Basketball Selection Show

There was just a few minutes of CU discussion on espn's bracketology build-up coverage. One guy kept pronouncing the name as "Kernell." Gotleib said he doesn't like us at #11 because "the best thing they've done is almost beat Kansas." They talked about Wittman and Foote, as well as the experience of the team. The usual "dangerous" and "they're not just happy to be there" talk.

I guess this could've gone in the other thread, but oh well.

Lunardi's mock bracket has CU in Providence as a #11 vs. #6 Xavier.

It will be a busy weekend for the Pep Band.

Are they sending a band to Minneapolis to support the women? With men's hockey in Albany and the basketball team somewhere to be named shortly, are the band alums going to be called into action?

RichH
Lunardi's mock bracket has CU in Providence as a #11 vs. #6 Xavier.

And he said the games were Friday and Sunday. I believe they are Thursday and Saturday.

terrible matchup

YankeeLobo
terrible matchup

Thank you Dr. Sunshine.

French Rage

YankeeLobo
terrible matchup

Thank you Dr. Sunshine.

Well, trolls do live in dark places.

Just stating the facts...

Would somebody care to include some information in their post for those of us who aren't watching?

Cornell's a 12 seed playing Temple in the first round.

Gotta say I agree with Yankee...not a great matchup in the first round against Temple. Both teams are probably underseeded by 1 or 2 spots so this is more like a 3/4 vs. 10/11 matchup. Gonna have to shoot the ball well to win. Good story though at Donahue used to be an assistant for Fran Dunphy at Penn.

In Jacksonville

Jay Bilas on ESPN - a team that could make a George Mason-type run this year is Cornell. Underseeded as a 12 seed - should be a 5 seed. Committee looks too much at strength of schedule and not enough at how teams do against their schedule.

A 5 seed? I wish. We're not THAT good.

I agree, I think a 10 or 11 is about right.

Record vs common opponents:

                Cornell             Temple
St. Joseph's      W                  W,W
La Salle          W                  W,W 
Pennsylvania     L,W                  W
Kansas            L                   L
Massachusetts     W                   W
Seton Hall        L                   W
St John's         W                   L

Temple is good. but they dont have a super stud, they dont play high speed, they wont be way more athletic, and that is all CU can ask.

Bilas waxing poetic about Cornell, says they can give Kentucky problems...hold your horses!

Yeah Temple got screwed, they should probably be a 4. The other problem is it would have been better to play a team like Vanderbilt who might underestimate us versus Dunphy who knows us well. The committee probably just had us play Temple so they can play up the Donahue-Dunphy angle endlessly

Temple's not going to overlook us, so we're going to get one of their better games. It'll be close but I don't think Cornell should be considered one of those more dangerous 12 seeds. Temple has the talent to dominate this game. Bilas is talking up Cornell, but he's also talking up Northern Iowa who I've seen play multiple times and really isn't that good.

YankeeLobo
Bilas waxing poetic about Cornell, says they can give Kentucky problems...hold your horses!

maybe if the teams sit for law boards at halftime.

Announcers felt Temple deserved a 4-seed which if correct makes us in some ways a 13-seed. At least the 5-12 seed winner avoids the 1-16 winner, right?

Vitale just screamed a little while ago as an aside about how "Temple is a lot tougher than people realize. Cornell had a good year, Wittman can shoot the three, Foote's good, but I think Temple's too tough."

Duke is also playing in JAX. I hope that means CBS will put the Duke pod (Louisville v. Cal) on prime-time tv and let the Wisconsin-Wofford and Temple-Cornell games be the early afternoon games.

(She said with her fingers crossed).

Dear hoops gods, thank you for sucking the joy out of March.

ansky629
Committee looks too much at strength of schedule and not enough at how teams do against their schedule.

Exactly what I've been saying for years about the lacrosse selection and seeding process.

Hillel Hoffmann
Dear hoops gods, thank you for sucking the joy out of March.

Hillel, that is a bummer for you. Do you get to go to the game?

Bilas picking Cornell to go to the Elite 8 before they lose to West Virginia. I'll have some of what he's smoking.

Rita

Hillel Hoffmann
Dear hoops gods, thank you for sucking the joy out of March.

Hillel, that is a bummer for you. Do you get to go to the game?

Nah. Even if I did, it would be a bitter win no matter who advanced. This sucks on so many levels.

Donahue's unhappy with the coaching match-up, but not the team match-up: [www.theithacajournal.com]

min
Record vs common opponents:

                Cornell             Temple
St. Joseph's      W                  W,W
La Salle          W                  W,W 
Pennsylvania     L,W                  W
Kansas            L                   L
Massachusetts     W                   W
Seton Hall        L                   W
St John's         W                   L

If nobody beats me to it, I'll add the scores to this in the morning.

uprdeck has it exactly right. Drawing a top A10 team is better for our style of play than a middle-of-the-pack BCS conference team. I also think that the 4-13 game in our bracket is ripe for an upset. Wofford is a great defensive team and definitely has a shot at an upset. If we are fortunate enough to defeat Temple, a Cornell-Wofford game isn't out of the question and would probably look a lot like the games against Princeton. I think this is a great draw.

Also, if we play Kentucky, John Wall will score 45.

billhoward
Announcers felt Temple deserved a 4-seed which if correct makes us in some ways a 13-seed.

You don't mean this, do you? Because if you do, it is the silliest thing you've said on the board in a long, long time.

No, it doesn't in any way "make us a 13 seed". What it means is that Temple got fucked because they SHOULD be playing a 13 seed. FWIW, I think Temple was seeded correctly, so even if the sense that we are a 13 seed is the difficulty of our draw I don't see that either.

current odds have temple as a 4 to 5 point favorite

Some announcers said Temple felt more like a higher-seed. If they're 4-seed material, we drew the team with the talent to be awarded a 13-seed opponent. So we got screwed, too.

If both our seeds are fair, then play on. The early line has the spread on our game in the middle of the 5-vs.-12 matchups.
Texas A&M 3 over Utah State
Butler 5 over UTEP
Temple 5 over Cornell
Michigan State 12-13 over New Mexico State

ugarte

Also, if we play Kentucky, John Wall will score 45.

I'm getting way way way way ahead of myself, but I've been hearing this kind of thing alot lately. I know alot of people have been pooh-poohing Bilas for his comments about us getting to the Elite 8, but of all the #1 seeds, Kentucky is definitely the one I would want to face. Having watched several of their games this year, and for all the talent and hyper-athleticism that they have, boy do they look pretty bad for long stretches. Wall turns the ball over way too much and has a propensity to jack up terrible 3's instead of driving the lane like they should. They're like Kansas except without the leadership and poise of Collins which is pretty much the only reason Kansas pulled the game out versus us. Give me Kentucky over and of the other 1 seeds any day.

Basically I'm saying Kentucky isn't making it to the final 4.

ugarte

billhoward
Announcers felt Temple deserved a 4-seed which if correct makes us in some ways a 13-seed.

You don't mean this, do you? Because if you do, it is the silliest thing you've said on the board in a long, long time.

I think this really overly harsh. Several commentators, including Lunardi, thought Cornell worthy of an 11 seed, and several thought Temple would be a 4. So to call Bill's posting "the silliest" is simply uncalled for. If you think Temple and Cornell were seeded correctly, that's all that had to be said. I don't recall anyone, here or elsewhere, anointing you as the final arbiter of college basketball knowledge.

Al DeFlorio

ugarte

billhoward
Announcers felt Temple deserved a 4-seed which if correct makes us in some ways a 13-seed.

You don't mean this, do you? Because if you do, it is the silliest thing you've said on the board in a long, long time.

I think this really overly harsh. ... [T]o call Bill's posting "the silliest" is simply uncalled for....

Have you read many of Bill's posts here He's written many sillier things!

Al DeFlorio

ugarte

billhoward
Announcers felt Temple deserved a 4-seed which if correct makes us in some ways a 13-seed.

You don't mean this, do you? Because if you do, it is the silliest thing you've said on the board in a long, long time.

I think this really overly harsh. Several commentators, including Lunardi, thought Cornell worthy of an 11 seed, and several thought Temple would be a 4. So to call Bill's posting "the silliest" is simply uncalled for. If you think Temple and Cornell were seeded correctly, that's all that had to be said. I don't recall anyone, here or elsewhere, anointing you as the final arbiter of college basketball knowledge.

I didn't ask to be anointed. Despite my lack of noble title, I've stated an opinion.

min's chart, with scores:

                  Cornell             Temple
St. Joseph's      W 78-66             W 73-46, W @75-67(OT)
La Salle          W @78-75            W 64-52, W @64-53
Pennsylvania      L @64-79, W 68-48   W @60-45
Kansas            L @66-71            L 52-84
Massachusetts     W 74-61             W 76-64
Seton Hall        L 79-89             W @71-65
St. John's        W @71-66            L 48-55

I think the St. John's game is officially a neutral site game but playing St. John's at MSG is effectively a road game.

The highlights for Cornell of this comparison are St. John's and Kansas. It doesn't look as close as I thought it might. Temple played decidedly better vs. St. Joe's, LaSalle, Penn and Seton Hall. UMass was a wash. I still feel good about this draw.

ugarte
min's chart, with scores:

                  Cornell             Temple
St. Joseph's      W 78-66             W 73-46, W @75-67(OT)
La Salle          W @78-75            W 64-52, W @64-53
Pennsylvania      L @64-79, W 68-48   W @60-45
Kansas            L @66-71            L 52-84
Massachusetts     W 74-61             W 76-64
Seton Hall        L 79-89             W @71-65
St. John's        W @71-66            L 48-55

I think the St. John's game is officially a neutral site game but playing St. John's at MSG is effectively a road game.

The highlights for Cornell of this comparison are St. John's and Kansas. It doesn't look as close as I thought it might. Temple played decidedly better vs. St. Joe's, LaSalle, Penn and Seton Hall. UMass was a wash. I still feel good about this draw.

I had the exact opposite impression. It's difficult going off of final scores, but I thought the comparisons look a lot better than one would have thought for a #5 and a #12. It's not as if they consistently steamrolled teams that we struggled with, or vice versa. There's a pretty good mix of everything in there.

Jordan 04

ugarte
min's chart, with scores:

                  Cornell             Temple
St. Joseph's      W 78-66             W 73-46, W @75-67(OT)
La Salle          W @78-75            W 64-52, W @64-53
Pennsylvania      L @64-79, W 68-48   W @60-45
Kansas            L @66-71            L 52-84
Massachusetts     W 74-61             W 76-64
Seton Hall        L 79-89             W @71-65
St. John's        W @71-66            L 48-55

I think the St. John's game is officially a neutral site game but playing St. John's at MSG is effectively a road game.

The highlights for Cornell of this comparison are St. John's and Kansas. It doesn't look as close as I thought it might. Temple played decidedly better vs. St. Joe's, LaSalle, Penn and Seton Hall. UMass was a wash. I still feel good about this draw.

I had the exact opposite impression. It's difficult going off of final scores, but I thought the comparisons look a lot better than one would have thought for a #5 and a #12. It's not as if they consistently steamrolled teams that we struggled with, or vice versa. There's a pretty good mix of everything in there.

Oh, sure, but I wasn't basing it on the seeds. I was basing it on my own expectations, regardless of seed. They're a 5 and we're a 12 because of SOS, not because Temple has so thoroughly outplayed us this year. You are right that it is pretty close for a 5 vs a 12. That's why I feel good about the draw.

KeithK
Have you read many of Bill's posts here He's written many sillier things!

Exactly.

Steve Donahue was interviewed on Saturday (March 13, 2010) NPR's Only a Game about his views on the Tournament possibly expanding to 96 teams. Even though a 96 field team would likely mean another IVY League team would get an invite, Coach Donahue is against the idea. (A 96 team field would mean changing the spelling of NC$$ to $$$$).

Also in this episode is a nice interview with Wofford's basketball coach. Wofford is in our pod and playing Wisconsin. With Cornell, Wofford and Duke, the JAX regional site probably has the highest GPA .

Rita
Even though a 96 field team would likely mean another IVY League team would get an invite,

Would it, though? While the chances would certainly increase in a strong year, "likely" seems to be pushing it. I don't know the historical RPI's for the non-champions, however.

He didn't give a time, but Mike Francesa is going to have "da Cornell coach" on today. I'll edit the post if I catch a time. Interviews are also often available aftewards on WFAN.com.

Jordan 04

Rita
Even though a 96 field team would likely mean another IVY League team would get an invite,

Would it, though? While the chances would certainly increase in a strong year, "likely" seems to be pushing it. I don't know the historical RPI's for the non-champions, however.

I think you just need to look to see how many NIT bids Ivies have gotten. (65+32 = 97, so pretty much the same but scrapping the play-in game) Back in the 90's when the conference was better, we got considerably more teams into the NIT. Of recent, not so much. So perhaps not "likely" but plausible or realistic.

CUontheslopes

Jordan 04

Rita
Even though a 96 field team would likely mean another IVY League team would get an invite,

Would it, though? While the chances would certainly increase in a strong year, "likely" seems to be pushing it. I don't know the historical RPI's for the non-champions, however.

I think you just need to look to see how many NIT bids Ivies have gotten. (65+32 = 97, so pretty much the same but scrapping the play-in game) Back in the 90's when the conference was better, we got considerably more teams into the NIT. Of recent, not so much. So perhaps not "likely" but plausible or realistic.

I was surprised that the NIT passed on Princeton this year. Princeton will be playing Duquesne in the CBI; Harvard will be focusing on their studies.

ugarte
I was surprised that the NIT passed on Princeton this year. Princeton will be playing Duquesne in the CBI; Harvard will be focusing on their studies.

Sucks will be in the CollegeInsider.com Tournament; they open against Appalachian State.

kingpin248

ugarte
I was surprised that the NIT passed on Princeton this year. Princeton will be playing Duquesne in the CBI; Harvard will be focusing on their studies.

Sucks will be in the CollegeInsider.com Tournament; they open against Appalachian State.

Ha! I forgot that they had added yet another not-the-NCAA tournament.

Jordan 04

ugarte
min's chart, with scores:

                  Cornell             Temple
St. Joseph's      W 78-66             W 73-46, W @75-67(OT)
La Salle          W @78-75            W 64-52, W @64-53
Pennsylvania      L @64-79, W 68-48   W @60-45
Kansas            L @66-71            L 52-84
Massachusetts     W 74-61             W 76-64
Seton Hall        L 79-89             W @71-65
St. John's        W @71-66            L 48-55

I think the St. John's game is officially a neutral site game but playing St. John's at MSG is effectively a road game.

The highlights for Cornell of this comparison are St. John's and Kansas. It doesn't look as close as I thought it might. Temple played decidedly better vs. St. Joe's, LaSalle, Penn and Seton Hall. UMass was a wash. I still feel good about this draw.

I had the exact opposite impression. It's difficult going off of final scores, but I thought the comparisons look a lot better than one would have thought for a #5 and a #12. It's not as if they consistently steamrolled teams that we struggled with, or vice versa. There's a pretty good mix of everything in there.

I have to agree with you here. In fact, if it weren't for that loss to Penn, you'd probably have a hard time picking out which is the 5 seed and which is the 12 seed.

Donahue currently on with Mike Francesa on WFAN.com

scoop85
Donahue currently on with Mike Francesa on WFAN.com

What could he have done to deserve that sort of punishment?

Trotsky

scoop85
Donahue currently on with Mike Francesa on WFAN.com

What could he have done to deserve that sort of punishment?

Francesa's an arrogant bully, but he does get the ratings.

Guess who tops the list of most overrated tournament teams on one of them "blog" thingies?

[rivals.yahoo.com]

See this analysis by Matt Carberry based upon Bradley-Terry (KRACH) ratings:
[mattcarberry.com]
Temple is #9, Cornell # 39.

jkahn
See this analysis by Matt Carberry based upon Bradley-Terry (KRACH) ratings:
[mattcarberry.com]
Temple is #9, Cornell # 39.

And as a result, the ratings would have given Temple a #3 seed (I placed them in the Midwest region, 1st/2nd rounds in Providence) and Cornell a #10 (I put them in the East, 1st/2nd rounds in Jacksonville, opening against Xavier). The final B-T matched 32 of 34 at-large teams, and no team was more than three lines from what the committee handed out.

The probabilities from the KRACH give Cornell an 11.35% chance of making the Sweet Sixteen, and 1.75% of proving Bilas right and making the Elite Eight.

This is always a fun little diversion, but I understand its relative importance:

RichH
Guess who tops the list of most overrated tournament teams on one of them "blog" thingies?

[rivals.yahoo.com]

I don't think I'd necessarily take issue with the idea that we might be (to borrow terms that the author uses to describe Maryland) "overrated-in-conversation", as oposed to "overrated-in-seeding". Temple is a very good team who probably should be seeded higher than they are (see Matt Carberry's posting that Jeff Kahn originally linked to here, for instance), and I think the author is just overreacting to the initial hype in our favor. (I mean, with all due respect to Coach Donahue's team, picking us to make it to the Elite Eight is putting the cart so far ahead of the horse that the horse can't even see the cart anymore because of the curvature of the Earth).

All that being said, I have us in the Sweet Sixteen in my bracket because where's the fun in filling them out if you can't be a homer?

Al DeFlorio

ugarte

billhoward
Announcers felt Temple deserved a 4-seed which if correct makes us in some ways a 13-seed.

You don't mean this, do you? Because if you do, it is the silliest thing you've said on the board in a long, long time.

I think this really overly harsh. Several commentators, including Lunardi, thought Cornell worthy of an 11 seed, and several thought Temple would be a 4. So to call Bill's posting "the silliest" is simply uncalled for. If you think Temple and Cornell were seeded correctly, that's all that had to be said. I don't recall anyone, here or elsewhere, anointing you as the final arbiter of college basketball knowledge.

But Al, nobody has ever accused ugarte of being subtle. He also doesn't seem to read the modifiers such as "relative" or "in some ways". Maybe I shouldn't say this, but I actually understood Bill on this one.

Jim Hyla

Al DeFlorio

ugarte

billhoward
Announcers felt Temple deserved a 4-seed which if correct makes us in some ways a 13-seed.

You don't mean this, do you? Because if you do, it is the silliest thing you've said on the board in a long, long time.

I think this really overly harsh. Several commentators, including Lunardi, thought Cornell worthy of an 11 seed, and several thought Temple would be a 4. So to call Bill's posting "the silliest" is simply uncalled for. If you think Temple and Cornell were seeded correctly, that's all that had to be said. I don't recall anyone, here or elsewhere, anointing you as the final arbiter of college basketball knowledge.

But Al, nobody has ever accused ugarte of being subtle. He also doesn't seem to read the modifiers such as "relative" or "in some ways". Maybe I shouldn't say this, but I actually understood Bill on this one.

As did I. Many informed college basketball pundits have essentially said the same thing Bill did.

Cornell takes it.

YankeeLobo
Cornell takes it.

Obama agrees:

[a.espncdn.com]

Jordan 04

YankeeLobo
Cornell takes it.

Obama agrees:

[a.espncdn.com]

Damn. I guess I have to root against us now!

Jordan 04

YankeeLobo
Cornell takes it.

Obama agrees:

[a.espncdn.com]

You know who else picked the team with all the white guys?

Hitler.

Think about it.

Josh '99

Jordan 04

YankeeLobo
Cornell takes it.

Obama agrees:

[a.espncdn.com]

You know who else picked the team with all the white guys?

Hitler.

Think about it.

Hmmm...Cornell...from Ithaca....likes to be called the Big Red... has a big “C” logo that looks like a sickle. Communist!!!

Jordan 04

YankeeLobo
Cornell takes it.

Obama agrees:

[a.espncdn.com]

This is totally off topic, but why is Northern Iowa the only school identified by mascot only on that bracket?

Don't know but it gives me a good excuse to again bring up teams whose mascot/name are inherently tied to the school name. In other words, you have to say the name of the school and the team for the choice of the team name to make sense. Examples:

UConn Huskies
Stetson Hatters
Harvard Sucks
and (almost) Buffalo Bulls

Can you come up with more examples?

Roy 82
UConn Huskies

How so? What am I missing.

KeithK

Roy 82
UConn Huskies

How so? What am I missing.

Yukon Huskies. I never noticed it until just now.

I've got another one that I doubt anybody here has heard of: Poca, WV's teams are called the Dots. Yes, that's right, the Poca Dots.

Jeff Hopkins '82

KeithK

Roy 82
UConn Huskies

How so? What am I missing.

Yukon Huskies. I never noticed it until just now.

I've got another one that I doubt anybody here has heard of: Poca, WV's teams are called the Dots. Yes, that's right, the Poca Dots.

The Macon Whoopee

I was not aware that Stetson is the Hatters. That's excellent.

Pleasant Hill (OR) High School's teams are the Pleasant Hill Billies.

Jeff Hopkins '82

KeithK

Roy 82
UConn Huskies

How so? What am I missing.

Yukon Huskies. I never noticed it until just now.

I've got another one that I doubt anybody here has heard of: Poca, WV's teams are called the Dots. Yes, that's right, the Poca Dots.

Wait, so the entire state of Connecticut decided on their main public univeristy's mascot so it would make a random pun?

"Best Case/Worst Case" from Pat Forde of ESPN:

Temple (5)

Best Case: Saddled with an undeserved No. 5 seed, the 29-win Owls play like the 2/3-seed they should have been. Fran Dunphy shows why he should get more love for his sideline work. The balanced team plays unrelenting defense, and runs poised offense to beat Cornell and Wisconsin. Then, orchestrating a tempo that has helped hold 11 straight opponents to fewer than 60 points in regulation, Temple stuns top-seed Kentucky in the Sweet Sixteen. (Ancient fans celebrate payback for the last-second loss to the Wildcats in the 1958 Final Four.) By the time the Owls arrive where John Chaney could never take them -- the Final Four -- Dunphy's pushbroom mustache has become a national fad.

Worst Case: The Owls draw another underseeded team in cagey Cornell. Lavoy Allen gets in foul trouble, and Temple cannot handle Big Red big man Jeff Foote and is eliminated in its first game. Dunphy, whose NCAA tourney record drops to 1-8, gets grief about his outdated pushbroom mustache.

Cornell (12)

Best Case: Seasoned by two years of NCAA appearances and stung by their disrespectful No. 12 seed, the Big Red come out firing against Temple. Cornell gooses the tempo to its liking, Ryan Wittman sinks jumpers and Jeff Foote controls the middle. The school captures its first NCAA tournament victory -- and the first for the Ivy League since Princeton in 1998. Then Cornell takes down Wisconsin in the second round, and America falls in love with the Ivy League -- making its first Sweet Sixteen appearance since 1979. Egghead students leave the library in Ithaca for the short commute to Syracuse, where they see the Big Red push the Big Blue of Kentucky for 38 minutes before faltering.

Worst Case: The team that's played just five opponents in Ken Pomeroy's top 100 -- none since Jan. 6 -- isn't ready for Temple, which has played 16 such teams. The Owls get Foote into foul trouble and blanket Wittman on the perimeter. Cornell does what Ivy teams do: exit early. Egghead students retreat to the library until next winter.

Jordan 04

YankeeLobo
Cornell takes it.

Obama agrees:

[a.espncdn.com]

I think this is a better bracket

sockralex

Josh '99

Jordan 04

YankeeLobo
Cornell takes it.

Obama agrees:

[a.espncdn.com]

You know who else picked the team with all the white guys?

Hitler.

Think about it.

Hmmm...Cornell...from Ithaca....likes to be called the Big Red... has a big “C” logo that looks like a sickle. Communist!!!

Yeah, the school with the 'C' for Communist logo, also inviting one of our nation's most powerful Commies to give the Convocation speech.

YankeeLobo

sockralex

Josh '99

Jordan 04

YankeeLobo
Cornell takes it.

Obama agrees:

[a.espncdn.com]

You know who else picked the team with all the white guys?

Hitler.

Think about it.

Hmmm...Cornell...from Ithaca....likes to be called the Big Red... has a big “C” logo that looks like a sickle. Communist!!!

Yeah, the school with the 'C' for Communist logo, also inviting one of our nation's most powerful Commies to give the Convocation speech.

You really are committed to making a jackass out of yourself here, aren't you.

Al DeFlorio

YankeeLobo

sockralex

Josh '99

Jordan 04

YankeeLobo
Cornell takes it.

Obama agrees:

[a.espncdn.com]

You know who else picked the team with all the white guys?

Hitler.

Think about it.

Hmmm...Cornell...from Ithaca....likes to be called the Big Red... has a big “C” logo that looks like a sickle. Communist!!!

Yeah, the school with the 'C' for Communist logo, also inviting one of our nation's most powerful Commies to give the Convocation speech.

You really are committed to making a jackass out of yourself here, aren't you.

Dear Al,

You won't find me there, but I hope you have fun standing in line to watch the epic failure Nancy Pelosi preach to the next generation of bleeding heart liberals.

Sincerely,

Recovering Liberal who can't find a job because the federal government took all of them

So that would be a yes, then.

jtwcornell91
So that would be a yes, then.

JTW, enjoy your free healthcare. Hopefully you can find a competent doctor to go to once it's free.

How can so many supposedly intelligent people (Cornell) come together and believe in something so stupid?

You really don't get it, do you? The point isn't which side of the argument you're on, the point is you brought self-serious political wankery into what had been a joke.

Lauren '06
You really don't get it, do you? The point isn't which side of the argument you're on, the point is you brought self-serious political wankery into what had been a joke.

Thanks Lauren!!!

Nice article on Jon Jaques in The Syracuse Post-Standard.

YankeeLobo

Al DeFlorio

YankeeLobo

sockralex

Josh '99

Jordan 04

YankeeLobo
Cornell takes it.

Obama agrees:

[a.espncdn.com]

You know who else picked the team with all the white guys?

Hitler.

Think about it.

Hmmm...Cornell...from Ithaca....likes to be called the Big Red... has a big “C” logo that looks like a sickle. Communist!!!

Yeah, the school with the 'C' for Communist logo, also inviting one of our nation's most powerful Commies to give the Convocation speech.

You really are committed to making a jackass out of yourself here, aren't you.

Dear Al,

You won't find me there, but I hope you have fun standing in line to watch the epic failure Nancy Pelosi preach to the next generation of bleeding heart liberals.

Sincerely,

Recovering Liberal who can't find a job because the federal government took all of them

Based on what I've seen here from you, the reason for your unemployed situation has nothing to do with the federal government...but it is, of course, a convenient scapegoat. Back to Fox News, pal. You're their targeted audience.

Good luck to Cornell on Friday. I don't think they have a great chance, but stranger things have happened.

YankeeLobo
Good luck to Cornell on Friday. I don't think they have a great chance, but stranger things have happened.

Stranger things always happen around here.

YankeeLobo

jtwcornell91
So that would be a yes, then.

JTW, enjoy your free healthcare. Hopefully you can find a competent doctor to go to once it's free.

How can so many supposedly intelligent people (Cornell) come together and believe in something so stupid?

As a doc, I'm happy to care for him; assuming he has arthritis that is. Many MDs, including many in my group, would be happy with a more universal healthcare system. There must be some reason the rest of the developed world has that.

Jim Hyla

YankeeLobo

jtwcornell91
So that would be a yes, then.

JTW, enjoy your free healthcare. Hopefully you can find a competent doctor to go to once it's free.

How can so many supposedly intelligent people (Cornell) come together and believe in something so stupid?

As a doc, I'm happy to care for him; assuming he has arthritis that is. Many MDs, including many in my group, would be happy with a more universal healthcare system. There must be some reason the rest of the developed world has that.

As a doctor (not sure what type of doctor you are, which might have some bearing on your opinion), wouldn't you prefer a combination of tort reform and increased competition (via abolishing the anti-trust exemption for healthcare insurance cos.) in order to drive down the cost of care? How does adding 30 million people to a system without increasing the number of providers (and most likely driving down the number of providers, since cost of doing business will exceed ability to make profit) better the healthcare system? There will be no option but for the government to start rationing care -- i.e. waiting in line 6 months to see a doctor. It doesn't add up.

Much of the developed world has universal systems, but where do they come when they need a major surgery? They come here. Canadians come here for heart treatment because there are not enough competent cardiologists in their country. The universal option is probably effective for certain levels of care (getting a basic physical) but for surgeries I would not want to go anywhere else but the U.S. because we have the best doctors. If you can't make money being a doctor, why would you train for 10 years or more (including college) to become one? Part of the reason we have the best doctors is the financial incentive, they work their asses off and fill one of the most important needs in society, they deserve to be compensated well.

We don't operate in a true free market healthcare system right now. Insurance companies own regional monopolies across the country, which leaves few options for healthcare consumers. The problem is that the insurance lobby is the largest in Washington, is bankrolling many of the politicians, and thus the common sense solutions that cost far less will never be implemented. That doesn't mean I'm going to accept some shittier option just because Washington is so deep in the pockets of the insurance companies that they won't do the right thing.

From an old discussion on "tort reform":

[elf.elynah.com]

As much as I enjoy bantering about politics and lawsuits and government action, etc. March isn't the time to do it. Especially in the hockey Other Sports forum as opposed to JSID. So save up your arguments for mid-April or May and we'll hash it out when there's no hockey to talk about.

KeithK
As much as I enjoy bantering about politics and lawsuits and government action, etc. March isn't the time to do it. Especially in the hockey Other Sports forum as opposed to JSID. So save up your arguments for mid-April or May and we'll hash it out when there's no hockey to talk about.

Yeah, my point was not a political one, but a personal one.

YankeeLobo

Jim Hyla

YankeeLobo

jtwcornell91
So that would be a yes, then.

JTW, enjoy your free healthcare. Hopefully you can find a competent doctor to go to once it's free.

How can so many supposedly intelligent people (Cornell) come together and believe in something so stupid?

As a doc, I'm happy to care for him; assuming he has arthritis that is. Many MDs, including many in my group, would be happy with a more universal healthcare system. There must be some reason the rest of the developed world has that.

As a doctor (not sure what type of doctor you are, which might have some bearing on your opinion), wouldn't you prefer a combination of tort reform and increased competition (via abolishing the anti-trust exemption for healthcare insurance cos.) in order to drive down the cost of care? How does adding 30 million people to a system without increasing the number of providers (and most likely driving down the number of providers, since cost of doing business will exceed ability to make profit) better the healthcare system? There will be no option but for the government to start rationing care -- i.e. waiting in line 6 months to see a doctor. It doesn't add up.

Much of the developed world has universal systems, but where do they come when they need a major surgery? They come here. Canadians come here for heart treatment because there are not enough competent cardiologists in their country. The universal option is probably effective for certain levels of care (getting a basic physical) but for surgeries I would not want to go anywhere else but the U.S. because we have the best doctors. If you can't make money being a doctor, why would you train for 10 years or more (including college) to become one? Part of the reason we have the best doctors is the financial incentive, they work their asses off and fill one of the most important needs in society, they deserve to be compensated well.

We don't operate in a true free market healthcare system right now. Insurance companies own regional monopolies across the country, which leaves few options for healthcare consumers. The problem is that the insurance lobby is the largest in Washington, is bankrolling many of the politicians, and thus the common sense solutions that cost far less will never be implemented. That doesn't mean I'm going to accept some shittier option just because Washington is so deep in the pockets of the insurance companies that they won't do the right thing.

Well, at the risk of upsetting those who say this is not the time, I'll answer. The bolded should probaby tell you I'm a rheumatologist. God, I just found out my spell checker didn't recognize rheumatologist.That means I'm on the low end of the pay scale, no procedures. But no, I wouldn't like that. I believe everyone should have access to good care. We ration now, we just let the insurance companies do it. BC/BS used to be about being sure localities had access to good insurance at a fair price, now most of them have gone from being not-for-profit to for profit and they're just another plan.

The number of people who come here for care is tiny, and no I don't have the numbers. We also go to other countries for care because it's cheaper, I don't know which is larger, but that's not important to the issue. Insurance companies across state lines is bogus. I don't want my employer buying a plan from Mississippi, which covers nothing. Regulations do have value and can make sure we get value for our money. Man I can hear them now.

I'd much prefer having to worry about too many patients for too few doctors, than paying for people going to the ER. We can work out the former with MD extenders, PAs and NPs. I believe we will not get control of costs till everyone is in the system. Medicare needs reforming, but very few seniors want to give it up. If all I had to deal with were Medicare, my expenses would go down dramatically. When I've decided what should be done with a patient, they and I have to go out and talk to someone else in my office to find out what their insurance will allow. If there were only a few plans I could know and go on to the next patient, impossible now.

Yes it does take many years to get done with training, 14 in my case, but having it simple once we're done would make it a lot more fun.

Jim Hyla

YankeeLobo

Jim Hyla

YankeeLobo

jtwcornell91
So that would be a yes, then.

JTW, enjoy your free healthcare. Hopefully you can find a competent doctor to go to once it's free.

How can so many supposedly intelligent people (Cornell) come together and believe in something so stupid?

As a doc, I'm happy to care for him; assuming he has arthritis that is. Many MDs, including many in my group, would be happy with a more universal healthcare system. There must be some reason the rest of the developed world has that.

As a doctor (not sure what type of doctor you are, which might have some bearing on your opinion), wouldn't you prefer a combination of tort reform and increased competition (via abolishing the anti-trust exemption for healthcare insurance cos.) in order to drive down the cost of care? How does adding 30 million people to a system without increasing the number of providers (and most likely driving down the number of providers, since cost of doing business will exceed ability to make profit) better the healthcare system? There will be no option but for the government to start rationing care -- i.e. waiting in line 6 months to see a doctor. It doesn't add up.

Much of the developed world has universal systems, but where do they come when they need a major surgery? They come here. Canadians come here for heart treatment because there are not enough competent cardiologists in their country. The universal option is probably effective for certain levels of care (getting a basic physical) but for surgeries I would not want to go anywhere else but the U.S. because we have the best doctors. If you can't make money being a doctor, why would you train for 10 years or more (including college) to become one? Part of the reason we have the best doctors is the financial incentive, they work their asses off and fill one of the most important needs in society, they deserve to be compensated well.

We don't operate in a true free market healthcare system right now. Insurance companies own regional monopolies across the country, which leaves few options for healthcare consumers. The problem is that the insurance lobby is the largest in Washington, is bankrolling many of the politicians, and thus the common sense solutions that cost far less will never be implemented. That doesn't mean I'm going to accept some shittier option just because Washington is so deep in the pockets of the insurance companies that they won't do the right thing.

Well, at the risk of upsetting those who say this is not the time, I'll answer. The bolded should probaby tell you I'm a rheumatologist. God, I just found out my spell checker didn't recognize rheumatologist.That means I'm on the low end of the pay scale, no procedures. But no, I wouldn't like that. I believe everyone should have access to good care. We ration now, we just let the insurance companies do it. BC/BS used to be about being sure localities had access to good insurance at a fair price, now most of them have gone from being not-for-profit to for profit and they're just another plan.

The number of people who come here for care is tiny, and no I don't have the numbers. We also go to other countries for care because it's cheaper, I don't know which is larger, but that's not important to the issue. Insurance companies across state lines is bogus. I don't want my employer buying a plan from Mississippi, which covers nothing. Regulations do have value and can make sure we get value for our money. Man I can hear them now.

I'd much prefer having to worry about too many patients for too few doctors, than paying for people going to the ER. We can work out the former with MD extenders, PAs and NPs. I believe we will not get control of costs till everyone is in the system. Medicare needs reforming, but very few seniors want to give it up. If all I had to deal with were Medicare, my expenses would go down dramatically. When I've decided what should be done with a patient, they and I have to go out and talk to someone else in my office to find out what their insurance will allow. If there were only a few plans I could know and go on to the next patient, impossible now.

Yes it does take many years to get done with training, 14 in my case, but having it simple once we're done would make it a lot more fun.

Thanks for your feedback. Appreciate it.