MID-WEEK WRAP-UP

KU and UT were the big winners in this week’s early slate of games. Both Contenders picked up � game on the rest of the field by prevailing in at-risk Road games vs. Pretenders NU and Texas Tech respectively, losers of at-risk Home games.

My how time flies. It seems like only a week ago that Tech was being touted as a team on par with KU, A&M, UT and Okie St, just because the Red Raiders had won two games at home and were tied in the newspaper standings. They have since fallen to 6th place in the newspaper, behind 5th place k-state-exactly where they were a week ago in the REAL Standings. But, then, that’s why they are called the REAL Standings.

All the projected winners-Baylor at Home, A&M at Home, and k-state at Home-garnered their W’s without muss or fuss, leaving their REAL records unchanged.

“THE” REAL STANDINGS AS OF FEBRUARY 1, 2007

1. 13.5-2.5

Kansas (6-1)

(No projected L’s; at risk games at Mizzou, at k-state, at OU)

2. 12-4

Texas (6-1)

(projected L’s at A&M, at KU; at risk games at Baylor, at OU)

3. 11-5

Texas A&M (6-1)

(projected L’s at KU, at Okie St, at UT; at risk games at NU, at OU)

Oklahoma St (4-2)

(projected L at UT; at risk games at NU, at OU, at Tech, at Baylor)

5. 9-7

k-state (5-2)

(projected L’s at UT, at KU, at NU, at Okie St; at risk games vs. KU, at CU)

6. 7.5-8.5

Texas Tech (4-3)

(projected L’s at OU, at Okie St, at A&M, at UT, at ISU; at risk game vs. Okie St)

7. 7-9

Iowa St (2-5)

(projected L’s at UT, at k-state, at KU, at NU)

8. 6.5-9.5

Mizzou (2-5)

(projected L’s at ISU, at Okie St, at NU, at A&M; at risk games vs. KU)

9. 6-10

Oklahoma (3-4)

(projected L’s at Baylor, at ISU, at Mizzou, at k-state; at risk games vs. Okie St, vs. A&M, vs. UT, vs. KU)

10. 5.5-10.5

Nebraska (1-5)

(projected L’s at Mizzou, at Tech, at KU, at Baylor; at risk games vs. A&M, at CU, vs. Okie St)

11. 5-11

Baylor (2-6)

(projected L’s at ISU at Mizzou, at A&M, at Tech; at risk games vs. UT, vs. Okie St)

12. 2-14

Colorado (1-7)

(projected L’s vs. Okie St, at k-state, vs. KU, at Tech, at ISU, at Mizzou; at risk games vs. k-state, vs. NU)

UPCOMING GAMES

The Weekend Big XII Games, with IQ (Interest Quotient) are:

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

Go out for lunch. Take a nap. Use this time to rest up for more interesting games.

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

This isn’t one of the games you are resting up for.

3. k-state at UT (2:30p.m.)***1/2 Projected W: UT

Two of the conference’s Top 5 teams on the same court at the same time. Worth a look.

4. Baylor at Iowa St** (5:00p.m.) Projected W: Iowa St

Only worth watching to see if Baylor can carry over solid performances at UT and vs. UT to Ames. Baylor is no threat to grab an NCAA bid, but they are on the verge of shedding their long-time laughingstock status.

5. Texas Tech at OU*** (7:00p.m.) Projected W: OU

Watchable game. Two solid, if unspectacular teams. Watchable that is, until halftime, which will come at approximately 8:00p.m. . . .

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

Game Day. Rece. Hubert. Digger. Duke-Boy. Dickie V. That other guy that always sits next to Dickie V. It will be worth the wait. The cr�me de la cr�me of the college basketball weekend. The pi�ce de r�sistance. KU will remain in first place in the REAL Standings regardless of the outcome, but A&M can stake its claim to being the best team in the league if it can walk out of Allen Fieldhouse with a victory. They can also close the gap in the REAL Standings to a manageable one-half game. Otherwise, they will remain 2.5 games behind the Jayhawks, and their championship dreams will be nothing but dust in the Kansas wind.

Happy couch-potatoing.

–Mark

He may just be trying to make (very slight) amends to those of us for whom this game (It took me a good 15 minutes to come up with even that link. NCAASports.org appears to have a policy against providing useful information and I don’t believe you can link to particular page of the KU Media Guide.) still represents an instance of youthful trauma in advance of his arrival in Lawrence this weekend, but here’s what Mr. Bilas signed off with today:

� Kansas is better than people choose to believe, and so is Bill Self.

This is really a funny post.� I especially liked the picture of Minute Bol! The picture of Evil Kenevil trying to cross the Grand Canyon’s a pretty good one too!

“First learn stand, then learn fly. Nature rule, Daniel San, not mine.”

Due to some poor planning, I didn’t get to watch last night’s game live. Due to an unexpectedly great concert (and, perhaps, a bit too much pre- and post-show conviviality), I haven’t watched the tape yet, either. Thus, no analysis from me. It’s probably for the best. As I mentioned yesterday, it was less than a month ago that I predicted Nebraska would finish 9-7 in conference play and make the NCAA Tournament. I guess that’s still mathematically possible.

Team	eFG%	OR%	TO%	FT Rate	FT%	PPP
KU	50.8	44.4	19.9	23.0	82.4	1.16
NU	51.1	3.1	21.5	19.6	64.3	0.86

Heading into conference play, Nebraska was my darkhorse pick to make the NCAA Tournament. Neither the best nor the worst prediciton I’ve ever made (though tending toward the latter so far), there’s a better-than-zero chance that the Cornhuskers will use their opportunity tonight to make me look (temporarily) slightly less foolish than normal.

My optimism regarding Nebraska was based almost entirely on two things: playing the Big 12 North schedule and shooting 65 eFG% or higher in five of their 12 non-conference games.

Nebraska has not been able to approach such feats of shooting against Big 12 competition. They’ve peaked at 55 eFG% in their home games against Colorado and Texas and are just shooting 50.2 eFG% in conference play as a whole. On any given night, they’re still dangerous as is any team with one good post player (Aleks Maric) and a desire to take about 45% of their field goal attempts from behind the arc.

NEBRASKA OFFENSE v. KANSAS DEFENSE

Team	eFG%	OR%	TO%	FT Rate	FT%	PPP
KU def	43.3	31.6	26.1	31.9	64.9	0.86
NU off	56.6	26.8	21.9	26.6	72.8	1.08

On the other side of the ball, Nebraska has forced each of their Big 12 opponents to take at least 40% of their own field goal attempts from three-point range. On the season, Kansas uses but 26.6% of their field goal attempts on three-pointers (making 38.4%). In conference play, they’ve further reduced their utilization of the three-point line, taking only 23.8% of their field goal attempts from there (making 46.5%).

KANSAS OFFENSE v. NEBRASKA DEFENSE

Team	eFG%	OR%	TO%	FT Rate	FT%	PPP
KU off	54.0	37.2	21.0	23.7	67.3	1.10
NU def	50.0	33.0	26.3	35.2	69.0	0.97

Bill Self picked a good spot to get on the big men about rebounding. Nebraska doesn’t do much of it on either end of the court getting just 26.8% of possible offensive rebounds (21.2% in Big 12 play) and 67% of possible defensive rebounds (63.8% in Big 12 play). If the Jayhawks fail to show at least a superficial improvement on the glass it will be cause for serious concern.

Finally, Nebraska has slowed the pace of their games way down in Big 12 play. They played at 66.5 possessions per game against their non-conference slate. The fastest paced game they’ve played against a Big 12 team was a 61 possession barn-burner against Colorado (or, approximately 75% of the possessions Kansas had against Colorado). Obviously, Doc Sadler didn’t/doesn’t share my previous enthusiasm over his team’s potential.

Prediction: Kansas 68 Nebraska 60

WEEKEND WRAP-UP

Doug Bell introduced the Big 12 double-header Saturday by proclaiming that “The Big 12 has been anything but predictable in conference play.” He also stated that Texas Tech, “easily favored, [faces] a Tiger team fueled by Mike Anderson’s energy and the prospect of a W.”

Again, it is enough to make you wonder why people who get paid to talk about college basketball are so lazy they make comments that might sound like they make sense at first blush, but are, in REALity, stupid. Or is this merely the natural extension of the Vitale-ization of college basketball.

In truth, the Big 12 has been extremely predictable. Although the REAL Standings do not purport to be predictions, if you had based predictions on them, you would have been 6 for 6 Saturday: All the Home Teams were projected winners, and they all won.

No change in the REAL Standings.

In fact, the only surprises thus far in the conference season have been in the middle of the standings: Tech’s victory at k-state; k-state’s victories at Mizzou and Iowa St, and Iowa St’s victory at Mizzou. These are the only games in which a Projected Winner bit the dust.

The few other games in which some non-discriminating media types have expressed surprise were not surprises at all: Tech losing at Baylor (that was a Projected W for Baylor); Iowa St losing at Colorado (in an at-risk game for ISU); KU losing at Tech (in an at-risk game for KU); and A&M losing at Tech (in an at-risk game for A&M). That’s it: unless you count Mizzou achieving its first conference victory over CU in Boulder (in an at-risk game for Mizzou), which hardly sent shock waves through the conference.

As for Tech being “easily favored” over Mizzou, the Tigers were a 3 point Home favorite and a projected winner in the REAL Standings.

To paraphrase a motto from the political arena: “It’s the Home Court, Stupid.”

One more thing: maybe Randy Riggs of the Austin American-Statesman should ask this question: “If Baylor and Mizzou have only 1 and 2 conference wins respectively what does that make Texas Tech?” Suffice it to say: “Not a REAL Contender.”

“THE” REAL STANDINGS AS OF JANUARY 28, 2007

1. 13-3

Kansas (5-1)

(No projected L’s; at risk games at NU, at Mizzou, at k-state, at OU)

2. 11.5-4.5

Texas (5-1)

(projected L’s at A&M, at KU; at risk games at Tech, at Baylor, at OU)

3. 11-5

Texas A&M (5-1)

(projected L’s at KU, at Okie St, at UT; at risk games at NU, at OU)

Oklahoma St (4-2)

(projected L’s at UT at risk games: at NU, at OU, at Tech, at Baylor)

5. 9-7

k-state (4-2)

(projected L’s at UT, at KU, at NU, at Okie St; at risk games vs. KU, at CU)

6. 8-8

Texas Tech (4-2)

(projected L’s at OU, at Okie St, at A&M, at UT, at ISU; at risk games vs. UT, vs. Okie St)

7. 7-9

Iowa St (2-4)

(projected L’s at A&M, at UT, at k-state, at KU, at NU)

8. 6.5-9.5

Mizzou (2-4)

(projected L’s at k-state, at ISU, at Okie St, at NU, at A&M; at risk games vs. KU)

9. 6-10

Nebraska (1-4)

(projected L’s at Mizzou, at Tech, at KU, at Baylor; at risk games vs. KU, vs. A&M, at CU, vs. Okie St)

Oklahoma (3-4)

(projected L’s at Baylor, at ISU, at Mizzou, at k-state; at risk games vs. Okie St, vs. A&M, vs. UT, vs. KU)

11. 5-11

Baylor (1-6)

(projected L’s at ISU at Mizzou, at A&M, at Tech; at risk games vs. UT, vs. Okie St)

12. 2-14

Colorado (1-6)

(projected L’s at Baylor, vs. Okie St, at k-state, vs. KU, at Tech, at ISU, at Mizzou; at risk games vs. k-state, vs. NU)

UPCOMING GAMES

The Early Week Big XII Games, with IQ (Interest Quotient) are:

MONDAY

1. KU at Nebraska***1/2 (8:00p.m.)-Swing Game: No Projection

NU had a seven foot shot in the closing seconds to take down UT. Who do you think the Huskers would prefer to beat: UT or KU? This is a dangerous, dangerous game for the Jayhawks, especially if they are peeking ahead to Saturday.

TUESDAY

2. Longwood at Oklahoma* (7:00p.m.)

I thought Longwood Longwood was suspended. Shouldn’t this game have been played in October-around UT weekend, when it could have gotten all the attention it deserved?

3. Colorado at Baylor* (7:30p.m.)-Projected W: Baylor

Speaking of games that should have been played in October.

Or September. . .

WEDNESDAY

4. Iowa St at A&M*1/2 (6:30p.m.)-Projected W: A&M

It just keeps getting worse and worse for the Cyclones.

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

Revenge is a dish best served cold. Mizzou is intent on ridding its palate of that foul tasting loss to k-state at home-highlighted by a Marshall Brown blown breakaway dunk just when it looked as if the Tigers were about to take control of the game. But can Mizzou take its game on the road? (No, Colorado doesn’t count-I’m talking about the REAL Road, where more the attendance is greater than 93.) Still, the Revenge Factor makes this game one to keep an eye on as a potential upset.

6. Texas at Texas Tech**** (8:00p.m.)- Swing Game: No projection

Can Tech take down its third Contender at home in less than two weeks. It will be intriguing to see what Bobby Knight devises for Durant, Augustin, Abrams, et al. Don’t miss this one. Better yet, split your screen between this game and the one in Manhattan.

Happy viewing.

–Mark

18-3.

That’s what KU will be after this afternoon’s game with Colorado.

Pretty impressive, huh?

Yet you hear the murmurs: What’s wrong with the Jayhawks? Why don’t they give more effort? Why are they not focused? Why so many silly turnovers? So many stupid shots? How could they lose to a dental school? A mediocre De Paul team? Texas Tech? Why was it so hard to put away Detroit? Toledo? Iowa State? Mizzou?

And the counter-rumblings: Just shut up! We’re 18-3. Mid-majors aren’t mid-majors anymore. Everyone has bad nights. Conference games on the road are hard. Why can’t you be happy with a win? Why isn’t 18-3 good enough? Even our former coach had bad losses, and here’s a list of them. . .

Always the kicker: We are 18-3. (Or 6-1, or 16-2, whatever the record du jour is.)

And 18-3 is pretty good. 18-3 is the mark of an elite team-right?

Maybe. Maybe not. It depends on whether you are satisfied with an 85.7% winning percentage in a vacuum or prefer to place it in a meaningful context.

The context I look at-for all teams, not just KU-is the team’s REAL Record, which is based on the following premises:

1. Throw out all Home W’s. You don’t win championships on your home court. Championships are won by teams that can win on the road and on neutral courts. A good team should win virtually all of its home games vs. even the best opponents. No Home W means anything. So out the window goes the win over Boston College. Out the window goes the 30 point win over Okie State. (Likewise, out the window goes Florida’s 26 point rout of Ohio St, UNC’s 10 point win over Ohio St, Wisconsin’s 3 point win over Ohio St, Okie St’s triple OT victory over UT, Oregon’s victory over UCLA, etc.).

Throw out KU’s 12 Home W’s, and the Jayhawks’ record is 6-3.

2. Throw out all victories over non-competitive teams. This is more subjective, but does anyone REALly want to argue that Northern Arizona, Towson, Tennessee St, Ball St, Dartmouth, Toledo, Winston-Salem, Detroit, and Rhode Island should be any more than glorified exhibition games for a team seeking a major conference championship and the right to be playing in late March and early April?

Seven of these games were already thrown out because they were played in Allen Fieldhouse (i.e., Northern Arizona, Towson, Tennessee St, Dartmouth, Winston-Salem, Detroit, and Rhode Island).

Throw out Ball St (neutral court in Las Vegas) and Toledo (pseudo-home court in K,C,), and the Jayhawks REAL record is 4-3.

This leaves us with seven games to examine. Let’s do the fun part first and look at the victories.

No. 1 on the list, of course, is No. 1. The Jayhawks defeated the defending national champion and current No. 1 ranked team, Florida, on a neutral court in Nevada. As a result, KU owns the best win of the season. No one else has beaten a team of Florida’s quality away from home. Second best is probably Gonzaga’s triumph over UNC in Madison Square Garden.

KU’s other REAL victories are at South Carolina, at Iowa St, and at Baylor. Not exactly Murderer’s Row. Although the Hawks’ 16 point victory over South Carolina looked impressive at the time, the Gamecocks have since lost at home by 34 to Florida and 38 to Kentucky. Although the Iowa St victory in OT, while ugly, looked solid at the time, the Cyclones have since lost to Colorado (yes, it was on the road-but we’re talking Colorado for god’s sake) and at home to k-state. And Baylor, while improved (they own a home victory over Texas Tech) is not by any means an upper crust team.

As for the three losses, the first, of course, is to Oral Roberts. The Golden Eagles are looking good at 6-0 in their conference. They are a good mid-major (and yes, that is still an apt term, because they cannot and will not ever recruit major talent). They will likely make the NCAA tournament. But KU let them walk out of Allen Freeakin’ Fieldhouse with a victory. This is the yin to the Florida yang. Just as the Jayhawks own the best win of the season, they also own the worst loss.

De Paul is 12-9 overall, 3-4 in the Big East. No shame in losing to a decent major conference team on the road-other than that blowing a 14 point lead in a game in which De Paul stunk up the place for 30 minutes thing. But no glory either.

And Tech is 4-1 in the Big 12, with a home win over A&M. And while Bobby Knight has been accused o many things, not being able to coach isn’t one of them. Again, no shame in losing to this team on the road. However, again, no glory either.

So how good are the Jayhawks?

Good enough to beat anyone (see Florida). Vulnerable enough to lose to almost anyone they might encounter in March Madness (see ORU).

They are 3-2 in REAL road games, with the 3 wins coming against mediocre teams, and the two losses against good, but certainly not great teams. Tech is probably in the NCAA tourney, and De Paul could make a run at it. Neither is a threat to make the Final Four.

Overall, not an impressive resume. Nothing to suggest that they should be favored to win the national championship or even make the final weekend of the college basketball season..

But that one win makes their resume impressive enough to include them among the short list of teams that have a legitimate chance to be playing in Atlanta in April.

(Note: In the next few days, I will run a similar assessment of the REAL Records of other top teams, so we can place KU’s REAL Record in some sort of context.)