Big East Tournament

Quote from: paultzman on March 13, 2016, 02:52:52 PM

Quote from: WillieG on March 13, 2016, 02:46:06 PM

Quote from: paultzman on March 13, 2016, 02:26:38 PM

Quote from: WillieG on March 13, 2016, 02:18:55 PM

Quote from: paultzman on March 13, 2016, 01:59:33 PM

Quote from: WillieG on March 13, 2016, 01:55:14 PM

Quote from: RedStormNC on March 12, 2016, 07:56:46 PM

SH has continued to show they know how to win.  Love em or hate em, Willard doing what he is paid to do..

He shouldn't be paid to break rules.

The horse is beyond dead man!

Are you kidding me.  I was called out on our own board for defending the program against cheaters and I'm the one that should not post about it.  Someone got fired here for not bringing in recruits and you shouldn't post about it.  I cited the rule.  How is this not relevant to the program.  Everyone was saying Willard did not break the rules.  I[pointed out how he did, and I'm the one who shouldn't have made the posts. If someone makes an error while they are trying to refute my argument then I have to respond.  Right?  What is the board for if you can't point things like this out.  Read the rule and explain to me how he did not break it.  What, because the Hall was not stupid enough to write the contingency into the contract so you can't prove there was quid pro quo.

It reminds me of when Clinton pardoned that fugitive criminal and said you can't prove there was quid pro qou for the gifts I received from him.  And  then Jimmy Carter, a Democrat himself, published an editorial in the Times saying "one assumes there was quid pro quo".  It was a pretty damning piece by Carter. 

Nothing is changing, so may be time to move on or take it to Supreme Court. Getting tedious. You have made your point. This is getting like an Aleve commercial.

If someone contradicts you in error then you have to respond. Right? If someone attacks you personally you have to respond. Right? I was asked to cite a rule. I did it.  People didn't have to call me out.  Several posters.  They are the reasons why this has gone on.  Not me. I have to defend myself. You should trust me by now that I know what I'm talking about.  Don't attack me.

I could understand if this was a Seton Hall board that there would be some fireworks because they would lose their objectivity.  They do.  But come on dudes this is the Jungle.  We should be circling the wagons.  Our program is on life support.  Someone stole key recruits at a critical juncture in program history.  Someone lost their job because of this.  This is relevant.  This is important.

"Storm the Bastile" 

I find it amazing how thousands and thousands of posts could be made by someone about SJU hoops and the person doesn't seem to care, even when they  shown how Lavin was cheated out of his job.  And now Willard basks in the glory.  Oh but wait a minute.  You knew the whole time he broke the rule, you just didn't care that we were cheated out of IW and Carrington.   Gee, "Storm the Bastille".  Wow you're so sophisticated you don't even care that we only won one game. Fourteen thousand posts.

Nah, just find your posts tedious and repetitive, but let's move on.

Willard and SHU out worked us on the court and off it.. Unless the ncaa accuses them of something shady,  they are good to go... Crying now looks weak. 

Bottom line , they got to celebrate a big east title at MSG ( which thru referred to as their home),  and St. John's is at , yet another, rock bottom... Amazing how year after year, that bottom floor gets lowered. 

We are.....

.Agree--whining is just sour grapes.  Since BE shares NCAA money hope the best for all our brethren.

Quote from: WillieG on March 13, 2016, 02:06:52 PM

Quote from: paultzman on March 12, 2016, 12:55:26 PM

Quote from: simplyred on March 12, 2016, 12:46:48 PM

Quote from: WillieG on March 12, 2016, 11:51:54 AM

Quote from: SJUhoopNUT on March 12, 2016, 07:41:41 AM

Willard's job was seemingly on the line, so he did what a desperate man would do, he got the kid he needed that he thought would turn it around. I won't give him credit for Whitehead.

However I will give him credit for Carrington and Desi. Lav dropped the ball on Carrington. I remember Chiles recruiting him aggressively at one point and we had strong momentum then it just stopped. Clearly, he would have been a great get. He wouldn't have played as much as he did for us last year, but Lavin could have made it work.

Overall, I would say Seton Hall getting it done with a soph class of local kids basically reflects how bad Lavin was recruiting the last 2 years.

Carrington wanted to play with Whitehead, so whoever got Whitehead also got Carrington.  Whitehead was the one who Willard chaeated to get.  So he does not get credit really for Carrington in my mind.  To me he is just a big cheater.

Can you point me to the rule that Willard violated.  I've tried looking it up and I can't find it.  I know what he did seems slimy but I can find an actual violation.  You've called him out in no uncertain terms as a cheater.  I just can't find the rule that he broke.

Because there isn't one. Good post.

The rule was found Paultz.  I researched it two years ago for another board.  NCAA bylaw 11.4.1.1.  It states the hires contract cannot be "contingent on the commitment".  It is why SH had to wait until the summer to even post the sham listing on their athletics website for the "coaching vacancy" .  Most people knew it was a package deal 8 months before that posting was even listed. They were attempting to make it look like there was no quid pro quo because they were aware of the rule even though most journalists were not. He was then hired some time later and nobody batted an eye because it had been known for almost a year.

Sometimes coaches make these deals and they backfire more times than not which is why you rarely see them happen. How's DePaul doing with Billy Garret Jr?

  Thats totally legal Dave.  To hire the parent of a recruit is totally legal.  But they would be much worse if they didn't have Garret.  Certainly worse then us if you can believe it.  Another thing; Garret is not the talent Whitehead is.  Plus he has sickle cell trait which severely limits his minutes. Also, Carrington came with whitehead.  A real home run for Seton Hall.  They're Big East champions.

Quote from: WillieG on March 13, 2016, 02:06:52 PM

Quote from: paultzman on March 12, 2016, 12:55:26 PM

Quote from: simplyred on March 12, 2016, 12:46:48 PM

Quote from: WillieG on March 12, 2016, 11:51:54 AM

Quote from: SJUhoopNUT on March 12, 2016, 07:41:41 AM

Willard's job was seemingly on the line, so he did what a desperate man would do, he got the kid he needed that he thought would turn it around. I won't give him credit for Whitehead.

However I will give him credit for Carrington and Desi. Lav dropped the ball on Carrington. I remember Chiles recruiting him aggressively at one point and we had strong momentum then it just stopped. Clearly, he would have been a great get. He wouldn't have played as much as he did for us last year, but Lavin could have made it work.

Overall, I would say Seton Hall getting it done with a soph class of local kids basically reflects how bad Lavin was recruiting the last 2 years.

Carrington wanted to play with Whitehead, so whoever got Whitehead also got Carrington.  Whitehead was the one who Willard chaeated to get.  So he does not get credit really for Carrington in my mind.  To me he is just a big cheater.

Can you point me to the rule that Willard violated.  I've tried looking it up and I can't find it.  I know what he did seems slimy but I can find an actual violation.  You've called him out in no uncertain terms as a cheater.  I just can't find the rule that he broke.

Because there isn't one. Good post.

The rule was found Paultz.  I researched it two years ago for another board.  NCAA bylaw 11.4.1.1.  It states the hires contract cannot be "contingent on the commitment".  It is why SH had to wait until the summer to even post the sham listing on their athletics website for the "coaching vacancy" .  Most people knew it was a package deal 8 months before that posting was even listed. They were attempting to make it look like there was no quid pro quo because they were aware of the rule even though most journalists were not. He was then hired some time later and nobody batted an eye because it had been known for almost a year.

Sometimes coaches make these deals and they backfire more times than not which is why you rarely see them happen. How's DePaul doing with Billy Garret Jr?

Finished better than us.

Quote from: Dave on March 13, 2016, 03:58:48 PM

Quote from: WillieG on March 13, 2016, 02:06:52 PM

Quote from: paultzman on March 12, 2016, 12:55:26 PM

Quote from: simplyred on March 12, 2016, 12:46:48 PM

Quote from: WillieG on March 12, 2016, 11:51:54 AM

Quote from: SJUhoopNUT on March 12, 2016, 07:41:41 AM

Willard's job was seemingly on the line, so he did what a desperate man would do, he got the kid he needed that he thought would turn it around. I won't give him credit for Whitehead.

However I will give him credit for Carrington and Desi. Lav dropped the ball on Carrington. I remember Chiles recruiting him aggressively at one point and we had strong momentum then it just stopped. Clearly, he would have been a great get. He wouldn't have played as much as he did for us last year, but Lavin could have made it work.

Overall, I would say Seton Hall getting it done with a soph class of local kids basically reflects how bad Lavin was recruiting the last 2 years.

Carrington wanted to play with Whitehead, so whoever got Whitehead also got Carrington.  Whitehead was the one who Willard chaeated to get.  So he does not get credit really for Carrington in my mind.  To me he is just a big cheater.

Can you point me to the rule that Willard violated.  I've tried looking it up and I can't find it.  I know what he did seems slimy but I can find an actual violation.  You've called him out in no uncertain terms as a cheater.  I just can't find the rule that he broke.

Because there isn't one. Good post.

The rule was found Paultz.  I researched it two years ago for another board.  NCAA bylaw 11.4.1.1.  It states the hires contract cannot be "contingent on the commitment".  It is why SH had to wait until the summer to even post the sham listing on their athletics website for the "coaching vacancy" .  Most people knew it was a package deal 8 months before that posting was even listed. They were attempting to make it look like there was no quid pro quo because they were aware of the rule even though most journalists were not. He was then hired some time later and nobody batted an eye because it had been known for almost a year.

Sometimes coaches make these deals and they backfire more times than not which is why you rarely see them happen. How's DePaul doing with Billy Garret Jr?

  Thats totally legal Dave.  To hire the parent of a recruit is totally legal.  But they would be much worse if they didn't have Garret.  Certainly worse then us if you can believe it.  Another thing; Garret is not the talent Whitehead is.  Plus he has sickle cell trait which severely limits his minutes. Also, Carrington came with whitehead.  A real home run for Seton Hall.  They're Big East champions.

WillirG...doesn't change your point, but I think the package was Whitehead and Rodriguez. I believe Carrington had already commtted.

Quote from: WillieG on March 13, 2016, 03:57:40 PM

Quote from: paultzman on March 13, 2016, 02:52:52 PM

Quote from: WillieG on March 13, 2016, 02:46:06 PM

Quote from: paultzman on March 13, 2016, 02:26:38 PM

Quote from: WillieG on March 13, 2016, 02:18:55 PM

Quote from: paultzman on March 13, 2016, 01:59:33 PM

Quote from: WillieG on March 13, 2016, 01:55:14 PM

Quote from: RedStormNC on March 12, 2016, 07:56:46 PM

SH has continued to show they know how to win.  Love em or hate em, Willard doing what he is paid to do..

He shouldn't be paid to break rules.

The horse is beyond dead man!

Are you kidding me.  I was called out on our own board for defending the program against cheaters and I'm the one that should not post about it.  Someone got fired here for not bringing in recruits and you shouldn't post about it.  I cited the rule.  How is this not relevant to the program.  Everyone was saying Willard did not break the rules.  I[pointed out how he did, and I'm the one who shouldn't have made the posts. If someone makes an error while they are trying to refute my argument then I have to respond.  Right?  What is the board for if you can't point things like this out.  Read the rule and explain to me how he did not break it.  What, because the Hall was not stupid enough to write the contingency into the contract so you can't prove there was quid pro quo.

It reminds me of when Clinton pardoned that fugitive criminal and said you can't prove there was quid pro qou for the gifts I received from him.  And  then Jimmy Carter, a Democrat himself, published an editorial in the Times saying "one assumes there was quid pro quo".  It was a pretty damning piece by Carter. 

Nothing is changing, so may be time to move on or take it to Supreme Court. Getting tedious. You have made your point. This is getting like an Aleve commercial.

If someone contradicts you in error then you have to respond. Right? If someone attacks you personally you have to respond. Right? I was asked to cite a rule. I did it.  People didn't have to call me out.  Several posters.  They are the reasons why this has gone on.  Not me. I have to defend myself. You should trust me by now that I know what I'm talking about.  Don't attack me.

I could understand if this was a Seton Hall board that there would be some fireworks because they would lose their objectivity.  They do.  But come on dudes this is the Jungle.  We should be circling the wagons.  Our program is on life support.  Someone stole key recruits at a critical juncture in program history.  Someone lost their job because of this.  This is relevant.  This is important.

"Storm the Bastile" 

I find it amazing how thousands and thousands of posts could be made by someone about SJU hoops and the person doesn't seem to care, even when they  shown how Lavin was cheated out of his job.  And now Willard basks in the glory.  Oh but wait a minute.  You knew the whole time he broke the rule, you just didn't care that we were cheated out of IW and Carrington.   Gee, "Storm the Bastille".  Wow you're so sophisticated you don't even care that we only won one game. Fourteen thousand posts.

Nah, just find your posts tedious and repetitive, but let's move on.

Don't condescend to me.  You said there was no rule.  I showed how you were wrong.  If you didn't say stuff like that I wouldn't have responded.  Because it's tedious when people continually say he didn't cheat when he so obviously did. It's real simple Paultz. If you don't want to hear about Willard cheating don't post there is no rule. Get it. If you don't want to admit that you stirred the pot with your post then fine.  If you don't want to admit you were wrong then fine.  Just don't respond when I post that they cheated to get their championship.  We bash Lavin here a lot.  Myself included.  He should have had back up plans.  This is important; recruiting.  This is what we post about.  We would have had IW and probably Carrington but we were cheated out of him.  As far as SH long term, that is another issue.  The issue here is we only won one game because we had no players as late as last April.  Why?  Is there something for us to complain about on Johnny Jungle?  Like nobody does.  And they should.  We won one game.

Quote from: mjdinkins on March 13, 2016, 12:27:28 AM

Quote from: prjohnnies on March 12, 2016, 08:44:40 PM

Easy with this. Willard was a JOKE for 5 years. He inherited a situation far better than what our staff got. And they didn't make the tourney for 5 years. They are on a great run but, as I've said repeatedly, if we have 5 years like Willards first 5, this board will combust.

If you are going to praise the Hall right now as a SJU fan you better have lots of patience for what this staff is taking over, and be pleased with incremental process. Otherwise you are a hypocrite.

Bingo!  Many on this board would've gone ballistic. 

Not to mention, this doesn't mean it'll be sustained success, although they're currently riding high.  If they're able to catapult their program from this, then the hiring of Morton and Antigua to land players paid off.  Otherwise, this season could be just a brief, albeit successful, blip on the radar.   

Many Seton Hall fans were fed up with Willard and wanted him gone a couple years ago. It was only the fact that he had this core of a roster returning for this year (and the fact that SHU is cheap and didn't want to pay his buyout) that got him to this year in the first place.

His chances on hiring Tiny and Antigua has already paid off. He won a championship. The program may not continue this type of success but they will never be worse off for having brought them in. If everybody returns for them next year they will be REALLY good.

Yes they're going to be really good.  But the real issue here is we're really bad.  And why?

Quote from: paultzman on March 13, 2016, 04:14:02 PM

Quote from: WillieG on March 13, 2016, 03:57:40 PM

Quote from: paultzman on March 13, 2016, 02:52:52 PM

Quote from: WillieG on March 13, 2016, 02:46:06 PM

Quote from: paultzman on March 13, 2016, 02:26:38 PM

Quote from: WillieG on March 13, 2016, 02:18:55 PM

Quote from: paultzman on March 13, 2016, 01:59:33 PM

Quote from: WillieG on March 13, 2016, 01:55:14 PM

Quote from: RedStormNC on March 12, 2016, 07:56:46 PM

SH has continued to show they know how to win.  Love em or hate em, Willard doing what he is paid to do..

He shouldn't be paid to break rules.

The horse is beyond dead man!

Are you kidding me.  I was called out on our own board for defending the program against cheaters and I'm the one that should not post about it.  Someone got fired here for not bringing in recruits and you shouldn't post about it.  I cited the rule.  How is this not relevant to the program.  Everyone was saying Willard did not break the rules.  I[pointed out how he did, and I'm the one who shouldn't have made the posts. If someone makes an error while they are trying to refute my argument then I have to respond.  Right?  What is the board for if you can't point things like this out.  Read the rule and explain to me how he did not break it.  What, because the Hall was not stupid enough to write the contingency into the contract so you can't prove there was quid pro quo.

It reminds me of when Clinton pardoned that fugitive criminal and said you can't prove there was quid pro qou for the gifts I received from him.  And  then Jimmy Carter, a Democrat himself, published an editorial in the Times saying "one assumes there was quid pro quo".  It was a pretty damning piece by Carter. 

Nothing is changing, so may be time to move on or take it to Supreme Court. Getting tedious. You have made your point. This is getting like an Aleve commercial.

If someone contradicts you in error then you have to respond. Right? If someone attacks you personally you have to respond. Right? I was asked to cite a rule. I did it.  People didn't have to call me out.  Several posters.  They are the reasons why this has gone on.  Not me. I have to defend myself. You should trust me by now that I know what I'm talking about.  Don't attack me.

I could understand if this was a Seton Hall board that there would be some fireworks because they would lose their objectivity.  They do.  But come on dudes this is the Jungle.  We should be circling the wagons.  Our program is on life support.  Someone stole key recruits at a critical juncture in program history.  Someone lost their job because of this.  This is relevant.  This is important.

"Storm the Bastile" 

I find it amazing how thousands and thousands of posts could be made by someone about SJU hoops and the person doesn't seem to care, even when they  shown how Lavin was cheated out of his job.  And now Willard basks in the glory.  Oh but wait a minute.  You knew the whole time he broke the rule, you just didn't care that we were cheated out of IW and Carrington.   Gee, "Storm the Bastille".  Wow you're so sophisticated you don't even care that we only won one game. Fourteen thousand posts.

Nah, just find your posts tedious and repetitive, but let's move on.

Don't condescend to me.  You said there was no rule.  I showed how you were wrong.  If you didn't say stuff like that I wouldn't have responded.  Because it's tedious when people continually say he didn't cheat when he so obviously did. It's real simple Paultz. If you don't want to hear about Willard cheating don't post there is no rule. Get it. If you don't want to admit that you stirred the pot with your post then fine.  If you don't want to admit you were wrong then fine.  Just don't respond when I post that they cheated to get their championship.  We bash Lavin here a lot.  Myself included.  He should have had back up plans.  This is important; recruiting.  This is what we post about.  We would have had IW and probably Carrington but we were cheated out of him.  As far as SH long term, that is another issue.  The issue here is we only won one game because we had no players as late as last April.  Why?  Is there something for us to complain about on Johnny Jungle?  Like nobody does.  And they should.  We won one game.

Kudos to Willard & Pirates for a great win. Not a SH fan, but no sense crying or choking on sour grapes. Well at least sensible folks know that. Hope my Johnnies will enjoy a day in the sun soon.

Willard and SHU out worked us on the court and off it.. Unless the ncaa accuses them of something shady,  they are good to go... Crying now looks weak. 

Bottom line , they got to celebrate a big east title at MSG ( which thru referred to as their home),  and St. John's is at , yet another, rock bottom... Amazing how year after year, that bottom floor gets lowered. 

We are.....

I think the weakness comes in when we don't have the power to defend ourselves against predatory and ILLEGAL recruiting tactics. Why was there no pushback on the part of the fanbase?  It's because we were misinformed.

Lets see:  We were cheated out of major recruits, including a McDonalds All American.   We were left with no other players. (Clearly Lavin shares in the blame). We then win one game.  I would think it would be a central topic of discussion.  When have the Redmen ever won one conference game? 

So Seton Hall wins the Big East Tournament with pilfered recruits.  Their recruiting is very relevant. It relates to ours because we are the ones from whom they were pilfered.     

for the sake of the old news argument, let's assume they (IW/Morton) did "cheat".

Taking the ability to cheat off the table, there is no guarantee IW would have chosen SH or SJ....   I believe many other big time programs would have been in the mix and both area schools might not have him.

Let it go.

Quote from: boo3 on March 13, 2016, 02:49:59 PM

Willard and SHU out worked us on the court and off it.. Unless the ncaa accuses them of something shady,  they are good to go... Crying now looks weak. 

Bottom line , they got to celebrate a big east title at MSG ( which thru referred to as their home),  and St. John's is at , yet another, rock bottom... Amazing how year after year, that bottom floor gets lowered. 

We are.....

I think the weakness comes in when we don't have the power to defend ourselves against predatory and ILLEGAL recruiting tactics. Why was there no pushback on the part of the fanbase?  It's because we were misinformed.

Lets see:  We were cheated out of major recruits, including a McDonalds All American.   We were left with no other players. (Clearly Lavin shares in the blame). We then win one game.  I would think it would be a central topic of discussion.  When have the Redmen ever won one conference game? 

So Seton Hall wins the Big East Tournament with pilfered recruits.  Their recruiting is very relevant. It relates to ours because we are the ones from whom they were pilfered.     

And relentless whining accomplishes what?

Quote from: boo3 on March 13, 2016, 02:49:59 PM

Willard and SHU out worked us on the court and off it.. Unless the ncaa accuses them of something shady,  they are good to go... Crying now looks weak. 

Bottom line , they got to celebrate a big east title at MSG ( which thru referred to as their home),  and St. John's is at , yet another, rock bottom... Amazing how year after year, that bottom floor gets lowered. 

We are.....

I think the weakness comes in when we don't have the power to defend ourselves against predatory and ILLEGAL recruiting tactics. Why was there no pushback on the part of the fanbase?  It's because we were misinformed.

Lets see:  We were cheated out of major recruits, including a McDonalds All American.   We were left with no other players. (Clearly Lavin shares in the blame). We then win one game.  I would think it would be a central topic of discussion.  When have the Redmen ever won one conference game? 

So Seton Hall wins the Big East Tournament with pilfered recruits.  Their recruiting is very relevant. It relates to ours because we are the ones from whom they were pilfered.     

Seriously!!! I am trying hard not to be a "condescending expressionist" as you put it, but you can't be serious with this we were wronged and need to fight back BS.  NCAA basketball is a dirty world, and everyone knows it, this particular episode is nothing compared to other transgressions that take place.  SJU had the opportunity to do the same exact thing and get away with it, chose not to... SHU did and that's that. 

Everyone else has moved on, you probably should to... I don't know, maybe focus on the next collapse of the program now that Alkins chose Arizona and played the staff, slice and the 20 loyal of fans of the program.  Now that has some wheels to it.

for the sake of the old news argument, let's assume they (IW/Morton) did "cheat".

Taking the ability to cheat off the table, there is no guarantee IW would have chosen SH or SJ....   I believe many other big time programs would have been in the mix and both area schools might not have him.

Let it go.

We don't have to assume NC.  Just read NCAA bylaw 11.4.1.1.  People all over were misinformed.  I don't understand the point of view that college basketball is a dirty world (it definitely is) so we should not try to defend ourselves.  That's the very reason why you should look out for yourself.   We won one game because we were cheated out of our recruits.  I don't understand the idea that the best thing to do is just let it go.  Forget it.  Pretend it didn't happen.  Look at our program. 

The reality of this is it would be hard to PROVE the quid pro quo.  So it's not really on our athletics department.  It's not their fault.  But grassroots pressure could be applied to make it less likely to happen again.  And could have been applied at the time to make it less likely to go through.  This happened in the Uthoff case when  Wisconsin blocked his transfer to Iowa and had to subsequently reverse their policy and allow him to transfer there. Pressure can be applied to these institutions and sometimes they have to reverse their course.

I don't see why this wouldn't make anybody furious. We had our recruits stolen.  We won one game for heaven sakes.  People were under the impression that there was no rule forbidding it, when there was.  I corrected that notion.  When I did people got mad.  Don't shoot the messenger.  I was aware of the rule so I had to point it out.  How can you not agree with that.  And don't be swayed by people just because they happen to be major posters on the board with huge numbers of posts.

If anyone watched Lavin, Stoner, and Donny the other night, this is what all that nutty joking around was all about.  Lavin despises Willard.  And IW deflecting the question by saying "Only Lavin can tell you that."  Normally that would be highly inappropriate. Not in this case.

I pushed back WillieG. Picketed in front of Willard's office, got myself arrested, spent a night in jail, payed a $500 fine and decided to give up the good fight. 

I pushed back WillieG. Picketed in front of Willard's office, got myself arrested, spent a night in jail, payed a $500 fine and decided to give up the good fight. 

Lol

You're missing my point Willie... Isiah Whitehead was not "stolen" from us.

Assuming their was a rule that clearly prevented any such hiring of a coach/friend/parent etc.. , there is no guaranteee IW would have chosen SJ or the Hall.

We can be mad at Willard, SH all we want or NCAA for allowing it, but then it's only fair if you give some responsibility to IW for allowing his college choice to be influenced by his coach getting a job.

Gonzaga 3 point favs over SHU. Im surprised by that

Gonzaga 3 point favs over SHU. Im surprised by that

It could be a large contingent of Gonzaga fans (somewhat, simulating a home game), as it's being played in Denver (the same place the Zags' played us 5 years ago).  I think that's gonna be a good game. 

Quote from: goredmen on March 13, 2016, 08:19:29 PM

Gonzaga 3 point favs over SHU. Im surprised by that

It could be a large contingent of Gonzaga fans (somewhat, simulating a home game), as it's being played in Denver (the same place the Zags' played us 5 years ago).  I think that's gonna be a good game. 

We were also dogs in that game. Game is even played in the same timeslot. Hopefully the Hall fares better than we did.

Quote from: mjdinkins on March 13, 2016, 08:24:42 PM

Quote from: goredmen on March 13, 2016, 08:19:29 PM

Gonzaga 3 point favs over SHU. Im surprised by that

It could be a large contingent of Gonzaga fans (somewhat, simulating a home game), as it's being played in Denver (the same place the Zags' played us 5 years ago).  I think that's gonna be a good game. 

We were also dogs in that game. Game is even played in the same timeslot. Hopefully the Hall fares better than we did.

Yep the similarities in situations is crazy. SHU didn't lose one of their best players to injury heading into the game though.... Should be a good game