Okay, the card is in for Saturday's Gotham Stakes day at the Big A (Aqueduct).
Why is Vyjack the favorite in the big race??!?!!?
The opening odds has the son of Into Mischief the 3-1 favorite, with Overanalyze 7-2.
Stunning.
Goes to show. Both have won stakes at the right distance on the Big A(as opposed to those with only 6f experience). Overanalyze's speed rating in the Remsen (which is longer than Saturday's 1 1/16th Gotham) was higher; remembering that Vyjack's Jerome win was at 1 and 70. We'll see if that 40 yards is worth anything.
Let's say we've got them (and it's Vyjack #7, Overanalyze #11 -- I think) to start our exotics -- who's #3 and 4?
I like EscapefromReality (#3) in the 3 hole; with Sky Captain (#9) in the 4 -- both have good speed numbers, good at the distance, and like the money. They may not match Overanalyze, but they won't be far away.
Now for the Pick 6.
There are two other stakes races in the 6 Saturday -- the 7th mile & 1/16th Top Flight Stakes, then the 9th the 6 furlong Tom Fool. Lots of talent in those races and will be a challenge to pick from a close pack.
Here's my first crack at straight 6: 6-8-1/1a-2-11 (Overanalyze)-6.
I'll be back with more analysis before Saturday; we'll see if we can come up with a strategy to come closer on the P6.
But I'm not on Vyjack Saturday. Maybe I'm missing it, but don't see how that's the winner given the talent in the field.
Wednesday, February 27, 2013
Sunday, February 24, 2013
Bracketology 3: 3 Weeks & Counting -- the Field Shapes Up
Three weeks from right about now, the NCAA committee will announce the field for the tournament. With Ohio St just beating Michigan St in Columbus -- a win OSU needs to keep from falling into the "also-ran" category -- the weekend is over and we know more than we did.
Number one seeds are still in the air. But it's still IU, Miami, Duke and Louisville. Only IU isn't suspect at this point, with Georgetown's win at Syracuse yesterday putting their name in the mix. Michigan, Michigan St, Gonzaga, -- well, someone has said there might be 14 teams with a shot at the number one line yet.
On the other end, my Big 6 watch continues. Iowa lost yesterday on the road to Nebraska. That's not a quality loss. Looking at the schedule, both Minnesota and Iowa might finish the last four at 2-2, but is that good enough to hold bids? Minnesota has the highest strength of schedule in the conference -- and they have IU this week -- so that may boost them.
Still not counting on both making it. Or either one, for that matter.
Villanova's win over Marquette yesterday puts them in -- for now. They finish @ Pitt and hosting Georgetown. They probably need one of those to make sure the "last few" indicator isn't against them.
Temple? They are probably in if they win the next three. Then they finish with VCU @ home. Depending on the bubble, they might need that to make the tournament. Probably not.
LaSalle? They should win their last three. If they don't, they deserve to miss the field.
Maryland? They finish with two teams ahead of them in the ACC standings -- UVA and UNC. Losing both is deadly; winning both assures them of a bid.
And, of course, Valpo. The Crusaders are in first in Horizon, but need to win the conference tourney to be sure. There's probably not an at-large out of the Horizon this year. So, we await that tournament week outcome. Fingers crossed.
The field is shaking out. Games are running out. Watch here.
Number one seeds are still in the air. But it's still IU, Miami, Duke and Louisville. Only IU isn't suspect at this point, with Georgetown's win at Syracuse yesterday putting their name in the mix. Michigan, Michigan St, Gonzaga, -- well, someone has said there might be 14 teams with a shot at the number one line yet.
On the other end, my Big 6 watch continues. Iowa lost yesterday on the road to Nebraska. That's not a quality loss. Looking at the schedule, both Minnesota and Iowa might finish the last four at 2-2, but is that good enough to hold bids? Minnesota has the highest strength of schedule in the conference -- and they have IU this week -- so that may boost them.
Still not counting on both making it. Or either one, for that matter.
Villanova's win over Marquette yesterday puts them in -- for now. They finish @ Pitt and hosting Georgetown. They probably need one of those to make sure the "last few" indicator isn't against them.
Temple? They are probably in if they win the next three. Then they finish with VCU @ home. Depending on the bubble, they might need that to make the tournament. Probably not.
LaSalle? They should win their last three. If they don't, they deserve to miss the field.
Maryland? They finish with two teams ahead of them in the ACC standings -- UVA and UNC. Losing both is deadly; winning both assures them of a bid.
And, of course, Valpo. The Crusaders are in first in Horizon, but need to win the conference tourney to be sure. There's probably not an at-large out of the Horizon this year. So, we await that tournament week outcome. Fingers crossed.
The field is shaking out. Games are running out. Watch here.
Oscar Sunday: What Should Win
I just watched David Edelstein on CBS Sunday Morning discuss who was going to win the Oscars tonight. I think he's profoundly wrong about some things, and, since the massive number of readers of this blog (ar ar) know, I see many movies and have an opinion about what should win. I'm not predicting here, I'm giving my opinion and what my vote would be.
Best Picture is often the point of much contention and this year is no different. To continue playing off Edelstein, it seems Kathleen Bigelow's Zero Dark Thirty, having gotten the early buzz, but then spin and politics have turned it into not quite the favorite.
My vote goes for Silver Linings Playbook. It's quirky, different, well written, well acted and insightful. It turns the notion of romantic comedy some (does anyone doubt early on that Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence's characters should get together?) and the excellent use of Philadelphia neighborhoods (the diner has gotten more famous) adds to its appeal. It may not win, but...there's my vote.
For best actor, Edelstein indicated Daniel Day Lewis was a lock. Really? Sure, DDL was great as Lincoln, but it looked too easy. By that I mean that acting like Lincoln was scenery chewing and DDL did it well. I like my acting more subtle, even only a little. I saw them all and I like Denzel in Flight.
For best actress, I've only see Jessica Chastain in Zero Dark (by which I wasn't impressed) and Jennifer Lawrence in Silver Linings. I wasn't impressed by either performance to the point of thinking "this was the best performance of the year", so I think one of the others should win. But I suspect there'll be a big swing to Chastain.
For best supporting actor, there are some quality performances. I've seen four of the five (who's actually seen The Master?) and DeNiro, Arkin, Jones, and Waltz were all excellent (unlike what I've seen from Best Actresses). I'd vote for DeNiro, though I'd think about Waltz. DeNiro is excellent as the tightly wound father of bipolar Bradley Cooper but Waltz is subtly brilliant as the understated bounty hunter in Django.
The best supporting actress statue should go to Helen Hunt, but I suspect it won't. It seems Anne Hathaway, without hair, impresses everyone else. Ah, yes, "acting" in a musical. Talk about scenery chewing.
I've seen almost all the animated films and as good as Frankenweenie was, I am a huge fan of Pirates. It would have my vote.
And music: I am intrigued by the original score nominees. I get why Skyfall received a nomination, although I'm not sure that's not overselling it -- the music was memorable. John Williams ALWAYS gets a nomination (for Lincoln). I don't remember the music in Life of Pi or Argo, which says something. But I do remember Anna Karenina. Maybe it's the nature of the movie's directing choices, but the music seems so important -- I guess ballroom scenes lend themselves to that. That'd be my vote.
That's enough. It won't go as I think it should -- it never does. And the wrong people will wear the wrong outfits (who wants to see DeNiro's decolletage?). Have fun watching. Go Silver Linings.
Best Picture is often the point of much contention and this year is no different. To continue playing off Edelstein, it seems Kathleen Bigelow's Zero Dark Thirty, having gotten the early buzz, but then spin and politics have turned it into not quite the favorite.
My vote goes for Silver Linings Playbook. It's quirky, different, well written, well acted and insightful. It turns the notion of romantic comedy some (does anyone doubt early on that Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence's characters should get together?) and the excellent use of Philadelphia neighborhoods (the diner has gotten more famous) adds to its appeal. It may not win, but...there's my vote.
For best actor, Edelstein indicated Daniel Day Lewis was a lock. Really? Sure, DDL was great as Lincoln, but it looked too easy. By that I mean that acting like Lincoln was scenery chewing and DDL did it well. I like my acting more subtle, even only a little. I saw them all and I like Denzel in Flight.
For best actress, I've only see Jessica Chastain in Zero Dark (by which I wasn't impressed) and Jennifer Lawrence in Silver Linings. I wasn't impressed by either performance to the point of thinking "this was the best performance of the year", so I think one of the others should win. But I suspect there'll be a big swing to Chastain.
For best supporting actor, there are some quality performances. I've seen four of the five (who's actually seen The Master?) and DeNiro, Arkin, Jones, and Waltz were all excellent (unlike what I've seen from Best Actresses). I'd vote for DeNiro, though I'd think about Waltz. DeNiro is excellent as the tightly wound father of bipolar Bradley Cooper but Waltz is subtly brilliant as the understated bounty hunter in Django.
The best supporting actress statue should go to Helen Hunt, but I suspect it won't. It seems Anne Hathaway, without hair, impresses everyone else. Ah, yes, "acting" in a musical. Talk about scenery chewing.
I've seen almost all the animated films and as good as Frankenweenie was, I am a huge fan of Pirates. It would have my vote.
And music: I am intrigued by the original score nominees. I get why Skyfall received a nomination, although I'm not sure that's not overselling it -- the music was memorable. John Williams ALWAYS gets a nomination (for Lincoln). I don't remember the music in Life of Pi or Argo, which says something. But I do remember Anna Karenina. Maybe it's the nature of the movie's directing choices, but the music seems so important -- I guess ballroom scenes lend themselves to that. That'd be my vote.
That's enough. It won't go as I think it should -- it never does. And the wrong people will wear the wrong outfits (who wants to see DeNiro's decolletage?). Have fun watching. Go Silver Linings.
Saturday, February 23, 2013
Gotham Stakes: A week out (or Beginning the Derby Trail)
To start: last year my betting sidekick, known from here as JG, and I got the itch and travelled to Long Island for both the Gotham Stakes (the first week in March) and the Wood Memorial (the first week in April).
It's one week till this year's running of the Gotham, which is advertised as a Grade 3 stakes for 3-year-olds, with a $400,000 purse. Good check if you can get it. Last year, Hanson, supposedly not named after the singing group, though I had JG believing it to be true, won before a ninth place finish at the Derby.
Let me start with next week's prep with this: today the weather forecast looks the best it has all week -- 46 and cloudy. It's been as low as 40 and with some precip in some predictions. It's not an overly warm forecast.
The race isn't looking that "hot" either, with the early call on entries making Overanalyze the highest rated horse on the chart. The colt out Dixie Union, won the Remsen, and Horse Racing Nation has as an 8.03. The next rated likely starter is Elnaewi, sired by Street Sense, at 6.07. Let's hope a couple of the "possibles" on the list, like Vyjack (the recent Jerome winner) get into the field.
No, for those of you scoring at home, it might not be the Derby prep that today's Fountain of Youth @ Gulfstream is -- with Violence, He's Had Enough, Speak Logistics, Sr. Quisqueyano, Joshua's Comprise, Orb, Majestic Hussar, and Sky Captain, it boasts that many horses with a higher HRN score than Vyjack.
But we aren't in Florida. We are in the mid-Atlantic and the Gotham is the race this month if you are following the Derby trail.
As any good tracker-goer knows, it's not just about the day's big stakes race. At the Big A (as Aqueduct seems to be known, or I'll make it up here), the Saturday 10-race card includes the wonderful exotic bet of the Pick 6 and the even more intriguing, if less lucrative, Grand Slam (starting in race 6). There are also 50 cent pick 3's and 4's along the way.
As we all know, a Pick 6 on a day like Gotham day at the Big A is worth some dough (as is the superfecta in a race like the Gotham). So JG and I will be trying to find a way to win that cash -- as will some tens of thousands of others. Which race and horse do you use as anchors? How deep do you go in a race, say the Gotham (#9 on the card, usually)? Is Overanalyze good enough to anchor your card and then work the other 5?
Great questions. Of course, if Overanalyze is the key -- and we won't know till we see the full card on say Thursday -- you know it lowers the payoff. It takes no genius to pick the highest rated horse in a stakes field. If it's a long shot, like the local running Clawback, who's won twice in a row at the Big A at 6 furlongs, then the pool gets to be even more worth desiring.
Look for blogs this week working through both the Gotham picks (hey, why not take a crack at the Superfecta?) and the Pick 6 and Grand Slams for day.
And good luck bettin' the Fountain of Youth. It's time to start smellin' the roses.
It's one week till this year's running of the Gotham, which is advertised as a Grade 3 stakes for 3-year-olds, with a $400,000 purse. Good check if you can get it. Last year, Hanson, supposedly not named after the singing group, though I had JG believing it to be true, won before a ninth place finish at the Derby.
Let me start with next week's prep with this: today the weather forecast looks the best it has all week -- 46 and cloudy. It's been as low as 40 and with some precip in some predictions. It's not an overly warm forecast.
The race isn't looking that "hot" either, with the early call on entries making Overanalyze the highest rated horse on the chart. The colt out Dixie Union, won the Remsen, and Horse Racing Nation has as an 8.03. The next rated likely starter is Elnaewi, sired by Street Sense, at 6.07. Let's hope a couple of the "possibles" on the list, like Vyjack (the recent Jerome winner) get into the field.
No, for those of you scoring at home, it might not be the Derby prep that today's Fountain of Youth @ Gulfstream is -- with Violence, He's Had Enough, Speak Logistics, Sr. Quisqueyano, Joshua's Comprise, Orb, Majestic Hussar, and Sky Captain, it boasts that many horses with a higher HRN score than Vyjack.
But we aren't in Florida. We are in the mid-Atlantic and the Gotham is the race this month if you are following the Derby trail.
As any good tracker-goer knows, it's not just about the day's big stakes race. At the Big A (as Aqueduct seems to be known, or I'll make it up here), the Saturday 10-race card includes the wonderful exotic bet of the Pick 6 and the even more intriguing, if less lucrative, Grand Slam (starting in race 6). There are also 50 cent pick 3's and 4's along the way.
As we all know, a Pick 6 on a day like Gotham day at the Big A is worth some dough (as is the superfecta in a race like the Gotham). So JG and I will be trying to find a way to win that cash -- as will some tens of thousands of others. Which race and horse do you use as anchors? How deep do you go in a race, say the Gotham (#9 on the card, usually)? Is Overanalyze good enough to anchor your card and then work the other 5?
Great questions. Of course, if Overanalyze is the key -- and we won't know till we see the full card on say Thursday -- you know it lowers the payoff. It takes no genius to pick the highest rated horse in a stakes field. If it's a long shot, like the local running Clawback, who's won twice in a row at the Big A at 6 furlongs, then the pool gets to be even more worth desiring.
Look for blogs this week working through both the Gotham picks (hey, why not take a crack at the Superfecta?) and the Pick 6 and Grand Slams for day.
And good luck bettin' the Fountain of Youth. It's time to start smellin' the roses.
Thursday, February 21, 2013
Bracketology 2: Minnesota? Iowa? "The Big Six"
Definition: Dbrolaw (pronounced da-bro'-law): Eastern European for an IU (Hoosier) fan.
That's for Google.
It's been a week since I began Bracketology for this BBall season.
In the week, Duke lost (to Maryland, who we were watching on the Bubble), but so did Florida (who might be next into Top Seed).
So, this week let's keep it simple: it's still IU (Dbrolaw!), Miami, Louisville & Duke.
On the other end: Maryland helped with win over Duke, but the experts still have them out. Virginia (who really isn't nearly as "local") lost narrowly to Duke, which didn't help.
We've added two Philly schools, LaSalle and Villanova, to our watch list. I doubt Villy can make it, but...see later on Minnesota. LaSalle is #4 in A10 & hasn't made tourney in 20 years. ESPN has them an 11 seed this week. Go Explorers! Explore away.
Now, to my point last week about 7 Big Ten teams making it: Iowa crushed #7 Minnesota over the weekend. Then Ohio St. crushed them last night. Maybe Iowa steps up to #7 (they have nearly the exact record), but it's unlikely, as I said last week, anyone from bottom half can win enough games against Top 6 (IU, Mich, MSt, OSU, Wisc & Illinois) to stay off the Bubble.
So, who wins more the next three weeks? Villanova in the 8 hole in Big East or Minn/Iowa in Big Ten? Or does another mid-major team sneak in instead, or someone surprise with a bid off winning a conference tourney?
Finally, a shout out to my "home" team, Valparaiso. The Crusaders lead the Horizon and need to win it (according to one source) to get a bid. They are seeded 14 in one ranking...not a lot of room for error. I'll watch them the next 3 plus weeks, too.
If you are picking pools early, take IU. As much as I hate to say it.
-- Not Dbrolaw (obviously)
That's for Google.
It's been a week since I began Bracketology for this BBall season.
In the week, Duke lost (to Maryland, who we were watching on the Bubble), but so did Florida (who might be next into Top Seed).
So, this week let's keep it simple: it's still IU (Dbrolaw!), Miami, Louisville & Duke.
On the other end: Maryland helped with win over Duke, but the experts still have them out. Virginia (who really isn't nearly as "local") lost narrowly to Duke, which didn't help.
We've added two Philly schools, LaSalle and Villanova, to our watch list. I doubt Villy can make it, but...see later on Minnesota. LaSalle is #4 in A10 & hasn't made tourney in 20 years. ESPN has them an 11 seed this week. Go Explorers! Explore away.
Now, to my point last week about 7 Big Ten teams making it: Iowa crushed #7 Minnesota over the weekend. Then Ohio St. crushed them last night. Maybe Iowa steps up to #7 (they have nearly the exact record), but it's unlikely, as I said last week, anyone from bottom half can win enough games against Top 6 (IU, Mich, MSt, OSU, Wisc & Illinois) to stay off the Bubble.
So, who wins more the next three weeks? Villanova in the 8 hole in Big East or Minn/Iowa in Big Ten? Or does another mid-major team sneak in instead, or someone surprise with a bid off winning a conference tourney?
Finally, a shout out to my "home" team, Valparaiso. The Crusaders lead the Horizon and need to win it (according to one source) to get a bid. They are seeded 14 in one ranking...not a lot of room for error. I'll watch them the next 3 plus weeks, too.
If you are picking pools early, take IU. As much as I hate to say it.
-- Not Dbrolaw (obviously)
Sunday, February 17, 2013
Movie Review: Law, Mara have Side Effects
As discussed before here, it's the season when one struggles to find something to amuse oneself with, between the NFL season, NCAA tournament, and baseball season.
But there are movies. It is that time of year when Hollywood releases are at least "interesting," if not downright good. Those of us who pay some attention to the rhythm of releases know that Hollywood puts out the big blockbusters (Iron Man, The Marvel Gang) in the summer, starting before Memorial Day. After Labor Day, it is "adult movie" time, when the "serious films" that are supposed to garner award nominations. Then comes November when the artsy blockbusters (think Skyfall, Sherlock Holmes, the Hobbit) come out, with an occasional award hoped for.
After the first of the year is the time when, in a small town like ours, when those smaller films that have garnered award attention arrive and when studios release films that don't fit into those other niches.
Side Effects is just such a film. Starring Jude Law and Rooney Mara, with a side turn by Catherine Zeta-Jones, it's not exactly the makings of a blockbuster. Or quite the big splash for awards season.
That doesn't mean it's not a particularly good thriller. It is.
By the middle of the movie, we wonder about Jude Law's Dr. Jonathan Banks's life and career, and Rooney Mara's Emily Taylor's sanity. In the hands of Ocean's 11, 12, 13 & Traffic's Steven Soderbergh, it's a taught thriller.
I won't give you spoilers here, but it's well crafted, turning the despair into interest, backed, as my movie companion (and delightful wife) pointed out at the time, with a tension-heightening score, and, finally, a resolution that is unforeseen until deep into the end.
It all pivots on the reappearance of Jones as Dr. Victoria Seibert -- it turns out Victoria does have a secret -- a visual and plot wordplay that adds to the cleverness of the film. Any experienced film-goer will know someone like Jones, the third-headliner, will have more than just that one scene that seems almost a throwaway at the time, and she's stellar, if not brilliant, as the stodgy, drug prescription-driven psychiatrist who treated Emily before her life fell apart.
Mara has the real scenery-eating role and she chews it appropriately. You can imagine in other hands it might be more impressive, but maybe there's something profound in the understated approach she has. Maybe all the anti-depressants she's supposed to be taking are working.
Of course, it's Law's movie. Although he's not in a scene until Emily has tried to kill herself, he's in almost every scene thereafter. His compassion shows in his handling of his patient before Emily, then her and he holds onto her as a patient longer than he might because he seems to worry about her edge. As his life unravels, symbolized lazily by a growth of beard, he does a good "life is unraveling and I've lost control." Of course, he's had this same look in recent roles -- whether Repo Men or Anna Karenina. But he's good here -- believable, emotionally vulnerable and excitable, as you'd think someone in his position might be.
So, here's your "between other seasons" treat: see Side Effects. It's a solid treat of a thriller.
But there are movies. It is that time of year when Hollywood releases are at least "interesting," if not downright good. Those of us who pay some attention to the rhythm of releases know that Hollywood puts out the big blockbusters (Iron Man, The Marvel Gang) in the summer, starting before Memorial Day. After Labor Day, it is "adult movie" time, when the "serious films" that are supposed to garner award nominations. Then comes November when the artsy blockbusters (think Skyfall, Sherlock Holmes, the Hobbit) come out, with an occasional award hoped for.
After the first of the year is the time when, in a small town like ours, when those smaller films that have garnered award attention arrive and when studios release films that don't fit into those other niches.
Side Effects is just such a film. Starring Jude Law and Rooney Mara, with a side turn by Catherine Zeta-Jones, it's not exactly the makings of a blockbuster. Or quite the big splash for awards season.
That doesn't mean it's not a particularly good thriller. It is.
By the middle of the movie, we wonder about Jude Law's Dr. Jonathan Banks's life and career, and Rooney Mara's Emily Taylor's sanity. In the hands of Ocean's 11, 12, 13 & Traffic's Steven Soderbergh, it's a taught thriller.
I won't give you spoilers here, but it's well crafted, turning the despair into interest, backed, as my movie companion (and delightful wife) pointed out at the time, with a tension-heightening score, and, finally, a resolution that is unforeseen until deep into the end.
It all pivots on the reappearance of Jones as Dr. Victoria Seibert -- it turns out Victoria does have a secret -- a visual and plot wordplay that adds to the cleverness of the film. Any experienced film-goer will know someone like Jones, the third-headliner, will have more than just that one scene that seems almost a throwaway at the time, and she's stellar, if not brilliant, as the stodgy, drug prescription-driven psychiatrist who treated Emily before her life fell apart.
Mara has the real scenery-eating role and she chews it appropriately. You can imagine in other hands it might be more impressive, but maybe there's something profound in the understated approach she has. Maybe all the anti-depressants she's supposed to be taking are working.
Of course, it's Law's movie. Although he's not in a scene until Emily has tried to kill herself, he's in almost every scene thereafter. His compassion shows in his handling of his patient before Emily, then her and he holds onto her as a patient longer than he might because he seems to worry about her edge. As his life unravels, symbolized lazily by a growth of beard, he does a good "life is unraveling and I've lost control." Of course, he's had this same look in recent roles -- whether Repo Men or Anna Karenina. But he's good here -- believable, emotionally vulnerable and excitable, as you'd think someone in his position might be.
So, here's your "between other seasons" treat: see Side Effects. It's a solid treat of a thriller.
Thursday, February 14, 2013
Bracketology: First post (T-5 weeks)
It's time to think college hoops (sorry, D. Eliot, hockey can wait...forever?).
This morning on Mike & Mike, Jay Bilas, MCB commentator extraordinaire, gave his current final four: Indiana, Michigan, Miami & Florida.
I'm okay with IU and Miami -- their seasons make it look like those are good picks. But Michigan has lost 3 of 4 and they started the season "young," and, although you get all that bromide crap about "they aren't freshmen anymore in March," they really aren't older now relative to their competition than they were.
Florida? Yup. As Josh pointed out at today's lunch, they lead the nation in efficiency. Great stat. Means nothing. Duke's RPI is much higher.
I like Duke in Florida's slot.
And I like Louisville in Michigan's. Someone from the Big East is going a long way in the tournament -- right now I call two Big East teams, minimum, in Elite Eight.
So, there's my first post on Bracketology call: IU (my Purdue roots hate this), Miami, Duke and Louisville.
Let's see how it goes these next weeks.
On the other end, I'm watching the "locals" Temple, Maryland and UVa. Let's see if they get in.
And I wonder about Minnesota (despite their win tonight) and Illinois, the 6 and 7 out of the Big Ten. I guess the conference can sustain seven, but I wonder if the math works. There are a lot of losses in being the 6th or 7th place team in a league, and a lot of room to lose ground to some mid-majors in the next 5 weeks. And if you are in the 6 and 7 hole for the conference tourney, that means that extra game on Thursday and they might need a win for a quality notch for the committee. The bottom of the conference isn't strong, so that might not be a problem, but neither looks good enough now to win on Friday. No quality wins in the conference tourney then doesn't help the cause if the bubble looms.
Let's see where we are next week. And beyond. Welcome to bubble watch and I'm NOT Dbrolaw!
This morning on Mike & Mike, Jay Bilas, MCB commentator extraordinaire, gave his current final four: Indiana, Michigan, Miami & Florida.
I'm okay with IU and Miami -- their seasons make it look like those are good picks. But Michigan has lost 3 of 4 and they started the season "young," and, although you get all that bromide crap about "they aren't freshmen anymore in March," they really aren't older now relative to their competition than they were.
Florida? Yup. As Josh pointed out at today's lunch, they lead the nation in efficiency. Great stat. Means nothing. Duke's RPI is much higher.
I like Duke in Florida's slot.
And I like Louisville in Michigan's. Someone from the Big East is going a long way in the tournament -- right now I call two Big East teams, minimum, in Elite Eight.
So, there's my first post on Bracketology call: IU (my Purdue roots hate this), Miami, Duke and Louisville.
Let's see how it goes these next weeks.
On the other end, I'm watching the "locals" Temple, Maryland and UVa. Let's see if they get in.
And I wonder about Minnesota (despite their win tonight) and Illinois, the 6 and 7 out of the Big Ten. I guess the conference can sustain seven, but I wonder if the math works. There are a lot of losses in being the 6th or 7th place team in a league, and a lot of room to lose ground to some mid-majors in the next 5 weeks. And if you are in the 6 and 7 hole for the conference tourney, that means that extra game on Thursday and they might need a win for a quality notch for the committee. The bottom of the conference isn't strong, so that might not be a problem, but neither looks good enough now to win on Friday. No quality wins in the conference tourney then doesn't help the cause if the bubble looms.
Let's see where we are next week. And beyond. Welcome to bubble watch and I'm NOT Dbrolaw!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)