A Look Ahead to Jayhawks

Georgetown just got done doing what Georgetown do: Bowing out of the tournament early.  The end result is NC State is heading to St. Louis to play the winner of Purdue v. Kansas.

Now let me tell you what I think about this evening's match-up (Look away if you have a weak stomach):

This game is about match-ups...and here's what we know.  Purdue's two victories versus ranked opponents came against UM and St. Mary's.  Both teams used guard play as the strength that led them to a ton of wins.  Our Boilers have few problems when playing guard-happy teams.  They have good defensive and offensive players in the backcourt who can play against anybody...in the frontcourt, the story changes.

Here are some teams that controlled Purdue from wire to wire in one or more contests this season: Alabama, MSU, aOSU and IU.  What do they all have in common? Good big men...athletic, long, strong players who Purdue simply has no answer.

So here comes Kansas.

They have not one, but two skilled big guys in their starting line-up.  One is a player of the year candidate, the other gobbles up space and averages nearly 10 points, 7 boards and 3 blocks. So who guards Robinson and Withey?  I have no idea.

My guess is that we'll see Hummel, Byrd, Carroll, Marcius and Lawson all try to juggle Kansas' large pair.  And I also think this group effort will yield a pretty big struggle as none of them are great match-ups for Robins and Withey.  Byrd's not big enough, Hummel's not quick enough, Carroll's not strong-enough, Marcius isn't skilled enough and Lawson has a hard time finding position in the post.  If we could combine all of them, we might have a pair of formidable post players; sadly I don't think we have the technology to do that just yet.

So, methinks it'll take some hot shooting- something we haven't seen in a few games, to just keep it close. Byrd, Smith and Hummel are all due for a good game offensively...especially Smith and Hummel.  But there are no guarantees...One thing that Purdue can control though is being smart on offense.  They can make the extra pass (I'm talking to you, Robbie), not take hasty threes out of the flow of the offense (I'm talking to you, DJ) and let the game come to you (I'm talking to you, Ryne).

It can happen...Purdue can go to the sweet 16; we've seen the underdog come through time and again during this tournament.  But there's a reason those games are exciting- they're rare and unexpected, even at this time of year.

Kansas is a a team that hauls in 4 and 5-star athletes with regularity and sends them off to the league just as quickly.  On this year's Jayhawk starting line-up, there are probably three future NBA players.  They've been ranked between 3 and 7 for the last 12 weeks or so.  The RPI likes them as much as humans- they landed at 6 at the end of the season.  And while rankings don't really matter, their #2 seeding puts them in exactly the place they should be this Spring; among the elite of the nation.

Our Boilers on the other hand struggled for much of the season to figure out who they were and how to play together.  This 4 month game of grab ass reaped a 10 seed.  Sure, our Boilers played their best ball in the last month, there's no question about that, but no one called Purdue elite in '11-'12.  All this means is that Purdue has nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Purdue's Captains might be holding all the cards

Some (myself included) might argue that Purdue is already playing with the house's money...and is already ahead.  Winning one game in the tourney (let alone two) is really a gift...and as a fan, I'm pretty pleased with my alma mater's basketball team already.  I'm positive that Matty isn't as pleased as I am...and his three Seniors are probably more motivated than they've been in the last four years to defy the odds; something they've already done a few times.

That said, Ryne, LewJack, Robbie and co. are sitting in the perfect place to sneak up on some people- hopefully they do just that to Kansas.  Tip-off is in just under 5 hours, at 8:40.

The Real Big One?

A year ago as the BT began to test the waters of mega expansion, the college sports nation reacted. But when it was all said and done and the B1G had made its move, a super conference in the midwest wasn't a reality, but a 12-team Big Ten was.

The Big 12 tried to slap a band-aid on its wound with a hastily- designed TV deal and conference re-structuring and everyone knew it wasn't a permanent solution...little did we know how temporary it would be.

The 10-team Big 12 will soon be an 9 team and with Texas A&M leaving...and like when the BT was changing, rumors are swirling about other parts- Mizzou (who clearly wants out of the B12), FSU and Clemson could all move to the SEC as well, and help form a 16 team, all-sport super conference. If this were to happen, what would happen in the BT?

My thought is that without a whale wanting to join and a greater stake in the Northeast TV market, no move will come from Delany and Co. In fact, I would guess it would take other schools coming to the B1G boss, not vice-versa.

EsPN was first to report the rumors of the new quasi-Southeast Mega Conference...and some reports directly contradict the whispers...but why wouldn't Mickey & Co. try to grease the wheels a bit? EsPN already has a heavy vested interest in the SEC and making this conference have longer arms and more TV interest would do nothing but help Disney.

We'll see what happens in the coming days/weeks...but it's getting interesting...Again.

Might not be smiling for too long

How Long Does This Band-Aid Fix the Big 12?

Not that I particularly care what the Big 12 does, but whoring themselves out to Texas is probably not the best solution to all of this. However, what choice did Dan Beebe have? Texas wasn't blinking in the staredown and was supposedly really considering bolting for the Pac 10 and -- just as importantly -- taking half the conference with them.

So Beebe acquiesced and gave in to Texas' demands, which, basically are that the Longhorns continue to be the big dog of the conference and now have the right to have their own television network.

Yes, that's right. Not a Big 12 network -- a Texas Longhorns network. Sure, sure, the new deal engineered by the Big 12 and the University of Texas' leadership reaps money for the rest of the remaining Big 12, too, but Texas stands to make the most. Of course.

Consider this: One of the primary complaints by schools like our newest Big Ten member, Nebraska, was that Texas made things all about them. They had to be the biggest, the baddest and they wanted the Big 12 to bend at their whim. Ever since the SWAC/Big 8 days, Texas has been the bully and has minimized other programs within the conference. It was thought that Nebraska was not alone in feeling this way.

Now, with Colorado (somewhat meaningless) and Nebraska (somewhat meaningful) gone from the Big 12, isn't it reasonable to assume that other schools will eventually begin to feel the way they did...if they don't already?

How long does this honeymoon last? Yes, as Orangebloods.com points out, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Missouri, Baylor, Kansas State and Iowa State will see their TV revenues double under the new deal. But Texas, Oklahoma and A&M will make 50% more than that. And then Texas will launch a Longhorns TV network, or so it appears. AND Texas, Oklahoma and A&M will reportedly get the others' share of the buyout money that Nebraska and Colorado have to pay to the conference.

So yes, everyone will be happy for a little while. But it could be a short period. Once we get to December of next year and nobody is paying attention to the Big 12 anymore because they can't have a title game with fewer than 12 teams in their conference, won't some grumbling begin? Or will they all be too busy counting their money to notice?

My point is the same thing that's been wrong with the Big 12 for years continues to be wrong with it. It's just that they've bought off the "lesser" schools for a little while. But why the pyramid with Texas at the top? Why is that okay? Are the have-nots in the Big 12 that reliant on Texas? Could they not catch on elsewhere? Perhaps that's why, but it's hard to imagine some of those schools (such as Kansas) not being appealing to a conference like the Big Ten.

I think they'll have to annex a couple of schools and get back to 12 and regain the level of significance that they had. Otherwise, it doesn't make sense. Yes, they're all making more money now, which is all that matters to them, but with a title game back in the picture, they could..... make even more money!!

This stuff sucks. Get me to football season.

Here's a Column From a Corn-Fed Dumbass

This is Don Cunningham. He's not very bright. And he's yet another shining example of the fact that traditional media is dying not because of irresponsible bloggers, but because of lazy, pathetic writing.

Let's give Don the treatment, shall we?

His article is entitled "Huskers in the Big Ten: Count me out, please."

First of all....who cares if you approve, Don? I mean, seriously... who effing cares? Beyond that, Don starts by mocking the Big Ten in numerous ways.

No. I won't go.

Sorry. I am a traditionalist of sorts and others who are similarly burdened know my pain.

Yes, a traditionalist. A Big 12 traditionalist, if you will. The Big 12 does indeed have a storied past, going all the way back to 1996. The Big Ten's tradition? A mere 100 years more.

A road trip to Madison just isn't the same as one to Columbia.

Really? You're actually comparing Columbia, Missouri (which I had to look up) to Madison? Have you been to Madison, Wisconsin? I hate the Badgers with a fury, but it's repeatedly listed as one of the best places to road trip and among the best college towns in the country. But okay. Solid.

Where's the pizzazz in "Illini." (Besides what self-respecting school would stoop so low as to restructure their official name to get their nickname?)

Yes, "Cornhusker" is much better.

As it now stands, we are the only "NU" in our league. This new grouping doubles that number. And the other one plays football in a city. In the shadows of skyscrapers. Worse yet, Northwestern's website announces their intent to play a game at Wrigley Field.

Yes, that's right. The Wildcats at Wrigley. Somewhere Papa Bear George Halas has got to be sick.

Wait, what? I don't get it. What's wrong with Chicago? What's wrong with playing a game at Wrigley? Oh, right, Don Cunningham doesn't like cities, with all of their bustlin'. He prefers down-home football played in cornfields like in Field of Dreams, small-town people, and his wife's biscuits and gravy. That's all he needs. He's a simple man and doesn't need your horn-honking big cityfolk.

By the way, Don, do you know where Papa Bear George Halas went to school? Illinois.

Wait. The best is yet to come. Ever notice how all of the games between those northern universities have a "trophy" at stake? Minnesota-Wisconsin: Paul Bunyan's Axe. Michigan-Michigan State: Paul Bunyan's Trophy. Illinois- Purdue: The Old Oaken Bucket. Minnesota-Michigan: The Little Brown Jug.

Yeah, I don't feel like looking them all up to see how many he got wrong, but Purdue and Illinois don't play for the Old Oaken Bucket. Nice try, though. See, when you're insulting a large group, it's best to have your basic facts right since so much else of what you're saying is so very stupid.

Evidently these folks spend their time drinking or chopping.

As opposed to the Big 12, where in places like Austin, Texas and Norman, Oklahoma the lasses are pure and the townspeople are sober and hard-working. And not "chopping," kind of work, either!

Not only am I not showing up, I might not ever leave my house again.

Promise?

You want to talk academic excellence? Why join a group of esteemed institutions who refuse to correctly reflect their membership in their title?

Do you REALLY want to go there, Don? Do you REALLY want to compare the Big Ten and Big 12 academically? Let me answer my rhetorical question for you: No, you do not.

Might pay to divide the conference membership in half - calling the Eastern bloc The Pick Six and the Western front The Deep Six.

Wow, this is just utter nonsense. Don had a higher word count required -- like with a 6th-grader's paper -- and so he threw together some words. I also suspect he felt he was being clever by using "bloc" to insinuate the Big Ten are a bunch of commies.

Volleyball competition will be limited to one game, Penn State/Nebraska. To be played at Wrigley Field on Thanksgiving.

Don, what the hell is wrong with you? Is this supposed to be funny...I guess?

Men's basketball? Well there will be new gyms in which to embarrass ourselves. That's a plus. No. Not really.

Ah, so there's part of the truth. You're just afraid. Afraid of change. You're an old man, I should have known.

I suppose the yet-to-be-created divisional football championship game will have a catchy crown title too.

The Ox Tail Trophy. Blue. It'll be blue, no doubt.

You, sir, are a flaming moron and you should never again be allowed near a keyboard. And if I were Nebraska or the Big 12, I'd say, "Thanks, but please don't be on our side, Don."

(Thanks to Joey for the heads-up.)

Yee-Haw! Texas Next?

It's been debated as a possibility for a long time, and while I initially poo-poo'ed the idea of Texas coming to the Big Ten, I hadn't envisioned the Big 12 crumbling like boilerdowd's morning coffee cake.

Once that started looking possible, and there was talk of Texas going to the Pac 10, well, I laughed -- heartily -- at that. The Pac 10 is a marginal conference and if Tejas wants to make dienero, the Big Ten or the SEC are the logical choices.

And if they want their currently well-respected academics to not be muddied by joining the community-college-level academic institutions of the SEC, well, the only choice is the Big Ten.

And as per the news in Kansas City (why not?), Texas and Texas A&M are "in talks" to join the Big Ten, while Oklahoma is ready to jump to the SEC. Texas and Oklahoma in different conferences? USC banned from the postseason? It's like cats and dogs LIVING TOGETHER!

Let's all just keep in mind that they can "talk" all they want and rumormongers can spread all the rumors they want, but until they get invited somewhere, nothing's nothing. It's only logical that they'd begin discussing their options and inclinations, though, since their conference seems to be teetering on crashing down around them.

(Thanks to Phillip for the heads-up.)

When will the first domino fall?

A few days ago, the irrelevant Big 12's Commish gave Mizzou and Nebraska until the end of the week to make their intentions with his daughter...errrrrr...the conference, public knowledge. This is important, kinda. But, what if they decided simply not to answer? Would Beebe immediately replace them with Boise State and Colorado State? Then, the next week, he could rename his conference the Big 8 after the mass-exodus to the Midwest/Pac10?

The Big 12 is dealing with the ramifications years of inequitable treatment of some of its charter members and preferential treatment for the new guys. Tom Osborn, Roy Williams and others expressed their contempt ("Big Texas") for the way the old Big 8 members were treated years ago, but nothing was done to make schools like Nebraska feel more respected by the league. No one will, or should, mind you, have pity for the soon-to-be defunct B12.

There are lots of moving parts that can make or break the new conference. From lawmakers to the public's perception, outside pressures can and will change as the new conference alliances are forged. But rumors and a few signs seem to point to UND being a pivotal part of what happens in the coming weeks, at least in the BT.

In my opinion, the public's perspective on the drive for four super conferences is not at all what Jim Delany had in mind before he started squeezing the toothpaste out of the tube. The BTN's overwhelming success coupled with a low roar of disgruntled ADs and Chancellors with their current conference affiliation brought this back to the surface. And Delany's smart-enough to understand that more revenue=happier conference members and potential growth. But there's an apple of his eye that he can't help but be smitten with: UND. They've rejected him twice, talked bad about him in public, but none of that matters...his eyes are fixed on SB and he sees UND as the key to big success for the BTN and in turn, the greater conference.

I'd go as far as to say, JD only wants UND- a 12-team conference make s a ton of sense and the proximity would make logistics simple. Plus, a third of the conference already has an athletic relationship, at least in football, with Swarbrick and co. But those inside of the Irish's athletic department, from coaches to Swarbrick have yet to give any positive nods to the idea of joining a conference...but Delany keeps driving for that. Some think that the whisper leaks by the BT were all designed to force UND to join the conference as the figurative music slows down. And while Delany seems to be an excellent negotiator, even a supreme conspiracy theorist like myself thinks that's a pretty big stretch.

Will the end of this week be significant? Perhaps. But, until one of the major conference starts making moves, it seems everything is based on conjecture, psuedo-news and tea leaves.

Todd McShay Is A Handsome Man

I never had much of an opinion on Todd McShay, except that I was glad he was kind of challenging idiot extraordinaire Mel Kiper, Jr. for supremacy in evaluating college football talent.

But this morning McShay was co-hosting on ESPN Radio (filling into for the fat man / gay man combo) and he was asked to rank the college football conferences in terms of strongest to weakest. And despite the constant bashing of the Big Ten by ESPN and others, McShay actually referred to the Big Ten as "underrated," which made me want to hug him. McShay's rankings went as follows:

1. SEC (which would be #1 even if they weren't thanks to ESPN making sweet, sweet love to the SEC)

2. Big 12 (which I might argue with since yes they have some great teams but also a lot of lousy programs)

3. Big Ten

4. Pac Ten

5. Big East

6. ACC ("ha ha!" -- insert Simpsons sound effect here)

I think this is the most fair representation of the various conferences I've seen in a long time. Of course, I'm sure ACC supporters wouldn't agree, and I could possibly see flip-flopping them with the Big (L)East, but again, I can't argue too much.

Mark Schlabach Still Hates the Big Ten

Just a quick hit to point out that Mark Schlabach continues to irrationally hate the Big Ten. This is not the first time I've tried to find some logic in Schlabach's anti-Big Ten comments.

Buried in this "College GameDay Final" article, we find this nugget from Schlabach:

WINNER: Big Ten. Frankly, the conference isn't very good. But five weeks into the season, Ohio State is ranked No. 4 and Wisconsin is No. 5. With a stingy defense and improving offense (as well as a soft schedule), the Buckeyes are 5-0. The Badgers have struggled to win their past four games. The Buckeyes and Badgers play Nov. 3 at the Horseshoe in Columbus, Ohio.

So let's look at this carefully.

WINNER: Big Ten.

Cool! Some props for the Big Ten!

Frankly, the conference isn't very good.

Oh. Then why are we "winners"?

But five weeks into the season, Ohio State is ranked No. 4 and Wisconsin is No. 5.

Ah, yes, disproving your previous sentence... I mean, how is it that a conference that "isn't very good" has two of the top 5 teams in all the land?

With a stingy defense and improving offense (as well as a soft schedule), the Buckeyes are 5-0.

So is Mark complimenting or bashing OSU in this comment? Is he fence-sitting?

The Badgers have struggled to win their past four games.

What's your point? Wisconsin is never flashy yet always seems to wind up with a solid record.

The Buckeyes and Badgers play Nov. 3 at the Horseshoe in Columbus, Ohio.

And that's it. That's his last line. Great reporting, Mark! Thanks for regurgitating what a refrigerator magnet schedule can tell us!

Did a fourth-grader from Madison, Wisconsin file this report for Mark? Maybe the rough draft looked like this:

"Wisconsin plays hard and wins. Ohio State is scoring lots and wins. These teams play each other."

And one more point on all this "The Big Ten isn't very good" baloney. What would make a conference good in Mark Schlabach's world? The Big Ten has two teams in the Top Ten. Here's how other major conferences break down:

Big Ten: 2 (OSU, Wisc)
Pac Ten: 2 (USC, Cal)
SEC: 3 (LSU, Fla, UK)
Big East: 2 (South Fla, BC)
Big 12: 1 (OK)

So, again, I ask what makes a conference better than "not very good"? You don't have to love the Big Ten, but we do ask that you show some damned respect. Does anybody meet your expectations, Mark?

My guess as to what makes a good conference in Mark Schlabach's world is one where Notre Dame is the charter member and wins the conference with an unblemished record every season, while Charlie Weis wears a toga and sways in a hammock while Schlabach feeds him grapes and pork rinds.