Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Officials have repeatedly denied that the fiasco’s roots trace to an illicit agenda that, in the name of coddling a disproportionately black undergraduate athlete population, has left many students intellectually crippled.
This is a chicken-egg issue that is going to be difficult to trace to a single, root cause. The bottom line question comes down to…..Did Prof ‘Roo create a crippled curriculum for athletes or did it do it for AA students (and quickly discovered by athletic dept academic advisers)? Boblee made this distinction several years ago and AFAIK, UNC has never attempted to answer it.
In a culture where a sizable number of people vote for a living instead of working for one, this won’t be an easy issue to resolve.
And like I said. You can’t coach, or teach, Man to Man D to 18 yr olds.
There’s a lot of evidence to the contrary.
Vawolf – yes. We didn’t start out with a lack of depth, Gottfried just didn’t play a lot of guys. We had 4 returning starters…more than 80% of our scoring and rebounding. We brought in 3 McDonald’s all American’s.
That’s only 7 players which qualifies as little depth to me. I consider the deficiences of last year’s team and this year’s as obvious and the results are not surprising. As far as Gott goes, he has a history and I’ve always based my expectations on that. And as Forrest says…that’s all I’ve got to say about that.
I love how people make contrarian arguments on one hand we’re told that last year we are overratedin spite of returningover 80 percentabout our scoringfrom a sweet 16 team.
So do you really think a S16 team with little depth, poor defense, and poor rebounding should be pre-season Top 10?
The last two years were nice, but we underachieved last year and this year’s team stinks.
I think that the evidence points more towards grossly over-rated than under performing for last year’s team. As far as this year’s team, life sucks the year after losing something like 80% of your scoring…what else could you expect?
I have never understood the purpose of these analyses. Do they expect institutions to hire less qualified applicants based strictly based on race and sex? Show me some examples of qualified people being denied a job and then I’ll gladly join the pitch-fork crowd in storming the castle.
Test
EDIT
Comments to a front-page entry can apparently be made at the bottom of that entry or in the forums (based on my quick test). Since the forum thread that I deleted yesterday has reappeared, I assume that SFN management wants the discussion to be available from either location.
This new feature should help in those instances where long conversations develop on multiple front page entries. We can all keep up with those conversations in the forums, instead of having to bounce back and forth between multiple front-page stories.
This analysis…is extremely premature.
Are you sure? Last year’s entry at the same point in the season correctly identified the four ACC teams to make the NCAAT.
I’ve looked back once before to compare the conclusions reached from the OOC schedule to the actual tourney selections. That year:
– The two teams graded “IN” made the NCAAT
– 3 of 5 Bubble Teams made the NCAAT
– Only one team graded “OUT” turned their season around and made the NCAATAt some point, I’ll have to dig up all of the old entries and see how many teams played their way into or out of the NCAAT with their conference schedule. But my main point is that even though less than half of the regular season has been completed, ACC teams good enough to make the NCAAT have generally accomplished something of note by this point in the season.
In general, I loathe the RPI. I think its lazy and is specifically designed to benefit mid-majors. I prefer pomeroy’s rating
I know absolutely nothing about Pomeroy, Sagarin, or any other ranking system. Since the other ranking systems are not used for anything real, it’s not worth my time to follow them.
I think that you are both right and wrong about the RPI benefiting mid-majors. The last change to the RPI calc gave a higher weight to road wins and home losses. This change benefited the best mid-majors over teams at the middle of the BCS conferences.
However, the SOS component gives a major advantage to teams from the power conferences. As we saw over and over during the Herb years, a miserable OOC schedule + middle of the conference results + one good win in the ACCT earned State multiple at-large bids to the NCAAT. That wouldn’t have happened in a mid-major conference.
I love reading and generally devour books fairly fast. But you people are too high-brow for me. The large, large majority of my reading is for entertainment only. But in anticipation of the conspiracy loons coming out for the 50th anniversary of JFK’s assassination, I read two different books on the shooting, the investigations, and the conspiracy claims.
Case Closed by Gerald Posner
Reclaiming History by Vincent Bugliosi (At 1600 pages, it doubles as a cheap exercise routine.)I may read The Kennedy Detail written by Secret Service agents…especially since I can check it out from my local library.
Here’s a question.
I just posted a new entry on the main page and a forum topic was automatically created. It appeared to me that with the default settings you could only add comments to the forum topic and not at the bottom of the entry. That’s not the same as the old setup and also doesn’t make much sense to me. (I edited the entry on the main page so that comments could be entered there.)
For example, when I’m reviewing one of my old Bubble Entries, I often read the comments to see if there is something that I should do differently with the new article. I’ll lose that ability if all of the comments to that old entry are buried somewhere in the forums.
Where does the management want comments to entries on the main page?
Do the readers want to wade through comments on front-page articles to get to new subjects on the forums?EDIT
I couldn’t figure out how to delete the forum topic on my new Bubble Entry, but I did close that topic to new comments. I checked and it looks like comments are still allowed at the bottom of the entry on the main page.Forgot a disclaimer
The RPI and SOS numbers were taken from CBS Sports yesterday afternoon. Yes I hate to visit the home of an unusually large number of State-haters, but I like their RPI breakdown. Problems with the math is their problem, while any transcription errors are mine.
There is great deal of volatility in the RPI numbers this time of year, so don’t get too worked up about differences between the CBS numbers and your favorite site. For instance, from yesterday to today State’s RPI ranking has improved and their SOS ranking has worsened (which is very strange).
A road win is certainly nice. But both teams have a long way to go before the NCAAT Selection Committe will be looking at either team’s resume.
This might be more Va’s speed
————–Pretty good video….as long as you know where the volume switch is.
I’d like a quiet, intimate week in the tropics with Emily Haines.
Yes, I did have to use google to find out who this is.
Why should I assume that the backups at QB won’t work hard to be ready if needed?
Shouldn’t we expect max effort from every backup at every position?
Herb Sendek has said that he is staying at ASU.
I don’t care who you are, that’s funny (as long as you’ve been a State fan for >10 years).
