If you weren't aware, it's actually midterm week at Notre Dame, with spring break being absurdly early this year, which is an excuse to explain why I haven't gotten a review of the Syracuse game up.  Thankfully, I've been wise enough to outsource the Louisville preview, so the first part of that arrives now, with Mike from the great Card Chronicle - perhaps the only site to have a worse football season than the Irish, all things considered - discussing the basketball teams that has helped raise the spirits at both universities.

If you're interested, my responses are up over at his site. Apparently we shouldn't be worried about Caracter, which leads me to believe he'll have an absolutely monster game. My questions and his answers follow the giant red bird.

His face has sort of been everywhere in recent weeks, but this isn't just a case of the media seeing an easy story and running with it. David Padgett is absolutely the difference between the team in December that looked like it was going to struggle to make the NCAA Tournament, and the one in late February that has a solid chance at capturing a Big East championship and doing some serious damage in late March.

I think that vague words of praise like "tough" and "heart" are thrown around too often by college basketball commentators and pundits these days (particularly in reference to white post players), so I'm going to avoid doing that myself, but I do think it's worth noting that the doctor who worked on his knee in November said that Padgett had "the highest threshold for pain" he'd ever seen.

Padgett is the undisputed captain of this team, the most intelligent player on the floor, the team's best passer, and the guy the Cardinal offense almost always runs through. He's also a pretty polished post player who can score with either hand.

Simply put, he means as much to this team as Dennis Dixon meant to the Oregon football team. And his name doesn't make him sound like a porn star.

 2. Pitino's style of  play usually requires a great deal of depth, and the Cardinals are seemingly getting some quality minutes off the bench in addition to time from the starters.  With all of these options, what five are you most comfortable with come crunch time?  If the clock is approaching zero and the Cards are down a score, whose hands do you want the ball in, and with what play being run?

At this point I'm pretty confident in all nine guys that are seeing considerable PT, but in crunch time I want the best mix of talent and level-headedness (word?), and I think Louisville gets that in its starting five of Padgett, Earl Clark, Terrence Williams, Jerry Smith and Andre McGee.

If U of L is down two, then I absolutely want the ball down low and in the hands of David Padgett. If he isn't double-teamed, then I'm extremely confident in his ability to score and send the game to overtime. If he is double-teamed, I'm equally confident that he'll be able to find the open man on the perimeter, who I hope would be Jerry Smith.

3. The Irish lack athleticism in some positions, but have managed to survive despite this fact for most of the season.  Who do you think will give Notre Dame the most trouble on Thursday night?  Conversely, is there anybody on Notre Dame that bothers you?

This is always the question where Earl Clark is the easy answer, but he's been very inconsistent recently and is just as likely to go off for 20 and 10 as he is to go relatively unnoticed for 40 minutes and finish with four and three. So I'll say Terrence Williams, who I think is the best pure athlete in the conference.

Even against a zone, Williams can get into the lane and draw guys like Harangody and Kurz away from the basket, and then he's a good enough passer to find Padgett or Clark for easy baskets. He's also shown an increased ability to hit the mid-range jumper and the floater in the lane in recent weeks.

As far as the guy on Notre Dame that worries me the most, I'm not even going to try to be cute and say someone other than Harangody. Louisville has done a pretty good job on opposing big men all year, but they really struggled to keep DeJuan Blair from scoring off of put-backs on Sunday, and that's one of the many ways that Harangody has been killing teams in the Big East. U of L really needs Clark and Williams to be active and in position to snag the long rebounds off of outside shots, because you can't afford to let Gody or Kurz get a cheap bucket if you've been fortunate enough to get a miss from McAlarney, Ayers, Zeller, etc.

 4. Edgar Sosa nearly bested Acie Law IV last March, but I've noticed your commentary sometimes mentions Good and Bad Edgar.  How's he progressing this season, and do you think Good Edgar will be permanent come tournament time?

I think Edgar's performance in the Texas A&M game raised both his and our (fans) expectations for his sophomore season to a level they had no business being. He seemed to come into the season thinking that he was going to score somewhere around 20 a night, which isn't the best mindset for a streaky-shooting Big East point guard to have. He's also a young kid who seems to be just a bit touchy, so he didn't handle his early season struggles or the fact that he wasn't the starting point guard on opening night particularly well.

I think about 75% of the people who watch Louisville's first round game in the NCAA Tournament will be finding out for the first time that Andre McGee, and not Sosa, is Louisville's starting point guard. At first I think Sosa's response to coming off of the bench was trying to score a lot so that he wouldn't be taken back out. The result was a lot of forced outside shots and crazy runners in the lane. Sunday, however, he played relatively under control, took good, in rhythm shots from the outside, and finished the game with 18 points. He doesn't defend nearly as well as McGee, but he does have an extra hop in his step when he's scoring on the other end.

Good Edgar is usually really good, but Bad Edgar hurts the team in ways that make keeping him on the floor impossible. It generally doesn't take all that long to figure out which one has shown up.

5. Moving away from the specifics of this game, how do you see the Big East doing come tournament time?  Do you think any teams are particularly over or underrated right now in comparison to projected seed?

This is the first year since Louisville moved to the Big East that there hasn't been a real dominant team that people were talking about as one the favorites to win the national title. People are starting to talk about the Cards as a sleeper final four team, but there isn't a team in the league right now that's in the mix to snag one of the four top seeds.

It's been about four months and I'm still not sure what to think of Georgetown. I can still see them getting either bounced in the first round or advancing to the final weekend. They don't need DaJuan Summers to be Jeff Green, but they need him to be closer than he is right now.

I do really like Notre Dame, and see them as one of those four seeds who is capable of knocking off a one in the Sweet 16. Torrid outside shooting will beat just about anyone, and the Irish are certainly capable of lighting it up from deep. You've also got a pretty solid post player.

I'm still not sold on Uconn being a team that can put together a run in the dance. They've got the athletes, they've got the size, but they don't shoot it well enough to deal with a team that can both put the ball in the basket and play solid defense. I think they're eerily similar to last year's Louisville team that lost in the second round.

Pitt with Mike Cook would be a force in the second weekend of the tourney, but Pitt without Mike Cook is going to be hard-pressed to make it past the first.

Marquette is playing very well, but its lack of any inside game whatsoever is going to kill it the same way it did against Michigan State in the first round last year.

I think West Virginia is capable of putting a scare into whoever they match up with in the first or second round if they get in, but there isn't another team in the league that I can picture tasting victory in the tournament.

So much of a team's success in March is predicated on the luck of the draw, so none of this really means anything until we see an actual bracket. But I'm still glad I typed it.  

6. With the Big East season two weeks from completion, how about some award preferences?  Who have you got on the All-Big East team, and as Player, Freshman and Coach of the Year?

First of all, I despise the 10-player All-Big East teams, so my squads are only going to have five guys. Just know that these selections are being made with two and-a-half weeks of league play left, and that very little thought went into them. Also, I'm drunk.

First Team

Luke Harangody, Notre Dame
Roy Hibbert, Georgetown
Sam Young, Pittsburgh
Brian Laing, Seton Hall
A.J. Price, Connecticut

Second Team

David Padgett, Louisville
Kentrell Gransberry, South Florida
Deonta Vaughn, Cincinnati
Draelon Burns, Depaul
Donte Greene, Syracuse

Third Team

Scottie Reynolds, Villanova
Terrence Williams, Louisville
Hasheem Thabeet, Connecticut
Joe Alexander, West Virginia
DeJuan Blair, Pittsburgh

Player of the Year: Luke Harangody, Notre Dame

Freshman of the Year: Donte Greene, Syracuse

Coach of the Year: Mick Cronin, Cincinnati

7. Do you think the quirky Big East scheduling this season was of particular benefit or detriment to any team?  And are you for or against the expansion of the conference tournament to include all the teams?

The league schedule is going to end up being particularly unfair to a couple of teams in any major conference outside of the Pac-10. I think Louisville having mirror games with both Georgetown and Marquette made its schedule more difficult than most, but of course it was nothing like 2005 when the Cards were welcomed into the conference by double-dips with Villanova and Connecticut, two teams that eventually made up half of the number one seeds in the NCAA Tournament. I do think that the 18-game schedule makes more sense than the 16-game one, but I can see why coaches would have a problem with having to play an extra pair of games in a league with this depth. Ultimately what it always comes down to is that if you're good enough, you win these games, and if you're not, then you really have no place to gripe. Sure the schedule is going to have a detrimental effect on the seeds of some teams, but if you can't deal with that as a possibility then you have no business in this league.

As far as the conference tournament expanding next year, I'm all for it. I adore the Big East Tournament, and would fully support the switch to a two-week double elimination format.

8. And finally, I know you'll be taking the Cards (because I am, too) but by how many and what themes and match-ups do you think will play the most important role in this rather important game?

Notre Dame is going to hit some outside shots, but Louisville has to continue to defend the perimeter well and make sure that even the ones that go in are challenged. The Cards also have to limit second-chance points, they can't afford Harangody and Kurz to score half of their points on put-backs. Getting Gody in foul trouble would obviously be enormous, but forcing Jackson and McAlarney to play the last five minutes on wobbly legs might be equally important.

U of L needs to utilize its advantage in athleticism, and score cheap points in transition and off of turnovers. In their halfcourt sets, the Cards must continue to pass up the challenge shot and knock down the open one.

I think this has all the makings of a fantastic game.

Louisville 79, Notre Dame 77