, the Green Bay Packers, and the New York Yankees all did. But no one called the end of their dynasties in their off years. And they came back to rise from the "ashes" just like Duke will.

The old Duke is dead. The new Duke is just another team.

No, this Duke team will be in the Top 10 next season, just like this year. The new Duke team will make a Sweet 16 run again next season. The new Duke team will not see another first round exit.

However, Mike Freeman should make an exit from his sensationalist journalism.

Copyright 2007 by MRISports.com. Ben Miraski writes for MRISports.com and is a featured blogger on FanIQ. Readers can contact Ben at bmiraski@mrisports.com

Posted by bmiraski at 12:15 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Thursday Thoughts

The tournament tipped off yesterday and I spent the better part of it perched on a stool watching every minute of every game that CBS felt fit to actually show.

And there wasn't much worth showing. Blowouts galore, only one true upset and for the most part the seeds held. However, that was to be expected on day one. The real action is tipping off now, and I imagine there are a lot of brackets out there which have a couple of double digit seed winners today.

I had a "beer mishap" before the later games, not of my doing so I have only limited notes on the day. However, here were a few thoughts that I took away from Tournament Thursday.

1. No one was at the game in Buffalo for Davidson - Maryland, which was a shame since that game was probably the best game overall until the late night slate.

2. I got a lot of crap for the MRI only liking 3 Big XII teams to make the tournament. After Texas Tech's pathetic performance, I would like everyone to take back what they said. They helped to prove that the league was Kansas, Texas A&M and Texas, and then everyone else. The league's only saving grace might be Kansas State making the final 8 in the NIT should they beat DePaul in the second round of that tournament. Bob Huggins has the coaching skill to do it, but I am not convinced he has the talent.

3. I still wish that the committee would have put together the Indiana-Texas Tech 7-10 match-up instead of the schlock we got.

4. Despite Texas Tech stinking up the floow, it wasn't like Boston College did much better. Georgetown should have no issues with them come Saturday.

5. The AT&T At The Half show is useless. They don't do anything. There was maybe one comment the entire day until dinnertime. It could be that Clark Kellogg made a big deal out of picking Stanford and then was stuck with his foot in his mouth the rest of the day. I don't know. But then don't insult my intelligence by thanking me for joining you when you didn't do anything at all but show me a live look at another game. Pointless. CBS's studio show might just be one of the worst out there.

6. ESPN actually had Digger and Dickie V make a pick in the UCLA-Weber State game. Did they use any brain power whatsoever to come up with the answer of UCLA in that one? Weber State was the 3rd worst team in the field. Although Texas Tech, George Washington, and Stanford tried to show us otherwise.

7. Anyone still think that Stanford should have been in the field? I got great joy out of standing and watching both Kellogg and the two studio guys on ESPNU pick the Cardinal and then having Louisville just run over them. I think the biggest lead I wrote down was 28 points. That was just pathetic. And those who think that Louisville got it easy by being at Rupp, I can guarantee that any real Kentucky fans there will cut Pitino and the Cardinals no slack.

8. I spent Wednesday night filling out my bracket and made the comment that Vandy reminds me of West Virginia from the last two years, only without all the size. That was my main reason for putting them through to the Sweet 16 despite the Commodores not having the MRI numbers that I normally like to have (This was the same with the Mountaineers in years past). Washington State will have its hands full.

9. I think four losses in their last 8 games, and a few scares made everyone forget how good Butler is. There really was no choice except to pick the Bulldogs. Old Dominion is good but not the 12-5 upset you were looking for. Putting my stake on two today: Illinois and Arkansas both win.

And that was when the beer came. I didn't even have time to scribble anything on the Duke game, although I think Paulus wanted to be J J Redick so bad that he forgot he has the rest of his team. But more on the Duke game in a bit.

I'll continue to be watching through Friday. Look for Sweet 16 revised percentages for tomorrow's games later.

Copyright 2007 by MRISports.com. Ben Miraski writes for MRISports.com and is a featured blogger on FanIQ. Readers can contact Ben at bmiraski@mrisports.com

Posted by bmiraski at 11:30 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

March 12, 2007

Opening Round Game Racism

You want outrage over seeding? Don't complain if you are Duke, or Notre Dame, or Kentucky. If you want to really complain, you need to go to MAAC champion, Niagara.

The opening round game which will be played on Tuesday is entering its seventh year of existence, ever since the old WAC conference split into the WAC and Mountain West and the committee moved to preserve the 34 at-large bids.

This year's game features Florida A&M, who upset the regular season winner in the MEAC conference, and the Purple Eagles of Niagara. Niagara's coach, Joe Mihalich, was not very happy with this decision, especially since the opening round game, or play-in game, is supposed to match the two worst teams in the tournament, usually rated by the RPI of the teams. Niagara's RPI was better than five other teams in the field, making their selection for the game an anomaly.

But apparently this was done on purpose.

On Monday, selection committee chairman Gary Walters basically admitted that the move was done to avoid claims of racism.

Racism? For real? This is the first I had ever heard of it. But apparently there have been claims that the play-in is a handicap for schools from historically black colleges and universities, most of whom play in the Southwestern Athletic Conference and Mideastern Athletic Conference. (And apparently these claims have been wide enough that the Wikipedia entry on the play-in game doesn't require a citation for the statement.)

That was specifically the language addressed in Walters's statement to the press. The committee was "sensitive to the historically black colleges." This is basically admitting that Niagara was placed in the game, rather than the 2nd lowest RPI team, the SWAC's Jackson State, so that there was no appearance of a racial bias. The committee did do Niagara a favor though. Rather than the winner of the play-in game having to face the overall #1 seed Florida in their next game, as should be the case since Florida is slated to play in a Friday site, the winner will get the #4 overall top seed, Kansas. So much for little victories.

But is the claim of racism really the case? The regular season winners of the SWAC and MEAC are usually among the worst teams in the field of 65. There should be no reason to expect a better seeding by the committee solely because of the history of their universities. More interesting though is that teams from these two conferences have never met in the play-in game, and I have never heard an "apology" from the committee chair in the past.

In 2000-1, the first season of the play-in game, the two teams playing were Northwestern State and Winthrop. Northwestern State was 18-12 overall and won the Southland's bid in a major upset. Winthrop was one of the worst 4 teams in the field and really could not complain. The MEAC champion that year was actually a very good Hampton squad, who pulled one of the only four 2-15 upsets ever beating Iowa State in the first round. The SWAC champion Alabama State did get a #16 seed, although there was no danger of both teams receiving that fate.

In 2001-2, the game saw Siena of the MAAC and Alcorn State of the SWAC play. Siena was an upset winner of their conference and was among the bottom two teams overall. Curious was the omission of Montana from that game who finished the season 14-14 against D-1 teams after winning their conference tournament. The MEAC champion that season was again Hampton, who again received a #15 seed, but couldn't duplicate their miracle against Connecticut.

In 2002-3, the committee was saved this hard decision when 13-16 UNC-Asheville won the Big South tournament. Both the MEAC and SWAC champions were among the bottom 4 teams into the tournament.

In 2003-4, we may have seen the committee make a subtle move, placing Lehigh into the play-in game. Lehigh was among the four worst teams in the field that year, but the MEAC champ (14-16 Florida A&M) and SWAC champion (Alabama State) were the two worst. However, since Lehigh was an upset winner in the Patriot league, very weak that season, they didn't have much room to argue.

In 2004-5, the committee was again saved as the 11-18 Oakland won the MCC conference title. They played SWAC champion Alabama A&M, at 16-13, the second worst team in the field. MEAC champion Delaware State was among the bottom four teams.

And last, in 2005-6, Monmouth and Hampton, two teams which were barely above .500, played in the game. The SWAC champ, Southern was an obvious 3rd worst choice, but Monmouth's record kept them in the game.

So would there have been any reason to believe that racism in some way has played a part in these 6 previous games? In almost every game, there has been a major upset winner from another conference keeping the pairing from being the MEAC and SWAC. So, this year, when clearly the worst two teams were from those conferences, could anyone really have complained?

That truly makes it exceptional that Gary Walters felt the need to call attention to the fact that the committee was sensitive to the historically black colleges. He then continued the argument by saying that the committee looked at the schools in the bottom part of the bracket that didn't win both their regular season league title and the conference tournament to fill the pairing for the game. Niagara finished second in the regular season despite winning the conference tournament. Funny thing is so did both Jackson State and Florida A&M.

I guess the real question should be for Walters and the committee. Clearly, Niagara deserved a better fate, most likely as a #15 seed in the bracket. Shouldn't we be sensitive to those kids, who won a tougher league, even though they finished the season 2nd going into the conference tournament? Shouldn't they get the benefit of the doubt over two teams in the same situation and be allowed to play in a true first round game as opposed to a game on Tuesday that almost no one will watch?

I think the answer this year is clearly yes, and that there is enough evidence to show that racism would have played no part in the decision to match what were the two worst teams, Florida A&M and Jackson State.

The MRI Rankings are copyright 2007 by MRISports.com. Ben Miraski writes for MRISports.com and is a featured blogger on FanIQ. Readers can contact Ben at bmiraski@mrisports.com

Posted by bmiraski at 11:15 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

March 7, 2007

Rebuttal

I should have seen this coming. The biggest danger is catching up to the rest of the world with the MRI is that now my bracket projections are current and everyone is scrutinizing them from the Bracket Project Website.

So, in order to respond to some of the comments you will undoubtedly see on the site, I have put together this full rebuttal.

Let's talk a few baseline topics first.

#1: If you look at the Bracket Project, you will notice that I have a number of seeds in difference to the rest of the projected brackets. There is a good reason for this in that I use a totally different methodology than the other brackets. Without having looked at all 30 of them, I would assume that most if not all are done by hand, by a human, with a brain crunching most of the hard numbers.

The MRI bracket projections are different. The MRI bracket projections, other than placing the teams into the regions according to the bracketing rules and automatically including conference tournament winners, are done by computer, using only computer numbers, and registering out a result based on the rankings of teams in the MRI. That's it. No grand scheme of all the top three teams from a major conference assumed to be in. No bias for or against a certain conference. Just computer numbers.

This means, despite some of the comments, there is no bias. There can't be. I have no human input into the numbers outside of entering them by hand into the spreadsheet which calculates the ratings.

Now you may say that the Dance Card site does the same thing, and projects with greater accuracy the seedings, the teams, etc. That is true, because the Dance Card formula looks at the metrics around a team as established by the tournament committee as things they look at for selecting teams to the tournament. They essentially built a model to represent the brains of the committee. The MRI doesn't do that.

The MRI uses its own factors and strength of teams to pick the field. That is what leads to baseline #2.

#2: While I "seed" teams and place them into nice little brackets because that is what everyone is used to seeing when they come look for projections, that doesn't mean that a seed in my brackets is saying the same thing as a seed in the bulk of the other brackets.

What a seed in the MRI bracket is saying is that the team, over the course of the season, has shown that they will, on average, perform at the expected level of a seed of that number in the tournament. That means any team seeded lower than #9 will be gone after the first day. Anything lower than #4 will likely be gone after the second round, and so on to where the #1 seeds are what the MRI sees as the likely Final Four teams.

That doesn't mean there can't be upsets, or changes based on actual match-ups.

For an example, let's take a look at George Mason from last season.

From about the middle of February to the end of the season the Patriots bounced around the MRI ratings hanging in the #15 - #18 range. They were up there earlier in the year too but didn't get the attention that their high rating did at the end of the year. The reason? I projected them for most of the month of projections as a #5 seed based on the numbers.

So what does a #5 seed in the MRI projections mean? It means that they have a good shot of winning their first round game and an outside chance of making the Sweet 16 based on actual match-ups. However, putting a mid-major team at that level, especially before the tournament starts, means a lot of push back from the masses at large.

You can only imagine the emails when the tournament bracket came out and GMU was a #11 seed, and not only a #11 seed, but likely one of the last 4 teams to get a place in the bracket. They were matched against Michigan State who finished at #22 in the final MRI (projected and actual 6 seed) and that made the likelihood of an upset a tough deal since the percentages would be in the 50-50 range. Still, I went with George Mason in the first round and they were a winner.

Now, facing a North Carolina squad in the second round is a different story, because this is when a projected #5 seed should be dropping out. North Carolina finished #9 in the MRI (a projected and actual #3 seed) and should have been expected to handle a #5 seed. George Mason went on to pull the upset which started the country talking.

Now, if you had followed the MRI all season, a team like George Mason getting to the Sweet 16 should not have been so shocking. Yet how many out there were talking about what a story GMU was even though I had been "talking" them up all year with their high overall ranking.

(As a side note, the final MRI rankings of last year's Final Four teams entering the tournament were 8, 10, 13, and 18. Not a bad cluster of teams especially since the tournament didn't see a single #1 seed make the Final Four last season.)

So why do I go into this much detail on George Mason? Because the Patriots have a lot in common with this year's highly rated mid-major Davidson (although don't look past Virginia Commonwealth, also of the Patriot league, and a likely 1st round winner). Davidson is currently, entering the final week when most of the major conferences have their tournaments, at #16, a projected #4 seed. While that may be shocking, and it semi is for me also since they have made huge leaps in the standings during their tournament, remember that they are done playing. And they are within the pack of teams which could change greatly based on the results of the conference tournament games, because of how closely stacked all of the MRI rated teams from about #10 to #40 are this season.

While Davidson could potentially have the ability to make it to the second weekend of the tournament, a huge coup for a team from the Southern conference, the ability for them to hang onto that seed in the final projection is much less. More likely: Davidson drops to a #5 or #6 projected MRI seed and wins their opening round game before being beaten in the second round.

This year is interesting for the simple fact that no team from a smaller conference, despite last year's huge successes, is projected to make it to the second weekend. There is no Gonzaga this year. There is no Kent State, and as of right now, the closest things we have to George Mason are Davidson and VCU, who are likely second round knock outs.

Again, to stress, a #4 seed in the MRI projections doesn't mean that I think a team will win it all. By far that is not the case. But they do have the ability to win not only a single game but maybe a second game in the tournament. That is all that a #4 seeding tells me. Ask yourself what you would expect for a #4 seed to do in the tourney. At best, if all seeds hold, you would see them going to the 2nd week of the tourney and being in the Sweet 16 but that is it. No final four, no championship. Just winning two games. So what does my placement of them at a #4 seed mean? It means the MRI thinks they have the potential to win 2 games. Not 3, not 6, just two.

And that is all based on the match-up they get because the committee could place them so they are playing one of the 15 teams rated above them at this point in the season and they could crash out in the 1st round. I will be sure to let you know if that happens come Selection Sunday.

So, as I have received comments and emails, I have made a list of the teams that right now are at the front of everyone's mind as to their placement in the MRI brackets. The teams are Davidson (covered above), Washington State, USC, and Virginia. There was some chatter about Texas A&M and Memphis being on the #1 line this week, but #1 vs. #2 line is very difficult to decide at this point, and giving the baseline above, all it means is that it could be possible (percentages holding) for those two to be playing into April.

What I find funny about the emails and comments I get are that they don't come with reasons why someone should be ranked higher other than "They are #2 in the PAC-10" which is only important if you think the PAC-10 was as great as everyone said they were, or "30 of the other 31 brackets have them in". It is nice to be the dissenter in the group. Maybe there is a reason for that dissent (think 12 Angry Men). But as I don't get a lot of argument back as to why they think the teams should be higher other than everyone else said so, I have to take a shot to explain the reasons why things are the way they are.

Remember, the MRI rankings and projections are different and shouldn't represent what you are used to thinking. Rather it should give you a different way to look at things.

So let's start with Washington State. And to talk about Washington State, let's look at another team which finished second in a Western Conference, UNLV of the Mountain West. Both teams finished at 24-6. So with record and conference standing overall being equal, who should get the higher seed?

In the latest edition of the Joe Lunardi brackets, Washington State is a #3 seed while UNLV is a #4 seed. In the MRI projections, UNLV was a #10 seed and Washington State a #13 seed and the last team "IN".

Washington State - SOS: 108, 8-4 on road, 4-0 neutral, Non-Con SOS 319, Non-Con RPI: 78, Conf RPI: 28, Conf SOS: 60, vs Top 25: 2-2, vs 26-50: 0-2, vs 51-100: 9-1

UNLV - SOS: 28, 8-5 on road, 1-0 neutral, Non-Con SOS: 34, Non-Con RPI: 11, Conf RPI: 20, Conf SOS: 78, vs. Top 25: 3-3, vs. 26-50: 1-0, vs. 51-100: 5-1

Looking at the numbers, who should be the higher seed? Other than a slightly better SOS for playing in the PAC-10 conference, almost every number is in favor of UNLV.

Let's also look at how Washington State actually performed on its schedule. I throw out that it would be difficult to point to one game on Washington State's schedule where they established themselves as a great team. They beat Arizona twice which are good wins, but the margin of those victories were 6 and 4. If they were that much better than the Wildcats, they should have beaten them by more than 4 at home. Obviously Washington wasn't as good as they were assumed to be at the beginning of the season, so does a 28 point victory over the Huskies at home or does the 4 point win on the road say more about Washington State?

Honestly, the Cougars haven't done anything to prove to me they deserve to be in the Top 12 teams in the country. They haven't won a signature game by double digits (No, Gonzaga and Washington don't count). The Cougars get out-rebounded by their opponents, something that will haunt them in the NCAA tournament and obviously did against UCLA this season. Given the schedule they played, they should not have a deficit in the rebound column. Their saving grace may be turnovers where they do have a substantial gain on their opponents.

If you look at UNLV in comparison, a team that played a tougher schedule overall, they were essentially even in rebounding with their opponents and they were about the same level in turnover margin as the Cougars. Where UNLV really excelled though was in their ability to put opponents away. They beat Nevada by 9, Air Force by 10, and Utah twice, once by 13. In general, the Running Rebels knew how to beat the opponents they were supposed to beat. They didn't struggle to put away lesser teams like Washington State. That said, UNLV didn't distinguish itself to be a #4 seed either, but overall performance should give way to UNLV being ranked higher than the Cougars.

USC: 21-10 SOS: 61, 4-6 on road, 2-1 neutral, Non-Con SOS: 185, Non-Con RPI: 66, Conf RPI: 36, Conf SOS: 50, vs. Top 25: 2-3, vs. 26-50: 2-2, vs. 51-100: 7-3 MRI: 74

I don't know what the fuss over USC is. Despite their 11-7 conference record (against a conference that I don't think was as strong as everyone thought), where do the numbers above lead you to think that they are an "IN" team? Their RPI is very low for a major conference selection as an at-large, albeit higher than Washington State. They have one of their conference losses against Arizona State, who has trouble getting out of its own way at times. They have absolutely no signature win despite beating Oregon and Arizona twice each (none by double digits). They beat Wichita State when everyone thought they were the next coming of Gonzaga, and then we later found out they weren't.

I am more concerned that they lost to Washington State twice, a team that the MRI has mired as one of the last 4 in. If the computer is placing Washington State in, it makes it difficult to put USC ahead of them into the field. Add in that USC has lost to Washington and Washington State as its last two games and that they need to really show something in the conference tournament since they are currently #74 in the MRI (despite being closer to being in prior to the last two losses). This is not to say that USC isn't a good team (much better than an average team), but they haven't really shown their ability to string together more than 2 wins in a row at times. That bothers me and it hurts their computer numbers overall.

Virginia: 19-9 SOS: 42, 3-6 on road, 0-2 neutral, Non-Con SOS: 165, Non-Con RPI: 80, Conf RPI: 22, Conf SOS: 32, vs. Top 25: 4-1, vs. 26-50: 2-2, vs. 51-100: 7-3 MRI: 63

Honestly, Virginia is the one team that I am going to have a hard time defending their placement in my rankings. Obviously their road/neutral record is not great, but that doesn't factor into the MRI. They didn't do wonderful in scheduling non-conference games, but they did a better job than Washington State. And honestly, their performance against the Top 100 is very respectable.

However, I contend that the Top 100 is a product of their conference. And within the conference, Virginia played one of the softest unbalanced schedules with the combined conference record of their opponents in the ACC actually being less than .500 (18 games under). They played all three bottom dwellers in the conference twice, while only playing UNC, Duke, and BC once. And combined in those five conference losses are defeats coming from Miami and Wake Forest. So despite a "tough" SOS from the their conference, they actually played the easiest schedule in the conference. Much of that conference SOS also comes from the decent overall records of their opponents and doesn't consider only conference games.

Virginia is actually the best positioned of those teams which aren't currently in my bracket but the world at large seems to think they should be. If they can win two tournament games and get to the tournament finals, the MRI will most likely have them moving into the field, but that might require wins against Duke, and either Georgia Tech or Virginia Tech. Neither of those are easy games given that Cavs have recently lost to Miami and Wake.

So, overall, there are the "crazy" teams that I am missing. Remember, I don't try to recreate what the tournament committee does. I do things differently and I don't use the same criteria to rank teams that the committee will ultimately use when they pick the field.

One thing to think about. Once the field is selected, my computer does a very good job of identifying which teams end up with too high a seed or too low a seed, and where the first round upsets will be. Last year, it was George Mason, and this year, we are all scrambling to figure out who will recreate the Patriots' run. And the MRI had GMU up there all season long and got flack for it. So this year, if the MRI has VCU or Davidson winning a few games, and they do, don't be surprised. You heard it hear first.

The MRI Rankings are copyright 2007 by MRISports.com. Ben Miraski writes for MRISports.com and is a featured blogger on FanIQ. Readers can contact Ben at bmiraski@mrisports.com

Posted by bmiraski at 9:35 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

December 20, 2006

Does Wichita State Warrant Their Ranking

Before I begin, let me say, I am of the mind that the Missouri Valley is the 7th best conference in the country. They deserve multiple tournament bids, and likely should get three or four this season. There is no doubt that from top to bottom, that is a tough conference to win in, and it can compete with the teams from the top 6 conferences. We have already seen wins this year to show us that. MIssouri State beat Wisconsin, Northern Iowa took out Iowa State and Iowa, Southern Illinois won against Virginia Tech, and Wichita State beat LSU and Syracuse.

Wichita State. They are one of five teams without a loss after beating Kennesaw State on Tuesday night. As a result, they have rocketed up the rankings to #8 in the country. I, however, am not sure the high praise is warranted.

Ken Pomeroy covered the Shockers earlier this week, looking at their schedule. To summarize, Pomeroy believes that Wichita State has one marquis win, coming on the road against LSU. The Tigers aren't as strong as everyone expected coming into the season, but they are still among the elite programs in the league and therefore, winning on their home turf is something to cheer about.

Other wins on the road that look good are Syracuse, George Mason, and Wyoming. Pomeroy dismisses the George Mason win, because they are definitely not the same team they were last season, and Wyoming is still coming back after a few off years. They may be 7-2 but they are not yet back to where they were a few years ago when beating Wyoming was a major win.

Syracuse is the one team that Pomeroy withheld judgement on. I think I might be ready to declare this less than impressive. The Orange lost to Drexel on Tuesday night. While I am excited that the Dragons managed their second Big East win of the year against Syracuse, it also came at the Carrier Dome. You have to wonder if the Orange have lost their mystique to drop two games now at a place that used to be an automatic loss for the visiting team, especially to teams like Wichita or Drexel. Since Carmelo Anthony left, they have not been the same team. Even that year, it took an amazing run in the tournament to get the title, something that was not expected from such a young team. Without Anthony though, the team struggled. With the Big East season still to come, it is doubtful that the Orange will end up in the top six of that league, and they will likely be scrambling to finish in the top half an be in position for a tournament bid.

Back to Wichita State, you have to wonder why they are getting so much attention then in the polls, given their schedule so far. Sure, going undefeated is a big feat, but to say that they are the 8th best team in the country might be stretching it.

Here are the other four teams without a blemish: UCLA, Clemson, Oregon, and Connecticut. Let's take a look at the computer rankings of those four teams.

UCLA - Pomeroy: 12, Sagarin: 1, Colley: 1, Massey: 1, MRI: 11...Avg: 5.2
Oregon - Pomeroy: 18, Sagarin: 5, Colley: 8, Massey: 10, MRI: 6...Avg: 9.4
Clemson - Pomeroy: 29, Sagarin: 6, Colley: 5, Massey: 7, MRI: 1...Avg: 9.6
Connecticut - Pomeroy: 7, Sagarin: 10, Colley: 26, Massey: 26, MRI: 4...Avg: 14.6

As to be expected, those four teams are at the top of the computer rankings. They may not be #1, based on how each computer determines strength of schedule, but they are all contenders on average. Now look at Wichita State

Wichita State - Pomeroy: 40, Sagarin: 8, Colley: 10, Massey: 8, MRI: 42...Avg: 21.6

They end up over #20 on average, and while some computers see them in the top 10, there are two here which do not. Without bias, I can say having the MRI agree with Ken Pomeroy at least means that the MRI is not too out of line on its view of the Shockers. Compared on average with the computer rankings, the human positioning of the Shockers just doesn't seem correct.

Now, it is no coincidence that the two computer rankings which have Wichita State out of the Top 25 are the ones that have their creators writing about the over reaction to the perfect record and the #8 ranking. Honestly, if Wichita State can get through the Missouri Valley Conference with only 2 or 3 losses, I think they definitely deserve their position in the top 10.

Every other team in a conference in the top 6 (read BCS) will have the benefit of the doubt when it comes to losing a couple of games in conference. However, we know that Wichita State will not be allowed that same leeway when it comes to losing, especially if the losses come against teams like Drake, Illinois State, or Indiana State. I do hope they can do it and manage to get a top 4 seed in the tournament, if only to see the look on Billy Packer's face when he has to announce the bracket.

But for right now, let's hold off on anointing Wichita State as a top 10 team. 40% of your computer friends feel very differently, and 60% have them barely in that position. Let's wait and see what happens when they play Missouri State, a team which is ranked higher in both the Pomeroy and MRI computers.

Ben Miraski writes for MRISports.com and is a featured blogger on FanIQ. Readers can contact Ben at bmiraski@mrisports.com

Posted by bmiraski at 6:20 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 5, 2006

The Jimmy V Classic

Today is my favorite basketball day of the year. No Championship is on the line, and no tournament berths are at stake.

Instead, the basketball world comes together for one night to celebrate the life of one its own, and help to save the lives of many more. Tonight is the Jimmy V Classic.

Jim Valvano lept into the spotlight when his North Carolina State Wolfpack defeated the Houston Cougars (of Phi Slamma Jamma) to win the 1983 NCAA Basketball Championship. Valvano ran around the court like a madman, just looking for someone to hug.

Jimmy V was stricken with cancer and less that 10 years after the celebration of his amazing victory, Valvano was fighting for his life. However, while cancer took away the life in his body, it never took away the life in his spirit or his drive and passion.

During his last few years, he dedicated himself to raising money for cancer research, not to save himself, but to help those that came after him. The Jimmy V Foundation was set up to do just that. When he announced the formation of the foundation, he was accepting the Arthur Ashe Award for Courage at the 1993 ESPY awards. This is probably my favorite speech of all time, at any event, anywhere, and you can read it at the Jimmy V Foundation website. (I would normally post it here, but the speech rights are owned by the foundation and there are no public domain videos of it. You can see a full length video here.)

It is rare that there is a charity where 100% of everything you contribute goes to research and the Jimmy V Foundation does just that. They recently received an endowment which allows them to give all of the donations to fight against cancer, not to pay bills. As I am sure is the case with many of you, a lot of people I know have been touched by cancer. Some have fought and won, others have fought and lost. I hope for a day when we can eliminate the second group and everyone fights and wins.

It is the holiday season and many of us are busy spending on gifts for our loved ones so there is probably not a lot of extra money to go around. If there is, please consider giving some to the Jimmy V Foundation.

I am sure Jimmy V would appreciate it.

"Don't Give Up, Don't Ever Give Up."

Posted by bmiraski at 5:20 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 30, 2006

Monson Resigns from Clemson

Apparently losing to Clemson by more than 20 is tough on a coach. However, it appears Dan Monson was less phased by the loss, than by the threat of a loss of money.

This story developed soon after I posted the ACC/Big Ten Challenge piece. Literally five minutes later, Monson was reported to be let go from his job, by his own choosing.

According to reports from ESPN's Andy Katz, Monson was given the choice earlier in the week whether to be fired or walk away. Walking away was guaranteed by the athletic director to give him more money.

And it did. Monson will be paid a little over a million dollars to leave, and will continue to receive his salary through March.

Monson took over at Minnesota after leading Gonzaga into the spotlight. I didn't think this was a good move when he did it. Minnesota was mired in controversy after Clem Haskins left. There were academic scandals, and I am sure there was more we never heard about. Monson had no chance, other than to make the program clean again. He did that, but couldn't get the Big Ten wins which would have saved his job.

Minnesota went from being a big name in the Big Ten to being an easy win under Monson. I think it will be some time before we see his name again in a big time coaching job.

He will be replaced by assistant coach Jim Molinari on an interim basis.

Posted by bmiraski at 8:20 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 24, 2006

Pre-Season NIT Final - Butler vs. Gonzaga

Last year was supposed to be the year of the mid-major. The Missouri Valley stormed into the NCAA tournament. The Colonial Athletic Association placed a team in the Final Four. Storied programs around the country struggled with their smaller foes all through the season.

And it looks early this season like the trend has continued.

Two schools which have been the poster children for small school success are set to take it to the big stage tonight as Butler and Gonzaga face off in Madison Square Garden. On the line, the Pre-season NIT championship.

Gonzaga rolled into the spotlight during the late nineties and never left. Over the years, they have been favored to get as far as the Final Four in the NCAA tournament. While the names in the jerseys change, the results stay the same. The Zags aren't going away anytime soon, and it continues to be a destination location for some of the best players from the West Coast, topping even some PAC-10 schools. Not bad for a little Jesuit institution that no one had heard of until current Minnesota coach Dan Monson marked them on the national collective conscious in 1999 with a huge run in the tournament.

Butler has not been as consistent over the years but have had their share of success. Competing in the Horizon league has made it difficult to win season after season, going up against Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Illinois-Chicago, and Detroit. However, Butler did make the tournament after the 1999-2000 season and was a breath away from a win in overtime over Florida. They went again under Thad Matta the next year and made the second round. They made the Sweet Sixteen a couple of years later, keeping the Bulldogs on the front of everyone's minds.

So who has the edge tonight in New York?

Well, it might be the underdogs from Butler once again based on the results this season.

Gonzaga might have the big names we remember in Derek Raivio, Jeremy Pargo, and the tongue twisting Pierre Marie Altidor-Cespedes, but Butler has the tougher defense.

The guard combo of A.J. Graves and Mike Green are averaging over four steals combined per game. And they are not the only pick pockets on Butler. Through the season so far, Gonzaga has had trouble holding onto the ball, turning it over almost as many times as they take it away. This will be a big advantage for Butler on the defensive end of the floor.

In addition, the Midwestern Bulldogs have enough depth in the front court to battle with Gonzaga's leading scorer Josh Heytvelt. The 6-11 sophomore has been averaging almost 18 points a game, against tough competition, including what will be former #2 North Carolina, and their star big man Tyler Hansbrough.

The real challenge for Butler will be rebounding the ball against the larger Gonzaga team. Drew Streicher comes off the bench for Butler and leads the team with five boards a game. At only 6-7, the junior will be undersized compared to the Zags who feature at least four players taller than him.

If Butler can play their tough style of defense and get a few runs like they managed against Indiana and Tennessee, the Bulldogs should be going home to Indiana a winner. Otherwise, the Zags will be talked about once again as ready to steal the show come March.

Both teams have been here before on the big stage. Now one of them has the chance to shine.

Ben Miraski writes for MRISports.com and is a featured blogger on FanIQ. Readers can contact Ben at bmiraski@mrisports.com

Posted by bmiraski at 4:00 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

November 15, 2006

Little Sisters of The Poor

There is the tendency come tournament time to make fun of teams with less that tough schedules. The most common saying is that the team got to where they were by beating up on the "Little Sisters of the Poor".

Well, Prairie View A&M, a team that probably won't be talked about come tournament time no matter who they play, may actually have decided to do just that.

On Tuesday night, Prairie View defeated the Southwestern Assemblies of God Lions 61-57. Not exactly the drubbing that they expected I am sure, but a win is a win, even if it doesn't count.

Speaking of wins, anyone seen what Savannah State has been doing this year? The infamous doormat of Division I is undefeated. Yes, you read that right, undefeated, and it isn't because they haven't played yet. They are 3-0 after defeating Clark Atlanta (DII), Jacksonville, and Mercer. The Tigers better not get too used to winning, even though they have two more gimmee games next on their schedule.

They travel to Illinois on November 21st. That should end whatever winning streak that Savannah State has at the time.

Posted by bmiraski at 5:20 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 14, 2006

The Mailbag is Open

My mail doesn't come like that pictured, but I usually try to address all the email that comes across. As we saw last February, I seemed to attract a lot of attention with my views on the seeding and placement in the tournament, and I spent a lot of the early year pleading my case. Of course, George Mason getting to the Final Four sure made the MRI look pretty smart with the #16 rating they had most of the season.

I was at dinner last night, and mentioned that I got my first letter of this basketball season. I figure it is a record. I had only made one post in order to get it.

It seems to follow a pattern. Football season goes quietly. I can say that a team is not that great, or is dragging, and nothing. However, as soon as basketball season begins, the flood begins.

So what began the flood is year? My article stating that Michigan State wouldn't amount to much this season because of their performance against Brown.

So, for the first email of the year, I present Mark, from Los Angeles, California:

"Brown plays a Princetonesque slow-down game that sucks the air out of the ball. I think you'll be seeing a lot of low scores against them. And you're absolutely right, you should be questioned for making a prediction after one game -- especially the first game. Should everybody be picking Michigan State to win the NC since in their second game they had 6 players score in double figures and wiped the court with a team who plays the kind of game 95% of the teams play, which is more indicative of how the season will go?

Btw, next time one team holds another team to a total of 35 points, don't try to spin it as a positive for the dominated team. It makes you sound like you have no idea what you're talking about."

Well, thanks Mark.

But honestly, I still think Michigan State is in trouble this year no matter what style of game they are facing. While they may be 3-0 to start the season, the record can be deceiving. But before I get ahead of myself, let me go back to Brown. In the second game of the regional, when they played Central Michigan, a team Youngstown State beat 74-50, they lost. And Central Michigan didn't score 45 points like the Spartans against that slow down game, they scored 71.

Plus, I think my point was that a team like Michigan State shouldn't be unprepared for a team like Brown, even if they play a different style. Tom Izzo had almost a month to prepare the team for the game. And he knows the type of game that Brown plays. This team is not ready for this season, no matter how much they dominated Youngstown State in their second game or The Citadel in their third.

And they should have dominated those teams. Last season, both teams went 6-21. No matter how great their recruiting, or how much improved their players may be over last season, they should not be able to compete with a team like the Spartans with better visibility and better ability to attract great players. These are teams picked to finish last in their conferences by everyone. If Michigan State didn't win like they did against Youngstown and The Citadel, then maybe the problems were deeper than I thought.

But maybe it is the messenger that is the problem here. Let me give you a man who knows this team even better than I do - the Head Coach, Tom Izzo.

During Izzo's press conference on Monday, his first statement was:

"We're a work in progress."

A work in progress which has struggled with a young lineup no matter how great their talent is. They are being out hustled on the floor by Izzo's own admission, which is unacceptable for a program of the caliber of Michigan State. They are turning the ball over way too much, even more than their opponents, opponents which we have already seen are not very good.

Coming back to the Youngstown State game, Michigan State did dominate, but part of that domination was the extra time to prepare. Again, Tom Izzo:

"We made Youngstown a big deal - the prep, the extra time, the walk through at seven in the morning - and I thought they responded very well."

It is not a good sign when you need extra preparation to get up to play a team like Youngstown State. The Penguins are not that great. Heck, I didn't even think they would get past Central Michigan like they did. It usually takes a few weeks for Youngstown to get their first win. They played The Citadel on Sunday, and won big again, despite the short time to prepare. But again Izzo was not pleased:

"If we play like this in New York, you guys will have a lot of time to hit the nightlife, because you won't have to write much. We have to improve drastically in the next couple of days."

Izzo now has 4 days to prepare to play one of the top young lineups in the game, in Texas. Texas's players are not making the mistakes that Michigan State is. Texas's team is more talented, despite being younger. Texas could honestly wipe the floor with Michigan State in New York on Thursday. And the schedule doesn't get easier from their with Maryland or St. John's the next day, Vermont after that, and a Boston College team, expected to be good, and that Vermont beat, two games later.

I am not saying that Michigan State won't be decent this year. I think they will improve over the season enough to maybe get into the 15 to 18 win range, but the Big Ten will again be a tough season. 15 to 18 wins is a step down from last season, and part of that is the losses from last season. I am not saying anything that we didn't already know about this team. Or that their coach didn't know about this team.

"We're a better basketball team than we were two weeks ago. The problem is we've got to get to be a lot better basketball team."

Ben Miraski writes for MRISports.com and is a featured blogger on FanIQ. Readers can contact Ben at bmiraski@mrisports.com

Posted by bmiraski at 8:00 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 12, 2006

First "Big Game" of the Season?

It may not seem like it, but tonight's game between Arizona and Virginia could go a long way towards saying what the fate of these teams may be this season.

The Arizona Wildcats are coming off of one of their worst seasons under Lute Olson and despite a #10 ranking, have a lot to prove this year. They should be helped out by the recruitment of Chase Budinger, a 6-7 freshman who should give Arizona a major presence at small forward. Olson has called Budinger possibly the most talented recruit ever at Arizona which is saying a lot about the young wingman. Budinger was also the national high school volleyball player of the year last year, so you know that he can jump. He will be joining a strong line-up of Mustafa Shakur, Marcus Williams and Ivan Radenovic, to provide a high powered offense that may not have been seen in the desert since the 1997 championship.

The reason this is a big game though, is that they will be facing a Virginia team which could surprise this season. The Cavaliers return the top scoring backcourt in the country in Sean Singletary and J.R. Reynolds. The two alone could give defenses some headaches, but they also add some big time help inside which could make Virginia an all-around nightmare.

Chances are that Arizona will walk away with the victory tonight, but let's be honest. A big game from Virginia, possibly keeping it close or stealing a win, could say a lot about where the Cavaliers will end up in this year's ACC. They were picked pre-season to finish 8th, but that is by no means a given in the always tough twelve team league. They have enough talent to challenge not only for a top five finish but also a chance at a NCAA tournament bid for the first time in six years.

Keep an eye on Virginia tonight, and also look to see if Arizona is as good as everyone thinks they will be. Yes, this is a big game.

Posted by bmiraski at 5:30 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 10, 2006

Who Will Be This Year's George Mason?

The buzz is already starting. People are wondering who will show up and become the team that shocks the world this season. They are being tabbed "The Next George Mason".

ESPN tackled this issue on Wednesday night during their broadcast of the Maryland-Vermont game. The first to weigh in was Jimmy Dykes. I am not a huge Dykes fan. I have watched him the last few years on the late games on Monday nights and more than not I disagree with him.

So, I am not sure whether I should be happy or fearful of his pick for this year's George Mason as he revealed them.

His four picks, with his reasoning after:

Creighton - Why? Nate Funk and Anthony Tolliver

Winthrop - Why? 4 returning starters (Side note: Here I agree. Winthrop was this close last year to what would have been a huge upset of Tennessee in the first round of the tournament. My computer had them as one of the top Mid-Major programs in the nation, and they were under everyone's radar. Winthrop is for real, no matter what league they play in.)

Loyola-Chicago - Why? 5 Starters return from a team that won 19 games last year. (Side Note: The Horizon league better watch out. I was honestly hoping Loyola would get to the tournament last year. They should make it easily this time around, maybe even an at large bid?)

Drexel - Why? 4 returning starters, most importantly, Dominic Mejia

As much as I love seeing Drexel mentioned, I am not sure what I think about this. I think Drexel has what it takes to compete and win this season in the CAA, but I am not too sure if they have what it takes to win more than a single game in the NCAA tournament should they get that far. And I think Hofstra is the more talented team in the league. So to pick Drexel without picking Hofstra strikes me as a bit strange.

Tom Brennan, who knows a little bit about being a Cinderella in the tournament when he was the head coach of Vermont (and he can thank Taylor Coppenrath for that), agrees with me, selecting The Pride to make a little run. Doug Gottlieb went with Dykes's first pick, Creighton, specifically because of Nate Funk.

My four picks? Hofstra, as I mentioned is my first pick, if only because of their great returns in the backcourt. Only Virginia's starting backcourt returns more points per game. The Pride are my pick to take the Colonial, taking out George Mason and Drexel along the way. Second, Winthrop based on their returns and their experience last season in the tournament against Tennessee. Third, Wichita State. The Shockers were the Midmajor overlook last season since they ran into the George Mason buzz saw. Look for Wichita State to rebound and surprise. Last, the Dragons, despite what I said before (Hey, I picked Hofstra first). I have to go with my home team and Dominic Mejia. Look for Bashir Mason to get some pub near the end of the season and this team to overcome last year's defeats in the final five minutes to get to 20 wins.

Ben Miraski writes for MRISports.com and is a featured blogger on FanIQ. Readers can contact Ben at bmiraski@mrisports.com

Posted by bmiraski at 4:00 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

November 9, 2006

Two Days In - Two Teams Not to Watch

The college basketball season has started with the Coaches vs. Cancer classic, this year expanded into a very large tournament. One of the teams that will be playing in the semi-finals coming up is Maryland, who took care of their first two opponents, Vermont and Hampton, with less than a concern.

However, there are plenty of concerns for the Terrapins, who last season missed the NCAA tournament last year. The biggest concern I would have is what they have done to address their issues inside. Ekene Ibekwe is good, but he got beat up last season in the ACC and didn't give the Terps the power they needed on the interior. This season, I already see concerns with Maryland on the inside and this was against Vermont and Hampton. They will be overmatched again in ACC play and may struggle to make the tournament for a second straight season.

The other team that concerns me so far? Michigan State. Not much was expected this season for the Spartans, and if the game against Brown was any indication, I don't think much should have been.

Brown held Michigan State to 45 points last night. And it wasn't as if the Spartans shot poorly. They were over 40% from the field. But 45 points over 40 minutes should be very disturbing for Tom Izzo and the boys in green.

Their defense might have saved them. They held Brown under 30% shooting and yet they only won by 11. Had Brown been able to shoot better, I think we would have been seeing a very unhappy East Lansing today.

I am going to go out on a limb here this early in the season. Neither of these teams will be title contenders, and should they make the NCAA tournament, you are looking at two teams ripe for a first round upset.

Sure, projecting that from the first couple of games this season is dangerous, but I think in these two cases, I am safe.

Ben Miraski writes for MRISports.com and is a featured blogger on FanIQ. Readers can contact Ben at bmiraski@mrisports.com

Posted by bmiraski at 5:00 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

October 24, 2006

Richard Billingsley Has Had Enough

Do you know who Richard Billingsley is? You should.

Why? Because for the past 8-plus years, you have blasted him and a number of men like him.

They are the ones who developed the computer formulas used in the BCS. And Billingsley is, for one, tired of it.

In an open letter to not only the fans of the sport, but also to ABC and FOX, the college football expert reacts to the very harsh criticism which has been laid against him in the past week, corresponding with the release of the first BCS rankings.

Being one of those out there in the world with a computer ranking system for football (There are at least 75 others that you can see here), I have to say I agree with him.

I was shocked at the way that Craig James behaved on television this weekend. While John Saunders and Doug Flutie looked on and laughed, James held his laptop in the air and waved it at the camera as he spoke. He was blatantly antagonistic to those that spend a lot of time not only developing the ratings, but also updating them and keeping them current each week. As you can see from Billingsley's letter, James has never once attempted to learn the reasoning for the discrepancies between his own beliefs and what the numbers show. That ignorance to the work of not just one individual, but many, who have a very direct influence on the sport he covers is just uncalled for and Billingsley rightly attacks him for it.

On a personal note, I take great pride in what I do with regards to the rankings I generate, not only for college football, but also basketball, and a computer based "seeding" of teams for the NCAA tournament. It is the culmination of many hours of effort on my part and it is not without a great deal of thought despite being mainly driven by the numbers coming out of my computer.

I know firsthand the pain of the attacks that Billingsley is expressing. Last year, I was blasted repeatedly by fans of a few schools who were not rated highly in the MRI. I had them "out" of the NCAA tournament while many experts had guaranteed them as locks. These attacks came not only in comments here at MRISports.com, which I am sure many of you saw, but also in very harsh posts on message boards and other sites on the Internet. I am sure there were more that I didn't see, but those I did almost made me stop doing what I do. That's right. No more MRI, no more writing, no more MRISports.com.

Why? Because only one of the those making the comments made an attempt to understand what I had done, and understand how the MRI or the seedings were generated. And his understanding came not from one e-mail, but a long trading of discussion on the topic. In the end, we calmly agreed to disagree, but that peace was not achieved without some amount of learning on his part. The others, however, blindly spoke out without even trying to understand, or reading a disclaimer that I added into the bracket projections each week. More than anything, it made me sad that people were so blindly against another way of looking at things.

Last week, on FanIQ, I participated in a discussion which commented on how strange the computer polls looked in the first week. It was mentioned during that discussion that the computers do tend to look correct at the end of the season, and I applaud that realization.

So, before we totally dismiss the computers totally, I have a challenge for all of us, the Fans. I challenge us to take the higher standard that Billingsley asks us to in his letter. Let's work to understand those computers before we dismiss them as out of sorts or wrong. We all might just learn something.

Ben Miraski writes for MRISports.com and is a featured blogger on FanIQ. Readers can contact Ben at bmiraski@mrisports.com

Posted by bmiraski at 3:30 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 18, 2006

Duquesne Players Shot, Suspect Still At Large

It is not often that Duquesne gets any press in the MRI. They haven't finished in the Top 25 in my basketball rankings yet, and they most definitely haven't made the tournament since the MRI started.

And yet, it has been quite some time since we have had a tragedy like this one where multiple members of a single team are involved. The last one in my memory was the plane crash back in 1999 which took the lives of half of Oklahoma State's basketball team midway through the season.

Five Duquesne basketball players were shot coming out of a school sponsored party early on Sunday morning. The suspect fired into a crowd after approaching the players and then following them as they walked back towards the campus. The suspect is still on the loose. Shawn James, one of the injured players, relayed the story of shooting to Andy Katz of ESPN.com earlier today.

One player remains in critical condition while two others are still in the hospital. The other two players were treated and released.

Not that it is of any importance at a time like this, but basketball practice is set to begin on October 13. Given the nature of the injuries, it appears that Duquesne may be without the services of at least two of the players for a significant amount of time. Two of the injured players were transfers and would have had to sit out the season under NCAA rules.

Here's holding out hope for the remaining hospitalized players and that the police capture the shooter soon.

Posted by bmiraski at 6:00 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

April 1, 2006

The Final Four, April 1st, 2006

Sitting in Columbia, South Carolina, the Gamecocks are celebrating a second straight victory in the NIT. And while they are celebrating, the bigger championship is still to be decided. Playing for that championship are two teams that South Carolina knows well, LSU and Florida, currently seen as possible favorites for a finals rematch.

What does the MRI say about the Final Four?

George Mason(11) vs. Florida(3) -
For the casual fan, having George Mason in the Final Four is a surprise. Not so if anyone watched the preseason NIT earlier this year. Those fans remember the Drexel Dragons pushing Duke for 35 minutes before falling to the Blue Devils. Then the Dragons almost pulled off the upset against UCLA before mental errors in the final minute let the Bruins take the game. Drexel was predicted to finish in the bottom half of the Colonial conference, and they did. So, why should it be any surprise that the winner of the Colonial Conference, a conference that sported four twenty game winners, two of the final eight in the NIT and two bids in the NCAA tournament for the first time in over twenty years, should be able to compete at the top of its game?

Competing at the top of their game is exactly what George Mason will need to do if they want to continue their amazing run. The Gators have one of the deepest front lines in the game. Of course, so did Connecticut, the team that George Mason surprised to make its first Final Four appearance. But while Connecticut big men are deep, they don't run the floor like Florida. They don't have the ball handling skills like Florida. And they definitely don't have the tandem of Joakim Noah and Al Horford. The two were the keys to Florida's victory of Villanova to reach the Final Four and they will be the main key to Florida reaching Monday's championship game.

Noah and Horford have not only the post game, but they are able to handle the ball and pass as good as most guards in the league. The two will need to also step up their defense against Jai Lewis and Will Thomas. Noah has been a consistent shot blocker all tournament long and his skills against Lewis and Thomas will both be pressed to score inside against him. Horford will provide the tough second defensive option inside to truly clog the middle and force the Patriot guards like Tony Skinn to beat them.

On the offensive side, Florida will also need a big contribution on the outside from Taurean Green and Lee Humphrey. Humphrey hits some big threes for the Gators down the stretch against Villanova and will be needed against the tough George Mason defense.

While the country is starting to come over to the George Mason side, including picking them second behind LSU for the championship, there is just too much athleticism on Florida to believe that the Patriots can pull off another upset. Of course, that is what everyone was saying back when George Mason was set to go against Connecticut. And we all know what happened there. The Florida Gators are turning forward the clock to midnight, turning Cinderella's magic ride back into a pumpkin.
MRI Predicts: Florida Confidence factor: 79.00%

LSU(4) vs. UCLA(2) -
Many of the tournament games have been decided inside, especially those when LSU has been involved. Other than a last second shot which they needed to beat Texas A&M, LSU hasn't needed to worry too much about their guard play. Instead they have been living inside on the play of Glen Davis and Tyrus Thomas. With Thomas jumping to the rafters and Davis holding off the lane, no one has been able to move inside against the Tigers.

So what makes the game against UCLA any different? It could be the play of Ryan Hollins, the seven foot tall center for the Bruins that has been holding off the middle all tournament long for them. Or maybe forward Luc Richard Mbah a Moute, the hero of the Gonzaga game. He certainly hasn't looked like a freshman throughout their four games to this point.

Chances are that the inside games of both of these teams are so evenly matched that the guard play is what will matter.

That is where UCLA should worry. They have been coming off some terrible shooting games when the ball has been more than two feet away from the rim. Jordan Farmar and Arron Afflalo might finally have to start hitting shots. Especially Afflalo, the Bruins' leading scorer this season who has been held in check for most of the tournament. Memphis's poor shooting was certainly talked about a lot, but the winners always get to write the history books. That is why a lot of people won't remember how poorly UCLA shot from the field and the free throw line in what was a closer than needed game between the two tops seeds in the Oakland Region.

You might think this is a good sign for LSU, but they haven't really needed top shooting from their guards in their games either.

So this may come down to the defense that UCLA and LSU put on the court and anything can happen. Garrett Temple's play against both Duke and Texas should be enough to have everyone believing in the Tigers but no one should be forgetting Farmar and the rest of the Bruins who shut down both Gonzaga and Memphis.

This game can go either way, and as the night cap, should be a fitting lead-in to the final game on Monday night.
MRI Predicts: UCLA Confidence factor: 59.98%

Posted by bmiraski at 1:45 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

March 26, 2006

Clock is stopped at 11:59, Cinderella Still Dancing

Oh my! Oh my! Oh my!

George Mason pulls off what was an unbelievable upset. The Patriots will be making the trip to Indianapolis thanks to their overtime victory over the Connecticut Huskies.

Rashad Anderson couldn't make magic this time as the game ran out. The lead for George Mason, yes the lead, was too much for Connecticut to overcome in overtime with just Anderson's magic.

Marcus Williams tried all he good to will back the Huskies. Rudy Gay disappeared once he had four fouls. Hilton Armstrong and Josh Boone were beaten by the smaller Patriot team on the boards.

Lamar Butler, Will Thomas, Tony Skinn, Jai Lewis, and coach Jim Larranaga, keep on dancing. You've definitely earned it.

Posted by bmiraski at 4:10 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

MRI Predicts the Final Four - Sunday

The MRI is still stinging from yesterday. Two 80% confidence games, two losses.

Things to learn from that?

1. There is no way that Texas can win when LaMarcus Aldridge can't hit a shot from within 10 feet of t