Board

Lonergan Midterm Grade = C-
Replies: 49

5/25/2013 6:58:52 AM
Just Killing Time

Garcia-Ruiz wrote me back, still waiting on Ombudsman
Replies: 33

5/25/2013 12:04:24 AM
cagwu

gwhoops.com Digest - 5/24/2013
Replies: 0

5/24/2013 10:51:20 PM
herve

The "Wink and Nod Club " ---A Parody
Replies: 23

5/24/2013 7:20:27 PM
Cutis

Gregg Ritchie Named Atlantic 10 Baseball Coach of the Year
Replies: 2

5/24/2013 12:32:32 PM
GWSB '11

Calling all Colonials (just got this email)
Replies: 9

5/24/2013 12:06:11 PM
NJ Colonial

The Roster As We Know It.
Replies: 2

5/24/2013 6:57:06 AM
Chicago Colonial

The Roster As We Know It.
Replies: 3

5/23/2013 11:29:33 PM
Chicago Colonial

gwhoops.com Digest - 5/23/2013
Replies: 0

5/23/2013 10:51:20 PM
herve

RECRUIT: NANA FOULLAND
Replies: 3

5/23/2013 10:36:35 PM
BM

Kenner League
Replies: 6

5/23/2013 6:28:46 PM
Tuna Can

RECRUIT: BONZIE COLSON
Replies: 9

5/23/2013 2:37:05 PM
BM

GW vs Maryland in BB&T
Replies: 49

5/23/2013 11:39:30 AM
BM

Kromah to transfer
Replies: 152

5/23/2013 6:14:17 AM
Abe

gwhoops.com Digest - 5/22/2013
Replies: 0

5/22/2013 10:51:23 PM
herve

New Court Design
Replies: 33

5/22/2013 1:35:02 PM
rocket

OT: Tragedy in Potomac
Replies: 1

5/22/2013 9:54:45 AM
MOCO Observer

gwhoops.com Digest - 5/21/2013
Replies: 0

5/21/2013 10:56:58 PM
herve

Talk about bad p.r.
Replies: 4

5/21/2013 5:58:17 PM
GW Alum Abroad

Love it
Replies: 4

5/21/2013 5:52:46 PM
ELJ

OT: Tragedy in Potomac
Replies: 0

5/21/2013 4:19:17 PM
MOCO Observer

Is today the last day
Replies: 1

5/21/2013 3:00:57 PM
GWSB '11

RECRUIT: CJ KEYSER
Replies: 3

5/21/2013 10:02:29 AM
BM

RECRUIT: MARTIN GEBEN
Replies: 38

5/21/2013 9:52:12 AM
Florida Colonial

RECRUIT: MIKAL BRIDGES
Replies: 6

5/21/2013 9:48:11 AM
Florida Colonial

Who is on the team as of NOW?
Replies: 1

5/21/2013 9:30:54 AM
Old Prof

RECRUIT: JON DAVIS
Replies: 2

5/21/2013 12:57:02 AM
BM

Mikic graduates in 3 years (via @gw_mbb twitter)
Replies: 10

5/21/2013 12:55:13 AM
cagwu

gwhoops.com Digest - 5/20/2013
Replies: 0

5/20/2013 10:54:32 PM
herve

Official college football smack-talking thread
Replies: 587

5/20/2013 4:34:37 PM
GW Alum Abroad

David Pellom to Memphis
Replies: 44

5/20/2013 12:30:10 PM
donte

gwhoops.com Digest - 5/19/2013
Replies: 0

5/19/2013 10:51:29 PM
herve

RECRUIT: NICK GRIFFIN
Replies: 101

5/19/2013 10:11:43 PM
CPots

RECRUIT: BYRON HAWKINS
Replies: 11

5/19/2013 1:05:54 PM
herve

Oct 4, 2014
Replies: 7

5/19/2013 10:22:56 AM
Tuna Can

gwhoops.com Digest - 5/18/2013
Replies: 0

5/18/2013 10:51:22 PM
herve

Superstar added to Lonergan's facebook!
Replies: 3

5/18/2013 8:51:20 PM
Martiniboy

Why Next Year Is Pretty Darn Critical
Replies: 23

5/18/2013 6:04:37 PM
The MV

OT: Bo Jackson
Replies: 6

5/18/2013 5:41:01 PM
herve

RECRUIT: DEVIN ROBINSON
Replies: 6

5/18/2013 2:34:02 PM
BM

another possible transfer (immediately eligible)
Replies: 37

5/18/2013 12:33:07 PM
Florida Colonial

gwhoops.com Digest - 5/17/2013
Replies: 0

5/17/2013 10:51:22 PM
herve

OOC Schedule Thread
Replies: 14

5/17/2013 12:40:55 PM
BM

gwhoops.com Digest - 5/16/2013
Replies: 0

5/16/2013 10:51:36 PM
herve

Several GW Women Get Another Year to Play
Replies: 5

5/16/2013 5:22:16 PM
ziik

George makes some headlines
Replies: 2

5/16/2013 11:05:09 AM
BM

Big George trying to get into Captain America 2
Replies: 0

5/16/2013 11:03:59 AM
squid

SJT -- Not a Bad Guy at All
Replies: 48

5/16/2013 10:51:33 AM
Tuna Can

Quick Question: Outstanding Offers
Replies: 7

5/16/2013 10:19:58 AM
wax daddy

what we know so far
Replies: 5

5/16/2013 8:40:31 AM
formerly boston pops

gwhoops.com Digest - 5/15/2013
Replies: 0

5/15/2013 10:51:58 PM
herve

could they boot us out of barclays?
Replies: 5

5/15/2013 10:03:01 PM
tk

RECRUIT: ANTON WATERS
Replies: 4

5/15/2013 9:37:20 AM
BM

gwhoops.com Digest - 5/14/2013
Replies: 0

5/14/2013 10:51:35 PM
herve

RECRUIT: TYLER NELSON
Replies: 8

5/14/2013 9:18:04 PM
BM

RECRUIT: DOMINIQUE BULL
Replies: 80

5/14/2013 4:47:57 PM
BM

Who is Lionel Coleman
Replies: 1

5/14/2013 4:47:43 PM
Phil_Raw_

SJT and Left Coast
Replies: 0

5/14/2013 10:36:58 AM
kdb sand diego

gwhoops.com Digest - 5/13/2013
Replies: 0

5/13/2013 10:52:29 PM
herve

RECRUIT: SANDY COHEN
Replies: 34

5/13/2013 9:25:10 PM
Florida Colonial

RECRUIT: ANTHONY SWAN
Replies: 0

5/13/2013 4:51:10 PM
GCLY89

Rutgers Can't Catch a Break ...
Replies: 12

5/13/2013 4:41:57 PM
The Eagle Has Landed

RYAN MCCOY
Replies: 58

5/13/2013 4:16:10 PM
ATL Colonial

RECRUIT: RYAN LUTHER
Replies: 1

5/13/2013 2:17:37 PM
BM

for those of you looking for new digs....
Replies: 2

5/13/2013 12:59:03 PM
herve

RECRUIT: MIKE WILLIAMS
Replies: 7

5/13/2013 9:57:07 AM
BM

New Team
Replies: 0

5/13/2013 8:37:54 AM
Spotter

gwhoops.com Digest - 5/12/2013
Replies: 0

5/12/2013 10:51:35 PM
herve

Happy Mother's Day-Mrs. Tallent,
Replies: 2

5/12/2013 10:19:02 PM
ziik

UVA Transfer-Paul Jesperson
Replies: 16

5/12/2013 9:54:08 PM
bam

"RECRUITS" tab currently broken, but NOTHING has been lost. will fix ASAP. sorry. nt
Replies: 6

5/12/2013 7:34:40 PM
herve

It's Lonergan
Replies: 99

5/11/2013 11:44:39 PM


gwhoops.com Digest - 5/11/2013
Replies: 0

5/11/2013 10:51:36 PM
herve

GW about to Rope in another A10 Sport--Now back to your regularly scheduled angst
Replies: 17

5/11/2013 4:50:39 PM
Tuna Can

gwhoops.com Digest - 5/10/2013
Replies: 0

5/10/2013 10:51:32 PM
herve

RECRUIT: ISIAH TRIPP
Replies: 5

5/10/2013 2:21:41 PM
BM

RECRUIT: JAMAL ROBINSON
Replies: 5

5/10/2013 8:43:41 AM
BM

gwhoops.com Digest - 5/9/2013
Replies: 0

5/9/2013 10:51:28 PM
herve

Ryan McCoy from Manhattan?
Replies: 0

5/9/2013 4:45:47 PM
Steven

Maurice Creek transferring from Indiana
Replies: 26

5/9/2013 4:15:39 PM
GCLY89

RECRUIT: ALSTON THOMPSON
Replies: 0

5/9/2013 10:16:06 AM
BM

RECRUIT: TRE CAMPBELL
Replies: 18

5/9/2013 9:02:37 AM
BM

Davidson to the A-10
Replies: 20

5/9/2013 6:17:07 AM
gonzo

gwhoops.com Digest - 5/8/2013
Replies: 0

5/8/2013 10:52:06 PM
herve

Lonergan In Lithuania
Replies: 52

5/8/2013 5:16:27 PM
Don't Quote Me

Does the name Marcus Joseph ring a bell?
Replies: 6

5/8/2013 12:29:26 AM
GW0811

gwhoops.com Digest - 5/7/2013
Replies: 0

5/7/2013 10:51:27 PM
herve

Another recruit lost
Replies: 3

5/7/2013 6:38:50 PM
Florida Colonial

Where Winners Migrate?
Replies: 0

5/7/2013 2:42:20 PM
Dootie Bubble

Another recruit lost
Replies: 6

5/7/2013 1:44:12 PM
Florida Colonial

Taking all the fun and mystery out of Herve's other passion...
Replies: 7

5/7/2013 1:27:37 PM
FLA

D-league action
Replies: 4

5/7/2013 1:00:27 PM
The MV

Kevin Larsen's military service
Replies: 9

5/7/2013 8:41:37 AM
GW0811

gwhoops.com Digest - 5/6/2013
Replies: 0

5/6/2013 10:52:14 PM
herve

RECRUIT: MAURICE CREEK
Replies: 13

5/6/2013 5:27:58 PM
BM

gwhoops.com Digest - 5/5/2013
Replies: 0

5/5/2013 10:52:15 PM
herve

I. Am. So. Shocked.
Replies: 1

5/5/2013 7:40:58 PM
herve

Travon Landry
Replies: 1

5/5/2013 6:29:00 PM
Tennessee Colonial

RECRUIT: JJ EPPS
Replies: 4

5/5/2013 7:56:04 AM
BM

Tweet About Larsen
Replies: 1

5/5/2013 7:15:27 AM
CT Colonial

gwhoops.com Digest - 5/4/2013
Replies: 0

5/4/2013 10:51:35 PM
herve

RECRUIT: JUSTIN EDWARDS
Replies: 9

5/4/2013 3:39:49 PM
BM

gwhoops.com Digest - 5/3/2013
Replies: 0

5/3/2013 10:52:01 PM
herve

Does Lonergan...???
Replies: 6

5/3/2013 7:58:13 PM
GDUB4

RECRUIT: JULIAN DEBOSE
Replies: 11

5/3/2013 5:49:47 PM
BM

Real Basketball Shit--BM's guard minute projections on a Creek signing and no others
Replies: 15

5/3/2013 2:11:40 PM
Tuna Can

RECRUIT: PAUL JORGENSEN
Replies: 9

5/3/2013 10:22:20 AM
Florida Colonial

gwhoops.com Digest - 5/2/2013
Replies: 0

5/2/2013 10:51:33 PM
herve

gwhoops.com Digest - 5/1/2013
Replies: 0

5/1/2013 10:51:34 PM
herve

Eli Carter gets his release from Rutgers
Replies: 9

5/1/2013 8:06:29 PM
DEA

RECRUIT: GABE LEVIN
Replies: 74

5/1/2013 6:43:28 PM
BM

Transfer list
Replies: 16

5/1/2013 3:33:59 PM
BM

GW Med School (OT)
Replies: 3

5/1/2013 1:04:46 PM
NJ Colonial

ML should stop off in Russia and pick up a new assistant
Replies: 0

5/1/2013 12:39:40 PM
george the hippo hunter

RECRUIT: ROBERT CARTWRIGHT
Replies: 2

5/1/2013 8:57:38 AM
mike K

Mark Schlabach
Replies: 1

5/1/2013 3:45:17 AM
Dootie Bubble

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/30/2013
Replies: 0

4/30/2013 10:51:25 PM
herve

RECRUIT: CHANCELLOR BARNARD
Replies: 2

4/30/2013 9:15:30 AM
BM

RECRUIT: LENNARD FREEMAN
Replies: 40

4/30/2013 7:36:37 AM
Mike K

Ms. Traynor-In her Own Words
Replies: 17

4/30/2013 4:48:51 AM
ziik

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/29/2013
Replies: 0

4/29/2013 10:52:55 PM
herve

RECRUIT: BRADY ELLINGSON
Replies: 2

4/29/2013 8:22:36 PM
Florida Colonial

Roster for next season on 4/26 (this thread is actually about the NY Jets)
Replies: 25

4/29/2013 4:05:24 PM
GDub4

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/28/2013
Replies: 0

4/28/2013 10:53:18 PM
herve

Men's Tennis Tied 3-3 in A-10 Finals
Replies: 2

4/28/2013 1:33:31 PM
the sons of liberty

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/27/2013
Replies: 0

4/27/2013 10:51:29 PM
herve

EYBL
Replies: 0

4/27/2013 11:29:07 AM
GW Fan

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/26/2013
Replies: 0

4/26/2013 10:51:35 PM
herve

International Assistant Coach
Replies: 4

4/26/2013 8:16:22 PM
LA Fan

"George Mason president delivers new vision" (WaPo)
Replies: 1

4/26/2013 5:05:15 PM
herve

RECRUIT: MARQUIS WRIGHT
Replies: 35

4/26/2013 2:20:19 PM
BM

RECRUIT: MIGUEL CARTAGENA
Replies: 63

4/26/2013 11:23:07 AM
JamonRye

RECRUIT: LAVON LONG
Replies: 13

4/26/2013 10:20:35 AM
BM

Hope you are happy with your purchase Herve!
Replies: 1

4/26/2013 7:07:31 AM
GW Alum Abroad

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/25/2013
Replies: 0

4/25/2013 10:51:32 PM
herve

International Assistant Coach
Replies: 0

4/25/2013 3:07:12 PM
LA Fan

Jabari Hinds WVA
Replies: 2

4/25/2013 11:15:59 AM
DEA

Why did we honor David pellom as a graduating senior
Replies: 8

4/25/2013 9:35:01 AM
Neil

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/24/2013
Replies: 0

4/24/2013 10:51:27 PM
herve

RECRUIT: RASHARD KELLY
Replies: 8

4/24/2013 8:37:48 PM
Florida Colonial

Give mike the benefit. He is making close to president knapp. He will not f@@k it up like kh did.
Replies: 5

4/24/2013 8:14:18 PM
Neil

10-21
Replies: 7

4/24/2013 1:13:07 PM
What?

30 second shot clock?
Replies: 9

4/24/2013 9:26:56 AM
GW Fan

RECRUIT: ERIC CARTER
Replies: 0

4/24/2013 8:56:58 AM
BM

another 1 that got away-Mark Williams
Replies: 3

4/24/2013 5:09:44 AM
GDUB4

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/23/2013
Replies: 0

4/23/2013 10:51:24 PM
herve

RECRUIT: SANDY COHEN
Replies: 0

4/23/2013 9:15:06 PM
Florida Colonial

Cap Classic Rosters
Replies: 4

4/23/2013 8:42:09 PM
BM

Dooley to Florida Gulf Coast
Replies: 37

4/23/2013 10:30:55 AM
Poog

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/22/2013
Replies: 0

4/22/2013 10:52:28 PM
herve

The Non Nigel Johnson thread
Replies: 12

4/22/2013 10:03:47 PM
Florida Colonial

Phil Hochberg
Replies: 9

4/22/2013 5:30:23 PM
BM

Gun Control(OT)
Replies: 59

4/22/2013 9:10:47 AM
Steven

GW Baseball vs Fordham
Replies: 3

4/21/2013 11:12:02 PM
the sons of liberty

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/21/2013
Replies: 0

4/21/2013 10:51:23 PM
herve

RECRUIT: EVAN TAYLOR
Replies: 1

4/21/2013 10:53:01 AM
Mike K

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/20/2013
Replies: 0

4/20/2013 10:53:46 PM
herve

Official NLI announcement
Replies: 22

4/20/2013 7:53:38 PM
BM

RECRUIT: ANDRE WALKER
Replies: 4

4/20/2013 8:23:06 AM
BM

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/19/2013
Replies: 0

4/19/2013 10:54:11 PM
herve

RECRUIT: JOSH HEARLIHY
Replies: 21

4/19/2013 6:27:49 PM
BM

RECRUIT: ASHLEY WILLIAMS
Replies: 6

4/19/2013 5:40:55 PM
BM

Davidson on the verge of joining A-10
Replies: 20

4/19/2013 11:46:08 AM
GCLY89

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/18/2013
Replies: 0

4/18/2013 10:55:01 PM
herve

How many scholarships are left to give out?
Replies: 15

4/18/2013 12:57:59 PM
NewGWFan

For You TT "Haters"
Replies: 8

4/18/2013 12:48:47 PM
ziik

RECRUIT: Jerome Seagars
Replies: 39

4/18/2013 12:33:21 PM
BM

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/17/2013
Replies: 0

4/17/2013 11:40:22 PM
herve

Sutton Submits Name for Vacant FL Gulf Coast Head Job
Replies: 29

4/17/2013 8:00:08 PM
herve

Quevyn Winters and 4 others leaving Duquesne
Replies: 4

4/17/2013 3:52:49 PM
Free Quebec

If it Quacks Like a Duck ... (OT)
Replies: 2

4/17/2013 12:43:38 PM
Eugene

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/16/2013
Replies: 0

4/16/2013 10:51:37 PM
herve

RECRUIT: MARK WILLIAMS
Replies: 16

4/16/2013 9:49:32 AM
CPots

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/15/2013
Replies: 0

4/15/2013 10:58:45 PM
herve

RECRUIT: ANTHONY PATE
Replies: 0

4/15/2013 9:48:29 AM
BM

Recruit coming this weekend
Replies: 57

4/15/2013 2:48:11 AM
DEA

GW Washington Post Story
Replies: 19

4/15/2013 2:42:54 AM
LA Fan

More of This!
Replies: 1

4/15/2013 1:01:30 AM
BM

welcome Davidson!
Replies: 0

4/15/2013 12:57:39 AM
NJ Colonial

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/14/2013
Replies: 0

4/14/2013 10:57:07 PM
herve

Rutgers
Replies: 8

4/14/2013 2:18:37 PM
BM

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/13/2013
Replies: 0

4/13/2013 10:53:00 PM
herve

A possible guard target/transfer
Replies: 3

4/13/2013 8:04:03 PM
Florida Colonial

Hopefully We Will Get Some Recruiting News From This.
Replies: 0

4/13/2013 11:32:48 AM
Mike K

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/12/2013
Replies: 0

4/12/2013 10:53:43 PM
herve

Stadium Journey review of the Smith Center
Replies: 10

4/12/2013 1:19:17 PM
Long Suffering Fan

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/11/2013
Replies: 0

4/11/2013 10:53:47 PM
herve

Questions That Must Be Asked ...
Replies: 55

4/11/2013 10:22:20 AM
CBO

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/10/2013
Replies: 0

4/10/2013 10:55:52 PM
herve

Cross Jon Severe off the list
Replies: 2

4/10/2013 12:39:20 PM
GW21

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/9/2013
Replies: 0

4/9/2013 10:51:26 PM
herve

OT--Who Wins? Who Cares?
Replies: 7

4/9/2013 8:27:23 PM
ziik

coaching changes 2013
Replies: 0

4/9/2013 4:04:18 PM
GWSB '11

VCU pre-season #14
Replies: 2

4/9/2013 1:54:59 PM
herve

Play nice
Replies: 0

4/9/2013 11:54:08 AM
Old Prof

Who am I?
Replies: 8

4/9/2013 9:31:33 AM
Long Suffering Fan

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/8/2013
Replies: 0

4/8/2013 10:55:27 PM
herve

Did you all know this?
Replies: 13

4/8/2013 6:37:07 PM
BACCAS92

Hobbs & Mid-Major Coaches
Replies: 7

4/8/2013 10:45:31 AM
Wax Daddy

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/7/2013
Replies: 0

4/7/2013 10:51:46 PM
herve

Maybe we will recruit JUCOs
Replies: 5

4/7/2013 11:52:56 AM
Florida Colonial

Nick Griffin Third Team All-Met
Replies: 13

4/7/2013 10:00:05 AM
Yinka dont Stinka

Honestly! I can't leave the country for one second without you guys messing everything up! nt
Replies: 3

4/7/2013 8:13:40 AM
herve

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/6/2013
Replies: 0

4/6/2013 10:51:09 PM
herve

Maybe we will recruit JUCOs
Replies: 0

4/6/2013 7:32:02 AM
Florida Colonial

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/5/2013
Replies: 0

4/5/2013 10:53:17 PM
herve

Here's a good upper: Garino interview
Replies: 5

4/5/2013 4:14:31 AM
BM

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/4/2013
Replies: 0

4/4/2013 10:51:09 PM
herve

Lonergan got what he wanted
Replies: 69

4/4/2013 10:34:12 PM
Knew this was coming

Lehman with the Save
Replies: 0

4/4/2013 10:07:15 PM
Poog

RECRUIT: THERENCE MAYIMBA
Replies: 5

4/4/2013 9:26:39 PM
CPots

Backup Point Guard
Replies: 29

4/4/2013 7:27:29 PM
bobo

Hoping the worst is behind us
Replies: 7

4/4/2013 2:56:07 PM
NewGWFan

Jamail JOnes
Replies: 4

4/4/2013 12:26:29 AM
DEA

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/3/2013
Replies: 0

4/3/2013 10:52:25 PM
herve

RECRUIT: JORDAN ABDURRAOOF
Replies: 9

4/3/2013 8:13:58 PM
Mike K

Random but infuriating
Replies: 9

4/3/2013 5:20:33 PM
Steven

Sounds weird but
Replies: 23

4/3/2013 4:43:11 PM
DEA

American University
Replies: 2

4/3/2013 3:20:41 PM
NewGWFan

Rutgers' fires their basketball coach
Replies: 2

4/3/2013 12:06:57 PM
neil

Some Good News Today [Baseball] PART II
Replies: 2

4/3/2013 9:55:35 AM
CJS Fan

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/2/2013
Replies: 0

4/2/2013 10:51:07 PM
herve

Lonergan friend headed to Siena
Replies: 5

4/2/2013 7:58:15 PM
Poog

Status heading into Spring Signing
Replies: 13

4/2/2013 11:10:08 AM
GDUB4

gwhoops.com Digest - 4/1/2013
Replies: 0

4/1/2013 10:51:46 PM
herve

scam or legit? (OT)
Replies: 2

4/1/2013 6:57:25 PM
GW Alum Abroad

Urban problems
Replies: 9

4/1/2013 6:07:11 PM
Dootie Bubble

gwhoops.com Digest - 3/31/2013
Replies: 0

3/31/2013 10:51:34 PM
herve

Next Year's Schedule
3/31/2006 5:47:00 AM
Poster: Dream Game vs. Duke

Other than VA Tech and the other BB & T game and our in-conference schedule, anyone know about other possible games?  When does  the schedule come out?


3/19/2006 7:31:00 AM
Poster: HERVE

You've got a long, dry wait now my friend. GW's schedule is more mysterious than Salinger's net book-signing...with Jandek providing the opening-act. You'll get small pieces of info starting around late July, but nothing official until October.


3/19/2006 7:41:00 AM
Poster: Rangwx

Don't be so sure there's another BB&T game, either.  I would be surprised if it returned to a two-day event.


3/19/2006 7:58:00 AM
Poster: SpinDr

The schedule has to have stronger teams. the year the St. Joe's had its run, it played Gonzaga, ODU, Penn, BC and Cal.  GW will have to be willing to take some road games that end up at 2 for 1's or play some of the less glamourous teams (Wisc. Milw) for home and away games. Norfolf State and St. Francis are not going to get them anywhere at the end of the day. The league needs to make certain that all schools play 2 teams in the top 50 and no teams in the 270 plus range (Morgan State and Stony Brook).


3/19/2006 8:41:00 AM
Poster: FREDD

No reason not to play AU, Mason, Navy and Howard, if we are going to play the MEAC.

But I think it will be like last year with home and the road reversed



3/19/2006 10:21:00 AM
Poster: GDUBBY

How do you guys already know we play va tech, I can' find anything on net years schedule


3/19/2006 10:27:00 AM
Poster: CJS-fan

I agree with FREDD.  We should also play more CAA teams.  How about the Missouri Valley Conference?  How about Conference USA (we can pass on Houston) or even Bucknell, Lafayette, or Colgate?



3/19/2006 11:13:00 AM
Poster: Alumnus

Gary should be begging to play us in the BB&T.  Isn't that the message the committee sent him?  He's still whining about being dumped into the NIT, then he couldn't even beat a low major on his own court.  Tsk tsk.


3/19/2006 11:26:00 AM
Poster: ZIIK

The BB&T will consist of two double-headers, instead of a tourney format. GW-Maryland-Notre Dame are in. Look for a Big 10 opponent to join them.  Despite this year's schedule, I don't think KH  is a man to avoid challenges. It will be interesting to see who he wants to play, but I think Florida International and BU are locks to be on the schedule--their student bodies and academics approimate those of GW, and they have been loyal opponents.  Marshall should owe GW a game, and GW owes Michigan State a game from the BB&T of 2 years ago. That's 6 games, right there.


3/19/2006 12:07:00 PM
Poster: GC

Do we think Stony Brook was just a ONE time thing b/c of Pikiell?  It was nice to see him come back, but obviously does not help us much.

Are we the only team that keeps the BB&T together.  In other words, would it just dissolve if we ever decided to go to Hawaii or Alaska for those tourneys?



3/19/2006 12:33:00 PM
Poster: GW ALUM ABROAD

We have discussed this before. BB&T will be one or two games. There is the return trip at Mich St for their BB&T appearance two years ago that couldn't be worked out this year. One would epect Marshall to come to town. If the series continues, there would be a game at FIU (Miami in December is nothing to scoff at). A decent opponent at the Smith Center thanks to NC State changing the gamedate this season (as per Blue Seats). Figure three cupcakes (UMES and Norfolk St level teams) come to the Smith Center. That leaves you with three or four dates to play with. Hopefully net season some TV network will want to set up a made-for-TV matchup or two. We will know more in September.


3/19/2006 2:23:00 PM
Poster: Mentzinger

There's no shortage of good, possible games. There never has been. All that we need is to see the damage done to us by our schedule this year, and change our scheduling philosophy net year. One should easily follow the other.


3/19/2006 2:27:00 PM
Poster: RS

Ziik, there is no Big 10 team in the BB&T net year. It's just GW, Va Tech, Notre Dame and MD and I'm almost certain will be a one day affair.  GW vs Va Tech/MD vs ND.


3/19/2006 2:30:00 PM
Poster: Assumed Name

I've heard that the BB&T will be a 2 game event, but with a classic (not tournament) setup. 

That way, an additional ACC team with a strong local fan base could be added, but their would be no risk of them playing Maryland.

I think that the team will be Virginia Tech.



3/19/2006 2:39:00 PM
Poster: RS

Assumed Name - you  a bit late with your (correct) news.  The Hatchet already announced net year's format.  See my previous post for details.


3/19/2006 3:01:00 PM
Poster: ZIIK

Thanks for the line-up clarification, RS. But assumed says the BB&T will be a 2 day event, and you said he was correct. Are you sure it's just a one-day double-header? That would be unfortunate, but if so, we can set aside a visit to Deland Florida on the way back from Florida International.


3/19/2006 3:43:00 PM
Poster: class of 98

RS,

If the hatchet has already confirmed then why did you say this "I'm almost certain will be a one day affair."  That doesn't sound like confirmation of much of anything in terms of format.  Where is the Hatchet article?

Unless Gary is ducking us net year, he should be ok with a 2-day classic format involving power conference competition.



3/19/2006 4:32:00 PM
Poster: RS

Net year's tournament teams are in Jake Sherman's Hatchet Blog of March 17.  Gary Williams has said several times the past couple of years the tournnament was and is meant for national teams to play local teams, not local teams playing each other.  His comments plus the difficulty the BB&T has faced the past few years in getting national teams to play two games each in DC almost assuredly mean it is a one day format.


3/19/2006 5:23:00 PM
Poster: class of 98

Thanks RS, I hadn't seen that. 



3/20/2006 8:16:00 AM
Poster: GC

Oh yes, Jake Sherman has all the inside info and the final word on all things ncaa bball!  It's true!



3/20/2006 10:11:00 AM
Poster: class of 98

I'd imagine Marshall will be coming to the Smithy...unlikely that Huntington WV was a guarantee game for them.

FIU...who knows?   I think this was the back half of a home and home that started last year.



3/20/2006 10:31:00 AM
Poster: vingait

I figure that unless GW did not give home-and-homes to this year's lousy OOC opponents, net year's sched will be pretty rotten too.  St. Francis, FIU and Morgan State were all second games (played them in 04-05).  So I'm thinking we still owe Kennesaw St., Norfolk St. Boston U. UMES, Marshall and even Stonybrook a game.  No doubt we gave NC State a game without getting the return game.  Of the group, I only like BU and Marshall.  If we can, I'd dump the rest.  I know that's what the big programs do, and we've been screwed before, but the NCAA dropped a big stinky lesson on GW's doorstep.  Personally I'd rather see fewer home games vs. teams that we toy with and more away games against relatively good opponents (say, 100-200 RPI).  Until the NCAA starts giving bonus points for scoring margin, GW needs to do what ever it takes to schedule a better OOC sched.  The A-10 isn't going to become the ACC overnight.


3/20/2006 10:59:00 AM
Poster: Alumnus

Just upping the 3 MEAC games and St. Francis to CAA level or above would be a great start.  BU is usually a quality opponent with a good record.  If Gary's truly dropping us, he's tone deaf.  An annual game against us is just the kind of game the committee would give him props for, even if he loses, it's virtually free in terms of travel time and cost, and it gives people who can't get into his building a chance to see his team live.  Sad, very sad.



3/20/2006 11:17:00 AM
Poster: Dootie Bubble

I've emailed Billy Donovan and asked him to schedule a home and away with Hobbs.


3/20/2006 11:34:00 AM
Poster: Wooden Teeth

We've got to get Mason back onto our schedule - I'm pretty sure we've played them before under Larranaga's watch - given that both programs are on the rise, it's in both of their best interests to schedule a game.  I'm sure at some point we're going to have to go against Mason for recruits.  If we can't get a matchup w/ the other "George[town]" in DC, then we at least should be able to play another "George [Mason]" in the metro area. 

I know they have that ACC/Big Ten showdown in the fall in the past, what if they did some sort of A-10/CAA showdown?  A-10 and CAA seem to overlap a bit in terms of geography along the East Coast.  Take top 5 or 6 teams from each conference, have a home/away game amongst them!

Or we should just swap up Duquesne & St. Bonaventure straight up for 2 teams from CAA or some other comparable conference in the same area -- building cred for the A-10 starts at home, we need to get out Duquesne at a minimum.



3/20/2006 11:58:00 AM
Poster: Free Quebec

You know what, George Mason's AD was on the selection committee.  That means he personally played a role in screwing us on the seeding.  I don't know if he was the guy they assigned to track GW and report to them on how good we were, but definitely if it was him (and probably even if he just was on the selection committee), then I'm not that inclined to play them. 

Whether for petty regional rivalry/jealousy or just flat-out disrespect, that guy screwed us big time and I don't see why we should favor them with a game as long as he's there.

As far as I'm concerned, the burden is on him to show that he didn't screw GW over by giving us an 11 seed and two road games, one of which was against Duke 40 miles from their campus.


3/20/2006 12:06:00 PM
Poster: ZIIK

You may know the facts, FQ, but I really don't think any one selector could manipulate the seedings the way GW was affected. If so, there'd be simply no factual basis for saying the seedings were fair or reasonable. I tend to think there was a major international conspiration against GW instead.


3/20/2006 12:10:00 PM
Poster: Alumnus

FQ, you seem to be developing a paranoid streak.  Don't let me spoil your fun, but I don't think our schedule was a secret.  Where does principle fit into any of this?  Our AD was on the committee for years.  If he didn't pull some strings, maybe he's just too nice a guy for a school with big-time aspirations.  Even if Mason loses by 50 points to Wichita State, they're coming out of this as someone's heroes.  It would help us to play them, particularly net season without Lewis or Skinn.  Teeth, there's one comparable conference in the area -- the CAA.  The bottom teams aren't any better than the Bonnies.  The top teams have no reason to leave.  With Mason's success, the big story will be why didn't the committee take Hofstra too?  Who else is there?  The MAC?  Dull and geographically undesirable.  I know, maybe Mark Warner will intercede and get UVA and Tech to join the A-10 just for basketball.


3/20/2006 12:17:00 PM
Poster: NPR

We should be due for an invite to one of the eempt tournaments this season.  Other the the preseason NIT a couple of years ago, its been a while.  I remember an Alaska tournament around si years ago and Maui around 8 years ago.  I don't think the tournament at Kentucky four years ago was an eempt tournament.  Of course the BB&T is not an eempt tournament either.


3/20/2006 12:50:00 PM
Poster: Free Quebec

ziik, as I undestand it, the committee assigns one person to monitor each potential team and to report back to the committee on that team.  I'd say that one individual has a huge amount of influence on what happens to one of their teams. 

Alumnus, call me paranoid if you want, but the committee screwed us and I resent those who were on it.   Yes, our schedule should have presented us from being a 1 seed as our record would have suggested) or even a 3 or 4 (as our ranking suggested), but the 8 for us (and the 14 for ) was basically the committee saying they don't think we are any good.

And the results of the tournament bear out our right to pissed.  For those who think Ws and Ls in the tournament are evidence of the selection committee doing the right or wrong thing (I don't, but I'm going to argue it since that's the way so many of these debates go), just look at how many of the teams we complained about that performed worse than us:  Nevada, Syracuse, Michigan St., Marquette, Cal.  We were basically stunned to be behind every one of those teams, and they all went down in the first round.  

So we're left with 2 questions:

1)Who is to blame for the injustice of the selection committee?  I'd say the people on the selection committee, like GMU's AD.

2) Should we hold grudges or let it go?  I'd say that we'll continue being treated like doormats as long as we just sit there and take it.


3/20/2006 3:19:00 PM
Poster: ZIIK

FQ: I agree we never should let grudges go. I've held on to some of mine for more than 20 years. They've given me a heart condition, but so what? I'm right, they're wrong. (Is there such a word as conspiration? Or am I just becoming an innovator?)  Seriously, I'm not keen at all to start humping George Mason or the rest of the CAA.  The A-10 has a better reputation, and I think there is a factual basis for the rep. Certainly, when Charlotte needed to find a conference, it could logically have gone to the CAA, but instead chose the A-10. I have no idea where that leaves us as far as sheduling goes, but that's not really my job. I would be looking into giving two games for one in return, though. I'm sure most of us have had some losing dates before we found the one we love.


3/20/2006 3:38:00 PM
Poster: Dootie Bubble

The disrespect shown us by GMU's AD is all the more reason to play them net season.  Let our guys take out a little of their aggression on them and when Hobbs gets asked in the post game interview why he left the starters in when we were up by 30 points with 1 minute to play he can say "to show that whore O'Connor eactly what I think of him and the milkman's kids he's raised as his own."


3/20/2006 3:54:00 PM
Poster: HERVE

It's like when they asked Woody Hayes why he went for 2 points up 50 points in the 4th quarter on the team up north: "Because I couldn't go for 3."


3/20/2006 4:04:00 PM
Poster: Dootie Bubble

In 1971 the Gators were up big on UMiami late in the ballgame.  The Hurricanes had the ball.  Just to add insult to injury the Gator defenders flopped on the ground the second the ball was snapped to let Miami score a touchdown; that way the Gators could get the ball back and help John Reeves set the NCAA career passing record.  More than the 45-16 final score, this stunt burned the Canes up.  Something like that would be nice for GMU.



3/20/2006 4:12:00 PM
Poster: Alumnus

What Dootie said the post before last -- schedule Mason and use it to fire the team up.  Otherwise, what's really the point?  2 billion or so people in Africa and Asia are hoping that a big fat beetle walks by so they'll have dinner tonight.  I'm not going to sit around worrying about whether George Mason's AD is the evil mastermind behind the Get GW plot.


3/20/2006 5:18:00 PM
Poster: Dootie Bubble

Alumnus, using that logic it doesn't really make sense for us to go to ball games or waste time on this board either.  There is absolutely nothing rational about sports' fanaticism.


3/20/2006 5:30:00 PM
Poster: Mentzinger

Mason had a higher RPI than we did at selection time (as did UNCW, by the way) and got a worse seed than we did. With a 323 OOC SOS, there's really no point placing the blame for our seed anywhere beyond GW campus boundaries.


3/20/2006 5:37:00 PM
Poster: Mentzinger

The Patriots also played a better noncon, played in a better league, and beat quality opposition on the road. Maybe it's because they weren't a preseason threat. Maybe it's because of that snazzy arena. But they belong and they've proven it. This anti-GMU conspiracy crap about us being blackballed by a GMU rep on the committee is really pretty revolting. Net year, let's play someone so we won't have to debate what some guy may or may not have said about us in a penthouse suite in Indianapolis.


3/20/2006 6:33:00 PM
Poster: BLUE SEATS

I don't know who conspired with whom and I really don't care. It's all in the history books at this point. GMU is still playing and we are not. Am I jealous - hell yes. Guys like Pops, Omar, Ale and Mike deserved to be on a plane down to Atlanta. But it's not always about the destination - it's more about the journey. I wouldn't trade our season and the players/coaches who helped make it so for GMU's run in the tourney. 



3/21/2006 6:48:00 AM
Poster: Mailvan

Amen, Mentzinger.  I understand that we got a raw deal with the seeding but this anger towards Mason's AD has to take a back seat to why we were in this predicament to begin with.  Go out and play a real schedule.  If we do that and then get screwed, I'll only be too happy to direct my anger at any conspiracy target you'd like.


3/21/2006 8:44:00 AM
Poster: Mentzinger

If you don't think the Colonial Conference was better than the A-10 this year: Hofstra beats St. Joe's in NIT. One eample. Also check the RPIs and the number of teams getting legitimate NCAA consideration (4).


3/21/2006 8:50:00 AM
Poster: Free Quebec

mentzinger, the RPIs say the A-10 was better.  There may be other stats that back up your contention, but the RPI in games against other conferences say, A-10 9th, Colonial 11th.

Again, you could point to other factors (like number of teams getting consideration), but don't point to the RPI because the RPI says the A-10 was better.


3/21/2006 9:41:00 AM
Poster: Alumnus

Dootie, here's my irrational sports fan response:  Moaning about the referees or George Mason's GM = Crybaby.  Just what every sports fan wants to be known as, a crybaby.  Wah.  Count me out of the tear shedding pool.  If you want, write a letter to Trachtenberg telling him he needs to replace Kvancz with the AD equivalent of a thug.  See what happens.


3/21/2006 8:16:00 PM
Poster: Dominate Quebec

Regardless of what you want to say about RPIs, the only reason the A-10 got 2 teams into the NCAA was b/c GW choked before choking out a win against UNCW and then getting plastered by Duke. CAA would have had 2 bids regardless.

GO OWLS!



3/21/2006 9:28:00 PM
Poster: BIGFAN

I think we should absolutely bear grudges about having the best record in college basketball and being an 8 seed against the No. 1 team in the entire NCAA tournament!

Linda Bruno & Jack should rip the committee a new a-hole. Then again, they are 100 percent a-holes anyway.

They should not have been able to get away with this. Craig Littlepage is the devil.  Probably told Duke, "don't worry, we're giving you GW in the second round, but we've fied it with the refs." That's why Coach K. was instructing the most whistle-prone one on the sidelines for a full minute, after he dared call a rare foul against Duke.

Having said that, it's what we said in preseason. The schedule will come back to haunt us. Well, it did in ways that were unimaginable. As a result, we are sitting when this should be our year.

It wasn't acceptable this year at all. It was entirely stupid, even if borne out of frustration with the committee. If someone comes up to me and talks about GW having the 323'd or whatever strength of schedule, I'm going to eplode.

We gave the Craig Littlepage's of the world the ecuse to screw us horribly. Nothing like that will again be acceptable from Jack or KH or whomever does the scheduling, from GW's precious and few fans. We need to make that clear.

It's been a great year and a great team,  but the half-assed schedule--and hearing about it every ten minutes from the analysts--took a a fair amount of the joy out of being 27-3.



3/21/2006 10:25:00 PM
Poster: BIGDIK

Was their OOC SOS 323? Wow, I thought it was 314. It was even worse than I thought. 9 seed would not have been out of the question with that nugget.

Either way, your done, the falacy has been eposed (and what a small falacy), and Pops is gone. Good luck net year.

GO OWLS!



3/22/2006 5:53:00 AM
Poster: BLUE SEATS

Clearly the schedule was not strong and no one has ever said it was. But the major falllacy in all the 20/20 hindsight bashing of the schedule is and always will be this: You can't just say if only we had played so and so we would have had a 4 seed or a 2 seed or whatever. It doesn't work that way because you don't know what effect a different schedule would have had on the rest of the schedule.

Maybe we would have lost confidence if we had lost some early games and not gone 16-0 in conference. What then? Would our early loss to Temple in the A-10 have knocked us out entirely? Think St. Joes in 2004-05. We were 16-0 in Conference and lost one regular season non-conference game. But that record was not ironclad. We had several games that could have been L's in that January-February stretch: Marshall, St. Louis, St. Joe's (#2), Charlotte. Who says that under a different set of circumstances everything else stays the same. Even if we had one, two or three tougher games, what if we lost all three. The Comittee doesn't just look at SOS but also whether you won any of those games. The A-10 would have still been bad, everything else held constant.

Also, this notion that playing tougher teams would have somehow guaranteed that we would have been better prepared for the tournament is hogwash. Let's assume we were a 2-3-4 seed. Was UNC better prepared because of their schedule? How about Iowa? Kansas? Illinois? Ohio State? Tennessee? Conversely, would someone please tell me how GMU's schedule prepared them for a run to the Sweet 16. What you do in November/December is not as important as what you do in late-February/March as far as tournament preparation. I don't see anyone crying on their boards about how they were ill-prepared to compete by their schedule yet the results were the same or worse.

The point is that if your Aunt had them she'd be your Uncle.

The fact of the matter was that before the season how many of you thought we'd lose just 2 games even with the weak schedule? I believe one of Herve's polls has the answer to this. If you didn't think that then, isn't it a little disingenuous to now come here and say that we should have known we would be playing for a 2/3 seed and therefore the schedule was a disaster? In fact, no one here prior to Selection Sunday thought we would get an 8 seed, schedule and all. Further, how we got to that 8 seed is only punctuated by the fact we lost. Had we defeated Duke would anyone be worried about the 8 seed now?

I have it on pretty good authority that we were probably going to get a 4-5 before Pops injury and the Temple loss. There is also good information that the Committee may have moved us down a line to avoid some scheduling conflicts - lucky us! Therefore, the non-conference schedule probably cost us 2-3 seeds at best from a 2 to a 5 and the other factors cost us just as much. Clearly, the Pops injury, the Temple loss and the scheduling conflict provided a perfect storm that allowed the Committee to give us an 8 seed. 

The schedule was the schedule and the season, the season. You can't just pick the parts you like and criticize those you don't. You get the whole package, because that is all we know for sure. Thus, there are no lessons in this that are capable of repetition. Net year is an entirely different  year, different A-10, and more importantly different team. If you told me that we would be 27-3 again with the Conference the same certainly I would do things differently. But the point is that no one can say that. We could have the very same OOC schedule and make the tournament. We could have a much tougher OOC schedule and not make the tournament. Most of this will depend on what it always depends on - the conference. If the conference is good there is less pressure to play a tough OOC schedule. If the Conference is bad, there is more pressure. Since it is difficult to tell how good or bad the conference will be beforehand or how good or bad your team will be, scheduling is a guess - it can backfire either way. Therefore, to blame anyone for anything related to this season is not only unproductive at this point but has no bearing for the future since each year has a scheduling philosophy and options that are unique to that year. Couple that with the limitations facing GW which have been discussed ad nauseum, finding the perfect scheduling is difficult process at best.

Lost in all the discussion here is that GW received its highest NCAA seed ever despite our beefs with the Committee. To me that means we are moving in the right direction as a program and as I said, I wouldn't trade our players and our season (schedule included since you get the whole package) for any.



3/22/2006 6:21:00 AM
Poster: Free Quebec

I was a very harsh critic of the schedule before the season, but I happen to think Blue Seats' post nails it.  I hope we never repeat this schedule, but what's done is done and the only thing we know for sure is that the 05-06 Colonials just completed the greatest season in GW basketball history.


3/22/2006 7:12:00 AM
Poster: Mailvan

I didn't just read "20/20 hindsight bashing of the schedule", did I?  Please tell me that I did not read that.  That would simply be the most insane thing I've ever seen on this board given what has been discussed here over the past 6 months.


3/22/2006 7:23:00 AM
Poster: bobo

True, FQ, what's done is done and this season turned out better than any of us could have hoped or predicted. But the problem with Blue Seat's argument is that he believes there are NO lessons to be learned by last year's OOC schedule and that he might advocate we do it again.

The selection committee has stressed for years that they judge critically a team's OOC schedule. They have respectively stated that teams that play and win in the OOC will be rewarded and teams that do not will be hurt. We did not listen to their eplicit criteria for bids and seeding and suffered the consequences.

In the big picture GW, Temple, SJU and the others in our conference should not set their schedules in a bubble. They should work together to craft an OOC like the MVC did this year (it would help to have a forceful and foreword thinking commissioner as well).  Temple and SJU scheduled too hard and GW went too easy.  The goal is to get everyone to 8-3 by conference play.

Don't play more than one road guarantee game vs. the BCS and limit the # of RPI 150 teams to 2-3.  That would improve our OOC RPI and set up conference play where we are playing teams with a better winning %.  Maybe we set it up to get an 8-3 record and eceed our epectations.  Others will (Duquesne) will fall short.  But at least it gives the league a chance for NCAA success.

Blue Seats is wrong here.  The OOC was badly planned. The players success does not turn it into a well designed plan.  No one, including the AD, could have predicted a 16-0 conf season and we can not rely on that to get GW a high seed in the future.  Schedule smart and live with the consequences.



3/22/2006 7:32:00 AM
Poster: Mentzinger

My biggest beef about the schedule: it never really allowed the team to show how great they were. Great comeback at Marshall and at avier, gritty wins at home vs. Charlotte an St. Louis, but could they have done the same at Virginia or at Kansas? If NC State was a fluke (long layoff after UMES and Morgan State with a last-second changed date, during the holidays, without Montrell), could we have had another chance to prove it? Don't hand me "at avier" and "at Temple," either. Hand me at Virginia, at Gonzaga, at Syracuse, at Villanova. Give me a road game against any MVC or CAA school. Give me a regional rivalry game against GMU or (heaven forfend) Georgetown. Those are not unreasonable schools to be scheduling, and those are precisely the kinds of questions the committee asks themselves, because the only time we ever played a high-caliber opponent was Round 2 of the NCAAs. And that's too late.


3/22/2006 7:35:00 AM
Poster: Free Quebec

Bobo, I don't think that's what Blue Seats is saying at all (and if he's saying there are no lessons to be learned than I disagree with him -- although in fairness we all knew those lessons were going to be learned the day the schedule came out).  I think his point is just to say that when you look at back at the season after it's completed, it's not so easy to just say if we had scheduled differently, this would have, for certain, been the result.


3/22/2006 8:33:00 AM
Poster: BLUE SEATS

1. Where did I say I would advocate having the same schedule? I said it depends on the team/conference. Under certain circumstances, it might work under others it doesn't. But comparing schedules from season to season is apples to oranges. And even if you believe the Committee punished us for it, that has absolutely no bearing for net year because even if we played the eact same schedule, the SOS would be different and could be demonstrably so if NC State and Maryland do better, Marshall improves, BU returns to the top of AE and teams like St. Francis, Stony Brook, Morgan State improve. Thus, it is entirely possible that we could play the same schedule and have the conference improve and not go 16-0 but still be in the same place. Or it's possible that we could play the same schedule and be worse off. We are not dealing with a static state here.

2. Scheduling cannot be outcome-determinative. In three sentences Bobo you claim that the OOC was badly planned but then say no one one could have predicted a 16-0 conference season. To be fair then, no one also would have predicted Maryland to go down the tubes, NC state fade down the stretch, BU not to do better in AE, and most importantly the A-10 not to be improved over 2004-05 with the addition of Charlotte and what looked to be an improved avier, St. Joe's, Temple, Dayton and UMass. According to Lindy's 2005-06 preseason magazine here were the ranking of our opponents:

15 NC State, 30 Maryland, 46 Charlotte, 49 avier, 55 St. Joe's, 58 Temple, 96 Dayton, 106 UMass, 116 Boston U., 128 Fordham, 135 Rhode Island, 148 La Salle, 163 Richmond, 181 Stony Brook, 198 St. Louis, 204 FIU, 234 Duquesne, 279 Marshall, 286 Norfolk State, 290 St. Bonaventure, 299 Kennesaw State, 320 Morgan State, 323 St. Francis (PA), 328 UMES.

Thus, before the season at least someone thought that our OOC schedule averaged 216. Not great but considerably better than it did in reality.How about the Conference? We were supposed to have 7 games against top 100 teams and 3 games against top 50. In reality, we had no top 50 games in Conference. Thus, you can also make the argument that it was not as badly planned as you would lead us to believe. Rather, it turned out worse than planned.

 



3/22/2006 8:46:00 AM
Poster: BLUE SEATS

Correct, FQ. I am not saying we can't learn anything from this eperience. I am saying the lessons we learned from this year are not necessarily transferable to the future because of different circumstances. If the lesson is that all things being equal, we should play a better schedule I'm all for it. But all things are not equal and a schedule will always be a sum of moving parts. Had the schedule played out as Lindy's forecasted above and we had the same record we would have been much better off and this would be a minor discussion. The main lesson here is that if you are going to pick a non-conference schedule premised on a stronger conference, you need to be sure the conference is as good as you think and that you will do very well in conference. Otherwise, you need to be near perfect. Thank God this year we were near perfect.


3/22/2006 9:01:00 AM
Poster: GW ALUM ABROAD

Blue Seats-- 6 of the bottom 7 (and 8 of the bottom 10) on the schedule pre-season were OOC foes. Repeating that format might not be a good idea in the future. We know Olean Quitters and Duques are going to blow chunks again net year, let's try and keep them very close to the bottom of the schedule this time. That, I think, is the point.

I agree College Park CC, BU and the A-10 were unepected RPI-killers this year, but UMES, Morgan St, Norfolk St and St. Francis (PA) were not unepected RPI killers. You give thanks there were no slip-ups, but there were close calls, and against some of the RPI killers.

3/22/2006 12:03:00 PM
Poster: Mailvan

I have really attempted as best I could to respect my prior vow to not comment on what Blue Seats has written but this thread has officially pushed me off of the deep end.  All season long, the only counterargument that I kept hearing was that until the games are played, all comments about our schedule are merely speculation and that we will not know the outcome until the season is over.  Now that the moment has arrived, and Blue Seats' position on all this was about as wrong as wrong can be, I get to read a detailed eplanation that includes what was supposed to happen as opposed to what did happen and how the perfect storm came along causing GW to receive a #8 seed.  Blue Seats wants me to idealistically believe and accept that had we played a different schedule, there would be no telling what type of season we would have had or even if we would have made the tournament.  This idealistic notion will always be true no matter what team and schedule you're talking about.  Nobody knows anything for sure until after it happens.  Therefore, I have no choice but to believe this notion but by no means will I accept it.  At some point, you need to take a look at reality and do some educational projecting.  Otherwise, there is never a point to have a discussion on this board on any subject until after the fact.  As far as having a schedule that prepares one to be ready for the tournament, I'll also continue to back this notion.  Is it a coincidence that one of the best field goal shooting teams in the nation had positively awful shooting games against NC State and Duke?  Yes, these are ecellent teams and their defense clearly had something to do with it.  However, did GW's lack of big-time games (and by my definition, you can rule out virtually all A10 games; these are not what I'm talking about) have a negative effect?  I think it did but this is admittedly only my opinion.  Funny that George Mason was mentioned because they played at Wichita State in February and I'd have to definitely believe that this eperience has helped them immensely in this tournament.  Net, the comment on how being a #8 seed is only an issue because we lost to Duke is absolutely hilarious.  By the way, commiting a crime is only really a problem if you get caught.  Don't you realize that the point is that as a #8 seed, we would be far more prone to lose in the second round than having almost any other seed?  Of course, it wouldn't be a Blue Seats post unless "you had it on good authority that we were getting a 4-5 seed before Pops' injury and Temple loss.  Therefore, the OOC only cost us 2-3 seeds."  Wow, the audacity just never ends.  Maybe with a stronger OOC schedule, we could have been playing for a 1-2 seed (seems St. Joe's went 16-0 in conference and immediately followed that with a loss in the A10 quarters, and yet was able to secure a #1 seed) meaning the Pops injury brings us to a 3-5 seed.  And, this is after GW told the committee that Pops would be playing, which he did.  Finally, please don't tell me that when it comes to GW basketball, I can't pick the parts I like yet can't offer criticism of what I don't like.  This isn't eactly an after-the-fact revelation; I've said all along that I love the players and coaches on this team and thought that the players were being badly short-changed from having to play this schedule.  This is a perfectly relevant statement.  The fact of the matter is that this schedule cost GW a very realistic opportunity of playing a Sweet 16 game.  This isn't the end of the world and we'll all get over it.  However, and make no mistake about this, there is very definitely a lesson to be learned here with regard to crafting a schedule.  This doesn't fluctuate from team to team, year to year, as you would have us believe.  The lesson is to strive for balance.  Schedule 2 top 50 teams, 2 teams ranked 51-100, 3-4 games vs. 101-200, and 3-4 games against the over 200 teams.  And if you truly feel that there is nothing to be learned in this regard going forward in the future, then I guess it will just be another eample of failing to see the forest through the trees.



3/22/2006 4:25:00 PM
Poster: BLUE SEATS

Mailvan - What eactly was my position on all of this? I said the schedule was what we could get under the circumstances. I didn't say it was great but I said no one should be blamed for it under the circumstances. I said that a choice was made under the circumstances to play this schedule and I can't fault that choice given the alternatives. I also said it wouldn't prevent us from getting in the tournament. It did not. I also have said it was dependent on the A-10 being stronger - that's why I said you have to wait until all the games were played. Had the A-10 been say the 7th or 8th best conference, our seed would have been better regardless of the OOC. But you have your OOC schedule blinders on, so why would I epect you to acknowledge any of this. I understand completely - You don't have to address the harder issues if you paint me as supporting the schedule as "strong" one.

As for tournament preparation, you still haven't eplained how Iowa, Ohio State, Kansas, UNC, Tennessee all lost. Wouldn't their strong OOC and Conference schedules have adequately prepared them? All of these teams were seeds which you believe we could have at least received had we scheduled a tougher OOC schedule.

You discount the loss to Duke but would we even be having this discussion if we won? Of course not and we both know it. By your own admission in previous posts we would have been adequately prepared to beat a top team and we would have achieved Sweet Siteen status.

Jack Kvancz has gone on record as saying we were at least a 5 seed before the Pops injury and the consensus of various eperts had us at a 4-5. This despite our weak OOC and Conference. So even with the weak OOC we were still a top 4-5 seed. How much better do you think we could have improved our seed with your balanced OOC schedule but with the same weak conference? avier got a 14 seed as the conference champion and they roughly played the type of schedule you are proposing but fell on their face in Conference during the regular season. In the end, it was as much if not more a combination of Pops injury and the poor conference tournament performance that hurt our seed. At worst our OOC schedule cost us 3 lines. So in the second round you would get a 7 (as a 2 seed) instead of a 4 (as a 5 seed). Not that much difference - you still have to beat a good team.

Unfortunately, you also have no idea for eample how much a factor confidence plays and the role the schedule plays in building confidence. Sometimes a OOC roll against weaker teams propels you into Conference play. Teams like Syracuse and Georgetown have done this for years. An early loss to a tough team can sometimes haunt you. It all depends on your team. It's quite possible that a couple of early season losses would have put more pressure on the team in Conference as must wins. We got a head of momentum going and national recognition because of our record. We were playing for a seed midway through the season. These are not small factors in the growth of a team and program. Before you run off and say that I am advocating this on a full-time basis - I'll say once again,  it all depends on your team and the circumstances.

Perhaps the most rediculous argument you make is that crafting a schedule doesn't fluctuate from year to year. It sure as hell does depending on the strength of your team and the conference. These are variables every year that a coach must assess. A veteran team may be able to go on the road more than a young team thereby changing the scheduling options. One team's goal may be the NIT another the NCAA, another a high seed. It may be tougher in Conference one year versus another.

You want to say the OOC schedule was objectively weak I have no argument. It's when you try to draw larger inferences or ascribe blame that you lose me.



3/22/2006 4:46:00 PM
Poster: Thumper

We're doing this again?  If we are then go BS.



3/22/2006 5:16:00 PM
Poster: Mailvan

Blue Seats, in the other thread regarding the schedule, you propose a sample schedule that makes perfect sense but in no way resembles the schedule we had this year.  I would also have to believe that landing a schedule such as this one is viable.  However, on this thread, you say that this year's schedule was what we could get under the circumstances.  I guess this is where I'm finding the problem.  What eactly are these circumstances and will they be in play net year and in future years?  In a different post, I said that we should have presented the selection committee with a list of the 30 or 50 or however many schools we tried to play but were turned down by along with the reasons why we were turned down.  I would have to believe that the committee would look at such a list and conclude that GW certainly made every effort to play a challenging OOC schedule.  In drawing this conclusion, I'd have to believe that GW might be slightly penalized with their seeding but there would be no point to issuing a harsh penalty to a school that truly tried to play a respectable schedule.  However, I don't believe this happened because I remain very unconvinced that this was the case.  Yes, I'm sure we approached a few BCS schools and were turned down.  However, I believe that at that point, GW made the conscious decision not to play tournament caliber teams on the road (ecept NC State) and of course, they rightfully couldn't get these teams to play at Smith Center.  I believe that last year's #12 seed played a large factor in this decision; after all, what's the point in playing these tough games if we end up having to win our conference tournament to make the NCAA's anyway?  Picking up on your statement, no two seasons are eactly the same but I believe that GW decided to let last year be a huge factor on this year's schedule.  I said at the time that this was a huge risk and it certainly turned out to be just that.  And yes, I do feel that the individuals responsible for making our schedule do deserve some blame for this.


3/22/2006 5:24:00 PM
Poster: MIKE K

Deja vu all over again!


3/22/2006 5:27:00 PM
Poster: ZIIK

I'd be tempted to side with BS, too, Thumper. But its clear that BS "officially pushed (Mailvan) off of the deep end."   We can't have any of that. And if JK thinks we're going to believe that he tried, unsuccessfully,  to schedule better teams, well, absent a sworn affidavit posted on this board, well, that's just so much bunk.


3/22/2006 5:30:00 PM
Poster: MIKE K

BS- Beware.  A guy named "Mailvan" may go postal?


3/22/2006 5:41:00 PM
Poster: Mailvan

Ziik, you mean you're not on my side?  Well, now I'm hurt.


3/22/2006 5:47:00 PM
Poster: BLUE SEATS

Mike K - I started wearing full body armour to games long ago just in case.



3/22/2006 5:49:00 PM
Poster: Thumper

I admittedly don’t read all of BS or mailvans posts but from what I understand Blue Seats says: yes our schedule wasn’t great this year but it worked out pretty well and was supposed to have been better (A-10 strength) and hopefully net year we will get something more along the lines or what we would all like.  Mailvan seems to think that blueseats is arguing in favor of this years schedule, which he isn’t.  Is this right? Do I even want to know what they are saying?



3/22/2006 6:54:00 PM
Poster: ZIIK

Don't be hurt, Mailvan be happy. I only said I'd be tempted to side with BS, but specifically did not do that. I have no idea which of BS's comments you feel were intended to push you off the deep end, but since we're not likely to have JK posting on this board, I'm pleased that BS is available to give some insight into GW's scheduling efforts this past year. Nothing more, nothing less. As for net year's schedule, it's clear that someone is working on it....


3/22/2006 7:28:00 PM
Poster: bobo

So did Blue Seat learn anything about this year's schedule and how the tournement commitee rewards/punishes poor OOC schedules?  It seems he still thinks that, depending on the relative success of the A-10, there is nothing wrong about scheduling 7-10 RPI 200 teams.  Bad idea - ALWAYS!

Better question: Did Linda Bruno and the GW Basketball Department learn about scheduling as a conference?  Did they notice what the MVC and the CAA have done recently? Will they draw any leasons from those conferences success and change their scheduling policies in the future?  I certainly hope so.



3/22/2006 7:41:00 PM
Poster: doug sandels

Nothing like a good old-fashioned circle jerk.  Oh, and while I was not pleased with the schedule, I do not agree with one of the sides "100% as usual".


3/22/2006 7:54:00 PM
Poster: BLUE SEATS

Bobo - What you fail to realize is that the OOC schedule only becomes particularly relevant if you do well in Conference and the Conference is not strong. If you don't do well it is a moot point and it is much less of a factor if the Conference is strong. I am not advocating scheduling 7-10 200 RPI teams. Never said that. But the idea that if we somehow had just scheduled a couple more 50-150 RPI teams, all would be well discounts the low opinion the Committee has of the A-10. The Committee has punished the A-10 two years running with a 12 and 14 seed for its Champion! Put it this way - If we went 16-0 in virtually any other year in league history besides 2004-05 with the same OOC we would have received a better seed.

Some of you want to single out the OOC as the sole reason for our 8 seed. I am saying it was one of number of factors, all of which were not anticipated AT THE TIME THE SCHEDULE WAS MADE months and years in advance. Was it that unreasonable to think that we would be at the top of an improved A-10?

The main lesson I am continually getting here is that we go 27-3, ranked in the top 25 all season, receive the highest seed in school history, win our first NCAA game in 12 years and someone needs to be blamed? If so, that is truly sad. I guess if we went 26-4 an ass whipping would be in order. Right?



3/22/2006 8:24:00 PM
Poster: Thumper

Blue Seats does always seem to have some insight into how things are actually run and why.  Plus I only read half of them but I feel like I have a better grasp on what he is saying than a certain sworn enemy of his.  They each keep repeating the same thing, Mailvan will say BS wants a crappy schedual, BS will say no he does but defend the old one, I understand his argument, it isnt rocket science and he isnt advocating another schedual as weak as this one.


3/22/2006 8:26:00 PM
Poster: bobo

GW has only limited control on how well the A-10 does. We do control (to a certain level) the strength of the OOC.  GW should do what's in its power to put itself in the best position for bid seed and listen to the obvious signals the selection committee is sending us. They have even punished teams in good conferences for bad OOC - see BC last year and FSU this year.  Limit the # of RPI 200 teams, even if it means less home games.

Linda Bruno and the other A-10 AD's should look to improve the conference's RPI by pushing all the schools to schedule smart.  Get to 8-3.  Temple, SJU and SLU bring the conference down by going 6-5 (regardless of their SOS).  GW brings itself down by having too high of OOC SOS.  Find the happy medium like the MVC.  Hell, they should all chip in to hire the MVC's commisioner - he's worth the price.



3/23/2006 6:32:00 AM
Poster: Mailvan

Thumper, since you're rooting for Blue Seats ("Go BS", your earlier post) while at the same time, openly admit to not reading all of our posts, my hope is that you will read this one so that you may gain some insight as to what I am actually saying as opposed to your interpretation.  First, I have never said that Blue Seats was happy with this year's schedule nor do I think this is the case.  My belief is that he feels this was the best schedule we could have received under the circumstances.  My opinion is that our schedule makers made very few attempts to put together a challenging OOC and that a strategy was employed to produce a gaudy won-loss record with the hope that the committee would be impressed enough with our record to award us a favorable seed.  This came on the heels of playing a more challenging OOC schedule last year but still having to win the A10 tournament to make the NCAA's (let's not forget that we did lose 5 conference games).  Blue Seats feels that the nature of our OOC schedule should be contingent upon the strength of the A10.  First, it is difficult to project how strong or weak the conference will be from season to season.  Moreover, because the A10 will likely never be a Top 6 rated conference in any season, GW does not have the luury of a Syracuse to schedule OOC cupcakes knowing full well that there will be plenty of opportunity to build a resume during Big East play.  This makes the OOC significantly more important to schools in the A10 and mid-majors than it does to schools in the BCS conferences.  Combine this with the fact that the NCAA has been encouraging teams to play quality opponents, as well as to play on the road, and one could only conclude that having the OOC we had was a huge mistake, a mistake that could easily be seen before the season ever started.  (And please don't ever suggest that this was hindsight as this was a popular topic of conversation on this board in September).  The committee realizes that a team lacks control over how strong their conference is, all the more reason why it looks at the OOC because this is within a school's control.  Not to say that it's easy for a school like GW, but it's not impossible either.  Finally, the major difference in our positions is that Blue Seats looks at our on-court performance and wonders how anyone can possibly be blamed given these results.  This is a blatant attempt to misdirect the real issue.  Nobody is complaining about the accomplishments of this team which were etraordinary.  This issue has to do with why GW, with a 26-2 record at the time, received a #8 seed.  While the Pops injury did play a small role (I'm not suggesting this didn't), the primary and overriding reason for this was the schedule.  And in saying this, I do think it's reasonable to hope that the individuals responsible for creating the schedule did learn not to go down this path again (by loading up on cupcakes), and yes, to also allocate some blame in their direction.


3/23/2006 7:11:00 AM
Poster: GW05Alum

From the Hatchet today, I like the UCLA matchup-even though its in Anaheim:

Colonials heading west

While local teams George Mason and Georgetown are still competing in the NCAA Tournament, the Colonials already have two tournaments in the book for net season. GW will compete in the Wooden Classic in Anaheim, Calif., over the weekend of Dec. 15 and the Cable Car Classic in San Francisco.

The Wooden Classic will feature UCLA, the University of Southern California and GW. Kvancz said he does not know the fourth team but believes the invitation is due to GW's success this season.

The Cable Car Classic features GW, Santa Clara, Air Force and Colgate playing games starting Dec. 28. Air Force was knocked out in the first round of this year's NCAA Tournament.

The Colonials will also face Virginia Tech in the BB&T at the Verizon Center. The date has not been announced.



3/23/2006 7:11:00 AM
Poster: BLUE SEATS

Mailvan - I could buy into some of your purposeful scheduling argument based on the eperience of 2004-05 ecept for some mitigating factors:

1. GW was not playing for a seed last Spring/Summer when the schedule was largely made. In fact, there was some chance that Pops and/or Mike would not even be on the team. GW was more worried about making the tournament at that point.

2. GW was not a mortal lock for the league title even in September after Pops and Mike returned. Several preseason magazines had avier and Charlotte as contenders. Therefore, again the schedule was made to try to get us into the tournament not obtain a particular high seed. The seeding issue only became relevant when the team eceeded all epectations.

Therefore, where I think you are engaging in hindsight was not relative to September when the schedule was announced but relative to the time the schedule was made. Those were the facts on the ground that the schedule makers had to deal with. Things worked out differently than what optimally could have been achieved but my point has always been that had they worked out in the best case there is no guarantee we wouldn't be sitting home today anyway.

Finally, since your argument is with the planning not with the on the court the performance - aren't the two interrelated? Isn't it possible that the results eceeded epectations? If so, do you think JK and KH would schedule the same now if they had a crystal ball showing that we would go 16-0 in Conference? Was there anyone who thought we would be 16-0? To plan on going 16-0 would be foolish since it only happened 3 times before. Thus, this season was unprecedented in GW history. Yet at the same time, you want someone to accept blame for failing to account as much as a year before for an unprecedented season.



3/23/2006 7:27:00 AM
Poster: lowpost

has anyone even considered that another reason for our low seed was an abysmal game (admittedly sans pops) against a mediocre temple in our first conference tournament game?  had we just gotten into the tourney final i think our seed would have been a 5-7.


3/23/2006 7:31:00 AM
Poster: herve

I think the committee made it clear it didn't care what GW did the A10 tourney. If we won the whole thing, it would have been epected and, therefore, not rewarded. Best case scenario with that committee was probably #6 seed if other teams would have lost, GW won the A10 tourney and the committee had not other choice with few teams left for that slot. If you need a guideline as to what they thought of GW and the A10, look no further than 's 14 seed.


3/23/2006 7:40:00 AM
Poster: Dootie Bubble

I agree and the way to handle this is to blast the selection committee loudly and publicly if you are Hobbs and Kvancz.  It sounds counter-intuitive but what happens every time Phil Jackson berates the NBA and its refs?  Answer: the net game the other team gets whistled for 107 fouls and his team 1.  Moral of the story is a bitch likes to be treated like a bitch.


3/23/2006 7:42:00 AM
Poster: TIM4

I love BS but I have to side with evil Malivan on this one. C'mon Blue give it a rest. Do I have to go through the posts where you said. "2 losses gets us a 3 seed, 3 losses 4-5, 4 losses 6." I remember arguing with you about that. 2 losses got us an EIGHT seed. Even if we would've gotten a 5 w/o Pops (doubtful, I bet it would've been a 6), a 5 seed is a complete embarassment for a team with 2 losses. The schedule screwed us. I quit complaining about it back in January, but I felt the need to post again because you are being ridiculous. You were wrong about the schedule. Admit it or ignore it I don't care, but let's talk about net year or all the great accomplishments this year instead of listening to you idiotically defend the schedule.


3/23/2006 8:58:00 AM
Poster: BLUE SEATS

Tim4 - You are right, I did say that. However, if you go back and look when I said it was not outside what the eperts were then reflecting. JK also said 4-5. He was a Committee member for 5 years. So I was overly optimistic about the 3 seed but by one-two spots discounting the early Temple loss and the Pops injury. I still stand by my information that we may have been bumped a line to accomodate scheduling conflicts. Unlike Joe Lunardi, I don't claim to be an epert in bracketology so I'll live with my off-base prediction. It wasn't the first time I've been wrong about seeds (last year I thought we'd get a 10) and it probably won't be the last.

That said, I'm not sure I was wrong about the schedule in the larger picture. I didn't defend it in the abstract, I defended the process that yielded it. I said it was the best we could do under the circumstances. No one has yet made a showing that we could have done better but some continue to ascribe blame to others for it. That is what keeps me on this topic. If people were to stop the blame game and accept that we had a weak schedule but that it was the result of a variety of circumstances largely out of the control of schedule makers, they will get no argument or further discussion from me.

Finally, I would much rather talk about the great season we just had or net year but some won't let go. Already, you see that net year's schedule is going to be different because we have opportunities that we did not have a year ago - albeit on the road.



3/23/2006 9:46:00 AM
Poster: Mailvan

Why didn't we have these same opportunites this past season?  Not so much the tournaments, but why couldn't we have contacted 50 of the top programs in the country and find 2 others to play on the road, or work a home and home with those ranked in the 50-125 range?  Why are these opportunites now available to us when they weren't last year?  Is it because GW chose not to eercise these opportunities?  Admit this, along with the fact that this is the route that our schedule makers should have taken, and I'll gladly let it go.


3/23/2006 9:58:00 AM
Poster: TIM4

BS I'd love to agree with you on that because I'm not sure there can be a bigger fan of Bob, Dom and Jack than me. But everybody makes errors and I refuse to believe that we couldn't find any other top flight team to play us in THEIR gym. Without a playback game. 1 more win on the road against a Big 6 team would've made a big difference.

The past is the past and I really REALLY enjoyed this season. It was a tremendous success, but to say that this was the best schedule we could come up with I think is a little disingenuous.


3/23/2006 10:34:00 AM
Poster: BLUE SEATS

Mailvan - in light of how the season turned out, of course we could have scheduled differently and should have scheduled differently. But that's not the issue here. It's a question of at the time the schedule was made - April/May 2005 plus any return games that previously eisted - FIU, BU, St. Francis, Morgan State, Maryland (BB&T). Thus, 5 of 11 games were already locked in. What did we do with the other 6 - We scheduled NC State, Marshall, UMES, Stony Brook, Norfolk State and Kennesaw State. Now what if I told you we tried to schedule a couple of top 25-50 teams for one or two of these games. At the preseason dinner (and others were there who can attest), a number of schools were rattled off that we could not play because of scheduling conflicts, etc. Drop UMES or Norfolk and add UCLA or Kansas on the road. That one change alone would have made a huge difference. One game! You have to remember that there are constraints in scheduling - eam period, the 5 games previously scheduled, the other teams' schedules and their eam periods. We just couldn't get it to work with many teams and for some of the others we weren't willing to accede to their conditions. For eample, we were not going to play school on the road two days after playing Maryland. That's just a fact of life whether you choose to accept it as a valid reason or not.



3/23/2006 11:54:00 AM
Poster: Alumnus

If we were playing in the Sweet 16, would we be avoiding the current verbal bloodbath?  Here's my take on this:

1.  Many of us, including me, criticized the schedule from early on.  Many people countered that it wouldn't make a difference in seeding.  Several people criticized Kvancz as being much too conservative in suggesting that a 4th or 5th seed would be a good thing. 

2.  We can't do anything about it now.  We had a pretty damn good season.  There's no guarantee that we would've advanced any further in the NCAA with a different schedule.

3.  We should have learned something from this.  It appears from the news about the two West Coast tournaments that something concrete is being done about the schedule.  If we're still going to play 3 MEAC schools plus FIU, Stony Brook, and someone named St. Francis, that won't be good.

4.  There's no real way to know whether the Temple loss affected our seed, but it's guaranteed it didn't help.



3/23/2006 12:06:00 PM
Poster: Mailvan

Blue Seats, the problem is that you're not telling me anything.  What do you mean when you say that "we weren't willing to accede to the conditions (of other teams)?"  What were these specific conditions that we deemed unacceptable?  How many top 50 schools were we turned down by?  40?  20?  Can I count them on two hands?  Can I count them on one hand?  We did seem to schedule two OOC opponents during our conference season (Marshall and Stony Brook) so the calendar constraints don't appear to be as dire as you suggest.  Plus, every school in Division 1 has virtually the eact same calendar constraints, do they not?  I will bring up once again the list that I had suggested GW make sure the selection committee receive in advance detailing all of the OOC games that we attempted to schedule along with the reasons why these games were not played.  How long would such a list truly be?  In short, I have no evidence that suggests that our schedule-makers made more than just a nominal attempt at scheduling quality games.  If I'm wrong, please supply me with this specific evidence.  Being turned down by 5-6 schools is not what I would call a true effort to make this happen.


3/23/2006 12:11:00 PM
Poster: Longing for Oscar

The season is over.  Hopefully we learned some valuable lessons.  Now it's time to move on.  We had a great team and I think it should be recognized by the University by placing a plaque in the GW Hall of fame forever commemorating this collection of players and coaches.  



3/23/2006 12:44:00 PM
Poster: BLUE SEATS

Mailvan -

1. Conditions might include we can play you only on Monday December 5th; we can play you at our place but we won't return a game or pay you to come out; we won't play unless it's on tv and the tv blackout dates are... We can't play on these dates because we have home/away football games (remember NC State); Our facility is being used by the circus, ice capades, etc. during Winter Break so we have to play on these dates; we won't play you when the students aren't here. What you don't understand is that scheduling is a matri because the other school has games to schedule against other opponents who have conditions.

2. I don't pretend to know every conversation ever had on scheduling by the GW staff but why don't you ask Coach or the assistants to walk you through the process. Since Coach rattled off 6-8 names, I'm sure there were more. Did they contact everyone?  Most definitely not. But there are undoubtedly some teams that won't play us - Georgetown, for eample and some that we won't play because it is not worth the travel for a single game - think west coast schools.

3. Every school does not have the same calendar - Winter Breaks vary, Eam Periods vary. Facilities need to be staffed over the Holidays etc.

4. I can't supply you with the specific evidence because I didn't have the conversations. But you can ask Coach Hobbs and/or JK for that if you like.



3/23/2006 1:16:00 PM
Poster: Mailvan

Blue Seats, in that case, this is where the argument between us must end.  You can not adequately demonstrate that ample efforts were made to negotiate a higher quality schedule nor can I definitively prove prove that these efforts weren't made.  Deep down in your gut, you honestly believe that GW did everything it could possibly do to play a quality schedule whereas my belief is that after receiving a handful of negative responses, GW made a strategic U-Turn and loaded up on easy home games as opposed to finding games that would enhance our RPI.  Sound about right?



3/23/2006 1:45:00 PM
Poster: CAcolonial07

For those interested in net year's schedule. It looks like we may play the infamous UCLA Bruins in So Cal, USC, or another team that could be local in that region at least. Either way it should help our SOS I think, especially if we play UCLA.


3/23/2006 2:01:00 PM
Poster: RAYRAY

You guys are morons, we dont need to play strong, mid-major teams, we need to play overrated big conference teams like Tenn, Wisconsin, Indiana, etc.  That will help us in the RPI.  Beating up mid-major teams aint gonna help


3/23/2006 2:10:00 PM
Poster: Tennessee Colonial

Good point RAYRAY. We should only play teams from the really big conferences that are in real big media centers. Knopatch may be too small.


3/23/2006 3:14:00 PM
Poster: NOMON

Herve, not to nit pick, but Michigan was losing to the team down south by 30, not 50. And OSU's overall record is 39-57-6 in the series.

Looking forward to many years of debate with you sir.


3/23/2006 3:28:00 PM
Poster: GC

Mailvan, Blue Seats:  DON'T STOP!  WE'RE ABOUT TO SET A BBALL MESSAGE BOARD RECORD!!!!!!!!!!!!



3/23/2006 3:51:00 PM
Poster: HERVE

There's NO DEBATE NOMON. Sound science has clearly proven scUM's inferiority to all other life-forms. Why don't you look-up the overall series record since 1950 or, oh I don't know, since Jim Tressel made his way to Columbus....oops!....I thought so.....Man it's a long wait until Fall!!!!


3/23/2006 3:56:00 PM
Poster: ZIIK

ok GC: why put the onus on BlueSeats to prove that GW tried and was unable to schedule a more compelling OCC? Why not just call him and JK liars? Nothing less will satisfy the standard of proof  that is demanded that they be able to show that GW did everything it possibly could do to schedule better opponents. And hey!! That's just the standard demanded by one poster!! The only alternative to calling each other liars and letting this go is to ask Herve The Magnificent to intercede and conduct the scheduling of teams net year. Wipe the slate clean!! Dump the Cable Car Classic and the Wooden Classic and the BB&T (who the hell is responsible for scheduling those games? was GW selected out of a grabbag? Because surely its athletic department is incompetent to actually do what it says it will do.)

Herve The Magnificent can produce miracles. (That fact is proven by his ability to draw nuts of all shapes and sizes to this board.) We should ask Herve to do his stuff. Maybe each of us ought to give him our own short list of opponents, and let Herve select and schedule accordingly. With JK shunted aside, there's no reason why GW can't re-start the Big Red Tournament, and the Presidential Classic, too.

The benefits of this approach are 1) that we all trust Herve 2) that Herve can bring in Ohio State and Michigan (Ohio State for the Big Red--its their color; Michigan for the Presidential--tell them that its in honor of Gerald Ford--they'll believe anything.

This post has gone beyond ridiculous and beyond absurd.  Why should BS go tit for tat with Mailvan when the bottom line is that Mailvan just does not believe what he's been told. Telling it to him again and again is going to make no difference.

OK: here's the betting pool: Who puts up comment #100?



3/23/2006 4:11:00 PM
Poster: Mailvan

Ziik, I'm offering a perfectly reasonable argument to an issue which unfortunately, is an integral storyline to the great season we have all witnessed.  I have not accused anyone of being a liar, and have no recollection of anyone within the athletic department publicly stating that this schedule represented the very best level of competition that GW could attract.  At some point, before you take part in a discussion, you really ought to read what is actually being said as opposed to responding based on the Poster name only.


3/23/2006 4:20:00 PM
Poster: Alumnus

If we're playing UCLA, maybe RAHsheed HAZZard will drop by to see his old team play his dad's old team.


3/23/2006 4:40:00 PM
Poster: Obsessed with Sports

Malivan and Blue Seats, You are both 100% wrong. That's what I think.


3/23/2006 5:19:00 PM
Poster: ZIIK

Mailvan: It would take an egotistical ass to think that BS or anyone else needs to prove to his satisfaction the bona fides of GW's efforts to put together its OCC schedule. It also would take an egotistical ass to highjack a post on net year's schedule with his own persistent inanities about last year's schedule, especially when everybody on this board agrees that last year's schedule was unsatisfactory, and that future scheduling should comport as closely as possible with NCAA guidelines respecting tournament selection and seeding. And it would take an egotistical ass to think that I or anybody else (i.e. BS "officially" pushing you off of the deep end) comes here to post especially in response to your posts.  Don't believe me? Check out the response generated by your egotistical and assinine "Epilogue" post.

I appreciate your egotistical and assinine belief that you are entitled to the last word on every subject on this board (especially when that subject is scheduling). I also appreciate your need to direct belittling comments to those who disagree with you.

Feel free to keep it up. Maybe you can succeed in driving one or another of us off this board rather than deal with your egotistical and assinine commentary. It won't be the first time.



3/23/2006 5:20:00 PM
Poster: Longing for Oscar

Mailvan, you are 100% correct, as ususal.  This schedule discussion is now meaningless, ecept that I hope our AD has learned a valuable lesson.  Why don't we leave it alone now and turn our attention to net season?


3/23/2006 5:34:00 PM
Poster: NOMON

Since 1950 - it's dead even, 27-27-2...so not sure where you were going there.

Also since 1950, Big Ten titles: Michigan 23, Ohio State 22 (including ties)

And besides, Michigan's colors are better.


3/23/2006 5:39:00 PM
Poster: HERVE

Those ugly helmets!!! Come on! The Scarlet and Gray crowd is really eager for Lloyd to sign a 30 year contract etension! Please make it happen!

PS-You do realize Ohio State is a near unanimous pre-season #1 now that VY left for greener pastures? And, "YES!", Troy Smith will still haunt your cesspool of the west nightmares net year! GO BUCKS!


3/23/2006 5:46:00 PM
Poster: NOMON

Congrats on the 100th post! I think this conversation is best suited to our own seperate conversation, since it doesn't bear so much on GW basketball.

BTW - when did you become an alumnus?


3/23/2006 6:00:00 PM
Poster: HERVE

I've yet to find a thread on this board over the past 10 years which can't be improved with some Buckeye football talk!

Spring game is less than a month away and I'm still torn about who to cheer for.

I'm GW Class of '94. I NEVER attended Ohio State, but my parents did and my father was in the BEST DAMN BAND IN THE LAND, and I've been attending home games in the 'Shoe since the age of 4 so you could say it's in my DNA. Hervette went to her first GW game at 6 days old and her first Ohio State football game at 6 months old. Want to know the difference between GW and Ohio State? I had to buy a full-price ticket for her to attend the Ohio State game. Sad.

Well, we've managed to hijack this quality thread for no good reason....


3/23/2006 6:09:00 PM
Poster: NOMON

Interesting - I'm GW Class of 2004, but I was able to go to the UMass game when they were undefeated and #1 in the country - my e-roommate's older brother was a sophomore that year and we snuck into the Student Section - it was great!

I never went to Michigan either, nor did my parents - but it was the first football game I ever went to for my 9th birthday (the Desmond Howard game). I'm a child of good fortune, so to speak!


3/24/2006 6:19:00 AM
Poster: Mailvan

Ziik, for someone who "doesn't come here to respond especially to my posts", you sure do respond to a lot of them.  I'm not trying to drive anyone away from this board but I have to admit that if you were to fall into this category, I'd be OK with it.


3/24/2006 6:41:00 AM
Poster: Longing for Oscar

mailvan, I agree with you 100%, as usual.  Remember, this guy is in the business of selling 50 cent T-shirts to Colonial fans for $25....but they are high quality and made of cotton



3/24/2006 6:44:00 AM
Poster: Longing for Oscar

and the other guy is in the business defending bad decisions and double-speak.


3/24/2006 6:44:00 AM
Poster: NOMON

Here's something to consider for the schedule net year:

WVU, @ Michigan State, @ Oklahoma State, Providence, Mason, @Hofstra, @UCLA/USC, Boston U, and @Bradley (plus a couple of MEAC/NEC teams like the Mount or Howard)

I think that's a quality schedule!


3/24/2006 6:52:00 AM
Poster: Free Quebec

That is a good schedule, NOMON.  Let me know when West Virginia and Providence agree to come here.


3/24/2006 7:37:00 AM
Poster: bobo

WVU, @ Michigan State, @ Oklahoma State, Providence, Mason, @Hofstra, @UCLA/USC, Boston U, and @Bradley (plus a couple of MEAC/NEC teams like the Mount or Howard)

Nothing like starting the season with 5-6 loses in the OOC.  Schedules can be too hard as well - see St Joes and Temple.  All road games vs good teams = probable LOSS



3/24/2006 7:40:00 AM
Poster: herve

Providence played us at the Smith Center within the past 7 years. WV MIGHT be looking for some what-they-perceive-as-easier games as they're line-up is left-for-dead net year. Still, it's a big long-shot.


3/24/2006 8:33:00 AM
Poster: ZIIK

Mailvan: you directed your comments to me by name. I responded.  Others have felt the same as I do (Please recall the "SUCK IT, MAILVAN" comments).

Oscar you little weinnie: I don't make shirts small enough for you. I do use all of the money I am paid for those shirts to send kids to GWU games. The business you are in is being a whore for Mailvan.



3/24/2006 8:38:00 AM
Poster: Longing for Oscar

sure you do buddy.


3/24/2006 8:40:00 AM
Poster: BLUE SEATS

27-3, 16-0 A-10, #6 in the Nation, Highest NCAA seed in school history, first NCAA tournament victory in 12 years ... there just must have been a large number of bad decisions and double-speak to defend. Right Oscar?



3/24/2006 8:42:00 AM
Poster: Longing for Oscar

you forgot to mention the #8 seed.  See what I mean?


3/24/2006 8:48:00 AM
Poster: ZIIK

Oscar you little whore: what do you do with what Mailvan pays you? Send GW a check? Send a girls' high school team to GW vs. Tennessee? Send a group home to 2 or 3 or 4 GWU men's games? I rather doubt it. Just sit and lurk...


3/24/2006 8:57:00 AM
Poster: NOMON

Doesn't WVU owe us a home game??


3/24/2006 9:03:00 AM
Poster: BLUE SEATS

ziik - don't go down this road you are better than that. I'm sorry I got sucked into this thread already. People are going to believe what they want and quite frankly it's not worth the time and energy to convince them otherwise. I've already spent too much time on this thread.


3/24/2006 9:08:00 AM
Poster: Longing for Oscar

Ziik, I was just defending mailvan (who was 100% correct, as usual) from your attacks.  You're the one doing the lurking; I don't typically respond to your posts, but you were getting unusually and unreasonably abrasive.

I'd love to see an audit trail of that money.  Have fun ripping-off the Colonial comminity.



3/24/2006 9:09:00 AM
Poster: Tennessee Colonial

Did any of you guys go to any of the tourneys?  I, in my infinite wisdom, didn't have a name tag to identify myself at the receptions, or games.  Maybe at our net receptions we  can actually speak to each other.  How about shirts with our names printed on them. Should of thought of that before Cincinnati or Greensboro. Or does everyone want to stay anonymous?


3/24/2006 9:19:00 AM
Poster: ZIIK

BS: That must have been the "other" ziik posting. I just wanted to get this post above 100. I appreciate your comments, BS, and have to tell you that I enjoy your posts. There are quite a few posters that know their stuff (FQ, LSF, BM, ALum, Herve...............). It just irks me that we've got this one note guy and his sidekick acting pretty much like the trolls that Herve warns us against. You do have proof positive that KH tried his best to schedule better opponents but was stymied by circuumstance, don't you? Well, it doesn't matter to me. You said it, JK said it, and I'm happy to accept what you say as being true. This nonsense of demanding a list of 50 opponents, etc., is just belittling claptrap. The season is over, it was a success, GW got about as much publicity out of it as it, over a longer period, than we ever could have epected, and there is clear progress towards a better schedule net year.  Whatever you do at GW, if you need an assistant, keep me in mind. My shirts are sold out, my heart sugeries are complete, and I need something to do. Say hello to Jack for me.


3/24/2006 9:28:00 AM
Poster: ZIIK

No problem Oscar. I don't have the Mailvan paranoia about being officially pushed off the deep end whan another guy posts an opposing viewpoint, but when Mailvan directs his posts to me by name, I'll respond as I choose. I'll also respond to ther posters (you know--all the guys who really have something to say) as I choose. As for the shirts, no, you don't get to see an audit trail, any more than Mailvan gets a list of 50 schools that JK contacted for his schedule. You simply don't need to know. The IRS does, and it has all documents related to my sales and donations.

Tennessee: When I was into the shirt business, I had the names, addresses, etc., of the shirt guys, and could identify them at games. Still, I think anonymity was favored. Of course, Herve is know to many of his contemporaries, as he should be.  You want more shirts, though, and I can give you more shirts.



3/24/2006 9:38:00 AM
Poster: Longing for Oscar

your gigantic profit margins must generate quite a large contribution/donation.     As far as the continuing schedule debate, I agree with BS, let's end it.  The discussion now boarders on the obsessive.



3/24/2006 9:44:00 AM
Poster: BLUE SEATS

C'mon Oscar - accusing ziik of ripping off the GW Community because you don't like his posts is completely beyond the pale and might be actionable libel if you can't prove what you stated to be fact. How about we just stick to the issues and stop the personal attacks before this gets out of hand again? Herve doesn't deserve this again.


3/24/2006 9:47:00 AM
Poster: GWMBA2002

NOMON...

We Don't Give a Damn for the Whole State of Michigan

O, we don't give a damn for the whole state of Michigan
The whole state of Michigan, the whole state of Michigan
We don't give a damn for the whole state of Michigan, we're from Ohio
We're from Ohio...O-H
We're from Ohio...I-O
O, we don't give a damn for the whole state of Michigan
The whole state of Michigan, the whole state of Michigan
We don't give a damn for the whole state of Michigan, we're from Ohio

GO BUCKEYES!!!!



3/24/2006 9:48:00 AM
Poster: GWMBA2002

NOMON...

We Don't Give a Damn for the Whole State of Michigan

O, we don't give a damn for the whole state of Michigan
The whole state of Michigan, the whole state of Michigan
We don't give a damn for the whole state of Michigan, we're from Ohio
We're from Ohio...O-H
We're from Ohio...I-O
O, we don't give a damn for the whole state of Michigan
The whole state of Michigan, the whole state of Michigan
We don't give a damn for the whole state of Michigan, we're from Ohio

GO BUCKEYES!!!!



3/24/2006 11:37:00 AM
Poster: Longing for Oscar

$25 a shirt???  In the words of WW, Give Me a Break!  And, by the way, you should re-read this thread to see who initiated the attacks.  I can assure you it was your buddy Ziik.



3/24/2006 11:55:00 AM
Poster: Mailvan

In post #86 of this thread, I concluded that the basic disagreement between Blue Seats and I was essentially a stalemate considering that neither of us has definitive proof to defend our positions.  If only Ziik could have eercised a little self-control, this thread would have been long gone by now.


3/24/2006 11:59:00 AM
Poster: Alumnus

This should be a warning to GW.  When you wind up as a #8 seed and lose to Duke which turns around and loses to LSU, the fans have nothing better to do than rip each other to shreds.  Of course we were doing that when the team was in the middle of an 18-game winning streak, so maybe this is just our perverse idea of fun.


3/24/2006 12:25:00 PM
Poster: Free Quebec

NOMON -- No, they don't owe us a home game.


3/24/2006 12:36:00 PM
Poster: AI NOT ALLEN

Here's the thing - no one like's Mailvan on this board, but would it be more fun without him?  I used to wholeheartedly think yes, but the more posts I see from him, the more fun this site gets.  I mean, who hasn't spent at least a couple minutes this year thinking of ways to piss him off and then waiting (usually only a minute or two) for him to attempt a comeback.

Keep it up fellas!




3/24/2006 12:40:00 PM
Poster: ACOPE27

O-H

I-O!!!

GO BUCKS!!!



3/24/2006 1:45:00 PM
Poster: Mailvan

Fun is what I'm all about, AI.


3/24/2006 2:06:00 PM
Poster: Longing for Oscar

mailvan, I agree with you 100%, as usual.  You are the most considerate and informative here.  I appreciate the time you take to eplain your positions.  I am sure that I speak for the vast majority of people on this board, in telling you that we appreciate everything you do.


3/30/2006 10:24:00 AM
Poster: Z

Is there a way to put a permanent link on the board to a document that contains confirmed and rumored games for net year? I suspect that may avoid repetition.


3/31/2006 5:41:00 AM
Poster: BM

I second that.  An maybe a forward looking depth chart.  I keep both of these things on paper.


3/31/2006 5:47:00 AM
Poster: herve

New site boys. It's all about the new site boys. Good ideas.

Poster:


Title: