(11-25-2014 11:39 PM)T-Town Cane Wrote:  Could have really used a win from SMU today, I think they will pick up play in conference, but need to get some wins now to show how good they are. I thought Houston laid an egg today against an "ok" Harvard team. Congrats to USF you guys played with some heart! Will be big to sweep tomorrows games!

Houston really needs to get LJ Rose back for us to start seeing signs of what they could be this year. Without a true point, we're just not going to see what kind of TEAM they are yet.

It's better to lose to a good team.

Quote:58-52 ECU over Fresno St
84-63 Harvard over Houston
71-70 South Florida over Hofstra
59-50 Cincinnati over North Carolina Central
76-67 Temple over Penn
78-72 Arkansas over SMU
74-59 Tulane over Southern

Not awesome, not terrible…

(11-25-2014 09:07 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  This Bulls team is gutsy. Down 15 points in second half to rally and win by 1
71-70
Bulls 4-1
Love this new attitude and playing style

great comeback

(11-25-2014 11:39 PM)T-Town Cane Wrote:  I thought Houston laid an egg today against an "ok" Harvard team.

Houston took 8 scholarship players to Harvard, and two of them fouled out.

We are missing two starters: PG and C. One will be cleared to play in about a week. The other sometime between finals and Christmas.

We should also get back an injured senior reserve who has started 27 games for us over the last two years.

I really like the team USF is putting together. Will be some up and down moments for sure, but certainly look to be much improved.

(11-25-2014 10:57 PM)LostInSpace Wrote:  

(11-25-2014 09:16 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(11-25-2014 08:52 PM)LostInSpace Wrote:  Two things: need blind admissions and a change in the Ivy "Academic Index" policy. With Harvard's endowment and need blind admissions there are few admitted athletes who aren't offered what are effectively full athletic scholarships, especially in sports such as basketball and hockey. Also at Harvard's behest (as are all Ivy athletic decisions) there is now a level AI floor for all Ivies. Football and basketball are the two sports where that decision makes the biggest difference.

Under the previous AI policy each Ivy member had a different AI floor tied to the average academic credentials of the students admitted to each school. From the time that AI was implemented in the 1980s until the fairly recent change, Harvard always had the highest AI minimum. it prevented them from taking full advantage of being Harvard as opposed to Yale or Princeton, let alone Penn or Cornell when recruiting athletes. They are brining in kids for basketball that they could never have gotten admitted under the previous AI policies. Frank Sullivan's career record at Harvard would have been a whole lot better if he could have recruited under the same terms as Amaker. It's a clear case of the Golden Rule. He who has the gold rules.

I suppose we also would have seen Jeremy Lin make his national coming out party in the NCAA Tournament and not for the New York Knicks.

Yes, because one player in a 16 year career is dispositive evidence. /s

Frank may not have been a great coach or even a particularly good one. But are you seriously arguing that he recruited under the same standards as Amaker? Was there not a change in the AI? Does Harvard not have a financial advantage over schools other than Y & P? Penn doesn't have Princeton's stature, forget Harvard's. Penn could bring Dunphy back but would still struggle to finish ahead of Harvard at present.

I didn't see the game tonight but I'm disappointed Temple didn't win by a larger margin. Penn is horrendously bad. Hopefully Morgan and Coleman will provide the offensive balance Temple needs. As for Penn, as much as I like Jerome personally he needs to go.

You realize I'm agreeing with your premise, right?

(11-25-2014 08:52 PM)LostInSpace Wrote:  

(11-25-2014 01:05 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  I know Harvard is good, but it's difficult to understand how they recruit the players they need, year in and year out.

Two things: need blind admissions and a change in the Ivy "Academic Index" policy. With Harvard's endowment and need blind admissions there are few admitted athletes who aren't offered what are effectively full athletic scholarships, especially in sports such as basketball and hockey. Also at Harvard's behest (as are all Ivy athletic decisions) there is now a level AI floor for all Ivies. Football and basketball are the two sports where that decision makes the biggest difference.

Under the previous AI policy each Ivy member had a different AI floor tied to the average academic credentials of the students admitted to each school. From the time that AI was implemented in the 1980s until the fairly recent change, Harvard always had the highest AI minimum. it prevented them from taking full advantage of being Harvard as opposed to Yale or Princeton, let alone Penn or Cornell when recruiting athletes. They are brining in kids for basketball that they could never have gotten admitted under the previous AI policies. Frank Sullivan's career record at Harvard would have been a whole lot better if he could have recruited under the same terms as Amaker. It's a clear case of the Golden Rule. He who has the gold rules.

I dont know when the AI came into effect, but when I was at BU, there was a hockey player who was there because he missed the cutoff at Harvard by like 1 SAT question.