Defending champions Windward Road Primary and Junior High lead the overall points standing after five finals on day one of the Institute of Sports (INSPORTS) Junior High School Athletics Championship at Stadium East yesterday.Windward Road also lead the girls’ section with 35 points, while John Mills are in front in the male category on 17.50 points.The Oral Whilby-coached Windward Road won two finals yesterday to accumulate 52.50 points and lead ahead of main rivals John Mills, who won one final and have amassed 47.50.Whilby described the day as a very good one, noting that his team exceeded expectations after winning two five finals.Michaelia Wilson took the girls’ Class One high jump with a leap of 1.54 metres, while Kishuana Smith took the girls’ shot put open with a throw of 9.63 metres. They also took silver in the Class Two girls’ high jump and Class Three boys’ long jump.Calabar’s Kevin Smith won the boys’ Class Two high jump with 1.69 metres and Braeton’s Mickel Wilson won the Class Three long jump with 5.05 metres.”We had some good results and some valuable points are on the board, so it was a fairly decent first day,” said Whilby. “Tomorrow (today), we anticipate another good day; there will be 21 finals, and we expect to be out front again tomorrow.”They (John Mills) are in many finals, and we are also in most finals with two athletes, so it’s going to be a straight shoot-out between us and John Mills and may the best man win,” he stated.John Mills’ only finals success on the day came from Shella Hamber (4.32m) in the Class Three girls long jumpHowever, coach Ransford Spalding was pleased with his team’s performance on the opening day.”All in all, I am satisfied with the performance of my team; we are just four points behind and they are giving a good account of themselves,” he said.Twenty-one finals are scheduled for today’s second day, with the first event set to begin at 9 a.m.
The letter announcing the changeSpeaking today after he became aware of a change in the Standard Operating Procedure for NowDoc Services which states that the out of hours doctor will no longer respond to life threatening calls other than where requested to do so by the Ambulance Service , Sinn Féin TD for Donegal South West Pearse Doherty said “I am utterly appalled at the change in the Now Doc Standard Operating Procedure for emergency calls, which came to my attention last night and has come into operation since yesterday,” he told Donegal Daily today.“The procedure states that life threatening calls will no longer be attended by the doctor on call except in cases where an ambulance is on the scene and a doctor has been specifically requested by the ambulance service. “In my view, this change to the procedure will put lives in danger. Often, in remote areas, the doctor on call can be with a patient in a significantly shorter timeframe than the ambulance and can administer life saving treatment.“Having to wait for an ambulance to first travel to the patient and assess whether the attendance of a doctor is required costs valuable time in an emergency situation and could literally be the difference in life or death.“In a county where serious concerns have been raised in relation to ambulance service cutbacks, this decision to change the Standard Operating Procedure is a scandal. It undermines the NowDoc service, which has been the target of cutbacks in recent years. It is difficult to think of a more essential time for the services of the local doctor than in a life threatening emergency.“It is clear that this decision has not been made in the best interests of the patient but is another cutback to our frontline health services, which have been slashed to the bone already. “I am calling on the HSE to suspend the new procedure with immediate effect, to revert back to the original procedures and to issue a statement to this effect without delay.” TD’S ANGER AFTER HE UNCOVERS CHANGE TO NOWDOC EMERGENCY CALLS was last modified: April 1st, 2014 by John2Share this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window) Tags:emergency callsNowDoc
A Darwinian can stare at evidence for intelligent design all day and conclude, without batting an eye, “evolution did it.” Look at these examples.A favorite attack by atheists is to accuse creationists of giving up on science, and just saying, “God did it.” That attack cuts both ways. Saying “It evolved” gives up on science even more, as the following news items demonstrate.The clownfish is unaffected by the stinging cells of a sea anemone (Corel Pro Photos)The sea anemone, an animal that hides its complexity well (Science Daily). Observe this opening paragraph. It sounds like a tribute to wise design until the last sentence.Despite its apparent simplicity — a tube-like body topped with tentacles -, the sea anemone is actually a highly complex creature. Scientists from the Institut Pasteur, in collaboration with the CNRS, have just discovered over a hundred different cell types in this small marine invertebrate as well as incredible neuronal diversity. This surprising complexity was revealed when the researchers built a real cell atlas of the animal. Their findings, which will add to discussions on how cells have diversified and developed into organs during evolution, have been published in the journal Cell.It must be understood that, in Darwinese, the verb developed is often used as a synonym for evolved. The assumption of mindless, unguided innovation of “organs” is buried within the word, making this rhetorical tactic a form of obfuscation or equivocation. With that in mind, look at the surprise they found in the humble sea anemone:The sea anemone Nematostella vectensis … is a small marine invertebrate that is easy to keep in the laboratory and whose genome is simple enough to study its workings and close enough to that of humans for conclusions to be drawn. “When the sea anemone genome was sequenced in 2007, scientists discovered that it was very similar to the human genome, both in terms of the number of genes (roughly 20,000) and its organization, explains Heather Marlow, a specialist in developmental biology in the (Epi)genomics of Animal Development Unit at the Institut Pasteur and the main author of this study. These similarities make the sea anemone an ideal model for studying the animal genome and understanding interactions existing between genes.” It also has another advantage — its strategic position in the tree of life. The cnidaria branch that anemones belong to separated from the bilateria branch, in other words from most other animals, including humans, over 600 million years ago. “The anemone can therefore also help us to understand the origin and evolution of the multiple cell types making up the bodies and organs of animals, and particularly their nervous systems,” sums up Heather Marlow.Superman could hardly leap over taller buildings in a single bound. As many genes as a human? Organized in a similar way? 100 cell types, coordinated in an animal body plan complete with a nervous system? Cnidarians, which include jellyfish, anemones and corals, appear for certain in the Cambrian Explosion. Claims of Precambrian cnidarians depend on indirect evidence, such as trace fossils or ‘molecular clock’ dating methods. Cnidarians are very different from sponges and ctenophores, the other Darwinian candidates for earliest animal. To assume that a sea anemone “evolved” without saying how all its cell types appeared in the same creature is equivalent to believing in a miracle. Then add the twenty or so other animal body plans that “developed” at the same time, and it becomes clear that saying “it evolved” amounts to fogma, not understanding.Off/on switch for DNA repair protein (Science Daily). DNA repair is a complex operation involving numerous sophisticated proteins and processes that must work together. The BAD act [Bluffing Assertion of Darwinism] is right in the first sentence in this article: “Damage to DNA is a daily occurrence but one that human cells have evolved to manage.” It’s equivalent to saying that power line repairmen or fire departments appeared by random, blind processes. A repair operation needs to recognize a fault and have the tools and instructions to fix it. If an atheist were to be offended by the explanation, “God did it,” would the answer “Chance did it” represent an improvement? We know that intelligence can create repair systems. Where has chance ever done that?Competitive team sports shaped the physical and psychological skills of early humans (Science Daily). Another science dilly comes from the University of Oregon, where Darwinists tell a quite typical just-so story:Competitive team games in which men test their mettle against others are universal across the world, and may have deep roots in our evolutionary past. Among hunter-gatherers, these games enable men to hone their physical skills and stamina, assess the commitment of their team members, and see how each performs under pressure. All these activities suggest motivation to practise skills involved in lethal raiding, says Michelle Scalise Sugiyama of the University of Oregon in the US, lead author of a study in Springer’s journal Human Nature.Play behavior in humans and other animals is thought to have evolved as a way to develop, rehearse, and refine skills that are critical for survival or reproduction. Chase games, for instance, build stamina and speed, which is helpful for evading predators. Similarly, play fighting is believed to develop skills used in actual fighting. Although many animals play fight, only people do so in teams. The study’s findings suggest that team play fighting is not a recent invention of agricultural societies.This may sound plausible until you think about it. All kinds of questions present themselves. Why did games enable men to hone their skills? What about women’s sports? Why are people different from all other animals? Why didn’t human ancestors just climb higher in the trees or go deeper in caves? Did the NFL and NBA evolve by natural selection? If that is the explanation, what gene mutated in a pre-sport ancestor? Are sportsmen the only ones who pass on their genes? Perceptive readers will notice the reporter’s high perhapsimaybecouldness index and use of Tontological statements, like “is thought to have evolved” and “is believed to develop skills.” Who would have thought of such things, much less believed them? Answer: lazy Darwinians. Glia and axons: A match made in evolution (Medical Xpress). If you want to learn about a cell type that defies evolution, consider the neuron. Lined with rapid-firing ion channels that convey electrical currents down its dendrites and axons, then converts them to chemical neurotransmitters across synapses using complicated packaging processes – and does this lighting fast (consider how quickly your brain learns you stubbed your toe) – the neuron is a marvel of complexity superior to human technology. Plus, it grows from an information code in the genome, and can make copies of itself. And yet this article audaciously gives all the credit to Darwin, saying, “The larger size of axons in adult lamprey compared to the larval stage may enable rapid signal transmission, suggesting that myelin may have evolved to achieve similarly fast neuronal communication in the much smaller axons of jawed vertebrates.” Understand that the evolutionists here are not just suggesting that myelin evolved as an improvement on a created design; to them, the whole shebang evolved from bottom up, just the way the cnidarian “evolved” a nervous system. Like Lewontin remarked, they must not let a Divine foot in the door.How evolution builds the most efficient airfoils (Phys.org). Chris Packham, still angry at fellow humans for causing extinctions (see 9 July 2018), shows his true colors as a Darwin storyteller. Many not yet inebrieted by Darwine can look to birds as marvels of design. Given the demands of overcoming gravity with powered flight, considering all the systems that must contribute to that function (as told in Illustra’s film Flight: The Genius of Birds), powered flight would seem to many to represent an all-or-nothing challenge to Darwinism. Enter the unfeigned faith of the moyboy evolutionist: “Over millions of years, the morphology of these animals evolved for maximally efficient cruising,” Packham yarns. Later, he BAD-ly asserts, “the animals selected as the fittest have evolved to a narrow range of highly efficient parameters.” In fact, he points out, fish and birds have arrived at nearly the best trade-off between competing constraints. Evolution News sees optimization theory as a branch of intelligent design science in action. Packham just throws up his hands and assumes, “It evolved.”Creation and evolution appear to be at a standoff: “God did it” vs “It evolved.” But consider: creation has a cause – intelligence – that is well known to be necessary and sufficient for organizing material into complex systems. What does evolution have? Chance (the Stuff Happens Law). That is the denial of causality.But is creation a “science stopper,” as evolutionists often allege? That argument cuts both ways, too: “It evolved” is a lazy way out of scientific explanation. Actually, belief in creation has a long history of stimulating excellent science (see our Biographies). They may believe in God as Creator as a final cause, but are often eager to learn how things work, and how God did it. Do evolutionists give the same diligence to explaining how chance made complex systems ‘arise’ or ‘develop’ or ’emerge’? (Pick your favorite euphemism for Stuff Happens.) Once you attribute the origin of something to sheer dumb luck, there’s not much more to say.What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. If “God did it” is too simplistic for an evolutionist, “It evolved” is too simplistic for a creationist. Don’t let the Darwinians pretend to have a superior explanation for the origin of complex systems. When they discuss the origin of a complex phenomenon and take the lazy way out (assuming evolution in a BAD way), press them for details, using their own theory. What gene mutated? What did it do? When did it happen? How did the gene spread through the population? (See the article on population genetics by Sanford and Basener, 22 Dec 2017). How frequently do beneficial mutations happen relative to neutral and harmful mutations? Are there enough beneficials to overcome the downward spiral of genetic entropy? Did the mutation have any deleterious pleiotropic effects? Were coordinated mutations required? How long would that take? (see Living Waters conclusion). Have you calculated the probability? Is there enough time in the universe for that to occur? Do 747’s evolve from tornadoes in junkyards? Pile it on till they cry uncle and admit, “I have no idea. I just take Darwin on faith.”Illustration by J. Beverly Greene for CEH. (Visited 1,012 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
American TweetPenn State made some news yesterday when it was revealed that the team literally buried the game tape of its 27-10 season-opening loss to Temple with a shovel. In the embarrassing defeat, the Nittany Lions surrendered 10 sacks. While Penn State was ready to let that game go, the American Athletic Conference, of which Temple is a member, wants to relish the memory of it . That’s why the AAC’s official football Twitter account dropped a solid troll job on Penn State this morning. Penn State may have buried the game tape, but you can watch all 10 @Temple_FB sacks from Sat on our YouTube page https://t.co/xkp5lidkzS— American Football (@American_FB) September 9, 2015That’s tremendous. This was Temple’s first win over PSU in over 70 years, and they set a conference sack record in the process. The AAC doesn’t have many opportunities to brag about its football accomplishments, so it is understandably proud of the Owls’ performance.
New Delhi: It was a bright and cool morning in the national capital on Tuesday with the minimum temperature recorded two notches below the season’s average at 16.2 degrees Celsius. The maximum temperature was expected to hover around 34 degrees Celsius. “The sky will remain clear throughout the day,” an Indian Meteorological Department official said. At 8.30 a.m. the humidity was recorded at 65 per cent. On Monday, the maximum temperature was recorded at 33.7 degrees Celsius, while the minimum was recorded a notch below the season’s average at 17.6 degrees Celsius, both season’s average.
NEW DELH: Just as possibilities of a Congress-AAP alliance looked more and more unlikely, Congress president Rahul Gandhi for the first time on Tuesday shed clarity on whether a tie-up was possible in the next few days. “There is no confusion on this, the situation is clear. We have constructed alliances and are constructing alliances, and are open to flexibility”. Interestingly, AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal had told reporters just on Monday that Rahul Gandhi said ‘no’ to an alliance with AAP. Also Read – After eight years, businessman arrested for kidnap & murderDespite Gandhi saying that the situation is clear, the two sides remain as far apart as ever when it comes to joining hands. Gandhi had a meeting with the two warring sides in Congress — the pro-alliance lobby led by PC Chacko and the anti-alliance lobby led by Sheila Dixit. While Dixit remained silent after the meeting, Chacko simply indicated that options were open. Earlier, Delhi Congress chief Sheila Dikshit met party president Rahul Gandhi on Tuesday triggering fresh speculations on the party’s possible alliance with the ruling Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) in Delhi ahead of the upcoming Lok Sabha elections. Also Read – Two brothers held for snatchingsThe meeting, which last for around 20 minutes was also attended by All India Congress Committee (AICC) in charge of Delhi PC Chacko. Dikshit, who has been opposing an alliance with the AAP, had said on Sunday that the decision on tie-up for Lok Sabha polls will be declared in a few days. The decision from Rahul Gandhi on an alliance is expected “anytime” now, sources said. The Congress is learnt to have discussed a 3:3:1 (three seats for both Congress and AAP and one mutually accepted candidate) or a 4:3 (four seats for AAP and three for Congress) formula in Delhi. This, though, remains unacceptable to AAP. The AAP, sources said, is slowly veering to the position that an alliance with the Congress just in Delhi is not worth the price. AAP is clearly indicating that it wants space beyond Delhi. AAP sources indicate that the party is willing to give 2 seats in Delhi, if Congress is also willing to give 2 in Haryana, and may consider giving 3 seats in Delhi, if Congress adds 3 seats in Punjab.
Florida 10-113%<1%23%68%18% Iowa 11-030%14%46%>99%20% TeamPlayoff ChancesLose nextWin nextWin outWin out likelihood Utah 8-3<1%<1%<1%<1%89% North Carolina 10-110%<1%17%39%25% Oklahoma 10-164%7%>99%>99%62% Oregon 8-3<1%<1%<1%<1%96% Michigan St. 10-147%<1%61%98%47% Oklahoma St. 10-110%<1%25%25%38% Clemson 11-071%40%77%>99%50% Notre Dame 10-121%<1%49%49%42% Florida State 9-2<1%<1%<1%<1%46% Thanksgiving week: time for turkey, stuffing and pumpkin pie. And college football, too! For many teams, it’ll be their last game of the year. But some are eyeing the College Football Playoff. Thirteen, to be exact.A baker’s dozen teams have more than a 1 percent shot at one of the four playoff spots, according to FiveThirtyEight’s model. For some (Alabama, Clemson), their paths are simple enough: just win out. For others (Ohio State, Baylor), their paths are a chesslike endgame: win the rest of their games and hope for some better-situated team to stumble. And still other teams (Michigan, North Carolina) don’t have a clear line to the playoff: instead they need a messy highway pileup for them to swerve into the mix.The Thanksgiving weekend games are a precursor to the Dec. 5 conference championship matchups, which leaves only two weeks before the College Football Playoff committee makes its final picks. To break down how each of these 13 squads can get in, let’s cluster the teams into five groups according to their playoff chances if they win all their remaining games (including any conference championship game). We’ve grouped them based on their chances if they win out rather than on FiveThirtyEight’s current playoff odds because, at this stage, almost no team can afford to lose, so it’s better to think of playoff odds in the event that they don’t slip up.The odds are presented in our what-if table below: Northwestern 9-2<1%<1%<1%<1%64% Baylor 9-121%<1%43%46%46% Washington St. 8-3<1%<1%<1%<1%33% Toledo 9-1<1%<1%<1%<1%61% Mississippi 8-3<1%<1%<1%<1%49% Navy 9-1<1%<1%1%2%27% Michigan 9-27%<1%15%16%42% Temple 9-2<1%<1%<1%<1%37% Alabama 10-164%29%78%>99%51% Mississippi St. 8-3<1%<1%<1%<1%45% Stanford 9-216%<1%28%52%30% In control of their destiny (> 98 percent): Clemson, Alabama, Iowa, Oklahoma, Michigan StateAt FiveThirtyEight we have a policy against labeling any prediction “100 percent.” So, sure, for Clemson, Alabama, Iowa and Oklahoma, their chances of making the playoff if they win out are “> 99 percent,” and Michigan State isn’t far behind at 98 percent. But that’s just a formality; these teams are locks if they can prevail over the next two weeks.The No. 1 Tigers1All the rankings I use in this article are the College Football Playoff committee’s. will face South Carolina on Saturday (they have an 86 percent chance of winning) and then UNC in the ACC championship (62 percent shot at victory). Alabama has a tougher lineup: the Iron Bowl rivalry with Auburn (’Bama is a 78 percent favorite) and Florida in the SEC title game if Alabama wins the SEC West. Clemson and Alabama — unlike anyone else — have a little wiggle room should they lose this weekend. A one-loss Tigers team that wins the ACC championship gets into the playoff in 72 percent of the 5,000 simulations we run for our model, and a two-loss Tide team that loses to Auburn but beats Florida gets in 65 percent of the time.Iowa, meanwhile, is one of two undefeated teams remaining in the country. And despite their weak schedule (the one knock against them), if the Hawkeyes win out, our model thinks they are a lock for the playoff. They have a tough test, though, at Nebraska on Friday (the game is a coin flip).Another Big Ten team is in this group: Michigan State. If the Spartans beat Penn State (the Football Power Index says that’s an 80 percent likelihood), they’ll face Iowa in the Big Ten championship game. So if both Big Ten teams win out, that conference final becomes a de facto playoff of its own. Michigan State is just a tad behind the Hawkeyes, with a 98 percent shot at the playoff should the Spartans win out. That Ohio State win was a season-maker for them.The last team fully in control of its destiny, by our model’s reckoning, is Oklahoma. The one-loss Sooners can lock up a playoff spot and win the Big 12 with a win against Oklahoma State (they’re favored even though it’s a road game). But if Oklahoma loses on Saturday, their odds fall to 7 percent, effectively eliminating them.A special case (68 percent): Florida The Gators are an odd duck — to mix our species. The committee docked them for being pushed into overtime by Florida Atlantic, so they fell four spots to No. 12. But look at Florida’s remaining schedule: Florida State on Saturday (with a 52 percent shot of winning) and then someone in the SEC championship, most likely Alabama (we estimate that Florida beats the Tide 31 percent of the time). If the Gators win both games, they’ll finish as a one-loss champion of a strong — if not the strongest — conference. In that scenario, our model puts their odds at 68 percent. Good, but not great. It’s not clear whether Florida winning the SEC with one loss would offset the otherwise harsh grades the Gators have received from the selection committee.A matchup of 50-50 chances (49-52 percent): Notre Dame, StanfordNotre Dame and Stanford face off on Saturday, but even the winner won’t control its own destiny. Both teams are probably left out of the playoff if Clemson, Alabama, Oklahoma and either Iowa or Michigan State win out; in that case, Notre Dame would very likely miss the playoff even if it beats Stanford, for example.Should the Fighting Irish beat the Cardinal — Notre Dame is the underdog — then their playoff odds rise to 49 percent. Notre Dame fans find it unjust that Oklahoma and Iowa leapfrogged them in the committee’s rankings, especially because the Sooners’ sole loss came against Texas, a team the Irish whooped 38-3. But who ever said the cries of injustice would end with a four-team playoff?On the flip side, should Stanford beat the Irish at home Saturday, which they have a 62 percent shot of doing, and then go on to win the Pac-12 title match over USC or UCLA, they’ll have a 52 percent chance of making the playoff. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ( 46-48 percent): Ohio State, BaylorThe Buckeyes and the Bears get crowned with that hallmark of sound statistical analysis: the shruggie. Both teams have contingent playoff paths — that is, either team getting in is heavily dependent on another team losing. There’s high uncertainty over how the committee will judge them should they win out.Ohio State’s playoff picture is complicated. It has two ways in. The team can still win the Big Ten title, but for the Buckeyes to do so, two things need to happen: (1) The Buckeyes beat Michigan at The Big House — which they’re just 58 percent favorites to do — and (2) Michigan State loses to Penn State (not very likely). Should the one-loss Buckeyes have such good fortune and then go on to beat Iowa to become conference champs, our model gives them a 94 percent shot at being picked for the playoff. On the other hand, if Ohio State merely beats the Wolverines, but can’t compete for the Big Ten title because Michigan State takes its place, then its playoff odds will be 38 percent. Those aren’t great odds; but they’re not terrible either.Baylor, too, has a split path. First, the Bears need to beat TCU on Friday (a prospect that’s little better than a coin flip). But Baylor needs Oklahoma State to win over Oklahoma, too. Then if the Bears beat Texas on Dec. 5, they will be one-loss Big 12 champs. In this scenario, Baylor makes the playoff 74 percent of the time. However, if the Bears win out without winning the Big 12, their odds are only 28 percent. Conference championships matter.Need lots of help (16-39 percent): North Carolina, Oklahoma State, MichiganThis is the group of chaos. Take one-loss UNC, for example. Even if the Tar Heels beat NC State on Saturday (a 64 percent likelihood) and No. 1 Clemson in the ACC championship game, it’s not clear they’ll get into the playoff. The Tar Heels’ playoff chances are 39 percent if they win out, but their chances were better last week. That’s because Ohio State lost and Michigan State is ascendant, and either team is now a better bet to be chosen over UNC. The Tar Heels, even if they should win, might be squeezed out by a one-loss Notre Dame or possibly a one-loss Ohio State that misses the Big Ten title game. Stanford, which ranked five slots ahead of UNC in this week’s rankings, could be another concern.Oklahoma State is an even longer shot. To win the Big 12, it needs to beat Oklahoma and have Baylor lose to TCU or Texas. But even if all that happens, our model gives the Cowboys only a 41 percent shot. In addition to Oklahoma and Baylor, Notre Dame probably needs to lose — that’s because a one-loss Irish team looks like a better bet than a one-loss, Big 12 champion Cowboys team.And then there is Michigan, which needs a lot to break its way. Yes, the Wolverines need to beat the Buckeyes, but Penn State needs to also upset Michigan State and then the Wolverines have to win the Big Ten championship over Iowa. If — and that’s a lot of ifs — all that happens, Michigan (as a two-loss Big Ten champ) has a 68 percent shot at the playoff. On top of winning the conference, Michigan — like all the teams in this final group — probably needs Notre Dame to lose, too.Read more: As The Playoff Nears, Notre Dame Is Running Out Of TimeCORRECTION (Nov. 25, 11:09 a.m.): An earlier version of this article incorrectly referred to the division that Florida Atlantic’s football team plays in. It plays in the FBS, not FCS. The article has also been updated to make clear that Notre Dame, Stanford, Oklahoma State and North Carolina have more difficult paths to the playoffs than the article originally described. UCLA 8-3<1%<1%<1%1%15% Ohio State 10-125%<1%45%48%51% TCU 9-2<1%<1%<1%<1%50% Playoff chances if they …
This is Significant Digits, your daily digest of the telling numbers tucked inside the news. With Walt Hickey away on vacation — and with the third round of the NCAA men’s basketball tournament getting underway tonight — I’m hijacking SigDig today and tomorrow in the name of March Madness. Enjoy! 6 ACC schoolsSix schools in the Sweet 16 — Duke, Miami, North Carolina, Virginia, Notre Dame and Syracuse — hail from the Atlantic Coast Conference, setting a record (at least, since the NCAA Tournament expanded to 64 teams in 1985). The ACC had tied the previous record of five last season, so at this rate they’ll claim all 16 slots by 2026. [USA Today]24.5 pointsIn their two NCAA Tournament wins thus far, Villanova has outscored foes by 49 combined points, or 24.5 per game — more than any other team in the Sweet 16 field. Granted, one of those games was against 15th-seeded UNC Asheville, but the Wildcats also beat No. 7 seed Iowa by 19 and have exceeded the scoring margin our Elo ratings would expect by 11.8 points per contest. They’ll try to keep that hot streak going tonight against Miami. [Sports-Reference.com]63 pointsOklahoma’s Buddy Hield has enjoyed a season for the ages this year, and it’s carrying over into the NCAA Tournament, where he’s scored a tourney-best 63 points (31.5 per game) on a scorching 73.2 true shooting percentage. But maybe it’s best for the Sooners if Hield doesn’t keep that average up against Texas A&M tonight — Oklahoma was 4-5 in conference play this season when Hield scored 30 or more points, and 8-1 when the Sooner scoring attack was more balanced. [Sports-Reference.com]5 startersEach basketball team has five starters, and in the case of Maryland’s game against Kansas tonight, each Terrapin starter will be taller than the Jayhawk lined up across from him at tip-off. As a team, Maryland has the fourth-biggest roster in the nation, with an average height a good inch and a half taller than Kansas. But will it matter against the skilled Jayhawks? Our model says “probably not” — we’ve got Kansas favored with a 73 percent probability of winning, despite Maryland’s size advantage. [KC Kingdom]109th bestIf defense really does win championships, nobody clued in Oregon or Duke. The combatants in tonight’s late game ranked 43rd and 109th, respectively, in schedule-adjusted defensive efficiency this season, per Ken Pomeroy’s stats. Aside from their 116th-place finish in 2013-14, this year’s Blue Devils have given Coach K more defensive fits than any Duke squad since Pomeroy started crunching numbers 15 seasons ago. [KenPom.com]More than $30 millionWith those aforementioned six entries in the Sweet 16, the ACC stands to make a cool $30 million, at least, from an NCAA cash pool that rewards conferences when their teams go deep in the tournament. Naturally, none of that money will ever be seen by Brice Johnson, Malcolm Brogdon, Grayson Allen, Angel Rodriguez or any of the other players who powered those teams to the Sweet 16. [ESPN.com]If you haven’t already, you really need to sign up for the Significant Digits newsletter — be the first to learn about the numbers behind the news.If you see a significant digit in the wild, send it to @WaltHickey — or to @Neil_Paine, I guess, if you want.CORRECTION (March 24, 5:35 p.m.): A previous version of this article incorrectly described the average height difference between the starters on Kansas and Maryland’s men’s basketball teams. Maryland’s starters are, on average, about an inch and a half taller, not a foot and half.
The Ohio State women’s volleyball team’s run in the NCAA tournament was cut short by a devastating loss Saturday night. The NCAA Tournament began Friday night when the Buckeyes faced Cincinnati in the first round. Behind a team-high 17.5 points from junior Katie Dull, the Buckeyes defeated Cincinnati 3-1 to advance to the second round. In the first set, two kills from freshman Emily Danks and two ace serves from junior Susan Halverson brought the Buckeyes out of a 16-12 deficit. Two Dull kills sealed the first game 25-20 for the Buckeyes.The second game had quite a different rhythm as the Buckeyes fell 25-16. The Buckeyes felt the pressure and came back in the third 25-15 and a Dull kill in the fourth ended the game 25-23 and the match 3-1. The victory was short-lived as the team was focused on its next task, No. 9 California, who defeated Lipscomb earlier in the night. Both coach Geoff Carlston and Dull were excited to get the opportunity to play California on Saturday. “First of all, I thought it was a great match,” Carlston said. “You are going crazy through it but in the end, to be able to win a match like that against a great team is neat.”Excitement immediately turned to focus.The Buckeyes met California in St. John Arena on Saturday night. The Buckeyes were slow to start in the first and trailed the entire game, falling 25-13. Seniors Ashley Hughes and Kristen Dozier exploded in the second game, opening a run early. Ohio State edged California 25-18, and tied the match 1-1.The third game was nothing short of a nail-biter. With 13 ties and four lead changes, the Buckeyes battle ended just short, 25-23. California held the lead throughout the fourth game. The Buckeyes only trailed by as many as eight points in the game, but fought back to stay within three points.The Buckeyes fell 25-20 in the fourth and 3-1 in the match. Carlston credited the players for their success just as much as the players credited the coaching staff for believing in them. “We knew we had a good team and we had something to prove,” Carlston said. “More than that, the coaching staff believed in us so every day. We came in determined to do something good with this season.”Good is an understatement. The Buckeyes finished last season 15-20 overall. This season they finished 25-11 overall and received an at-large berth to the NCAA tournament. The Buckeyes will have to say goodbye to three seniors this year, Kristen Dozier, Ashley Hughes, and Chelsea Noble. The team recognizes them for all they have given to the season and the program as they look to the future. “This year was our year to prove to the Big Ten that we are back on track and we are who we are,” sophomore Kelli Barhorst said. “We are Ohio State. We are looking forward to building on it next year.”
Ohio State football coach Urban Meyer made his weekly appearance on the Big Ten teleconference Tuesday afternoon and discussed the improved play of the offensive line, the emergence of sophomore running back Ezekiel Elliott and his comfort level with the team thus far.The Buckeyes are 3-1 on the season following a 50-28 victory over the Cincinnati Bearcats Saturday night. Meyer said after Saturday’s win over Cincinnati his offensive line has “crossed the barrier” and added he believes the offense has developed depth and more of an identity. He named redshirt-junior Chase Farris as someone who has improved and is earning playing time on the offensive line. He said that with the return of senior tight end Jeff Heuerman from injury to go along with the improved line play that the Buckeyes have more of an offensive identity now. Meyer said he believes the performance of Elliott is a product of better offensive line play. Meyer said the running back position as a unit is the hardest working group on the team. He gave credit to running backs coach Stan Drayton and said Elliott is among the top two or three hardest workers on the team. He said after evaluating the pass defense, he doesn’t think there is a lack of talent, rather a lack of execution. He said young corners in the secondary simply need to play better, singling out redshirt-freshmen Gareon Conley and Eli Apple as players who need to improve. Meyer said his comfort level with his team is night and day from where it was week one against Navy. He said the biggest challenge for the Buckeyes going into Saturday’s game against Maryland will be slowing down the Terrapin offensive skill players. Meyer added that Maryland quarterback C.J. Brown will greatly test OSU as he is the leading passer and rusher for Maryland.The Buckeyes are scheduled to take on the Maryland Terrapins on Saturday at noon at Byrd Stadium in College Park, Md.