Live Q&As

Hello, everyone! We are getting down to crunch time in the regular season. Thanks a lot for stopping by. Lots to talk about. Feel free to ask about anything you want, and to ask as many times as you want. I promise I will get to every question.

I am also interested if anyone out there thinks a 96-team NCAA tournament field is a good idea. Let me know. As always, feelf ree to email at prisbelle@washpost.com if you have any other thoughts.

I ahve Geogetown winning tonight. If the Hoyas play a good team at home, good bet to pick the Hoyas. But we'll get into that more later. Flip a coin on the other game.

I am told Gene Wang will be conducting a live chat during tonight's Georgetown game on The 65 blog, which is dedicated to everything and anything NCAA tournament related.

Fire away, everyone!

I agree. It depends on the matchup, of course, but I think there is a good chance I will pick the Hokies to win one NCAA tournament game (assuming they make it). They are very athletic, and they strike me as a mentally tough team -- look at the win at Virginia. Delaney is a stud, Hudson is an accomplished scorer. Allen is surely capable, etc.

I don't see any ACC team advancing too far, but VT can make a little noise for sure.

Not at all.

Here's the situation on Gary: He is a Hall of Fame caliber college basketball coach, nothing less. He is one of the best coaches in the entire country. He gets the absolute most out of his teams. If a team underachieves or falls off, blame the players (like a John Gilchrist), but Gary is not the problem.

As for recruiting, Gary Williams will struggle to get the elite national prospects in large part because he refuses to push the envelope, bend the rules or deal extensively with unsavory characters (runners, hangers-on, etc.) who attach themselves to the best players. That is fact. Take the top 30 players and there are runners, or other individuals attached to most of them. Gary does not want -- or need -- to deal with them. Other coaches do. Not all do. But some do. Gary can take his five and more often than not beat the five you want to put on the floor. He is an old-school rarity these days, but college basketball is better with Gary still on the sideline. That's how I feel.

Thanks for the question. I've got the Big 12 with a solid 7 teams. I thought before the season started that the Big 12 would compete with the Big Ten for the title of the nation's strongest conference. I underestimated Syracuse and just how strong the top of the Big East would be.

Texas Tech is interesting, I was actually looking closely at its resume earlier today, very early this morning. Look, they have only 5 wins against top 100 teams, and that's one of the problems I have with Tech. The overall SOS is good. I'd say they are on the fringe of the bubble right now. There is room for them if they want to make a run.

When you get to trying to figure out the final 5 teams that will get at-large bids, a lot of resumes look alike, and some of these Big East teams -- I have six competing for the final five slots! -- will start to eliminate one another.

I agree with some of what you have said, but not all of it UNC has carried the entire league in NCAA tournament play since 2005. Duke has a strong resume, but raise your hand if you are picking Duke to get to the Elite Eight. Not many people will be.

I think there are a bunch of "good" teams in the league. Maryland is good. VT is good. Georgia Tech and Clemson surely can be good. Wake is good so long as they don't play Cleveland State again. I would not be surprised to see a couple ACC teams make the Sweet 16. But I also would not be surprised to see none make it. I can say with relative confidence that I will not be selecting an ACC team to advance to the Elite Eight.

As mediocre as the ACC has been -- and it has been mediocre this season -- we need some perspective, too, because the Pac-10 is simply awful. It is in position to be the first power conference since 1985 to be a one-bid league.

Good question. I'll just consider the term mid-major to mean any team not in a BCS conference with the exception of Gonzaga.

The non-BCS team I am most excited to see is New Mexico. I have not seen a game of theirs yet this season but really want to. They have an excellent resume. I have them as a No. 3 seed right now, but the top of the MWC is strong and if they should win the conference tournament it would be interesting to see if they could climb to a No. 2.

There are some tough road games in that league because of the travel situation and the venues, but New Mexico for the most part keeps rolling. Very impressive.

Richmond is another team that I will be excited to see and that could make a little noise.

I like UTEP and Derrick Caracter, whom I have read about and watched play since he was 12 or 13 years old.

Murray State is a very balanced team with I think six players averaging double figures. Could give a 3 or 4 seed a game.

I always like Butler. Siena and Cornell? The recent losses surprised me, but Cornell will still be a dangerous and capable 13 seed that can shoot the lights out.

Great question. As far as I know, Maryland fans have behaved this season. Years ago, it was a different matter and they were quite vile at times. But something needs to be done at West Virginia and Miss. State because a few fans at each place ruin the reputation of the entire fan base, not to mention put players and coaches in danger. They will need to start penalizing the home team and holding the students accountable. Cannot be tolerated.

I love Morgantown. I do. Great place.

But if I went to school in Starkville, Miss., I'd be upset, too. Still, you need to behave yourself!

On that note, it's a shame Renardo Sidney has not played.

Well, Gary Williams has talked about this some, I believe. Mosely started off so well, but now, at this point of the season, all the teams are scouted so well, everyone knows everything about everyone else, and the ACC opponents during the second half of league play are more prepared for him. I think that is some of it. I also think that he has looked indecisive at times, and perhaps he just needs to go back to playing more, reacting more, instead of thinking it through. That's more of an observation. All that said, the improvement of his shot has been pretty remarkable and a good sign for the future in the years to come.

Hiring the wrong coaches. And they can't recruit a state and area loaded with talent. Hire Eddie Jordan. It would be a great move for Rutgers if they can get the former Scarlet Knight. The RAC can also be a tough place to play. When I went to school at Rutgers, I remember coveraging RU's win over Georgetown. Intense atmosphere.

I am intrigued by the team. I certainly commend Steve Alford on the job he has done there. I like Darington Hobson as a player. And I like the team's overall resume. But I need to watch this team play some. New Mexico is one of the teams I am most looking forward to seeing play over the next few weeks. They are also one of the few teams west of Manhattan, Kansas, that matter this year. New Mexico will get a good seed and head to San Jose and Spokane, Wash., for a first round game. It will be interesting to see if those sites attract a lot of fan interest because there will be a good number of east coact teams (3 and 4 seeds ) out there this year with the Pac-10 down.

Well, it is an issue worth keeping an eye on this season. But I disagree with you completely about the mid-majors. To me, they are what makes this event so special. George Mason beating a no-fun UConn team and reaching the Final Four in 2006 wasn't so bad, was it? Davidson coming within a shot of beating Kansas? Steph Curry can play a little, right?

This season, Cornell nearly won in Lawrence, William & Mary won at Wake and at Maryland -- two likely tournament teams and New Mexico -- get this -- has 7 top 50 wins. That is 7 more than California has.

The big boys don't want the little guys in because they want to keep their jobs. They want 96 teams so more coaches can have job security. But the stories make the tournament -- whether it's George Mason, Steph Curry or whatever -- and more likely than not those stories can be found with the mid-majors.

That said, you raise a good point. Only four at-large mid-majors got in last season. It will be interesting to see if more get in this season. I think there will be more because more are deserving.

True. I used to cover the WAC and Fresno State for three years, so I'm very much interested with the WAC, WCC and MWC. The WAC tournament was good at times, but I always have wanted to cover a MWC tournament. A trip to Vegas in March isn't so bad.

Good points. The next four games are all against top 50 teams. I say Maryland gets either Clemson or GT and Duke at home in Vasquez's last home game (should be a wild atmosphere). The game at Virginia Tech will be a bloodbath, a tough atmosphere against a good team. I've got Tech. And I've got the Terps winning at UVA, which is sinking fast. So I have three more wins.

Well, I still have Kansas winning the whole thing because it is the best team. A lot of depth. Star power. Future pros. A coach who has done it. Etc.

The Syracuse team has quickly grown on me because of the team's length and because of Wes Johnson's supporting cast. But the team that I liked the most in the Big East before the season to make the Final Four is West Virginia. Huggins is underrated as a coach.

I have a hard time rating the entire Big East because it is just too darn large at 16 teams. I still think the bottom of the league is junk, even with Rutgers beating Georgetown. The middle of the league is too muddled right now. I like South Florida's potential with Jones, UConn's potential if they ever get it together.

As for Kentucky, they may have the top two picks in the draft on the team in Cousins and Wall. But they are playing in the SEC. They have only one loss, but they have not beaten a great team. Wins over North Carolina and UConn don't look as strong now. Once again with Calipari's teams, very hard to predict in March. Because of the youth, I could see a Sweet 16 exit, or I could see Calipari putting another banner up in the rafters. (Okay, if someone wants to say, Banner goes up, in two years banner comes down, now would be the time -- but I'm not saying it)

When I participated in the mock bracket exercise at the NCAA headquarters a few years ago, it really struck me with how far the committee goes to try to place top four seeds near home. They measure the mileage, etc. It is unlikely, though I guess not impossible, for Maryland to creep up to a four seed, so the Terps can pretty much go anywhere.

Take Buffalo. Syracuse will likely be there as a No. 1 or No. 2. Maryland could easily be a 8/9 or 7/10 and be up there and play the 'Cuse in the second round.

Say Maryland gets a 6. They play an 11 in the first round and a 3 in round two. If that 3 is, say, New Mexico, Maryland could be shipped out to Spokane or San Jose, so it really could be anywhere at this point.

I am hoping for New Orleans or Milwaukee. Not Buffalo again!

Thank you. I agree.

I heard Florida State Coach Leonard Hamilton say that he would be open to every team -- all 347 -- being in the NCAA tournament. That would be, um, interesting. Try doing a mock bracket for that, Patrick Stevens!

Yes, I agree with you, and thanks for the question. I love the top of the Big East, hard not to. But I just have a hard time comparing the league to other leagues because it is too large.

I think I like the Big 12 the best this season. It has the national title favorite in Kansas, a solid 2/3 seed in Kansas State. Texas is capable though struggling. Texas A&M is dangerous. Missouri can reach the Sweet 16 again. Baylor is capable. That's my league. And I also like the top half of the Big Ten. I think Purdue, Wisconsin, Michigan State and Ohio State are all very good.

I picked Purdue to make the Final Four before the season and I am not backing off that now, regardless of how many times Steve Yanda wants to badmouth 'em!

It depends on whether the bearded one on Duke down low plays like he did against Maryland.

No, seriously, I think VT has a chance against any ACC team. Compete with Duke on the boards, try to contain Scheyer, etc. It won't be easy by any means, but the Hokies certainly have a shot.

That said, I would not take the house money approach just yet. I did a chart on our blog, The 65, yesterday about just how bad VT's schedule is. It is awful. Awful. The worst of any BCS conference team this season. By far the worst of any bubble team. No team has earned an at-large bid the past few years with a schedule even close to being that poor. The nonleague sked ranks 340 out of 347 games. There are 10 members of the selection committee.

What if you have a few who have the letters SOS tattooed on their arms and they are just in love with Strength of Schedule ratings more than family members? And what it they won't put VT in unless they have 4-5 top 50 wins -- which they don't?

So nothing is ever a lock when you have a team with an extreme like VT's SOS. But I do think at least 10 ACC wins should be enough and they should get there. The team is good enough to make the NCAAs.

I haven't even gotten a chance to see how it looks, just trying to answer the questions with the new system. Looks good so far.

Well, that would help the ACC from a football standpoint, I suppose.

I liked the ACC better before expansion when the double round-robin was in place for hoops. A shame.

To be honest, I have no idea about the AP rankings and refuse to look a them. The selection committee focuses on the RPI and top 50 wins and all that, so I study that every day. I could not tell you where teams are ranked in the AP poll.

But why was Duke ranked ahead of a Georgetown team that spanked them? Why was Cornell in the top 25 when, while a good team, they had virtually no at-large hopes and were nowhere near a top six seed in the NCAAs? This is why I don't look at the polls much.

If Tech beats Duke, I could see Tech as a 6 seed, which would mean (6 times 4=24) they could slip in.

I would not blame Gary even if he didn't take over the program in such condition. Who wants to deal extensively with unsavory characters or runners or hangers-on or with people who want money, jobs, cars, tax-exempt donations, speaking deals at camps, etc. I don't blame Gary at all. And he does more than fine without giving his fans a scare that NCAA investigators could one day make their way to College Park. Won't happen. They are one of the cleanest programs around.

Dog games? Like what? What exactly was a dog game? Virginia-Florida State maybe was a dog game. I guess it was a dog game.

I'm looking forward to a handful of Bracket Buster games, especially Siena-Butler.

Fair point. The ACC is really taking a beating today!

The Big East is a confederation more than it is a league. Sixteen teams? Really?

As far as leagues I like to watch usually: the CAA, the Big 12, the MVC, the Pac-10 (usually, but not this year) and the Big East and ACC.

Thanks. Interesting point. I would be okay with 68 teams, but adding 31 more at-large berths seems insane. That means that almost every ACC team would make it. Crazy.

If there were a way to bring a few more capable at-large teams, both from big leagues and small leagues, that's fine.

Jerry's a great quote. But it didn't work out at DePaul and that would not get me too excited. I like Eddie Jordan.

Very impressive. My preseason Final Four pick has not lost in a month. Ohio State was also starting to surge, and it has the best player in the country, so the win was all the more impressive. Purdue has beaten five teams in the RPI's top 25. The team's core has been together for a few years now, and this team has a chance at a No. 1 seed if things break right.

The Louisville-Notre Dame game was fun to watch.

I'd probably lean toward Marquette, which could still use the win to bolster its credentials.

My Bracketology 2011 Edition is not quite out on the shelves yet, but George Mason should be improved with a more experienced team. Virginia Tech should be very good if the entire roster, for the most part, returns. Virginia should be better. Maryland should take a few steps back.

Great point about the ACC schedule. That's why I don't like the scheduling now. But the nonconference sked is ranked 340 -- hard to defend that, really. VT does have two good wins -- Clemson and Wake -- and the Wake win is a very good win. VT also has a better record against top 100 teams than Maryland does. So VT has beaten good teams, it just has had limited chances against very good teams.

Good points. Some people may value one over the other, and others may disagree. I'm just saying that when the SOS is that extreme, that bad, it just jumps out at you. It's kind of like a team with an RPI in the 90s. No team with an RPI worse than the low 60s has ever earned an at-large berth. The SOS in nonconference play can also show a little bit about what a team intended to do with its schedule. Who tried to play people? Did you schedule someone that was supposed to be good but had a down year? I look at that, but I am not sure everyone does.

RPI is not the end all, either. Texas Tech and St. mary's are in the 40s and they are probably not in the field now. Siena has an RPI around 33 and they don't have much of an at-large chance. A few years ago, Mizz State got left out with an RPI of 20 or so.

It's the whole body of work, as they say. But I think it's important to take a clear look at exactly who the teams played. And by beating up on softies, I don't think it shows much.

See ya, everyone. It was fun. Thanks for all the questions. Take care.