McAlister Musings, 2017-18: Time for some really fast hoops (hopefully with winning involved)

Links of interest:

Season preview, The Post and Courier

Bulldogs add freshmen to mix

School website preview

League preview, The Post and Courier (The Citadel is picked to finish 7th in the SoCon, out of 10 teams)

Preseason league polls and preseason all-SoCon team (The Citadel is tied for 7th in the coaches’ poll and 8th in the media poll)

NBC Sports league preview (The Citadel is picked to finish 9th)

Blue Ribbon yearbook league preview [not online] (The Citadel is picked to finish 8th)

CBS Sports all-Division I preseason rankings (The Citadel is picked 248th out of 351 D-1 teams, 7th in the SoCon)

Kenpom.com preseason rankings (The Citadel is picked 247th out of 351 D-1 teams, 8th in the SoCon)

ESPN “BPI” preseason rankings (The Citadel is picked 243rd out of 351 D-1 teams, 7th in the SoCon)

2017-18 schedule

2017-18 “Quick Facts”

2017-18 “Hype Video”

Box score of exhibition game at Lenoir-Rhyne (The Citadel lost 97-83)

Box score of exhibition game versus Coker (The Citadel won 122-98)

Hey, it’s time for basketball!

 

No, seriously, it is!

This isn’t really a detailed preview. It is more just an acknowledgement that the season is starting.

A few quick points:

– The Citadel isn’t picked last in the league in any preseason poll, and is generally slotted in the 7-8 range (out of 10 SoCon teams). That’s a step up from recent seasons.

– While the team will still be quite young (no seniors), and a lot of freshmen are on the scene (six), there is actually a lot of returning experience.

When taking into account last year’s numbers, here is what The Citadel has coming back in terms of the various statistical categories, by percentage:

  • Starts: 70.3%
  • Minutes: 69.5%
  • Field goal attempts: 75.6%
  • 3-point field goal attempts: 79.0%
  • Free throw attempts: 75.3%
  • Offensive rebounds: 75.7%
  • Defensive rebounds: 68.6%
  • Total rebounds: 71.2%
  • Fouls: 68.4%
  • Assists: 71.8%
  • Blocks: 64.7%
  • Steals: 73.9%
  • Points: 74.8%

From the school preview release:

Last season, the Bulldogs played at a fast pace and scored in bunches, leading the nation in points per game and ranking in the top-10 in the nation in six other statistical categories. This year, head coach Duggar Baucom wants his young squad to move even faster and score even more.

“We’re going to try to play a little bit faster than we did last season. Last year, we isolated players a little bit more, forcing them to create their own shots, but this year we’re hoping that the offense will create shots for the players,” Baucom said. “The players are getting used to it. It’s a little bit of a style change for the guys who were here last year, but hopefully it will help us play faster and score some more points.”

If The Citadel is really going to play faster this season, that is going to be noteworthy.

Last year, the Bulldogs were second nationally in both adjusted and raw tempo, averaging a shade over 80 possessions per game. I don’t know what Baucom has in mind in terms of a possessions per game average, but he hasn’t had a team with an adjusted tempo significantly higher than last season’s outfit since 2010 (when his VMI team averaged 85 possessions per game).

Baucom’s 2007 squad at VMI is the last Division I team to average over 90 possessions per game against D-1 opponents. That team lost 19 games but also got to the final of the Big South tournament, after the coach “dialed down” the pace during the conference tourney.

If The Citadel could come even close to replicating the pace of the 2007 Keydets with the current talent on the Bulldog roster, that might really be something to watch.

It could be wildly exciting. It could also be a train wreck.

Early-season schedule (first three games)…

Oglethorpe, November 10 at McAlister Field House, 3:00 pm (SoCon Digital Network)

Oglethorpe is a Division III school located in north Atlanta that went 10-16 last season. The team nickname is the Stormy Petrels, a truly excellent moniker.

While it is a regular season game for The Citadel, it is actually considered an exhibition matchup for Oglethorpe. Yes, that is a bit confusing, but not particularly unusual.

The Stormy Petrels did not play a D-1 school last season, and last faced a team in that division during the 2015-16 campaign, when they played Georgia State (another example of a regular season game for the D-1 team, but an exhibition for Oglethorpe). Georgia State won that contest 85-34.

During the 2012-13 season, Oglethorpe (which was 17-10 that year) played Mercer and lost 70-25 in another regular season/exhibition matchup.

Virginia Tech, November 12 at Cassell Coliseum in Blacksburg, VA, 7:00 pm (ACC Digital Network)

The Hokies defeated The Citadel 113-71 last season in Blacksburg, one of the 22 wins Virginia Tech had en route to an NCAA tournament appearance. Buzz Williams should have another good team again this season, despite losing the two top scorers off that squad.

Most outlets believe the Hokies will finish in the top half of the ACC. The Blue Ribbon yearbook gave VT a #25 preseason national ranking.

While Virginia Tech’s adjusted tempo in 2016-17 hovered around the national average, the Hokies were more than happy to run with the Bulldogs in last year’s matchup. Virginia Tech had 89 possessions in the contest, the most it had in any game.

The Hokies open this season on Friday with a home game versus Detroit. As for the contest against The Citadel, Kenpom projects Virginia Tech to win 100-80, with the Bulldogs given a 4% chance of pulling the upset.

North Carolina A&T, November 15 at Corbett Sports Center in Greensboro, NC, 7:00 pm

Simply put, the Aggies were one of the worst teams in Division I last season. North Carolina A&T won just three games all year (only one versus a D-1 opponent) and finished with an RPI of 350, next-to-last in the division.

However, this game won’t necessarily be easy for the Bulldogs. For one thing, the Aggies’ only D-1 win actually came against a very solid North Carolina Central squad that won the MEAC regular-season and tournament titles. Based on that result alone, there is clearly some talent on the roster.

Also, North Carolina A&T had three players sit out last season as transfers. All of them will be eligible to play this season, as will a graduate transfer from Georgia Southern, combo guard Devante Boykins.

On the other hand, last year’s leading scorer for the Aggies transferred to North Carolina State.

Before hosting The Citadel, North Carolina A&T will play at Clemson on November 12. It opens the season with a non-D1 game against Greensboro College.

Kenpom projects The Citadel to prevail by an 88-80 score, with a win probability of 77%.

This could be a fun year for the Bulldogs. I’m ready for some hoops.

College Football 2017, Week #5: the top 15 matchups

The weekly explanation of this post:

On his college hoops ratings website, Ken Pomeroy has an algorithm called ‘FanMatch’, in which “games are rated for competitiveness and level of play with a lean towards higher-scoring games”. It is a way to rate the potential watchability of various basketball contests. There is just a touch of whimsy involved, which makes it even better…

Mimicking this idea, I’ve concocted an exceedingly complicated and overly mysterious formula to produce game ratings; it is called “Tingle Factor”, or TF. The higher the TF, the better.

To access a Google Document that has a complete schedule of televised/streamed D-1 college football games (including all the announcing teams), see this post: Link

I am excluding the game between The Citadel and Samford this week, because that matchup is so clearly the biggest game on the board it would be worthless to compare it to the rest of the slate.

Outside of that contest, here are the top 15 games for Week 5. One of them is being played late Friday night, while the other fourteen are on Saturday. Three of them are FCS matchups between ranked teams.

Road Team Home Team Gametime (ET) TV/Streaming TF
Clemson Virginia Tech 9/30, 8:00 pm ABC/ESPN3 77.1
Memphis UCF 9/30, 7:00 pm ESPN2 75.7
Southern California Washington State 9/29, 10:30 pm ESPN 74.3
Oklahoma State Texas Tech 9/30, 8:00 pm FOX/FS-Go 72.1
Florida State Wake Forest 9/30, 3:30 pm ABC/ESPN3 69.8
Georgia Tennessee 9/30, 3:30 pm CBS 68.5
Sam Houston State Central Arkansas 9/30, 7:00 pm ESPN3 68
Mississippi State Auburn 9/30, 6:00 pm ESPN 67.1
Colorado UCLA 9/30, 10:30 pm ESPN2 65.7
Navy Tulsa 9/30, 3:30 pm ESPNU 65.1
South Dakota State Youngstown State 9/30, 7:00 pm ESPN3 64.2
North Carolina Georgia Tech 9/30, 12:00 pm ESPN2 63.5
South Carolina Texas A&M 9/30, 7:30 pm SEC Network 62.9
South Dakota Western Illinois 9/30, 4:00 pm ESPN3 62.5
USF East Carolina 9/30, 12:00 pm CBS Sports Network 62.1

 

Additional notes and observations:

– CBS/CBS Sports Network games will also be streamed on CBS Sports Digital.

– The games on the ESPN “Family of Networks” will also be streamed via WatchESPN.

– Per Bill Connelly, Clemson and Virginia Tech ranked 2nd and 5th in the category of success rate margin for last week’s games. In other words, both teams played very well (despite Clemson letting BC hang around for three quarters). This week, those two teams play each other in the top TF game on the board and are presumably in “good form” as our friends in the soccer world would say.

– Georgia crushed a good Mississippi State team last week, while Tennessee struggled to outlast winless Massachusetts. Nevertheless, even Butch Jones couldn’t prevent the UGA-UT game from landing in the top 15. We all remember the crazy ending to last year’s game between these two squads.

– North Carolina-Georgia Tech has been an odd series. UNC has won the last three games, after the Yellow Jackets had won 14 of 16 contests against the Heels. Average score in this game over the past seven years: North Carolina 36.5, Georgia Tech 36.4.

– Games in the top 15 that the oddsmakers think could be particularly high-scoring include Navy-Tulsa (over/under of 71.5), Colorado-UCLA (67), Sam Houston State-Central Arkansas (71), Oklahoma State-Texas Tech (84.5), Memphis-UCF (68), and USF-East Carolina (75.5).

– South Carolina and Texas A&M, historic SEC rivals, have only met three times in football. The only previous time the teams met in College Station, in 2015, the game featured 989 yards of total offense.

The winner gets to keep the James Bonham Trophy. Bonham is more of a hero in Texas (dying at the Alamo), as not a lot of people in the Palmetto State are overly familiar with him. Perhaps they should be, though. According to Wikipedia:

Bonham entered South Carolina College in 1824. In 1827, in his senior year, he led a student protest over harsh attendance regulations and the poor food served at the college boardinghouse. He was expelled, along with the entire senior class. In 1830, Bonham practiced law in Pendleton, but was found in contempt of court after caning an attorney who had insulted one of Bonham’s clients. When ordered to apologize by the sitting judge, he refused and threatened to tweak the judge’s nose. Bonham was sentenced to ninety days for contempt of court.

– South Dakota State and Youngstown State are both ranked in the top 5 of the FCS. SDSU is ranked #4 on the FCS Coaches’ Poll, and is a 3-point favorite over homestanding YSU, which is tied for fifth in that same poll. This is also a matchup between Jackrabbits and Penguins, and ought to have a bonus “Tingle Factor” point or two just for that.

– Texas Tech’s defense allowed 43.5 points per game last season. So far this year, the Red Raiders are giving up just 26.3 points per game. Admittedly, that is just a three-game sample. This week’s opponent, Oklahoma State, is coming off a home loss to TCU and can’t afford to drop two straight Big XII games. Last year’s contest resulted in a 45-44 victory for the Cowboys after Texas Tech scored what would have been the game-tying touchdown, only to miss the extra point.

– Last year, Navy beat Tulsa 42-40 in a game that featured 1077 yards of total offense. No fewer than 597 of those were rushing yards. Also, both quarterbacks had a rating that exceeded 215.

The two QBs from that game are gone, but the clash of styles between the two offenses remains.

– Memphis and UCF were supposed to play on September 8 (a Friday), but that game was postponed thanks to Hurricane Irma. Now the two AAC title contenders will finally meet.

– Florida State is winless. Wake Forest is undefeated. Could those two factoids still be true after Saturday?

It isn’t out of the question, though FSU is a 7.5-point favorite. The Seminoles just lost to a North Carolina school at home, however (NC State), and now have to play another Old North State team on the road.

It should be another excellent week on the gridiron. Don’t forget about that Friday night game!

College Football 2017, Week #1: the top 15 matchups

On his college hoops ratings website, Ken Pomeroy has an algorithm called ‘FanMatch’, in which “games are rated for competitiveness and level of play with a lean towards higher-scoring games”. It is a way to rate the potential watchability of various basketball contests. There is just a touch of whimsy involved, which makes it even better.

I’m going to do the same thing (more or less) and rate the top 15 games of Week 1, excluding Newberry-The Citadel, because it wouldn’t be fair to compare that game with all the lesser gridiron battles.

Sometimes the high-profile contests really are the best games of the week, but often under-the-radar matchups are worth the attention of the viewing public. That includes FCS games.

I briefly explained this in a previously post, but basically I’ve created a super-secret formula (patent pending) to produce these game ratings; it is called “Tingle Factor”, or TF. The higher the TF, the better.

Of course, there are many games this week that are worth watching, because after all — they are college football games!

To access a Google Document that has a complete schedule of televised/streamed D-1 college football games, see this post: Link

Here are the top 15 games for Week 1 (Thursday through Monday):

Road Team Home Team Gametime (ET) TV/Streaming TF
Alabama Florida State 9/2, 8:00 pm ABC/ESPN3 86.73
North Carolina State South Carolina 9/2, 3:00 pm ESPN 84.20
Tennessee Georgia Tech 9/4, 8:00 pm ESPN 83.90
Virginia Tech West Virginia 9/3, 7:30 pm ABC/ESPN3 83.55
Tulsa Oklahoma State 8/31, 7:30 pm FS1/FS-Go 79.68
Richmond Sam Houston State 9/1, 7:00 pm ESPN3 78.11
Colorado State Colorado 9/1, 8:00 pm Pac-12 Network 72.15
James Madison East Carolina 9/2, 6:00 pm ESPN3 68.44
Temple Notre Dame 9/2, 3:30 pm NBC 67.18
Kennesaw State Samford 8/31, 7:00 pm ESPN3 66.95
Texas A&M UCLA 9/3, 7:30 pm FOX/FS-Go 65.60
Maryland Texas 9/2, 12:00 pm FS1/FS-Go 64.19
Eastern Washington Texas Tech 9/2, 4:00 pm FS Nets/FS-Go 64.03
South Carolina State Southern 9/3, 2:30 pm ESPN2 63.88
Navy Florida Atlantic 9/1, 7:00 pm ESPNU 63.79
  • Alabama-Florida State will be played in Atlanta, GA
  • Georgia Tech-Tennessee will also be played in Atlanta, GA
  • North Carolina State-South Carolina will be played in Charlotte, NC
  • Richmond-Sam Houston State will be played in Waco, TX
  • Colorado State-Colorado will be played in Denver, CO
  • Virginia Tech-West Virginia will be played in Landover, MD

Additional notes and observations:

– The top four games this week are all neutral-site Power 5 games. I think they would probably be more fun if played on a campus site, but money talks. At least these matchups will take place.

– It’s not surprising that Alabama-Florida State (a 1 vs. 3 matchup) tops the list, but watch out for North Carolina State-South Carolina. That should be a good game, and it is a bellwether contest for both programs.

– The game between Richmond and Sam Houston State was originally supposed to have been played last Sunday in Huntsville, TX, but was postponed and relocated due to Hurricane Harvey. Because of that, I had to resubmit the game into my computer program that produces the Tingle Factor ratings, and as a result it lost two TF points. It is still easily in the top 15 this week, however.

– If Tulsa can successfully replace Dane Evans at quarterback, look out (and as the over/under is 70, bet the over).

– Colorado State-Colorado strikes me as underrated, but perhaps instinctively the algorithm knows the game is being carried on the Pac-12 Network, and that very few people will be able to actually watch the game.

– James Madison, the defending FCS champion, is currently a 1-point favorite over homestanding FBS opponent East Carolina.

– Another FCS vs. FBS matchup, Eastern Washington-Texas Tech, features an over/under of 87.

– Navy-FAU barely sneaked into the top 15, but the algorithm doesn’t know the potential fun of having a military school face off against Lane Kiffin and a team described by one observer as an “Island of Misfit Toys”. This game might actually be top 10 material.

– One contest not in the top 15 is Michigan-Florida, and given that the Gators may struggle to put 11 players on the field at the same time on Saturday, that seems reasonable. BYU-LSU also didn’t make the cut.

– Tennessee State-Georgia State isn’t in the top 15 either, but it might be worthwhile to watch a few minutes of that game (it’s on ESPN3), if only to see the wonder of Georgia State playing at Turner Field (!).

It’s time for college football. Life is good.

Variety Pack: The NCAA’s Seven Sinners, Gonzo’s friend Duke Rice, and the Plant of the Week

It’s the long-awaited latest edition of the Variety Pack, the celebrated TSA series that debuted earlier this year.  The idea is to write briefly (I hope) on two or three different topics without being limited to 140 characters, like my Twitter tweets.

This is one of two holiday Variety Packs; in a week or two I’ll post the other one, which will (probably) feature The Citadel’s role in the modern-day proliferation of college football on television.

Both Variety Packs are inspired by Google Books.  What  I did, basically, is type in some search terms, and see what came up.

In 1948, the NCAA crafted a statute colloquially known as the “Sanity Code”.  The Sanity Code was an attempt to end the practice of awarding athletic scholarships, something many southern institutions had been doing since the early 1930s.

The Sanity Code allowed schools to award scholarships to prospective athletes, but only on a basis of need – and even then the scholarships were limited to tuition and incidental expenses.  Most scholarship athletes would either have to qualify for academic scholarships, or pay their own way, usually by holding down jobs while in school.

This was seen by a lot of the southern schools as an attempt by the “establishment” to keep itself on top of the college athletics pyramid.  The establishment consisted mainly of the Big 10 schools, largely aligned with the Ivy League and Pac-8.  To add fuel to the fire, in those days the Big 10 commissioner also oversaw the NCAA’s daily activities; Walter Byers, later executive director of the NCAA, split time between his NCAA duties and his primary job as the Big 10’s publicity director.

There were myriad problems with the Sanity Code.  It was basically unenforceable.  It was also seen as unfair.  The southern schools had no interest in dropping athletic scholarships, especially when at the same time wealthy Big 10 alums would be giving bogus jobs to football and basketball players with no penalty.

The school most often ridiculed by Sanity Code opponents was Ohio State.  Prior to the 1950 Rose Bowl, it was revealed that at least 16 Buckeye football players had cushy jobs with the state, including a running back on the payroll of the state’s transportation department as a tire inspector.

The Sanity Code was going to allow OSU to do that, but not let SEC or Southern Conference schools offer athletic scholarships.  It’s easy to see why people got upset.

Enter the “Seven Sinners”.  No, I’m not talking about the John Wayne-Marlene Dietrich movie.

In this case, the “Seven Sinners” were seven schools that refused to live a lie, and admitted that they were not adhering to the new statute enacted by the NCAA.  The seven happened to be a very difficult group for the establishment to criticize.  Only one, Maryland, was a major college football power offering a large number of athletic scholarships.  The others were Virginia, Virginia Tech, VMI, The Citadel, Boston College, and Villanova.

For The Citadel, the notion of having athletes work jobs while at the same time go to class, play a sport, and participate in military activities was a non-starter (the same was true for VMI, and to a certain extent Virginia Tech).  The school also questioned the amateur-but-not-really idea of the Sanity Code, with The Citadel’s faculty representative stating that “The Code defines the word amateur and then promptly authorizes students to participate…who do not meet the requirements of the definition.”

At the 1950 NCAA Convention, the association moved to expel the seven schools. That’s right, the NCAA wasn’t going to put them on probation, a concept not yet considered.  It was going to expel them.

UVA president Colgate Darden made a principled argument against the statute, and stated that his school had no intention of following the Code.  Maryland president (and former football coach) Curley Byrd worked the floor at the convention, making sure there weren’t enough votes to expel the seven schools, and using Ohio State’s situation (as an example of the NCAA’s hypocrisy) in order to convince some fence-sitters to support the Sinners’ position.

The Citadel, however, had already announced it was going to resign from the NCAA, stating it refused “to lie to stay in the association”.  For The Citadel, either the Sanity Code had to go, or The Citadel would go.  After all, it’s not like the school had a history of shying away from secession-related activities.

Since all seven of the “Seven Sinners” are still members of the NCAA, you can guess that they weren’t expelled.  Expulsion required a two-thirds majority, and that didn’t happen (although more than half of the NCAA members did vote against the Sinners). This prevented a complete fracture of the NCAA, as it is likely the southern schools would have left the association otherwise.

While most of the votes supporting the seven schools came from the south, there were schools in the other parts of the country which also voted against expelling the seven, a fact not unnoticed by the NCAA leadership.  The Sanity Code was repealed the following year.

In retrospect, it’s kind of funny that The Citadel was in the position of being an NCAA malefactor.  However, it should be pointed out that 111 schools did vote to expel the military college from the NCAA on that fateful day in 1950.  In fact, when the vote was taken, NCAA president Karl Lieb announced that the motion to expel had carried, before being corrected by assorted shouts from the convention floor.  He then said, “You’re right, the motion is not carried.”  Lieb had forgotten about that two-thirds majority rule for passage; the vote to expel The Citadel and the other six schools had fallen 25 votes short.

The echoes from the Sanity Code controversy still reverberate today.  There are still notable divisions between the Big 10 and Pac-10 schools and the other “major” conference schools like the SEC.  The Ivy League has basically withdrawn from the scene.  Even today, there is some distrust of the Big 10 and its closeness (real or perceived) with the NCAA.

Below are some links that touch on this topic.  They are mostly links from Google Books, so it may take a little bit of work to get to the referenced sections.

College Football:  History, Spectacle, Controversy (starting on page 213)

The 50-Year Seduction (starting on page 18)

Unsportsmanlike Conduct:  Exploiting College Athletes (starting on page 53)

College Athletes For Hire (starting on page 43)

Sport:  What Price Football? (column in Time magazine)

Egg In Your Beer (editorial from the January 21, 1950 edition of The Harvard Crimson)

While perusing Google Books, I read a passage from a book entitled Gonzo:  The Life of Hunter S. Thompson:  An Oral Biography:

[Thompson’s] best friend from his early days was probably Duke Rice.  He was a skinny kid and not all that tall, and suddenly he shot up to six-six or six-seven and got a basketball scholarship to The Citadel, where he was the only player of the time who was able to shut down Jerry West.

Now, this little blurb interested me, for a couple of reasons:

— Thompson’s friend was named Duke Rice.  With a name like that, he shouldn’t have gone to The Citadel; he should have gone to Vanderbilt or Northwestern.

— The “Blitz Kids” were a group of players recruited by Norm Sloan to The Citadel in the late 1950s and early 1960s (which is also the time period when Jerry West played for West Virginia).  That era was the pinnacle for basketball at The Citadel.  The stars of those teams were Art Musselman, Dick Wherry, Ray Graves, and Dick Jones (and later Gary Daniels)…but not anyone named Duke Rice.

The Blitz Kids never won the Southern Conference, mostly because West Virginia was in the league at that time, and Jerry West played for the Mountaineers.  He was, of course, a fantastic player.  Very few teams shut him down, and The Citadel certainly didn’t.  West played three games in his career against The Citadel.  WVU won all three games, by scores of 89-61, 85-66, and 98-76.

That 85-66 score came in the 1959 Southern Conference tournament championship game, the only time The Citadel has ever made the league final.  West scored 27 points in that contest.  I don’t know how many points he scored against the Bulldogs in the other two games, but since the Mountaineers put up 89 and 98 points in those matchups, I’m guessing he wasn’t exactly “shut down”.

Incidentally, that 98-76 game was played during the 1959-60 season at McAlister Field House, and was arguably the most anticipated contest ever played at the ancient armory (at least for those contests not involving Ric Flair).  West Virginia had lost in the NCAA championship game the year before (to California, 71-70), and West was the most celebrated college basketball player of his time.  People came out in droves to see West play.

West was so good, both in college and in the NBA, that he had no fewer than three great nicknames — “Zeke from Cabin Creek”, “The Logo”, and “Mr. Clutch”.  There are a lot of great athletes who would love to have just one cool nickname, and West had (at least) three of them.

Going back to the book, the person who stated that Duke Rice had played for The Citadel was another friend of Thompson’s named Gerald Tyrrell.  Now, I was sure Tyrrell didn’t make up that story.  After all, there wasn’t any reason for him to do so, and I suspected that part of it was true.  It’s just that it was rather obvious that The Citadel part of it wasn’t true.

No one with the last name “Rice” is listed as having lettered for The Citadel in the school’s media guide.  I briefly considered the possibility that the last name was incorrect (and that Duke was a childhood nickname), but Hunter S. Thompson grew up in Louisville, and none of the players for The Citadel during that era were from Louisville, at least from what I was able to determine.

As it happened, it didn’t take much effort (just some additional Googling) to come up with the answer.  Duke Rice had in fact played college basketball, and had played in the Southern Conference for a school with a military component…but the school in question was Virginia Tech.

Rice is mentioned in this interview of Chris Smith, who starred for the Hokies from 1957-61.  Smith described the 1960 Southern Conference championship game:

We had great athletes.  Bobby Ayersman, Louie Mills, and Bucky Keller were each outstanding high school football quarterbacks.  Dean Blake and Duke Rice did a great job  during the game as they took turns guarding Jerry West.  They held him to 14 points.  When Jerry fouled out in the third quarter, we were tied 49 to 49. Unfortunately, the rest of the WV team responded well and they scored on several long shots during the final 10 minutes of the game.

There he is!

What’s more, it appears that Tyrrell’s comment that Rice was “the only player of his time to shut down Jerry West” has some validity to it.  Maybe it’s an overstatement, but at least it’s rooted in fact.

In the end, the Duke Rice story doesn’t really have anything to do with The Citadel.  It’s more about a slightly blurry memory (which I suspect Thompson himself would have appreciated) and a lack of fact-checking by the book’s editors.  This particular book happens to be co-authored by Rolling Stone publisher Jann Wenner.

It also illustrates the inherent danger of taking oral histories at face value.  Anyone who follows baseball knows this all too well.  The success of Lawrence Ritter’s classic The Glory Of Their Times has led to a number of similar books, a lot of which are a little short in the truth-telling department.

It’s time for the Plant of the Week.  For this edition, the honoree is a canna lily, the Cleopatra canna, which when it comes to coloration basically has a mind of its own.

Warm weather can’t get here fast enough…

NCAA basketball bracket projection, 3/14/10 — noon

Everyone else posts their bracket projections, so I decided to post this here.  It’s probably not mistake-proof, and there are likely multiple rematch scenarios (including a potential Wake Forest-Purdue game in the 2nd round, although assuming either of those teams has another win left in them could be dangerous).

Thanks to the bubble being so soft, the last few in/out squads are really up in the air this year.  My last five for each category…

— Last five in:  California, Utah State, UTEP, Florida, Illinois (the Illini being the last in)
— Last five out:  Virginia Tech, Minnesota, Mississippi State, Seton Hall, William & Mary (the Hokies being the first out)

I think both Minnesota and Mississippi State have to win today to get a bid.  That’s particularly true for the Bulldogs, in my view; Minnesota may just have to “look good” against Ohio State to pass Illinois.  Of course, the Illini lost in double overtime to the Buckeyes yesterday, so the proverbial “eye test” didn’t hurt them, either.

If Illinois was ahead of Minnesota prior to the Big 10 tournament, I’m not sure what exactly has led to Minnesota moving ahead of the Illini on the S-curve.  Illinois beat Wisconsin and lost that 2OT thriller to OSU.  Minnesota beat a hapless Penn State, Michigan State in OT, and then a decimated Purdue squad.  I’m not sure there is much to differentiate between those performances.

Speaking of Purdue, I have no idea how the committee will seed the Boilermakers. (Right now the committee may not know either.)  I seeded them as a 4, but would not be surprised at anything from a 2 to a 7.

One reason I kept Purdue on the 4 line is that several other teams with a shot at a protected seed failed to produce in their respective conference tournaments. Wisconsin, Michigan State, Texas A&M, and Maryland all lost in league quarterfinals. BYU went down in the Mountain West semis.  I couldn’t quite pull the trigger on Butler for a 4 seed, although I thought about it, and I suspect the committee will too.

I think Temple could be playing for a 3 seed today in the Atlantic 10 final, and may also be playing for a spot in the Providence sub-regional.  The Owls are competing with Pittsburgh and Villanova for one of two protected seed spots in that pod (Georgetown will get the other).  I have Pitt getting it right now.

After some debate, I kept Duke as the 1 seed in the West and West Virginia as the 2 in that region.  A loss by Duke today in the ACC final would result in those two teams flipping seeds.  Ohio State isn’t going to get enough of a bump by beating Minnesota to get to the 1 line, especially with the late start today for the Big 10 final.

Anyway, my current bracket projection (Midwest vs. West and South vs. East in the national semifinals):

Midwest

Oklahoma City

1-Kansas 16-Robert Morris

8-Marquette 9-Florida State

Spokane

5-Butler 12-Wake Forest

4-Purdue 13-Oakland

Jacksonville

3-Tennessee 14-Houston

6-Xavier 11-Missouri

Providence

7-UNLV 10-Cornell

2-Georgetown 15-Morgan State

West

Jacksonville

1-Duke 16-East Tennessee State

8-Notre Dame 9-Oklahoma State

Spokane

5-Michigan State 12-UTEP

4-Vanderbilt 13-Murray State

New Orleans

3-Baylor 14-Montana

6-Richmond 11-California

Buffalo

7-Old Dominion 10-San Diego State

2-West Virginia 15-Ohio

South

Buffalo

1-Syracuse 16-Lehigh

8-Texas 9-Siena

San Jose

5-Maryland 12-Illinois

4-New Mexico 13-Wofford

New Orleans

3-Temple 14-Vermont

6-Texas A&M 11-Utah State

Milwaukee

7-St. Mary’s 10-Louisville

2-Ohio State 15-UCSB

East

Milwaukee

1-Kentucky 16-PIG (Winthrop/Arkansas-Pine Bluff)

8-Northern Iowa 9-Clemson

San Jose

5-Wisconsin 12-Washington

4-Villanova 13-New Mexico State

Providence

3-Pittsburgh 14-Sam Houston State

6-Brigham Young 11-Florida

Oklahoma City

7-Gonzaga 10-Georgia Tech

2-Kansas State 15-North Texas

Random bubble thoughts and theories, 3/8

I’m going to wait a few days before writing a post-mortem on The Citadel’s hoops season.  It was a little bit of an odd year.  Part of me is disappointed in the overall record (16-16, 9-9), but another part of me remembers that in the last two years the Bulldogs have won 24 SoCon games.  In the six previous years, The Citadel had won 15.  Total.

The past brings perspective.

Sometimes the past also helps when trying to evaluate bubble teams and seeding scenarios.  The membership of the selection committee has changed over time, of course, but that doesn’t mean you can’t look back and see what the committee did when presented with certain situations.

— Let’s face it, the Pac-10 is wretched this season.  California won the outright Pac-10 title.  Is that good enough to guarantee the Bears an at-large bid if they don’t win the Pac-10 tourney?

History says yes.  Exhibit A:  Air Force, 2004.  That season the Falcons were 22-5 during the regular season and won the Mountain West, but did almost nothing outside the league, managing to beat no one of consequence and losing games to UT-Pan American and Belmont.  However, Air Force was 12-2 in league play and won the MWC outright by two games.

Air Force lost in the quarterfinals of the MWC tournament to Colorado State (by 12 points).  Despite that, the Falcons still made the NCAAs.  When asked about it, selection committee chairman Bob Bowlsby noted AFA’s less-than-stellar profile, but pointed out that the Falcons had been the regular-season champion of a top-10 league — and that achievement, in the opinion of the committee, merited Air Force’s inclusion.

I can’t say I disagree with that argument.  (It’s certainly a better line of reasoning than the one Bowlsby’s successor as committee chair, Craig Littlepage, gave for the committee’s absurd decision to put Air Force in the field two years later.  I still have no idea how that was justified.)

If winning a top-10 league is good enough, then Cal is safe.  Admittedly, it’s not quite the same situation; Air Force won the MWC in 2004 by two games, while Cal edged Arizona State by just one game in the standings.  Also, 12-2 is better than 13-5.  Still, it’s a factor, as is the fact we’re talking about the Pac-10, and not one of the “mid-major” leagues (even if it isn’t as good as some of those leagues this season).  Cal better not lose in the Pac-10 quarterfinals, though.

Incidentally, the same argument would presumably work in the favor of Utah State.

— Could last-second seeding adjustments actually happen?

This season there will be four conference title games played on Selection Sunday.  The SEC, ACC, and Atlantic 10 title games will all tip at 1 pm ET, while the Big 10 final will start at 3:30 pm ET.

Let’s say that Duke and Ohio State are both in their respective conference finals. Would the committee wait until the end of the Big 10 game to finalize the seeding?

Someone asked Joe Lunardi about this in an ESPN “chat session” :

A lot of experts think that Ohio State has the best shot this side of Durham to collect the final 1-seed if they win the Big Ten tournament. Isn’t there a good chance though that they could get screwed by the schedule. The Big Ten final doesn’t start until 3:30 on Sunday and the ACC championship is at at 1:00 on Sunday. I know that the brackets take a long time to put together and the top seeds are placed first. If Duke lost in the Final and Ohio State won, is it possible that their fates would already be set before those games finish?

Joe Lunardi:  It has happened this way in the past…More recently, however, the Committee has built multiple brackets accounting for the various Sunday scenarios. I would be disappointed in this group if they bailed on the process and didn’t finish the job (and I do not expect they will).

Lunardi may be right, but I think most of those “various Sunday scenarios” have revolved around teams playing on Sunday who were “auto bid or bust” types — like Mississippi State last season, or Georgia the year before that.  I’m less than sure the committee is going to wait until the last moment (or prepare alternative brackets) for a question of one seeding line.  Besides, should one game really be the difference between a team getting a 1 or a 2?  What about the previous 30+ games?

This reminds me that in the past, there were occasionally conference tournaments still going on when the selections were announced.  The Big West did this several times (this was back when UNLV was in the league).  It invariably led to scenarios where the committee would have either/or bracket lines where a team would be in the field, unless the Big West had a surprise champ (in other words, if  Vegas didn’t win).

This finally ended after the committee basically decided to hose any at-large hopeful out of the Big West until it quit playing its tourney so late.  I recall Long Beach State being a bubble team that found out at halftime of the conference final that it had to win, or else.

Another league that at one time played its final after the pairings was the SWAC.  Now, with the SWAC there wasn’t any at-large issues; it was just a question of what team would advance.  However, it did pose a problem for the committee when trying to seed.  These days the SWAC is an easy 16 (if not play-in game) pick, but back then it wasn’t always the case.

One year the committee puzzled just about everyone by deciding the winner of the SWAC title game would get a 13 seed.  Nobody could believe the SWAC got so high a seed, especially because no one knew yet which team would be the league representative.

As it happened, Southern won the tournament final (televised immediately after the selection show), and the lucky 4 seed it drew as an opponent was ACC tournament champ Georgia Tech.  Well, maybe not so lucky.  Ben Jobe’s Jaguars shocked Bobby Cremins’ Yellow Jackets in the first round, 93-78.

— This season, there seem to be several “as long as they don’t lose to a really bad team, they should be okay” situations.  It’s all right if Virginia Tech loses to Wake Forest in the ACC tournament, but if Miami upsets the Demon Deacons and then beats the Hokies, VT is in trouble.  Washington might get an at-large bid if it loses to Cal in the Pac-10 final, but can’t afford to lose to another school — and it also would hurt the Huskies if their semifinal opponent wasn’t Arizona State.

As mentioned earlier, Cal can’t afford to lose in the Pac-10 quarters.  Utah State needs to avoid losing until it plays Nevada in the WAC final, because Nevada is hosting the event, and a loss then would be more acceptable.  However, Utah State couldn’t afford to lose to another school in the final, because then it would be a neutral-site loss.  Also in the same position, perhaps, is UTEP, which could face host Tulsa in the C-USA semifinals.

Conversely, Mississippi needs to beat Tennessee in the SEC quarterfinals — but it does the Rebels no good at all if the Vols are upset by LSU in the first round.  If that happened, then Mississippi would have to beat LSU and (presumably) Kentucky to get the needed big-win bounce.  Mississippi State is expected to play Florida in a “play-out” game in the SEC quarters, but if Auburn upends the Gators, then Mississippi State would have to beat the Tigers and Vanderbilt (if form holds) to reach the final — and it still would not have a strong enough at-large case.

Then there is Illinois, which is a good example of a team that would probably be better off not playing a game at all.  As it is, the Illini play Wisconsin for the second time in a week in the Big 10 quarterfinals — and for Illinois, it’s probably a win-you’re-in, lose-you’re-out situation.

— Memphis is starting to show up on some bubble watches.  I’m trying to figure out how a team that has not won a game this season against a prospective tournament team (unless Oakland wins the Summit League tourney) is a viable at-large candidate.

— If the tournament would have been expanded to 96 teams for this season, we would be discussing the bubble candidacies of North Carolina, South Carolina, Arizona, and St. John’s.  There is a good chance all four would have made the field of 96.

Expansion is such a dumb idea, it’s inevitable that it will happen…

The NCAA wants to ruin its own basketball tournament

This is a little late…okay, more than a little.  It’s the holiday season, after all.  I was busy.

You may have heard that the NCAA is considering expanding the D-1 hoops tourney to 96 teams.  The particulars:

[The NCAA] is gauging the feasibility of moving the tournament from broadcast to cable…as it decides whether to exercise an escape clause in its 11-year, $6 billion deal with CBS, the NCAA’s longtime partner…

…the NCAA has the ability to opt out [of the deal] at the close of the 2010 Final Four. One source said this is just the beginning of a process that will conclude in summer  2010, at the earliest…

…the NCAA is not committed to making any changes. It also is talking with TV networks about whether they are interested in the tournament as is. The NCAA’s current deal with CBS is heavily backloaded. More than a third of the total value — $2.13 billion — is due to the NCAA in the final three years.

But the potential expansion of the NCAA tournament has support in collegiate circles, particularly from college basketball coaches. The idea talked about with TV networks would likely take it from its current field of 65 teams to 96 teams and add another week to the competition, with the top 32 teams receiving byes. The move has been characterized as folding the NIT into the NCAA tournament.

The NCAA clearly expects that the added week of games would significantly increase the tournament’s rights fee.

If you’re wondering why college basketball coaches favor expanding the tournament, it’s about job security, primarily for major college coaches.  Now, you might think that coaches who make six figures per annum (or more) might deserve being under a bit of pressure for that kind of dough (and all the other perks that go with the job).  The coaches, though, have a different idea.

Those poor major college coaches do have it rough.  There are 72 schools in the six BCS conferences.  Of those 72, only 36 made the NCAA tournament last season.  Just 50%.  Why, there wasn’t room for 16-14 Georgetown, or 18-14 Virginia Tech, or 17-15 Washington State!  Expanding the field to 96 would surely correct those injustices.

The writer of this article in The Wall Street Journal favors expansion.  As he puts it:

Expansion would, in no particular order, give more quality teams a chance to prove themselves and fix the shamefully low percentage of bids given to lesser-known “mid-major” teams. It might also create enough of a supply of games to allow a portion of the tournament to be shown on cable (at the moment, fans can’t see every game in its entirety because CBS—the rights holder—doesn’t broadcast every game nationally).

Most important of all, adding an extra round or stage to the tournament would mean an extra helping of what fans love most about the event: the early rounds, the unpredictable festival of games that go on all day and create wild excitement all across the country.

Give more quality teams a chance to prove themselves?  Isn’t that what the regular season is supposed to be about?

The problem with his argument about expansion aiding mid-major teams is in his next sentence.  The object of this exercise is for the NCAA to extract as much money as it can from ESPN and/or CBS (or maybe Fox; after all, Chris Rose needs work).  Let’s get serious here — ESPN isn’t going to give the NCAA a zillion dollars to televise first-round matchups between Illinois State-Niagara, or Duquesne-Tulsa.

His basic idea (which mirrors Coach K’s thoughts in the earlier link) is that a 96-team field would envelop and replace the NIT, which is now owned by the NCAA and doesn’t make nearly enough money to satisfy that organization.  As a practical matter, though, it would not and could not.

For one thing, three of the teams in last season’s NIT (Jacksonville, UT-Martin, and Weber State) were regular season champions of smaller conferences that would not be given at-large bids to an expanded tournament.  Several other schools invited to the NIT would also be questionable candidates for NCAA at-large bids, including several of the C-USA squads and Duquesne, which was only 9-7 in Atlantic 10 play.

If you expanded the field to 96, last season at least 51 of the 72 BCS schools would have made the field, and as a practical matter probably five or six more would have also (Vanderbilt for UT-Martin, Seton Hall for Jacksonville, etc.).  That would mean that over 75% of all major conference schools would have received bids last season.

Do we really need that many of those power league teams in the tournament?  Georgetown (to name just one example) lost 12 league games in the Big East (counting its first-round conference tourney loss to St. John’s).  I would suggest that the Hoyas conclusively proved that they had no business playing in the NCAAs.

Another thing is that the near-monopolization by the major conference outfits would only get worse, as once the tournament expands, you can expect a different approach to scheduling in the power leagues.  Schools would know that just approaching .500 in league play would be enough to get a bid as long as the overall record was a winning one.

It wouldn’t be a total wipeout of interesting non-conference games (ESPN has to televise something in November and December, after all).  It would, however, resemble what we’re starting to see in FBS football, which is a paucity of quality non-conference games.

Once that scheduling strategy came to the fore, you would start to see even more of the major conference schools grab at-large bids, to the point where the percentage of at-large bids in a 96-team field would be the same as it is now for the 65-team field.  Last season that number was 88%.

If that percentage held for a 96-team event, then 63 of the 72 BCS teams would get in the NCAAs.  Basically, just the one or two worst teams in each of the six BCS leagues would be left out.  Every BCS school would fully expect to make the tournament every season (well, maybe not DePaul).

Another thing that would happen is that the major conference tournaments would be completely devalued.  I suppose they might affect seeding, but that’s about it.  Even a game on opening day in the ACC or Big XII, for instance, between an 8 and 9 seed wouldn’t matter much.

I am surprised that people like Doug Elgin (MVC commissioner and now a proponent of expansion) are not concerned about how this thing might ultimately evolve.  If the idea is that maybe the mid-major leagues might get a few extra at-large bids, sure they might — but they will find that eventually their place in the tournament as a whole will be further marginalized.

Of course, the mid-majors will still be in better shape than the low-majors, who will be even less of a factor in an expanded field.  For example, 90% of the time the Southern Conference will only have one team in the tournament, the automatic qualifier.  The league has never had more than one team in the field in its history, and hasn’t had a school receive an at-large bid since 1950 (North Carolina State).

There have only been a tiny handful of SoCon schools over the years left out of the 64-team bracket that might have snagged an at-large bid in a 96-team tourney.  Davidson may have received one last season, and the Wildcats might have had a chance in 1996, too.  From a small-school perspective, does that justify the diluting of the tournament?  No.

Besides, the event is already open to nearly every school in Division I.  As pointed out in this article from last season, only 47 of the 344 schools competing in Division I did not have a chance to advance to the NCAAs from conference tournaments (and several of those were schools like Presbyterian, ineligible for the big tourney because they were transitioning to Division I).

Everyone has a shot — The Citadel, William & Mary, St. Francis of New York, Army, Northwestern — everybody.

I think an expansion to the tournament would ruin the event, which is almost perfect as it now stands.  The only true flaw in the current bracket is the dreadful play-in game; the tourney would be better served to have 64 teams instead of 65, and do so by eliminating one at-large berth.

If you expanded to 96 (and then 128, which I suspect would become inevitable), just making the tourney would lose a great deal of its value.  I would like very much someday to see people filling out a bracket with The Citadel on it, even if those people weren’t picking the Bulldogs (which would be a mistake — if The Citadel ever makes the field, I guarantee we’re taking out a high seed in the first round).

However, with 96 teams what would probably happen is that all the major bracket contests you see would start after the first weekend cull from 96 to 64.  It’s like having 32 play-in games instead of one.

I’m not arguing against expanding the field just because of bracket pools.  I’m arguing against it because it is (almost) perfect the way it is now, and expanding it would signicantly lessen its charm, particularly with regards to the schools that don’t see their name in lights all that often.

I have no doubt the NCAA will decide to expand…