Gregg Marshall on Sports Sunday (March 8)

[DUShock]

Say what you will about Heartl but his quip about the grassy knoll is funny.

[pogo]

I don't prescribe to the conspiracy theory and I believe BH was just being humorous in his comment. Some one explain to me how the scheduling with the mountain west conference kind of screwed us since we were already scheduled to play tcu this year already but the two conferences went and used the existing game as part of the deal. Is this interpreted as we should have also been scheduled to play an additional mountain west member for the agreement? The other part to the conspiracy was who we were scheduled to play in bracket busters. My understanding was WSU lobbied to get a warm weather school, preferably one in an area we are recruiting, but we get csu which on paper looks like to be a much tougher opponent in comparing rpi which also was the largest differential between any teams scheduled. I thought espn did the pairings and if so how could that have been a part of the consiracy. I do believe we get the short end of the stick from time to time but just winning takes care of many things. And I believe we are on the cusp of owning the valley. The other valley members need to be afraid. Be very afraid.

[rrshock]

I don't prescribe to the conspiracy theory and I believe BH was just being humorous in his comment. Some one explain to me how the scheduling with the mountain west conference kind of screwed us since we were already scheduled to play tcu this year already but the two conferences went and used the existing game as part of the deal. Is this interpreted as we should have also been scheduled to play an additional mountain west member for the agreement? The other part to the conspiracy was who we were scheduled to play in bracket busters. My understanding was WSU lobbied to get a warm weather school, preferably one in an area we are recruiting, but we get csu which on paper looks like to be a much tougher opponent in comparing rpi which also was the largest differential between any teams scheduled. I thought espn did the pairings and if so how could that have been a part of the consiracy. I do believe we get the short end of the stick from time to time but just winning takes care of many things. And I believe we are on the cusp of owning the valley. The other valley members need to be afraid. Be very afraid.

I think the TCU game is the thing that is a crock. We shouldn't have to return that game the next year. Because they are using an already existing contract to fill their agreement. Didn't one of the other MVC schools play an MWC school this year? I wonder how that is going to work out for next year?

[rrshock]

Ok. This is what I found from this season:

11/16 New Mexico at Creighton
11/28 Utah at MSU
12/08 WSU at TCU
12/13 UNI at Wyoming


This is the schedule for next year:
11/13/09 Bradley at BYU (BYU, 2-1, last met 12/17/77)
11/20/09 Colorado State at Indiana State (tied, 1-1, last met 12/30/81)
11/21/09 Southern Illinois at UNLV (UNLV, 2-1, last met 12/23/83)
12/05/09 Air Force at Missouri State (first meeting)
12/12/09 TCU at Wichita State (WSU, 5-2, last met 12/8/08 )
12/19/09 Creighton at New Mexico (UNM, 2-1, last met 11/16/08 )
12/19/09 Illinois State at Utah (first meeting)
12/22/09 San Diego State at Drake (DU, 4-2, last met 11/25/77)
12/23/09 Wyoming at Northern Iowa (UW, 3-0, last met 12/13/08 )


Looks like UNI is gonna get the hosing too. And they're using Creighton's return in it as well. I wonder if things will be different the next year.

[WSUwatcher]

Conspiracy

Didn't see Haertl; never do.

But the idea that the Valley is involved in some sort of conspiracy against WSU is just laughable -- first, why would they care; and second, even if they did, why would they take shots at one of their more successful and prosperous members, one that if anything brings the league positive national recognition? It's the sort of paranoia and self-obsession we see in abundance on this board.

Obvioiusly, the clock operator messed up pretty badly and needs to be replaced, along with the cheap and archaic system the Valley uses. Maybe this will cause that to happen, which is good. As for the camera angle, it may be that the time put back on the clock was wrong but that once it was there and play resumed, it was unreviewable further, and the league didn't want to embarrass the refs and themselves by opening up a can of worms that wasn't subject to change anyway.

And as for the final play, maybe they got it right, maybe they didn't -- Elgin's response was to be expected, and he at least deserves some credit for being proactive -- but we've seen from the discussion on here that it's hard to prove with certainty that the decision on the court was wrong. I don't know if there's official language in the rules covering such a case, but it just stands to reason that if the actual ruling can't be clearly shown to have been wrong, it ought to stand. (Otherwise, you have a potential mess, which is why the NFL, for example, uses the approach it does.) So I can't complain about the decision, even though I hated the outcome.

ShockRef nailed it in another discussion of the game: there were so many things the Shocks could have done better, both in the last two seconds and throughout the game, that could have changed the outcome, that it's silly to obsess about the ending. WSU may still get into a peripheral tournament, which was all they ever had a realistic chance to do anyway, and regardless of whether they do the coaches have been handed about as good a teaching and motivational tool for next year as they could possibly want.

The loss is a pain, and so is Creighton, but the sun continues to come up every day and no one died -- which unfortunately is something that Coach Marshall has actually seen happen -- or was injured. Life goes on, and that's enough.

[Rosewood]

"And as for the final play, maybe they got it right, maybe they didn't "

I'm obviously a nutty fan, but even I don't think there is a conspiracy theory. I just think the Valley needs massive improvement and has really suffered under the last few years under Elgin.

But if you want to have a serious discussion around here, don't give me this maybe they got it right nonsense. It has been proven through multiple angles in multiple ways that the shot took more time then the 1.9 seconds, which was .2 more than should be.

[jocoshock]

Self-fulfilling conspiracy perhaps????

[ShockBand]

You know, it really can't be a conspiracy, because you have to be competent in order to successfully pull off a conspiracy. Incompetence and ineptness was to blame for the debacle on Friday night.

Now if someone comes up with a shadowy figure a grassy knoll, and "back, and to the left" evidence, then maybe it is a conspiracy.

I just hope we get a CBI bid with at least one home game, if not more!

[rZ]

If you want to be thought of as one of the big boys, you have to act like the big boys. And for the most part, I think The Valley tries to do this, but its all in the details and this is one of those details that cannot be overlooked.

[WSUwatcher]

Right or not

Rose, I'm actually not that interested in a discussion; I'm just here to state my thoughts. You can do with them what you want.

But all you have to do is read the threads here with people talking about the different times they got when they reviewed the play, from less than 1.9 to more, and it's obvious that there can be no certainty. That's what it means to say, "Maybe they got it right, maybe they didn't." If it makes you feel better to say "probably they didn't," that's fine. But there are too nmay people getting too many results to know for sure.

I'm certainly not going to waste time looking at it myself, because (a) between work, a wife, and a family, I don't have time -- I already have a life and am frankly amazed at the number of people who exhaustively reviewed the play, given that (b) it doesn't matter anyway. It's over and the game is decided, rightly or wrongly, and it isn't going to change.

I guess I can see a sportswriter or blogger looking at it time and again, because those people sell controversy. But I'm neither of those things, and my life is going on. The Shocks had plenty of chances to win the game, and if this was one that was wrongly denied them, c'est la vie. I'm a Cardinals baseball fan who got over Don Denkinger in the 1985 World Series, so I can get over this too. It'll all work out.

Meanwhile, rZ has it right in saying that if the Valley wants to be one of the big boys, it needs to act like one. Getting rid of Bozo the Clock Operator and implementing a real and more reliable timing system triggered by the refs themselves would be a good place to start.

[_kai_]

If there ever was bulletin board material for the offseason, this is definitely it. Imagine how the team will play next year, with this bunk in the back of their head. 09-10 is the year of vengeance.

[ShockerGorilla]

Ok. This is what I found from this season:

11/16 New Mexico at Creighton
11/28 Utah at MSU
12/08 WSU at TCU
12/13 UNI at Wyoming


This is the schedule for next year:
11/13/09 Bradley at BYU (BYU, 2-1, last met 12/17/77)
11/20/09 Colorado State at Indiana State (tied, 1-1, last met 12/30/81)
11/21/09 Southern Illinois at UNLV (UNLV, 2-1, last met 12/23/83)
12/05/09 Air Force at Missouri State (first meeting)
12/12/09 TCU at Wichita State (WSU, 5-2, last met 12/8/08 )
12/19/09 Creighton at New Mexico (UNM, 2-1, last met 11/16/08 )
12/19/09 Illinois State at Utah (first meeting)
12/22/09 San Diego State at Drake (DU, 4-2, last met 11/25/77)
12/23/09 Wyoming at Northern Iowa (UW, 3-0, last met 12/13/08 )


Looks like UNI is gonna get the hosing too. And they're using Creighton's return in it as well. I wonder if things will be different the next year.

According to Bruce, we are getting hosed, because in 2010, we have to go back to TCU as part of the MWC deal -- essentially a 2 for 1 advantage for TCU.

[RoyalShock]

I don't consider the TCU thing a slight by the MVC. It's just a timing misfortune. It only makes sense to utitlize the existing contracts when there were three games between the conferences already scheduled for next season. Had HCGM scheduled the TCU series differently, we would be pleased as punch.

I'm assuming the MSU-Utah game was only for this year?

[WSUwatcher]

Foolishness

Sounds like Bruce-anoia to me.

All it means is that the Valley and the MWC are conveniently pairing a couple of teams who already have each other on the schedule rather than forcing them to use up another date for the challenge game. No big deal.

[rrshock]

I don't consider the TCU thing a slight by the MVC. It's just a timing misfortune. It only makes sense to utitlize the existing contracts when there were three games between the conferences already scheduled for next season. Had HCGM scheduled the TCU series differently, we would be pleased as punch.

I'm assuming the MSU-Utah game was only for this year?

I didn't see anything in the agreement that I was reading that said we had to return a game the next year back to TCU. This isn't the crappy Bracketbusters.

I was just trying to point out that WSU wasn't the only school that had this happen to them.