odhgibo

I caught the tail end of one of ESPN's dozens of tournament-related shows. It ended with a compilation of highlights of teams that had been discussed. I think French's slightly odd end-of-game call was used as a voiceover near the end of the montage (without attribution, of course).

In these summaries, the #12 seeds' percentages range from ~25% to ~40%. Given those odds (i.e., 4 x ~0.33), it makes sense that one #12 beats a #5 most years. It's also interesting that the numbers crunch to about the same as the eye test: VCU probably would win 2 of 3 or 3 of 4 games against Akron on a neutral floor. As we all know, however, this tournament is one game only, so toss it up and see what happens.

Thanks, ZTZ. Coach KD sprinkled a few choice nuggets among the platitudes in this one.

Agreed. Both the 2012-13 Rams and Zips are significantly better than their 2011-12 counterparts (and even that Rams team took IU to the wire in the round of 32). I would go so far as to argue that the talent level of this year's Rams team is close to the level of the 2010-11 Final Four team, although a Burgess-type leader does not appear to have emerged (yet). VCU's last three tournament seeds have been 11, 12 and 5. The #11 and #12 seeds were jokes, a result of the CAA getting far less respect than the A10. Now that the school has had the benefit of playing a better conference, it's getting the type of seed it should have had two years ago. The wild card is Zeke ... when he steps up his game, Akron plays at level higher than a #12.

I've seen Jackson since he was a freshman. CJ McCollum (GlenOak), at least as often as not, found ways to score without needing to handle the ball. Perhaps because of his skill set relative to those of his teammates, Jackson typically scores off the dribble. In that regard, he's more like Nyles Evans. His outside shot is above average for HS, but I wouldn't classify it as elite. He can play D1, although not at the highest level.

Detroit? MTSU?

FWIW (which isn't much), I think the line will somewhere in the 4-6 range.

Great question. Randal Holt, even though he's more of a SG than PG?

Yes! He played spectacularly against WMU, but is that enough?!

What it will take to win: keep TO margin to no more than -7, rebounding margin of at least +8, and FT at least 65%. More than anything, a decent start. Confidence is critical.

Coach KD was just on WHBC. He echoed a couple things mentioned elsewhere in this thread. (1) VCU will attempt to make life miserable for anyone handling/holding the ball, i.e., ball pressure to offset height disadvantage. (2) Akron needs to get the ball to the rim and then rebound like crazy. (Reminded me of hockey coaches that tell their teams to just get the puck on the net in the expectation that they'll be able to jam home a few rebounds.)

Oregon is a very nice team. They should have been higher than a 12, and UCLA should have been lower than a 6 (taking into account the PG being out with a broken foot). Dukes-Pokes ought to be a great game.

+1. My thoughts exactly. Would rather have played Okla. St. or Wisconsin (even though I think UW should have been a #4 seed, with Kansas St. being a 5).

One of the worst possible match ups for a team with ballhandling issues. If Harney was an adventure at times last night, wait until he sees Havoc. Akron must be able to pass OVER the press and score. Otherwise, ...

Must disagree, AZ71. There was quite a bit of hand-to-hand combat both directions, and the officials (Carstensen, Mayborg and Ek) tried to let them play. Nevertheless, many of the players still couldn't stay out of trouble. The call that led to Tree's T was matter of angles. Mayborg made the call from the baseline. I had the mirror image view (sitting next to the TV cameras) and could see how the OU player somewhat undercut Tree. That would not have been visible to Mayborg. Once the call was made and Tree slapped the floor, the T had to be called. Did anyone else notice that the Big 10 now is using guys that we saw at the MAC tournament 5-6 years ago? Wymer even worked the championship game today w/ Kitts & Valentine.

I thought the same thing. Conspicuous by his absence. Avsec, Hoisten, McNees and even Futch got medals, but not Jonas.

@QZ was darn close to dead on with this set of predictions. Not much double teaming, and distributed scoring among the big guys. The Zips did not double team DJ5. Instead, they switched absolutely everything out front. It did not matter who guarded the "big" setting the screen. That defender ended up on Cooper, with the original defender guarding against the bounce pass on the screen and roll (which killed WMU the night before). The strategy got further refined after halftime. In the 2nd half, one of the bigger players (e.g., Tree) initially guarded Cooper and then switched to the screener, i.e., the match up desired in the first place. The whipped cream on the sundae was that the coaching staff somehow figured out who would NOT be setting the initial screen and put Zeke on him, thereby keeping #44 available to help out. The amazing thing to me was that the OU coaches had no plan B. When the dribble drive and the screen-roll were cut off, there was no third option. The weave just kept going (more accurately, going nowhere), and OU got more and more frustrated. The OU fans around me in section 109 cleared out by the 6 minute mark.

Thanks for this info, ZZZ.

Couldn't help but add this one for Hannah Plybon, a Coach Kest recruit who might be able to teach the men something about free throw shooting -- 20-for-21 in a regional final victory

Isaiah Johnson and Walnut Hills also into the regionals

Aaron Jackson leads Gahanna Lincoln into regionals

With Tulsa on deck for 2014-15.

I was responding to this statement: "I think that a 7,000-seat arena with steep pitch seating leading up to suites at the top may be the optimum arena for the Zips." I just happen to disagree with that being optimum. Nevertheless, if someone is willing to pay for the construction of a suite and make a long term commitment to buy the full slate of tickets for 5+ seasons, I'm fine with it. However, absent those conditions, suites are a guaranteed money loser and a waste of space. I have dozens of voicemail messages from the Indians over the past 5 years to prove the point. A college basketball arena has only 20 dates over which to amortize the cost of a suite. It's not a baseball stadium or a multipurpose arena. It's also not football stadium where people plan weekends around a game.

If the arena is to be on-campus and dedicated to basketball, I for one (and I'm probably in the minority) am against the idea of suites in a 7000-8000 seat venue. I'm not opposed to a club level, however. This could be accomplished with 4-8 rows that overhang part of the lower bowl, with the top of the aisles opening to dedicated concessions and restrooms. For this type of arrangement, envision the north and east ends of Nationwide Arena, which is a far nicer execution of this concept than what was done at the Q. Like suites, a club level gives a sense exclusivity to those willing to pay for it. However, it also provides benefits not available with suites: because small groups are not silo-ed into suites, involvement in the game increases (i.e., less time spent in the suite), better viewing angles than top-of-bowl suites, ability for an average joe or someone wanting to bring a business colleague but who can't afford a season commitment to a suite to splurge occasionally for premium seating, more tiers for pricing: club level, lower bowl sides, upper bowl side (opposite the club level) and lower bowl ends. (The bowl would not be as deep, and one side would have sections -- with maybe 10 or so rows -- above the concourse level.) I'm not sure how this affects cost, but I get the impression we're not overly concerned about costs on this forum.

Announced attendance was 5511.