Hugh Hewitt, who seemed to be wobbly on the ports deal just days ago, seems to have figured some things out:

The president appears to be counting on his well-earned reputation for sincerity on matters of security to settle the ports issue. It may, or it may not. But it is clear he doesn't mind the debate. And increasingly it is obvious why not.

As with the Patriot Act, as with the debate over the NSA program to conduct surveillance of al Qaeda communicating with its agents inside America, and as with the war on all of its fronts, the president and the party he leads are serious about the debate and the stakes.

The Democrats aren't.

A photo op at the harbor with [Chuck] Schumer and Hillary is just another in a long line of stunts that is supposed to pass as a policy: Congressman Murtha's demand for an immediate withdrawal; Harry Reid's gloating that he "had killed the Patriot Act," John Kerry's never-ending campaign --they are all the same stunt.

It didn't work in 2002. It didn't work in 2004. And it isn't going to work in 2006.

If the issue is the nation's secuirty in a time of grave and growing threats, the answer isn't, and probably won't be for at least a generation, the Democrats.

Bush is setting up the next eight months to be yet another referendum on the war's conduct. Incredibly the Democrats have agreed to the terrain, which always has them fighting uphill. They seem to think that some combination of Katrina and the ports debate will allow them to emerge as a credible alternative on national security --when they refused to allow exploration in ANWR, opposed SCOTUS nominees in large part because Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito might agree that the president has stand-along war powers pursuant to Article II, and routinely argue idiocies like Dick Durbin's assertion that members of the American military are similar in their action's to the thugs of Hitler's, Stalin's and Pol Pot's regime or Howard dean's blanket assertion that the war can't be won, and that it is another Vietnam.

The sneering and jeering of Democrats on the ports issue is instantly recognized as rank posturing, the political equivalent of a demand for better exercise equipment from the morbidly obese.

I think these folks still haven’t figured out that they will not be running against George W. Bush in 2008 nor 2006.

Oh well.

As I’ve written before, President Bush has backbone where it matters most. To his credit, he immediately made it clear he was sticking with this deal – polls be damned. Especially when those polls amount to nothing more than taking the temperature of a gossip index.

Pioneers, all of them:

Jennifer Carroll– Fla. House of Representative,

District 13 (Duval & Clay Counties)

Arthur Graham- Council Member,

District 13, Jacksonville

Glorious Johnson- Council Member-at-Large,

Jacksonville

Elizabeth Wade- City Council,

District 3, Riviera Beach

Esther Berry- Commissioner,

Vice-Mayor, South Bay

Gow Fields- Commissioner,

Northwest District, Lakeland

A good, representative group.

It’s very interesting to watch the NFL Combine live on the NFL Network. Money is being made and lost, based on some standardized drills. Chad Jackson from Florida was the number one timed receiver in the 40-yard dash. Ingle Martin, a transfer from Florida to Furman, just made a couple of good throws in the QB drills and may find himself a place in the League, too.

Been there, done that: Gerard Van Der Leun calls out those who have a convenient problem with making money (except when it’s them making the money):

Over the nearly four decades since 1968, the list of regimes dedicated to, and capable of, the destruction of the United States shrank. They either took a long dirt nap in history or are now shambling towards the graveyard of all other failed but deadly fascist ideologies. The political genius and destiny of the United States lies, after all, in the fact that we do not require you to be a friend. You simply have to not be an enemy. The American Way is, after all, that nothing need be personal when it can just be business. One on one, we can be very warm, understanding and generous. But piss us off too much and we'll bomb your cities to rubble. We don't like business to be disrupted too much.

In all this, the world at large has gone forward and, all in all, improved for the better. We call it "Globalization" and it seems, slowly, to be working out well for most of those people who have, as they say, "gotten with the program."

But there remains a group of us who, although they batten off the program, don't want to get with it at all -- except when it comes time to buy a new Prius or get a country home. They take pride in never having sold out, even as they buy in.

Those Americans of the 60s whose fantasies were lit by a dream of a destroyed United States have very few friends left out of the long list of countries once dedicated to totalitarianism. And the list becomes shorter with each passing year.

Time and chance also makes the list of those Americans still dedicated to becoming life-long friends of countries and movements dedicated to the destruction of AmeriKKKa shorter every year. Yet most still live and thrive in the place they hate the most. They have made prosperous lives for themselves in local, state and national governments and politics, as well as in academia, the entertainment world, and the media. Greying now they still continue in their quest for an enemy of their enemy to make their friend. They are the American Left and, risen from their impoverished conditions in 1968, they have now tenure, high position, or acolytes from which they draw comfortable stipends. Of late, they've taken more and more to coffee klatches with Islamic fundamentalists who, if they don't have the armies to bring about the destruction of the United States, have at least shown they've got enough hate to kill Americans here and abroad retail and wholesale. Besides, they're out shopping for a nuclear weapon and some smallpox, so what's not to like about these guys from an American Leftist's point of view?

I wouldn’t say this of “the left” but I would of “the far left,” also lovingly known as the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party. You know, those folks who think Nancy Pelosi is “a moderate with an edge.” Right!

One of Gerard’s readers put it quite nicely:

Dancing with the Moonbats,
Everybody feeling warm and right,
It's such a fine and natural sight--
Everybody was dancing with the Moonbats.

Yeah, buddy. Good music from those days, updated quite nicely.

Ruth Wisse, a literature professor at Harvard, speaks up for Larry Summers – the soon-to-be former President at that beacon of American higher education:

For the moment, the attackers have won the day, asserting their right to dictate to the rest of the university the accommodations they favor.

But student response to the ouster suggests another long-term outcome. Although the activists of yesteryear may have found a temporary stronghold in the universities, a new generation of students has had its fill of radicalism. Sobered by the heavy financial burdens most of their families have to bear for their schooling, they want an education solid enough to warrant the investment. Chastened by the fall-out of the sexual revolution and the breakdown of the family, they are wary of human experiments that destabilize society even further. Alert to the war that is being waged against America, they feel responsible for its defense even when they may not agree with the policies of the current administration. If the students I have come to know at Harvard are at all representative, a new moral seriousness prevails on campus, one that has yet to affect the faculty members because it does not yet know how to marshal its powers.

As long as FAS [the Faculty of Arts and Sciences] went about its business as usual, no one may have noticed its skewed priorities, but its political victory sets its actions and inaction in bolder relief. The same professors who fought so hard to oust their president did not once since the events of 9/11 consider whether they owed any responsibilities to a country at war.

FAS continued to ban ROTC from campus on the excuse that the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy discriminates against homosexuals. Many students realize that this is tantamount to letting others do the fighting while advertising their moral superiority. Several years ago, the Undergraduate Council voted to give ROTC its approval. Although the faculty ignored this vote and simply waited for that cohort to graduate, other students will sooner or later stand up for their contemporaries who want to serve their country.

Yes, they certainly will.

There’s been much discussion, of course, on this turn of events. Instapundit, and Power Line, among many others. My contribution to this discussion is to introduce another university President into the discussion. John Lombardi, former President at the University of Florida and presently Chancellor at the University of Massachusetts – Amherst, in 1992 delivered an address before a national meeting of American Liberal Arts and Sciences Deans in Tampa on November 12, 1992 that strikes me as relevant today. Lombardi was a truly great President at Florida and the factors chasing him away from Gator Country may be the subject of another writing soon. However, in his 1992 address (designed to be a wake-up call to all academicians who care about arts and sciences education in the United States) he said then, in part:

We know the university cannot stand without its arts and sciences. We recognize that the college carries the university's primary mission and defines its place in western civilization. Yet, we still find the arts and sciences under attack and on the defensive. In most of our great universities, the arts and sciences have drifted out of the institutional focus. The arts and sciences disciplines find themselves competing with professional schools for institutional attention and resources and they struggle against attacks on their intellectual integrity from interdisciplinary programs that dilute their disciplinary authority. Where once the college controlled the destiny of its university, its moral imperative grows weak under the fragmenting power of micro-specialization and political controversy and under the dissolving agendas of race and ethnicity, gender and sexual orientation, class and entitlement.

Our popular audience, that once embraced us for our ability to explain science and history, literature and arts, politics and society, now rejects us as our discourse grows ever more abstract, specialized, and inaccessible. Historians write for historians, but the public looks to amateurs for its history. We reward research of such mind-numbing obscurity that the audience shrinks to a dozen, and we scorn the popularizer, the great teacher of the general public. Our incantation might go thus:

"Woe unto the academic who makes a popular success of her work, for she shall be scorned by her peers."

Lombardi then continued his address by noting the excesses resulting from the environment of the 60s and 70s:

Those of us who grew up in the universities of the late 1960s and early 1970s participated in the weakening of faculty authority and responsibility within our colleges of arts and sciences. We watered down the curriculum, we declined to accept responsibility for defining the core of our intellectual focus, we abdicated our authority for academic judgment and discretion, and we rushed into our sub-specializing research as a refuge against the bitter conflicts of the times. In the 1980s and increasingly now in the 1990s we have begun to recapture some of that lost ground and that abdicated authority and responsibility, but oh how slowly it goes!

Were these dilemmas not enough, the muckrakers of academe attacked our universities bitterly, irresponsibly, and effectively. A cottage industry of academic exposés sprang up, detailing the crass hypocrisy of the professor, outlining the college teacher's flight from teaching, and glorying in examples of a greedy grasping professoriat. Angry and pained, shocked at the welcome these attacks earned from the public, and hurt by the general failure of anyone to appreciate our self-recognized virtues, we in the universities struck out, crying foul, seeking solace in the belief we had been misunderstood and misrepresented.

Our response fell on deaf ears. Our public believed our attackers and not our protests. While recognizing the excess of muckraking, our public saw the basic truth in these books and articles and, in that truth, found a reason to lose faith in our achievement and our dedication.

That loss of faith hit hardest at the arts and sciences because, for the most part, the muckraker's examples came from arts and sciences departments, programs, and disciplines. Oh, to be sure, a shot here and there landed on a professional school, but by and large the big hits came against English, history, political science, sociology, physics, chemistry, comparative literature, foreign language, and the other pillars of our colleges of arts and sciences.

If you take the time to read Lombardi’s full address, I think you’ll agree that it is an interesting insight into the battle between Harvard’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences and President Summers. There is a war going on inside academia and it is being fought all over the nation. On point, check out this closing observation at Power Line blog:

Reader Jack Lifton asks us to quote the last three paragraphs of the [L.A. Times] story:

...Harry Lewis, a computer science professor and former dean of Harvard College who left under pressure from Summers, said campus politics here had been shifting for decades, as more students from less affluent backgrounds enrolled.

A more diverse group, they are also "eager to prosper and less willing to take risks by rebelling," Lewis said. His upcoming book, "Excellence Without a Soul: How a Great University Forgot Education," traces what he considers to be the decline in the quality of education at Harvard. It's left them far more likely to support the power structure, he said.

"The Harvard student body looks more like America than the Harvard faculty," he said. "That's what's happened."

Jack comments:

The statement by a man who felt he could not remain on a faculty headed up by Summers unwittingly wrote an epitaph not only for the hard left wing of the Harvard faculty but also for the hard left wing of the Democratic Party.

So true; he (Lewis), I can virtually guarantee, never comprehended the condescension quite evident in his statement. “Oh dear,” he seems to be lamenting, “we’re being overrun by the less affluent riff-raff and they are absolutely RUINING our university.”

Eager to prosper, as if that’s a bad thing. Less willing to take risks, as if that [risk-taking] is their primary purpose at Harvard, rather than obtaining a first-class education.

The Arts and Sciences folks are killing their cause at universities all across America.

This point is shamelessly lifted from Rishi's Ratings:

WHY THE RPI IS FLAWED

The RPI uses a system of averages. Because 50% of your overall score is from your opponents record this can overpower the 25% that comes from winning percentage. Often when very good teams play very bad teams, their RPI goes down even though they won the game. Likewise the RPI for the very bad team rises even though they lost the game. Since winning margin is not a factor, it should be impossible to have your score drop after a victory. After all winning was the best possible result. When ranking the very top teams, the key to gaining a great RPI is not so much winning, but rather avoiding the really terrible teams.

That last sentence explains why the RPI is a tool for use at the end of the season and is incredibly misused as a tool during the course of the season.

One of the first national announcers I remember watching on TV, Curt Gowdy, has died in Palm Beach County.

Many Miami Dolphins fans [RattlerGator: count me in that number] remember the epic postseason game Gowdy worked on Christmas Day, 1971. The Dolphins and Chiefs played into the second overtime period at Kansas City before Garo Yepremian won it for Miami at 82 minutes and 40 seconds, the longest game in pro football history. Gowdy recalled it years later with the same matter-of-fact style that framed all of his work in reality as much as drama.

“There was a full moon and when Yepremian’s kick tumbled through the goalposts, it was the quietest I ever heard a packed stadium,” Gowdy said. “It was eerie. ...They just packed up their seat cushions and left.”

Those were the days. Godspeed, Curt Gowdy.

For starters, take a look at how the SEC finished up the basketball season last year:

MEN’S 2004-2005 FINAL STANDINGS

The SEC is obviously up this year and if you switched U.K.’s position with U.T.’s -- nobody would think the SEC is down. Take a look at Mike Huguenin’s preseason tournament projection of the 65 teams that make it into March Madness this year:

2005-2006 Preseason NCAA Basketball Tournament Projection

Although there clearly would be differences, that’s a pretty good representation of the conventional wisdom at the start of this basketball season. Among seeds one through seven, three from the SEC (Kentucky 1, Alabama and Arkansas were both 5-seeds) and five from the ACC (Duke 1, B.C. 3, Maryland 3, Wake 5, and N.C. State 7). Both conferences would get six bids, but the SEC was bottom heavy (Florida 8, LSU 9, and Vandy 12) and the only ACC seed below a 7 was Miami at 10.

Clearly, it’s the ACC that’s down and the SEC that’s up. I found another small site that was interesting on the point of preseason projections:

SEC Basketball 2005-2006 Preseason Predictions

PROJECTED 2005-2006 BASKETBALL STANDINGS

Eastern Division

(1) Kentucky

(2) Vanderbilt

(3) Florida

(4) South Carolina

(5) Tennessee

(6) Georgia

Western Division

(1) Alabama

(2) LSU

(3) Arkansas

(4) Mississippi

(5) Mississippi State

(6) Auburn

ALL-CONFERENCE TEAMS

FIRST TEAM

G - Rajon Rondo - Sophomore, Kentucky

G - Ronald Steele - Sophomore, Alabama

G/F - Ronnie Brewer - Junior, Arkansas

F - Chuck Davis - Senior, Alabama

F - Glen Davis - Sophomore, LSU

SECOND TEAM

G - Patrick Sparks - Senior, Kentucky

G - Mario Moore - Senior, Vanderbilt

G - C.J. Watson - Senior, Tennessee

F - Corey Brewer - Sophomore, Florida

C - Jermareo Davidson - Junior, Alabama

HERE AND THERE

Player of the Year: Ronnie Brewer, Arkansas

Freshman of the Year: Tasmin Mitchell, LSU

Most Underrated Player: C.J. Watson, G, Tennesee

Most Overrated Player: Patrick Sparks, G, Kentucky

Best Frontcourt: Alabama

Best Backcourt: Kentucky

Best Bench: Kentucky

Most Likely to Overachieve: Kentucky

Most Likely to Underachieve: Arkansas

Best Conference Rivalry: Kentucky-Florida

Best Coaches:

(1) Tubby Smith, Kentucky

(2) Billy Donovan, Florida

(3) Rick Stansbury, Mississippi state

Best Programs (Currently):

(1) Kentucky

(2) Alabama

(3) Florida

Toughest Places to Play:

(1) Rupp Arena, Kentucky

(2) O’Connell Center, Florida

(3) Memorial Gym, Vanderbilt

POSTSEASON PROJECTIONS

NCAA: Kentucky, Alabama, LSU, Arkansas, Vanderbilt

NIT: Florida, South Carolina, Mississippi

It’s been a great season. And it should be a fantastic finish. The SEC is definitely having a better season than expected -- Florida and Tennessee are slam dunks proving the point.

According to the Orlando Sentinel, Florida will become the 3^rd largest state in the nation by 2011. In large part, this is due to a large influx of new residents from New York and New Jersey. In fact, for the period 1995-2000 Florida was the only state with two spots on the Top 10 list of net gain of transplants from other American states (427,000+ from N.Y. and N.J.). Here’s the top ten:

1. New York to Florida 308,230

2. New York to New Jersey 206,979

3. California to Nevada 199,125

4. California to Arizona 186,151

5. California to Texas 182,789

6. Florida to Georgia 157,423

7. California to Washington 155,577

8. California to Oregon 131,836

9. New Jersey to Florida 118,905

10. Texas to California 115, 929

Also of personal interest was the tremendous level of interaction between Florida and Georgia. Additionally, check out this Black Fact:

3.5 million

The estimated black population of New York on July 1, 2004, highest of any state. Four other states had black populations that surpassed 2 million: Florida, Texas, California and Georgia. About 85,900 blacks were added to Florida’s population between July 1, 2003, and July 1, 2004. That is the largest numeric increase of any state in the nation. Georgia and Texas added 61,800 and 45,000, respectively.

For a comprehensive collection of interesting Black History Month numbers from the Census Bureau, click here.

If you happen to be interested in a uniquely snarky take on what is occurring up on “The Hill” (a.k.a. Florida A&M University), be sure to pay a visit to the website known as Rattler Nation.

I have no idea who these folks are, but they apparently intend to stir the pot quite a bit.

Instapundit, citing Tigerhawk, who himself referenced Jean Francois Revel’s book titled “Anti-Americanism,” gave this succinct quotation today:

Tolerance is a two-way street. Those who do not grant it, have no right to demand it.

Agreed.

In that earlier post, Tigerhawk shared this Jean Francois Revel quote from his book:

Another myth that has been strenuously maintained since September 11 is that of a moderate and tolerant Islam...

The dominant idea in the Muslims’ worldwide view is that all of humanity must obey the rules of their religion, whereas they owe no respect to the religions of others. Indeed, showing such respect would make them apostates meriting instant execution. Muslim “tolerance” is a one-way street; they demand it for themselves but rarely extend it to others.

Anxious to show tolerance, the Pope permitted – even encouraged – the erection of a mosque in Rome, the city where Saint Peter is buried. But no Christian church could be built in Mecca, or anywhere in Saudi Arabia, for that would profane the land of Muhammad. In October 2001, Islamic opinion – echoed by voices in the West – continually asked the American administration to suspend military operations during the month of Ramadan, which was to begin in mid-November. War or no war, decency requires that holy days be accorded proper consideration – so said these well-intentioned people. A fine precept, except that Muslims consider themselves exempt from it. In 1973, Egypt didn’t hesitate to attack Israel on the day of Yom Kippur, the most important Jewish religious holiday, thus initiating what will be known forever as the Yom Kippur War.

The second element in the myth of a tolerant Islam is the claim that the bulk of the Muslim populations, especially those resident in or citizens of European countries or America, disapprove of terrorism. The imams of the principal mosques in the West have made a specialty of dispensing these suave assurances. After each wave of murderous attacks, for example in France in 1986 and 1995, and after the fatwas (in 1989 and 1993) ordering Salman Rushie and Taslima Nasreen to be killed for their “blasphemies,” these spokesmen tripped over themselves as they rushed to guarantee the essential moderateness of the communities under their spiritual leadership. Politicians and the media hastened to fall into line, so fearful are we of appearing racist....

On September 12, 2001, the newspaper Le Parisien-Aujourd’hui published an account of the jubilant atmosphere that reigned the previous evening in the 18th arrondissement, where there is a large Muslim community. “Bin Laden will nail all of you! He started with America, then it’ll be France.” Such was the sort of moderate remark hurled at passersby who didn’t look like North Africans. Or again: “I’m going to celebrate big time tonight! Those guys were real heroes. That’ll teach those Americans – and all you French are next!”

This reportage by the Parisien had no equivalent in any other publication and was passed over in silence by almost all the media. At any rate, as an assiduous listener every morning to news and press summaries on the radio, I heard no mention of it on the morning of the 12th.

While the statistics are unreliable, it’s thought that between four and five million Muslims are living in France. This is the largest such community in Europe, followed a long way behind by those in Germany and Britain. If the “immense majority” of these Muslims are moderates, as the imams and muftis and their political and media parrots claim, it seems to me that this moderation should be rather more apparent. For example, after the bombings of 1986 and 1995 in Paris, which killed several dozen people and wounded many more, it should have been easy to find a few thousand “moderates” our of 4.5 million Muslims, a good proportion of whom have French nationality – enough at least for a demonstration march from the Republique to the Bastille or along the Canebiere. There was never even a hint of one.

In Spain, there were several rallies of up to a hundred thousand people in 2001 to condemn the assassins of the Basque ETA terrorist organization. These took place throughout the country and even in the Basque Country, where protestors had reason to fear reprisals, though the terrorists’ partisans were actually very much in the minority (which was made overwhelmingly evident by the regional elections of November 2000).

In contrast, if moderate Muslims in France dare to protest publicly so little, couldn’t it be because they know that they, and not the extremists, are minorities within their communities. This explains why they are so moderate with their moderation…. The notion that the “immense majority” of Muslims settled in Europe were peacefully inclined was, during the two months after September 11, starkly revealed for what it was: a mirage.

Rights cannot be properly contemplated without an equal focus on responsibilities. There is the crux of our problems with Islam.

While reading the Freakonomics Blog, Stephen Dubner linked to a Milton Friedman interview in New Perspectives Quarterly where I found this question and response:

NPQ | The US Treasury debt is held mainly by China, Japan and South Korea. Is the huge foreign balance of payments deficit a problem for the US and world economy?

Friedman | I don’t think so. It may well be a statistical mirage. If you look at the balance sheet, the US is heavily in debt. If you look at the income account—the amount of interest the US pays abroad—it is almost exactly equal to the amount of interest that it receives from abroad. American assets held abroad are earning a higher rate of return than foreign assets held here.

That is understandable because what is most attractive about the US to people and countries with wealth is that it can provide security, insurance really, against political instability. Nobody is afraid that the money they place in the US is at risk of expropriation or of in some other way being taken away. For this safety, the wealth holders of the world are willing to accept a lower rate of return. US assets abroad, in contrast, are riskier and thus yield a higher rate of return.

This explains why there is a rough balance in real terms. It is not clear there really is a debt. It looks like the imbalance concerns are misleading. It doesn’t worry me a bit that China and Japan hold so much US debt. In a way, it seems foolish for them to do it because they get lower returns than they might elsewhere. But that is their business.

Like I said, hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

The current standings have already changed from those represented in the gray column below, but they were accurate as of Monday and still valuable as a snapshot on this season that is rapidly coming to a close. The first two columns, of course, are snapshots from earlier in the season based on the Massey Composite Ratings:

1 Duke  

16-0

2 Florida  

16-0

3 Texas  

14-2

4 Memphis  

15-2

4 Texas  

21-3

5 Illinois  

16-1

5 Memphis  

22-2

6 Villanova  

11-2

6 Pittsburgh  

19-3

7 Connecticut  

14-1

7 Tennessee  

18-3

8 Pittsburgh  

14-0

8 Ohio St  

18-3

9 Wisconsin  

14-2

9 Illinois  

20-4

10 NC State  

14-2

10 Florida  

21-3

11 Gonzaga  

13-3

11 West Virginia  

18-5

12 Washington  

14-2

12 Iowa  

19-6

13 Syracuse  

15-2

13 Gonzaga  

20-3

14 Ohio St  

12-2

14 G Washington  

20-1

15 Michigan St  

15-4

15 NC State  

19-5

16 Indiana  

11-3

16 UCLA  

20-5

17 Iowa  

13-4

17 Georgetown  

17-5

18 Xavier  

11-2

18 Michigan St  

19-6

19 Cincinnati  

13-4

19 N Iowa  

21-5

20 N Iowa  

15-3

20 LSU  

16-7

21 UCLA  

14-3

21 North Carolina  

15-6

22 Tennessee  

11-2

22 Boston College  

19-5

23 West Virginia  

12-3

23 Oklahoma  

17-5

24 G Washington  

12-1

24 Wisconsin  

17-7

25 North Carolina  

10-3

25 Wichita St  

20-6

26 Maryland  

13-4

26 Kansas  

17-6

27 Wichita St  

14-4

27 Washington  

18-5

28 Michigan  

11-3

28 Syracuse  

17-7

29 LSU  

10-5

29 Michigan  

16-6

30 Louisville  

13-3

30 Creighton  

17-6

31 Boston College  

12-4

31 Missouri St  

16-7

32 Creighton  

11-4

32 Cincinnati  

16-9

33 Florida St  

11-3

33 Indiana  

14-8

34 Bucknell  

12-3

34 Arizona  

16-9

35 Arizona  

11-6

35 Arkansas  

16-7

36 Colorado  

11-3

36 Colorado  

16-5

37 Vanderbilt  

11-3

37 Marquette  

16-8

38 UAB  

12-3

38 Bucknell  

20-3

39 Air Force  

15-2

39 Maryland  

15-8