CMJ

I think most teams have ones that last 3-4 minutes. Given our slower pace of play, it's not surprising ours can last longer. On the other side, we also shut down teams for long minute stretches though. Hell, Wisconsin went over 9 minutes against us. What we don't need is multiple stretches like that. It's what killed us in the CUSA tourney a coupe of years ago.

NT 33 ----------- Memphis 30 Halftime I'll take it. Worried if our shooting vanishes again though.

Memphis 25 ----------- NT 24 3:03 to go We've gone over six minutes without scoring.

NT 24 ----------- Memphis 15 8:01 to go Game seems to have settled for now. Considering out three point shooting so far, I wish we had a bigger lead.

NT 18 ----------- Memphis 11 11:05 to go Tigers crawling back.

NT 15 ----------- Memphis 4 14:45 to go Unbelievable start to this game.

NT 9 ----------- Memphis 2 17:21 to go Super hot from outside!

I consider those to still be 20 win seasons though. I'm not giving back last year's 30 win squad with the guys just because they hit the mark with the NIT.

Memphis seems to be have recovered from their swoon of a few weeks back (the kind we are currently still in). This is gonna be a really tough game.

Perhaps 19 wins is the record pre-conference tournament?

We have. 1985-1986 Season 20-10 1998-1999 Season 20-8 2001-2002 Season 21-9

I've hurt my groin before. Not sure the extent exactly, but it was my right muscle during a time trial run years ago. Maybe it's my age (I mean a 20 something will recover faster), but not only does it take time to recover, but even now it needs to be warmed up way more than it ever used to (or my left side). And that injury was probably a good five plus years ago now.

On a tangent to that - even when I was a kid in the late 80s, DePaul was still pretty solid, but their history prior to that is fantastic. Considering they're in Chicago and the league they're at, I think they're one of those under the radar sleeping giant programs who could be great again. Kinda nuts how far they've fallen the last 30+ years.

I'd go see UNC or Duke....to see the Heels or Blue Devils. Not to see SMU.

Probably 2010 Texas Tech for me. I specifically flew back into town for the banner raising of the previous season's NCAA Tournament and to see us take on the Red Raiders. White and Odufuwa both had great games. TT and DJ also hit some big shots. Tremendous atmosphere that night.

You're right, but I more or less include UVA for their current status as a perennial contender. They've basically taken Florida's status ever since Billy Donovan left.

UVA isn't even a blue blood. They're a great program, among the best of the last decade or so (and a nice run in the 80s) but they're not a blue blood with multiple titles or at least contenders with Final Fours and such fairly consistently reaching back decades. Having schools win titles with multiple coaches also helps, though I don't penalize Duke for getting all of theirs with Krzyzewski given he won 5 (plus they did have Final Fours in their history prior to his arrival - so they had a quality history). Blue Bloods can and do have down periods, but they're rarely out of the contender conversation for too long (Indiana is an example of a Blue Blood that's been down so long they're in danger of losing the status -- but I still keep them on given their history is so rich). UNC, Connecticut, Duke, Kentucky, Kansas, UCLA, Indiana --- those are Blue Bloods. Other quality programs like your Michigan States, Villanovas, Louisvilles, and UVAs - while very close don't quite hit the mark for me.

“Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.”

I'm not backpedaling on anything. I didn't consider it a real admission since you said you weren't gonna look it up and preferred to remember it the way you did. If it was an admission, it was a halfhearted one at best, but I suppose that's the best you can produce. Go on and do you though.

Again...who is the silent majority? You? No one else seems to think so, so I need receipts. Otherwise it is not a "silent majority" -- it's a majority of one individual...which as you said doesn't make sense. Point 2...when you said you liked the way you remembered the story and wouldn't really look it up, to me that was the cowards way out. You only half heartedly admitted anything. Actually it seemed like you were putting your fingers in your ears and would go on believing the story as you wanted to remember it.

The "silent majority" of our fanbase probably thinks Josh White is a better player than Edwards. You my young friend are not the silent majority. You can think Edwards is the best player in recent UNT history. Hell, you might believe he's the best there has ever been here given you've been around for about half an hour. Of course you've also proven to be wrong nearly as frequently as Andrew. Mandela didn't die in prison, and it's about time you let some other misconceptions go too.

The silent majority would say you're being premature. If you wanna say the feats of Hamlet and Perry don't matter because nobody saw them or whatever it is you're implying - then what Edwards has done REALLY doesn't matter. Listen you can't even admit you were wrong about what year Duke won a National Title or one of their players went there, so I don't expect a great deal of humility from your arguments. Doesn't mean you're right very often though.

Listen, I like Edwards, but until he has heroics similar to Hamlet in the NCAA or Perry in the NIT, it's absurd to say he's better than those guys. He MAY be, but he hasn't proved it.

Not sure I ever implied otherwise?

I'm not saying it happens consistently...just that's all he needs to produce IMHO.