Phog Blog » 2009

REAL Standings; Got Lieb?

posted by Mark on 1/28/2009 -

Cookie Miller is a punk. Doug Gottlieb said it, so it must be true.

I chastened another Big 12 color commentator recently for promoting the urban legend that Mizzou is a good defensive team. (A mantra repeated by Jon Sundvold Wednesday night while the Tigers were holding k-state to 88 points, but I will cut him some slack, being a Mizzou alum and all.)

But I also must give credit where it is due: Mr. Gottlieb not only hit the nail on the head as to Cookie, he made an insightful comment that few of the so-called experts either refuse to acknowledge or, at a fundamental level, do not understand, despite being the primary premise of the REAL Standings since its inception: any conference Road win should be valued more than any Home win. Well, unless the Road win is at Colorado or Texas Tech.

As for the mid-week action on the Court, the Word of the Day is “pathetic”—as in Baylor, Texas, and Kansas. Three putrid efforts. UT won in Waco, because—well, because one of the two “pathetic” teams that showed up (using the term loosely) had to win. It’s a law of nature. That, and Baylor out-choked them. Heck, Baylor out-choked everyone this side of Cabman John Gray. They started choking during the introductions and didn’t stop until they were back in the locker room after the game.

And KU won despite playing unalert, uninspired, and unsmart basketball on the Road for 35 or 36 of the game’s 40 minutes. But, regardless of how ugly the game was, the Jayhawks live to fight another day. And, it was that critical. With OU and UT winning on the Road, the Hawks could not afford to let this one slip away—not with more difficult Road games waiting in the wings (i.e., every Road game not in Lubbock).

Unless KU or Texas step up their games, it might all be moot anyway. Because “pathetic” was not the word for OU. No, the Sooners did not look overpowering at Okie St—it was a one point game late. What was impressive was the Sooners’ mental toughness. They responded to every challenge, and, most importantly, Austin Johnson displayed so much seniorism he should receive a discount at Denny’s and the local cinema.

In the “pathetic game of the week,” Colorado came through in the only game this season it was projected to win, holding off fellow Tier 3 denizen Iowa St. Along with k-state’s Home victory over Mizzou and A&M’s win over Tech in College Station, Projected Winners went 3-1 (the lone loss being Baylor’s Home Court gagging exhibition vs. UT) and are now 22-3 for the season (88%).

In the two toss-up (at-risk) games, the Home teams went 0-2, with NU and Okie St losing to KU and OU respectively. Home at-risk teams are now 2-6 for the season. Which makes sense, considering the Home team in these games is always a full tier lower than its opponent.

REAL STANDINGS: 1/29/09

Texas was the big winner in the mid-week REAL Standings, picking up a full RS game with its Projected L turned into a W at Baylor. Meanwhile, OU and KU each moved ½ game in the right direction with their at-risk game victories.

Baylor, obviously, was the big loser, suffering what might well be the end of any REAListic chance the Bears had of competing for the conference title.

The Big 12 hierarchy:

Contenders (Tier 1): Baylor, KU, OU, UT.

Competitors (Tier 2): A&M, k-state, Mizzou, Nebraska, Okie St,

Bottom-feeders (Tier 3): Colorado, Iowa St, Tech

1. 13.5-2.5

OU (6-0) Projected L’s: at Baylor, at UT

Losable games: at Mizzou

2. 13-3

KU (5-0) Projected L’s: at Baylor, at OU

Losable games: at Mizzou, at k-state

3. 12.5-3.5

UT (4-1) Projected L’s: at KU

Losable games: at NU, at A&M, at Okie St

4. 11-5

Baylor (3-3) Projected L’s: at UT

Losable games: at Mizzou, at Okie St

5. 8.5-7.5

Mizzou (4-2) Projected L’s: at UT, at KU, at A&M

Losable games: vs. Baylor, at ISU, vs. KU, at CU, vs. OU

6. 7.5-8.5

A&M (2-4) Projected L: at OU, at Baylor, at NU

Losable games: vs. UT, at Tech, at CU

7. 7-9

k-state (2-4) Projected L’s: at UT, at A&M, at Mizzou, at Okie St

Losable games: vs. KU, at ISU

OSU (2-3) Projected L’s: at A&M, at KU, at UT, at OU

Losable games: at Tech, vs. Baylor, at CU, vs. UT

9. 6.5-9.5

NU (2-4) Projected L’s: at Mizzou, at KU, at k-state, at Baylor

Losable games: at Tech, at CU, vs. UT

10. 4-12

ISU (1-4) Projected L’s: vs. OU, at k-state, at Okie St, at KU, vs. Baylor, at A&M, at NU

Losable games: vs. Mizzou, vs. k-state

11. 3-13

CU (1-4) Projected L’s: at KU, at OU, at ISU, vs. UT, at NU, at Baylor, at k-state

Losable games: vs. NU, vs. Mizzou, vs. Okie St, vs. A&M

12. 2.5-13.5

Tech (1-4) Projected L’s: at Okie St, vs. Baylor, at k-state, at OU, at UT, vs. OU, vs. KU, at ISU

Losable games: vs. NU, vs. Okie St, vs. A&M

FOR YOUR VIEWING PLEASURE

Saturday Games, with IQ (Interest Quotient):

1. Oklahoma at Iowa St (12:30p.m.)** (Projected W: OU)

My guess is that Craig Brackins does not score 42 points this Saturday.

2. Okie St at A&M (1:00p.m.)*** (Projected W: A&M)

Not even February, and we already have a revenge game.

3. k-state at UT (3:00p.m.)*** (Projected W: UT)

Nothing to see here.

4. Colorado at KU (3:00p.m.)** (Projected W: KU)

Or here. . .

5. Baylor at Mizzou (5:00p.m.)**** (Toss-up)

Not much defense here. I will take the over. Whatever it is. . .

6. Nebraska at Texas Tech (7:00p.m.)* (Toss-up)

A resistable force vs. a moveable object. Nice game—if you are suffering from insomnia.

–Mark

——————————————————————————–
A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy steps!

Comments (0) * Have the Phog Blog come to you! * Subscribe to Comments

REAL Standings: Reid-iculous Comments

posted by Mark on 1/25/2009 -

RECAP

I like Reid Gettys. I enjoyed watching him manage the game as a point guard for arguably the best team in college basketball history. Yes, they fell victim to the one and done format of the Big Dance, but I would pay to watch a best of seven series between Phi Slama Jamma and some of the other great teams in college basketball history (includeing UCLA of either Alcindor or Walton vintage, Indiana ’81—yes, over ’76—and UNLV ’90).

And any friend of a certain judge in Houston (whose name Reid drops every time he does a KU game the way Dickie V pays homage to Coach K and Self’s predecessor in any game involving any team anywhere) is a friend of mine.

That said, there were a couple of comments by Mr. Gettys Saturday that gave me, for one, pause. One, in fact, was Reid-iculous: that Mizzou is playing defense as well as anyone on the country.

Uh, Reid: have you watched Mizzou play? Did you see the 96 points dropped on them by Oklahoma St Wednesday night, or the 86 put up by Tech Saturday?

Yes, those numbers are attributable in part to the number of possessions in a game played by teams that both want to run and shoot and shoot and run, a la Mizzou, Okie St, and Tech.

But some of it also due to god-awful defense. Mizzou’s game in Stillwater was such a fine exhibition of two teams waving the other through to the basket, a video of it should be shown in defensive driving classes as an example of courtesy behind the wheel.

If you are not paying close attention—say you’re doing your taxes with the game on in the background–Mizzou creates the appearance of playing good defense by generating turnovers. When a team gets a steal, it gives the impression that it is playing tough on the ball defense.

However, the type of defense that focuses on creating turnovers, especially in the backcourt, is also susceptible to allowing easy scoring opportunities in the form of uncontested jump shots and layups when the turnover doesn’t come.

The question for any team that tries to create a frenzied pace by playing to what is effectively a 12 second shot clock and forcing the action from end line to end line with a frenetic defense is: What is the bottom line?

The bottom line is that, on balance, this tactic can be quite effective against teams with lesser athletes or with teams that are comparable in talent but who lack the will-power to play their own game, but, rather, get sucked into a pace outside its comfort zone.

Against teams with strong ball handlers who refuse to let Mizzou dictate the action, the “forty minutes of hell” concept is exposed the same way the Big 12’s spread offenses in football were exposed by teams capable of putting pressure on the quarterback—as in Illinois 75, Mizzou 59 and Nebraska 56, Mizzou 51.

Which is not to say that Mizzou is not a reasonably good team. They may well make a run at being the Big 12’s fifth or sixth entrant in the Big Dance. They will have a shot in every game they play in front of the Home crowd, where opponents will feel even more pressure to play at Mizzou’s pace in a misguided attempt to shut the crowd up fast. Mizzou, however, still has some proving to do before they should be classified as a strong team—or as one that plays defense as well as anyone in the country.

Still, I understand that Reid’s job is to say good things about the Big 12. But certainly he can find some good things to say about Mizzou without resorting to touting imaginary traits.

His other questionable statement Saturday was that OU is a team built to be in the Final Four.

Not Reid-iculous, but questionable. OU has Blake Griffin and Willie Warren. Nice. Perhaps nice enough to win the Big 12, as projected by the current edition of the REAL Standings. And if they get the right match-ups and a little bit of luck in March, they could, indeed, be playing into April. But as for being a team made for the Final Four, they are not particularly strong at point guard and center. Reid credits Austin Johnson as doing an excellent job at the point guard position, but he does not create opportunities. He is, instead, a game manager, a serviceable, if not spectacular, player: more Reid Gettys than Isiah Thomas. And Reid did make the Final Four. But, than again, I expect Johnson would do so if he were playing alongside Akeem Olajuwon, Clyde Drexler, Larry Micheaux, and Michael Young. And as good as Griffin and Warren are, they are not Olajuwon and Drexler.

As for Saturday’s games, as opposed to Saturday’s comments, only two had any effect on the REAL Standings: Okie St, projected to lose its Road game against fellow Tier Two Team Nebraska, downed the Huskers in Lincoln in overtime. (Here’s hoping the country’s No. 1 three point shooter prior to Saturday, Nebraska’s Paul Velander, is 1-8 from behind the arc when the Jayhawks invade the Devaney center.)

The other four games in which a projection was made went according to Hoyle: KU over ISU in Ames; OU over Baylor in Norman; UT over A&M in Austin; and Mizzou over Tech in Columbia.

Projected Winners are now 19-2 (90%) for the season.

In the only at-risk (or toss-up) game, k-state claimed its first victory of the conference season in Boulder. Road teams are now 4-2 in at-risk games (i.e., those in which Home teams play host to teams one level higher in the REAL Standings).

REAL STANDINGS: 1/25/09

The only game that raised any question about a team’s placement in the REAL Standings’ hierarchy was Baylor’s non-competitive effort in Norman. Or is OU REALly as good as Mr. Gettys believes? At any rate, that game was projected as a loss for the Bears, so no harm done. Yet.

In addition, a closer look will be taken at k-state’s bona fides. Although they have not played a game yet in which they were a Projected Winner, their performance in Boulder was not their first shabby effort. They have generally looked like a poorly coached, unorganized team. Where have you gone, Michael Beasley? And, Billy, we hardly knew ye. . .

Still, for the time being, we will stay with:

Contenders (Tier 1): Baylor, KU, OU, UT.

Competitors (Tier 2): A&M, k-state, Mizzou, Nebraska, Okie St,

Bottom-feeders (Tier 3): Colorado, Iowa St, Tech

1. 13-3

OU (5-0) Projected L’s: at Baylor, at UT
Losable games: at Okie St, at Mizzou

2. 12.5-3.5

KU (4-0) Projected L’s: at Baylor, at OU
Losable games: at NU, at Mizzou, at k-state

3. 12-4

Baylor (3-2) Projected L’s: at UT
Losable games: at Mizzou, at Okie St

4. 11.5-4.5

UT (3-1) Projected L’s: at Baylor, at KU
Losable games: at NU, at A&M, at Okie St

5. 8.5-7.5

Mizzou (4-1) Projected L’s: at k-state, at UT, at KU, at A&M
Losable games: vs. Baylor, at ISU, vs. KU, at CU, vs. OU

6. 7.5-8.5

A&M (1-4) Projected L: at OU, at Baylor, at NU
Losable games: vs. UT, at Tech, at CU

OSU (2-2) Projected L’s: at A&M, at KU, at UT, at OU
Losable games: vs. OU, at Tech, vs. Baylor, at CU, vs. UT

8. 7-9

k-state (1-4) Projected L’s: at UT, at A&M, at Mizzou, at Okie St
Losable games: vs. KU, at ISU

NU (2-3) Projected L’s: at Mizzou, at KU, at k-state, at Baylor
Losable games: vs. KU, at Tech, at CU, vs. UT

10. 4-12

ISU (1-3) Projected L’s: at CU, vs. OU, at k-state, at Okie St, at KU, vs. Baylor, at A&M, at NU
Losable games: vs. Mizzou, vs. k-state

11. 3-13

CU (0-4) Projected L’s: at KU, at OU, at ISU, vs. UT, at NU, at Baylor, at k-state
Losable games: vs. NU, vs. Mizzou, vs. Okie St, vs. A&M

12. 2.5-13.5

Tech (1-3) Projected L’s: at A&M, at Okie St, vs. Baylor, at k-state, at OU, at UT, vs. OU, vs. KU, at ISU
Losable games: vs. NU, vs. Okie St, vs. A&M

FOR YOUR VIEWING PLEASURE

Mid-Week Games, with IQ (Interest Quotient):

MONDAY

1. Oklahoma at Okie St (8:00p.m.)**** (Toss-up)

In its last three games, Okie St has played into overtime twice and lost by one point in regulation. If nothing else, they are competitive. One of the few games in which OU is vulnerable. If they win this one handily, the conference championship will be theirs to lose.

TUESDAY

2. Texas at Baylor (8:00p.m.)**** (Projected W: Baylor)

Remind me again when Baylor last beat UT anywhere? Maybe they were looking ahead to this game Saturday while playing OU. If they don’t win this game, at Home, with comparable, if not better, talent than UT, when will they do it? Any time this century?

3. Iowa St at Colorado (8:30p.m.)*1/2 (Projected W: Colorado)

This is easily CU’s best chance at a conference victory this season. If they can’t beat a peer team at Home, they will be looking down the barrel at 0-17. Can they control Craig Brackins better than the Jayhawks did in Ames, or will Mr. Brackins be the first man in history to record a double triple?

WEDNESDAY

4. KU at Nebraska (6:30p.m.)**** (Toss-up)

With the top two teams in the REAL Standings both at-risk, the Jayhawks could leapfrog the Sooners and take over the pole position in the conference race by Thursday morning. Or, dare I say, fall 1 and ½ games back. The Hawks must protect the perimeter in this one. Paul Velander is not likely to comply with my hope expressed above and go 1-8. He will, however, continue to make fine German beer.

5. Mizzou at k-state (8:00p.m.)***1/2 (Projected W: k-state)

k-state’s virgin voyage this season as a Projected Winner. If they lose, will it tell us more about them or more about Mizzou? On the other hand, if they win, will it tell us anything about either?

6. Texas Tech at A&M (8:00p.m.)** (Projected W: A&M)

Like k-state, this is A&M’s first projected W of 2009. Should be a cakewalk after consecutive games against the conference’s top four teams in the REAL Standings.

–Mark

Comments (0) * Have the Phog Blog come to you! * Subscribe to Comments

Missouri Shows ‘Em–Kind of. . .

posted by Mark on 1/21/2009 -

RECAP

After this week’s M-W games, I am on the verge of going subjective and declaring KU the best team in the Big 12. And you know what that means. It means that the rest of the conference season is for entertainment value only. And for March prep. But more about that later.

In the big news of the week, Mizzou became the first Road team to pick up a victory against a peer or higher level team, by outlasting Okie St 97-95 in a game that resembled a Three Stooges episode in the final five minutes. In the end, Mizzou played the role of Moe to Okie St’s Larry. As for Curly Joe: that would be the mindless moments of slapstick provided by the refs.

With Mizzou’s surprise victory, Projected Winners in the REAL Standings are now 15-1 for the season (94%).

Meanwhile, in the only midweek at-risk game, Baylor took care of k-state handily. In at-risk games, Road teams are now 2-3 in games in which Home teams have hosted teams one level higher in the REAL Standings hierarchy.

In other games, Home teams KU, Tech, and OU, Projected Winners all, took out A&M, CU, and Nebraska.

REAL STANDINGS: 1/22/09

Although Mizzou took a step toward moving up a level, they did everything but lose a game that appeared un-loseable with five minutes remaining. They will have to take out a team that plays REAL D—and play some themselves–before they move up the Big 12 ladder.

Not to mention k-state, which is getting perilously close to being dropped in status to the land of the Bottom Feeders. Although they have been either the Projected Loser or at-risk in their four conference games, they have lost all four—and in unimpressive fashion.

Still, not enough information to justify changing any team’s status yet:

Contenders (Tier 1): Baylor, KU, OU, UT.

Competitors (Tier 2): A&M, k-state, Mizzou, Nebraska, Okie St,

Bottom-feeders (Tier 3): Colorado, Iowa St, Tech

1. 13-3

OU (4-0) Projected L’s: at Baylor, at UT
Losable games: at Okie St, at Mizzou

2. 12.5-3.5

KU (3-0) Projected L’s: at Baylor, at OU
Losable games: at NU, at Mizzou, at k-state

3. 12-4

Baylor (3-1) Projected L’s: at OU, at UT
Losable games: at Mizzou, at Okie St

4. 11.5-4.5

UT (2-1) Projected L’s: at Baylor, at KU
Losable games: at NU, at A&M, at Okie St

5. 8.5-7.5

Mizzou (3-1) Projected L’s: at k-state, at UT, at KU, at A&M
Losable games: vs. Baylor, at ISU, vs. KU, at CU, vs. OU

6. 8-8

NU (2-2) Projected L’s: at Mizzou, at KU, at k-state, at Baylor
Losable games: vs. KU, at Tech, at CU, vs. UT

7. 7.5-8.5

A&M (1-3) Projected L: at KU, at UT, at OU, at Baylor, at NU
Losable games: vs. UT, at Tech, at CU

8. 6.5-9.5

k-state (0-4) Projected L’s: at UT, at A&M, at Mizzou, at Okie St
Losable games: CU, vs. KU, at ISU

OSU (1-2) Projected L’s: at NU, at A&M, at KU, at UT, at OU
Losable games: vs. OU, at Tech, vs. Baylor, at CU, vs. UT

10. 4-12

ISU (1-2) Projected L’s: vs. KU, at CU, vs. OU, at k-state, at Okie St, at KU, vs. Baylor, at A&M, at NU
Losable games: vs. Mizzou, vs. k-state

11. 3.5-12.5

CU (0-3) Projected L’s: at KU, at OU, at ISU, vs. UT, at NU, at Baylor, at k-state
Losable games: vs. k-state, vs. NU, vs. Mizzou, vs. Okie St, vs. A&M

12. 2.5-13.5

Tech (1-2) Projected L’s: at Mizzou, at A&M, at Okie St, vs. Baylor, at k-state, at OU, at UT, vs. OU, vs. KU, at ISU
Losable games: vs. NU, vs. Okie St, vs. A&M

FOR YOUR VIEWING PLEASURE

Saturday’s Games, with IQ (Interest Quotient):

1. Texas Tech at Mizzou (12:30p.m.)** (Projected W: Mizzou)

Imagine Mizzou vs. Tech in football, only with lesser athletes and even less defense. Take the over. And Mizzou on the money line.

2. KU at Iowa St (1:00p.m.)*** (Projected W: KU)

The Jayhawks just might be the Big 12’s best team. If not now, before long. They have the best inside-outside combo. REALly. OU has Warren and Blake Griffin. UT has Abrams and James. Four damn good players. But what would you rather have: an inside-outside force consisting of a shooting guard and power forward, or one represented by a world class national champion point guard and true center. Advantage: KU.

And whereas OU and Texas had the early season edge in experience, that edge is fast disappearing as KU has added a third option (Mario Little) who may be the best on all three teams when he nears 100%, and the Hawks’ freshmen are learning and accepting their roles: i.e., their defense and decision-making are both improving noticeably with the passage of each game. The youngsters still have to demonstrate that they can take the game between their ears on the Road, but the early season schedule—including their first two Road games coming against Tier 3 teams—is giving them a chance to adjust slowly to conference life away from the friendly confines of AFH.

My vote for KU’s MVP goes to the Big 12 schedule-maker.

If and when this team beats a good team on the Road, they will be the most dangerous team in the league—i.e., the one most capable of doing some serious damage in March. In the meantime, because of their youth, they need to take every game seriously if they don’t want to be the biggest upset victim of the year.

3. Okie St at Nebraska (3:00p.m.)**1/2 (Projected W: Nebraska)

Did Nebraska give everything they had against OU, or are the Huskers REALly pretty good? Regardless, they should win this game unless Okie St turns its D up 5 or 6 notches over what it displayed Wednesday night in Stillwater vs. Mizzou.

4. Baylor at Oklahoma (3:00p.m.)**** (Projected W: OU)

Game of the weekend in the Big 12. Was OU looking ahead to this one while playing Nebraska? Can Baylor take its game on the Road against a truly good team?

5. k-state at Colorado (4:00p.m.)** (Toss-up)

For the fifth straight time, k-state is at risk or projected to lose. Still, as a Tier 2 team, they have to win one of these games. Or maybe they are not a Tier 2 team. . .

6. A&M at Texas (7:00p.m.)*** (Projected W: UT)

We’ll give this three stars because of the rivalry factor. If A&M shows something on the Road in this game, it will be a first in conference play.

–Mark

Comments (0) * Have the Phog Blog come to you! * Subscribe to Comments

REAL Standings: Sooners Boomin’

posted by Mark on 1/17/2009 -

RECAP

In the past, I have noted that the REAL Standings projections are not intended to be predictions, even though, at times, it seems uncanny how often the Projected Winner is, ultimately, the actual winner. In fact, so far this season, Projected Winners are undefeated at 8-0—not to mention12-0 if the REAL Standings principles are applied after the fact to the games of January 10.

As for those games in which no Projection has been made (the “toss-up” or “at-risk” games, where a higher level team plays a one tier lower team on the Road), the Home team is 2-2: OU winning at Tier 2 teams k-state and A&M; A&M taking down Baylor in College Station; and Iowa St, a Tier 3 team, taking advantage of that old Hilton Magic vs. Nebraska.

Because the RS projections are not based on a head-to-head assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of specific teams, but, instead, the teams’ general classification (as a Tier 1, 2, or 3 team) and where the game is being played, I would still hesitate to declare them predictive in nature—especially since the REALly useful prediction (i.e., point differential) is a non-factor. Nevertheless, for curiosity’s sake, I will keep track of the correlation between Projected Winners and actual winners the rest of the season.

As for Saturday’s action, again, there were no REAL surprises: As Projected, it was Nebraska over k-state, Baylor over Okie St, Mizzou over Iowa St (all at Home), and KU and UT over Tier 3 teams Colorado and Tech on the Road.

In the only game without a Projected Winner, OU took an early stranglehold on first place in the conference by taking out A&M—the Sooners’ second victory in two attempts over a Tier 2 team on the Road (k-state being the other).

REAL STANDINGS: 1/18/09

Contenders (Tier 1): Baylor, KU, OU, UT.

Competitors (Tier 2): A&M, k-state, Mizzou, Nebraska, Okie St,

Bottom-feeders (Tier 3): Colorado, Iowa St, Tech

1. 13-3

OU (3-0) Projected L’s: at Baylor, at UT
Losable games: at Okie St, at Mizzou

2. 12.5-3.5

KU (2-0) Projected L’s: at Baylor, at OU
Losable games: at NU, at Mizzou, at k-state

3. 11.5-4.5

Baylor (2-1) Projected L’s: at OU, at UT
Losable games: at k-state, at Mizzou, at Okie St

UT (2-1) Projected L’s: at Baylor, at KU
Losable games: at NU, at A&M, at Okie St

5. 8-8

NU (2-1) Projected L’s: at OU, at Mizzou, at KU, at k-state, at Baylor
Losable games: vs. KU, at Tech, at CU, vs. UT

6. 7.5-8.5

Mizzou (2-1) Projected L’s: at Okie St, at k-state, at UT, at KU, at A&M
Losable games: vs. Baylor, at ISU, vs. KU, at CU, vs. OU

: OSU (1-1) Projected L’s: at NU, at A&M, at KU, at UT, at OU
Losable games: vs. OU, at Tech, vs. Baylor, at CU, vs. UT

A&M (1-2) Projected L: at KU, at UT, at OU, at Baylor, at NU
Losable games: vs. UT, at Tech, at CU

9. 7-9

k-state (0-3) Projected L’s: at UT, at A&M, at Mizzou, at Okie St
Losable games: vs. Baylor, at CU, vs. KU, at ISU

10. 4-12

ISU (1-2) Projected L’s: vs. KU, at CU, vs. OU, at k-state, at Okie St, at KU, vs. Baylor, at A&M, at NU
Losable games: vs. Mizzou, vs. k-state

11. 3.5-12.5

CU (0-2) Projected L’s: at Tech, at KU, at OU, at ISU, vs. UT, at NU, at Baylor, at k-state
Losable games: vs. k-state, vs. NU, vs. Mizzou, vs. Okie St, vs. A&M

12. 2.5-13.5

Tech (0-2) Projected L’s: at Mizzou, at A&M, at Okie St, vs. Baylor, at k- state, at OU, at UT, vs. OU, vs. KU, at ISU
Losable games: vs. NU, vs. Okie St, vs. A&M

FOR YOUR VIEWING PLEASURE

Work Week Games, with IQ (Interest Quotient):

MONDAY

1. Texas A&M at KU (8:00p.m.)**** (Projected W: KU)

The Jayhawks have the second longest Home Court winning streak in the country at 34. Their last loss in AFH? To A&M. Of course, that team had Acey Law. Then again, that KU team had Julian Wright, Brandon Rush, Mario Chalmers, etc., and etc. In other words, two entirely different teams. The only key players from those teams are A&M’s Josh Carter and Donald Sloan, and, of course,the nation’s premier point guard, Sherron Collins. The young Jayhawks have played relatively well at Home. A&M has lost its only conference game on the Road. Still, the Hawks better come ready to play forty minutes. None of this allowing an eighteen point led to shrink to three or Mark Turgeon might not let his alma mater get away with it.

TUESDAY

2. Colorado at Texas Tech (7:00p.m.)* (Projected W: Tech)

What a stinker. Watching this game means you are either one of the all time college basketball fanatics, or you have no life. Or both.

WEDNESDAY

3. Mizzou at Okie St (8:00p.m.)*** (Projected W: Okie St)

Mizzou has taken out Tier 3 teams Colorado and Iowa St in impressive fashion at Home. Can they take their act on the Road? Against a decent team?

4. Nebraska at Oklahoma (8:00p.m.)** (Projected W: OU)

Unless OU falls asleep at the wheel, nothing to see here.

5. Baylor at k-state (8:00p.m.)**1/2 (Toss-up)

Have to admit that k-state has had the toughest startup schedule in the Big 12. This is their fourth straight game that has either been a Projected Loss or an at-risk game. We will see what Frank Martin can do with a desperate team.

–Mark

Comments (0) * Have the Phog Blog come to you! * Subscribe to Comments

REAL Standings: Home Security

posted by Mark on 1/15/2009 -

No surprises in the mid-week portion of the Big 12’s first week. All five Home teams won, and, in the REAL world, a Home team victory is always par for the course—with the exception of a Tier 3 (Bottom Feeder) team taking out a contender. Which almost never happens.

As projected, Oklahoma took care of Texas in Norman; KU downed k-state for the 38th time in their last 40 attempts; and Mizzou kicked Colorado into the middle of next week—not to mention central Utah.

In the two at-risk games—i.e., where the Home team hosts a team one level higher in the conference hierarchy, the Home team won both: as in A&M over Baylor and Iowa St over Nebraska.

Meaning that the only changes in the REAL Standings are 1/2 game movements by A&M and ISU (up) and Baylor and NU (down).

REAL STANDINGS: 1/15/09

Contenders (Level 1): Baylor, KU, OU, UT.

Competitors (Level 2): A&M, k-state, Mizzou, Nebraska, Okie St,

Bottom-feeders (Level 3): Colorado, Iowa St, Tech

1. 12.5-3.5

KU (1-0) Projected L’s: at Baylor, at OU
Losable games: at NU, at Mizzou, at k-state

OU (2-0) Projected L’s: at Baylor, at UT
Losable games: at A&M, at Okie St, at Mizzou

3. 11.5-4.5

Baylor (1-1) Projected L’s: at OU, at UT
Losable games: at k-state, at Mizzou, at Okie St

UT (1-1) Projected L’s: at Baylor, at KU
Losable games: at NU, at A&M, at Okie St

5. 8-8

NU (1-1) Projected L’s: at OU, at Mizzou, at KU, at k-state, at Baylor
Losable games: vs. KU, at Tech, at CU, vs. UT

A&M (1-1) Projected L: at KU, at UT, at OU, at Baylor, at NU
Losable games: vs. OU, vs. UT, at Tech, at CU

7. 7.5-8.5

Mizzou (1-1) Projected L’s: at Okie St, at k-state, at UT, at KU, at A&M
Losable games: vs. Baylor, at ISU, vs. KU, at CU, vs. OU

: OSU (1-0) Projected L’s: at Baylor, at NU, at A&M, at KU, at UT, at OU
Losable games: vs. OU, at Tech, vs. Baylor, at CU, vs. UT

9. 7-9

k-state (0-2) Projected L’s: at NU, at UT, at A&M, at Mizzou, at Okie St
Losable games: vs. Baylor, at CU, vs. KU, at ISU

10. 4-12

ISU (1-1) Projected L’s: at Mizzou, vs. KU, at CU, vs. OU, at k-state, at Okie St, at KU, vs. Baylor, at A&M, at NU
Losable games: vs. Mizzou, vs. k-state

11. 3.5-12.5

CU (0-1) Projected L’s: vs. KU, at Tech, at KU, at OU, at ISU, vs. UT, at NU, at Baylor, at k-state
Losable games: vs. k-state, vs. NU, vs. Mizzou, vs. Okie St, vs. A&M

12. 2.5-13.5

Tech (0-1) Projected L’s: vs. UT, at Mizzou, at A&M, at Okie St, vs. Baylor, at k-state, at OU, at UT, vs. OU, vs. KU, at ISU
Losable games: vs. NU, vs. Okie St, vs. A&M

FOR YOUR VIEWING PLEASURE

Saturday’s XII Games, with IQ (Interest Quotient):

1. Iowa St at Mizzou (12:30p.m.)** (Projected W: Mizzou)

Should be an easy time for Mizzou—though not as easy as Wednesday night.

2. Okie St at Baylor (12:30p.m.)*** (Projected W: Baylor)

The game at A&M was not critical for Baylor. This one is. The Bears cannot afford a Home Loss.

3. Oklahoma at A&M (1:00p.m.)**** (Toss-up)

OU can grab sole possession of first place in the REAL Standings with a win in College Station. Being one of the few REAListic chances for a Sooner loss this season, the Jayhawks and others have a big time rooting interest in this game. Gig ‘Em.

4. KU at Colorado (2:30p.m.)**1/2 (Projected W: KU)

A fortuitous opening Road opponent for a young team that has shown nothing thus far this season in enemy territory. If they can’t win this game, what game will they win outside the friendly confines of AFH? It’s the first Road victory that is always the hardest. If the young Hawk do taste some Road Kill, no matter the opponent, the sky might suddenly become the limit.

5. Texas at Texas Tech (3:00p.m.)*1/2 (Projected W: UT)

Even the Home court is unlikely to turn this into a contest. UT will be focused after their loss in Norman. Tech might give Colorado a run for the title of the Big 12’s worst team.

6. k-state at Nebraska (5:00p.m.)**1/2 (Projected W: k-state)

Nice match-up between two evenly matched teams. Could be an NIT bid on the line.

–Mark

Comments (0) * Have the Phog Blog come to you! * Subscribe to Comments

REAL Standings: 2009 Pre-Season Edition

posted by Mark on 1/11/2009 -

It is time for the pre-season 2009 REAL Big 12 Standings.

I know what some of you are thinking: What do you mean “pre-season”? OU beat k-state Saturday afternoon. Nebraska beat Mizzou. Baylor beat Tech. UT beat Iowa St. Not to mention the Okie St taking care of A&M with relative ease.

But, as they say in Augusta, the Masters begins on the Back 9 on Sunday.

In the Big 12, the season begins with KU’s first conference game.

BACKGROUND

The REAL Big 12 standings is not intended to be predictive in nature. My subjective pre-season prediction last year, for example, was that KU would do better than its REAL Standings projected record of 12-4. And my prediction was correct (13-3).

What the REAL Standings does is indicate which team or teams are in the most advantageous position to win the conference championship without regard to their current record as shown in the newspaper or on your web page. It assesses where teams truly stand in relation to each other, taking into account who they have played and where and who and where they have yet to play. This is especially helpful in an unbalanced schedule setup, as most conferences—including the Big 12–now have, as opposed to the days when every Big 8 or SWC team played an identical schedule consisting of games home and away with every other conference opponent.

The premise of the REAL Standings is that championships are won by:

1. Winning EVERY game that a champion should win: i.e., all Home games and all games against the league’s bottom-feeders; and

2. Winning the most losable games—i.e., Road games vs. other contenders and competitive teams—with Road wins vs. a contender being “Special.”

In the REAL Standings, each contender is projected to win all Home games and all games against the conference’s bottom-feeders; to lose all Road games versus other contenders; and to be at-risk (i.e., assigned .5 W and .5 L) for all Road games against those teams that are competitive enough to be dangerous, even for a contender, on their Home court.

Second tier teams (i.e., the competitors), are projected to win their Home games vs. their peers and third tier teams; to lose their Road games vs. contenders and their peers; and to be at risk at Home vs. contenders and on the Road vs. the bottom-feeders.

Third tier teams are projected to lose every game except Home games vs. second tier teams (which are counted as at-risk games) and other third tier teams (which are projected W’s).

The only subjective factor in the REAL standings is identifying the contenders, the competitors, and the bottom-feeders. I usually base this on my own observations, but remain open to changing a team’s status as the season progresses if actual results demonstrate that one of the contenders REALly isn’t, or that one of the others teams should be taken more seriously. This year, because my focus has been first and foremost on football to this point, I have also consulted Sagarin and Kenpom to supplement what my own eyes have seen.

THE 2009 PRE-SEASON REAL STANDINGS

My Pre-season assessment of the Big 12 teams is:

1. Contenders: UT and OU, of course. Both have been in the Top 10 all season. Baylor is looking good. And KU: because, even though they have yet to impress me (or anyone else) as a team that can get the job done on the Road, they (a) have the talent to do so if they get their act together—and I mean soon; (b) are the Defending National Champions (can that ever be mentioned enough?); and (c) this is a KU-oriented analysis, so the Hawks get the benefit of any reasonable doubt.

2. Competitors: A&M, k-state, Mizzou, Nebraska, Okie St,

3. Bottom-feeders: Colorado, Iowa St, Tech

Here, then, are the 2009 Big 12 REAL Standings two days from the tip-off of the 2009 Big 12 season:

1. 12.5-3.5

KU (0-0) Projected L’s: at Baylor, at OU
Losable games: at NU, at Mizzou, at k-state

OU (1-0) Projected L’s: at Baylor, at UT
Losable games: at A&M, at Okie St, at Mizzou

3. 12-4

Baylor (1-0) Projected L’s: at OU, at UT
Losable games: at A&M, at k-state, at Mizzou, at Okie St

4. 11.5-4.5

UT (1-0) Projected L’s: at OU, at Baylor, at KU
Losable games: at NU, at A&M, at Okie St

5. 8.5-7.5

NU (1-0) Projected L’s: at OU, at Mizzou, at KU, at k-state, at Baylor
Losable games: at ISU, vs. KU, at Tech, at CU, vs. UT

6. 7.5-8.5

A&M (0-1) Projected L: at KU, at UT, at OU, at Baylor, at NU
Losable games: vs. Baylor, vs. OU, vs. UT, at Tech, at CU

Mizzou (0-1) Projected L’s: at Okie St, at k-state, at UT, at KU, at A&M
Losable games: vs. Baylor, at ISU, vs. KU, at CU, vs. OU

: OSU (1-0) Projected L’s: at Baylor, at NU, at A&M, at KU, at UT, at OU
Losable games: vs. OU, at Tech, vs. Baylor, at CU, vs. UT

9. 7-9

k-state (0-1) Projected L’s: at KU, at NU, at UT, at A&M, at Mizzou, at Okie St
Losable games: vs. Baylor, at CU, vs. KU, at ISU

10. 3.5-12.5

CU (0-0) Projected L’s: at Mizzou, vs. KU, at Tech, at KU, at OU, at ISU, vs. UT, at NU, at Baylor, at k-state
Losable games: vs. k-state, vs. NU, vs. Mizzou, vs. Okie St, vs. A&M

ISU (0-1) Projected L’s: at Mizzou, vs. KU, at CU, vs. OU, at k-state, at Okie St, at KU, vs. Baylor, at A&M, at NU
Losable games: vs. NU, vs. Mizzou, vs. k-state

12. 2.5-13.5

Tech (0-1) Projected L’s: vs. UT, at Mizzou, at A&M, at Okie St, vs. Baylor, at k-state, at OU, at UT, vs. OU, vs. KU, at ISU
Losable games: vs. NU, vs. Okie St, vs. A&M

FOR YOUR VIEWING PLEASURE

The MidweekBig XII Games, with IQ (Interest Quotient):

MONDAY

1. Texas at Oklahoma (8:00p.m.)**** (Projected W: OU)

What needs to be said. The two league favorites playing each other right off the bat. A veritable must game for the Home team.

TUESDAY

2. k-state at KU (7:00p.m.)***1/2 (Projected W: KU)

A second must game so early in the season.Subjectively speaking, the Jayhawks must win this game, or their Big 12 dreams will be as bleak as their national championship hopes seemed with 2:12 remaining in regulation on April 7.

WEDNESDAY

3. Nebraska at Iowa St (7:00p.m.)** (Toss-up)

Two teams, two programs, seeking credibility. Might be a dud game later in the season. For now, the questions surrounding these two makes it worthy of two stars.

4. Colorado at Mizzou (8:00p.m.)*1/2 (Projected W: Mizzou)

Mizzou has flirted with respectability thisseason.That could go down the drain in 40 minutes if they don’t take care of business vs. what might be the worst team in the Big 12.

5.Baylor at A&M(8:00p.m.)**** (Toss-up)

Another top of the line game for so early in the season. This is the game that Baylor won in like 17 overtimes last year.

–Mark

Comments (0) * Have the Phog Blog come to you! * Subscribe to Comments

Some Insight: Tastes Like Tiger

posted by Mark on 1/3/2009 -

The Insight Bowl was a fun time for all. Not as magical, nor as mystical, as the event 52 weeks earlier in Miami, but fun nevertheless.

Which is the positive of the bowl system. It gives teams like KU and Minnesota, who are in the “Others receiving votes” category (or even not that high in the college football pecking order) a nice outing to far off distant and (usually) warmer climes the last week of December, and give their fans an opportunity to enjoy watching and/or following their team one final time before the full onset of basketball season.

So keep the thirty bowls that are nothing more than exhibitions. Nothing wrong with having a little fun.

But for God’s sake, let’s have a few meaningful games as well. It is hard for me to understand why anyone would not want to see the top teams play each other with something on the line. And who wouldn’t want to see more games between teams from major conferences in September, rather than having to wait until December because the top teams refuse to play each other in the regular season—afraid that a loss will knock them out of contention for the pretend National Championship?

The BCS has destroyed September and December, with its proponents proclaiming that a playoff would undermine October and November—which, of course, is bull.

As I have noted before, there is no good reason to deny the teams and the fans a playoff. At some point, what is logical and right will prevail: we will have fewer exhibition games and more games that matter.

Until that day, the Insight, Alamo, Cotton, Orange, Sugar, Rose, Fiesta, et al., will still be fun.

But just fun.

Comments (0) * Have the Phog Blog come to you! * Subscribe to Comments

January 2009
M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« Dec				Feb »
			1	2	3	4
5	6	7	8	9	10	11
12	13	14	15	16	17	18
19	20	21	22	23	24	25
26	27	28	29	30	31

REAL Standings; Got Lieb?

REAL Standings: Reid-iculous Comments

Missouri Shows ‘Em–Kind of. . .

REAL Standings: Sooners Boomin’

REAL Standings: Home Security

REAL Standings: 2009 Pre-Season Edition

Some Insight: Tastes Like Tiger

Other Sites