Yesterday, I made a post called 17 teams for 12 spots. With Northwestern beating Michigan with a full court Hail Mary, they have now eliminated any chance that they play themselves off the bubble. As a reminder, red games are ones that don't help much if you win but hurt a lot if you lose. Green games are ones that raise your profile if you win but don't hurt much if you lose.
Arkansas:UGA
Xavier: @DPL
USC: WASH
Seton Hall: @BUT
Providence: @SJU
Middle Tennessee State: FIU, FAU
Syracuse: GT
California: @UTAH, @COLO
Illinois State: N/A
Rhode Island: DAV
Current Cut Off
Vanderbilt: FLA
Wake Forest: @VT
Illinois: @RUT
Kansas State: TTU
Houston: @Cincy, ECU
With only 1 green game remaining on each of their schedules, Marquette and Northwestern move off the bubble. Quite simply, they have no more opportunities to play themselves off the bubble. Teams behind them would have to win significant games to move ahead of them. Kansas State and Illinois have run out of opportunities. There is no situation outside them winning huge games in their conference tournaments where they could finish ahead of Marquette and Northwestern. That leaves only Vanderbilt, Wake Forest, and Houston as potential upstarts. But teams like Rhode Island, Illinois State, and Middle Tennessee State would get bumped before either of them.
Seton Hall stays on, despite only having one green game left. Unless I have the tiebreaker wrong, they could still end up in the 7th place game against Depaul. A loss there would jeopardize their NCAA hopes.
This exercise doesn't take into account bid stealers and the human element of the committee. They could come out of left field and make unexpected decisions. But on paper, Marquette has locked up its first NCAA appearance in the Wojo Era.
I just don't see us as that safe.
But hopefully I'm wrong
And even more so, hopefully it doesn't need to be proven because we smash Creighton in two days
Great analysis. Completely agreed. I am working on something to determine what the bubble may look like in a nightmare scenario of bids being stolen left and right next week. Will be interesting to see what it looks like.
Quote from: PFsHeroes32 on March 02, 2017, 01:00:04 PM
I just don't see us as that safe.
But hopefully I'm wrong
And even more so, hopefully it doesn't need to be proven because we smash Creighton in two days
You are wrong. Accept it. Your team is in the tourney. Kill the drama.
Quote from: Windyplayer on March 02, 2017, 01:17:01 PM
You are wrong. Accept it. Your team is in the tourney. Kill the drama.
When teamrankings has you at 54% there's a lot to still accept.
Plus, I want to avoid Dayton.
Need to beat Creighton. Accept that.
Quote from: PFsHeroes32 on March 02, 2017, 01:18:41 PM
When teamrankings has you at 54% there's a lot to still accept.
Plus, I want to avoid Dayton.
Need to beat Creighton. Accept that.
(1) Teamrankings sounds like a neat start-up, (2) avoiding Dayton is not the same as missing out on the Dance altogether, (3) a "need" to ensure we're not in Dayton? If so, accepted.
Quote from: PFsHeroes32 on March 02, 2017, 01:00:04 PM
I just don't see us as that safe.
But hopefully I'm wrong
And even more so, hopefully it doesn't need to be proven because we smash Creighton in two days
Per your streak, can't you just make a Prop Bet in Vegas that Marquette does NOT make the tourney? Then we will be sure fire locks?
"This exercise doesn't take into account bid stealers and the human element of the committee."
Those are some pretty important variables. Saturday is not an easy game. We have very little margin for error currently that will be razor thin if we lose.
Quote from: frozena pizza on March 02, 2017, 01:51:53 PM
"This exercise doesn't take into account bid stealers and the human element of the committee."
Those are some pretty important variables. Saturday is not an easy game. We have very little margin for error currently that will be razor thin if we lose.
We actually have a pretty significant margin for error at this point.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 02, 2017, 12:52:34 PM
Yesterday, I made a post called 17 teams for 12 spots. With Northwestern beating Michigan with a full court Hail Mary, they have now eliminated any chance that they play themselves off the bubble. As a reminder, red games are ones that don't help much if you win but hurt a lot if you lose. Green games are ones that raise your profile if you win but don't hurt much if you lose.
Arkansas:UGA
Xavier: @DPL
USC: WASH
Seton Hall: @BUT
Providence: @SJU
Middle Tennessee State: FIU, FAU
Syracuse: GT
California: @UTAH, @COLO
Illinois State: N/A
Rhode Island: DAV
Current Cut Off
Vanderbilt: FLA
Wake Forest: @VT
Illinois: @RUT
Kansas State: TTU
Houston: @Cincy, ECU
With only 1 green game remaining on each of their schedules, Marquette and Northwestern move off the bubble. Quite simply, they have no more opportunities to play themselves off the bubble. Teams behind them would have to win significant games to move ahead of them. Kansas State and Illinois have run out of opportunities. There is no situation outside them winning huge games in their conference tournaments where they could finish ahead of Marquette and Northwestern. That leaves only Vanderbilt, Wake Forest, and Houston as potential upstarts. But teams like Rhode Island, Illinois State, and Middle Tennessee State would get bumped before either of them.
Seton Hall stays on, despite only having one green game left. Unless I have the tiebreaker wrong, they could still end up in the 7th place game against Depaul. A loss there would jeopardize their NCAA hopes.
This exercise doesn't take into account bid stealers and the human element of the committee. They could come out of left field and make unexpected decisions. But on paper, Marquette has locked up its first NCAA appearance in the Wojo Era.
Clearly we want Buzz and Company to beat Wake Forest.....
Quote from: JamilJaeJamailJrJuan on March 02, 2017, 01:54:31 PM
We actually have a pretty significant margin for error at this point.
So if we lose Saturday and don't win a game in the BET and there are 3-4 bid stealers, are we a lock? Because that could happen.
Quote from: frozena pizza on March 02, 2017, 02:01:36 PM
So if we lose Saturday and don't win a game in the BET and there are 3-4 bid stealers, are we a lock? Because that could happen.
We may be in Dayton in that scenario, but I think we're still in.
Most likely going to take 7 or 8 bid stealers, and some other crazy results to push us out with an 0-2 finish. It is incredibly unlikely.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 02, 2017, 12:52:34 PM
Seton Hall stays on, despite only having one green game left. Unless I have the tiebreaker wrong, they could still end up in the 7th place game against Depaul. A loss there would jeopardize their NCAA hopes.
I believe Xavier is locked in to the 7-seed. Of the 3 teams 1 game ahead of them, they split with 2 of them (Hall, Providence) and were swept by the other (MU). They would have the worst record in any mini-conference and would lose any two way tie procedure (swept by MU, and MU would serve as the best win tiebreaker for both Hall and Providence.)
Quote from: MarquetteDano on March 02, 2017, 01:51:31 PM
Per your streak, can't you just make a Prop Bet in Vegas that Marquette does NOT make the tourney? Then we will be sure fire locks?
Lol good point.
But considering I'm on the lock train with a Creighton W.
Might as well only waste money once!
I agree with the green n red games. Howver this all assumes these teams are below us. This is a huge assumption and i could very easily seeing a vast majority of these teams somehow being ahead of us in the commitees eyes.
Creighton would clinch it tho
Quote from: frozena pizza on March 02, 2017, 02:01:36 PM
So if we lose Saturday and don't win a game in the BET and there are 3-4 bid stealers, are we a lock? Because that could happen.
There are 7 teams currently between us and the bubble. Even if there are 4 bid stealers (crazy high), four teams behind us would have to pass us. A loss to Creighton doesn't hurt us. By my estimate, there are 6 teams with enough meat on their schedule to pass us. So yes, theoretically we could be left out. But it would require a lot to go wrong.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 02, 2017, 04:51:50 PM
There are 7 teams currently between us and the bubble. Even if there are 4 bid stealers (crazy high), four teams behind us would have to pass us. A loss to Creighton doesn't hurt us. By my estimate, there are 6 teams with enough meat on their schedule to pass us. So yes, theoretically we could be left out. But it would require a lot to go wrong.
You have no idea where we stand, it is not published, there is no true metric. I wish there was , there isnt
A long time ago say a 20 year ago, i noticed a trend that said top 60 rpi and 20 wins, like 1 high major had ever missed the dance. Recently, its gone to 68 n the rpi is supposedly less used. Then again we dont have 20 wins.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 02, 2017, 04:51:50 PM
There are 7 teams currently between us and the bubble. Even if there are 4 bid stealers (crazy high), four teams behind us would have to pass us. A loss to Creighton doesn't hurt us. By my estimate, there are 6 teams with enough meat on their schedule to pass us. So yes, theoretically we could be left out. But it would require a lot to go wrong.
Does UNC-Ashville still it make after the lose to Campbell? I would guess no but will defer to the "experts", EDIT i'm a moron sorry, not even leading their conf. i'm gonna go sit in the corner and think about my actions
Quote from: GWSwarrior on March 02, 2017, 05:23:30 PM
Does UNC-Ashville still it make after the lose to Campbell? I would guess no but will defer to the "experts", EDIT i'm a moron sorry, not even leading their conf. i'm gonna go sit in the corner and think about my actions
In other Big South news, Liberty was stunned by Radford. Looks. like John Dawson's career over unless he can win his appeal on the 4 minutes he played for us. John had another good season leading the team to a 14-4 record in conference and 19-12 overall. I was hoping Liberty could have won their conference tournament and made the dance.
Quote from: Marquette Fan In NY on March 02, 2017, 05:35:40 PM
In other Big South news, Liberty was stunned by Radford. Looks. like John Dawson's career over unless he can win his appeal on the 4 minutes he played for us. John had another good season leading the team to a 14-4 record in conference and 19-12 overall. I was hoping Liberty could have won their conference tournament and made the dance.
And I'm sure all the one fan on that program was thinking all about how he started off his career at marquette
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 02, 2017, 04:51:50 PM
Even if there are 4 bid stealers (crazy high), four teams behind us would have to pass us.
So I'm trying to guess at which conferences are most likely to generate a bid-stealer.
CUSA is maybe the best candidate, if MTSU has a bad night.
AAC might be next, if a UConn or a Tulsa ran the table.
Maybe BYU in the West Coast Conf. if the Zags and Gaels stumble.
After that, I'm not sure who likely candidates would be. Maybe someone in the A10 or SEC?
Could St. John's do it playing at home, if the bracket falls their way?
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 02, 2017, 12:52:34 PM
Yesterday, I made a post called 17 teams for 12 spots. With Northwestern beating Michigan with a full court Hail Mary, they have now eliminated any chance that they play themselves off the bubble. As a reminder, red games are ones that don't help much if you win but hurt a lot if you lose. Green games are ones that raise your profile if you win but don't hurt much if you lose.
Arkansas:UGA
Xavier: @DPL
USC: WASH
Seton Hall: @BUT
Providence: @SJU
Middle Tennessee State: FIU, FAU
Syracuse: GT
California: @UTAH, @COLO
Illinois State: N/A
Rhode Island: DAV
Current Cut Off
Vanderbilt: FLA
Wake Forest: @VT
Illinois: @RUT
Kansas State: TTU
Houston: @Cincy, ECU
With only 1 green game remaining on each of their schedules, Marquette and Northwestern move off the bubble. Quite simply, they have no more opportunities to play themselves off the bubble. Teams behind them would have to win significant games to move ahead of them. Kansas State and Illinois have run out of opportunities. There is no situation outside them winning huge games in their conference tournaments where they could finish ahead of Marquette and Northwestern. That leaves only Vanderbilt, Wake Forest, and Houston as potential upstarts. But teams like Rhode Island, Illinois State, and Middle Tennessee State would get bumped before either of them.
Seton Hall stays on, despite only having one green game left. Unless I have the tiebreaker wrong, they could still end up in the 7th place game against Depaul. A loss there would jeopardize their NCAA hopes.
This exercise doesn't take into account bid stealers and the human element of the committee. They could come out of left field and make unexpected decisions. But on paper, Marquette has locked up its first NCAA appearance in the Wojo Era.
So it is written, so it shall be done.
Quote from: Windyplayer on March 02, 2017, 01:23:24 PM
(1) Teamrankings sounds like a neat start-up, (2) avoiding Dayton is not the same as missing out on the Dance altogether, (3) a "need" to ensure we're not in Dayton? If so, accepted.
It is true that getting a game in Dayton is "making the dance", but it really does not feel like it as a fan. Until we get a game on Thurs. or Fri. when all the other games are going on, it does not feel like you made the NCAA tournament.
Quote from: PFsHeroes32 on March 02, 2017, 01:00:04 PM
I just don't see us as that safe.
But hopefully I'm wrong
And even more so, hopefully it doesn't need to be proven because we smash Creighton in two days
Same here. I am missing something.
We were on the bubble with 3 games to play, but we are a lock if we lose 2 out of those 3. Losing 2 of 3 moves you down, not up.
Comment on 7th seed.
It has to be Xavier. After head to head, you compare records against the top team/teams in the BE and move down until one team has an advantage.
If MU involved in any 9-9 head2head miniconf with X. Then X is the 7 seed because everyone split who could be 9-9 except PR swept MU and MU swept X and X swept .... nobody. So MU would be X's undoing if part of a 9-9 miniconf.
If MU wins and is not part of an X 9-9 mini conf then the head2head is inconclusive ... all split (X/SH/PR) no matter who it is. So who has the best record against nova of the possible 9-9's? Nobody, it's nova and MU and Butler are only ones who beat them. Butler next. Interesting X lost twice to BT and PR split so X can't finish ahead of PR. If SH is 9-9 then they would have lost their last game to BT and have two losses also. So on we go...now it's a race between X and SH.
Their record against the 10-8's would include MU,CR, and maybe PR.
This is where MU is X's downfall again. SH split with all of the possible 10-8s but X has that pesky sweep at the hands of MU.
So X is 7 and will play DePaul twice...very little chance for redemption. I think they are out of the big dance unless the win the next 3.
Quote from: brandx on March 02, 2017, 06:46:20 PM
Same here. I am missing something.
We were on the bubble with 3 games to play, but we are a lock if we lose 2 out of those 3. Losing 2 of 3 moves you down, not up.
Not necessarily since the win is a top 30 win and the losses would be "good losses" while other teams could also lose.
But yeah, it certainly isn't something that screams "lock".
If I were bet I'd actually say I think people are right saying we'd be in. But it's not a gurantee
Quote from: PFsHeroes32 on March 02, 2017, 07:09:04 PM
Not necessarily since the win is a top 30 win and the losses would be "good losses" while other teams could also lose.
But yeah, it certainly isn't something that screams "lock".
If I were bet I'd actually say I think people are right saying we'd be in. But it's not a gurantee
I don't think we are a lock yet, but I'd say we are 90%. Some of this has to do with the bubble teams (especially ACC) falling off and failing to get big wins. I personally think we are better off than where Lunardi/Palm have us. However, I don't want to say lock until we are immune to bid stealers.
A difference this year is we have some evidence from the committee based on the Top-16. I think what they seemed to value is very good for us. Our top 50 wins stand out compared to the surrounding teams.
Here's my problem...and I have said this before..I do not trust the committee and never will. Sure, most of MU's metrics look good, and even maybe history of numbers favor MU...but what we don't know is what the committee thinks of MU as far as the eye test goes. All it takes is one committee member for example to think they aren't worthy and get others on board with that belief. Maybe this is a committee that decided they want to take more mid majors this year, and leave some majors(Like MU) out for reasons only known to them. I mean really, what would be the fallout for them if something like that happened?? Nothing in reality. People would complain and piss and moan(like everyone does every year about teams being left out), but once the tourney started, it would mostly be forgotten, and besides, once it's set there's nothing can be done about it..so sure maybe people would always remember this committee as the one that screwed team X and Team Y and team Z when it was pretty obvious. And all it would take is one of those teams to make a run, and in their minds they are then justified.
I'm just saying...We just don't know for 100% certain what they are thinking about MU.
14** teams for 10 spots. You can cross Houston off that list.
Only 1 top 50 win.
0-4 vs the only two tournament teams in the AAC. They needed a Cincy win tonight to even be in the conversation - but they're losing by 25 with 9 minutes left.
Quote from: muguru on March 02, 2017, 07:28:56 PM
Here's my problem...and I have said this before..I do not trust the committee and never will. Sure, most of MU's metrics look good, and even maybe history of numbers favor MU...but what we don't know is what the committee thinks of MU as far as the eye test goes. All it takes is one committee member for example to think they aren't worthy and get others on board with that belief. Maybe this is a committee that decided they want to take more mid majors this year, and leave some majors(Like MU) out for reasons only known to them. I mean really, what would be the fallout for them if something like that happened?? Nothing in reality. People would complain and piss and moan(like everyone does every year about teams being left out), but once the tourney started, it would mostly be forgotten, and besides, once it's set there's nothing can be done about it..so sure maybe people would always remember this committee as the one that screwed team X and Team Y and team Z when it was pretty obvious. And all it would take is one of those teams to make a run, and in their minds they are then justified.
I'm just saying...We just don't know for 100% certain what they are thinking about MU.
Exactly where i am. The nova win is a great hold card tho
Oh to be 1-3 against butler n provi right now, woulda, coulda, shoulda been 4-0
Quote from: muguru on March 02, 2017, 07:28:56 PM
Here's my problem...and I have said this before..I do not trust the committee and never will. Sure, most of MU's metrics look good, and even maybe history of numbers favor MU...but what we don't know is what the committee thinks of MU as far as the eye test goes. All it takes is one committee member for example to think they aren't worthy and get others on board with that belief. Maybe this is a committee that decided they want to take more mid majors this year, and leave some majors(Like MU) out for reasons only known to them. I mean really, what would be the fallout for them if something like that happened?? Nothing in reality. People would complain and piss and moan(like everyone does every year about teams being left out), but once the tourney started, it would mostly be forgotten, and besides, once it's set there's nothing can be done about it..so sure maybe people would always remember this committee as the one that screwed team X and Team Y and team Z when it was pretty obvious. And all it would take is one of those teams to make a run, and in their minds they are then justified.
I'm just saying...We just don't know for 100% certain what they are thinking about MU.
The 10 person committee has:
1. Creighton's AD
2. Duke's AD
The committee begins meeting in NYC next Tuesday. So Creighton's last game will have been against MU. Not to mention they will be in NYC for a potential Big East tournament game between the two teams.. Plenty of opportunity to make a good impression, if that 103 point performance from earlier this season hasn't already.
And Dukies love their own. Did you guys know that Wojo used to slap the floor when he was a player at Duke? I heard that on TV once.
Quote from: muguru on March 02, 2017, 07:28:56 PM
Here's my problem...and I have said this before..I do not trust the committee and never will. Sure, most of MU's metrics look good, and even maybe history of numbers favor MU...but what we don't know is what the committee thinks of MU as far as the eye test goes. All it takes is one committee member for example to think they aren't worthy and get others on board with that belief. Maybe this is a committee that decided they want to take more mid majors this year, and leave some majors(Like MU) out for reasons only known to them. I mean really, what would be the fallout for them if something like that happened?? Nothing in reality. People would complain and piss and moan(like everyone does every year about teams being left out), but once the tourney started, it would mostly be forgotten, and besides, once it's set there's nothing can be done about it..so sure maybe people would always remember this committee as the one that screwed team X and Team Y and team Z when it was pretty obvious. And all it would take is one of those teams to make a run, and in their minds they are then justified.
I'm just saying...We just don't know for 100% certain what they are thinking about MU.
One things I'll say regarding this is
While we don't know how they view us, I think eye test favors us. Pretty much anyone who references that says we pass it.
Quote from: brandx on March 02, 2017, 06:46:20 PM
Same here. I am missing something.
We were on the bubble with 3 games to play, but we are a lock if we lose 2 out of those 3. Losing 2 of 3 moves you down, not up.
That's some world class analysis right there
Ah...for the mole
(https://weredogpeople.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/famousmoles-page0011.png)
Quote from: MUBigDance on March 02, 2017, 07:05:03 PM
Comment on 7th seed.
It has to be Xavier. After head to head, you compare records against the top team/teams in the BE and move down until one team has an advantage.
If MU involved in any 9-9 head2head miniconf with X. Then X is the 7 seed because everyone split who could be 9-9 except PR swept MU and MU swept X and X swept .... nobody. So MU would be X's undoing if part of a 9-9 miniconf.
If MU wins and is not part of an X 9-9 mini conf then the head2head is inconclusive ... all split (X/SH/PR) no matter who it is. So who has the best record against nova of the possible 9-9's? Nobody, it's nova and MU and Butler are only ones who beat them. Butler next. Interesting X lost twice to BT and PR split so X can't finish ahead of PR. If SH is 9-9 then they would have lost their last game to BT and have two losses also. So on we go...now it's a race between X and SH.
Their record against the 10-8's would include MU,CR, and maybe PR.
This is where MU is X's downfall again. SH split with all of the possible 10-8s but X has that pesky sweep at the hands of MU.
So X is 7 and will play DePaul twice...very little chance for redemption. I think they are out of the big dance unless the win the next 3.
I don't think X is locked into the 7. If X, MU, and PC win but SH loses, I think X finishes 6 and SH finishes 7.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 02, 2017, 08:37:50 PM
I don't think X is locked into the 7. If X, MU, and PC win but SH loses, I think X finishes 6 and SH finishes 7.
That's not the impression Coach Mack gives.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 02, 2017, 08:37:50 PM
I don't think X is locked into the 7. If X, MU, and PC win but SH loses, I think X finishes 6 and SH finishes 7.
I think in that scenario with X and SHU tied at 9-9, the tie breaker drops all the way to MU in 4th, which SHU beats X. They will have both been swept by Nova and Butler, and split with PC.
I think.
Iowa just won at Wisconsin. I do not think it puts Iowa in at this point, but they are moving closer.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on March 02, 2017, 08:16:47 PM
Ah...for the mole
(https://weredogpeople.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/famousmoles-page0011.png)
Melanoma-niac?
Quote from: JamilJaeJamailJrJuan on March 02, 2017, 08:48:00 PM
I think in that scenario with X and SHU tied at 9-9, the tie breaker drops all the way to MU in 4th, which SHU beats X. They will have both been swept by Nova and Butler, and split with PC.
I think.
You know what, you are right. Honestly, was just going down the list and thought well X's best win is @Creighton that's better than Hall's best win.....but technically under that scenario we are a better win!
Quote from: bilsu on March 02, 2017, 10:05:50 PM
Iowa just won at Wisconsin. I do not think it puts Iowa in at this point, but they are moving closer.
They were dead by the side of the road weeks ago.
California on the other hand is going the opposite direction. Getting stomped by 20 points in Salt Lake right now, on their way to their 4th L in 5.
Lunardi had them in his last 4 in, but there's a good chance they drop out after this game. And they still have a tough road contest at Colorado this weekend. These are the kind of games that really don't help the resume, but can certainly knock you out of the conversation.
Looks very likely that the the PAC-12 gets only 4 bids - and could get only 3 depending on how USC finishes, and how the conference tournament goes. PAC12 had only 4 two years ago. And the SEC has had only 3 bids in 2 of the last 3 years -- so it wouldn't be shocking.
Iowa will get a bid if they win the B1G tournament, and only then. There are no elite teams in the Big 10, so upsetting Purdue (who I really like, in all transparency) and Wisconsin are not as impressive as it sounds on paper. The Big 10 has been atrocious this year.
All of that being said, let's not take anything away from how much fun it is to watch the Badgers' tailspin.
Quote from: amen426 on March 02, 2017, 11:23:23 PM
California on the other hand is going the opposite direction. Getting stomped by 20 points in Salt Lake right now, on their way to their 4th L in 5.
Lunardi had them in his last 4 in, but there's a good chance they drop out after this game. And they still have a tough road contest at Colorado this weekend. These are the kind of games that really don't help the resume, but can certainly knock you out of the conversation.
It certainly is interesting to see the runner up for Wojo's job looking up at him in year three despite being handed a much better starting point.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on March 02, 2017, 11:31:19 PM
It certainly is interesting to see the runner up for Wojo's job looking up at him in year three despite being handed a much better starting point.
The shocking part to me is the number of jobs he's rumored for in this Pete Thamel column:
http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2017/02/23/nc-state-indiana-coaching-carousel (http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2017/02/23/nc-state-indiana-coaching-carousel)
Quote from: RJax55 on March 02, 2017, 11:34:58 PM
The shocking part to me is the number of jobs he's rumored for in this Pete Thamel column:
http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2017/02/23/nc-state-indiana-coaching-carousel (http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2017/02/23/nc-state-indiana-coaching-carousel)
Damn, he says Groce being fired is a foregone conclusion. They are in the first four out! I'd have a hard time seeing him get fried if he manages to sneak Illinois in.