|
|
|
Friday, July 20
Updated: August 3, 4:26 PM ET
The Word's Answer Man
|
The Answer Man is back throughout the offseason. Andy Katz tackles some of the questions he receives each week.
As a Minnesota season-ticket holder, I'm anxious to hear the Gophers' non-conference schedule. I heard Temple is going to play at Minnesota this year? Is that correct? I haven't heard much about the Gophers' non-conference slate, other than that they play at Georgia, at Texas Tech, at Wake Forest and at home vs. Nebraska.
Scott King
Minneapolis
Scott, you've got most of it covered. But the Temple game isn't likely. The date would be Dec. 10 on ESPN and there are other suitors like possibly Charlotte or Auburn or anyone else that still needs a game. If you're truly excited about the Gophers then you should be thrilled to know that Jerry Holman is considered the impact junior college transfer in the Big Ten. The Gophers will be a sleeper team in the Big Ten and in the nation last season, not bad after all the school has been through in the past four years.
During the summer, recruiting seems to dominate the college basketball news, especially with adidas and Nike camps in early July. How are the counselors selected for each camp? Are the shoe companies trying to entice these current college players as potential endorsers? Do their respective college coaches recommend them? I can't imagine a college basketball player being enticed by a trip to suburban New Jersey, though. It doesn't seem to follow sponsorship logic, as Dahntay Jones was at the adidas camp, even though Duke is a Nike school. Also, what do the counselors really do? From what I've read on ESPN.com, the camps -- especially ABCD -- are heavily skewed toward individual play, as opposed to fundamentals and team play. It doesn't seem like the counselors are leading drills or scrimmages or the like. In fact, the only mentions of the counselors are that they play pickup games against each other. (Granted, that's probably the most newsworthy of their activities.)
Jemshaid Cheema
Morrisville, N.C.
Jemshaid, the counselors are almost like political appointments. Schools try to get their players in the camps for a variety of reasons. They're not there for potential endorsements. They are there for the workouts with coaches and the other players and to be seen by the NBA scouts who frequent their workouts and pickup games. They don't do much with the players. They'll help coach them, but they're not as involved as a camp counselor would be in Maine or Wisconsin for a 12-year old doing arts and crafts. The fact that Duke is a Nike school doesn't matter. Jason Williams made a cameo at the New Jersey camp because he's from there and so is Dahntay Jones. Carlos Boozer was with adidas during his prep career and that's where his allegiances lie, even though he plays at a "Nike" school. Most schools are Nike, but a lot more elite players are with adidas. The players go because they want to be seen, while also trying to get in a constructive workout.
I have a couple of questions regarding the new bracketing system used by the NCAA.
One, will this mean sites like Boise, Idaho, will be phased out? Few schools in that area make the tournament, and when they do, usually aren't seeded in the top 5. In this year's tournament, only the 12 seeds (Gonzaga, BYU, Utah State, Hawaii) and one of the 14 seeds (Southern Utah) would have seemed "natural" for placement in Boise (although none played there). Only Utah is a school close to Boise that is a) a perennial tournament team and b) likely to be seeded
1-5.
Two, how will this affect seeding? For example, the five seeds this year were Syracuse, Virginia, Ohio State and Cincinnati -- all east of the
Mississippi. Wouldn't one of them have had to go west to ensure that the 4 seed (UCLA) in the West stay close to home? Thanks.
Deron Overpeck
Tucson, Ariz.
Deron, don't worry. Boise isn't going anywhere. It will still be one of the sites in the West rotation. The committee needs Boise in the tournament and will try to put western teams in there if it makes sense. If it doesn't, or if there aren't any available, then there certainly could be eastern teams in the bracket. They may try to avoid loading the bracket in Boise like they did last year with teams from the Washington D.C.-Maryland-Virginia area. But in your above scenario, one of the four seeds would have been in the West to accommodate UCLA staying closer to home.
I'm curious about the NCAA choosing Dayton to host the pregame again. While I understand Dayton as hoop crazy, there are other places as well It seems as though the NCAA would have to answer to a lot of other schools/cities on why they were not chosen. Was there any political reason?
Russell Florez
Farmington, N.M.
Russell, the NCAA chose Dayton because it's assured the game would be well-attended based on last year. They don't want to take chances with the opening-round or play-in game. I'm sure you're speaking of the Pit in Albuquerque. The Pit could be an opening-round site in the future, although the Pit has been better for regional finals than the first and second round. The Pit rarely draws fans for in-season tournament games that don't include New Mexico. It's a tough call, but the NCAA can't afford to put the game in an arena that isn't two-thirds full.
Hello Andy I have a question about the NCAA Tournament. Because NCAA is trying to get fans to the first and second round is there a chance that Gonzaga could play in Spokane Arena? I believe it's a host next year? I heard that the NCAA said Washington State is the host team.
John Sterrett
Houston
John, not sure where you got your information, but Spokane isn't a host next season. But if it were, Gonzaga could play there if it were a high enough seed. A team can play in an arena during the tournament if it has not played more than three regular-season games there.
With the new bracketing system implemented for the first and second rounds of the NCAA Tournament, how will this affect the way that subregional sites are selected in the future? For instance, could we see the day that three West Coast cities and/or three Northeastern cities host first and second round games in the same tournament?
Victor Mendoza
Bronx, N.Y.
Victor, not at all. The NCAA selection committee will still select sites that meet their capacity criteria, hotel space and logistical acceptance. The NCAA likes going back to sites that have run a tournament well. They don't like to go into unchartered waters too often. You'll still see the similar sites being rotated each season.
With the recent changes in the NCAA tourney, it seems that the NCAA has taken the shield of academics (on the heels of the Knight Commission) and made it that much more difficult for a lower seeded team to pull the upset. The tourney committee wants the higher seeded teams to play close by so they can make it back to campus for class. That's admirable, but what happens to the lower seeded teams that are forced to travel even farther? It should be noted the the average top-4 seed has a better academic support staff (tutors and supplies) than the average 13 seed and below. So if the committee want to make sure that the student athlete can remain a student during the tourney, then they will try to keep the lower seeds as close to home as possible, not the other way around. Besides, past the sub-regionals the sites are set, so the same problem arises.
Also, if these pods continue, it will be less of a financial boost for schools, conferences, and cities to bid to host an NCAA tourney site. If your site is lost in the shuffle of a city with two No. 1 seeds, then there will be much less of an incentive to host and there will be more of a problem of empty seats than we have now (which I believe is a very tiny problem to begin with).
If I have miss the point of this change, then please set me straight, but the only thing I see coming out of this is more home court advantage for high seeds and less upsets and hotel space for the lower seeds.
David
Barnsley, Ky.
David, you're right to some extent. There will be more of a homecourt advantage for the higher seeded teams. But it's not an exact science. There will be a few schools that will be protected, but not all. The academic support issue is a good one, but the expectation is that the lower seeded team wouldn't be gone for more than a week. Plus, I don't think the NCAA looks that deep into the question of who has more tutors. They just look at the broad stroke of which teams historically have been on the road for three to four weeks. I doubt they break it down to compare Hampton's and Iowa State's support staff. But I still question how much the NCAA will be able to control sites. It's going to be a tough call and there will be some outraged coaches and fans that they weren't given preferential treatment.
I just wanted an update on the whereabouts of Edwin "Greedy" Daniels. Although he was leading the nation in steals and averaging over 16 ppg and 4.5 apg, Greedy still ended up in trouble at questionably the best school, best coach in Billy Tubbs, and best offensive scheme to match his open style of play. I had been able to keep up until that great Fresno State game when TCU ran them out of the arena. I've heard rumors that he is attending NBA camps. Please grace me with your up-to-the-millisecond updated information.
Moses Thompson
New Orleans, La.
He was cut by the Sonics and at last report was trying to find out what his next option would be this summer. Daniels could be a perfect player for the developmental league which starts up in November.
I know you won't answer this, but I thought I might ask anyway: As a hardcore Michigan Wolverine fan I started to get concerned about U of M's problems as of late. They have a good core of players with LaVell Blanchard, Bernard Robinson Jr., Josh Moore, Jaquan Hart, and Avery Queen. Do you believe Tommy Amaker can turn the program around in not only performance but also in the recruiting area? Also, just to know, do you know if Blanchard could go pro after this season and even if he doesn't go this year do you believe he could find a spot in the NBA someday? Thanks, hopefully you'll answer me ,it would mean a lot to me.
Alex
Cheboygan, Mich.
Alex, have faith. Why wouldn't I answer this question. Amaker has the pieces in place to turn Michigan around and climb up in the Big Ten. Blanchard and Robinson are two of the better scoring wings in the nation. Blanchard is expected to be an impact player for the U.S. national team traveling to Japan later this month. Amaker is making inroads in recruiting locally and should have the Wolverines talent upgraded over the next two seasons. I would be surprised if Michigan weren't a contender in the league in the next three seasons. Blanchard should be a pro and could bolt after next season, but he still has to stand out more during the regular season. The Japan trip could go a long way toward determining if he'll skip out in May.
I love reading your columns and answers to other peoples questions -- but do you not like the University of Virginia? You never talk about them in your columns. EVERY year I have asked the same question to you and you have never answered it. So once again I ask you what do you think of Virginia's chances in the ACC and NCAA Tournament this year?
John Culpepper
Somehow I missed this one John. Thanks for your patience. No, I don't have anything against Virginia and if you've noticed Virginia assistant Tom Herrion has been quoted quite often recently. The Cavs recruiting of transfers has been covered and so has Travis Watson's decision to go to the Pete Newell Camp and the recovery of Majestic Mapp. The Cavs are in a similar spot to last season where they should be a top-five ACC team, on the cusp of the top 25 and a likely NCAA Tournament member.
Andy Katz is a senior writer at ESPN.com.
|
|
|
|
