College Football Fan Site Area 51 @CFB51; dead nuts accurate

One community smart about college football

Civil discussion, topics, and reading of both original and aggregated news.


Author Topic: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~  (Read 26313 times)

Online 847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 2735
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1440 on: March 13, 2018, 12:06:21 PM »
I'm bullish on Michigan this year. I think they have the right makeup (toughness, desire, coaching, experience) to go pretty far in this thing.

As I was doing picks yesterday, I was still wondering how the F#$k UNC got a 2 seed and why Syracuse is in at all.

Offline PSUinNC

  • Red Shirt
  • ***
  • Posts: 242
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1441 on: March 13, 2018, 01:51:05 PM »
I'm bullish on Michigan this year. I think they have the right makeup (toughness, desire, coaching, experience) to go pretty far in this thing.

As I was doing picks yesterday, I was still wondering how the F#$k UNC got a 2 seed and why Syracuse is in at all.
I have M and MSU in the Final Four.

Offline PSUinNC

  • Red Shirt
  • ***
  • Posts: 242
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1442 on: March 13, 2018, 01:55:29 PM »
So picks?

3 categories:
1.) First round upset picks (11 seeds or low, none of this 10 over a 7 garbage)
2.) How far do you have the Big Ten teams going
3.) Your Final 4 with National Title game

Upsets: Loyola over Miami; South Dakota State over Ohio State; NM State over Clemson; ASU/Cuse winner over TCU

Big Ten: OSU out 1st round; MSU and UM to Sweet 16; Purdue to Final 4

Final Four: Cincinnati, North Carolina, Purdue and Duke; Duke over Cincinnati for the title

I have about my normal number of 1st round upsets; then a lot of 2nd round chalk, but only one #1 seed (Kansas) surviving the Sweet 16
My FF:  Michigan, Sparty, UVa, WVU.  UVa winning it all
 
Notable upsets:  Providence in E8 (over UNC, losing to M), SDSU over OSU, NMSU over Clemson (my 12/5), Loyola over Miami (I love MVC teams), URI over Duke

B1G: OSU out in first, Purdue E8, M and MSU in FF

Offline FearlessF

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Posts: 2815
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1443 on: March 13, 2018, 01:58:33 PM »
I'm bullish on Michigan this year. I think they have the right makeup (toughness, desire, coaching, experience) to go pretty far in this thing.

As I was doing picks yesterday, I was still wondering how the F#$k UNC got a 2 seed and why Syracuse is in at all.
I have the Heels beating the Wolvies
I'm bullish on Sparty
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

Online ELA

  • Global Moderator
  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 3446
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1444 on: March 13, 2018, 02:07:04 PM »
My FF:  Michigan, Sparty, UVa, WVU.  UVa winning it all
 
Notable upsets:  Providence in E8 (over UNC, losing to M), SDSU over OSU, NMSU over Clemson (my 12/5), Loyola over Miami (I love MVC teams), URI over Duke

B1G: OSU out in first, Purdue E8, M and MSU in FF
In your scenario I like MSU and UM's chances a lot.  I think both are Final 4 caliber, but both got nightmare matchups in their Sweet 16 game.  I actually think if you switched them, I would pick both to win their other's region.  But since you have UNC and Duke both getting upset in the 2nd round, I would then pick both MSU and UM to upset the 1 seed and reach San Antonio

Offline PSUinNC

  • Red Shirt
  • ***
  • Posts: 242
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1445 on: March 13, 2018, 02:36:55 PM »
In your scenario I like MSU and UM's chances a lot.  I think both are Final 4 caliber, but both got nightmare matchups in their Sweet 16 game.  I actually think if you switched them, I would pick both to win their other's region.  But since you have UNC and Duke both getting upset in the 2nd round, I would then pick both MSU and UM to upset the 1 seed and reach San Antonio
Something about those two teams from Rhode Island that I really like.  I think both are going to be really tough outs.
Love the first good matchup tonight, the Bonnies and UCLA.  Bonnies are a dangerous bunch IMO.

Online ELA

  • Global Moderator
  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 3446
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1446 on: March 13, 2018, 04:23:02 PM »
Bucknell benching Nathan Davis for a violation of team rules.

Only averaged 5.6 ppg and a 2.1 rpg, but played 22 mpg.  So on one hand that's pretty bad production for 22 mpg, on the other hand, he's 6'8", and those 22 minutes have to go somewhere.  Mid-majors usually aren't stocked with 6'8" guys.  Might be big advantage MSU in a closely called game, get both sides in foul trouble.

On the other hand, it might force Bucknell to go to a smaller lineup more than they want to, which MSU has struggled WAY more with this year.

Online ELA

  • Global Moderator
  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 3446
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1447 on: March 13, 2018, 05:15:34 PM »
Updated composite computer poll entering the NCAA Tournament. 67 rankings (last week in parenthesis)

1.Villanova (2)
2.Virginia (1)
3.Duke (3)
4.Cincinnati (4)
5.PURDUE (5)
6.MICHIGAN STATE (6)
7.Kansas (8)
8.North Carolina (9)
9.Xavier (7)
10.Gonzaga (11)
11.MICHIGAN (10)
12.Tennessee (13)
13.West Virginia (16)
14.Texas Tech (14)
15.Wichita State (15)
16.Kentucky (20)
17.Auburn (12)
18.Arizona (23)
19.OHIO STATE (17)
20.Houston (22)
21.Clemson (18)
22.TCU (19)
23.Florida (21)
24.Nevada (24)
25.Texas A&M (-)
-
43.Penn State (45)
56.Nebraska (55)
58.Maryland (56)
80.Wisconsin (81)
81.Indiana (84)
101.Northwestern (96)
109.Iowa (106)
113.Illinois (113)
115.Minnesota (114)
139.Rutgers (137)

Online MaximumSam

  • Player
  • ****
  • Posts: 948
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1448 on: March 13, 2018, 06:50:26 PM »
I had Kentucky, Duke, North Carolina, and Purdue, with UK over Duke

Online TyphonInc

  • Player
  • ****
  • Posts: 547
  • Easily Amused
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1449 on: March 13, 2018, 10:03:38 PM »
1.Upsets - New Mexico over Clemson, and ASU/Sy over TCU

2. B1G - OSU & UM out at 32, Purdue E8, MSU FF

3. FF - UVA, Gonzaga, Villanova, & MSU; Cavaliers over Wildcats

Bonus: Heh, I had ESPN do a "smart pick" for me, It has Villanova beating Cincinnati in the Final, and OSU and MSU as the other FF teams. And I thought I'd be giddy to see that Final Four so submitted it as another pick.
« Last Edit: March 13, 2018, 10:51:20 PM by TyphonInc »

Offline Kris61

  • Red Shirt
  • ***
  • Posts: 264
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1450 on: March 13, 2018, 10:28:32 PM »
My FF:  Michigan, Sparty, UVa, WVU.  UVa winning it all
 
Notable upsets:  Providence in E8 (over UNC, losing to M), SDSU over OSU, NMSU over Clemson (my 12/5), Loyola over Miami (I love MVC teams), URI over Duke

B1G: OSU out in first, Purdue E8, M and MSU in FF
In case you want to change that I’ll let you know Nova is a terrible matchup for WVU in the Sweet 16 (if they get that far).  Nova is basically a better version of Kansas, IMO.  And although in 120 minutes of basketball against KU this year WVU only trailed for about 20 minutes they still went 0-3 against the Jayhawks.
WVU can’t guard the 3 point line.  If/when teams break the press they get great looks at the basket and in the half court they habitually leave 3 point shooters to help on drives despite having possibly the best shot blocker in the country underneath to erase mistakes.  Appreciate the love but don’t want to see you get your bracket busted.;)

Online bayareabadger

  • Red Shirt
  • ***
  • Posts: 366
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1451 on: March 13, 2018, 11:07:54 PM »
UW's Andy Van Vliet to transfer. He came in with a lot of offensive promise. Had to sit his first year because of an NCAA thing and could never earn minutes.

Coaches said they set standards for defense/rebounding effort for Andy to play. He did not play. Kid had a nice game that might've needed to be featured too much. It's too bad. Hope he lands somewhere that can use him. Now hopefully UW can find a grad transfer (hopes against hope it's the South Dakota State kid). 

Online 847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 2735
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1452 on: March 14, 2018, 07:07:36 AM »
UW's Andy Van Vliet to transfer. He came in with a lot of offensive promise. Had to sit his first year because of an NCAA thing and could never earn minutes.

Coaches said they set standards for defense/rebounding effort for Andy to play. He did not play. Kid had a nice game that might've needed to be featured too much. It's too bad. Hope he lands somewhere that can use him. Now hopefully UW can find a grad transfer (hopes against hope it's the South Dakota State kid).
Time for Krabby to earn his paycheck, although Gard recently said he'd like to balance the classes a little better moving forward. That's been an Achilles for a while now. We'll see.

All the best to Van Vliet, although I didn't appreciate the "thank you" omissions from his tweet.

Offline fezzador

  • Red Shirt
  • ***
  • Posts: 187
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1453 on: March 14, 2018, 08:34:00 AM »
So is UCLA going to bite the bullet and finally dump Alfraud?  He's not a good coach, but he keeps getting sweet gigs (sort of the Kiffin of MBB).  He needs to go back to the NBA as an assistant coach.

Online ELA

  • Global Moderator
  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 3446
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1454 on: March 14, 2018, 08:48:22 AM »
So is UCLA going to bite the bullet and finally dump Alfraud?  He's not a good coach, but he keeps getting sweet gigs (sort of the Kiffin of MBB).  He needs to go back to the NBA as an assistant coach.
He's always been a good mid major coach.  He's just not a high major coach.
In his 10 years at SW Missouri State and New Mexico, his teams always overachieved.  He might just be better served there.
Although, looking up his career record, he had been better at UCLA than I would have guessed.  Already forgot they were 31-5 last year and reached the Sweet 16.  

Online MaximumSam

  • Player
  • ****
  • Posts: 948
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1455 on: March 14, 2018, 11:24:49 AM »
I'm bullish on Michigan this year. I think they have the right makeup (toughness, desire, coaching, experience) to go pretty far in this thing.

As I was doing picks yesterday, I was still wondering how the F#$k UNC got a 2 seed and why Syracuse is in at all.
They have like 12 wins over teams in the field this year, including OOC wins over UM, OSU, and Tennessee.

Online 847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 2735
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1456 on: March 14, 2018, 11:49:51 AM »
They have like 12 wins over teams in the field this year, including OOC wins over UM, OSU, and Tennessee.
Yes, but they also have 10 losses - some bad, one of which was at the hands of 29-4 MSU, which pounded them at a neutral site, and is a 3 seed.

Offline Entropy

  • Red Shirt
  • ***
  • Posts: 354
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1457 on: March 14, 2018, 12:26:08 PM »
the committee looked at who you beat over any other metric.   And beating name schools also mattered.  

Offline fezzador

  • Red Shirt
  • ***
  • Posts: 187
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1458 on: March 14, 2018, 12:39:57 PM »
He's always been a good mid major coach.  He's just not a high major coach.
In his 10 years at SW Missouri State and New Mexico, his teams always overachieved.  He might just be better served there.
Although, looking up his career record, he had been better at UCLA than I would have guessed.  Already forgot they were 31-5 last year and reached the Sweet 16.  
For a program as storied as UCLA, the expectations should be a lot higher than an occasional S16 run.  A couple of generations ago, they were the premier program in college hoops (and it wasn't even close), but now they're firmly behind the quartet of Duke, Kentucky, UNC, and Kansas.
And as weak as hoops are out West, there's no reason they shouldn't be dominating the PAC (or at least be neck-and-neck with Zona).
While I didn't specifically say Alford was a *bad* coach, he's hardly an elite one and almost certainly won't get the Bruins over the hump.  He had talent at Iowa but couldn't get the Hawks over the hump either.
IIRC, his dream job is Indiana and I don't think the Hoosiers want to touch him with a ten-foot pole.  If he gets the axe, maybe he can join Kiffy-kins at Florida Atlantic.  I'm sure he'd kill it over there (if they need a new coach that is).

Online ELA

  • Global Moderator
  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 3446
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1459 on: March 14, 2018, 02:46:48 PM »
Bracket is already out, but as a comparison to how it would look just using the composite computer rankings.  As for Big Ten teams, Purdue, Michigan and Ohio State are correctly seeded as a 2, 3 and 5, but MSU is underseeded, should be a 2 also.  As for opponents, Purdue and Ohio State got a nice draw, getting CS Fullerton as a 15, when they should be a 16, and Ohio State getting South Dakota State as a 12, when they should be a 13.  Conversely, UM and MSU getting opponents as 14s, who should be 13s.  Oddly, MSU, UM and OSU are all facing teams who should be 13s.  FTR, last time MSU was underseeded based on this, and also faced an underseeded team, we got MTSU, so...

EASTSOUTH
1VillanovaVirginia1
16Tx So/NC CentralRadford/LIU16
PittsburghCharlotte
8MiamiRhode Island8
9USCKansas State9
.
5OHIO STATEAuburn5
12Murray StateBuffalo12
BoiseSan Diego
4KentuckyWichita State4
13S.D. StateUNC Greensboro13
.
3XavierMICHIGAN3
14Georgia StateMarshall14
NashvilleWichita
6FloridaTCU6
11Baylor/PENN STNC State11
.
7Texas A&MSeton Hall7
10Loyola(Ill)Florida State10
PittsburghWichita
2North CarolinaKansas2
15PennsylvaniaWright State15
---
WESTMIDWEST
1CincinnatiDuke1
16CS FullertonUMBC16
NashvilleCharlotte
8Saint Mary'sButler8
9LouisvilleTexas9
.
5ArizonaHouston5
12NM StateDavidson12
DallasSan Diego
4Texas TechWest Virginia4
13BucknellMontana13
.
3GonzagaTennessee3
14Stephen F. AustinCharleston14
BoiseDallas
6NevadaClemson6
11Oklahoma/UCLASan Diego State11
.
7ArkansasCreighton7
10Virginia TechMissouri10
DetroitDetroit
2PURDUEMICHIGAN STATE2
15LipscombIona15

So which teams got screwed (along with the seed they got here)?  Saint Mary's (8), Louisville (9), USC (9), Baylor (FF), and Penn State (FF).

Which teams should be thanking the committee (along with their ranking)?  Arizona State (47), Alabama (48), Providence (49), Syracuse (52) and St. Bonaventure (57).

And for good measure, an NIT bracket

1Notre DameArizona State1
8HamptonSE Louisiana8
.
4OregonWestern Kentucky4
5GeorgiaLSU5
.
3NEBRASKASt. Bonaventure3
6N. KentuckyVermont6
.
2MarquetteOklahoma State2
7RiderUC Davis7
.
1ProvidenceAlabama1
8WagnerUNC Asheville8
.
4Mississippi StateUtah4
5UL LafayetteOld Dominion5
.
3Boise StateMARYLAND3
6Boston CollegeBYU6
.
2Middle TennesseeSyracuse2
7HarvardFlorida Gulf Coast7

Online ELA

  • Global Moderator
  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 3446
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1460 on: March 14, 2018, 02:47:23 PM »
It appears the right justify didn't hold, but it's still readable

Online 847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 2735
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1461 on: March 14, 2018, 02:59:45 PM »
For a program as storied as UCLA, the expectations should be a lot higher than an occasional S16 run.  A couple of generations ago, they were the premier program in college hoops (and it wasn't even close)
Yep, and they had the highest payroll in college sports (and it wasn't even close).

Online medinabuckeye1

  • Player
  • ****
  • Posts: 896
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1462 on: March 14, 2018, 04:04:31 PM »
the committee looked at who you beat over any other metric.   And beating name schools also mattered.  
I noticed this too.  The same thing happened in CFB when they went to the playoff.  It seems like wins are compared now and losses just get forgotten (other than the fact that you lost).  In earlier times we used to talk about "bad losses" in both sports but that seems to be an antiquated concept now.  

Online ELA

  • Global Moderator
  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 3446
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1463 on: March 14, 2018, 04:24:13 PM »
I noticed this too.  The same thing happened in CFB when they went to the playoff.  It seems like wins are compared now and losses just get forgotten (other than the fact that you lost).  In earlier times we used to talk about "bad losses" in both sports but that seems to be an antiquated concept now.  
I think the only place they seemed to care about it was the MSU vs. UM thing.  UM had better wins, including head to head.  But MSU only lost 4 times, and all 4 losses were to top 15 teams, while UM lost more times, including 3 times to non-tourney teams.

Online bayareabadger

  • Red Shirt
  • ***
  • Posts: 366
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1464 on: March 14, 2018, 05:04:38 PM »
For a program as storied as UCLA, the expectations should be a lot higher than an occasional S16 run.  A couple of generations ago, they were the premier program in college hoops (and it wasn't even close), but now they're firmly behind the quartet of Duke, Kentucky, UNC, and Kansas.
And as weak as hoops are out West, there's no reason they shouldn't be dominating the PAC (or at least be neck-and-neck with Zona).
While I didn't specifically say Alford was a *bad* coach, he's hardly an elite one and almost certainly won't get the Bruins over the hump.  He had talent at Iowa but couldn't get the Hawks over the hump either.
IIRC, his dream job is Indiana and I don't think the Hoosiers want to touch him with a ten-foot pole.  If he gets the axe, maybe he can join Kiffy-kins at Florida Atlantic.  I'm sure he'd kill it over there (if they need a new coach that is).
I mean, they made three Sweet 16s in five years, so more than occasional. 
That job is weird. You have Wooden who was just impossible (and had Sam Gilbert). But the last set of coaches: 
Alford-Gone after three Sweet 16s in five years. 
Howland-Went to three Final Fours, gone after a 25-10 season that ended in the first round, which was part of missing the dance twice in four years. 
Lavin-Gone after missing the tourney for the first time in 15 years. Before that an Elite 8 in year 1, then four sweet 16s in five years. 
Harrick-A title at the end of a kinda ok run. One sweet 16 and one elite eight in first six years. Out for impermissible benefits. 

Where does one go? 

Online 847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 2735
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1465 on: March 14, 2018, 05:09:52 PM »
Gonna be a tough job to fill out there. Plus, right now, there is the added concern about which coaches knew what with this shoe thing and all that jazz.

I'm thinking they will keep him.

Online bwarbiany

  • Player
  • ****
  • Posts: 780
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1466 on: March 14, 2018, 06:03:56 PM »
Ouch: https://thebiglead.com/2018/03/14/steve-alford-is-a-terrible-basketball-coach-and-ucla-deserves-better/ 

Online medinabuckeye1

  • Player
  • ****
  • Posts: 896
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1467 on: March 15, 2018, 09:05:45 AM »
I think the only place they seemed to care about it was the MSU vs. UM thing.  UM had better wins, including head to head.  But MSU only lost 4 times, and all 4 losses were to top 15 teams, while UM lost more times, including 3 times to non-tourney teams.
Even there, I'm not sure if the committee actually assessed Michigan's losses or if they simply noted that Michigan had more losses and quit there.  
Michigan State only had four losses and all were quite respectable:
  • vs #6 Dook, neutral court
  • vs #12 M, neutral court
  • vs #12 M, home
  • @ #20 tOSU
Michigan's four "best" losses are similarly respectable, but their other three were MUCH worse:
  • @ #4 UNC
  • @ #9 PU
  • vs #9 PU, home
  • @ #20 tOSU
  • @ #54 UNL
  • vs #92 LSU, neutral court
  • @ #167 NU

I think the committee got it right with MSU above M based on Michigan's three bad losses being significantly worse than any MSU loss.  I am fearful though that the committee would have had M behind MSU even if those three "extra" losses had been on the road against top-10 teams.  

That is the part I don't like, because in my mind bad losses should matter.  There should be a difference between losing on the road to UNC and losing at home to Penn State.  Right now, I'm not sure that there is.  The committee's criteria seems to be:
  • How many losses did you have, 
  • How many tier-1 wins did you have
If my suspicion there is right, then the quality of the losses effectively no longer matters.  That doesn't make any sense to me.  

Online ELA

  • Global Moderator
  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 3446
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1468 on: March 15, 2018, 10:59:15 AM »
Nebraska looked pretty blah last night.  Basically their resume is handling business against a bunch of bad teams, but losing to every decent one, save one really good night at home against Michigan.

Penn State closed strong after a putrid first half offensively, to beat Temple and advance to play the 1 seed, Notre Dame, in South Bend on Saturday.

Seems like in recent years you get a bunch of 1st round NIT upsets where teams that just missed look to not care.  While Louisville and USC were pushed to the limits, overall, you have a really solid final 16.  The only lower seeded team that won was Washington, which was a 5 seed over a 4 seed Boise State.

Online ELA

  • Global Moderator
  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 3446
  • Liked:
Re: ~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~
« Reply #1469 on: March 15, 2018, 11:03:06 AM »
Seems like in recent years you get a bunch of 1st round NIT upsets where teams that just missed look to not care.  While Louisville and USC were pushed to the limits, overall, you have a really solid final 16.  The only lower seeded team that won was Washington, which was a 5 seed over a 4 seed Boise State.
For comparison, last year you had a 1 seed lose, three of the four 2 seeds lose, and all four 3 seeds lose.  Then all three 1 seeds who won, lost their 2nd game.
I'm assuming they play those games Monday-Wednesday to fill in the gap, and this year they might be worth watching, as opposed to last year, where one bracket had Colorado State, UT Arlington, Akron and Bakersfield left at this point.

 

Welcome, Guest!!! Please login or register.

From Our Gift Shop:
CFB51 Goofy T-Shirt CFB51 Cap CFB51 Jacket CFB51 Polo
From Our Gift Shop:
CFB51 Goofy T-Shirt CFB51 Cap CFB51 Jacket CFB51 Polo