Minnesota

[90Jackrabbit]

Re: Minnesota

The NY Times picked up the story:
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/spor...mp;oref=slogin

[Jacks#1Fan]

Re: Minnesota

It won't change a thing, but the "official" rule is certainly misleading as Terry Vandrovec's article points out.

And also it is interesting to note that Division II and Division III rules specify that the LED light is the determing factor (obviously a background that was ingrained in AJ's mind as to what the rule was!)

Here's the language in the official NCAA release on rules changes in 2004 (which added the tenth-of-a-second clock to the game-ending rule):

Rule 2-5.2, 5-7.2 (BR-41 & 96)—For games with a courtside television monitor and a 10th –of-a-second game clock, when officials are required by Rule 2-5.2 to view the monitor before making a final ruling, the determining factor as to whether the ball was released before time expired shall be when the game clock shows 0:00, provided that the game clock is visible on the monitor. When the game clock shows 0:00 before the shot leaves the shooter’s hand, the period has ended and the shot shall not count. When the clock is not visible, the red or LED light shall be the determining factor, then the sounding of the horn. If definitive information is not available from the monitor, the original ruling that was based on a call using the red or LED lights and then the sounding of the horn shall stand. Rationale: This clarifies game-ending situations. Using the reading of 0.00, which indicates that the game has ended, factors out the time lag that occurs when this reading sends an impulse that triggers the mechanisms in the light and the horn.

Rule 2-12.13, 5-7 (BR-52 & 96)—For game- or period-ending last-second shots, the red light or LED lights (one of which is required for Division I), when present, shall be used as the indicator for the expiration of playing time. This signal shall terminate player activity. The sounding of the horn shall be used as a backup or when the red or LED lights are not available in Division II or III. Rationale: Using the red light provides a consistent measure that terminates player activity.

Two thoughts on the above language:

1) The 0.00 is absolutely misleading. It would indicate that the tenth-of-a-second clock should be a one-hundredth of a second clock. And using the rationale that this makes up for the almost-instantaneous signal to the light (which undoubtedly happens in 0.09 of a second) seems crazy as well. (It's also interesting that the "chief" official couldn't explain the 0.00 in the rule!!)

2) Having a different rule between Division II - III and Division I seems crazy as well, particularly for refs who work back and forth. I assume it exists because few if any Division II - III schools have court-side monitors.

Finally -- WHY cause the confusion. The LED light should be the determining factor for all divisions. When watching the shot and the basket, it is certain that the LED light is more visible to refs who are trying to simultaneously watch the shot release, and the clock.

[fabio208]

Re: Minnesota

Just thought I would throw this out there... #6Gophers and #3Michigan State playing right now in there conference tournament on FSN.... 63-57 Mich ST Good Game

[NightHawk78]

Re: Minnesota

Gophers fall to MSU, 77-68, and finish their regular season at 16-15. Will they get into the WNIT? Probably. Are they deserving of a bid? Probably not.

[thebluehatman]

Re: Minnesota

Gophers fall to MSU, 77-68, and finish their regular season at 16-15. Will they get into the WNIT? Probably. Are they deserving of a bid? Probably not.

Wisconsin has a better chance than the Gophers of a WNIT bid. Just because they are big 10 does not give the gophers an automatic pass to the WNIT.

[RodentiaX1]

Re: Minnesota

[quote author=NightHawk78 link=1166848807/135#138 date=1172876985]Gophers fall to MSU, 77-68, and finish their regular season at 16-15. Will they get into the WNIT? Probably. Are they deserving of a bid? Probably not.

Wisconsin has a better chance than the Gophers of a WNIT bid.  Just because they are big 10 does not give the gophers an automatic pass to the WNIT.[/quote]

In the Men's NIT, playing in the Big Ten and having a .500 or better record essentially guarantees an NIT invitation. Theoretically it doesn't, but in practice it does. I don't know if the WNIT operates much differently.

[rabidrabbit]

Re: Minnesota

[quote author=thebluehatman link=1166848807/135#139 date=1172877528][quote author=NightHawk78 link=1166848807/135#138 date=1172876985]Gophers fall to MSU, 77-68, and finish their regular season at 16-15. Will they get into the WNIT? Probably. Are they deserving of a bid? Probably not.

Wisconsin has a better chance than the Gophers of a WNIT bid.  Just because they are big 10 does not give the gophers an automatic pass to the WNIT.[/quote]

In the Men's NIT, playing in the Big Ten and having a .500 or better record essentially guarantees an NIT invitation. Theoretically it doesn't, but in practice it does. I don't know if the WNIT operates much differently.[/quote]

Using the WNIT criteria, MN was seeded 6th in B10, WIS was seeded 7th, therefore, MN should be taken prior to WIS. Penn St. ends with <.500 record, ineligible to be selected.

[JACKGUYII]

Re: Minnesota

I think the Gophers will be in the WNIT and I hope we an opportunity to prove who is the better team. Prior to the BIG Ten Tournament the SDSU game was still brought up by the press and the thought being the selection committee should view that game as a win for the Gophers.

[SD-STATE]

Re: Minnesota

I think the Gophers will be in the WNIT and I hope we an opportunity to prove who is the better team. Prior to the BIG Ten Tournament the SDSU game was still brought up by the press and the thought being the selection committee should view that game as a win for the Gophers.

The game should be at best a wash for the gophers, no way should that game be viewed as a win. If I remember correctly it was the Jacks who controlled the majority of the game.