wonder if Bruce Arena will call up Andrew Shue for this match?
don't worry Zack, we'll be back!
That remains to be seen. My understanding is that Rutkiewicz finally arrived in Cary this weekend (5/12). I know Clarke is high on his arrival. However, James and Hamilton have been an effective pairing in the back. That said, with James' injury issues and Hamilton's aggressive demeanor, the RailHawks can't have enough depth at CB.
Martinez looks to be a great addition. Wonder how much Rutkiewicz will offer?
Where can we find photos of the match?
Feel sorry for Fort Lauderdale Strikers, though it’s still a great match hope they can make up on their next figth with RailHawks. I just notice while watching their replay that there are repetitive errors that can be avoided if they only learn the 7 Secrets To Soccer Excellence (http://e1fit.com/recommendsSoccerWebinar/). If you want to be competitive you need to learn the 7 key mental, physical and nutritional strategies that you can use immediately and over time to catapult your performance.
A couple of passes and corner kicks, plus a supposed uncalled foul, without shots on target doesn't really equal early offensive aggression.
"Edmonton sought to strike first in the 16th minute when forward Daniel Fordyce unleashed two shots, the first caroming off the woodwork."
I guess this might be true if you ignore the first few minutes of the game when Carolina had possession and a series of corners, and what looked to be a handball in the box by Edmonton...so, not accurate reporting at all?
Nice article Neil. I think the Railhawks are poised to flourish with the new players and new stadium ammenities.
Amen Thad! Nice research on the history of this terrible policy put in place by the NCAA. I am struggling to stay engaged with the games as I get older due to excessive TO's. Problem is that money drives everything and they will never roll it back until the game has been ruined. I am surprised that coaches haven't raised the roof on this?!
Mike Krzyzewski said in the ESPN documentary on Jim Valvano that college basketball was never better than the ACC in the 1980s. I can't disagree with that, and I was 24 when the decade began. The coaches in the '83 tournament were Valvano, Krzyzewski, Dean Smith, Lefty Driesell, Terry Holland, Carl Tacy, Bobby Cremins and Bill Foster. That lineup was just ridiculous.
In an amazing coincidence, the heyday of the ACC Tournament overlaps precisely with the adolescent years of most of this blog's contributors.
In my previous comment, I neglected to account for the television revenue of the tournament, which is surely bundled up in the current $3.6 billion deal with ESPN that extends through 2027. It's the ACC's job to deliver the product (even if it means some teams play four games in four days).
From a competitive standpoint, however, I think the tournament's purpose is pretty marginal.
Sure, but Boeheim is already complaining that it should be held in New York from time to time, and it's certainly going to go back to Atlanta at some point. The geographic expansion ensures that it won't stay in Greensboro.
I also think it's good for nobody for the ACC tournament champion to have to play four games in four days.
Your last question gets to the heart of the matter, Michael. What, then, is the purpose of the tournament? Seems like as long as North Carolina produces basketball teams that will be reliably competing on Saturday and Sunday, the tournament will continue to make enough money to justify its existence--as long as it's held in Greensboro.
Fair enough. If you didn't want to do home-host, you could do the southern divisional tournament in one location and the northern one in another. The point of the home court would be to ensure attendance -- you'd get students and the local fans, at least (which would be a lot more than are currently in the building in Greensboro at the moment here on Thursday afternoon). The fans of the lower seeded teams don't bother traveling anyway, for the most part.
Also, at the very least, in the Southern division, there would be a very, very strong likelihood that at least one of the pods was playing in the Triangle every year. And for logistics, the NIT early rounds are often organized with five days notice. By the second to last weekend of the year, you're probably going to have it down to four or five teams that are likely to have to host -- making them all have a plan in place wouldn't be all that hard.
And is the travel any less sensible than expecting BC fans to go to Orlando, or Miami fans to go to New York?
Michael, the logistics in your proposal are probably unworkable. The four-team tourneys on Tuesdays and Wednesdays would be impossible to organize on 48 hours notice (e.g. Wake Forest finishes second on the last day of the season and suddenly says, "Oh shit, we're hosting three teams on Tuesday").
Attendance might possibly be worse for these games, because only the most insanely hardcore alums would make these last-minute, mid-week trips.
Likewise, the four-team finale on the weekend might struggle to attract traveling support if people have to wait until the last minute to book their trips.
Hrm, can't quite get there with Neil. I have to agree with WIlliams that a four-day cocktail party is no way to settle a championship.
I'd do something rather different. First of all, when the league goes to 16 teams (and it will), I seriously hope it splits into two divisions for basketball. A simple north-south division on the North Carolina-Virginia line would work -- there's sufficient basketball power in the north now to no longer need everyone to get a UNC or a Duke game on the schedule, which is what seems to have kept it from happening before. Yes, it reduces the UVA-UNC rivalry, but that was always a minor one, and the Maryland-Duke rivalry was the only other one that would have mattered, and that's all over now.
From there, there should be four four-team tournaments held at the home court of the 1 and 2 seeds in each division on Tuesday and Wednesday. The winners of those four tournaments gets to go to the big game that the ACC can now feel free to toss around the eastern seaboard (as it already has), to Washington or MSG or Atlanta or wherever. That way you still keep the Big Event of the weekend, but you also reward success in the regular season, as you should.
I like the No. 1 seed idea. But there also has to be a provision that an undefeated independent could get one if its RPI is good enough. Not likely, but mathematically possible.
I agree that this proposal is a simple and painless way to raise the stakes for the conference tourneys.
However, count me among those who think there could be a benefit to shrinking the NCAA Tournament. This year, there are five decent ACC teams: Miami, Duke, UNC and NC State and Virginia. They're probably all assured of NCAA berths, so there's little drama this weekend for them (although your proposal would certainly help). But what if a 32- or 48-team field meant that only two or three would get in? There would be all to play for in the conference tournament then.
While it may be tempting to think it was a benighted, deprived era when it was difficult to get into the NCAA Tournament, we have, in fact, very fond memories of basketball in those years--the 1970s through the mid-1980s. (Of course, we were also children then.)
Indy Week • 302 E. Pettigrew St., Suite 300, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation