ham sandwiches

A lot of people were understandably wary of a board post previewing a hypothetical championship game. I might be in the minority, but I'M OKAY WITH THIS. Consider the actual team's necessary preparation:

This deep in the tournament, all of the teams are clearly very good. To win two games in three days requires more than just a day of prep for the second game. If I were the coach, I would consider having the first day of the week be devoted to the two potential teams to come in the Championship. Reasoning?

First, you want to prepare more than just a day for Louisville/Wichita. You can get to the championship if you just prepare for 'Cuse, but you can easily lose if you're unprepared for the finals. Having 4 days to prep for Cuse vs. 5 days is not as detrimental as having 1 day for Louisville when you could have 2.

Second, not wanting to confuse the team. That's why I'd do it the first day, because otherwise the team gets confused and doesn't focus on Syracuse when it should be. Talking about L'Ville the first day and then the day before the hypothetical game means a good memory refresher and you can start from somewhere other than scratch. (I get this reasoning from exam studying, where one studies first for the exam that will come last in a series, which I have found to be very effective).

Then there are the other forms of reasoning for the fan perspective, e.g., we're not the actual team and can discuss other things, etc. But if the team should be preparing for both games, can't fans do it too?

Thoughts? Does anybody know if a coach prepares the team for both games, or decides to make it as far as possible and hope a day is enough to prepare? It might really be unfeasible to prep for 2 teams the first day, but I think it's also really hard to get over the final four hypothetical victory high in one day and go to work with 1.5 until the next game.

It is being reported on Rivals that the HS coach of one of our main targets - Trevon Bluiett -has been hired by UCLA head coach Steve Alford.

It might be because the HS coach at one point was some sort of assistant for Coach Calipari or it might be a way to get Trevon to commit to UCLA.

Andy Staples just wrote an article detailing the possible consequences of the O'Bannon lawsuit, if the plaintiffs win.

"...it has been my longstanding belief that The Big Ten's schools would forgo the revenues in those circumstances and instead take steps to downsize the scope, breadth and activity of their athletic programs," Delany wrote. "Several alternatives to a 'pay for play' model exist, such as the Division III model, which does not offer any athletics-based grants-in-aid, and, among others, a need-based financial model. These alternatives would, in my view, be more consistent with The Big Ten's philosophy that the educational and lifetime economic benefits associated with a university education are the appropriate quid pro quo for its student athletes."

"It's not that we want to go Division III or go to need-based aid," Delany said. "It's simply that in the plaintiff's hypothetical -- and if a court decided that Title IX is out and players must be paid -- I don't think we'd participate in that. I think we'd choose another option. ... If that's the law of the land, if you have to do that, I don't think we would."

Lately I've been torn about the issue of players getting paid or not, but this seems a bit hypocritical. Staples points out the discrepancy between the Big Ten adding Maryland and Rutgers for no other reason than cable money, and then trying to claim it's really all about the athletes education, that's all.

It's worth noting, that Delany isn't alone on this either, he's just the biggest guy to speak about it. Per Staples:

Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott, SEC executive associate commissioner Mark Womack, Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby, Texas athletic directors DeLoss Dodds and Chris Plonsky, Wake Forest president Nathan Hatch and a host of others also filed declarations.

I thought this was an interesting turn of events, even if it is just an empty bluff (does anybody really think UM or OSU would drop Football as a D1 sport?). Curious what people here think

Two big wins for the softball team today, as our ladies pounded a Georgia Tech squad that is struggling to stay above .500 by a score of 6-1, and then turning right around and crushing a top-10 Texas A&M squad 9-2, handing the #9 Aggies their first loss of the season.

Driesenga shined in the circle again, dishing out a staggering 25 Ks on the day, including 15 against the Georgia Tech batters who clearly had no idea what to do with her stuff.  Bear in mind that, in a 7-inning game, there are only 21 outs to be had, and Sara got 15 of those by way of the K!

Freshman Sierra Romero continues to impress as well, crossing home twice in both games, including a home run against the Aggies.

The team takes the field tomorrow for two more non-conference matchups, including a 4:45 pm date with #11 LSU.

Title pretty much says it all, but apparently WIlton will not be participating in the Rivals Camp Series. He was invited, but turned it down per Rivals message board - Tim Sullivan

I've never seen a kid invited to show his talents/compete and turn it down, but he has his reasons.

I am not sure if that means he won't be doing the All-Star games too or what.

Tim says it may be because he learned a little something about getting burned out (sick) from Shane.

Kenpom's latest blog entry covers the late game 3-point situation and what's a smarter option: fouling or not fouling. For those of you still arguing one way or the other, it's a really interesting read. If you don't want to take the time to read it all, the basic conclusion is that losses are so rare that neither option is more of a guarantee than the other.

He does note that it's possible that Michigan, by virtue of having fouls to give, might be in a slightly different position than most of the games in his analysis (in fact, the Michigan game doesn't fit his sample set, as he chose games where the team that's losing gets their possession with 5-12 seconds remaining, presuming those situations lead to a better quality shot than what Brust had).

Personally, I'm in the "shit happens" camp where you play defense and make them hit an extremely low percentage circus shot.

Link: http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/yet_another_study_about_fouling_when_up_3