UBigbobby

UB just need to apply pressure and ASU has a mental breakdown and throws it away.

Given the AZ game last year and the way Harris covered Ayton, I might give him a shot.

Am I crazy to feel that ASU and SJU were the worst two teams in the first four, play in games, and that includes the 4 16 seeds?

Also, if ASU is anywhere near as careless with the ball on Friday, Dontay and Jordan will absolutely eat them alive.

This may be the worst effort I've ever seen from a team in the NCAA tournament, by St. John's. They should be embarrassed and the committee should be shamed for putting them in the field. ASU should also be thanking their lucky stars because almost every other team in the nation would have buried them with that putrid second half they had.

ASU looked good in the first half, but has been downright bad in the 2nd. My overall impression is that St. John's is bad and should not be in the tournament. ASU is less bad and was a legit bubble team. They can absolutely beat UB but Buffalo is the better team.

ASU travelling, then draining a shot with their foot on the line but the refs calling it a 3 isn't helping the Red Storm.

St. John's is shooting 30% for the game. The fact that they have kept it within about 10 gives me a lot of hope for Friday. ASU should be running them out of the gym. They've been almost as bad as St. John's in the second half.

You're right, I forgot about Seton Hall.

This is a bad basketball game. All the other first four games have been good. Neither team is shooting better than 31% in the second half. It's just an ugly game.

The only reason St. John's is in the tournament is because the committee couldn't bear to have one 2 Big East teams in. They are not a good team. They beat BGSU by 4 at home. On the road or neutral court, BGSU would beat them half the time.

ASU is very athletic, but also like their coach, are also a bit nuts. They lose focus easily and make a lot of dumb mental errors. St. John's honestly looks like a mid-major. One star player with a bunch of "meh" guys whose job is to just not be a liability.

ASU clearly the better team, which is also borne out by their schedule. St. John's went 8-10 in the Big East and their only good OOC wins were a 1 point win over VCU and a 4 point win over Bowling Green. They should not be in the tournament. That being said, I hope they find a way to come back and win because ASU will cause UB problems and will be much closer than a 6-11 game should be.

I have no idea why you're fighting me on this. I prefer the WSJ/THE rankings due to their methodology over the US News ones. UB is #28 among publics in the WSJ rankings and what? #38 in the US News? Both are fantastic spots to be in for UB. UB is a top quality academic institution among national public universities. I'm completely unsure of what your goal is.

WSJ also incorporates student engagement, which has a major impact on outcomes including success and the development of employable skills. I'd recommend the book Engagement and Employability by Dr. Adam Peck for a primer on the link between student engagement and outcomes achievement. There's also a demonstrated link between student engagement and retention and success. Again, you can think what you want about me and my motives. But my career is working in student success, retention, and engagement. I prefer the WSJ rankings because they factor these measurements in, in a more modern way than the US News does.

Wait, since when do people not get entertainment value from a blowout when UB wins? I love when UB blows teams out. WTF are you smoking mate? Or is this more of, "I think this, therefore everyone thinks this", just like your sham poll?

Wall Street Journal/Times Higher Education Rankings. It's a newer system that foregoes some of the more traditional US News metrics like SAT scores and class sizes to focus on actual outcomes and student success more. Far better system that better reflects the actual experience a student will have. I'm not saying this because UB does better in it. I work in higher education and do work with student success and engagement and the WSJ rankings are a positive step up from US News. The selectivity of a school, or the SAT scores of their applicants or metrics like these, which US News relies heavily on have little bearing on the actual quality of education a school provides. I did misspeak. Minnesota is #27 and UB is 28. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/student/best-universities/best-public-universities-united-states

This is a bad poll. Lots of binary choices that are NOT binary in reality. I will not vote in it unless you decide to re-write it in a non-biased way.

In Cleveland I said to Mark Alnutt, "Mark, we're going to be playing for the American championship in a few years, right?" His response was, "Oh yea, that would be nice!". You heard it here first. Confirmed. We're moving to the AAC. 😄 😄😉

Cracker Barrel. The Cracker Barrel on Transit ONLY sells Syracuse stuff. And it is infuriating.

I got to work too soon, but sometime this morning Howard was going to be interviewing FLJ on air. They're getting love too.

I chatted with Tripathi briefly on the court after the women won in Cleveland and this is basically the gist of what I said. I thanked him for supporting athletics and mentioned how it's so important that the public perception of the University be bolstered by successful big time athletics to more closely match the demonstrated academic success of the University. Basically, we're the #28 public institution in the nation, ahead of places like Minnesota, but no one know us. The athletics success has helped so much in swaying public perception across the country of the university and that will have a positive impact on recruiting faculty, recruiting students, and soliciting alumni donations. He agreed and said that the impact they've been able to measure has been massive.

Seth Greenberg is a tool. We sometimes take rushed shots, but I rarely see us take bad shots.

I have to disagree. Most of the time the hyped up teams win just fine. We just remember those that fail more because of the spectacle around it.

Honestly, each of the last two times the women have been to the dance it's been similar. The women's bracket is always a mess that often makes little sense. The men's bracket can actually be predicted fairly well because the committee is, for better or worse, rather predictable in how they operate and most decisions are understandable. The women's bracket though is like throwing darts at a dartboard. I have no idea how they come up with it.