As over-the-top fans grab more and more college basketball headlines, the question is raised: How much is too much?

Generally, four-letter words tend to dominate student sections. But some games are more than nasty language.

UCLA's Kevin Love received death threats on his cell phone. Indiana's Eric Gordon has been target of Illini fan hatred ever since switching his commitment from Illinois to Indiana. UAB nearly upset then-undefeated Memphis, then the fans nearly started a riot.

It wasn't as drastic, but Thursday night, a fan was tossed from the Arizona-USC game for throwing a water bottle at the USC bench. That prompted interim Wildcats coach Kevin O'Neill to admonish the fan and apologize to USC coach Tim Floyd.

So what's with everyone? SI.com's Grant Wahl wrote a fascinating story – complete with all the pertinent Love details – which covers the worry about players' personal safety and the tendency for fan chants and taunts to have a homophobic slant.

Is all of this new? No. Obscene chants have marred parts of the game for years. When I attended Kansas, Missouri fans found Ryan Robertson's phone number and would leave nasty messages before games. And I'm sure Kansas fans did the same to Missouri players.

Still, the recent taunts are disturbing and a little depressing for the sport in general.

Don't mistake that statement for wanting tame, boring crowds. I don't. But there is a difference between clever and caustic, energetic and obnoxious.

Schools are aware of the problem – Oregon's athletic director apologized to Love – and most have a code of conduct, but enforcing it is another matter. After all, these are college students, who are part of a highly partisan crowd eager to "help" their team win. (Though in some cases, some fans are just jerks, regardless of the score.) Eject one rowdy fan and another replaces him. That's true for any sporting event, let alone college basketball. That doesn't mean ignore everything, but it does seem like jousting at windmills.

So what would make a difference?

Coaches have to set the tone (Wahl reports neither Oregon coach Ernie Kent or Illinois' Bruce Weber addressed the vulgar fans on the P.A. systems). Without them, nothing would change.

I know it's not their main job requirement, but it can't be ignored, either. They're the most visible part of any college program and they carry weight, even among young kids who might ignore most authority figures.

Even established, rowdy fans like the Cameron Crazies or the Izzone can get carried away. But when Mike Krzyzewski and Tom Izzo want their fans to behave, they do. There's no reason coaches at all schools can't follow that model.

That won't solve everything, but it's a start.

Big wins like Vanderbilt's force a re-thinking of one's hoop perceptions.

So I thought more about the Commodores last night, slept on it, did more research this morning and here's my verdict:

This isn't the year Vandy breaks through to the Elite Eight, let alone the Final Four.

Vandy (24-4) has two elite players and is doesn't lose at home. That's generally not enough to win three NCAA Tournament games, let alone four.

Lunardi's latest bracket has the Commodores as a 5 seed, which seems about right. They close out their season with three more wins and a couple in the SEC Tournament, they could snag a three seed. They've been once (1993) since the tournament expanded to 64 teams, and that didn't result in an Elite Eight.

(That Elite Eight spot is important because Vandy is usually good for the Sweet 16. Since 88, it's been to the tourney seven times, and have been to the Sweet 16 four of those times, including in 2004 and last year. But never an Elite Eight.)

This year isn't that much different. Vandy has piled up wins, but until last night its biggest wins were against South Alabama and UMass. Blame a weak SEC, but when you're 4-4 on the road and your two neutral court wins are against Bradley and Utah State, it doesn't inspire confidence for a deep March run.

Need numbers? Vandy is fourth among SEC teams in efficiency margin. The Commodores are great from beyond the arc, but are a good, not great offensive team (37^th in adjusted offensive efficiency). The defense is below average, if not downright bad. They don't force many turnovers, don't rebound or block many shots.

Essentially, this post from more than a month ago isn't that far off.

BUT… they're good in the clutch. Shan Foster and A.J. Ogilvy (when he's on the court) are among the nation's best 1-2 combinations behind Eric Gordon and D.J. White, and Michael Beasley and Bill Walker. And when Vandy's in the tourney, they're playing during that second week.

Yet, when you limit Foster or Ogilvy and Vandy is vulnerable. Take away both players and the result is four losses in a five-game stretch. And that doesn't cut it in March.

Two quick thoughts on Tennessee's loss to Vandy, with more to come in the morning.

The Vols are still a No. 1 seed, no doubt.

This piece from the Sporting News' Mike DeCourcy was published before Tuesday's game, but it spells out the top-seed situation fairly well. The short version is the Vols (25-3) are atop the RPI, are 8-2 against the RPI top 50 and are the only team to beat Memphis.

The only team with a comparable résumé is Texas, which is 10-3 against the RPI top 50, with wins against Tennessee, UCLA and Kansas. The Vols do need to keep winning, though, and Sunday against Kentucky won't be a cakewalk.

Second, Tennessee's scrappy style – played to perfection against Memphis – does have its flaws. The Vols were good on defense, but didn't suffocate Vandy's Shan Foster on the perimeter, which resulted in Foster hitting 9-of-13 shots for 32 points (1.76 PPWS!). And the offense was only bailed out by Chris Lofton's hot shooting. He hit 7-of-18 field-goal attempts (the 1.17 PPWS isn't amazing as he cooled off in the 2^nd half); everyone else was 13-of-43. The Vols really need a point guard.

Now, where does Vandy fit in with the rest of the title contenders? More to come tomorrow.

In the meantime, cast your vote for the new No. 1 team here.

Also, the silly numbers from Vandy's win:

• The Vols have played hoops for 99 seasons, but this was their first week at No. 1. Probably the last, too.
• It's the seventh time in the last eight games No. 2 has beaten No. 1. The lone exception was Duke in 2005 against Texas.
• It was the 7^th time the Commodores have beaten a No. 1 team, the most from a school that's never been No. 1 itself. It's also their fourth straight home win against a top-ranked foe.

Tuesday reading, with an eye on the Vols-Commodores and Hoosiers-Buckeyes. But first, another Kelvin Sampson update.

Former Indiana University president Adam Herbert, who approved the Sampson two years ago, commented on the Sampson fiasco, telling the Jacksonville Times-Union that he thought the coach's previous NCAA violations were "an aberration."

Ex-squeeze me? Baking powder? Surely there was more than that.

"We had every confidence that the letter and spirit of (Sampson's contract) would be met," Herbert told the paper. "We had to have a pretty high comfort level (to hire him)."

Ah. That clears it up. It was all about winning.

The school didn't mind trying their luck because "When you're looking at someone who is one of the best coaches in America, who had 20-win seasons for a decade, this became a value hire for us. ... It was worth giving him a second chance."

It's crazy to think that Indiana was going for a value hire. Maybe the job isn't the best in America, but it's still Indiana. There wasn't a coach out there who represented a value hire and had a clean background?

(One last thought on Sampson, for now. If you haven't yet, click here to read John Gasaway's post on Kelvin Sampson. He thinks Sampson, a coach who always had to hustle to beat out other schools for top-notch recruits, simply didn't understand that – as the Hoosiers coach – he didn't have to do that anymore. It's an interesting thought: Don't be arrogant about the NCAA rules but be arrogant about yourself.)

So enough about that. Let's consider the Hoosiers, who have won three games in a ridiculous 10-day stretch. Two were impressive wins under Sampson (against MSU and Purdue), while the third was a putrid 85-82 victory against Big Ten bottom-dweller Northwestern.

Did the emotionally roller coaster of losing their coach have an effect on the game? Did the Hoosiers (23-4) seem a little unsteady under interim coach Dan Dakich? Probably both. But if nothing else, it's shown them they should be able to handle the rigors of March.

"I think any adult knows that when you've been through a lot, you're able to handle more," Dakich told the Indy Star. "And these kids have been through a lot … These kids have shown that they can handle things. They've shown that they'll play hard, that they'll play tough, and that's what we expect here as we come down the stretch."

However, if there's a Big Ten team even more unsure of itself right now, it's Tuesday's opponent, Ohio State (17-10), which has lost four of its last six games. Thad Matta kept Jamar Butler out of the starting lineup in Sunday's loss to Wisconsin because of a "personal matter" as OSU continues to play its way out of the Big Dance. Butler, one of the keys to last year's title run, says no way, telling the Columbus Dispatch "I don't think we're falling apart, and me being a leader and a captain of this team, I'm not going to let it happen."

The only coach who may be more nervous on Tuesday? Newly No. 1 Bruce Pearl. He knows Vandy will be gunning for his Vols (25-2).

"It's our toughest challenge; a tougher challenge than the Memphis game," Pearl told the Knoxville News Sentinel. "What makes this the tougher challenge is there's a lot more at stake because we're playing for an SEC championship and we're doing so on less rest and less preparation."

But the question is, can Vandy (23-4 and in the middle of its own dream season) really be a trap game for Tennessee when everyone in the country knows it's a trap game?

Other notable Tuesday items:

• UConn guard Jerome Dyson returns for the Huskies' game against Rutgers tonight. Now that his nine-game suspension is over, it lets A.J. Price go back to being a pass-first point guard. That's good for UConn's offense, which now has two guys who can create their own shot in the clutch.
• Ken Pomeroy writes that the NCAA seeding committee placing less importance on the RPI is a good thing for Davidson. I wonder if it a team like Wake Forest – with its RPI in the 60s, but .500 ACC record and a win against Duke – also is helped by something like this.
• After all, it's a little strange to the think that the Deacons (16-9, 6-6) may be the ACC's third-best team. Or does that just mean the ACC is overrated? Or that if you're not Duke or UNC, the best you hope for is ruining someone else's NCAA Tournament?

Tennessee did two things Saturday night with its scrappy, impressive win against Memphis.

The Vols erased any further doubts about them as a national title contender (there weren't many left considering they've been a top 10 team since Dec. 31 and some were smart enough to tag them as favorites to start the season.)

And two? By knocking off previously undefeated Memphis, the Vols established March Madness – just over three weeks away – as wide open. The Tigers were the last squad who could've made any argument to being the nation's dominant team, and even that was shaky after their recent close encounters.

Instead, this is shaping up to be a March where 15-20 teams could make a title run. Will it be as wild as two years ago when no No. 1 seeds made the Final Four and three-seed Florida romped its way to the first of two titles? There's a damn good chance of it.

Let's consider the teams.

My favorites (in order of who I think is most likely for the Final Four).

UCLA. There's a lot to like with the Bruins (24-3). They're experienced (two Final Fours in last two seasons), deep, balanced and have elite players in Kevin Love, Darren Collison and Russell Westbrook. BUT … like the last two seasons, UCLA's perimeter scoring stinks and it can struggle against sub-par teams.

Tennessee. By winning their state title, the Vols (25-2) showcased their pressing defense, athleticism and ability to crash the boards despite its slightly undersized roster. BUT… as Memphis showed early on, Tennessee is vulnerable to teams that hit 3s and can who can control the glass.

Memphis. The Tigers (26-1) remain one of the deepest and most athletic teams around. BUT … when their shots stopped falling Saturday, the Tigers tended to panic a little on offense. And their beast inside, Joey Dorsey, was a non-factor when he should've owned the boards.

Kansas. Defense, depth and balance – like UCLA, the Jayhawks (24-3) look damn good on paper and are due for a Final Four breakthrough. BUT … after a performance like this and considering its best wins are against USC and Arizona, will you respect yourself in March for getting burned by Kansas yet again?

Connecticut. The Huskies (21-6) have great defense, depth and athleticism. A.J. Price should get some national player of the year votes. Frankly, they seem awfully similar to Kansas and Memphis. BUT … their offense and defense are just a smidge worse and I wonder if they'll have that same groove in March.

Louisville. Love the Cardinals' defense. Love that they're finally healthy. Love their big guys down low and love Earl Clark's game. BUT … Clark has struggled since late Dec. and Louisville (21-6) could use a natural point guard.

Duke. The Devils' scoring balance and depth was on display Saturday, ending a two-game skid. And, at 23-3, it's like Bill Parcells says: You are what your record says you are. BUT … I've already voiced concerns about the Devils and my mind hasn't changed. If their shots don't fall and opponents are aggressive, Duke is vulnerable.

Texas. The Longhorns (23-4) have won 7 straight, sit atop the Big 12 and have beaten UCLA, Tennessee and Kansas. And if D.J. Augustin has found his shooting stroke, he'll be the most important player in the NCAA Tournament. BUT … when Augustin has a bad night, it ain't pretty for Texas. Also, that defense needs work.

North Carolina. Tyler Hansbrough is the nation's best player (sorry Michael Beasley). The offense is fast and scary. The 'D' ain't bad either. BUT … If Ty Lawson isn't healthy, the offense – even with Hansbrough – isn't good enough to carry UNC to the Final Four.

Indiana. The Hoosiers (23-4) have the nation's best 1-2 punch in D.J. White and Eric Gordon to go with an underrated bench. Plus, they'll be playing with a big chip on their shoulder without Kelvin Sampson on the bench. BUT … Sampson's not on the bench. Seriously, did you see Saturday's game against Northwestern? Yikes.

Stanford. Do Brook and Robin Lopez = one Greg Oden? The 7-foot twins have the goods to take the Cardinal (21-4) deep into the tournament thanks to a strong defensive post presence. BUT … Stanford may have a couple of Odens, but no Mike Conley is in sight.

Georgetown. My preseason pick to win it all is doing what it does best: Beating down opponents with brutal efficiency. The Hoyas (21-4) are atop the Big East and have most everything in place to mimic last year's Final Four run. BUT … Georgetown, despite similar numbers, doesn't feel like the same team as last year. Maybe it's not having Jeff Green, maybe it's that they haven't beaten anyone really good. Either way, that preseason pick may hurt.

Wisconsin. The Badgers (22-4) have beaten Indiana twice, and the Hoosiers are like, way ahead of them on this list. According to kenpom.com's efficiency ratings, Wisconsin's Final Four good with wins against Texas and Indiana (twice!). BUT … be honest: Do they look like a Final Four team? (I know, looks can be deceiving, just like in 2000. Trust me, I'm getting help for this problem.)

After this, you'd have to consider Xavier (because offenses with great guards always usually do well in March), Pitt (can Panthers regain that December form?) Marquette (see Xavier), Michigan State (has the talent, but it hasn't gelled lately), Arizona (a longshot, but I have a man crush on Jerryd Bayless), Drake (see Xavier, Marquette) and Kansas State (because Michael Beasley could pull a Carmelo, but I doubt it).

Out of the last six, Pitt probably should be up above Georgetown and Stanford. But if Levance Fields (who could start vs. Louisville) isn't 100 percent healthy, the Panthers are Sweet 16, nothing more. Still, if you're looking for a March darkhorse, Pitt's my pick.

College basketball's regular season gets tagged as blasé, but even naysayers should be pumped about Saturday.

After all, No. 1 vs. No. 2 just doesn't happen that often. Top 10 games, sure. But this'll be the 38^th time since 1949 when the top teams face off in what should be the regular-season's best game.

In this instance, the SEC's best team, Tennessee, travels to No. 1 Memphis. No, the game isn't on Tobacco Road, but hoops in the state of Tennessee shouldn't take a backseat to anyone this season. (Well, maybe Indiana, with its four ranked teams would have something to say about that.)

Especially when one considers Memphis (26-0) hasn't lost at home in 47 games and wants to avenge last season's 76-58 thrashing. It all turns an already fierce rivalry into a monster game. (Want a ticket? Got $10,000?)

Beyond all that hype, there's plenty more:

Expect defenses to take center stage. It's the nation's best defensive team vs. a team that thrives on forcing turnovers.

It'll be fast. Memphis gets more than 71 possessions a game, Tennessee 73.2.

Joey Dorsey will own the boards. The Vols' Wayne Chism is good (10.3 OR%, 20.2 DR%), but Memphis' beast on the inside is among the top 10 in OR% (16.3) and DR% (28.4).

The free-throw line will hardly be free. Tennessee is 302^nd in FT percentage, but Memphis is worse at 338^th (58.8 percent!).

Kenpom.com expects an 81-71 Memphis win. I think it'll be like 89-85, Memphis. Feels like a game where the Vols can keep it close with outside shooting and balanced scoring, but  will fall short in a hostile environment.

More tidbits?

• The last time an undefeated No. 1 team played No. 2 this late in the season, top-ranked UNLV beat Arkansas, 112-105, on Feb. 10, 1991 in Fayetteville, Ark.
• Before this season, Memphis spent one week at No. 1 in the polls. It lost, 64-56, to Virginia Tech on Jan. 10, 1983.
• Tennessee has beaten No. 1 once. Dec. 6, 1969 at South Carolina.
• No. 1 has won 19 of the 37 meetings against No. 2, but has lost five of the last 6, including Wisconsin's 49-48 loss to Ohio State last season.

The next Duke-North Carolina game isn't until March 8. But there is plenty of fodder for hype in the meantime. And it's all coach created.

If you missed Roy Williams' jab at Mike Krzyzewki – a retort to a comment from Coach K about Carolina's injuries – listen to the audio here. The best quote? Williams asking an unspecified person to "coach their own damn team, I'll coach my team." That person being Krzyzewski.

All of this has been building for a while, but came to a head on Sunday and Monday.

Krzyzewski, whose Duke team has flown under the radar most of the season (or been outright dismissed) wants more attention paid to the Devils' 22-2 season, or at least compared to their Tobacco Road counterparts. UNC (24-2) entered the season as one of the heavy title favorites, but injuries have taken some of the shine off the Heels, which has resulted in more coverage.

So was it a comment during Williams' radio show last week (comparing Duke's eight McDonald's All-Americans to the Heels' three) or the Devils' surprising loss to Wake Forest on Sunday that nudged Krzyzewski into his subtle jab at the Heels and their injury situation? Probably both.

From the AP: Noting that freshman Nolan Smith had been playing through a knee injury for a few weeks, Krzyzewski added, "unlike other schools we don't release our injuries," according to the Web site for radio station WRBZ-AM in Raleigh.

The next day, Williams said on his weekly radio show: "Regardless of what somebody else says about they have injuries too, which is a bunch of bunk, so I don't give a crap what somebody else says, but coach their own damn team, I'll coach my team — in case anybody has heard some statements about that."

If all seems like two men simply sniping at each other for perceived slights, that's exactly what it is.

But this is Carolina-Duke. Everything is magnified. That enmity is why these two schools remain the nation's premier rivalry. It's why posts like this and this are so fun to read and why we have entire features built around the two.

Is it all a little silly? Well, maybe. But if it makes for a fun few weeks before March 8, and makes the rematch an even better game, hoops fans should thank both coaches for extra push.

If this is it for Kelvin Sampson, it was a helluva exit.

A 77-68 victory against in-state rival and Big Ten leaders Purdue surely left an impression upon Indiana fans. Their Hoosiers (22-4, 11-2 in conference play) are coming off their two biggest wins of the season, yet their coach is likely on his way out, possibly by Thursday.

For those who haven't kept up, click here for a rundown of allegations against the Indiana coach. The gist? He made more than 100 impermissible phone calls to recruits, lied about it to school officials and to the NCAA, which told IU Sampson made five major violations and failed "to deport himself ... with the generally recognized high standard of honesty."

Tuesday's win – maybe Indiana's best performance of their season – came under the klieg lights from TV, reporters and fans, all wanting to know what would happen to the coach, and when.

The exceptions: Sampson and his players.

"We don't expect our coach to leave any time," freshman guard Eric Gordon said afterward.

"We haven't tried to think about that," forward Kyle Taber said. "We don't think it's his last game. We don't know. We just try to play as a team."

"I expect to be back ... when do we play at home again, Tuesday?" Sampson asked. "Because of the rules, we have to take [Wednesday] off, we'll [practice] Thursday and Friday, then we have Northwestern on Saturday. That's all I'm focused on."

Not gonna happen, according to an ESPN.com report.

Sampson is likely to be suspended and eventually fired. Less probable is Indiana and Sampson agreeing on a settlement, followed by his resignation. Least likely is Indiana's investigation being extended.

After all, most people think Sampson's ouster is a no-brainer. Most votes I've seen (click here for ours) have overwhelming majorities in favor it. One of the few pro-Sampson items I've seen – this N.Y. Times article – but slants toward Sampson being a winner and not wanting Indiana to slide backward into hoops mediocrity. Hardly the case to make when it comes to not breaking the rules.

And, as this excellent SI.com story from Luke Winn points out, Indiana knew exactly what it was getting with Sampson: A coach who won, but messed with the rules.

If Sampson's out, assistant coach Dan Dakich is the likely interim coach for the rest of the season. (Oddly enough, for those who want the school to re-hire Bob Knight, Dakich may be as close as they get. A former Hooiser who played for Knight (1982-85), Dakich was an IU assistant coach until taking over at Bowling Green in 1997.)

Could Dakich replicate Steve Fisher's remarkable start at Michigan in 1989? (Fisher replaced Bill Freider, who left for Arizona State, for the NCAA Tournament and started his Michigan career 6-0 with a tourney title.) Saturday's a good place to start. The Wildcats (7-17) are terrible. After a home game against Ohio State and a trip to East Lansing, the Hoosiers won't be tested again until the Big Ten Tournament.

They'll enter March Madness ready for a Final Four run. As one of the NCAA's most efficient offensive and defensive teams, motivated by the departure of its coach, I wouldn't rule 'em out.

This one's the ideal post for arguing among hoops fans. Except when you get to the top – then there's little room for debate.

Just like in football, ESPN is counting down the 25 greatest players in college basketball history. (Click here for videos.) And it's a loaded list.

Counting down from 25, they've hit George Mikan (DePaul), David Robinson (Navy), Calvin Murphy (Niagara), Austin Carr (Notre Dame) and Tim Duncan (Wake Forest). The top 20 starts with Bob Kurland (Oklahoma A&M, now State) Elgin Baylor (Seattle U), Ralph Sampson (Virginia), Tom Gola (La Salle) and Patrick Ewing (Georgetown).

Nice start. All of those players except Murphy were unanimous choices for the All-America team, while some – Mikan, Sampson – were unanimous choices for three seasons. Some might disagree with the order (I think Kurland's too high), but they're all worthy.

The fun part about these lists is everyone has their version.

A few seasons ago, SI.com had nearly 30 writers write essays on their picks for the greatest college player of all time. Check out each one when you have time. They're thoughtful, impassioned pieces that sum up why the college game is so dammed great.

Here's another list for the top 100 players, but it only has arguments made for the top 20. The rest is a list.

Also worth reading are these two items from ESPN on their "Mount Rushmore" of college hoops. (Click here for the second version.) Paired with those are: the most dominant individual college seasons, and the best Big Dance performances.

So who will be in the top 15 of ESPN's list? Here's how I'd rank 'em.

(Note: The list likely won't include Ralph Beard, a three-time All-American at Kentucky. His role in a point-shaving scandal is a no-no for something like this. After all, they left O.J. off the football list.)

15. Scott May, Indiana. If not for a broken arm in 1975, May would've had two NCAA titles to his résumé, instead of only having that perfect 1976 season.

14. Elvin Hayes, Houston. Another dominator down low, Hayes' 1968 season – 36.8 ppg, 18.9 rebounds – is impressive. More so? That win against Lew Alcindor and UCLA, one of the few times Alcindor's team ever stumbled.

13. Jerry Lucas, Ohio State. Lucas never ended a season without playing in an NCAA title game. Also a unanimous three-time All-American, who averaged 24.3 ppg and 17.2 rpg for his career.

12. Michael Jordan, North Carolina. His NBA career surely influences this pick, but MJ also dominated during his junior season, was a two-time unanimous All-American and there's that famous shot as a freshman.

11. Magic Johnson, Michigan State. Left after just two seasons, but was arguably the best college point guard we've ever seen.

10. Wilt Chamberlain, Kansas. The Stilt could probably be higher – he was a two-time All-American and averaged 29.9 ppg and 18.3 rebounds in two seasons – but I wish he would've stuck around longer.

9. Christian Laettner, Duke. Hate him or love him, there's not denying Laettner as one of the game's greatest players. He played in four Final Fours, won two of 'em and was the player behind one of the sport's greatest upsets (UNLV in '91) and its greatest game (Kentucky in '92).

8. Larry Bird, Indiana State. I wish he and Bob Knight could've made it work. But I'll take the three brilliant years as a Sycamore, where he willed a true mid-major to the title game and snagged Player of the Year – over Magic – in the process.

7. Danny Manning, Kansas. My pick – over Laettner – for the best player in the modern era. Manning, a unanimous All-American in '87 and '88, could score, rebound, defend … you get the idea. Danny and the Miracles had no business beating Oklahoma for the 1988 title.

6. Bill Russell, San Francisco. Centers dominated college hoops during the 40s and 50s, and Russell was the best of the lot. His Dons rarely lost (71-8 in three seasons, 57-1 in the final two) and he averaged nearly as many rebounds (20.3) as points (20.7) for his career.

5. Pete Maravich, LSU. The game's greatest scorer. He had a permanent green light and he used it, averaging 44.4 ppg for his career. Put it this way: He has 400 more career points than the guy in 2^nd place, Freeman Williams, who went for more than 30 a game himself.

4. Oscar Robertson, Cincinnati. Put simply, the game's best all-around player. The Big O is one of two players to have a Final Four triple-double, but somehow never won a title himself.

3. Bill Walton, UCLA. Will always be the second-best center in UCLA history, but that's no dig. Walton's Bruins once won 88 straight games, he once made 21-of-22 field-goal attempts in the 1973 Final Four and was an paralleled unparalleled passer out of the low post. Why isn't he No. 2? Because he lost to my guy at No. 2.

No. 2 David Thompson, N.C. State. Thompson's mystique (he snagged a quarter off the top backboard!) and on-court ability are enough to cement his place in the game's lore, but when the 1974 Wolfpack team beat UCLA – after beating Maryland in the ACC Tournament – it vaulted him into legendary status.

No. 1 Lew Alcindor, UCLA. The perfect college player. He had an unstoppable shot, was an underrated defender and the greatest winner we've seen in the college game. UCLA was 88-2 in his three seasons, won three NCAA titles and – because of Alcindor – set the standard for all college dynasties.

There's my list. What's yours?

If the speculation is correct, Kelvin Sampson can forget about taking D.J. White and Eric Gordon to the Final Four. He'll be lucky if he gets to face in-state rival Purdue.

Indiana University has seven days to decide Sampson's future. A three-person committee will weigh the NCAA allegations of five major violations, and then recommend to the University by Friday what action it should take. Then again, it may be sooner.

"I think the president is looking for a quick yet thoughtful resolution to the situation," Larry MacIntyre, IU's director of university communications, told the Indianapolis Star. "The process could take seven days or less. It just can't take eight."

The school had until May 8 to issue a written response to the NCAA allegations. Instead, they're going to use three people to review the material and won't interview anyone new. It'll be led by athletic director Rick Greenspan, who hired Sampson.

In short, it's all just to give the appearance that the school is giving Sampson due process. An appearance, mind you. Because it's obvious officials have made up their mind – Sampson's out.

After all, if it normally takes a school about 90 days to review an NCAA allegation, how is Indiana doing so in just 7 days? The decision's likely been made already, and this is to save the University if Sampson decides to sue for breach of contract. Anything that violates Sampson's deal could cost the school at least $2.5 million.

(This editorial from the Star endorses the school's decision for "due process." I wish Bob Kravitz could've been in the room when they discussed that one. He would either suspend Sampson or simply cut to the chase and fire him. Think that could've gotten heated?)

So what will Indiana do after Sampson?

First, a talented group of players must finish out the season. The Hoosiers are in the hunt for the Big Ten title, but without wins against Michigan State and Purdue, they'll be hard pressed to claim the regular-season crown. Still, provided the school doesn't impose a postseason ban – which isn't on the radar – they'll have a chance to prove themselves in March.

As for a new coach, Indiana doesn't have many options right now. They'll almost certainly turn to an interim coach for the rest of the season and have a full-blown search after the season. Big names will likely surface – Steve Alford, for starters – but the smart money would be on a younger coach without any ties to the Knight era so the school can have a clean break. Baylor's Scott Drew (a Valpo grad), Wright State's Brad Brownell or Southern Illinois' Chris Lowery would be good places to start.

Why not just hire Bob Knight? Mike DeCourcy of the Sporting News lists several reasons why that'd be a bad idea. Also, Knight may not even want the job.

One thing's for sure: The next Indiana coach won't bring any baggage with him.

Indiana players may not say it, but it wasn't surprising the Hoosiers lost to Wisconsin on Wednesday. Their coach provided a supreme off-court distraction.

Kelvin Sampson's alleged lying to the NCAA was the talk of college hoops on Wednesday – and would've dominated the news if not for Roger Clemens' trip to Capitol Hill. Instead, after a well-played game with its share of on-court drama, it figures that a banked three-pointer would win it for the Badgers. Such was the Hoosiers' luck on Wednesday.

"Nothing outside of us hurt our team," Hoosiers forward D.J. White said. "We were a family tonight. Tonight didn't have anything to do with anything, we just didn't win."

So, instead of talking about how a 20-4 Indiana team can reach the Final Four, it all centered around Sampson.

I've already blogged that the school is unlikely to keep Sampson, even if the NCAA report isn't true and he didn't lie. Hard to retain a coach that does this to a school's reputation.

Other Web thoughts?

There's a wait-and-see attitude at IU right now. But I wonder how long that'll last.

Bob Kravitz says Sampson should've resigned on Wednesday and says the school has to fire its coach.

Seth Davis maintains the coach deserves to have everything analyzed, but admits it doesn't look good for Sampson.

Just more shame for the Hoosiers.

Indiana should suspend him for postseason play, says Mike DeCourcy.

Fire him and do it now, writes Gregg Doyel.

That last one seems to be where everything will be headed. I especially like this point: "You fire Sampson, or you alienate a sizable portion of your fan base. On some topics Indiana fans can be as irritating as any fan base in the country, but give them credit for this: They don't stomach a cheater."

We'll see how long Sampson can weather this storm.

Note: I changed the title of this post after a reader correction.

So this is how it goes.

First it was Kelvin Sampson's 577 impermissible phone calls made between 2000 and 2004 while coaching at Oklahoma.

Then Sampson violated telephone recruiting restrictions – brought on by those 577 calls – when he and assistant Rob Senderoff made approximately 100 impermissible phone calls to recruits. The school's initial response contended those were secondary violations.

Now, it's come out that Sampson lied about the violations to Indiana and the NCAA. In an NCAA report, Sampson is accused of five major violations and failed "to deport himself ... with the generally recognized high standard of honesty."

(Click here for a timeline of the allegations and here for a pdf of the NCAA's report.)

In short, the NCAA isn't happy with Sampson or the school.

Indiana has until May 8 to provide a written response to the report and will be required to appear on June 14 at a Division I infractions committee hearing.

To be fair, as this Indianapolis Star article points out, these are only allegations. The school will investigate and then decide what to do about their first-year coach. (Cast your vote here.)

A cynic would note that the No. 13 Hoosiers (20-3) are enjoying their best season in years and, with stars D.J. White and Eric Gordon, are primed for their first Final Four since 2002. So any action before the season ends is unlikely. (And, even if one wasn't a cynic, the school has until May 8 to provide its response, which makes it unlikely anyway.)

Would a Final Four – or a national championship – keep Sampson in Bloomington despite major violations and being dishonest? According to his contract, the school can fire him for "just cause."

From the Indianapolis Star: 

Among the definitions of "just cause" in Sampson's contract is "a significant, intentional, repetitive violation of any law, rule (or) regulation" of the NCAA.

The contract says IU is allowed to use its "sole judgment" to determine if Sampson's conduct "reflects adversely upon the university and its athletic program."

Dragging a school through this type of situation doesn't do much for its reputation, which makes me think Sampson keeping his job is doubtful.

The only thing that would let Sampson stay on is if the allegations aren't true. And even that may not be enough if the school wants to start over with a coach who doesn't have this kind of baggage.

Call it a gift for Georgetown, call it a horrendous call for Villanova or just call it part of the game, all three would be correct.

A "nudge" from Villanova's Corey Stokes sent Georgetown's Jonathan Wallace – who was 70 feet from the basket – to the free-throw with less than a second to play and effectively gave the Hoyas a 55-53 win on Monday.

Make the call? Don't make the call? Watch for yourself and judge.

Dan Steinberg (who thinks the ref should've swallowed his whistle) made the morning rounds on this one the DC Sports Bog. Click here for more.

(Though I will point out two links Steinberg finds: King Kaufman says it was a foul that's never called at any point in the game, which is overstates it. Stokes clearly blocks Wallace and it would normally be a foul. The issue is that it gave Wallace a real chance to make a shot by sending him to the free-throw line whereas the odds of making a 70-foot heave are remote. Just give the teams a chance to settle it all in overtime. That's why this post from Soft Pretzel Logic makes sense – the game was poorly officiated throughout, which gives that ending nice symmetry.)

Oddly enough, it ended right when another key matchup was decided by a little more than the players when No. 1 Tennessee beat No. 5 Rutgers.

From the AP: Trailing 58-57, [Nicky] Anosike grabbed an offensive rebound and was grabbed by Kia Vaughn from behind. Unclear whether the foul had come before time expired, the Rutgers bench began to celebrate, but officials reviewed the play and determined that the foul had been committed just before the buzzer.

Television replays showed the game clock seemed to pause as Anosike came down with the ball and two-tenths remained on the clock, leading to the controversial finish.

The game, which was a rematch of last year's national title matchup, left Rutgers coach C. Vivian Stringer baffled.

"This should not be tolerated," she told ESPN.com. "We have a question mark behind this game."

It was the second time this season Rutgers has lost a game on a controversial call. Stanford's Candace Wiggins made two-free throws with .1 second remaining after a foul 80 feet from the basket.

Part of the game? Sure. But it doesn't have to be a part we like. (For that matter, it's one of the parts Bob Knight won't miss. Can't say I blame him.)

It's been a week since Bob Knight resigned at Texas Tech. In that time, we've seen stories about Knight's softer side, his tendency to hold grudges, his undeniable imprint on the game and musings that it may not be Knight's last season on the bench.

And some took all of that into account, dealing with his good and bad aspects and how they affect his legacy. One article had a decidedly unflattering opinion – though not entirely unfair. (For example: Knight did graduate players, run a clean program and win games, but so did Dean Smith and Smith didn't come with the extra baggage.)

But the one that keeps gnawing at me is tangential to Knight. Frankly, I'm surprised it took me so long to run across it.

This story from Dick Weiss (a N.Y. Daily News icon) at FoxSports.com laments Knight, 67, as a dying breed of the "teacher-coaches" in favor of "younger, good-looking, extroverted figureheads" who can just put people in the seats.

"Most college presidents, boards of trustees and ADs have turned corporate. They have now started to hire younger, good-looking, extroverted figureheads they can sell to their alums and big donors rather than the quirky, ruffled Pete Carril-like coaches. They are willing to invest more than a $1 million per year in the right candidate, hoping it pays major dividends like Billy Donovan did at Florida."

Yes, that sounds like a cranky column, but I do understand the sentiment. Essentially, it's about the transition from era into another one where coaches may not have the longevity as someone like Knight. And it's worth a small lament.

Weiss spotlights coaches like Mike Krzyzewski (61 this week), Jim Calhoun (65 in May), Jim Boeheim (just turned 63), Gary Williams (63 in March) and Rick Majerus (60 on Sunday) who are all likely to retire from coaching in the next few years. (Though Lute Olson, 72, plans on returning to Arizona next season, which means all those guys may not be done that soon.)

Combined, those six coaches have eight NCAA Tournament titles and more than 4,000 victories. They're among the game's most successful coaches of all time, let alone this era.

And yes, as those coaches retire, college basketball will lose a large part of its most notable aspect. After all, there is more coaching turnover than ever before in the college game, which makes coaching icons more visible than ever before.

But there are new icons out there.

Billy Donovan, for instance. Among active coaches, only Coach K has more NCAA titles. And Donovan, who spurned the NBA in the offseason, has turned Florida into a hoops power, something few thought possible. At 42, he's in his 12^th season with the Gators and just passed 300 career wins. That's not far behind where Knight was at 42 – and he began his coaching career at age 24.

Michigan State's Tom Izzo didn't get a young start like that, but he's no less an icon at Michigan State. He's 52, but has spent the past 13 seasons turning the Spartans into an elite program, with an NCAA title and four Final Fours.

Gonzaga's Mark Few may not have a Final Four on his resume, but he's 45, and with a coaching record few can match. Only Everett Case and Roy Williams had better starts to their careers.

They're three of the best examples associated with one school, though coaches like Al Skinner (200 wins and always underrated at Boston College), Tom Crean (a Final Four, 180 wins in 9 seasons at Marquette), Dana Altman (spurned Arkansas to come back for a 15^th season at Creighton) and Phil Martelli (who can forget that 2004 season from St. Joe's?) deserve mention.

This doesn't even include coaches who have thrived at multiple schools like Rick Pitino (Kentucky, Louisville, Providence all in the Final Four, to say nothing of his remarkable 1996 Wildcats squad), Roy Williams – fast becoming an icon at UNC after a remarkable run at Kansas – Rick Barnes (a Final Four and more than 200 wins in 10 seasons at Texas, to say nothing of his time at Clemson, Providence and George Mason) or Kelvin Sampson (after winning at Washington State, he took Oklahoma to a Final Four and could do the same for Indiana).

Want others? I'd put Ben Howland (revived Pittsburgh before taking UCLA to two Final Fours in just four seasons), Thad Matta (is there a better recruiter/coach in the country? Ohio State, like Xavier before it, bears Matta's stamp) and Bill Self (a winner everywhere he's been, Final Four be dammed).

I'd say the college game is in good hands, even more of the legendary coaches do start retiring.   

Sunday's sobering thought? Hockey rates higher than college hoops among U.S. sports fans. In a recent Harris poll, five percent of surveyed fans say hockey is their favorite, compared to four percent who prefer pro or college hoops. Ouch.

What's behind that? March Madness.

As marvelous and frenzied as those three weeks in March have become, I've heard grumblings that those three weeks have made the regular season all but invisible. The Lexington Herald-Leader's Mark Story lists other reasons, but comes to same conclusion. Jason Whitlock of the K.C. Star says the regular season is simply boring.

Maybe the regular season, compared to college's football's weekly do-or-die Saturday, isn't as compelling because one loss won't ruin a team's chance at a national title. And yes, it can be hard for casual fans to get excited about games between teams like Texas and Iowa State (the No. 12 'Horns escaped in OT, but who saw it?), but still … hockey? Sigh.

On that note, Selection Sunday is just over a month away.

Other Sunday selections:

The Big East (once again, a loaded conference) could get hosed in March because of its parity.

For the second straight year, college hoops writers learn how grueling Selection Sunday can be.

UConn continues to roll. And Hasheem Thabeet continues to get more pub.

Roy Williams asks: "Who's Dr. Phil?"

Florida's all about offense and Billy Donovan is sick of it.

Right now, Todd Lickliter is wondering why he ever left Butler.

I'm avoiding this 11-year-old in games of 1-on-1.

John Feinstein spends time with the NCAA's supervisor of basketball officials.

Duke looked every bit like a No. 1 seed in the NCAA Tournament in an 89-78 road victory against North Carolina on Wednesday.

The Blue Devils (20-1) hit 13-of-29 three-pointers, made five fewer turnovers in a raucous Dean Dome and their defense hounded UNC's Wayne Ellington (16.2 ppg) and Danny Green (12.1 ppg) into a nightmarish shooting night. Combined, they were 4-of-24 from the field for 11 points. Without point guard Ty Lawson, UNC's offense never got on track despite 28 points from Tyler Hansbrough.

In short, Duke looked like Duke. And Duke's been a No. 1 seed eight of the last 10 seasons. A game like that will go a long way to making it nine of 11.

But that brushes over the nagging thought from Wednesday's game: If Duke played that great and UNC only lost by 11 points, does that mean Duke's hit its ceiling?

That is, if the Devils play UNC – or another team with Carolina's depth and balance, like Memphis, Kansas, UCLA or Georgetown –in the NCAA Tournament, what are the odds they make 13 threes? Or benefit by playing an injured or struggling team?

After all, it seems strange to think that Duke is a team without room for error when March rolls around because that kind of hot shooting doesn't last.

(Consider a team like Tennessee, which wore down perimeter-oriented Florida on Tuesday. The Vols are long, athletic and relentless on the perimeter. As good as Duke is, it's hard to believe they'd get the same looks beyond the arc.)

That probably comes off as Duke bashing, but there's no other way to put it. Duke looked great against Carolina (21-2). It made plays when needed, hit shots and free throws down the stretch and basically owned Carolina. That's a helluva win. The Devils were aggressive and energetic and it showed in the final score. That's something to be proud of and relish until the rematch in Cameron.

"They're pretty special right now," Blue Devils coach Mike Krzyzewski said afterward. "We know who we are. We're a very unconventional team. We're not a strong physical team, but we are strong team emotionally, a real together group.

"You have to hope you don't get killed by a team for a stretch by their strength. You have to find a way and because we have versatile players we've been able to do that so far."

Coach K knows what he has. He's set up a Phoenix Suns-like offense that relies on dribble penetration and kick outs for threes (pretty much what Duke's done for years), making his squad deadly when it hits those shots.

Yet, Duke surely knows it didn't get Carolina's best game.

"It was just one of those nights," Ellington said. "We couldn't get the ball to fall."

Without Lawson, UNC struggled in transition and had trouble getting players like Green and Ellington open looks. Credit goes to Duke's defense, but Lawson's absence was apparent throughout. Would he be worth 11 points? Almost certainly.

This isn't to say Carolina will win in Durham if Lawson's healthy. The Heels will have to improve that perimeter defense – like Duke's gonna stop shooting – and ensure Green and Ellington don't start slow. And even all that may not be enough.

But it's enough to sew doubt in my mind about Duke. In March, being one-dimensional is just too risky.

Return to this space at 8:50 p.m.ET. I'll be doing a live blog of the Duke-UNC game. I'm trying something a little different than a normal post, which will allow readers to post comments in-between my in-game thoughts. Anyway, more details to come then.

It's not as if Duke-North Carolina needs any extra hype. The two teams enter Wednesday's game as No. 2 and No. 3 in the rankings, 3 and 4 in the RPI and 4 and 7 in kenpom.com's ratings. Duke (19-1) hasn't lost since Dec. 20. The Heels (21-1) won their first 18 games.

UNC's Tyler Hansbrough is the leading candidate for Player of the Year, while only Kansas and Memphis have a deeper bench than Duke (maybe UConn and Tennessee, too).

That alone would make it a monster matchup. Throw in the history between the two schools, and it's MEGA.

But, because it's Carolina-Duke, we get one more angle, involving Duke's Gerald Henderson and Hansbrough's nose.

To be honest, I'd nearly forgotten about that bloody play from last March, when Henderson's right arm struck the All-American in the nose, sending him crumpling to the floor. As a result, a brawl had to be averted, Henderson was ejected and Hansbrough wore a protective mask for the ACC Tournament and part of the Big Dance.

Now, with Henderson heading back to the Smith Center for the first time since that foul, I expect the game to be a little more heated than normal. But just a little. After all, it's Duke-UNC. It's always gonna be big.

About a week ago, my buddy Ben (die-hard Nebraska and Big 12 guy) and I were talking about Kansas and what kind of challenges the Jayhawks would have during conference play. Texas, for sure. Maybe A&M, maybe Baylor and maybe K-State (better than either of us thought). But we didn't consider Missouri, which makes me a little sad. Kansas-Missouri used to be one of THE rivalries that the networks had to broadcast and the national media swarmed upon. Now, it's just another game, with heightened local implications.

And without a major media market to ramp up the interest, Ben and I bemoaned the demise of KU-Mizzou as a rivalry. Frankly, I'm wondering if all the college hoops rivalries are going the same way.

Traditional ones like KU-Mizzou, Purdue-Indiana and Cincinnati-Xavier have lost national interest, mostly because one team dropped off as a hoops power. Even Kentucky-Louisville – two teams that have remained hoops powers – doesn't have the spark it used to nationally. To be clear, I think the localized interest is great -- and maybe even better in some ways because of how intense it can get -- but it's hard to get non-hoops diehards or non-local fans to care about what can be essentially two college towns going for bragging rights. (Maybe it's the timing. Playing after the NFL season is key has always been key to attract casual fans.)

Only North Carolina-Duke remains the must-see rivalry. This is because of two things: TV and the traditional excellence of both teams. Duke and Carolina are perennial title contenders with huge national fan bases. They churn out NBA players and their coaches are recognized as two of the game's best.

Still, the cynic in me wonders if even Carolina-Duke will always stand the test of time. When Coach K leaves, will Duke always be relevant? When Roy Williams retires, will Carolina endure another downswing? And if either happen, will ESPN still build a "Rivalry Week" schedule around their game? After all, Army-Navy football used to be the Duke-Carolina college football equivalent.

Maybe I'm being too pessimistic. Maybe the new rivalries – UCLA-USC, Florida-Tennessee, Marquette-Louisville, Texas-Texas A&M – will flourish. Maybe the traditional ones will be revived (Purdue-Indiana, with their combined records of 36-8 would be a good place to start).

Maybe both will happen. Then Ben and I can relive the good old days.

Bob Knight ends his legendary coaching career with three NCAA titles and five trips to the Final Four. He has an Olympic gold medal, coached the last undefeated men's team (a 32-0 Indiana squad in 1976) and leaves as the winningest coach in D-I history. His last win, a 67-60 win against Oklahoma State, was the 902^nd of his 42-year career.

Regardless of how Knight's perceived (cast your vote here), his wins record is an impressive achievement (though Knight always maintained it just meant he'd been around for a while). That's nearly 22 victories a season for 42 years. And when you consider 13 of those seasons were spent at Army and Texas Tech, it reinforces to me just how good Knight was as a coach.

After all, his time at Indiana (662-239 in 29 seasons, including those 3 titles) remains one of the hallmarks in college hoops history. Simply put, the man could coach.

But that's how Knight will have to be remembered – as a great coach, because he won't keep that wins record for long.

Duke's Mike Krzyzewski will pass Knight sometime during the 2011-2012 season. And Coach K may not be the only coach to surpass 900, either.

I wrote this column about Coach K when he surpassed 700 wins a couple years ago. If Coach K stays in the game until he turns 65 (he'll be 61 next week) and the Devils keep winning at their usual 27 games a season (yes, they had a sub-par 2006-07, but they're gonna win more than 30 this year), Krzyzewski will pass his mentor, and then some. If he coaches to age 67 – like Knight – that puts the wins record around 950. I know, IF, but that's what'll likely happen.

(Syracuse's Jim Boeheim, 63, also could make a run at 900, but he has fewer wins than Coach K. The guy most likely to pass Krzyzewski – with serious long-term projections – is Florida's Billy Donovan. He's 42, has 314 career wins and notches about 27 victories a season. If he coaches until he's 65, that's about 930 career wins. That's a lot bigger IF.)

So if Knight doesn't keep the wins record, what is he left with? We can debate his coaching /personal style, but I'll leave that to our columnists, Ken Davis and Ray Glier. (Click here for more.) Me, I like the quotes.

• "A man's got to believe in something. I believe I'll go fishing." (Simple, offbeat.)
• "All of us learn to write in the second grade. Most of us go on to greater things." (Insulting, at least to all of us media types…)
• "If the NBA were on channel 5 and a bunch of frogs making love was on channel 4, I'd watch the frogs, even if they were coming in fuzzy." (David Stern, getting upset!)
• "You don't play against opponents, you play against the game of basketball." (Dismissive and silly.)
• "When my time on Earth is gone, and my activities here are past; I want that they should bury me upside down, so my critics can kiss my ass." (Blatantly offensive.)
• "People take Patton — a tough, demanding individualist — and equate him with me. Well, that's not what I try to imitate. He sacrificed people. My basic idea is 'Let's live and fight tomorrow.'" (Um…is that the softer side?)

Then you have longer exchanges, like this one when Indiana lost to Colorado in the 1998 NCAA Tournament. Knight, always one of the game's more intimidating presences, was downright brutal here. The man does not suffer fools (or at those he deems fools).

"Now you only got two people who are gonna tell me I'm not gonna be here. One is our SID and the other is me. Who the hell told you I wasn't gonna be here..I'd like to know. Do you have any idea who it was?"

Moderator: "Yes I do coach."

Coach Knight: "Who?"

Moderator: "I'll point him out to you in a minute."

Coach Knight: "They were from Indiana right ... nope, they weren't from Indiana and you didn't get it from anybody from Indiana, did you?"

Moderator: "Could you please address questions?"

Coach Knight: "No, I'll handle things the way I want, now that I'm here. You #$%^ed it up to begin. You just sit there or leave. I don't give a $#^! what you do. (Turns toward the media members). "Now, back to the game."

(That soundbite also is included in this video clip. I also love the "gameface" bit. If you don't mind cursing, try this now famous clip of Knight's golf outtakes. Not suitable for work or delicate ears.)

Without Knight – who had mellowed a bit in recent years, but was still good for the occasional ridiculous story – the college basketball landscape loses one of its best coaches and best quotes. And that's a strange world to live in. Thankfully, we have the TV clips.

One undefeated New England may have lost Sunday, but there's another still standing. And it's an awfully familiar unbeaten sight.

The UConn women's team torched Providence on Saturday, setting up a showdown against Big East rival Rutgers on Tuesday. Rutgers beat the Huskies in the Big East Championship last season and was the conference representative in the Final Four, losing to Tennessee in the title game. Since then, the Huskies (21-0) have torn through the competition, winning all but one game by double-digit margins.

There's some symmetry that another team from the New England region would be toying with a perfect record, too. Geno Auriemma's squad was the last D-I college basketball team to finish a season unbeaten, going 39-0 in 2001-02. (The last men's team? Bob Knight's 1975-76 Indiana squad.)

This year's version may be just as good as the two previous undefeated squads ('95 was the other), because of its depth and ability on both ends of the court. The Huskies average more than 80 points a game and allow less than 50.

Of course, Memphis' men's team is no slouch either. It just takes me out of the New England theme…

The No. 1 Tigers (21-0) are off to the best start in school history, and despite a lackluster win against UTEP on Saturday, they remain a good bet to enter the NCAA Tournament without a loss. That hasn't been done since UNLV in 1991.

However, if there's a weakness in the Memphis machine, it's the free-throw shooting.

(Memphis' three-point shooting stinks too. Yet even at 34.0 percent, it's positively scorching compared to the free-throw shooting, which is dead last among D-I schools on kenpom.com.)

The Tigers missed 20 free throws against UTEP, which has to be a major concern for coach John Calipari. Instead of putting teams away in crunch time, Memphis could very well clang its way out of the record books. No team has ever finished a season 40-0, which Memphis would do with an NCAA title.

As the Patriots' loss showed, no team is perfect. Memphis or UConn could be knocked off that perfect porch soon, too.

Then again, what's perfection mean, anyway? John Wooden – who had four undefeated championship teams at UCLA – says his best squad may have been the 29-1 squad of 1967-68. (I maintain few things are as enticing as the thought of the perfect season, yet must admit the crushing expectations that come with it make it tough to actually deliver on that final game.)

If Memphis or UConn do lose a game, but still win the title, it wouldn't diminish their seasons. Just ask the Pats.

Monday could be a big day for New Jersey Institute of Technology. When Longwood rolls into Newark, the Highlanders know it's their best chance to win this season.

Of course, chance is a relative term…

A 81-69 loss to Utah Valley State on Saturday dropped NJIT to 0-23 this season, and extended their losing streak to 27 games. The last time NJIT won? Feb. 19 against Longwood (78-74).

NJIT, which made the jump to Division I hoops two years ago (finishing 5-24 last season), is the only winless D-I team, though it oddly enough isn't dead last in RPI. (North Florida, at 1-20, deserves some mention.  A 57-41 win against Concordia (N.Y.) on Nov. 16 technically relieves them of a donut, but beating a non D-I team is an easy out.)

If the Mountaineers don't beat Longwood Monday, they do have one more shot this season, a Feb. 18 game at Longwood. Still, Monday seems like the day, the point where the Highlanders can either end the skid or join the likes of Savannah State (0-28 in 2004-05) and Prairie View (0-28 in 1991-92).

People have been on winless watch for NJIT for months, realizing that the Highlanders would struggle, but until mid-January, I don't think many people fully realized just how fruitless this season could be.

Such is the life of a school without a conference affiliation.

NJIT re-evaluates after each season to determine if moving to D-I hoop is the right move or if they're just jousting at windmills. Thus far, their coach, Jim Casiano, doesn't have too many regrets. It's been easier to recruit players and there's no real pressure to win – though that'd be nice.

"I don't think you are ever mentally prepared to go through a stretch like this. You don't know what this is like unless you go through it," Casciano told the Press of Atlantic City (N.J). "The parents don't, the fans don't. We want to stay positive, but you also want them to be accountable."

Thus, the need to win Monday. A season like this can stick with a program for years. And no team should have to deal with that.