Sports Central | Articles and Columns

« February 2006 | Main | April 2006 »

March 31, 2006

Sifting Through the Madness

What in the holy name of James Naismith is going on in college basketball this March? March Madness is one of the most over-used phrases in sports, but never has a tournament so lived up to the adage. This year's spring classic could be deemed the greatest tournament ever.

Here's some stats to back up the claim. Twenty-three games have been decided by five or fewer points. Five games have gone to overtime. Five of this year's Sweet 16 games went down to the final seconds, and three of the regional finals either went into OT or kept up the incredible drama into the final minute. Oh yeah, and did I mention a No. 11 seed made the Final Four?

There have been some unforgettable moments in each and every round. Northwestern State's Jermaine Wallace burying a fall-away three-pointer and Iowa in the process to lift a 14-seed over a three. LSU's Darrell Mitchell erasing a 57-55 Texas A&M lead in the second round with a three to win it. West Virginia's Kevin Pittsnogle burying a trey to tie the game against Texas only to see Kenton Paulino end it with a three of his own. UCLA going on a 11-0 run in the final minutes to end Gonzaga's season and send Adam Morrison into a tear tantrum. And George Mason's baffling overtime win over No. 1 Connecticut has Jim Calhoun's jaw permanently dropped to the hardwood.

Everyone's bracket in your office is in shambles, and we wouldn't want it any other way. All of the experts were completely wrong. Dick Vitale got only UCLA correct, and he was the best finisher of the analysts on ESPN.com. There isn't a single number one seed left in the tournament. There was no pre-tournament indicator that could have helped anyone predict what happened.

If you decided to pick your brackets by power conferences, you're definitely scratching your heads right now. Let's take a look at the break down of each conference:

The Big East was the number one rated conference coming into the tournament. The newly-reformed super-conference sent eight teams into the field of 64, more than any other conference. As a whole, the Big East finished 11-8. The two number one seeds, Connecticut and Villanova, both reached the Elite Eight. Georgetown and West Virginia had good showings. However, Syracuse, Marquette and Seton Hall were both knocked out in the first round, and Pittsburgh was bounced in the second round.

The Big 10 came in heavily-touted and ranked second in the RPI prior to the tournament. They sent six teams into the field with Ohio State being the highest seed at number two. However, despite the hype, the Big 10 was by far the biggest disappointment in the entire tournament. After sending both Michigan State and Illinois to the Final Four in 2005, the six Big 10 teams finished 3-6 with not one team advancing out of the second round. In fact, No. 3 Iowa, No. 6 Michigan State, and No. 9 Wisconsin didn't even make it out of the first round.

The usually very strong Atlantic Coast Conference only sent four teams to the big dance this season. Duke received a number one seed, UNC a three, Boston College a four, and NC State a 10. The ACC finished 6-4 overall with not one team advancing past the Sweet 16. Duke was bounced by LSU and Boston College lost a heart-breaker in overtime to Villanova.

But enough about the disappointments what about the pleasant surprises. Let's start with the Missouri Valley Conference.

Experts had warned us all year that the MVC would be a force to be reckoned with and they didn't let us down in March. There were rumblings before Selection Sunday that the MVC would send six teams, which didn't happen. Instead, they sent four: No. 13 Bradley, No. 10 Northern Iowa, No. 11 Southern Illinois, and No. 7 Wichita State. The conference finished 4-4, but sent both Bradley and Wichita State to the Sweet 16. Bradley defeated both No. 4 Kansas and No. 5 Pittsburgh before falling to No. 1 Memphis. And Wichita State went through No. 10 Seton Hall and No. 2 Tennessee before falling to George Mason, who we'll get to soon. All in all, it was a great showing for an up-and-coming conference.

With all of the talk about the Big East, Big 10, and ACC, the Southeastern Conference obviously felt neglected this season. The conference sent six teams, with Tennessee receiving the highest seed at No. 2. However, the SEC faired better than any other conference in America. The SEC sits at 10-3 in the tournament and has a chance to have the championship game all to themselves. Florida's Billy Donovan is back in the Final Four for the first time since 2000 when his Gators fell to Michigan State in the championship game. And Louisiana State is in the Final Four for the first time since 1986 when they were an 11-seed.

The Pac-10 was equally neglected this year, and sent just four teams to the dance. UCLA rightfully received the highest seed of the group at No. 2, joining No. 8 Arizona, No. 7 California, and No. 5 Washington. The Pac-10 has held its own putting up an impressive 7-3 record. Arizona played exceptionally well in advancing to the second round and giving No. 1 seeded Villanova everything they could handle before falling by four. Washington reached the Sweet 16 barely getting knocked off by Connecticut in overtime. And UCLA is going to the Final Four for the one-millionth time in its history.

Then, of course, there's the nation's new darling, George Mason. The Patriots, as we all know by now, almost didn't make the tournament because of their loss in the Colonial Athletic Association conference semifinals to Hofstra. GMU has had the most improbable run into the Final Four in NCAA history. They are just the second No. 11 seed to ever advance to a Final Four, and the first CAA team ever to accomplish the feat.

The Patriots have been tested more than any other team on their road to the national semifinals. GMU defeated three teams that have accounted for three of the last six national championships. They beat Michigan State (2000 champ) in the first round, followed by North Carolina (2005 champ) in the second round, then Wichita State and Connecticut (1999, 2004 champs) in overtime in the Elite Eight.

George Mason is the reason why Billy Packer and all of his followers are dead wrong about their views towards the game of college basketball. This is Rolly Massimino's Villanova, Jim Valvano's NC State, and Gene Hackman's "Hoosiers" all rolled into one. The only difference is no one's ever heard of George Mason. George Mason is forcing every media mogul to take a look at the mid-major and realize its worth to the game. And along the way, they're capturing the attention and hearts of sports fans all across the nation.

If the Patriots were to win the next two games and capture a most improbable first NCAA title, it could be the best thing to happen to college basketball. Hell, it could be one of the best things that's ever happened in sports. Let's face it, who really wanted to see North Carolina, Duke, or Connecticut back in the Final Four? I take great joy in seeing a no-name team who couldn't get regular news coverage in their hometown before this run taking these big boys to the woodshed.

All I have to say is keep it rolling, Patriots. Make some history.

Posted by Chris Cornell at 6:00 PM | Comments (8)

NASCAR Top 10 Power Rankings: Week 5

Note: the quotes in this article are fictional.

1. Matt Kenseth — Kenseth led 124 laps and was well on his way to victory before former teammate and current friend Kurt Busch bumped him out of the lead five laps from the finish. Kenseth recovered, then used the same move to send Jeff Gordon spinning. Kenseth took third and claimed the points lead, as Jimmie Johnson finished 30th.

"What goes around comes around," says Kenseth. "And I'm not talking about the bird flu, although that chicken-necked, bird-brained former friend of mine, Kurt Busch, better hope he doesn't see me in his rear-view mirror in Martinsville. Because if he does, he will see the bird, my finger, that is, then he will see me fly past him as he spins into the wall. As for Jeff Gordon, he's got every right to be angry. I did wreck him, and I guess I deserved a shove, but I was only trying to check the junk in his trunk. But, in my defense, I was trying to apologize. The next time I try to make peace with Gordon, it will be over the phone, preferably with a pane of plexi-glass between us, with a few guards present. You know, like in jail, or the NASCAR office."

2. Jimmie Johnson — Johnson was in trouble from the start, suffering a cut tire on the first lap and never recovering, and eventually finishing 30th, thirteen laps down. One casualty of his disastrous day was the loss of his points lead. Johnson started the day leading the points by 50. He ended it in third, 19 points out.

"Obviously, the return of Chad Knaus as crew chief was the worst thing that could happen to this team," says a frustrated Johnson. "At least, if he's going to follow the rules. Apparently, on Sunday, he did, and we finished 30th. I hope Chad followed the rules. If he didn't, and we finished 30th, we're screwed."

3. Kasey Kahne — Kahne nearly overtook the points lead with a tenth-place finished in wintry Bristol, coupled with Johnson's misfortune and Kenseth's late race bump from the race lead. Kahne now stands second in the points, a mere eight points out of the lead.

"I'm not one to bump someone out of the lead," says Kahne, "or shove someone in anger, or take verbal pot shots at anyone, even if they are as goofy as Kurt Busch. It just goes to show that nice guys don't finish last, but they often finish 10th. Besides, I can't risk losing my major fan base of females 12-16-years-old if I act like a brute on the track. I absolutely don't want to lose merchandise sales to the teeny-bopper demographic. [Dale] Earnhardt, [Tony] Stewart, and [Jeff] Gordon might sell more baseball caps, but I guarantee I lead the way in quantity of earring and bracelet sets sold."

4. Mark Martin — Martin scored his fourth-straight top-10 finish, finishing sixth to maintain fourth-place in the points. He now stands 32 points behind teammate Matt Kenseth.

"It was a nice day for a Roush reunion," says Martin. "and also a nice day for a white wedding. It's a nice day to start again. Billy Idol rules! Anyway, four Roush cars in the top seven, and a former Roush driver, Kurt Busch, wins the race, albeit with a questionable bump and run maneuver on Matt Kenseth. We don't condone that type of racing here at Roush, unless it's done by one of our own."

5. Dale Earnhardt, Jr. — Earnhardt hovered around the top 10 all afternoon, but handling issues arose late in the race, and he finished with a solid 11th-place result, which was good enough to improve his points position one notch to sixth. Junior sits 118 points back of points leader Kenseth.

"A good day for me," says Earnhardt, "but not a good one for the Bass Pro Shops No. 1 Dale Earnhardt, Inc. Monte Carlo driven by my fellow junior, Martin Truex. First, Martin gets booted by Jeff Gordon, then, when he tries to retaliate, Tony Stewart serves him right into the wall. Veterans have a name for that. It's called 'rookie training.' Hey Marty, if Stewart is on your tail, it's only a good idea to do one thing: move. You could have confronted Gordon after the race, and made it a three-way dance with Matt Kenseth. You took on two veterans on the track. Why not off the track?"

6. Kyle Busch — Busch followed Saturday's win in the Busch series' Sharpie Mini 300 with an eight-place finish in Sunday's Food City 500, won by his brother Kurt. Kyle advanced from eighth to fifth in the points, and trails Kenseth by 105 points.

"It was quite a weekend for the Busch brothers," boasts Kyle. "Not only did we win both races, but Kevin Harvick finished second in both. That's got to eat him up. I'm sure it left a bitter taste in his mouth, much like the taste of a bowl of Kelloggs' Frosted Flakes topped with a few cans of Miller Lite. Nobody talks more junk and does less about it than Kevin Harvick."

7. Jeff Gordon — Gordon's eventful Sunday drive culminated in a pit lane shove of Matt Kenseth, after Kenseth spun Gordon out, then approached the Hendrick driver with what looked to be an apology. Gordon was fined $10,000 for the shove, placed on probation through the August Bristol race, and must perform sixty hours of community service, as well as appear with Jack Nicholson and Adam Sandler is the lowly anticipated follow-up to Anger Management.

"Apology accepted," says Gordon. "Geez. Ten Grand? That's outrageous! It takes me at least two laps to earn that much money. NASCAR officials were lucky I wasn't in their presence when they announced the fine, because I would have shoved them, too. I'll gladly pay the fine, though. I guess the moral is 'When push comes to shove, get out your check book.' NASCAR apparently would rather have me solve problems on the track that on pit lane."

8. Casey Mears — Mears finished two laps off the pace, in 25th, and stumbled three places in the points to eighth, 140 off the lead.

"Chip Ganassi Racing drivers are not really setting a good example as far as safety is concerned," says Mears. "Last week, my teammate Reed Sorenson hit a competitor's pit crewman on pit lane. In Bristol, I did the same thing. In my defense, though, he was jaywalking, and I drove the Target car last year, and I guess I'm seeing the Target logo on all crewmen, now. There's only one word to describe our driving on pit road: 'pedestrian.'"

9. Tony Stewart — After starting on the pole, Stewart led 245 of the first 385 laps, but faded down the stretch and finished twelfth. He did, however, pick up three places in the points to ninth, and also added a new enemy, Martin Truex, Jr., whom Stewart wrecked as Truex was battling with Jeff Gordon.

"Should I be afraid of Truex?" asks Stewart. "That name, 'Truex' doesn't really overwhelm me with fright. In fact, it kind of sounds like a laundry detergent. I'll gladly add his name to my list of enemies, a list that stretches the length of the front stretch at Daytona."

10. Elliott Sadler — Sadler enjoyed a consistent day in the M&M's Ford, finishing 13th after starting in the 13-spot on the grid. Sadler gained two places in the points, and currently resides in 11th, 197 points out of first.

"Enough about me," says Sadler. "Let's talk about my teammate, Dale Jarrett. Midway through the race, a piece of his bumper flies off of his car and into the stands, and is quickly snatched by a fan. What was Dale thinking? Never let a piece of your car go without first autographing it for a hefty fee. And what about the fan who 'caught' the piece? That idiot could have intentionally sliced his his head open, blamed it on the sheet metal, and sued for big bucks. Instead, he's no richer, and probably has that piece of the car on his living room wall like a piece of art. What a bunch of clowns."

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 5:33 PM | Comments (0)

March 30, 2006

The Trouble With Barry

If the authors of Game of Shadows are correct (full disclosure: I have read the well-publicized excerpt; my copy of the book is yet to arrive at this writing), and Barry Bonds has no more deniability regarding steroid use, what does it really wreak upon Bonds' legacy and, concurrently, that of a baseball government which enabled him to use whatever it was that he used since the end of the 1998 season?

Will Carroll, whose book The Juice: The Real Story of Baseball's Drug Problems should be required reading for anyone deigning to comment on the steroid issue, has offered one answer.

"Ben Johnson, the Canadian Olympic sprinter stripped of his gold medal after testing positive for the anabolic steroid Stanozolol at the 1988 Olympic Games in Seoul, did not become a world-class record-holding sprinter merely because he used anabolic steroids," Mr. Carroll writes.

"Rather, steroids allowed him to do the type of workout that developed his upper- and lower-body muscles to propel him down the track at an extremely rapid rate of speed. He still had to have the proper genetics, still had to work constantly on starts and running form, and still had to tirelessly practice his skills."

We can condemn Bonds with little fear of contradiction for being a first-class ass, but we cannot condemn him as a cheater, really, because we don't know for dead last certain whether he would not have rolled "the greatest five consecutive seasons of any hitter in baseball history" but for the sundry substances with which he amplified his training and, hence, his musculature. We don't know for dead last certain whether Thomas Boswell, the eminence of the Washington Post, was right in concluding that Bonds otherwise could not have "approached, much less broken, any of the all-time marks for which he lusted so much that he has now ruined his name."

This we know: If Mark Fainaru-Wada and Lance Williams (the authors of Game of Shadows) are right, and Bonds started playing with steroids because he seethed over Mark McGwire turning Roger Maris aside, then Bonds is as guilty as anyone of springing forth from a false or an unproven pretense. Fainaru-Wada and Williams describe a Bonds convinced that McGwire was a 'roid oid, never mind that McGwire's substance, androstendione, was a) a lawful supplement and b) is not a steroid.

This, too, we know: describing as Fainaru-Wada, Williams, and others have done about steroids' ability to mask fatigue and pain and resuscitate stamina, there is a serious question in terms of asking precisely what the hell is wrong with relieving fatigue and pain and resuscitating stamina. Generations of ballplayers before Bonds were said to use one or another form of amphetamines (now, too, barred from baseball) for much the same reasons. But it is difficult to reconcile the actual or alleged artificial "enhancement" to the point that the substance(s) customarily will not jump a hitter from good to great to off the charts in a sustained swoop.

And if the issue is the impossibility of a man in his mid-30s performing at levels "impossible" for his age, it should be borne in mind that Hank Aaron from age 33 through age 40 — the age at which he passed Babe Ruth's career home run mark — hit 271 home runs, averaging out to 39 a season. He hit 44 home runs at age 35, 47 at age 37, and 40 at age 39. Ruth at 33 hit 54; he hit 46 at 34, 49 at 35, 46 at 36, and 41 at 37. It is impossible to say whether Barry Bonds would not have performed at a 39-a-season average from 33 to 40. Eliminate his 73-bomb 2001 and health problems and Bonds might yet be within sight of Aaron, anyway.

He has, of course, rendered the question's impossibility by way of his behavior and the void in which the actualities of steroid use for baseball players' performances reside. That he might have launched into steroid use from jealousy and a false perception renders him a fool. At least, a bigger fool than he was already.

"Bonds's sour personality and petty peevishness toward the demands on his time by the fans and press — surely a small price to pay for the wealth and adoration they have heaped on him — have smothered the public's interest in Bonds and his place in baseball history," Allen Barra observed, in Brushbacks and Knockdowns. "He is the great wet blanket of Major League Baseball."

Bonds may prove fortunate that he isn't even close to being the only or the biggest jerk who ever approached a record otherwise held in awe, never mind being the best in his business for time enough. He may pass Hank Aaron as a home run hitter and a ballplayer, but Hank Aaron is light years past him as a man.

Posted by Jeff Kallman at 9:00 PM | Comments (1)

Slant Pattern's Final Three Preview

As nice as I'm sure it is for followers of Florida, UCLA, and LSU that they made the Final Four this year, that happiness has to be mitigated somewhat by the heaping lack of attention being poured on their teams because of the profile of the fourth team. It's quite possible that one of the above three will win it all yet, as early as next November, fewer people will remember that than the historical arrival of David into the Final Four.

But like any proper, right-thinking, non-traitorous American, my heart bleeds for the big guy. So while the rest of the media tells us all about a certain commuter school in Fairfax, Virginia, this columnist won't even mention their name in this preview.

I'll start with the team I think is the best of the three, LSU. On the February 23rd edition of the Slant Pattern, I wrote, "In SEC country, I like how LSU, like Virginia Tech, seems to have something to prove at a football-crazy university. ... They are underranked at No. 24. I like them in pretty much any circumstance against the spread..." Now, look how smart they have made me look. It is those very smarts that has allowed me to ride a rocket to eighth place (out of 11) in the Sports Central Message Boards bracket contest. So do my bidding.

Finally, a team that knows how to block shots. Finally, a team that turns a tough out-of-conference schedule into a formula that has them ready for anyone. Finally, Glen Davis.

UCLA is just as hot, if not more so, than LSU. Slick point guard Jordan Farmar is a joy to watch, but I wish he'd change his last name to Farmer. Or anything else. Not since Curtis Enis has a name annoyed my ears so. The name instantly calls forth in my head the aliens from South Park. Greetings, Farmar. I am Marklar. I'm happier to hear of the much more pleasantly named Arron Afflalo, Farmar's backcourt mate, striking a blow for Compton, his home neighborhood.

I am not as high on Florida as I am on the above teams, but they've been proving me wrong all tournament. I was wrong anything they couldn't hang with a Big East team (they've beaten two along the road to the Final Four — oops, did I just infringe on a CBS phrase copyright?), and I was wrong about Joakim Noah. Does the fact that Yannick Noah has a son old enough to be a pro athlete (let's say he declared right out of high school) make anyone else feel old?

Maybe that phenomenon made me hold things against Joakim, but earlier in the year, I was asking people whom they thought was the most mediocre college basketball playing son of a famous athlete — Joakim Noah, or D.J. Strawberry at Maryland? Now, Joakim has the inside track of my tournament MVP. Quite a turnaround.

Okay, that'll do it. That's it. Stop reading now. I will stop ... typing .... no! I can't do it!

THREE CHEERS FOR GEORGE MASON! They inspire poetry in me. Others have come very close to doing what they've done. Some low-profile teams that have made the Elite Eight are Gonzaga (before they were Gonzaga), Kent State, and Loyola Marymount (the Bo Kimble/Hank Gathers RIP team). But none of those teams were able to push Sisyphus's rock all the way to the top and over the other side.

Names like Tony Skinn will resound with us forevermore. Last Saturday, we not only witnessed history be made, but it's been an epic piece we have been waiting for for a long, long time. There's no going back from this. The big-time schools will always have more money, more championships, and more advantages, but nonetheless, a huge facade the heavies have had around them has crumbled and will never be rebuilt. Now every team ... every team, from North Dakota State to South Dakota State, from Mercer to Mount Saint Mary's, can honestly, realistically dream for the future now. It can be anyone.

George Mason should change their nicknames from the Patriots to the Pioneers. They were the first, but they won't be the last. They did it with such style and strength. They made their comeback against UConn in a second half where the Huskies committed only one turnover. Many big underdogs crumble when taken to overtime when the favorite forced the extra period with a buzzer-beater. It's just too deflating to come back from. But not for George Mason. They scored on each of their overtime possessions except the last one. Just as significant as Mason's victory in itself is the fact that they did indeed beat Connecticut. UConn was more than game and did not beat themselves.

George Mason opened floodgates that millions of fans have been standing behind. For that, I can only say, "Thank you!"

And to tell you that they are going to win it all.

Posted by Kevin Beane at 11:38 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

March 29, 2006

NBA Role Players to Watch

There's a lot of talent hidden in the NBA. Teams tend to build around superstars. When those teams win, the stars receive the credit. But a team can't win with just one guy. Role players need to step up for a team to be successful. Often, the best role players are first- or second-year players who are fighting for their NBA careers.

These five guys are some of the best players you've never heard of. They are not "underrated," per se, just inexperienced and out of the spotlight. None will be the next Kobe Bryant, Tim Duncan, or Allen Iverson. They will, however, make a few all-star teams before it's all over, and help a team or two win a championship. Expect to hear these names more and more in the coming years.

Nenad Krstic

Krstic is having an impressive sophomore season for the New Jersey Nets. Nenad is a 22-year-old from Serbia and Montenegro. He was the 24th pick overall in the 2002 NBA draft, but played two years in Europe before signing with the Nets in 2004. He was selected to NBA All-Rookie Second Team in 2004-05. This year, he is quietly producing for the Atlantic Division-leading Nets behind stars Jason Kidd, Vince Carter, and Richard Jefferson.

Nenad Krstic is averaging 13.3 points and 6.1 rebounds per game this season, while playing just 30 minutes per contest. That's 20.8 points and 9.5 rebounds per 48 minutes. On top of that, he has scored over 20 points 10 times and has seven double-doubles. Those numbers are all impressive given Krstic is playing on a team with three guys who like the ball in their hands.

Don't look now, but the Nets are starting to look like an Eastern Conference contender coming off wins over Detroit and Phoenix. Krstic has been a big part of these wins, scoring 37 points and grabbing 19 rebounds in the two games.

For the Nets to get back to the NBA Finals, they would most likely need to beat the Heat and the Pistons. That's unlikely but not impossible. The Nets are heating up at the right time and Jason Kidd is playing his best basketball of the season. If Krstic keeps playing like he has been over New Jersey's 9-game winning streak, the Nets are a tough team to beat.

There are only a few years left in the NBA career of Jason Kidd. No one knows what the Nets will look like in a couple years, but wherever Krstic ends up, he will have an impact.

Ryan Gomes

Gomes is the first of two Celtics on this list. This is partly because I am a Boston native and lifetime C's fan. It is also because the Celtics are one of the youngest teams in the NBA, with an average age of 24.8, and have seven youngsters with serious potential. Furthermore, it's not hard to find players who fly under the radar in Boston. The Celtics have drifted hopelessly into NBA irrelevancy and everything they do is under the radar.

Gomes did not become a starter until February 10. Since then, he has displayed the potential to be a star. Ryan was drafted in the second round of last year's draft — 50th overall. He was a four-year star at Providence, but it was believed that he was undersized for an NBA power forward. He has proven critics wrong and shown the ability to play with bigger guys in this league. He can do this because he is a crafty post player with good rebounding instincts.

The best thing about this guy is the smooth transition he has made from college. He doesn't get frustrated when he throws up a brick, nor does he give a cheap foul because he just turned the ball over. It's amazing how well college basketball prepares young players for the NBA.

In 22 starts, Gomes averages 12.8 points and 8.1 rebounds, shoots 52.3% from the field, and has six double-doubles. If he had started all season, these numbers would have put Gomes in the "best rookie not named Chris Paul" conversation.

On a team with Paul Pierce and Wally Sczcerbiak, precious few scoring opportunities arise for the role players. Gomes has worked hard to find ways to score. He runs the floor, gets offensive put backs, and hits open 15-footers. Ryan has a bright future in the NBA.

Sarunas Jasikevicuis

Jasikevicius hails from Lithuania. He is an undrafted 30-year-old rookie point guard with good basketball instincts. He played college ball at Maryland from 1995-1998, and has been one of the best international players since.

After leaving Maryland, Jasikevicius played in Lithuania and Barcelona before joining Maccabi Tel Aviv of the European League. He led Tel Aviv to back-to-back Euroleague titles in 2004 and 2005. Sarunas scored 22 points in the championship game in '05, and was named finals MVP.

As for the NBA, the Pacers signed him last offseason with high expectations. He hasn't lived up to them yet, but he is getting there. He shoots well, over 40% from the field and nearly 90% from the free throw line, and can run an offense. Once he figures out how his game translates to the NBA, he will be a solid point guard. He has been playing professionally for many years outside the NBA. This eases the transition, but he still needs to learn the differences between the international game and the NBA.

Sarunas can be effective when he gets minutes, but has been struggling for playing time of late. For the season, he averages 8 points and 3 assists per game. He has shown that he is more than capable to produce at this level. On Jan. 2, he dropped 20 points on Seattle in an Indy win. Two months later, on Mar. 1, Jasikevicius recorded his first career double-double with 14 points and 11 assists against the Wizards.

This guy can play, but the window is closing for him. At age 30, he has precious few years left. He might ride the pine in Indy until he's 35. If he can crack a regular NBA rotation in the next couple of years, he'll be a solid backup point guard.

Kevin Martin

Martin looks like he's too small for the NBA. He's listed at 6'7", but only 195 lbs. He would be too thin if he were a forward, but he plays the shooting guard position, which makes his weight less of an issue. In fact, his height makes him difficult to guard and helps him get rebounds. He will probably need to put on some muscle if he wants his body to hold up in the NBA.

Martin started 41 straight games for the Kings this season, before missing a couple lately due to a strained right thigh. In those 41 games, he scored in double figures 30 times, including 10 in a row from Jan. 29th to Feb. 15th. He also scored 20 or more points 13 times as a starter.

Martin has shown potential as a scorer and grabs a lot of rebounds for a guard. These strengths have helped the second year player from Western Carolina fit into the Kings' system. Sacramento's scoring comes from point guard Mike Bibby, center Brad Miller, and forward Ron Artest (previously Peja Stojakovic). Martin gets open looks, and makes them (just under 50% from the field and 40% from the three-point line), because of the attention paid to the other guys.

His wingspan allows him to steal rebounds. Kevin averages 4.7 rebounds as a starter — 12th among NBA guards.

Martin needs to limit turnovers. He averages 2.1 turnovers per 48 minutes, which is too high considering he is not a focal point of the offense, nor does he handle the ball regularly.

Having said that, he looks like he could develop into a dynamic scorer in this league. His ceiling is somewhere around that of Ricky Davis or Ron Mercer. He can play two-guard on a team with a scoring point guard. He could also develop into a bench scorer that anchors the second unit of a playoff-caliber team.

Delonte West

The second Boston Celtic on this list is having a terrific sophomore season. West is remembered for nearly leading St. Joseph's to an undefeated season in 2004. Like Gomes, West played four years of college basketball and has earned his time in the pros by playing hard.

For a point guard, there are a number of things Delonte does well. He is third among NBA guards in blocked shots per game, with 44 total on the season. He also averages 4.1 rebounds per game.

As he continues to look for his own shot, his offensive numbers will improve. Currently, he averages 11.9 points per game, and has gone over 20 seven times. He can drive to the hoop on almost anyone who guards him, but he is never the first option for the Celtics. As he begins to impose his will more with the basketball, his scoring numbers will increase.

Additionally, West has a way of filling up the stat sheet. He gets rebounds, steals, blocks, and assists. On Nov. 2nd vs. the Knicks, he put up 14 points, 9 assists, 9 rebounds (5 def, 4 off), 3 steals, and 4 blocks. In another game on Feb. 15th vs. Cleveland, West had 15 points, 8 assists, 10 rebounds, and 3 blocks. This is what Delonte does. He hustles all the time, and he'll always get minutes playing as hard as he does.

West will be in the NBA for a long time if keeps improving. He is a terrific shooter (49.1% from the field, 39.9% from behind the arc, and 85% from the free throw line), but he needs to develop his point guard skills. He can run the offense, but he needs to improve his ability to locate the open man. If he does this, he will be a top-five point guard in the NBA.

Delonte's ceiling is somewhere in the area of Kenny Anderson or Sam Cassell. West makes any team better, and will have a productive NBA career.

Obviously, this list is incomplete. There is plenty of young talent in the NBA, and many other guys will emerge as time goes on. Feel free to add yours in the comments.

Posted by Isaac Miller at 6:15 PM | Comments (0)

Meyer Left a Great Legacy

Ask a Chicagoan about "The Coach" and most will reminisce about Mike Ditka. The original "Coach" in the Windy City was former DePaul head coach Ray Meyer. The long-time Blue Demon boss passed away on March 17th at the age of 92.

Meyer led DePaul for 42 seasons, was an innovator, a Hall of Famer, and a true college basketball legend. He led DePaul to the 1945 NIT title and the 1943 and 1979 Final Fours, and coached 21 future NBA players, 17 All-Americans, and six consensus All-Americans. His tenure is unimaginable in an era that elite coaches seem to be looking towards available NBA jobs or a more elite college job. Meyer finished with a career record of 724-354.

Meyer was one of the first coaches to stress the importance of inside play. He turned George Mikan into one of the NBA's 50 greatest players. Other superstars that studied under his tutelage include Mark Aguirre and Terry Cummings.

The Blue Demons' run to the 1979 Final Four was one that captured the country's imagination. DePaul upset UCLA in the regional final to put Meyer in his first Final Four in 36 years. In Salt Lake City, DePauk succumbed to Indiana State, 76-74. A DePaul win would have prevented the most anticipated NCAA Championship Game ever. The Magic Johnson/Larry Bird, Michigan State/Indiana State showdown might never have happened had DePaul upset the Sycamores.

Meyer was able to use the success of the 1979 season to build the Blue Demons into a national power over the next five years. DePaul dominated the regular season like few teams do today. DePaul finished with only 21 losses during the first half of the decade. They entered four NCAA tournaments with number one seeds, and only advanced to one Sweet 16. In what would be Ray Meyer's last game, the Blue Demons were unable to hold on to a 10-point second half lead, and fell to Wake Forest. Their inability to advance predated the 64-team tournament. From 1980-82, DePaul lost their opening game three straight years.

What made Meyer's career amazing wasn't the superstars he coached or the players he sent to the NBA. "Coach Ray" was a giant because of the way he treated people. He was extremely tough on his players in practice and didn't tolerate lapses in judgment. Ray Meyer was special because he was everyone's father, grandfather, and favorite uncle. Chicago will never be able to claim someone like him as its own again.

Posted by Alan Rubenstein at 5:29 PM | Comments (0)

March 28, 2006

If the Slipper Fits...

I was rooting harder than anyone for George Mason to pull off the upset of Connecticut. I started with a dislike for the Huskies because they seemed to be the consensus pick to win the national title, but after watching them against George Mason, I feel vindicated in my dislike.

UConn may have the most talent in the country, but no one on that roster worthy of being a champion. Jim Calhoun's team certainly would've been better off suiting up a few Patriots (either George Mason players or the founding fathers of America would work, as I assume Paul Revere could lead a killer fast-break).

My problem with Connecticut is they just don't seem to care. It's work to them, but not work in the "I'm going to bust my backside to earn an honest wage to feed my family of four so they don't get mad when I play golf on the weekends instead of spending time with them" sense. It's more along the lines of "people know what I can do, so instead of doing it, I'm just going to play solitaire for a few hours, take a long lunch, then come back later to pickup my check."

The Huskies certainly have more than a few players headed to the NBA, but the problem is that they are already playing with an NBA mentality. That mentality doesn't fly at a school like George Mason and they proved to the country that heart is more important than talent (this is the most generic, least thoughtful comment I could come up with, but it's going to be the flawed premise of just about every article and column about George Mason in the next week, so this is just me caving preemptively to peer pressure). Really, though, this George Mason thing is full of emotional storylines.

First, the way the team rallied around their senior leader was touching. When Tony Skinn was held out of the first round matchup with dark horse Final Four candidate Michigan State, everyone assumed he had played his last game as a college basketball player. Of course, his team fought for him so he could live to die another day, side-by-side with his teammates. Sure, that's great, but the reason Skinn was held out of the first game is even more important to the story.

In case this is the first thing you've read about college basketball in the past month, Skinn was held out because he viciously punched a Hofstra player in the groin during a game in the CAA conference tournament. This is important because Hollywood would lead you to believe that teams only rally around players that are gruesomely injured, on their deathbeds (win one for the Skipper ... every few years), or unjustifiably removed from the team.

Realistically, how many of us are in that situation frequently? Skinn was 100% to blame for his screw-up, which is something that the common man can relate to. I may be the luckiest man alive, but I can't remember the last time I've been stricken with a debilitating disease or a gruesome injury. I can, however, remember the last time I made an ignorant mistake (it was earlier today). To me, it's a much better story to see players rallying around people that make ignorant mistakes because that gives hope to everyone, not just those of us with one foot in the grave.

I suppose there's some sort of message in here that deals with the fact that when you break the rules, you pay the price. Who would've expected little George Mason to suspend one of their best players for the biggest game of the season? After hearing that, I assumed the Patriots were coached by the legendary Ken Carter (played memorably by Samuel L. Jackson in the hit major motion-picture "Coach Carter"). Most athletes in major sports these days aren't usually held accountable for their missteps, so it's good to see one forced to deal with the consequences of his actions.

Finally, the most important part of this story is the fact that the low blow really wasn't that big of a deal. Tony Skinn had a clean record before his action and is still generally accepted to be a good kid. Also, most rational people understand that this isn't nearly as important as some broadcasters will try to make you believe. It's great that he was able to overcome this self-induced adversity, but he's nowhere near the hero he's portrayed to be (despite his professional wrestling-esque precision in executing the low blow).

For far too long, American culture has glorified the crotch shot. Groin strikes have long been celebrated and even rewarded with thousands of dollars if captured on film in a comedic fashion (think football tossed to unsuspecting groin receiver). It's a staple to any bland comedy on TV and in the theaters. To me, the whole low blow thing is just played out. Skinn received no glamour, accolades, or even a handshake from Bob Saget as a result of his groin punch. This is at least a step in the right direction. And it's one more reason I can appreciate George Mason's historic trip the Final Four.

That being said, for the sake of college basketball, they can't be allowed to advance any farther. Enjoy George Mason's epic win over Connecticut. I know I did, on many levels.

The Sports Gospel According to Mark is sponsored by BetOnSports.com. BetOnSports.com gives you the greatest sports action to bet on. Wager on football, cricket, boxing, rugby, horse racing, and more. Mark Chalifoux is also a weekly columnist for SportsFan Magazine. His columns appear every Tuesday and Thursday on Sports Central. You can e-mail Mark at [email protected].

Posted by Mark Chalifoux at 3:58 PM | Comments (2)

Measuring a Man's Worth

At the PLAYERS CHAMPION ... sorry, I just got used to capitalizing ... Championship this week, PGA Tour Commissioner Tim Finchem announced a six-year extension on his contract.

It seems that it was probably a reward for getting through a difficult television contract negotiation that saw the PGA Tour losing a network broadcasting partner (ABC) and engage a 15-year relationship with the Golf Channel for early round tournament coverage. For his troubles, Finchem will be reportedly paid $4.5 million per year over the life of the deal.

To put that into perspective, Finchem would have finished in fourth on the Tour money list last year with his annual paycheck. That is a staggering amount of money to be paid just to oversee the operations of a nonprofit organization — which the PGA Tour is. Well, at least he realized he was not as important as Tiger Woods, Vijay Singh, and Phil Mickelson, right?

The board of directors of the PGA Tour must believe they are getting a good deal for their nearly $5 million that they are paying their commissioner. So, let's break down Tim Finchem's salary and find out just how much he is really worth for his contribution to the PGA Tour.

First, Finchem has been riding on easy street for the past decade since Tiger Woods has almost single-handedly made golf dramatically more popular than it was before he hit the scene. Woods' presence and the buzz he creates generated larger purses, two huge television contracts in a row, and attracted new fans and sponsors to the game that would have never come along otherwise. Arguably, Woods deserves a cut of the Commish's salary on that fact. So, let's give Tiger, oh, a million dollars. In our alternate universe, Finchem now makes $3.5 million.

Speaking of Tiger, the Tour did a poor job of marketing itself in the face of Tiger's slump in 2003 and 2004. Like the NBA after Michael Jordan retired for the second time, the PGA Tour focused too much on marketing Woods during his slump to the point that it may have had a negative effect on Tour ratings — even after Woods reasserted himself. The NBA is still struggling to find its identity, and the PGA Tour seems to continue to find a way to market the rest of the Tour's great talent when Woods is not at the top of the leaderboard. Some of the blame for that has to go on Tim Finchem. Cut his salary $250,000 because a 2006 Tour without Woods would be like a 1996 PGA Tour. The current figure for Finchem is at $3.25 million.

Second, Finchem has been wasting a lot of time over the past few years trying to convince everybody (and maybe even himself) that the PLAYERS Championship should officially be considered the fifth major. Every year, in the third week of March, he barrages the media with gibberish talk that the PLAYERS should be in the same company as the four majors.

As if that was not enough, he dramatically altered the schedule under the guise of a playoff system to move the PLAYERS to a much more prime placement on the schedule — in between the Masters and the U.S. Open. In the end, though, does the PGA Tour really benefit by having a fifth major that no one recognizes? With that in mind, Finchem should pay a penalty. Let's dock Finchem approximately $500,000 per year for wasting time. He's now down to $2.75 million.

Speaking of the FedEx Cup, no one — even the Commish — seems to know how in the world this thing is going to work less than 12 months from now. What exactly has he been doing to make this happen since the concept was announced last fall? You would think that since the Tour will dramatically change in response to the concept that the boss would expedite the rules for how it will work. Sorry, Tim, you lose more money. There goes another half-mil — Finchem's salary is $2.25 million.

The Tour's response to the growing importance of distance to the game has been lackluster. The Tour has refused to make any proactive attempt to curb technology on Tour and does not appear poised for any such move in the future. Instead, the Tour response has been to encourage course lengthening (except at the TPC at Sawgrass for some reason) at tournament sites and to use pin placements that are nothing short of brutal on Sundays. Time will tell whether or not this will have an effect on ratings and attendance, but it sure is tough for a golfing purist to watch and for many outspoken players to experience on a weekly basis. Exact about $250,000 in pain and suffering for the fans and Finchem is getting paid $2 million.

And to round out his salary, we should place the PGA Tour Commissioner among his peers in the other major sports.

NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue gets paid $5 million per year to do his job. Look at his track record over his tenure and see what he has accomplished — salary cap, enormous TV deals, and football has become the national pastime. Now compare all of that to what Finchem has achieved, and remember that he doesn't have to deal with 32 billionaire owners. And you're telling me that Tim Finchem is only worth $500,000 less than Tagliabue? Just for that fallacy alone, he loses that $500,000.

Furthermore, Tim Finchem isn't even listed on Wikipedia, which is the encyclopedia of record for knowing just how important you are. If you're not listed in that thing, you're nobody. I'm not cutting his pay based upon that fact. I just wanted you to know how important Tim Finchem is in the grand scheme of things. You could replace Tim Finchem with Gary Bettman (NHL Commissioner) and re-read this paragraph.

With all of this in mind then, Tim Finchem is worth $1.5 million to me. Still, that's a lot of money to be paid to a guy who faces all of the problems listed above, and others still that have not been mentioned. In his next contract as commissioner, Finchem will have to face many of the game's issues if he hopes to improve the stature of the Tour in the sports pantheon.

If he can manage to take a stand in the face of technological advancements, figure out how to market the FedEx Cup and the Tour's deep talent, and give up his dreams about the PLAYERS Championship, then Finchem may be worth every penny.

If not, then I would like to offer my services for ... $3 million.

Posted by Ryan Ballengee at 3:34 PM | Comments (0)

March 27, 2006

I Hate Mondays: Blue, White Clouds

The Toronto Maple Leafs may have accumulated 13 Stanley Cups during their 80-year existence, but the dominant franchises that were once built on talent and team chemistry are now a forgotten memory.

The current goal is still success, but it is of a different kind: financial success.

Front office minds don't trouble themselves with assembling championship contenders, especially not when ticket sales continue to be snapped up at a pace on par with franchises who actually win in the playoffs, like the New York Yankees and New England Patriots.

Win or lose, the Leafs sellout the Air Canada Centre, so why put in all the arduous work of pinpointing the right coach to mesh with the appropriate mix of players?

That takes too much time. And plus, it is much easier to conjure up a false sense of hope.

Those who bleed the blue and white dote on the Maple Leafs so much that they have lost all touch with reality.

And now that the spring playoff races are heating up, you can frequently hear delusional comments from Leafs fans that make the average crack addict seem like a sagacious individual.

"If the Leafs could just make it in to the playoffs ... you never know..."

"If the Leafs land eight place, they can make the second round since they have Ottawa's number…"

It's simple to instill a little bit of hope in the mind of a Leafs fan. Sign a couple of over-the-hill veterans to overgenerous contracts (a la Jeff O'Neill or Ed Belfour), perform well on "Hockey Night in Canada," and win 60% of your home games.

But as naïve as the enthusiastic followers are, one might wonder if the leaders are any more intelligent.

You see, for anyone who can count from one to five, and recognizes which way "up" is, it is pretty clear that the Maple Leafs need to rebuild.

Not the typical renovation or a minor tinkering — from top to bottom, the Leafs need the NHL equivalent of "Queer Eye For the Straight Guy." The question remains: is management is cognizant of the situation?

The perfect blueprint has been on display in Anaheim, where general manager Brian Burke has shipped away expensive, non-contributing veterans like Sergei Federov and has begun the extensive youth movement.

Meanwhile, the Leafs had the opportunity to begin the reconstruction process at the trade deadline, but front office instead chose to remain stagnant.

Mats Sundin, who proved his worth during the Olympic Games for the gold medal-winning Swedes in Torino, could have been a valuable ingredient for a Stanley Cup contender, but instead, with linemates like Chad Kilger, will continue to clog up the Leafs' salary cap. Offensive-minded defenseman Bryan McCabe, who will likely walk as a free agent at the end of the season, also commanded interest from many possible suitors, but the Leafs couldn't finalize any deal.

And you have to wonder if a savvy goaltender like Ed Belfour (who at the time was healthier than he is now) could have returned some form of a draft pick to the Leafs, especially since untested backup Mika Noronen was traded for a second-round pick and Dwayne Roloson was acquired for a first-round pick.

Those decisions would likely make sense to Burke, or to any team that is under construction, but clearly they don't make sense to the Toronto Maple Leafs.

Maybe it's because the process of tearing down the house will finally burst the bubble of false hope and rouse the hypnotized fans from their deep slumber.

Regardless, as long as there is plenty of bread to go around in the organization, there will never be that hunger from inside to win the Stanley Cup.

The Toronto Maples Leafs and the Stanley Cup mix like Mondays and me.

"Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so." — Douglas Adams

Posted by Dave Golokhov at 11:19 AM | Comments (0)

The Other Side of the River

The New Jersey Nets have played second banana to the New York Knicks for some time now. Even in seasons such as this one when the Knickerbockers are wallowing in the bottom of the Atlantic Division and the Nets are on top.

The metropolitan area media has always been in love with the tenants of Madison Square Garden. Losing and controversy at 33rd and 7th have received more attention than consistent winning in the Garden State. But that hasn't seemed to bother the Nets, who quietly go about their business under the radar.

Four Atlantic Division titles in five years and heading towards another, the Nets are looking ahead to possible obstacles in the Eastern Conference on the road to the NBA finals. Currently, they are the third seed in the East with the Detroit Pistons and the Miami Heat leading the pack first and second, respectively.

Jason Kidd, Vince Carter, and Richard Jefferson are the Nets' "big three." But opponents should not disregard Nenad Krstic. He has found a groove and in addition to his inside game with his size, the PF/C has been effective from the outside, as well. F/C Clifford Robinson is an experienced warrior that will be valuable in the postseason. He is in his 17th NBA season and you just can't put a price on that.

If the regular season ended today, the Nets would face the sixth-seed Indiana Pacers in the first round of the playoffs. They should be able to get through that series fairly easily. Then the road to the Eastern Conference semifinals would go through Miami or Detroit. For the Nets to make a trip back to the NBA finals, they would have to beat both top seeds without home-court advantage.

Of course, this is assuming that there are no upsets along the way. In the topsy-turvy world of basketball, an eighth-seed has defeated a one-seed more than once. In 1994, the Denver Nuggets shocked the Seattle Supersonics in five games after being down two games to none. And in 1999, the New York Knicks bested the Miami Heat in Game 5 when Allan Houston hit a last-second shot. In 2003, the first round was lengthened from a best-of-five to a best-of-seven.

One thing is for certain come playoff time — the New Jersey Nets have the talent and the experience to get far. They will have to be on top of their game to win in the Motor City and/or sunny Florida.

Just another day at the office for the incognito team on the Jersey side of the river.

Posted by Joe Pietaro at 10:51 AM | Comments (0)

March 25, 2006

Surprise, Surprise

The playoffs are still a few weeks away, but with more than 65 games under most team's belts, the season's storylines have clearly taken shape. It didn't take a genius to predict that the Detroit Pistons would be a very good team (although Flip Saunders' success in his first year at the helm may take a few folks by surprise), and the San Antonio Spurs' corresponding march to the No. 1 or No. 2 seed in the Western Conference isn't the stuff of rocket science.

That's not what makes this fun.

It's the epic collapses, the standout performances, and the dark horses that let you chuckle at all those preseason prognosticators. Thus, without further ado, here are the five stories (well, maybe not "the" five, but certainly five) that have come out of nowhere to shape the 2005-2006 NBA season.

5) The Dallas Mavericks are tied with the Spurs for the most wins in the Western Conference.

It's no shock that the Mavericks are a good team. They've been that and more for several years now. But did anybody (even you, Mavs fans) think they were going to be one of the NBA's top three teams and maybe better than that this year?

The key has been the defense, which has been one of the league's best, and arguably even better than the numbers indicate. It's not that Dallas played horrible defense over the past few seasons, but stopping opponents on offense wasn't what secured playoff appearances each of the past five years.

The Mavericks were a middle-of-the-road to poor defensive team from year to year while tirelessly running up and down the court and loading up the scoreboard night after night. Factoring in pace of play, the Dallas offense was never worse than the fifth-best unit in the league during these last five years and was the best three times.

This year, however, the Mavericks are surrendering just over 92 points per game, in the same ballpark as more plodding teams like Detroit and Houston, while still hanging almost 100 each night. Gee, maybe that Avery Johnson guy knows a little something after all.

4) Elton Brand has moved from "pretty good player" to the MVP discussion.

You can't watch or listen to a Clippers game without hearing somebody gush about all the weight Brand lost during the offseason at the bidding of head coach Mike Dunleavy. If Brand's year is all about dieting, then maybe Congress should start investigating Jenny Craig for distributing performance-enhancers, because apparently "a shake for breakfast, another one for lunch, and a sensible dinner" makes a guy's jumper deadly from the elbow and boosts his point production five per game over his career average.

He scores more points than Kevin Garnett, blocks more shots than Ben Wallace, and pulls down more rebounds than Chris Bosh. Brand has been the catalyst on one of the NBA's most surprising teams (the Los Angeles Clippers), and has the Clips looking like more than a one-and-done playoff team for the first time in ages.

3) The New York Knicks are an absolute basket case.

I wonder if this was what the New York front office had in mind when it parked the armored car full of cash in back of Larry Brown's house? Not that anybody thought the Knicks would turn it around immediately (teams with the talent to contend don't go out and pay top dollar for another team's coach), but the daily bickering between Brown and Stephon Marbury makes the Terrell Owens situation in Philadelphia look like a Hawaiian vacation.

Being bad is understandable. Being embarrassing is not. The Knicks are about five puzzle pieces short of being a real team (not that the Pistons noticed, as they dropped one to the lowly Knicks on Friday), but at least they've still got Isiah Thomas, who couldn't run a brothel on a WWII army base, at the helm. So much for Larry Brown's dream job.

And welcome to the NBA, Channing Frye.

2) Ron Artest is helping Sacramento win games.

Ron-Ron is pretty much a surprise by default, since the guy's next move continues to befuddle the world's greatest psychics. Somehow, you knew he was headed out of Indiana, but when, why, and how were all up for debate.

His arrival in Sacramento, a team in the middle of its own personal Dark Ages, seemed destined to cause trouble. Once again, nobody knows the when's or the how's with Ron-Ron — just the what's. Then, without warning (his standard M.O.), Artest decided to behave himself, play his tail off, and hoist the Kings to a 16-9 record over 25 games and an 11-0 record at home.

Sure, the Kings are still barely in sniffing range of that eighth Western Conference playoff spot, but who cares? Artest has once again resurrected his stock and positioned himself perfectly for his next career move: hot dog vendor.

1) Chris Paul is the NBA's best rookie, and it ain't close.

Most thought Paul would be a good pro — particularly the Hornets, who spent the fourth overall pick on the former Demon Deacon — but the race for Rookie of the Year is pretty much over, and most of the other contestants don't appear to have heard the gun.

Paul leads all NBA rookies in points, assists, and steals and has stepped into one of the game's most difficult positions and immediately excelled. Andrew Bogut, Marvin Williams, and Deron Williams (the three players selected before Paul in the 2005 draft) may all be great pros one day, but for now, their point production combined (26.4) is just 10 points higher than Paul's and at 36.1 minutes per game, Paul is the only rookie to crack the 30-minute mark this year.

For a guy who wanted to play for the Atlanta Hawks, only to hear them call out Marvin Williams' name, revenge doesn't get much sweeter than this.

It's a short list, and there are plenty of other good stories this season, so feel free to complain below and list some of your favorites.

Posted by Zach Jones at 8:40 PM | Comments (1)

March Madness Media Memos

On occasion, I feel I must take it upon myself to refresh the ethics and common sense of my brothers and sisters in the mainstream media. And by "mainstream," I mean those pretty people who bring us sports on television, or anyone who has to leave the comfort of their coffee table to actually do some reporting. So you can stop reading now, Bill Simmons.

With that, here is the latest batch of media memos, this time with the delightful scent of March Madness...

TO: CBS ANNOUNCERS

FROM: ME

RE: ONE-NIGHT STANDS

I'm so tired of college basketball announcers and their starf-king. Every time there's a star player on the court, the announcers sound like a bunch of girls in tube tops at a John Mayer concert. Last night, one of them compared LaMarcus Aldridge to Bill Walton, going as far to say he looked like Walton. Uh, have they ever looked at LaMarcus Aldridge? Do they even know what uniform number Aldridge is?

Who is Bradley center Patrick O'Bryant, and why should I have cared about him? I'm a casual college basketball fan, but I'm pretty sure I wasn't the only one who laid eyes on this kid for the first time in the tournament. Yet the announcers treated him like he was in the middle of the Player of the Year race with Adam Morrison and J.J. Redick.

Speaking of those two Great White Hypes, they both couldn't lead their teams out of the Sweet 16 in what should be their final college seasons. And maybe that's why the announcers feel the need to perform verbal fellatio on every star on the screen: because their time in college sports is so fleeting, they have to cram four years' worth of praise into a single tournament.

And another thing: what's with the overkill on Cinderella love? I know we all are infatuated with underdogs, from Rocky Balboa to Bill Clinton to the New England Patriots ... at least the first time. But here's my problem with NCAA tournament underdogs: they get all the glory if they win, and none of the criticism if they lose. Texas A&M, Northwestern State, Bradley, Bucknell, and Montana all won games "they weren't supposed to win," and the higher seeds they upset were slaughtered for "not showing up." But when all of those Cinderellas left the ball in the following rounds, it was in games that, again, "they weren't supposed to win." When, exactly, are we to start expecting teams like this to win? When do we start to kill them for not winning, like we do the higher seeds that crap out before the Elite Eight?

Why do we treat a tournament Cinderella like a 13-year-old Special Olympics athlete?

**

TO: LOCAL TV NEWS AFFILIATES

FROM: ME

RE: COVERAGE OF DRUNKEN FANS IN COLLEGE BARS

Whenever a Washington, DC area sports team does well in the postseason, the local news has one reaction: overkill.

That means a good chunk of the sportscast at 11:25 PM will be given to said team. That means every on-air personality will take off their fancy clothes from Lord & Taylor and throw on cheerleader uniforms. And that means some poor reporter will be shuttled off to a bar and charged with finding obnoxious morons who can comment on their favorite team's fortunes.

It happened again this week with the George Mason University Patriots, whose run to the Sweet 16 was highlighted with an upset win over reigning NCAA men's basketball champion North Carolina. Soon, the Patriots were on the cover of SI and the New York Times was doing a feature on the closest sports bar to campus.

What the Times didn't do is fill 700 words with the kind of piffle the local TV news does. What's the point of these remotes, where a reporter is screaming over a bunch of beer-swigging knuckleheads who are more concerned with whom they'll be waking up next to than what team wins the game? Is it breaking news that sports fans like to gather in groups and yell at the TV? Boy, shine up that Pulitzer.

Until this GMU lovefest, I thought the DC media hit its all-time low with Redskins coverage last postseason. Washington made the playoffs for the first time in years, and then faced Tampa Bay in the first round. Every night produced another pathetic attempt at milking the Redskin cow for another puff piece. One DC station actually had a paid, professional reporter go house-to-house on "Buccaneer Street" somewhere in Maryland to see if any of them were actually Tampa Bay fans cheering against the Redskins. IN MARYLAND!

The George Mason thing hasn't gotten that bad, but it's darn close. I'm going to throw my cat at the television if I see one more reporter-that, 24 hours earlier, was covering actual news-interviewing inebriated dolts about the NCAA tournament:

Reporter: "Do you think George Mason can go all the way?"

Dude: "WHOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAA! GO MASON! WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGAAAA!"

Why don't we cover other events like this? Hey, look, they just car-bombed a bunch of our boys in Baghdad: let's grab a camera crew and get group reactions at TGI Friday's happy hour.

The most embarrassing part of this media overkill is that GMU is one of two local teams to make the Sweet 16, the other being Georgetown. Coverage of the Hoyas is a bit different: interviews with players, coaches, and video of practices. There's really none of that rah-rah stuff, no patrolling DC bars for yahoo fans.

Could it be because the Hoya bars are in DC, while the Mason bars are in the lilywhite suburbs of Virginia?

Naaah...

**

TO: THE PRINT MEDIA

FROM: ME

RE: GAMBLING

From Michael Wilbon of the Washington Post, in the third paragraph about George Mason's amazing upset of North Carolina:

"Sunday's 65-60 victory over defending champion North Carolina — a school with twice as many national titles, four, as George Mason has tournament victories — is the biggest athletic accomplishment for the Fairfax commuter school and no doubt sent the brackets of many office pool players into the shredder."

Brackets into the shredder? Good lord. It's "the biggest athletic accomplishment for the Fairfax commuter school," and we're talking about the implications for the betting public?

Look, I know there's nothing illegal about an office pool, and I'm happily sitting in second place in mine. But can't March Madness gambling sort of linger in the background, like it does in football? I like the nod-and-wink approach to NFL betting, like those sly little comments Al Michaels makes near the end of a Monday Night game if one team is close to covering. I like the fact that the main outlets for football media don't acknowledge betting, but that fans know where to look to find that news. It's a little like porn: the more your significant other doesn't know about, the more salacious it feels to dabble in it.

I suppose what I'm asking for is for March Madness gambling to return to the background.

Unless it's the NIT, which should run Vegas lines at the bottom of the screen, because it'd give somebody a reason to watch.

Greg Wyshynski is the Features Editor for SportsFan Magazine in Washington, DC, and the Senior Sports Editor for The Connection Newspapers of Northern Virginia. His book "Glow Pucks and 10-Cent Beer: The 101 Worst Ideas in Sports History" will be published in spring 2006. His columns appear every Saturday on Sports Central. You can e-mail Greg at [email protected].

Posted by Greg Wyshynski at 8:32 PM | Comments (0)

Billy Packer: Deal or No Deal?

Billy Packer neatly divides his world into two columns.

On the left are the Mid-Majors, or Middies, those lesser desirables from parts of the country unknown. They have no sex appeal and even less claim to the honor the selection committee confers on them each March. To you and I, they are Cinderella stories. To Billy, they are pests.

On the right are the Majors. They're the reason March Madness was invented, the subject of Billy's protectionism as he wards off those nuisances in the same manner a horse's tail brushes away flies. Majors hail from the big power conferences in college basketball — the Pac-10, Big 10, Big 12, Big East, SEC, and ACC.

Between the two columns, Billy draws a thick north-south line of delineation more divisive than the river Styx, separating Majors from Middies as life from death. He is, in every sense, innately perfect for this ultimate contest of columns. But now he's keeping the emcee waiting.

"Deal or no deal?" Howie Mandel repeated, albeit more curtly this second time.

Billy snapped to and enveloped the silver suitcase he had selected from the pretty model earlier in the show. He cast one final look up at the board, where appeared the names of 64 schools of higher education. One of those very names also resided in the silver suitcase he clutched, the name of the men's 2006 NCAA Basketball champion. No one knew which, only that it was among the remaining slots still illuminated on the board. By now, half were darkened.

Billy pressed his luck. "No deal," he replied, and flipped the glass box over the red flashing button.

"Very well then," Howie continued. "I will now ask you to select eight more suitcases."

Billy turned to a triple-tiered dais to his left where 31 identically-dressed models held out 31 silver suitcases. Billy read off his selections. One by one, the models opened their cases, revealing another eight names that were not in the suitcase Billy coveted.

George Washington, Montana, and Wisconsin-Milwaukee each drew courteous rounds of applause from the studio audience. Texas A&M, Alabama, and Tennessee brought obligatory sighs of disappointment. However, Illinois and Indiana outright stunned everyone. Lights were extinguished in the slots for each.

After the last light went off, a phone on the table rang. Howie picked it up and listened for a moment before announcing that it was the Banker. His face turned grave. He hung up.

"Losing two Big 10s really hurt your odds," came the frank assessment. "The Banker thinks your suitcase may hold a Middy and has reduced his offer accordingly. He's only giving the ACC six NIT invites and dinner with Bobby Knight is now lunch. Take his offer and you can walk away from the broadcast booth for the rest of this season. They'll be no ugly embarrassments on your watch. Turn him down and you'll risk disgrace. So Billy, deal ... or no deal?"

The board now commanded Billy's attention. The 64 names had been arranged in an order of preference. High atop the left side, where contestants who play for money see the $.01 slot, hung four Missouri Valley Conference teams. Half were still lit. Desirability improved grudgingly down the left column, then really picked up on the right across the imaginary river Styx. Way down in the $1,000,000 neighborhood were the Big 10 entrants, followed by the ACC. Its four names were all illuminated.

To be truthful, the board looked good to him. Even with the recent losses, the right side was far more resplendent than the left. Of the 32 Majors slots, 17 still shone compared to only seven Middies. A graphic on the bottom of the screen informed home viewers of a 38% chance that this year's NCAA champion would be from either the Big East or ACC.

Billy liked his odds. He flipped the glass box over the deal button once again.

Another eight suitcases were chosen in an exercise more painful than the last. Sure, Bucknell and Northwestern State were outed, but so too were Arizona and Pittsburgh, not to mention two more ACC teams and the last remaining Big 10s. Yes, the RPI's strongest conference would have no Sweet 16s this year. The audience sighed on queue. Billy was shaken.

The phone rang.

The Banker now slashed every ACC team with a losing record from the women's NCAA tournament, leaving only seven. Bobby Knight cancelled out of lunch and even declined to commit for coffee. Billy's Majors — both guys and gals — were on the cusp of extinction. According to another graphic, there was a 25% chance that the Missouri Valley would be represented in the Final Four.

Staying in the contest beyond this point could mean the unthinkable possibility of playing analyst to a Bradley vs. Wichita State final a week from Monday. Anti-Packerites would have a good laugh at his expense. But by taking the deal, Billy would bid adieu to his beloved Blue Devils, perhaps denying himself a share in their champagne revelry.

In the end, his sense of daring won out. He flipped the glass box. There would be no deal.

More sighs were heard, but these were not out of any sense of obligation, nor were they from the studio audience. Rather, these were genuine guttural moans emanating from across the breadth of America as its own unthinkable possibility became imminent.

Billy Packer would be back on air this weekend, once again espousing the joys of big-time college basketball as Indianapolis looms on his horizon.

Posted by Bob Ekstrom at 8:19 PM | Comments (0)

March 24, 2006

Sports Q&A: T.O. in Dallas; Bonds vs. BK

Steve from Iron Mountain, MI writes, "Terrell Owens just signed a three-year, $25 million dollar contract with Dallas. Is this a good move for the Cowboys?"

For that price, it better be. One would think, after Owens' last year in Philadelphia, his contract would be laden with stipulations protecting the Cowboys should Owens pull his usual stunts and feud with the entire organization. But no such stipulations exist, and Owens will make millions, whether he hates Drew Bledsoe's guts or not. Do you get the feeling Dallas owner Jerry Jones got approval from no one before making this deal?

"I ain't saying T.O.'s a gold digger," Jones must have said to himself, or any one who would listen, "but he ain't messin' with no broke owner."

Obviously, Jerry. Do you realize it sets a bad precedent to reward a player with a giant contract for behavior like that of Owens in Philadelphia last year? Of course, you're not thinking of precedents — you're thinking of wins, which is understandable.

Okay, so no contract behavioral stipulations were instituted in Owens' contract? A mistake on the Cowboys' part? Probably, but that can be tempered by requiring other Cowboys to follow certain guidelines. For example, demand that Bledsoe have no contact whatsoever with Jeff Garcia and Donovan McNabb. If Bledsoe absolutely must talk to them, then the words "Terrell Owens," "the receiver I hate most," or "the person I hate most" must not be used in the conversation.

And if Owens chooses to pose on the Dallas star anywhere, like in practice, safety Roy Williams must agree not to tackle Owens, as former Cowboy George Teague did five years ago when Owens pulled that stunt as a 49er. Also, Coach Bill Parcells must consume at least one bottle of Maalox per day as long as Owens is a Cowboy. Parcells, under no circumstances, is to mistakenly call Owens "Keyshawn." If he does, Owens can seek an immediate trade.

Parcells has to be the coach most able to tolerate Owens, but that doesn't mean Parcells will hold his tongue if Owens deserves some criticism. Has Parcells ever not said what he felt? Neither has Owens. They are a perfect match. Owens should know, without being told, that Parcells won't let Owens get away with the transgressions for which he's famous. Parcells has coached two of the league's most troublesome receivers in Keyshawn Johnson and Terry Glenn — at the same time. He's never backed down from any of Johnson's rants, and once called Glenn a "she."

It's too bad Dallas didn't keep Johnson on the roster. Talk about a three-ring circus with Owens, Johnson, and Glenn. Parcells always pulled the right strings with Johnson and Glenn, and, in turn, got good production from both. There's no doubt that Owens will produce — Parcells' influence may even make Owens a better player, which may not be possible in the eyes of Owens, whom already thinks he is the greatest. In this respect, Parcells must be careful. If he gets more out of T.O. than even T.O. expects, then T.O. might demand to be paid even more. When Owens demanded more money from the Eagles, the situation quickly deteriorated.

Should Owens stay on the straight and narrow (no, T.O., I'm not accusing you of being gay), then Dallas got a sweet deal. 2006 should be a great year for Owens and the Cowboys. It's the year after that would likely be a problem, after T.O. has had a year as a Cowboy under his belt to decide that he is being mistreated, underpaid, and under-appreciated. That's when the fun starts.

But the Cowboys should enjoy 2006. Owens is still one of the best, if not the best, receivers in football, and could be the player that leads the Cowboys on a serious playoff run. Or he could bring down the entire organization. Owens has the talent and the selfishness to do both, but usually not at the same time. His positive attributes will make an immediate impact. It's his negative attributes that take time to manifest themselves.

Ray from Oak Park, IL asks "Who would win a fight pitting Barry Bonds against the Burger King and his sidekick Dr. Angus?"

Great question. I love making predictions when mythical creatures clash in epic battles. As a rule of thumb, never bet against Godzilla, especially in Japan, and never take a human in a labyrinth against the Minotaur, unless that human is named Sinbad and is not a comedian. By the way, I include Bonds in the category of mythical creatures.

Why would Bonds and the BK duo be fighting? Do the King and Angus have a beef with Bonds? You bet they do. Bonds has powered his body with questionable methods and supplements instead of pumping up in an honorable manner like many Americans, courtesy of flame-broiled fat grams from Burger King. It may not look like it judging from his perpetual smile, but the King is still fuming from the time he surprised Bonds in the Giant slugger's hotel room with a croisanwich and an orange juice. Bonds was so frightened upon awaking beside the creepy king that he wet his pants and ordered the King out of his room.

"This isn't the juice I ordered!" shouted an enraged Bonds.

Luckily, Dr. Angus was there to collect a urine specimen, which later tested positive for steroids, growth hormone, and 93 octane gasoline.

But the damage was done. Bonds had alienated the Burger King, who was just trying to do a good deed. In doing so, Bonds had also severed ties to Dr. Angus, possibly the last doctor who would dare risk his reputation and supply Bonds with the performance-enhancing "goods."

Now, I know Angus' medical credentials are questionable, and his toothy grin and artificially tanned skin make him look a bit unsavory, but isn't that the kind of people with whom Bonds enjoys doing business? Dr. Angus is probably not a doctor of medicine, but he is a doctor of beef, which still affords him the right to prescribe for a patient anything that a pharmacy or veterinarian stocks in their respectable medicine cabinets. Bonds blew his chance, and the King and Angus are hot on his tail.

So, what if Bonds met up with the fast food duo in a dark alley? Bonds wouldn't have a chance. First of all, it's a dark alley. Bonds would be expecting a mysterious package, not a street fight. Advantage King and Angus. Maybe Bonds could land a few punches, but they would have little effect. In case you haven't noticed, the King and Angus never stop smiling, no matter what you do. Bigger advantage, King and Angus.

Finally, I'm sure Dr. Angus smells like Angus beef, of course. That aroma, mixed with the putrid stench of over-applied Old Spice cologne, is a lethal combination. The smell alone would take Bonds out. It's over. No contest. The Burger King and Dr. Angus destroy Bonds with a technical knockout in less than a minute.

Anthony from Dallas, TX writes, "Tennessee women's basketball player Candace Parker dunked twice in Saturday's NCAA tournament game against Army. Is this a sign that the women's game is evolving into a more athletic, high-flying version of the game?"

Those were dunks? They weren't rim-shaking by any means, although the nets sure took a pounding. One thing is for sure: the nicknames "Chocolate Thunder," "The Human Highlight Film," and "Air" are safe for now — Parker won't be taking those nicknames. And, for now, breakaway rims are totally unnecessary in women's basketball.

Here's what the NCAA should do: outlaw the dunk in women's basketball. Dunking detracts from the mastery of fundamentals and the implementation of team concepts. Doesn't that sound like bull? I thought so. But that had to be the NCAA's reasoning for outlawing the dunk in the men's game nearly forty years ago. Possibly the silliest rule in the history of sports deprived fans of seeing one of the greatest leapers of all-time, North Carolina State's David Thompson, throw down a dunk.

Who's to say Dr. James Naismith didn't have the dunk in mind when he invented basketball back in 1891? How do we know Jimmy wasn't dunking himself? He probably was, but destroyed too many peach baskets. Or maybe, just maybe, he was playing a little one-on-one with the wife and she went facial on him. Maybe, out of sheer embarrassment, Naismith decided to raise the height of the goal to 10 feet, so women couldn't dunk. Well, times have changed, Doctor, and, it may have taken them 115 years, but women can dunk.

Hopefully, as a result of Parker's exploits, more girls and women will try to dunk. I would watch a lot more women's basketball if there were more dunking. Real dunking. Dunking in which the ball takes less than three seconds to hit the floor after it is dunked. That's a "real" dunk. The women's game has yet to see a "real" dunk. Somewhere in America, a 12-year-old girl can already touch the rim. In four or five years, she'll be dunking with power, and we'll see a "real" dunk.

Get Your Questions Answered!

Do you have a question, comment, or earth-shattering announcement? Have you fallen, and can't get up? Do you have two tickets to paradise? Won't you pack your bags, we'll leave tonight? Then send your relevant information and two forms of identification along with your name and hometown to [email protected]. You may get the answer you're looking for in the next column on Friday, April 7th.

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 8:45 PM | Comments (0)

Injuries Costly to the Avs

Playoff hopes for the Colorado Avalanche are deteriorating, and it isn't even April. It's not because the team won't make the top eight in the Western Conference. Not because they don't have the talent or drive to win, either. It's thanks to injuries that the Avs will struggle in the playoffs.

In the final stretch of the regular season, the Avs have suffered some major blows, and it will cost the team dearly.

Prior to a shoulder injury that will sideline him for the rest of the season, Marek Svatos led the Avs in goals (32) and was competing against NHL standouts Alex Ovechkin (Wash.) and Sidney Crosby (Pitt.) for top rookie honors. Losing such a talented player would have a negative effect on any offense. Unfortunately, the situation is even worse for the Avs.

Now the Avalanche have lost Alex Tanguay for two to four weeks. His collision with San Jose forward Ville Nieminen resulted in a knee sprain on March 19. Like Svatos, Tanguay is an offensive powerhouse — he currently leads the Avalanche with 74 points, including 26 goals. The loss of these guys leaves the Avalanche offense in serious trouble — to put it mildly.

Or does it? Monday night's dethroning of the L.A. Kings showed otherwise. Joe Sakic set the tempo of the game and scored twice, while assisting on goals from Ian Laperriere and Andrew Brunette. Antti Laaksonen added another goal midway into the third period, resulting in a 5-0 shutout.

Reality hit on Wednesday, however, when the Avalanche lost to the Anaheim Mighty Ducks in overtime. The Avs led 3-1 early, but the Ducks rebounded and tied it 4-4 in the third. Jonathan Hedstrom scored the winning goal for the Ducks.

Before their loss to Anaheim, the Avalanche were on their way to sweeping a West Coast road trip. Had they done it, the injuries to Colorado's roster would have looked much less sinister. Now, after giving up a solid lead and a game they should have won, the impact of the void left by Tanguay and Svatos is apparent.

When in a slump, the Avs count on Tanguay to spark things up. He forms plays, creates scoring chances, and invigorates his teammates. When a team loses intensity, as the Avs did Wednesday night, players like Tanguay turn things around.

Marek Svatos is a goal-scoring powerhouse. His speed, skill, and eye will draw comparisons to Peter Forsberg in a couple more years. 'Nuff said.

Topping it all off, the injuries to Ossi Vaananen and Steve Konowalchuk can't be ignored. Vaananen's broken leg sidelines him indefinitely — was playing at a team best +10 before February 2. Steve Konowalchuk injured his wrist on November 21. He posted 15 points in 21 games, the best start of his career. He remains on the injured reserve and isn't expected to return this season.

Colorado currently sits pretty in the fifth Western Conference slot, but that could easily change in 12 games' time. This final stretch is all against Western Conference rivals, most of which are vying for a playoff spot. The Avalanche need every point, and that means shooting pucks in the net to win. Slumps like Wednesday's against Anaheim cannot happen. Shutouts such as the one against L.A. would be nice on a nightly basis, but aren't realistic.

What Colorado needs is consistency. Joe Sakic and Milan Hejduk must take the initiative and keep the puck in the other team's zone. Players like Ian Laperriere and Antti Laaksonen will be expected to post impressive numbers because they are capable of doing so. The defense must be solid, and so must the goaltending.

The Avs need to play like they're in the playoffs starting now. If they don't, their postseason run might as well end before it's begun.

Posted by Charlynn Smith at 7:59 PM | Comments (0)

March 23, 2006

Six Things That Make You Say, "D'OH!"

6) What's up with the city of Anaheim? Do its sports team not win enough that they have to keep making headlines by changing their teams' names? First, they were the Los Angeles Angels starting in 1961. Then, it was the California Angels when they moved to Anaheim in 1966. Next, they were the Anaheim Angels when The Walt Disney Co. bought the team. And now the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim? Talk about a mouth full.

But wait, Anaheim's NHL representative, the Mighty Ducks, announced in January that starting with the 2006-07 season, they would be known as the "Anaheim Ducks." Are they implying that they aren't so mighty anymore? Make up your minds, people! Fortunately, the Anaheim Amigos (1967-68) of the American Basketball Association only lasted one year, and for all we know, they could've become The Orange County Friends.

5) What's up with World Baseball Classic? Who would've thought that Japan and Cuba would be battling for the championship? Wait, who even knew that they were? Am I being a typical American by saying that after the United States was eliminated, I lost interest? From what I've heard, Cuba doesn't count as a real country anymore. Interesting. Well, good for Japan for winning it all and proving that the USA isn't superior in its own pastime. Here's an idea — maybe this tournament should be renamed as the "World Series," and our own championship series should be the "Fall Classic"...

4) What's up with the Missouri Valley Conference? After Andy Kennedy and the Cincinnati Bearcats, I was probably the most angry person and complainer in the country that four Missouri Valley Conference teams had made the tournament and the Bearcats, with a strength of schedule of five and RPI of 40, had not. Air Force's strength of schedule was 158. I e-mailed Craig Littlepaige, the chairholder of the Selection Committee:

"I can't believe you are the leader of a group that put Air Force into the tournament as an AT-LARGE BID over Cincinnati. In fact, Creighton deserved the spot better than Air Force. Your whole reason for putting Air Force in is because they are considered a tough team to play, so you said. For one, they have a good HOME winning streak — guess what, they don't play any games at home even if they win the whole tournament. Next, they don't play in the Big East, nor did they lose to the eventual Big East Tournament champion by allowing a running three-pointer at the buzzer. Sometimes teams are put in based on history — not so in this case. Sometimes by strength of schedule — not so in this case. And sometimes, more often than not, at-large bids are given out based on the fact of who is a better team — NOT SO IN THIS CASE. You better hope and pray that Air Force wins a game and bails you out, because right now, you look like one of the most out-of-sorts people in college sports."

He e-mailed me back with a generalized email that didn't mention any team names. Well, Air Force didn't win, and Seton Hall got blown out. And Cincinnati is going to win the NIT tournament. That's a bad move on their part, but I will admit the MVC is looking pretty good at this point. These teams like Bradley and Wichita State have definitely done a good job making the Big 10 conference seem very small.

3) What's up with Billy Packer during the Selection Show? If you didn't catch what happened, it was probably the funniest thing I have ever seen on a Selection Show. Packer, who is Jim Nantz's partner on CBS, was supposed to be discussing his thoughts about the Washington, DC bracket, which had already been announced. He was talking about how the eight versus nine seeds were two well-coached teams, Arizona and Wisconsin. I'm looking at my Washington, DC bracket, and I know that the eight and nine are Kentucky and Alabama-Birmingham. What is Packer talking about? When the Minneapolis region was announced, it was definitely Arizona against Wisconsin as the eight-nine matchup. Packer screwed up big time. Next year, he better not be allowed to get the full bracket before viewers like me. I like surprises, but not those kind.

2) What's up with Dallas fans jumping ship after the Cowboys signed Terrell Owens? Every Cowboys fan that I've heard from and listened to on the radio has declared that they are finding a new team because of Owens. Has he really done something that bad that you have to burn all bridges with the team you and America have loved for years? You don't want to give the guy with 101 touchdowns and 10,535 receiving yards a chance? Gimme a break. If you don't want him, the Browns will take him.

1) Finally, what the heck is up with Alfonso Soriano? People make headlines in different ways. Some people pick teams like Air Force for the NCAA tournament over Cincinnati. Some people give away the seeds on a Selection Show. And them some people just decide they aren't going to play left field for the Washington Nationals at all costs. You're getting paid to play baseball. You aren't even a good second baseman. What do you have to lose? Hey, you know what? I'll play left field.

Posted by Sara Normand at 3:43 PM | Comments (0)

NASCAR Top 10 Power Rankings: Week 4

Note: the quotes in this article are fictional.

1. Jimmie Johnson — Johnson retained his points lead with a sixth-place finish in Atlanta, only his first result out of the top five in four races. Johnson now holds a 50-point lead over Atlanta winner Kasey Kahne, and will welcome back suspended crew chief Chad Knaus for Sunday's race in Bristol.

"It's been such a long time," says Johnson, humming the tune to the 1979 Peaches and Herb smash, 'Reunited,' "since I've had my ride pimped. Incidentally, during Chad's 'time off,' he's filmed a few episodes of his new show Pimpin' Rides is Easy, Until You Get Caught, soon to be aired on the WB. Chad also appeared on ABC's new show, American Inventor, where he introduced a new magic ruler that makes one inch appear to be only 15/16 of an inch."

2. Kasey Kahne — Kahne won the Golden Corral 500 from the pole on Monday in Atlanta, leading the final 80 laps for his second career win. He also finished second in Saturday's Busch series' Nicorette 300.

"Wait a minute," says a concerned Kahne. "The Nicorette 300? That sickens me. Just a few years back, NASCAR was all about promoting cigarettes and tobacco products. Now, NASCAR sanctions a race sponsored by a product used to help smokers quit? Hypocritical, I tell you. What's next? The Alcoholics Anonymous 500? Or the Cirrhosis of the Liver 400? I could go on, out of respect for heavy drinkers. But how about those Dodges? The Charger is really coming around. I finish first, and Kyle Petty comes home in eighth, with Reed Sorenson and Scott Riggs tenth and eleventh, respectively."

Kyle Petty eighth? You're right. The Charger really is coming around. It must be pretty much driving itself.

3. Matt Kenseth — Kenseth finished outside of the top 10 for the first time this year, due to two flat front tires, and his 13th-place finish in Atlanta dropped him a slot in the standings to number three. It was an up-and-down day for the Roush Racing team. Mark Martin finished second, but Carl Edwards suffered a pit road accident and finished 40th, while Greg Biffle lead 128 laps before running out of gas on the final lap. He ultimately finished 16th. Kenseth now stands third in the points, 78 behind Johnson.

"Edwards can't drive," says Kenseth, "and Biffle can't even read a fuel gauge. Jamie McMurray had a good day driving, finishing 14th, but his hair was an absolute mess. His highlights are fading, and his styling gel was poorly applied. It looks like I'm the leader of this team, on the track and, reluctantly, in front of the vanity mirror."

4. Mark Martin — NASCAR's oldest driver and Roush elder statesman Martin chased one the youngest racers, Kasey Kahne, but came up short, finishing second to the Evernham Dodge. Martin's best result of the year moved him up a spot in the points to fourth, 90 points behind Johnson.

"Youth was served," says Martin. "Kasey was well-deserving of the win. Pretty impressive for a kid who doesn't even have a driver's license. Oh, he does? That's great. Anyway, I like the way things have turned out so far. This could be the year the old man does it, and I finally win that championship. Of course, I said that 20 years ago, when I was in my 40s."

5. Casey Mears — After a season-best qualifying effort of 10th, Mears finished 21st in Atlanta, a lap off the leading pace. His first result out of the top 10 this year dropped him one spot to fifth in the points, 136 points from the front. Mears was outdone by teammate Reed Sorenson, who finished 10th.

"Sure, Reed beat me on the track," expains Mears, "but I beat him in the category of 'fewest opposing crew members ran over.' He scored one, I scored zero. Like in golf, lowest score wins. You know, it's not cool to run over an opposing team's crew member; it is cool to run over your own, on certain occasions, like when your crew is breaking in a new member. Those crew guys have some bizarre initiation rites."

6. Jeff Gordon — Gordon picked up his second top-five finish of the year with a fourth in Atlanta, and even led a lap for five bonus points and a free game of putt-putt. Gordon has quietly piloted the DuPont Chevrolet steadily up the standings since starting the year with a 26th at Daytona.

"I'm taking the Tony Stewart 2005 approach to the championship," says Gordon, sipping on what has to be the millionth free Pepsi of his career. "No, I'm not going to feud with a new driver every week. But I plan to hang around the top of the standings until I make a midseason run to the top, which will lead me to my fifth championship. But if I have to run a few guys into a wall, and take no responsibility for my actions, a la Tony, I'll do it."

7. Dale Earnhardt, Jr. — After a 27th in Las Vegas, Earnhardt rebounded with a third in Atlanta that vaulted him four places into the points top 10, to seventh, for the first time this year. Starting 26th, Earnhardt worked his way back to the front after a cut tire dropped him to 32nd 115 laps from the end. Earnhardt's efforts earned him the Mobil 1 Command Performance Driver of the Race contingency award.

"I don't know what I did to deserve that award," says Earnhardt, "but I'll accept in behalf of everyone at Dale Earnhardt, Inc. I'd like to thank the people at the oil company that presents this award, although I'm forbidden to mention its name, since they are not a major sponsor of the No. 8 car and I could be heavily fined for saying its name."

8. Kyle Busch — Busch fell two places in the points to eighth, despite a solid 12th-place result in Atlanta. Equally as important, Busch was not burdened with any incidents or verbal sparring with rival Tony Stewart.

"Tony and I spoke before the race and ironed out our differences" says Busch. "Does that make us friends? No. Does that make us enemies? No, but it leaves our personal feelings for each other somewhere between 'hate' and 'dislike.' And I guess since we're on such good terms, I'll have to postpone replacing the image of Tony The Tiger on my hood with that of Tony Stewart. There'll be other chances. Truces are like promises, made to be broken."

9. Tony Stewart — Stewart made a huge leap in the points due to his fifth-place finish in Atlanta, moving up to 12th from 19th. Stewart also finished fifth in Daytona, and turned in an impressive drive for the folks at Home Depot, which is based in Atlanta.

"In case you're wondering why I was on my best behavior," says Stewart, "there's your answer. I didn't want to embarrass any of the corporate suits that may have been in attendance. If you noticed, you saw that I only had a minor skirmish on pit road with Greg Biffle. Don't get me wrong. There were several drivers that pissed me off. But I'm saving that pent up rage for the track at Bristol, where everyone's tempers will be on edge. I want to be in the right state of mind for Bristol. You'll can expect a Tony Stewart blow up or two there."

10. Dale Jarrett — Jarrett started on the grid 31st, and overcame handling issues to post a strong ninth-place finish, improving four places to return to the top 10 at number nine.

"We were unable to find the balance for the No. 88 UPS Ford until late in the race," says Jarrett. "The tightness and looseness may have been the result of a mix-up from aerodynamics testing earlier. It seems we plugged in the information from an aero test involving the UPS truck. As you know, the UPS truck is anything but sleek, and cuts through the air like a dull butter knife through steel."

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 3:28 PM | Comments (0)

Creating a Superstar

In college basketball, stars are born in March. A role player can transform into a first-round draft pick, a bench-warmer can turn into the big man on campus, and a season of turmoil can be forgotten after a few sound games.

One such player is Bradley center Patrick O'Bryant, a seven-foot sophomore who has stepped up from relative obscurity to become the top center prospect in the entire nation, according to several NBA scouts. While he will get his fair share of fluff pieces and media coverage this week and however long Bradley stays alive, he'd be far better off staying in school another year.

In fact, it would only take a few small acts on his part to truly achieve stardom. He's got game, but so do plenty of college kids. To really be a star, you have to go the extra mile. If he follows my plan, he'll be bigger than any mustachioed trash talker or poetry-reading three-point shooter ever could have dreamed of.

1) Get involved in a feud — This is important for him, because a feud, if played correctly, could benefit all parties involved. This would be a great way for people to start to take notice of him for something other than a copious amount of double-doubles or for blocking shots. Once he gets his turn in the spotlight is when the rest of this list becomes important, but first, he has to make himself a bigger story than just a good basketball player.

Of course, this would be much better for him if it was something completely fabricated, unlike a "the opposing fans vs. J.J. Redick" feud, which turned Redick into a victim, but also got everyone to really hate him. Now, I don't think a feud with any player or coach in the MVC would be enough to garner headlines, and he won't have enough chances to meet up with big teams in non-conference play to really hold people long enough. To me, there's one logical choice here — Billy Packer.

Packer already has the whole anti-small school stance, so it wouldn't be such a stretch for him to disrespect O'Bryant. A few especially harsh comments from Packer would send hordes of reporters to O'Bryant seeking comment, which he would refuse to talk about for the first week or so. Of course, after Packer's over-the-top whining and baseless claims, O'Bryant would be forced to respond.

This could easily escalate into an ongoing feud during next season, with things going up a notch if it could be arranged for Packer to do analysis for a few of the bigger Bradley games next year. After a huge block, instead of glaring at the player he just rejected, he could snap his gaze over to the press row and stare down the player-hating Packer.

It's a safe play for O'Bryant because Packer can't win. The best he could do is run out a "I-told-you-so” if O'Bryant falls a little short of his goals. Everyone would still hate Packer, and that would still make him look like the bad guy. Even Packer wins in this because he seems to love being the story instead of telling the story.

Meanwhile, everyone will rally to the side of the little guy who never can get the respect he deserves. O'Bryant makes a great victim, but also gets in a few shots at a guy everyone loves to hate. It's not like he's picking a fight with Ghandi. It's a fight with an old, cranky analyst that whines about anything that doesn't have to do with the ACC. And people always relate to those who don't get the respect they deserve...

2) Start talking about how everyone disrespects you — It's important not to go overboard with this, like Bruce Pearl claiming everyone doubted his Vols, only to be utterly shocked when they were given a two-seed. And then there's Adam Morrison, who said everyone was picking Xavier to upset Gonzaga, only no one outside of Cincinnati even thought it was possible.

Still, most people think they don't get the respect they should, and they could relate to the stud player at the mid-major who is constantly trashed by an annoying analyst. It seems like people have doubted every superstar in sports, so it just seems like this will be something that has to get addressed sooner or later.

3) Feeding the hungry, teaching kids to read — Does anyone know what Big Pat's (his current nickname will work, although it's important that he at least has a passable nickname) best non-athletic talent? Well, they would after he started using it to help those who are less fortunate than himself. It's cooking, and he even plans to be a chef after his basketball career is over.

If he played this right, more people would know this than whose sister Ohio State linebacker A.J. Hawk dated (someone from Notre Dame?). He just needs to constantly work in soup kitchens, organize special team community service projects, and then just cook the occasional meal for the homeless or downtrodden. And then, of course, he needs to make sure people are watching when he does it. No sense in wasting good PR.

Also, his advice to youngsters, according to the Bradley media guide? Stay in school. He needs to harp on this message continuously, and it would help if he held a few "read to young kids" days at the library. Everyone loves the gentle giant who does his best to make his community better and fights his hardest to represent them on the basketball court.

And it might not hurt to strike up a pen-pal relationship with a soldier in Iraq, because anytime he didn't want to talk to reporters, he could just talk about how he gets discouraged sometimes because what he does is just a game. Meanwhile, the real heroes, like his friend, are off bravely defending our country overseas.

4) Hook-up with attention whore Hollywood starlet — Just a brief offseason fling is all that's really necessary. This worked wonders for Matt Leinart, bu it's easier to mix in with that crowd when you are in L.A. as opposed to Peoria, Illinois, but Big Pat could make it happen.

Someone like a Lindsay Lohan would be a great fit. He could meet her at some charity function (obviously, Lohan was tricked into going) and then they start hanging out, she helps him feed the hungry, they go to some function together, and then end up on a few tabloid covers. Naturally, Lohan would cheat on him after a week or two, but that will just again help put him over in the eyes of America. Everyone can sympathize with the caring, kind-hearted athlete who was stabbed in the back by one of America's biggest bimbos, a person who most Americans love to hate already.

5) Save a kid from impending doom — I don't care whether some gang members (they have gangs in Peoria, right?) try to jump some handicapped youngster and O'Bryant saves the day, or whether the youngster fell into an 18th century well and Big Pat has to use his shot-blocking arms to pull the kid to safety, but he has to do something. Tall people can be intimidating, but who will be intimidated of a guy who fought off some bullies to save a kid or helped someone get a second chance that life just didn't plan for them? There are a lot of people in this world who could use a 7'0" giant watching their backs, and if he does it for just one of them, then he's doing it for all of them.

Sure, O'Bryant will have a solid career either way, but stardom is within his reach. It's not a complicated process, and if Big Pat follows this simple plan, it could be the difference between a few local commercials as a quiet NBA big-man, or millions of dollars in endorsements for the man that simply loves America too much.

The Sports Gospel According to Mark is sponsored by BetOnSports.com. BetOnSports.com gives you the greatest sports action to bet on. Wager on football, cricket, boxing, rugby, horse racing, and more. Mark Chalifoux is also a weekly columnist for SportsFan Magazine. His columns appear every Tuesday and Thursday on Sports Central. You can e-mail Mark at [email protected].

Posted by Mark Chalifoux at 3:03 PM | Comments (0)

March 22, 2006

We Need a New Word For Underrated

The term underrated is used far too often.

Once a legitimate assessment, it has now become the trendy statement reduced to a dull void cliché. It's come to the point where being underrated is no longer a slight, but a sought-after title.

Relatively speaking, every player wants to be underrated. If Kobe Bryant is considered the best player in the game and a major media outlet like ESPN begins calling him underrated, then the feeling becomes that the "best in the game" title is not enough — more praise, more recognition is needed. Thus, underrated has become a cheap way for players and teams to get a little more pub, a little more ink, and a little more public praise thrown their way.

That's what irks me. The sentiment the term was originally meant to stand for still has its place. Many players can still justly say they don't get the recognition they deserve, that's what prompted me to write this article. But not long after my digits hit the keyboard, I realized the subject I was attempting to write about had lost its meaning. Not everyone who claims to be underrated has truly been slighted, most are just bitching. And the media uses to the term so liberally it's like hearing someone call themselves a Christian, so many people say it that it really doesn't mean much anymore, at least not like it used to.

So who really is underrated? Well, I'd be happy to tell you. What follows is a list of 10 players who I've found to get less attention, pub, and love then they deserve. Keep in mind that the list is not based on how good a player is or how well known a player is, but on how well his game is recognized and if that recognition is at the level it should be. Also, underrated-overrated discussions can be some of the deepest around, so I expect the comments to come forth abundantly.

10) Michael Redd (SG), Milwaukee Bucks: 25.1 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 3.1 apg, .386 3pt FG%

Redd has been an all-star and is one of the league's leading scorers, yes, but he still deserves to be on this list. At 25 points a game, Redd is one of the most consistent scorers in the NBA and one of its best pure shooters, yet he is constantly overlooked in favor of flashier guards who sit just a few notches up on the scoring leaders list. He isn't as much of a lost gem as he used to be, but he still doesn't get as much attention as other guards of his caliber.

9) Jamaal Magloire (C), Milwaukee Bucks: 10.1 ppg, 10.1 rpg

What can I say, no one pays attention to Milwaukee. Another Buck makes the list at number nine in Jamaal Magloire. Magloire also has an all-star appearance to his credit, but most wrongly doubted that he even deserved it. Jamaal isn't exactly exciting, but he is a consistent double-double on a nightly basis and legit center. Those two things in one package are hard to find in today's NBA and they shouldn't be overlooked here.

8) Chris Kaman (C), Los Angeles Clippers: 11.7 pps, 9.5 rpg, .522 FG%

I must admit, I wasn't always a Chris Kaman fan. I think it was the hair. His game, however, was enough to win me over. Kaman is an excellent rebounder and his offense game has developed from nearly non-existent to pretty damn serviceable. He shoots good percentages and finishes well around the basket. Kaman is a great compliment to Elton Brand and is a key piece for the Clippers.

7) Bruce Bowen (G/F), San Antonio Spurs: 7.8 ppg, 3.8 rpg, .449 3pt FG%

If it wasn't for his selection to the U.S. National Team, Bowen may have ended up higher on this list. He's been a regular on the NBA All-Defense team and gets annual talk for Defensive Player of the Year, but even so, I don't think many people understand the effect he has on games. I consider him the defensive equivalent to Kobe Bryant. Bowen makes defensive plays at will like Kobe does on offense. Bowen makes more of an impact defensively than any other player in the league, period.

6) Mike Bibby (PG), Sacramento Kings: 20.6 ppg, 5.6 apg, .371 3pt FG%

Bibby gained his initial fame in the 2002 playoffs, posting big numbers and nailing bigger shots. Since then, however, the Kings have declined and apparently Bibby's short-lived fame did with them. Of course, Bibby isn't as good as he was in that '02 playoff run — he's better. Bibby is a consistent 20-point scorer and the best playmaker on a team poised to seize a playoff spot despite an ugly start to the season. Bibby is the catalyst for his team and a top-five point guard in this league.

5) Mike James (G), Toronto Raptors: 18.9 ppg, 5.6 apg, .427 3pt FG%

Mike James might be one of the most overlooked guards in the NBA. His numbers are near all-star status and his game is right on pace, as well. James has got a quick first step for great penetration and a deadly shot from deep. When he's in rhythm, he's one of the toughest covers in the league. The obvious knock would be that he gets his numbers on a bad team, but as I like to say, either you got game or you don't — Mike James got game.

4) Josh Howard (G/F), Dallas Mavericks: 15.5 ppg, 6.4 rpg, .412 3pt FG%

Injury has slowed him down of late, but when he's healthy, he's as good a player the Mavericks have. If anything is underestimated about Howard, it's his importance to the Mavs. Josh Howard is nearly as valuable, if not as valuable, as Dirk Nowitzki is to the Mavericks, that's why it's imperative he gets healthy before the playoffs. His perimeter shooting is vastly improved from his first two seasons and he's athletic enough to finish at the rim regularly.

3) David West (F), Oklahoma City/New Orleans Hornets: 16.9 ppg, 7.4 rpg, .514 FG%

As a third-year player, West is the leading scorer and rebounder on a young Hornets team that has surprised a lot of people and is contending for a playoff spot. What West has done speaks for itself, he's stepped up his game immensely since his second year and, along with Chris Paul, is the key to this success for this Hornets team.

2) Boris Diaw (N/A), Phoenix Suns: 13.2 ppg, 6.9 rpg, 5.9 apg - .520 FG%

As I'm sure you noticed, I did not list Boris Diaw's position. I couldn't. Diaw isn't a guard or a forward, he's just a basketball player and a damn good one at that. Steve Nash has helped his scoring output, certainly, but Diaw's rebounding and playmaking ability can be attributed only to himself. Diaw is truly one of the most versatile players in the League and is the most important player on this Suns team after Steve Nash. Diaw is the reason why Amare Stoudemire can sit out the rest of the year and the Suns can still make a deep playoff run.

1) Andrei Kirilenko (F), Utah Jazz: 14.9 ppg, 8.0 rpg, 4.1 apg, 1.56 spg, 2.90 bpg

Kirilenko has been an all-star, led the league in blocks, and been named to All-Defense teams, and despite that, I still don't think people get it. Kirilenko tops this list not because he isn't recognized as a good player, but because he isn't recognized as a great player. Kirilenko has freakish length and all-world skill. He is a superstar without question. He won't be getting named to any All-NBA teams due to the sub-par record of the Utah Jazz , but on skills alone, Kirilenko is a top-10 player.

Honorable mention: Troy Murphy (GS), Mehmet Okur (UTA), Nenad Krstic (NJ), Luke Ridnour (SEA), Samuel Dalembert (PHI), Gerald Wallace (CHA)

Posted by Jordan Rivas at 11:10 AM | Comments (1)

Soriano Hung Out to Dry By Nats

How often does it happen that a present Major League Baseball all-star player gets treated with so little respect that he is told after his trade to another team that he will have to give up his starting position or else? After all, baseball has come a long way since free agency, forming its players' association, gaining arbitration for its players, and providing them access to high-powered agents that nearly guarantee them a shot at multi-million dollar contracts.

But this latest faux pas on the part of Major League Baseball ownership concerns second baseman Alfonso Soriano, formerly of the Texas Rangers and the New York Yankees, who has spent the entirety of his major league career playing second base. He has been known, however, for his offense over the past five years that included his first three years, 2001- 2003, with the New York Yankees and his last two years, 2004 and 2005, with the Texas Rangers.

Yet, before all of the so-called expert pundits and baseball fans have at it with their generalizations about the latest supposed "spoiled professional athlete who should grow up," it would be wise to examine exactly which athlete they are attacking and the circumstances involved. Unfortunately, it is athletes such as the NFL's Terrell Owens who have now given all professional athletes a bad name.

The dilemma which has become the talk of the day and should play itself out by week's end, or around March 24, 2006, involves the controversial trade of Soriano from the Texas Rangers to the Washington Nationals on December 7, 2005, which became official on December 13, 2005. The Washington Nationals' General Manager, Jim Bowden, was looking to get some pop in the Nats' lineup and offered to trade outfielder Brad Wilkerson, outfielder Termel Sludge, and minor league pitching prospect Armando Galarraga to the Rangers.

Prior to the trade, in all fairness to Bowden, he claims that before the Nationals signed off on the deal, he requested the Rangers' permission to speak to Soriano first, to specifically ask him if he would agree to change his second base position to left field. The Rangers said no, supposedly pending players' physicals, and precisely because they knew of Soriano's history of not wanting to change positions in the past and did not want to kill the deal. According to Bowden, "We took it [to mean that] if we talked to the player [the Rangers felt] that the player would say no [to changing positions] and the deal would be killed." Soriano was never consulted about being traded either, for that matter.

When Soriano originally signed his first Major League Baseball contract with the New York Yankees in 2001, he was a shortstop, which he considered his natural position. Obviously, with shortstop Derek Jeter at that position, the Yankees were forced to find another position for him as he showed so much promise with his bat.

When he filled in briefly at shortstop for a few weeks during spring training in the 2001 season when Jeter was nursing an injury, he proved to the Yankees that they had to have him in the lineup everyday. And when Jeter returned that spring, Soriano was moved to left field, albeit for a total of only five games. Soriano was expected to start the season there, but when second baseman Chuck Knoblauch developed a mental block with the inability to throw to first base, the Yankees switched the two players' positions. Since that time, Soriano has never played any other position but second base and has never played a regular season major league game in the outfield.

But upon arriving in Texas in 2004, when Soriano was traded by the Yankees for Alex Rodriguez, Rangers manager Buck Showalter had another rising star in Michael Young, also a second baseman, who needed to be added to lineup. Unlike Bowden's approach, however, Showalter felt out the situation with Soriano changing positions. "We just talked about trying to make some plans and asked him how he felt about it. It wasn't something we were trying to cram down his throat." And Michael Young helped resolve the situation by volunteering to move to shortstop, as Soriano was adamant about not moving from second base.

Given Soriano's known history of relishing his position at second base in spite of steeped criticism of his defense, it makes Jim Bowden's deal for him seem ill-fated from the onset, as it was well known throughout MLB of Soriano's reticence to change positions. And in the case of Soriano, Yogi Berra's philosophy could not hold more true as "baseball is 90% mental, the other 50% is physical." Given Soriano's being so upset with the situation is enough to distract his offense, let alone learning a whole knew position as the season progresses.

But one would think that his stellar offensive skills and good attitude would have earned him some brownie points to not have been put in this position in the first place. A four-time all-star from 2002-2005 and the MVP of the 2004 All-Star Game, Soriano has earned his notoriety and the $10 million he will earn this year, due to his record-high arbitration case. Although considered a defensive liability, Soriano's offensive stats are more than impressive. They include his breakout season in 2002 when he had 209 hits, 128 runs scored, 39 home runs, 102 RBI, 41 stolen bases, 51 doubles, a .332 batting average, and 198 hits. In 2003, Soriano followed up with very comparable stats with a .338 batting average, 35 stolen bases, 38 home runs, 114 runs scored, 198 hits, and 91 RBI.

In 2004 when he was with his new team, the Rangers, his offense dipped slightly, but he finished with a respectable .324 batting average with 91 RBI and 170 hits. And in 2005, his batting average dropped off markedly to .268, but he still scored 102 runs, had 171 hits, 43 doubles, 36 home runs, 30 stolen bases, and 104 RBI. Only time will tell how the grand expanse of RFK Stadium in Washington, DC and adjusting to the National League will impact his offensive skills.

Following the no-show of Soriano for the Nationals' spring training game against the Los Angeles Dodgers on March 20th, when he was written in the lineup by manager Frank Robinson to play leftfield, he will have another opportunity to redeem himself by showing up for the March 22nd game that the Nationals have against the St. Louis Cardinals in another preseason matchup. It has been promised that the lineup card will remain the same according to Robinson.

Should Soriano maintain his refusal to play left field and thus refuse to play, according to Bowden, the Nationals will petition MLB's Commissioner's Office to place Soriano on the rarely used "disqualified list." This additionally presents Commissioner Bud Selig with a new twist to the problem, in that MLB officially still owns the Nationals, as Selig has failed as of yet to get a deal done for new ownership. Becoming "disqualified" translates into Soriano losing his salary for 2006, losing any credit for 2006 service time, and his chance to become a free agent at the end of the season would also be lost as he would remain the property of the Nationals.

Since Soriano chose to participate in the March 2006 World Baseball Classic (WBC) for the Dominican Republic team, should he decide to play left field, he now has less than two weeks in which to learn a non-infield position he has never officially played. Bowden claims that during Soriano's time away during the WBC he tried to work a deal to trade Soriano if the right offer came along. "We obviously will field offers, but we're not going to give the player away, Bowden said on March 20th. "If we can make a deal that makes sense, we would have. At this point,a we have not been given a trade proposal that makes any sense for the Nationals, he said.

Besides putting his manager, Frank Robinson, in an uncomfortable position, and giving Soriano an ultimatum of playing left field after the trade was completed, leaves the actions of Bowden questionable. Combined with the fact that the Nationals already had an all-star second baseman in Jose Vidro, and Bowden's admission that he had heard of Soriano's prior insistence on playing second base prior to the deal with the Rangers, could put his own job in jeopardy when new ownership is finally decided.

After all, the deal for Soriano was misguided at best and Bowden's theory that he alone could convince Soriano to change positions was foolhardy. It begs the question, excuses aside, which Soriano himself asked of Bowden, "Why didn't you try to talk to me before you made the trade?"

Posted by Diane M. Grassi at 10:49 AM | Comments (0)

March 21, 2006

Empathy For Borg?

As I was reading the news online late in my hotel room in Denver, Colorado, I came across a tragic article. The article said that Bjorn Borg, the legendary Swedish tennis star was putting his five Wimbledon trophies up for sale, along with two of his rackets, one of which he used when he won his first Wimbledon in 1976 defeating Ilie Nastase, and the other which he used when he won the classic 1980 Wimbledon finals match against John McEnroe.

It was shortly before I went to bed at the end of a tiresome day involving a ton of traveling. I had to read the article one more time to make sure it was not my tiredness playing tricks on me. Still stunned, I went to three different reliable news sources to make sure that what I am reading was not a mirage or a science fiction article involving the Borg from Star Trek The Next Generation.

Barely able to keep my eyes closed, I turned off my computer, went to bed, and closed my eyes. I did not go to sleep immediately, however. I stayed awake for a good 30 minutes wondering how in the world this could happen to such an invincible man. I spent all 30 minutes immersed in nostalgia.

I remembered how at a small tennis club in Switzerland in 1980 I was playing a junior tournament final, and I hurried up to shake my opponent's hand at the end of the match, running to the clubhouse to catch the rest of that legendary Wimbledon finals match between Borg and McEnroe, while cursing the tournament director for scheduling my measly finals match at the same time as the Wimbledon finals, hence making me miss the first two sets.

I remembered coming back early from my skiing day-trip on my vacation in Megeve, France to the hotel room, just so I could watch Borg toy with Vitas Gerulaitis in the finals of Masters tournament in 1979.

I remembered putting together a collage of pictures of Borg that I collected from magazines, and enthusiastically making a piece of art out of it, just so I could impress Borg at the 1981 Martini Open in Geneva and have him sign it. I remember breaking the world sprint record for 30 meters, running back to my Mom and Dad to show them that he did indeed just sign my collage about 40 seconds ago.

So many memories of Borg from those years came flooding back. None of them involved how much money he made or what his check was when he won one of his 11 Slam titles. For the generation of tennis lovers that had the chance to watch him, Borg was a symbol of tennis, someone above a mere tennis player or an athlete. Tennis without him was never the same, a point so often made by two of his biggest rivals as well as two of the biggest egos in tennis — John McEnroe and Jimmy Connors.

I mean, the guy's pulse rate at rest was below 40 per minute for crying out loud.

Borg's life and career took a 180-degree turn after he retired abruptly from tennis in 1983. Showing the sides of his character that none of his fans ever knew existed (didn't McEnroe once say, "Borg was the biggest character in tennis without ever having one!"), Borg became the prime example of the motto "athletes only know how to play sports, and nothing else!"

For years following his retirement, it seemed that money was the only subject mentioned whenever Borg's name comes up in the news.

But this?

Selling his five Wimbledon trophies and two rackets for "long-term financial security?" This quote coming from a guy who had a fortune of over $60 million dollars?

Selling his Wimbledon trophies and rackets at an auction? An auction where he hopes people will make silly hand signals for higher bids and pay around $700,000 dollars for his collection? How did it ever get this way? Is there a more tragic road traveled from a high to a low?

Apparently, the formula of this tragedy involves several lawsuits with business partners and girlfriends, a custody battle involving a child with an teenage girlfriend, two divorces, cocaine use, failed business ventures and an ensuing bankruptcy, years long feud with Swedish tax authorities, a humiliating comeback attempt in 1991, an alleged suicide attempt, and complete surrender to an outrageously irresponsible lifestyle and partying.

Do I feel empathy for Borg? It's hard for me to say objectively. In a way, Borg was bigger than tennis. A vast generation of youngsters (especially in Europe) took up a tennis racket for the first time in their lives only because of Borg. He is not just an important figure in the history of the game. He is an enigma in the game of tennis. So for me, a mere individual who is a part of that vast generation, not to feel empathy for Borg would be similar to not having any feelings if the house where I grew up was destroyed in an explosion or an earthquake.

Sure, I will hear people in my tennis-related surroundings talking about what an idiot Borg is for squandering away his estimated $60 million dollar fortune (give or take a few). I will hear them mention casually how smartly they would invest if they had such a fortune, etc. I may even hear young tennis players say, "Who is Borg?" Perhaps I will even secretly resent them for saying such things without walking a mile in the man's shoes or never having seen him perform the miracles on the court.

Even I, however, must admit that he is no longer the icon he was once upon a time. His image and legend are tarnished. He is, after all, an ordinary man with extraordinary athletic ability. And you will not me see run to get the signature of the person who ends up buying his trophies and rackets.

Yes, perhaps some might say that he is a loser in all aspects of life other than the tennis court. Just don't say that out loud when you are with me. After all, he is the enigma called Bjorn Borg. In my world of tennis, he is no loser and needs no empathy.

Posted by Mert Ertunga at 2:02 PM | Comments (9)

Madness Geographied: Weekend in Review

The NCAA tournament is chaos. There is a reason it's called "the madness." It's disjointed, controversial, bizarre, and rarely makes any sense whatsoever.

For instance, of the four teams that played in Philadelphia on Sunday, three of them were named "Wildcats." One such team, Villanova, a Philadelphia school, played their first two games in Philadelphia, same as fellow top-seed UConn, but supposedly didn't have home-court advantage — even though they beat UConn earlier this season on the same court in their biggest game of the year. Villanova is in the Minneapolis bracket. The UConn Huskies are in the Washington, DC bracket. So are the other Huskies, the University of Washington. Confused? Me, too.

According to the CBS scorekeeper in the corner of the screen, BRAD played PITT in Detroit. That game was followed by West Virginia beating Northwestern State (which is located in neither the north or the west). The University of Oakland hosted both games, but only one of the games was part of the "Oakland" bracket, which will reconvene in California next week.

Maybe this is why Jim Nantz called it "one of the wildest weekends ever" — no one knew where they were. It couldn't have been the results. Other than how teams won, closer than expected games and large comebacks, there wasn't a huge surprise all weekend. As you can see, it is virtually impossible to build a coherent essay on the NCAA tournament, so I'm going through it region by region and we'll try and make sense of it for Thursday.

Atlanta Region

Duke did Duke things. J.J. Redick hit threes that mortals miss and get benched for. Their role players played steady. They never looked like they would come close to losing at any time and they never embarrassed any one either. Classic Coach K all around. I'm not sure why every year I think they will blow out the 16-seed they play. I'm sure I have seen it, but the last couple years they just get a nice, easy win and move on and you really don't know what you are looking at heading into the second weekend.

Prior to the tournament, I had them going out either against LSU or one round later to Texas. While Texas could still be a possibility, you can't get too excited about LSU. They didn't exactly manhandle No. 13 Iona and needed a pseudo-buzzer beater to beat Texas A&M. With that being said, they are still a team that theoretically matches up well with Duke. They have long athletes to guard J.J., and someone to bang with Shelden Williams. Perhaps their unimpressive weekend was a case of bad matchups.

About a month ago, I wrote in this space that Iowa would normally be the first team I would take out as an upset. While I didn't write a tournament preview, Iowa's high seed was enough for me stick to my guns and fight the urge to take them out in my bracket. Sure enough, they take a dive in the second half against Louisiana's Northwestern State, leaving them open to one of the most improbable shots in tournament history.

In terms of difficulty, doesn't the NSU buzzer-beater go down as, maybe, the most ridiculous? He shoots it from in the corner, almost behind the basket, for three, and down two points. Is this the first round or a game of horse? If there is a tougher shot, please let me know. He might as well have tried the "Sweet Lou Dunbar Half-Court Hook Shot." Anyway, West Virginia moves on to face Texas (who, surprisingly, few people are talking about), no surprises here. Speaking of which, is there something wrong with taking a team that has been consistently good over the years and may have all five starters in the NBA eventually? I'm pretty excited about having them in the finals. With that being said, the Mountaineers will probably shoot them back to Austin.

Oakland Region

I did not see one second of Memphis this weekend. This is usually good news. CBS only goes to your game if it's in doubt and theirs never really were. Of course, I was at work on Friday, but I never paid attention to their score because there was no reason to. Is this a team that goes to the Final Four? If I had told them they had to beat Oral Roberts, Bucknell, and Bradley in order to face a one-gamer against either Gonzaga or UCLA for a spot in Indy, do you think they would have signed up? Umm, yeah.

Speaking of which, Bradley center Patrick O'Bryant is my new favorite player. He finishes with finesse, plays defense straight-up, passes out of the double team, provides a perfect outlet in breaking the press, and hits free throws in the clutch. Oh, and he's a sophomore. Wow. Can we all chip in for a keep-him-in-school fund to have this guy around two more years? This is the kind of guy that catapults the "Valley" conference into major status. Though if Kyle Korver couldn't do it, it may be impossible.

All this talk and I haven't even gotten to the play of the tournament. For anyone who joined me in astutely taking the SDSU Aztecs to take out Indiana in the first round, you know where I am going with this. If you were dribbling a basketball and someone knocked it out of your hand, you would know it, right? You would know that you didn't just dribble it away. So if that basketball rolled behind the half court line, you would pick it up. In fact, how often do you see a backcourt violation and the player picks the ball up and immediately claims the opponent deflected it? This is the usual course of action. Pickup the ball and argue if necessary.

Instead, with a five-second shot clock difference, SDSU junior guard Brandon Heath inexplicably attempted the block-out bait-and-switch leading to the tie-up, jump-ball-alternate-possession and the inevitable, betyourhousethisshotisgoingdown scramble three-pointer to win the game for Indiana. Of course, the Hoosiers were no match for Gonzaga and pretty much just wasted everyone's time.

When I am president of sports, I would allow for occasional history re-writes: the final bracket would have SDSU as the team that advanced in the second round. Brandon Heath would be stricken from the record. Kind of like how the NCAA did with the Jim O'Brien era at Ohio State last month. It never happened, and if you want to play again, Mr. Heath, we'll have to review if there should be additional punishment. I may have a couple dollars towards the Aztecs, not sure. No one is really talking about this play. Probably because it was: a) after midnight on a Thursday and b) the winner was getting killed by Gonzaga either way.

By the way, I have no idea who wins the UCLA/Gonzaga game and then I will have no idea who wins the regional final. This quarter-bracket was difficult last Sunday night and nothing has changed a week later.

Washington, DC Region

The NCAA tournament is big. You know how I know this? I am in the 99.5 percentile on ESPN.com's bracket challenge. This gets me barely into the top 15,000 in the world. My seventh grade math class tells me there are three million entries on the website. Now, how many people do you know are signed up on ESPN versus those who filled out a bracket that isn't on ESPN.com?

Personally, I think the ratio is like one ESPN bracket for every 40 non-ESPN bracket. More math means there are 120 million brackets lying around on coffee tables in North America. This is almost half of North America. Of course, for every one of me, there is someone like my Mom who mentioned to me in an e-mail that she heard "there was an upset the other day." Great job, Mom, it's good to know she isn't having a secret affair with Dick Vitale, Digger Phelps, or Joe Lunardi.

What does any of this have to do with the Washington Regional? Nothing. Its just a long-winded way of telling you I am in the 99.5 percentile in North America before it all goes up in flames around 9 PM EST on Thursday.I can waste this space because UConn was penned in to the finals on day one and if anyone wants to take Washington/George Mason/Wichita St. for their final four come talk to me about a wager.

Scrappy effort by Kentucky, though — exactly what you would expect from a team that underachieved all year with a ton of talent — close, but no cigar. This bracket is really all about disappointment. Illinois, Michigan State, North Carolina. Talent, talent, and more talent and yet we've got Brandon Roy, George Mason, and the Shockers (who I could have sworn were a wrestling tag team) trying to knock off a team that if kept together for a couple years, would probably make the NBA playoffs in 2008. Assuming they would be in Eastern Conference, of course. In fact, if Isiah Thomas was smart, he would negotiate a deal with David Stern to just take the UConn Huskies and restart the Knicks.

Minneapolis Region

This is my favourite quarter. Only because my bracket is "clean" — all highlighter, no sharpie. Plus, it contains the Boston College Eagles who managed the gambling highlight of the first two rounds. Any time a large favorite can cover a point spread in double overtime, well, that's a treat. Unfortunately for me, I have B.C. and Georgetown advancing to the Elite Eight and that sounded like a lot better idea early last week when the image of Allen Ray's eye outside of its lid was still fresh in my memory.

That injury, by the way, has to rank as one of the top-five grossest injuries ever. His top eyelid was behind his eye! I'm sorry, that's right there with Joe Theismann, Moises Alou, and Willis McGahee. I'm willing to argue it's worse because it was his eye and more impressive because he is back making clutch free throws and NBA-distance threes a week later. It gives me chills just thinking about him telling the story of how the ambulance kept hitting potholes on the way to the hospital in New York. Ugh.

While we are here, I can't be the only one to have seen Ohio State and Tennessee going out this early, can I? I mean, if these teams made the Elite Eight that would be upset. I was discussing with a co-worker the other day about Tennessee specifically. It's an interesting phenomenon as people were talking about how Winthrop could beat them. Two weeks ago, I thought to myself that Tennessee would be a good sleeper in the three, four, or five spot. Then they get a two-seed and they are automatically the worst team of all-time suddenly?

Sure enough, they get ousted, so maybe I don't have a point here, but I would have liked to see what people would say about the team if they were a four-seed on pace for a game against, say, Memphis. Finally, I refuse to even make a statement about Georgetown. I am an incredibly superstitious individual when it comes to things in the same realm as jinxing a no-hitter and the SI cover curse. So let's just say I am looking forward to see how this shakes down and move on.

Final Four

How do you write a conclusion to a story that hasn't been written yet? Well, you don't. Simply stated: UCLA, Texas, UConn, and ... shhhhhh ... Don't tell ... Well, let's just say they are from a capital city and will be looking for a "Dubya" in Indianapolis. Damn, I probably just jinxed them.

Posted by Matt Russell at 1:32 PM | Comments (0)

March 20, 2006

NCAA Tournament Weekend Wrap-Up

A few observations from the NCAA tournament this past weekend:

Things the Committee Got Right

The MVC and other small conferences. For all the whining that was doled out by Jim Nantz and Billy Packer that too many small schools got entries over more deserving ones from the power conferences, it must have been pleasantly gratifying for the committee to see the likes of George Mason, Bradley, and Wichita State advance to the Sweet 16 by knocking off major schools from major conferences, including a few elite and storied programs like Kansas and North Carolina.

Things the Committee Got Wrong

Tennessee and Air Force. How Tennessee received a two seed last Sunday was a mystery, and they did nothing to prove any of their naysayers wrong. After barely edging out Winthrop, the Vols were knocked out by seventh-seeded Wichita State. But Tennessee's seed was minor compared to the committee's shock inclusion of Air Force in the field of 64. The Eagles only gave their detractors more grist for the mill after a rather uninspiring loss to the Illini in the first round.

What CBS Did Right

Allowing Billy Packer and Jim Nantz to crucify the committee chairman Craig Littlepage. Not often do we see networks with the temerity to bite the hand that feeds them. Kudos, gents!

What CBS Did Wrong

Deciding not to show replays of controversial calls, whether it be a foul or travel. After, no exaggeration, two billion times of asking "can I get a replay of that terrible call?" I began to lose track. Also, they let Leslie Moonves sue Howard Stern. Lame. Baba-booey.

Be Happy This isn't College Football

You have to prove it on the floor regardless. Should Florida State and Cincinnati have been included? Maybe, but we're arguing about the 65th best team in the country being left out. At least Auburn didn't go undefeated, only to be shut out of the national title because their pre-season ranking wasn't high enough.

It's the Teams, Not the Conferences, Stupid!

The ACC and the MVC have the exact same amount of teams in the Sweet 16. Does that mean the conferences are equal? Who cares? Even if the ACC had four teams ranked in the top 10, does that automatically make the rest of their conference better? Can't there be four really good teams and eight terrible ones? And thus by contrast, couldn't there be six better than average teams in the Missouri Valley, but none of them approaching the lofty standards of Duke? It's not about conferences, it's about the teams, and that being said...

The Big 10 Stinks

Six teams and no one gets out of the second round? Give me break, that's terrible! This was the highest-ranked conference according to the RPI? Thank god the committee didn't rely heavily on that. Michigan's omission can now be retired into the annals of history, not as one of the great injustices as some pundits were referring to it, but as another wise decision the committee can rest its laurels on.

The Return of West Coast Basketball

Gonzaga, Washington, and UCLA have all advanced to the Sweet 16. Arizona was more than respectable against Villanova, and Pacific and San Diego State both almost pulled off first round upsets. The left coast's long climb back to respectability has taken its first steps.

Pittsburgh Still Can't Shoot

Despite an .818 regular season winning percentage over the last five years while playing in one of the toughest leagues in the country, the Panthers remain a tournament anomaly, or more accurately the most unsurprising expected unexpected surprise ouster of every year.

Part of the reason Pittsburgh has failed to advance past the Sweet 16 in the last half-decade is their lack of scoring. Their Big East blueprint of toughness and brute force proves effective against conference foes, but as we have seen the last two years, it's not a style that yields results in the Big Dance.

The Greensboro Announcing Team Needs to Chillax

Kevin Harlan and his partner Dan Bonner (who might be better known to viewers as that guy who screamed and hollered at the top of his lungs anytime anyone made the most rudimentary of passes or baskets as if he were blind for the last 20 years and had just retained his sight the day before) need to chill out and act like they've been there before. And Harlan actually asked when Chris Lofton made a game-winning jumper, "Where did he get the courage to take that shot?"

Good grief! It wasn't so much courage as it was time constraints — there was less than a second remaining when the ball went through the hoop. Feel free to drop the scripted call if the situation dictates otherwise.

And another thing, that play when they call the timeout when falling out of bounds is no longer heady/smart/mature, etc. It might have been back when they started doing it in 1985. Now it's just annoying and the rules need to be changed.

Upsets Come in Various Forms

Northwestern State and George Mason knocked off Iowa and North Carolina in low-scoring affairs, while Bradley and, to a lesser degree, Alabama, achieved their upsets by outscoring high-flying Kansas and Marquette teams. It might help to limit possessions, but it's more important to make your open threes.

Everybody is More or Less the Same

Except Connecticut. If they lose, I will be shocked. They haven't played well, and they still have yet to be in a situation where they are on the brink. And by on the brink, I mean losing in the last minute, not down by 10 to a 16-seed in the second half, that doesn't count.

Otherwise, if anyone loses, it won't be considered a surprise. After Bradley knocked off Kansas and Pittsburgh, would it really "shock" anyone if they got past Memphis? If Texas beats Duke, no one will be awed. Even though it is a cliché, parity rules in college hoops.

And One More Cliché

This is the best annual sporting event America has to offer. It seems as if almost every game in this tournament has come down to the last minute. I always wind up rooting enormously hard for schools where not only do I not know a single player/coach/alumnus, but I have no idea what city/state/region of the country that school is located in.

George Mason? No idea. Bradley? I think it's one of those states that begin with an "I", no? Wichita State? That's Kansas, I was born there. Okay, I know one. Actually, I was born on the Missouri side of Kansas City, thus proving my point that watching this tournament is so much fun it will literally make you forget where you were born.

Posted by Piet Van Leer at 5:37 PM | Comments (0)

Closing the Gap

To some coaches of the NCAA's top 20 basketball programs in the 1980s and early 1990s, scary movies didn't have titles like "Friday the 13th" or "Nightmare on Elm Street," but "Princeton vs. Villanova game film."

To those coaches, gear didn't come in the form of Freddy Kruger's dagger fingertips or Jason Voorhees' pitchfork. Instead, it wore a suit and went by the name of Pete Carril.

Carril, who coached at Princeton for 30 seasons, took years off the life of many of his counterparts by putting up good battles in the NCAA men's basketball tournament's opening round with low-seeded teams.

Those Tigers squads weren't as talented as the top-shelf teams they played against, but they flawlessly executed Carril's philosophy.

But ultimately, the script usually called for Tigers put a scare into guys like Villanova's Rollie Massimino, Arkansas' Nolan Richardson, or Georgetown's John Thompson — national champion coaches all — before losing.

Carril's Princeton teams were notable for their ability to perform all of the basketball fundamentals, be relentless in their effort, and avoid making mistakes.

This year, though — the 10th anniversary of Carril's last trip to the NCAA tournament — the underdogs did a lot more than scare the favorites. The longshots came in.

Based on the opening round seedings, six of the tournament's remaining 16 teams shouldn't be there. That includes Bradley (13th seed), George Mason (11), Wichita State (7), Georgetown (7), West Virginia (6), and Washington (5).

Fully one-fourth of the first weekend's games — 12 of 48 — ended in legitimate upsets. And that doesn't include Pacific's tough Princeton-style effort in an 88-76 loss to Boston College.

And, since all of those upsets involve teams seeded at least one slot higher than their opponents, the list also doesn't include ninth-seeded Bucknell's first-round win over eight seed Arkansas, or fifth seed Washington over fourth-seeded Illinois.

It also doesn't include West Virginia, which defeated two lower-seeded teams en route to the Sweet 16.

And, while it's still too early to tell, or to rule out the possibility that the NCAA basketball committee members were drunk when they seeded this field, these results might not be a fluke, but the beginning of a pattern.

In the Carril era, unit cohesion, good shooting, and defensive hustle could get a team so far, but usually not all the way against a squad that holds a huge advantage in talent.

However, in recent years, the very best players — the ones who would end up in programs like Tennessee or the University of North Carolina, two of the second-round upset victims — are now bolting for the NBA after one or two years, or even before they set foot in a college classroom.

Without those marquee players, many of the top 20 programs are left with second-tier talent and no cohesion.

Meanwhile, it's pretty unlikely that very many Bradley recruits picked the school over pro ball, unless it's the Swedish League. But today, the 13th-seeded Griffins are getting ready for a surprise week of practice after victories over No. 4 Kansas and five seed Pittsburgh.

With players defecting from the top-shelf programs, the Bradleys and George Masons of the college basketball world have been able to creep closer to their supposed betters. Close enough that victory is only a matter of good shooting and a concerted effort.

The upset storm will probably end this weekend, if only because the top teams remaining hold a sizeable talent advantage over the Sweet 16 party crashers.

And it's no coincidence that the tournament favorite also has the best senior player — Duke, with J.J. Redick.

But it's also worth noting that, just a few years ago, the trend of top players skipping college was being lamented as being the end of NCAA basketball. Instead, it's helped make the tournament more exciting.

Just don't tell that to all those people who picked the favorites in their office pool.

Posted by Eric Poole at 11:31 AM | Comments (1)

Lucky Sevens: Potential NBA Cinderellas

Concerned basketball fans can take it easy, there is life after March Madness. The NBA playoffs aren't always as exciting and nobody wants to talk about them before April, but once the nets are cut down in Indianapolis, people will be looking for a fix and there aren't always many places to turn.

Of course, after two weeks of squeaking sneakers and buzzer-beaters, the NBA will seem tired, contrived, and above all else, filled with spoiled egomaniacs that don't appear to care nearly as much as their college counterparts (all of which it sort of is).

But there is some good news. This year's playoff edition could actually be exciting, even if you can't imagine how.

Yes, there's a good chance the Detroit Pistons could cruise to their second title in the last three years, but even if they do, there could be some very interesting performances by others along the way. Of course, such scenarios aren't very likely, but then again, that's what makes them fun to think about.

In the Eastern Conference, beyond the Pistons, the Shaq and Wade Show, and LeBron James, there's not much to look at. New Jersey's soft and the Pacers don't appear too intent on putting it together. If Jermaine O'Neal comes back healthy, we'll talk. Otherwise, the only championship in Indiana this year will be the one handed out at the end of the Final Four.

But I'm not writing the rest of the east off entirely. One team I'm strangely intrigued by is the Milwaukee Bucks. They're not even .500 and I write this two days after they surrendered a double-digit fourth quarter lead to the Toronto Raptors, but there's just something about them. They don't defend well, they give up a point a game more than they score, and yet while most see extreme mediocrity, I see Cinderella getting ready for the ball.

Milwaukee has more than enough talent to shock their way to the end of April. It's all about balance. They have stars in the making in Andrew Bogut and T.J. Ford, depth on the front line with Jamaal Magloire and Dan Gadzuric, legitimate scoring and intangibles from Bobby Simmons and Michael Redd and reliable, often underrated bench players in Maurice Williams, Tony Kukoc, Joe Smith, Jiri Welsch, and Ervin "Why the Long Face?" Johnson. When they play well, they're as much of a team as any in the NBA, and they can run guys at opponents all night long.

I'm not saying they're sure to shock the world, but if there's going to be a surprise in the Eastern Conference come playoff time it could very well be Terry Stotts' club — assuming they can actually hold on to the seventh seed.

As one might expect, the Western Conference is a bit more convoluted, but strangely, much like in the East, I find myself drawn to that seventh team. Dallas and Phoenix could very well score their way into the second or third round, but neither's done enough to prove they can beat San Antonio during the one time of year NBA players actually "D" up. What you'll get from relative newcomers Memphis, Denver, and the L.A. Clippers is equally difficult to predict.

But I will make one predication — look out for the Sacramento Kings.

You're talking about a team with principal players that have taken part in past playoff runs and they still feature one of the best passing big men in Brad Miller and Mike Bibby, who's had some of the most impressive games of any point guard in the NBA this year. They may lack a ton of solid guard play beyond Bibby, but what's unique about this club is that they can run bangers at you faster than an English waitress.

Corliss Williamson, Kenny Thomas, and Shareef Abdur-Rahim should be able to out-rebound almost every collection of bench front lines badly, and if you add the versatility of Bonzi Wells, the Kings are also much deeper than most of the teams they'll face. And then, of course, there's Ron Artest.

The idea of Ron-Ron putting any team on his shoulders seems ridiculous these days, but if (and this sort of pondering is always built on "ifs") all of the aforementioned can click at the right time, Artest could be the guy to take Sacramento from a fading Western Conference power to one of the surprise contenders down the stretch in 2006.

Don't forget, even though they won't have home-court advantage, Arco Arena is still one of the toughest places in the league to play, and that could put Rick Adelman's club in a position where all they have to do is steal one or two on the road to pull off a first round upset and beyond.

Combined, the Bucks and Kings were 65-65 as of Sunday, meaning most NBA fans aren't expecting to see much of either in the coming weeks. But as we temporarily focus on Shockers from Wichita State and other last-second spectacles at the Big Dance, Milwaukee and Sacramento — less than exciting teams from two rather boring cities — are quietly positioning themselves to remind you miracles can happen, even when millions are made.

Posted by Aaron Miller at 11:03 AM | Comments (0)

I Hate Mondays: When They're Gone

Doesn't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone?

By severing relationships with their franchise quarterbacks, the San Diego Chargers and the Minnesota Vikings have paved their paradise and put in a parking lot.

On one hand, there is an argument for replacing a paradise with a pink hotel, a boutique, and a swinging hot spot.

For San Diego, Drew Brees was commanding an annual eight-figure salary after suffering a serious shoulder injury, while Philip Rivers, a more affordable, burgeoning young stud, was waiting to blossom.

For Minnesota, their franchise face Daunte Culpepper was now a frowned upon figure after a season rife with on-field and off-field calamities. He is also recovering from a severe injury.

But even so, considering that the quarterback is the most important position on a football team and takes the longest to develop, one might question what exactly the Chargers and Vikings are doing.

When San Diego drafted Drew Brees with the first pick in the second round of the 2001 draft, they expected him to be their solution at quarterback. After three discouraging seasons, though, their expectations were lowered. His 29-31 TD-INT ratio and his sub-80.0 quarterback rating had the Chargers' front office so uncertain about his future that they used their highest pick in the 2004 draft on a quarterback.

But after three seasons of headaches for the Chargers, Brees finally blossomed into a Pro Bowl quarterback. In total, they invested five seasons worth of time and money into Brees hoping he would ripen into a viable franchise quarterback. And when he finally did, they let him walk.

The trepidations regarding Brees' injury come across as a weak excuse for letting him go, rather than a serious concern in regards to his future. He's damaged goods right now, but he will recover. What if Philip Rivers gets injured, does that mean the Chargers will quickly cut ties with him, as well?

What is more puzzling is the fact that Chargers were willing to part with Brees for no compensation whatsoever. Considering that by simply franchise tagging him, they could have landed a similar return as the Dolphins received for Culpepper (51st pick overall) or what the Jets are asking for defensive end John Abraham (late first-round pick).

At the very least, one can defend the Chargers by pointing to Rivers as a feasible prospect waiting in the wings, but the same cannot be said for the Vikings.

They will turn to stopgap quarterback Brad Johnson until they find someone they believe can eventually fill Culpepper's shoes.

But let me ask you this: what is the point of ridding yourself of a franchise quarterback, a known commodity that you have developed and supported for years, in hopes of finding yet another signal caller who you anticipate will eventually perform at a similar level?

There is no point.

The search for a legitimate quarterback is not a quick process. Just ask the Cincinnati Bengals or Chicago Bears, who have spent nearly a decade in the NFL basement mostly due to shoddy quarterbacking.

The Dolphins and the Saints, who have been limited by inconsistency at that position, will immediately gain from this sale and upgrade their status as contenders.

You would think a franchise like the Chargers, who spun through Craig Whelihan, Jim Harbaugh, Doug Flutie, and Ryan Leaf in a recent four-year span, would cling to anything or anyone that resembled competency, never mind someone who threw for 51 touchdowns in two seasons.

The Vikings have been quite comfortable at the position for the last decade, but will experience some turbulence going forward as they begin their search for a future prospect.

Even if they somehow land a top prospect like Vince Young or Jay Cutler in this year's draft, they are still at least 2-3 years away from being considered a threat in the NFC.

As for the Chargers, they drop from the ranks of being a Super Bowl contender who was only one or two players short of a serious run and will instead delay their championship hopes for at least one season — if not more — depending on how Rivers handles his bumps and bruises.

And for what?

The desire is that Rivers, and whoever becomes the Vikings' candidate, can achieve the superstar status at the position so that the team can try to lock them up with a lucrative long term contract.

But isn't that what they just had?

Sure, both quarterbacks experienced injuries last season, but can you expect a fragile position like the quarterback to be healthy every week of every season? It's not like the man in question is Chris Chandler, we're talking about Brees, who missed one game in two years as a full-time starter, and Culpepper, who had only missed two games in three years prior to last season.

Investing in a quarterback is like investing in a car: it is a long-term commitment. You don't toss it onto a scrapheap the first time the muffler kicks out.

The Green Bay Packers once had Mark Brunell, Matt Hasselbeck, and Aaron Brooks behind their stalwart starter Brett Favre, but they never went the cheaper, younger route.

They shipped away their sexy prospects and haven't looked back since.

The Vikings might be rebuilding and the Chargers might be retooling, but Brees and Culpepper should have been part of the solution.

Doesn't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone? The Vikings and Chargers have regressed for the time being and will realize that next year.

Big Yellow Taxi and the NFL offseason mix like Mondays and me.

"From the moment I picked your book up until I laid it down, I convulsed with laughter. Someday, I intend reading it." — Groucho Marx

Posted by Dave Golokhov at 10:51 AM | Comments (2)

March 18, 2006

Instantly Controversial For NCAA

I don't watch much regular season college basketball because I find it to be a pointless waste of time. There are only about four games in each conference that determine anything important for the postseason, so I'll watch those. Every other game is basically just a glorified exhibition contest, something to fill arenas with students and high-paying alumni, and fill cable sports television networks on the weekends.

Regular season college basketball is actually a lot like the NHL exhibition season: you might watch one or two games involving rivals, but for the most part, you just don't want anyone to get injured. That puts it somewhere behind the functional joys of the NFL preseason and ahead of the endless yawn of the Major League Baseball exhibition season.

(Great idea, by the way, that World Baseball Classic was. Zero interest, the end of Roger Clemens, and we are yet again reminded that baseball has been carried for over a decade by Latino and Asian stars. Can we please just get a World American Football Classic going so the Steelers can pummel some 85-pound Korean dudes?)

Not having watched much NCAA basketball, outside of March Madness, has disconnected me with some of the innovations in the men's game. I did not know, for example, that fighting for your tournament life every single night in the ACC was less impressive than being the second-best team in the CAA when it comes to the selection committee. I also didn't realize what a fluke the Syracuse run in the Big East tournament was, not having witnessed the true colors of the Orange in the regular season.

I also didn't conceive how much instant replay has crept into the college game. It may have been the grease from my sixth piece of Papa Johns' pizza — or my distraction as I attempted not to drop a glob of garlic sauce on my red button-down — but I swear I saw the officials review something that I really did not think was reviewable during the Pacific/Boston College first-round classic on Thursday afternoon:

Is figuring out if a player's feet are on the line during a three-point basket really a reviewable infraction?

Again, I might be wrong. Everyone else in the room seemed to think that's what the referees were checking when a Pacific player sunk a trifecta in overtime.

If that was the case, what a joke. I mean, let's just review everything from now on. What about traveling violations the referees missed? What about illegal picks? What about using the play clock to determine five-second violations? Hell, let's just make the games 10 hours long every night.

I searched and searched the NCAA rulebook, but couldn't find any inference to this three-point rule, so maybe it was another situation (shot clock, maybe) the officials were checking on. Perhaps it's like in the NBA, where if an official is ruling on a clock violation, he is also allowed to double-check everything else that happened in the play, including the validity of a basket.

While I didn't find that specific replay rule, I did find a few other eye-poppers about instant replay and NCAA men's basketball. Did you know:

If a player is doubled over in pain or is bleeding, the referees can review how that happened. If another player is viewed using "combative and flagrant" use of his hands, legs, arms, or feet, then it can be ruled a fight and the second player is ejected.

A coach asks for a correctable error due to a shot-clock violation, but there isn't a camera that captured the shot and the shot clock. But a school official is in the stands with a camcorder, and he has the video necessary to make the ruling. The official can't use the camcorder footage to make the call ... unless the school administrator is seated at the official courtside table and all of the camcorder's equipment is there, as well. Then they can go to the video tape. (This makes me wonder if they'd still be able to use the footage if the battery charger is in the administrator's car, or if the NCAA would sue the administrator for violating its broadcasting agreement with ESPN.)

The officials can review a try for a field goal to see if it was released before the reading of 0:00 on the clock at or near the expiration of the game, but only if the shot "will determine the outcome of a game (win, lose, tie)." So if Duke is up by 20, the betting line is 19, and a Boll Weevil State player sinks a basket "after time expired," the refs won't even give it a second look. I wonder why...

In my book, "Glow Pucks and 10-Cent Beer: The 101 Worst Ideas in Sports History," the issue of "Instant Replay Abuse" is in the top five. There's just too damn much of it in some sports, and not enough of it in others. It pains me to think that officials in basketball can add 0.3 seconds back on the clock in a meaningless regular season game, but NFL officials can't review pass interference in the Super Bowl.

Maybe if a team administrator filmed the infraction with a camcorder from the sidelines...

Random Thoughts

There was a bomb scare at the first-round NCAA tournament games being played at San Diego State's arena on Thursday. Turned out to be a false alarm, as bomb-sniffing dogs were simply picking up the scent of Marquette...

Can we please have a moratorium on these stories where Think Tanks estimate the millions of dollars companies lose when their employees are watching the NCAA tournament or skipping out to see the latest "Star Wars" movie? How about this: quantify how many years are shaved off of my life sitting in meetings in which bosses — the same ones who deal with the financial hardship of hiring basketball fans — bore our asses to death with the sound of their own voices...

Members of the Three 6 Mafia have been reportedly using their Oscar for Best Original Song to gain access to hot clubs in the L.A. area. Which is great news if you figured they would have melted it down for a new set of grillz by now...

And finally, I don't want to say that it's tough being a Jets fan, but on the same day the Miami Dolphins traded for Daunte Culpepper, the lead story on the Jets' official web site was that the team's children's television cartoon show won a local Emmy award.

Maybe they can use the trophy at quarterback. It couldn't be any more fragile than Chad Pennington...

Greg Wyshynski is the Features Editor for SportsFan Magazine in Washington, DC, and the Senior Sports Editor for The Connection Newspapers of Northern Virginia. His book "Glow Pucks and 10-Cent Beer: The 101 Worst Ideas in Sports History" will be published in spring 2006. His columns appear every Saturday on Sports Central. You can e-mail Greg at [email protected].

Posted by Greg Wyshynski at 4:47 PM | Comments (0)

Roddick and USTA, I Told You So!

Andy Roddick lost another pathetic match this week, this time to Igor Andreev. Yes, Andreev. Andy went a little "mental" at the end of the match, as I guess someone of Andy's ranking and potential should. But I'm not surprised, and I told you so here several years ago.

If you look back at my columns, you will see time and time again how I felt that Roddick would wind up being potential never realized, and that his big serve and forehand only game would not hold up over time. I guess I'm allowed to say it right now, "I told you so!"

Roddick has made a ton of mistakes over the past couple of years, the biggest of which was parting ways with coach Brad Gilbert. While Brad's methods are not always obvious, he does manage to bring out the best in players and teach them how to win, not just compete. I've watched Brad during practices with both Andy and Andre Agassi, and there really doesn't seem to be anything that a coach like myself doesn't already know or couldn't teach. But obviously there is. Roddick didn't see it, and prematurely cut off his own head.

Since Gilbert's departure, Roddick has been mediocre at best. His game has become more one dimensional, his approach to points clearly not thought out, and because of that he can't get past hot players like Andreev let alone ever think to approach Roger Federer.

Once again, the American tennis fan is left wanting. Yes, James Blake has really blossomed since returning from his near career-ending accident two years ago. James is as good as they come, and is now winning much more than he loses. Unfortunately, James' game does not have enough to win on talent and speed alone, and he hasn't yet perfected the all-court style. Robbie Ginepri, Taylor Dent, Vince Spadea, and the like are fun to watch, but a step below the top for sure. Maybe Roddick fell prey to the great expectations placed upon him from an early age. Or maybe, just maybe, Andy was never quite that good to begin with.

Talking about being way ahead of everyone else, it was here less than a year ago that I wrote about the fees charged to play tennis on the public courts in New York City. Just this week a report was issued that showed that tennis participation was down in the city, and it was attributed directly to the charging of the fees and the increase in fees. As I predicted and stated, tennis players would be chased from trying or playing the game. Imagine what would happen in NYC if they charged to play basketball on every public court.

I can only blame the United States Tennis Association (USTA) this time. With the commitment it has publicly stated to bring about more grassroots tennis and bring tennis to more people, you would think that NYC with its population and its relationship to the U.S. Open would be prime on their agenda. The USTA has missed the possibility to offset the costs for the players in the city and bring more inner city youth into the game.

I don't understand why they didn't pay more attention to this. Maybe it's the fact that the fees charged to play tennis in the city are well below that of most private clubs where the USTA directors play. If it doesn't cost thousands, I guess then it's okay. Shame on you, USTA. Shame on you, USTA Eastern Section. You let the number of tennis clubs in and around NYC dwindle to almost nothing, you let the historic Harlem Tennis Center nearly disappear, and now you are letting the future of tennis get away, all without batting an eye. It's time you guys finally sat down and rolled up your sleeves. If you can't make tennis accessible in New York, you certainly can't do it elsewhere.

So Andy, USTA, and New York City, once again, I told you so. Don't make me ever say it again...

Posted by Tom Kosinski at 4:36 PM | Comments (4)

March 17, 2006

What Happened to the Good Old Days?

It has long been said that sport is a microcosm of society. Applying that idiom to basketball as it pertains to the good ol' US of A, you'll see that it is a theory that bears itself out.

In the early years of the league, there were few true greats of the game — those who excelled were generally stoic, blue-collar players who brought their lunch pails to the game and did everything "by the book." The working class of America was very much the same ... hard-working, unspectacular, and bereft of real headline-grabbing stars, yet consistently effective in all that they did.

Moving ahead on the timeline, the ABA became a more fan-friendly basketball fare with it's kaleidoscopic basketball, oversized afros, and jaw-dropping action it was a much more palatable version of a sport America was growing to love. Likewise, new technology began to spring up in society during that time, boasting flashiness never before seen in the various industries, but not yet accepted as mainstream enough to be little more than a novelty.

With the integration of pro basketball's two major leagues, a new era began in 1976, merging the traditional pomp and circumstance of the NBA with the eccentric high-flying styles of the ABA. It is no coincidence that this also marks a revolution of sorts within mainstream America in terms of new technologies being universally accepted. The new age of the United States began at about this time as everything from Post-It notes to satellite imagery came into the country's mainstream consciousness, bringing convenience, user-friendliness, and flash to previously unheard of levels.

Looking still further into this topic, you see the glory years of Magic Johnson and Larry Legend coinciding with a feel-good era of self-sufficiency in our nation. Michael Jordan brought to light a singular importance and excellence that undoubtedly could be seen replicated throughout the business world in America, but one that was tempered with the realization that no man is an army and that even those at the height of their respective fields needed a strong supporting cast. A feeling was created that the ceiling was limitless and that any person or group could accomplish whatever they wanted as long as they wanted it badly enough and went about their business understanding the import of others.

Now, as we see the world from a much more global point of view, David Stern's modern NBA is very much a worldly commodity. America's excellence isn't as evident in the sport, and it certainly has come into question from a political standpoint, as well. The unilateralism that has grown to be a trademark of U.S. politics and policies in recent years can be seen on the hardwood, and this is not necessarily a good thing. The Euros that understand the importance of teamwork and hard work have begun to excel and succeed while the arrogant countrymen that represent America continue to insist that success of the one outweighs the greater good of the whole.

While it might seem trite to relate the NBA to politics, the reality of the situation is that the two are not mutually exclusive. A tone is set within the youth and the public consciousness that cannot be ignored as those youths and that public consciousness apply their life-lessons to day-to-day living.

While this article may, to this point, be reading as a political diatribe, the underlying idea here is to bring to light an interesting synergy between the NBA and the cultural climate of the county on the whole. It can be said that Kobe Bryant's 81-point explosion was nothing more than a singularly gifted athlete pushing himself to a performance that has seldom been seen. While that is the easy answer, a secondary take on the matter points to a burgeoning me-first attitude that is symptomatic of lessons being taught to our youngsters on a much lower level.

The media hypes and re-hypes all things accomplished in sport these days. Lead-ins on "SportsCenter" talk of superstar performances and flash high-wire slam-dunks across the screen. Boys and girls strive to be known as singular entities rather than as moving parts on a successful machine. Yet time and time again, it is the mechanical rhythm of a successful group (see: San Antonio Spurs or Detroit Pistons) that leads to championship glory. Sad thing is, it isn't that championship that brings glory any longer, not to the youngest generation. Professional basketball, in my opinion, is one big reason why this is the case.

While it makes sense to market individuals as a matter of lucrative fact, it teaches all the wrong lessons to those who need the most teaching. Today's high school point guards and power forwards are tomorrow's doctors and teachers and congressmen. More importantly, today's athletes are tomorrow's voters, and if they are taught that the squeaky wheel gets the grease, then they will ignore the blue-collar humanitarian that keeps a low profile, but stands for all the right things for all the right reasons. Worse yet, they may choose to neglect all comers altogether.

This line of thought begs the age-old question, which came first, the chicken or the egg? Is sport a reflection of society, or is society built around the fundamentals that we all learn through participation in team and individual sports? Does Allen Iverson hoist 25 shots a game because he feels it gives his team the best shot at winning, or does he throw those shots up there because he knows individual performance is the easiest way to feed himself and his family?

These questions are all, in essence, unanswerable. You'll have your opinion and I'll have mine. Neither is right, nor is either particularly incorrect. But to approach the point with indifference is part-and-parcel to the greater problem: are we glorifying the wrong type of greatness and is this false glorification tearing the fabric of our culture?

There is a good reason our NBA forefathers stressed winning to their children and their fans. They understood the importance the "finer points" of sport held when exposed to the societal whole — a reality that is far too often overlooked by today's athletes. While league coffers will undoubtedly continue to overflow as the next best ballplayer puts his own name in lights, the lessons our country's youth is learning remain increasingly dulled by the spectacular glow of fame and fortune.

These men, we must remember, are all rich beyond comprehension. They don't care what lessons they teach or what type of character they portray. They do what they do and get rewarded handsomely for it. That, my friends, is the nature of the beast and it is a beast that cannot be tamed by you or me. But it can be fixed.

The next time you watch Kobe assault another scoring record or check out Paul Pierce trying to carry an undermanned Beantown squad on his back, realize that you are watching professionally paid athletes making their "ends," so to speak. I'm not here to demean what they do, because, frankly, the Celts and Lakers have little chance at attaining team glory without individual excellence from one of their respective stars.

It is not the A.I.'s or the Kobe's or the LeBron's of the world that I direct my writing to. Rather, it is the Ricky Davis's and the Kwame Brown's to which I refer — those trying to score so they can get a highlight on ESPN or dogging it down the floor because they are put off that this play wasn't called for them. While they may get fat contracts or countless chances to prove they are more than just exceptionally gifted yet altogether too maladjusted human beings, they should not be looked upon as successes. A cameo on the "Ultimate Highlight" should not be the be-all, end-all to their life stories.

Take a look at your children and wonder to yourself if they understand the import they could have on society, if properly managed and effectively taught the lessons our fathers taught us. Don't assume that they comprehend the context of every show of aggression or flaunting of individual skill. Don't shrug off a Kevin Garnett groin-grabbing dunk as he wears his nation's colors on the Olympic stage. As a parent or a coach or a teacher, you are responsible for providing direction and clarity in an increasingly misguided and cloudy world.

Years of inaction and indifference have brought us a bevy of prima donna basketball players who care more about profit margins than margins of victory. Don't assume your eighth grade basketball star will be the next great singular talent at his high school or your college alma mater. Hope for it, wish for it, but don't let the youth be fooled into thinking Stuart Scott and Bill Walton are the deciding factor in what matters and what doesn't.

The lesson this teaches is far too damaging for us to ignore.

Posted by Matt Thomas at 10:12 AM | Comments (3)

Does Lightning Strike Twice For Avs?

When the playoffs start in April, Colorado will find out. For the second time in franchise history, the Avs have made a trade with Montreal for their goaltender.

In 1995, that goaltender was Patrick Roy, arguably the best man ever to play between the pipes. In 2006, it's Jose Theodore. The parallels have been made countless times already — how they both fell out of favor in Montreal, were both traded to Colorado, and how the move was good for both goaltender and team. For Roy, switching teams re-invigorated his game, and he was a solid part of the team's 1996 Stanley Cup victory. The Avalanche are hoping the same might happen with Theodore.

In a recent Q&A session for ColoradoAvalanche.com, Jose Theodore called Patrick Roy a "one of a kind." He knows he isn't Patrick Roy and is perfectly comfortable with that. He shrugs off the endless comparisons being made between him and Roy, but also sees them as a compliment. And that is exactly the attitude he will need when he plays for Colorado.

David Aebischer never did shrug off the stigma of succeeding Roy, despite being a talented netminder in his own rite. His play was erratic in 2003-04 as a result of the pressures he felt, real or imagined. He would give away five goals in one game and then post a shutout the next night. No one knew which version of Aebischer would show up. Management indicated its lack of confidence in Aebi by acquiring Tommy Salo, a solid veteran from Edmonton just before the trade deadline. A disappointing second-round playoff exit was partially blamed on Aebischer. The rest of the blame was placed on Tony Granato, who stepped down as Avalanche head coach after that season.

Aebischer's inconsistencies surfaced again at the start of the 2005-2006 season. By December, the Avalanche were in a goaltender round robin, playing Aebischer one night, rookie Peter Budaj the next, and AHL standout Vitaly Kolesnik after that. The starting goaltender position was clearly up for grabs. In January, however, Aebischer proved that he was the best guy for the job by posting a franchise record for most wins in that month, nine.

With Colorado currently seeded third in the Western Conference, the necessity of winning games is facilitated by the competitiveness of the standings. In the Northwest Division, every point is sacred — it is the tightest division in the league by far. Where most divisions have a leader in the 90s and a bottom-ranked team in the 40s, the Northwest Division has Colorado at the top with 80 points and Minnesota at the bottom with 69 points. For the Avalanche, the final stretch of the regular season is a series of division games, compounding the urgency of every point.

The Avalanche will have to rely on Peter Budaj for that stretch since Jose Theodore will be out until the playoffs — he injured his ankle during the Olympic break. Since the trade, Budaj's play has been stellar. His level of play makes it difficult to remember that he is a rookie and is untested in NHL playoff games.

And that is when Theodore will have his chance. His performance in the '06 playoffs will make or break his trade to Colorado, both for himself and for Avalanche GM Pierre Lacroix. Though the amount of pressure he is under is tremendous, Theodore sees the trade as a positive move for his career. "I have no doubt in my mind that changing teams and going with another organization is going to be good for my career," he said in the Q&A session. "I'm really confident that I am going to play well and help the team a big deal."

Lacroix's confidence in Jose Theodore it is the one thing that gives Theodore an edge before he has even played. That is something Aebischer never fully had. For Theodore, his positivity toward the trade may be the ultimate booster to his game. He believes that this will work out well for him, and therefore it probably will. Sometimes attitude is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Should Theodore's play be as positive for the Avs as his outlook, the team won't have a problem trusting him in net.

In fact, should Theodore's play be nothing less than stellar, the Avs will have a new weapon on their side. They will have confidence, which is something that the Colorado has lacked this season. Take away the insecurities that the team has had in the regular season, and the Avalanche will be transformed into a dangerous playoff contender.

Posted by Charlynn Smith at 9:44 AM | Comments (0)

March 16, 2006

The NFL's Best Triplets

Five Quick Hits

* I like what the Browns are doing in free agency, bringing in an elite center (LeCharles Bentley) and a steady, veteran receiver (Joe Jurevicius) to help the team's young quarterback and receiving corps.

* I miss Olympic ice hockey.

* Every offseason, I feel like I'm writing about Washington too much, but every year, they're the biggest player in free agency and the trading market.

* Imagine a lineup with Clinton Portis, Santana Moss, Brandon Lloyd, Antwaan Randle El, and Chris Cooley. Those are five serious playmakers surrounding the quarterback. Whoever is throwing the ball for Joe Gibbs in '06 should make the Pro Bowl if he's any kind of decent.

* I haven't found the World Baseball Classic terribly interesting, but it's a great idea, and I'd like to see it develop into something everyone wants to be a part of.

***

On Sunday, Edgerrin James signed a four-year contract with the Arizona Cardinals. It's bad news for the Colts, though it's insignificant for the Cardinals, who will always be terrible. Unlike many observers around the league, I think losing James is a big deal for Indianapolis, and I think they'll find him difficult to replace. Even if another player steps in for the Edge without missing a beat, though, his move to Arizona signals the end of an era.

Throughout the brief history of the 21st-century NFL, the combination of Peyton Manning, James, and Marvin Harrison has given Indianapolis the most potent trio of "skill" players in the game. Deemed the "triplets" (a tag that originally became famous when applied to the Cowboys' Troy Aikman, Emmitt Smith, and Michael Irvin), they ran roughshod over defenders, were endlessly hyped by the league, and set a number of team and league records in the process.

With James moving on, this is an appropriate time to examine the greatest triplets in NFL history, and the Colts' place on the list. I've assembled a register of what I believe to be the 20 best trios ever, but there are some ground rules. To be eligible, a group must:

• Consist of exactly one quarterback, one running back, and one wide receiver. Flankers and split ends are eligible, but tight ends are not. Fullbacks may qualify as running backs, but they'll be judged primarily on their rushing ability. Blocking is just icing on the cake.
• Have a minimum of three years together. All three players should be starters in each season. Longer spans are higher on the ist.
• Be from the modern era, defined here as 1946 to present. It's almost impossible to compare two-way players to today's.
• No player can appear more than once in the same time period. For instance, Bart Starr can't appear once with Jim Taylor and again with Paul Hornung.
• No pairing can be used more than once. For instance, Terry Bradshaw and Franco Harris can't be used with both Lynn Swann and John Stallworth.
• Players are judged by both their careers and their level of play during the years listed. Groups are ranked by their collective strength, but ties are broken by the weakest member of the triplets, so that two great players can't carry a chump along with them. We're looking for true "triplets."

20) 1983-1989 Seattle Seahawks: Dave Krieg, Curt Warner, Steve Largent

Largent, one of the five or six best receivers in history, is the only obvious choice here. Krieg, who played 19 seasons with six teams, has some name recognition, and had a good career in the same sort of way as Vinny Testaverde. But he was at his best throwing to Largent, making three Pro Bowls in the seven years listed, despite AFC competition that included Dan Marino, John Elway, and Dan Fouts. Warner missed most of the 1984 season with an injury, but in the other six years, he had four 1,000-yard seasons, plus 985 in the strike-shortened 1987 campaign.

19) 1965-1969 New York Jets: Joe Namath, Matt Snell, Don Maynard

Namath and Maynard also played with John Riggins in the early '70s, but not for long enough to meet the list requirements. Snell is probably a better choice anyway, since Riggins had his best seasons in Washington, and the late '60s were the Jets' glory years. In 1967, Namath became the first player ever to pass for 4,000 yards in a season, and in 1968, he and Snell led New York to the greatest upset in pro football history: a victory in Super Bowl III.

18) 1964-1966 San Diego Chargers: John Hadl, Paul Lowe, Lance Alworth

The AFL had a reputation for being an offense-oriented league, and the Chargers were the primary reason. Hadl, who led San Diego to the AFL title game in 1964 and 1965, played in two Pro Bowls and four AFL all-star games. Lowe's career average of 4.87 yards per carry ranks third among players with more than 1000 attempts, trailing only Jim Brown and Barry Sanders. Alworth was simply the greatest receiver of his era, and arguably ever. He led the AFL in receiving touchdowns all three years this group played together.

17) 1999-2002 St. Louis Rams: Kurt Warner, Marshall Faulk, Isaac Bruce

The 2003 season isn't included because Warner was benched after one disastrous start. But for three years, this trio was NFL royalty. Warner or Faulk won every MVP from 1999 to 2001, and Bruce was a Pro Bowler in each of those seasons. Faulk — the only likely Hall of Famer in this group — carries the show, but Warner and Bruce were effective in the years listed.

16) 1981-1985 Washington Redskins: Joe Theismann, John Riggins, Art Monk

Washington went to two Super Bowls during this stretch, and no players were more important to that achievement than this group of triplets. Theismann, the 1983 regular-season MVP, had his best seasons during these years, but a devastating hit from Lawrence Taylor ended his career midway through the '85 season. Riggins, the MVP of Super Bowl XVII, set the NFL's single-season TD record in 1983, and averaged 121 rushing yards per game in the postseason. Monk broke the NFL record for receptions in a season in 1984, and set the career mark in 1992.

15) 1996-1998 Denver Broncos: John Elway, Terrell Davis, Rod Smith

The Mile High Salute Broncos, led by Elway and Davis, were the closest thing the NFL had to a dynasty in the late 1990s, winning back-to-back Super Bowls, with Davis the game's MVP in 1997-98 and Elway in 1998-99. It's debatable whether Smith was better than Ed McCaffrey, but his career achievements put him ahead.

14) 1977-1979 Dallas Cowboys: Roger Staubach, Tony Dorsett, Drew Pearson

Although they only meet the three-year minimum, the Cowboys were dangerously explosive on offense. Staubach was the NFL's best quarterback at the time, and Dorsett, also a first-ballot Hall of Famer, was among its best runners, gaining over 1,000 yards each season and winning Offensive Rookie of the Year in 1977. Pearson was slightly past his prime, but he beats out Tony Hill on the strength of his career as a whole.

13) 1964-1966 Washington Redskins: Sonny Jurgensen, Charley Taylor, Bobby Mitchell

This one is a little strange. Mitchell and Taylor both started their careers as running backs, and each finished as a wide receiver. This three-year period — really two and a half — represents the overlap between the beginning of Taylor's career and the end of Mitchell's. This is the first group on the list with all three members in the Hall of Fame.

12) 1988-1996 Buffalo Bills: Jim Kelly, Thurman Thomas, Andre Reed

Along with Jimmy Johnson's Cowboys, the inspiration for the widespread use of the term "triplets" to refer to a quarterback, running back, and wide receiver. This group went to four consecutive Super Bowls and made a collective 15 Pro Bowls in their nine seasons together.

11) 1951-1959 San Francisco 49ers: Y.A. Tittle, Joe Perry, Billy Wilson

Wilson was a good receiver — he made six straight Pro Bowls in the late 1950s — but he was overshadowed by the other members of this combination. Tittle and Perry, along with fellow Hall of Famers Hugh McElhenny and John Henry Johnson, comprised the Million Dollar Backfield. Perry, who finished the 1950s as the NFL's all-time leading rusher, was a close call over McElhenny for the running back spot.

10) 1950-1955 Los Angeles Rams: Norm Van Brocklin, Dan Towler, Tom Fears

The NFL was once a league of dynasties, and in the early '50s, it was dominated by the Browns, Lions, and Rams. In the six years listed for this group, no other team even played in the NFL title game. The 1950 Rams set a record for points per game (38.8) that may never be broken. This group was also the hardest to narrow down, with other options available at quarterback (Hall of Famer Bob Waterfield), running back (several candidates, most notably Tank Younger), and receiver (Hall of Famer Crazylegs Hirsch).

9) 1974-1981 Pittsburgh Steelers: Terry Bradshaw, Franco Harris, Lynn Swann

Only the second group featuring three Hall of Famers, this group also boasts the best championship résumé. None of the three was an extraordinary regular-season player, but they were at their best when the stakes were highest. Bradshaw was probably the best Super Bowl quarterback in history, Swann was probably the best Super Bowl receiver ever, and Harris — along with Davis, Riggins, Marcus Allen, and Emmitt Smith — is one of the greatest postseason runners of the Super Bowl era.

8) 1947-1950 Philadelphia Eagles: Tommy Thompson, Steve Van Buren, Pete Pihos

Van Buren and Pihos are enshrined in Canton, and Thompson, one of the NFL's best quarterbacks in the late '40s, still gets brought up as a possible Seniors Candidate from time to time. During these years, Pihos hadn't yet totally come into his own as a receiver, but Thompson, and especially Van Buren, were at the top of their respective games. From 1947-49, Van Buren led the NFL in rushing yards and rushing TDs every year. He scored the only touchdown in the 1948 NFL Championship Game, and in the '49 contest, he set a league record with 196 rushing yards.

7) 1992-1994 San Francisco 49ers: Steve Young, Ricky Watters, Jerry Rice

If Watters hadn't left for Philadelphia after the 1994 season, this group would be top-five. Young was by far the league's best QB during this period, winning league MVP in 1992 and '94. In '93, he passed for over 4,000 yards, led the NFL in TDs and passer rating, and was named first-team all-pro. Rice had double-digit TDs and over 1,200 yards each season. Watters, a rushing and receiving threat, scored more than 10 TDs every season he played in San Francisco.

6) 1970-1974 Miami Dolphins: Bob Griese, Larry Csonka, Paul Warfield

This group helped Miami put together the NFL's only undefeated season, and its second back-to-back Super Bowl victories. Griese missed most of 1972 with an injury, but he was a unanimous choice for all-pro QB in 1971. Csonka rushed for over 100 yards in both of Miami's Super Bowl victories, including a then-record 145 yards and MVP honors in Super Bowl VIII. Warfield didn't put up big numbers in the Dolphins' ball-control offense, but he was almost universally regarded as the league's best wide receiver during this period. All three players made the Pro Bowl every season, except Griese in his injured season.

5) 1990-1999 Dallas Cowboys: Troy Aikman, Emmitt Smith, Michael Irvin

They're the first group of triplets on the list to spend a decade together, but their prime came from 1991-95, when Aikman was at the top of his game, and Smith and Irvin were the best players at their respective positions. All elite triplets since have been compared to these Cowboys.

4) 1999-2005 Indianapolis Colts: Peyton Manning, Edgerrin James, Marvin Harrison

I know what you're thinking, but this isn't too high. Manning and Harrison are already cinch Hall of Famers — either one could retire today and get in on the first ballot — and James has had four 1,500-yard seasons. These guys had a reasonably long seven-year run together, including all their best seasons. Manning led the NFL in interceptions as a rookie in 1998, James didn't enter the league until 1999, and Harrison's first 1,000-yard season came in '99.

3) 1985-1990 San Francisco 49ers: Joe Montana, Roger Craig, Jerry Rice

There's a big gap between the top three and the rest of the list. Montana is the best quarterback on the list to this point, and Rice is almost universally regarded as the greatest wide receiver in the history of professional football. Craig, from 1985-88, was the best running back this side of Eric Dickerson.

2) 1946-1953 Cleveland Browns: Otto Graham, Marion Motley, Dante Lavelli

As rare as it is for Hall of Fame triplets to play together during their primes — this is only the fourth group on the list — it's even more rare for teammates to make eight consecutive championships together. Graham may be the greatest QB in history, Motley is almost certainly the best fullback ever to play, and Lavelli was also a Hall of Famer. It's worth noting that Graham also could have made this list with Dub Jones and Mac Speedie.

1) 1956-1966 Baltimore Colts: John Unitas, Lenny Moore, Raymond Berry

By far the greatest triplets in NFL history. This is the best combination of talent and the longest reign (11 years). The only question here is whether or not Moore qualifies as a running back. Obviously, I believe he does — he was an exceptional receiver and sometimes lined up as a flanker, but he also had over 1,000 carries — but Unitas and Berry would still be top-three if I replaced Moore with Alan Ameche.

In the late '50s and early '60s, Johnny U. was the undisputed master of the art of quarterbacking. His name remains a byword for great quarterback play. Moore was the most versatile offensive weapon in football. He led the NFL in touchdowns twice and in rushing average four times. Three times Moore averaged over 7.0 yards per carry, twice he had over 900 receiving yards, and he was the third player in NFL history to score 100 touchdowns in a career. Berry led the NFL in receptions and receiving yards three times each, and in receiving touchdowns twice. He retired as the league's all-time receiving leader, and many believe he had the best hands in history.

Posted by Brad Oremland at 5:36 PM | Comments (1)

NASCAR Top 10 Power Rankings: Week 3

Note: the quotes in this article are fictional.

1. Jimmie Johnson — Johnson is the King of Las Vegas after a dramatic last turn pass of Matt Kenseth to win the UAW-DaimlerChrysler 400. Johnson added the Vegas title to his Daytona win in the season's first race, and now stands atop the points standing by 52 points.

"I guess that's the equivalent of hitting the jackpot on your last quarter in the slots," says Johnson. "Or seeing a two of clubs on the river to win the World Poker Tour championship. Some people are skeptical about NASCAR drivers' athletic ability. I say we are the second most gifted athletes in sports, right behind poker players. It takes a true athlete to sit at a table for eight hours while peeking at cards and pushing chips on a table. And I got a much cooler trophy for my efforts in Vegas than that cheap hunk of metal with which they burden the winner in Daytona. I'm referring to the belt they strapped around my waist. That makes me feel like a true champion. I'll be defending that title in Atlanta next week, with promoter Don King and a useless posse in tow."

2. Matt Kenseth — As was the case in California, Kenseth was strong in Las Vegas, leading 146 of 270 laps (Kenseth won in Fontana on February 26th, with Jimmie Johnson second). This time, however, Kenseth was unable to hold off Johnson, who nipped Kenseth at the line to win in Vegas.

"Correction," says Kenseth. "I actually led 146 and 9/10 laps in Vegas. But that's beside the point. The real issue here is Jimmie Johnson's proclivity for trailing me on the track. In some states, that's considered stalking, and is punishable with a stop-and-go penalty in the county lockup. It was a tough weekend for me all around. I also came up a little short on Saturday, finishing second in the Busch race. In Las Vegas, there's only one way to express my frustration. Craps!"

3. Casey Mears — Along with Jimmie Johnson, Mears is the only driver with a top-10 finish in each of the three races this year. In Vegas, Mears improved 29 places from a disappointing qualifying effort that left him 38th on the grid.

"This is NASCAR," says Mears. "Qualifying means nothing. I think there's just slightly more passes in an actual race than there is in a qualifying session. And, with only one car on the track at a time, chances are slim that someone will rub Tony Stewart the wrong way. There's no fun in that."

4. Kasey Kahne — Kahne was the highest-finishing Dodge driver, collecting his second consecutive fourth-place finish to improve to number three in the points. Kahne now stands 85 points behind Johnson. It was a successful weekend for the Emunclaw, Washington native, who won the Busch Series Sam's Town 300 on Saturday.

"I'd like to give a shout out to the good people at Ragu," says Kahne. "They sponsor my No. 9 Busch car and they make a delicious spaghetti sauce. NASCAR fans offer Ragu an untapped market. Ragu realizes that many fans consider ketchup 'spaghetti sauce' and are unaware of Ragu's product. But not for long."

5. Mark Martin — Martin led 57 laps, second to Kenseth's 146, and eventually finished sixth, his best result of the year. Martin moved up to fifth in the points, 110 off of Johnson's leading pace.

"Enough about me," says Martin. "Let's talk about the singing of the national anthem by John Schneider, better known as Bo Duke of the greatest television show of all-time, The Dukes of Hazzard. The man can sing, and drive, as well. But he would have to be my third choice of the Duke I would most like to see in a pair of cut-off jean shorts, right behind Daisy and Uncle Jessie."

6. Kyle Busch — Busch was a part of the Hendrick team that countered the usual Roush dominance in Las Vegas. He finished third at his home track, sandwiched between teammates Jimmie Johnson, who won, and Jeff Gordon, who came home fifth. Once again, Busch clashed with Tony Stewart, who accused Busch of holding him up in the last third of the race.

"Am I re-living my brother Kurt's past?" asks Busch. "A few years ago, my brother had an ongoing feud with Jimmy Spencer. Now, I find myself in a similar situation, banging heads with another chubby racer with a bad attitude, Tony Stewart. I guess I should prepare myself for getting slapped by Stewart sometime in the future. I see where all this talk of 'Buschwhackers' is leading."

7. Clint Bowyer — Bowyer was part of another strong day for the rookie class, one of four in the top twenty, including a top-10 for Mexico City winner Denny Hamlin. In Monte Carlo and festooned with HBO's "The Soprano's" paint scheme, Bowyer made up 16 places in the race's final 13 laps to finish 15th.

"It took us a while to make the correct adjustments to get the car like we wanted it," says Bowyer. "In fact, it was Tony Soprano himself who made the call late in the race that allowed us to make up ground. It seems Tony had stashed a dead body in the trunk. The dude was really fat, and the weight was affecting the car's balance. Once we disposed of the hit, the car ran fine. Thanks, Tony."

8. Jeff Gordon — From his fifth-place position, Gordon witnessed teammate Jimmie Johnson's last gasp pass of Matt Kenseth to take the Las Vegas win. It was Gordon's first top-10 finish of the year, and boosted him to ninth in the points. Does this foreshadow a change in the balance of power, from the Roush camp to the Hendrick camp?

"Typically, the Roush cars have dominated on 1.5-mile tracks," says Gordon. "I think we realized that's what we needed to work on, and we did. We're all following Jimmie's lead this year. He's proven himself as the team's leader. For that reason, Kyle Busch, Brian Vickers, and myself have decided to fire our crew chiefs and enjoy immediate improvement."

9. Elliott Sadler — Sadler battled a disagreeable car all afternoon, but using the strength and savvy he learned growing up on the mean streets of Emporia, Virginia, Sadler muscled his Ford to a 14th-place finish. He improved two places to eighth in the points.

"There are some perks to being sponsored by M&Ms," explains Sadler. "And there are some drawbacks. Sure, I get all the free M&Ms I can eat, but I've found that it's not wise to eat them in the middle of a race. Melts in your mouth, not in your hands? That's bull. In any case, it's impossible to drive an ill-handling car with chocolate on your hands."

10. Jeff Burton — Burton, this year's Daytona 500 pole-sitter, picked up his second top-five finish of the year in the No. 31 Cingular Wireless Chevy made infamous by Robbie Gordon. Burton finished seventh in Las Vegas to crack the top 10 in points.

"It's a kinder, gentler No. 31 car," says Burton, who looks a lot like brother Ward, but speaks an entirely different language. "I'm one of the most popular drivers on the circuit ... Robbie can count his friends on one finger. Maybe that's why he's raising it all the time."

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 5:33 PM | Comments (0)

Nats Have New Stadium, But at What Cost?

With mayor Anthony Williams finally submitting a revised District of Columbia baseball stadium lease, it finally seems that the Washington Nationals will have a new baseball stadium to play in by the year 2008. The revised plan has also put to rest some of the issues brought forth by D.C. City Council Chairwoman Linda Cropp, former mayor Marion Barry, Adrian Fenty, and other members of the City Council. Some of the provisions that helped get the lease to the Council include:

• A cap on the total construction costs of the ballpark. ( Last estimated at $667 million dollars)
• D.C. residents will not be taxed to help the costs of the ballpark.
• The District may also use property on the ballpark site for private development.
• Major League Baseball agrees to increase the number of free tickets given to D.C. youth from 8,000 to 10,000 per year.
• Major League Baseball agrees to help create a new youth baseball academy with a $3.5 million contribution.

With at least $3.5 million being put into a new youth baseball academy, it is obvious that the District realizes that baseball is floundering among the youth. So how exactly do the youth of the District feel about the stadium?

Malecia Bynum, a 17-year-old senior at Benjamin Banneker Senior High School, said, "I feel as though the new baseball stadium is not necessary." Jonnika Hart, a 17-year-old senior at Carroll Senior High School, echoed that sentiment saying simply, "I don't care about it". Not all students share the view of these two students. Jared Middleton, a 16-year-old junior at Banneker, said, "I feel good about it because it would keep baseball inside of the city."

Even though students may have mixed feelings about the new stadium, there is no denying the fact that students are aware of the problems facing this city. They realize that the money being spent on this stadium can be used in other areas for the city. For example, Andrew Dyer, a 16-year-old junior at Banneker, offers his opinion saying that money could be spent on issues such as "a homeless initiative, raising minimum wage, and school system improvements."

The revised stadium lease was voted on and passed by the D.C. City Council and then approved by Major League Baseball. Now as Opening Day approaches, the Washington Nationals can begin their search for an owner, and begin operating like a normal MLB team.

While there will continue to be many questions to be answered, such as will the city's love affair with the team continue? How long will it take the team to find an owner? The Nationals at last have a brand-new stadium to look forward to. Also, the new stadium assures the team that they will not be moving anytime soon. And while the city remains divided over the stadium, the bigger problem may be trying to justify the stadium to the high school children, a lot of whom are paying attention, and took notice of the whole stadium situation.

Posted by Alfons Prince at 5:07 PM | Comments (0)

March 15, 2006

NCAA Committee Makes Extraordinary Error

If I may be so bold as to quote bestselling author Nicholas Sparks, I am just an ordinary man. Of course, intuitive readers found Sparks' graceful Noah Calhoun to be truly extraordinary in the end of his hit novel, The Notebook. The chairman of NCAA Tournament Selection Committee should have opened his press conference last Sunday with this same line, because he and his comrades are as ordinary as white rice and vanilla ice cream. They are ordinary people who fail to understand extraordinary concepts.

This group sees absolutely nothing extraordinary in the George Washington Colonials. Not their two-month-long winning streak. And certainly not being victorious a mere 96 percent of the time, during the regular season. Their 16-0 mark in the Atlantic 10 conference? Ordinary, in the eyes of those who decide the fates of young men and leave them mystified at every team they cross off and every number they scribble next to those fortunate enough to be invited to the NCAA tournament.

These stat-mongers and puppeteers are the truly ordinary people. Their decision-making is as suspect as the American presence in Iraq.

The committee's biggest error this year was not one of omission, as most NCAA analysts and fans believe. Leaving Cincinnati or Michigan home may have been wrong, but this type of thing happens every year and can be debated endlessly, until a different system is concocted.

The far bigger mistake, which virtually all of my expert colleagues have neglected to discuss, was the seeding of George Washington.

If this were the old days, and a challenge was being made, GW coach Karl Hobbs might sashay up to tournament selection committee chairman Craig Littlepage, slap him squarely across the cheek with a white glove and say, "How dare you, sir," before drawing his sword and removing Littlepage's brainless head from his feeble body.

For his part, Littlepage pinned GW's low seed on a poor non-conference schedule. Of course, he didn't want to mention the Colonials' 26-2 record, best in the nation, which included 18 straight wins to end the regular season.

In spite of the ramblings of Littlepage or ESPN's Jay Bilas, who also vilified GW's schedule while sanctioning the seed, evidence that the Colonials deserve more respect is clear.

Not only did GW finish the season ranked sixth by the Associated Press, this in-your-face, non-stop pressure team was undefeated in the Atlantic 10 Conference. The Colonials were an impressive 8-0 against the top five A-10 teams not named George Washington. These teams, including NCAA tournament qualifier Xavier, averaged 18.4 wins on the year.

If the selection committee considers players, GW should be appraised by its entire roster, not just one person. It's been suggested that the committee considered the injury to forward Pops Mensah-Bonsu as a detriment to its seeding. If this is true, they fail to realize that the whole of GW is far greater than the sum of its parts. Consider the stellar backcourt of J.R. Pinnock and Karl Elliott, both of whom average big points, rebounds, and assists and create huge matchup problems because of their size. The Colonials' three other starters all average double-figure points, a balanced scoring attack matched by few teams in the tournament.

Another angle to consider is how this decision destroys the integrity of the Atlanta bracket, and the tournament in general, creating a potential second-round matchup between Duke and GW. How happy do you think Blue Devils coach Mike Krzyzewski is about this? Now, the No. 1 seed overall might be forced to play in the round of 32 against the sixth-ranked team in the nation — the team with the best record in college basketball. Shouldn't this be a Sweet 16 or even Elite Eight game? Won't this entire side of the bracket be skewed, should GW pull of the upset?

Last season, Gonzaga received a three-seed. The 'Zags finished 14-0 in the West Coast Conference, one of the weakest leagues in America. After Gonzaga, the remainder of the WCC finished 2005 at an appalling 78-95. Gonzaga's non-conference record wasn't much better than this year's Colonials. Gonzaga posted early wins against, ironically, Maryland and Michigan State. It lost to three other ranked opponents. Aside from having one of the nation's premier players in Adam Morrison, this year's GW team is clearly better on paper than last season's Gonzaga squad, heading into the tournament.

Back to this year's bracket and more eyebrow-raising decisions. What about Syracuse as a five-seed? Sure, the Orangemen marched through a very difficult Big East, but prior to the conference tournaments, they were slated to be on the outside looking in, according to every known pundit. Then, they steam roll the league. Sure, this puts them in, but how does it get them a higher seed than GW?

The final dagger in the back of the collective Colonial nation is Tennessee getting a two-seed. The Volunteers finished the season 2-4 in their last six games. Their overall 21-7 mark included losses to the likes of these unranked teams: South Carolina, Kentucky, Arkansas, and Alabama. These are tough teams in their own right, but the bottom line is they are not top-25 squads. Isn't this the same issue the committee had with GW — its schedule? And let's not forget that the Colonials won against their weaker opponents, to the tune of 26-2!

Something has gone horribly wrong on the hardwood floors of this year's Big Dance. Now, I'm not saying I think GW will win the national title or even make the Final Four. Hell, they may lose in the first round. So, before you start reaching for your four-letter-word dictionary, understand that I'm simply saying the decision to seed GW as a No. 8 is profoundly wrong.

Of course, this type of ignorance has been going on for decades. Twenty years ago, the Selection Committee seeded a 27-3 Cleveland State team 14th, based on a weak conference. The Vikings shrugged off the disrespect and promptly upset legendary coach Bob Knight and Indiana, before advancing to the Sweet 16. A buzzer-beating shot by Navy's David Robinson ended the fairytale run, or a 14-seed might have gone to the Elite Eight. No doubt, that committee breathed a huge sigh of relief when the feisty Vikings finally fell.

Nothing can change what has happened, though, 20 years ago or today. But real Bracketologists like me can hope that, like Sparks' Noah Calhoun and that old CSU team, the Colonials will align the stars and show how extraordinary some people truly are.

Mark Barnes is a novelist, regular contributor to fantasy football site 4for4.com, and NFL football radio analyst. He appears weekly on ESPN radio in High Point, NC and on WBAL in Baltimore, MD, where he discusses pro football and fantasy sports. Mark's novel, "The League," is the first-ever published work of fiction with a plot based on the dangers of a multi-million-dollar fantasy football league. Learn more about "The League" and Mark's work at NFLStory.com.

Posted by Mark Barnes at 10:54 AM | Comments (4)

The NFL CBA: Costly Future Effects?

After two postponements, New Year's Day finally arrived in the National Football League.

With the passing of midnight on Friday, the sounds of crunching cleats and shuffling dollars could be heard throughout the weekend as players began their annual migration from one owner to another. Fans could again imbibe in the festivities of the NFL's Hot Stove League, secure in the peaceful accord hammered out between owners and the NFLPA on Wednesday. But now that the first weekend has passed, let us sober up and take stock in what was gained and what was lost.

There were resolutions aplenty this year. Players sought a bigger piece of a bigger pie. Owners resolved to maintain financial control over their game in a way that other games cannot. The fans just want the engine of professional football to purr along to September. With these many resolutions, something had to give, so why not New Year's Day itself?

Unlike most of us who cannot simply erase the first squares on the new calendar until we're ready to start that diet or exercise program, NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue and NFLPA Executive Director Gene Upshaw moved the start of their new year from square to square like another game piece on their real-life Monopoly board. At stake was more than just the $320 million difference in their proposals. The entire system of parity that sets the NFL apart from other professional team sports was quivering at its foundation.

Ratification of the NFLPA proposal would laser-level an already even playing field. Teams would divvy most local revenue sources — the ones dreamed up by resident MBAs in Apprentice-like brainstorming sessions — with both players and other owners. Businessmen like Daniel Snyder and Bob Kraft would toss the revenues they leverage from stadium naming rights and logo branding into a pot where Ralph Wilson and Michael Brown await with ladles in hand. It is the epitome of socialism in sports.

Rejection of the NFLPA proposal would create an immediate depression as teams scramble to comply with a $94.5 million cap holding ownership in its chokehold. Then this chastity belt of the purse would be unlocked in 2007. Free market forces would initiate a recovery the likes of which this league has never seen. Major League Baseball's plagues would be set upon the NFL as eager players await the incarnation of George Steinbrenner from within their sacrosanct walls. Capitalism unfettered would have its field day.

We all know by now how the owners capitulated to the players. Most analysts said it was their turn anyway after Gene Upshaw played Ned Beatty's character in the NFLPA's 2002 remake of Deliverance. By a vote of 30-2, they handed the players 59.5% of total revenues, consoling themselves in the half-point discount off Upshaw's original resolution that the percentage shall start with a "6."

So, the gain is money. Plenty of it. Right from the private vaults of the 15 most enterprising teams standing on the cutting edge in terms of leveraging team identity and stadium assets. Enough money to drive the salary cap from last year's $85.5 million to $102 million in 2006 and $109 million the year after. Enough money to arm revenue-light franchises and to feed the egos of players who were on the cusp of substantial pay cuts or the unemployment line. Either would be their fate under the $94.5 million cap going into effect without owner concessions.

The system is already at work in Cleveland, where the Browns used Other People's Money to snag LeCharles Bentley, Kevin Shaffer, and Joe Jurevicius on Saturday, then Ted Washington and Dave Zastudil on Sunday. In Indianapolis, the have-not Colts couldn't spend OPM fast enough. Edgerrin James, stripped of any loyalty, moved on to Arizona, leaving owner James Irsay the unique distinction of being outbid by William Bidwell.

Parity and the strength of competition seem to be preserved through 2011, so what was lost?

NFL owners, especially the top 15, were on the wrong side of this New Year's ledger. They lost face, they lost profits, and they lost solidarity.

The final vote itself cast aspersions on their quizzical states of mind. Ralph Wilson and Michael Brown, as lone dissenters, were squarely among the 17 have-nots who figure to reap in local revenue sharing where they did not sow. These two are the last bastion of vanity in the NFL, foregoing lucrative naming rights for the pleasure of seeing their surnames on the façade each Sunday. Now they will accept as consolation for their defeat a piece of Gillette's and FedEx's and Alltel's annuities.

In ratifying this collective bargaining agreement extension, owners may have mollified economic differences, but they did not quell the civil war rising in their ranks. By sapping the resources of its entrepreneurial faction, this CBA has pulled the drain plug on their drive, as well. Rather than setting performance standards and financial metrics to which all must endeavor, this agreement hands less-visionary owners the fish rather than the proverbial fishing pole. The true losses accruing must be tallied over the next six years as revenue streams are dammed and fewer fish become available for distribution.

Jonathan Kraft said it best in an interview given Friday morning. The Harvard Business School grad and vice chairman of the New England Patriots, whose team has grown from last to among the top in revenue generation under his family's control, was on his way into Gillette Stadium for another day of work after 72 sleepless hours in negotiations. Radio talk show hosts taunted him by conjuring images of Ralph Wilson in pajamas heading into bed.

He chuckled and asked for the next question. For the time being, he kept on course for Gillette.

Posted by Bob Ekstrom at 10:40 AM | Comments (2)

March 14, 2006

Selection Sunday Winners and Losers

Over the next few weeks, I'll be doing daily reports on the tournament for SportsFan Magazine and covering the tournament from almost every angle possible, ranging from talking to the pros on how to gamble on the tournament, revealing the vote I submitted for the All-American teams and the POY award, talking to fans about what superstitions really work in games, and talking to past tournament heroes about what it takes to win in March.

Be sure to check it out, because it is going to be superb (coming from a very modest person, perhaps even the most modest sports journalist...). Of course, there's no better way to start than with the winners and losers from Selection Sunday.

Winners

1) Allan Ray, Villanova — After going through a horrific injury in the Big East tournament, 'Nova stud Allan Ray has been cleared for shooting and should be cleared for full practice today. That's remarkable news if anyone saw the footage of his eye getting knocked out of its socket (it's even more gruesome than it sounds). 'Nova finally catches a break on the injury front, which is a pleasant change from the norm (see: Curtis Sumpter).

2) The MVC — Four bids in the tourney, just as many as the Pac-10 and ACC. It's good to see a mid-major getting in just as many teams as the ACC in a down year. This naturally has caused plenty of controversy among big school wonks, but let's make one point clear — the MVC is not the Ashley Simpson of the NCAA (more on this later).

3) Oklahoma — I've got to be honest, I've been a little harsh on Oklahoma this year. And I'm going to continue to be honest — it's well deserved, because Oklahoma blows. A few wins don't impress me, they are lucky to have been given a six-seed (if you're asking me, I give them Cal's No. 7, give Cal GW's No. 8, and give GW the No. 7). Note to Oklahoma: enjoy your only weekend in the tournament.

4) Tennessee — I was a little surprised to see the Vols get the No. 2 seed because of their recent slide, but I think they deserve it. A lot of fuss was being made over the fact that Florida won the SEC and was only a No. 3 seed, but Tennessee has a better resume, thanks to some big non-conference wins. I like C.J. Watson and Chris Lofton, but I still think they could be in some trouble in the Washington Region.

5) J.J. Redick — Absolutely unbelievable finish to the ACC championship game by one of the ACC's all-time greatest players. A fitting way for him to end his ACC career, but Duke is going to need some of its freshmen to really step up to make a run in the tourney. If J.J. is anything less than perfect, Duke will struggle to make the Elite Eight. Shelden Williams is a great shot blocker, but not nearly the defender that some blowhards (*cough* Jay Bilas* cough*) think he is.

6) Arizona and Kentucky — I predicted on my show a few weeks ago that both would miss the tourney, but they finished strong and earned their seeds (both 8s). They have tough first round games, and I know fans of those programs expected much, much more, but they still have potential to make some serious noise. Either way, it's a hell of a lot better than the NIT. Props to them for playing strong down the stretch.

7) Syracuse — They went from fighting for their NIT seed to winning the Big East tournament. I still can't explain this turnaround, but it was nothing short of phenomenal. Gerry McNamara has made me a believer and after drinking the Kool-Aid, I agree with their five-seed (despite the fact that they weren't even in the tournament until Thursday).

Losers

1) George Washington — How does the No. 11 team in the country get an eight-seed? By playing an embarrassing schedule, losing their only non-conference test (NC State) by more than 30 points. That and the fact that Pops Mensah-Bonsu is injured dropped the Colonials to the dreaded eight slot. Still, even with their embarrassing schedule, they should have been a six-seed at worst. They definitely got the shaft, but they should have proved themselves outside the conference. I wasn't exactly impressed that they had to climb out of a big hole against Xavier and beat teams by fluke last-second tip-ins.

2) Cincinnati — I was shocked, simply shocked that they didn't get in. I don't know how well I could argue my case for Cincy (well, over Utah State and maybe Air Force), but I really thought they would be in. It would've been a great story, how Andy Kennedy would be able to continue the Bearcats' string of consecutive NCAA appearances alive despite the administration and fans turning their backs on the team, devastating injuries, and their introduction to the Big East conference. Andy Kennedy is frustrated and disappointed and he has every right to be. This is the beginning of the end of UC as the administration isn't bright enough to keep Kennedy after he takes UC to the NIT. Their program just feel apart on a last-second three by McNamara.

3) Connecticut — A second-round matchup with Kentucky, win that to face Washington, only to then face Michigan State (mark it down). They have, in my opinion, the toughest route to the Final Four. They are a great team, but I really can't see them in Indy.

4) Monmouth/Hampton — These two teams face off in the play-in game on Tuesday, meaning one of the two won't be in the real tourney. I hate the entire concept of the play-in game and if we have to have one at all, it should make the last two at-large teams face off. I know that it will be good exposure for the teams because they will be the only show on Tuesday and that one team gets a "win" in the tournament, but what about the team that loses? They weren't really in it at all. Garbage.

5) Jay Bilas, Jim Nantz, Billy Packer — I was considering making this just Billy Packer and illustrating the point that he is a loser, but it's fair to group all three here. I know they are extremely disappointed that the MVC got four bids (Nantz is only in this category because he cut off Selection Committee chair Craig Littlepage in mid-sentence, which was a complete bush-league and dick move), but that decision was more than fair.

I'm sick and tired of Jay Bilas and his abysmal argument that the RPIs of the MVC teams shouldn't be taken for what they are, because the only good wins they have are against other teams in the conference. Well, Jay, isn't that the same deal for just about every Big East team? It makes me sick that hypocrites like Bilas can use the RPI to defend big school teams, but when a conference learns to play it the right way, they talk about the flaws in it and try to argue that the smaller schools don't have any big-name wins. Of course they don't, as most of the big schools are far too cowardly to schedule mid-majors. Thus, the RPI had to be tweaked to take that into account.

Why don't big schools man up and schedule MVC teams? Because they have nothing to gain — they usually only serve to hurt a team if they lose as those teams are likely to end up in the 100s, making it a bad loss. I don't like it, but it does make sense. Still, if that's how it's going to be, then the big-school wonks can't get pissed when they don't have any big wins but still have great RPIs.

What people like Bilas and Packer are trying to illustrate is that the MVC is a lot like Ashley Simpson, meaning that their entire act is simply smoke and mirrors. They are trying to say that the MVC, like Simpson, just knows how the game is played and how to work the system and that there is no substance behind the style.

That just isn't true, the MVC has some very quality teams in it, and it will show during the tournament. You won't see any coaches doing awkward jigs after being exposed, because each and every one of those teams will put up a fight. I even expect one of them, Wichita State, to be in the Sweet 16. It will be even sweeter knowing that Bilas will be watching the game through angry tears.

The Sports Gospel According to Mark is sponsored by BetOnSports.com. BetOnSports.com gives you the greatest sports action to bet on. Wager on football, cricket, boxing, rugby, horse racing, and more. Mark Chalifoux is also a weekly columnist for SportsFan Magazine. His columns appear every Tuesday and Thursday on Sports Central. You can e-mail Mark at [email protected].

Posted by Mark Chalifoux at 4:08 PM | Comments (2)

NHL Trade Deadline Winners and Losers

Set a few weeks earlier than prior seasons, this year's NHL trade deadline featured plenty of movement, but not a lot of substance. Some teams tweaked, some teams loaded up, and some teams waved the white flag. For all the furor made over the new elements of this year's deadline as a retardant for movement (salary cap, earlier date, increased parity), there were a record number of trades.

We Want The Cup

When there's magic in the air, you gotta go for it. That's why Carolina GM Jim Ruthorford and Ottawa GM John Muckler pulled the trigger on two deals that will give their respective clubs necessary padding and depth for a long playoff run. Ottawa claimed Blackhawk problem child Tyler Arnason in an attempt to get some second line scoring behind Jason Spezza and Dany Heatley.

The Sens, with Martin Havlat out, had become increasingly dependant on the production of the Team Canada duo, so the need for a second wave of attack became absolutely necessary. With the hopes of a playoff return by Havlat, the Sens have enough firepower to take out any team. However, their season still lies in the hands (and groin) of injured Dominik Hasek.

Carolina was essentially set by grabbing Doug Weight from the St. Louis Blues until Erik Cole's horrific neck injury at the hands of Pittsburgh's Brooks Orpik. With Cole gone indefinitely, it's up the fiery Mark Recchi to ride shotgun with Eric Staal. If Cole comes back for the playoffs, the Hurricanes will likely have a deeper offense than any other team in the NHL. Can the Stanley Cup land in Raleigh? Much to the chagrin of countless Canadians, the answer is yes.

Adding to the Arsenal

Philadelphia added Bobby Clarke's favorite type of player by obtaining Denis Gauthier from Phoenix: tough, big, and a little dirty. Gauthier won't solve Philly's biggest problem, however, since he's not a doctor who can ensure that Peter Forsberg is 100% healthy or a magician who can extract 100% consistent effort from his teammates. Clarke's addition of journeyman forward Niko Dimitrakos from San Jose is negligible. Dimitrakos has talented hands, but is lacking in will, hustle, and hockey sense.

Nashville already had one of the top defensive cores in the NHL before adding hulking Brendon Witt. The Predators paid dearly for a No. 3/4 stay-at-home defenseman, but considering their relative abundance in talented youngsters, a high first-round draft pick won't be missed. Witt adds reinforcement and toughness, but isn't a gamebreaker by any means.

In the same vein, an already-potent New York Ranger squad added power play expert Sandis Ozolinsh to run the blueline. While the Rangers' fate hangs solely on the shoulders of Jaromir Jagr and Henrik Lundquist, Ozolinsh's passing and skating abilities will help any team. To a lesser extent, throw Dallas' acquisition of Willie Mitchell and Detroit's addition of Cory Cross under the same category.

Filling Holes

Give kudos to Kevin Lowe: he saw what his team needed and he tried to address it as best as he could. What he got, however, is hit and miss. Sergei Samsanov will help any team, but the jury is out on whether Dwayne Roloson is really that much of an upgrade over Ty Conklin. Roloson is steady, but not spectacular. Still, goalies with lesser resumes have caught fire in the Stanley Cup playoffs (see: Johan Hedberg), and the Oilers will win or lose as a team.

Similarly, Vancouver got some backup for Alex Auld by plucking talented but rusty Mika Norenon from Buffalo. Canucks fans are hoping that Norenon is the second coming of Mikka Kiprusoff — their worst nightmare is that Norenon's relative lack of play this season will throw him off his game — or worse, easily injured. On the blueline, the Canucks picked up a number of defensemen who will help out, but won't replace the void left by Ed Jovanovski and Mattias Ohlund.

The L.A. Kings picked up up some enigmatic talent in Mark Parrish and Brent Sopel, who will boost the Kings' playoff push, but any real hopes the Kings have in pursuing the Stanley Cup lie in the team's questionable goaltending and health of leading scorers Pavol Demitra and Alex Frolov.

Spare Parts

Will Jeff Friesen push the Mighty Ducks into the playoffs? Will Ville Nieminen spark the Sharks into the postseason? Maybe yes, maybe no. Quite a few teams picked up a few parts for their playoff push, but these deals did not amount to any significance.

Firesale!

The Phoenix Coyotes and New York Islanders essentially waived the white flag and began their umpteenth rebuilding phase. The Coyotes, hovering around the .500 mark despite the loss of leading scorer Ladislav Nagy, couldn't afford Denis Gauthier's asking price, but managed to keep talented Derek Morris for a few more years, and did not unload the core of the team. The Islanders jettisoned contract after contract, marking the end of the Mike Milbury era with the legacy of the untradeable Alexei Yashin.

Standing Pat

Many observers will point to the Tampa Bay Lightning's lack of movement, specifically in goal, as the number one reason why the defending Cup champions won't repeat. Along the same lines, faced with an aging squad that won't make the playoffs, Toronto GM John Ferguson, Jr. opted to stay the course, meaning that the team is neither rebuilding nor contending. They just ... are.

And Finally...

Colorado Avalanche GM Pierre Lacroix ships out David Aebischer, who performed well in the 2003-2004 campaign and stabilized his play over the past two months, for an injured headcase who has lost his form. To make matters worse, Jose Theodore's whopping contract will have many salary cap implications as the Avalanche move forward. Theodore's MVP season was several years ago, and he has admitted to having trouble adjusting to the new pad regulations adopted by the league — not to mention the Propecia hair-growth chemical scandal from a few weeks back.

What's even worse for Avs fans is that the team, already on the playoff bubble, will try to push for the postseason without a No. 1 goalie until Theodore returns, perhaps in time for the first round of the playoffs, in addition to the loss of leading sniper Marek Svatos.

Way to tarnish your legacy, Mr. Lacroix.

Posted by Mike Chen at 3:28 PM | Comments (0)

One For the Ages

If you are anything more than merely a casual fan of college basketball, you will be sick of reading or hearing the name Gerry McNamara after the next week. You will be so bored, and possibly annoyed, by the amount of praise and acclaim heaped on McNamara that you will start to think that he cannot possibly live up to the hype that will soon surround his name. You might even start to think that he is overrated.

As sure as you might think that McNamara is overrated, try not to say it aloud. But if you cannot keep yourself from muttering the dreaded "o" word, please, whatever you do, do not say it loud enough for McNamara to hear you. Because if he does hear you, your beloved alma mater might be the next school to fall victim to the once-again mighty Syracuse Orange and their fearless senior leader.

Having led the Orange to a victory over Pittsburgh and back-to-back Big East championship trophies, McNamara has just put the exclamation point on one of the most incredible week-long runs in college basketball history. There might be lot of players who put up better stats over a four-game stretch, but, in the hallowed history of the college hardwood, it is not "how much," but merely "how."

Until this past week, Randolph Childress' performance for Wake Forest in the 1995 ACC championship was the barometer for greatness in a conference tournament. It was not just the points Childress amassed, but it was how he did it. Childress pulled up for three-pointers when leading a three-on-one break or took fade-away 22-footers off the dribble early in the shot clock.

Most famously, of course, was Childress crossing over a defender so badly that the defender fell to the ground, which was followed by Childress staring at the defender, then smiling and waving his hand at the defender to get up and guard him. Childress then casually knocked down a step-back jumper. If you did not see the play, then words cannot justify how spectacular it was. If you did see Childress' crossover, however, you will never forget it.

This writer never thought he would be excited by a player as much as Randolph Childress excited me for one week in that ACC tournament. Then I watched Gerry McNamara this week at the Garden. Syracuse might proceed to bomb in the Big Dance (as they did last year against Vermont) and McNamara's career might not amount to much at the next level. But, for one week in March, nobody did anything better than Gerry McNamara played basketball.

As stated earlier, forget the statistics. McNamara did not ring up a ton of points and his shooting percentage was not off the charts. But what those statistics fail to tell you is that he was carrying the offensive load for a team that did not have either a viable second scoring option on offense or another ball handler comfortable enough running the show to allow McNamara to play his more natural position of shooting guard.

McNamara, as has been the case all season, was forced to play out of position and counted on to both run the offense and be the primary scorer. And he had to do it while both his school and hometown newspapers, respectively, were citing unnamed Big East sources who claimed he was the most overrated player in the Big East.

So, in perhaps the greatest unspoken retort to "unnamed sources" in history, McNamara went about ensuring that Syracuse would repeat as Big East champions. First, it was a running three-pointer at the buzzer against Cincinnati. Then, it was a long three to force overtime and an eventual upset of the number-one ranked Connecticut Huskies. Then, for a change of pace, he hit a long three to cut the lead to one in the waning seconds of the Georgetown game, and proceeded to win the game with a beautiful pass in transition.

Gerry McNamara secured his place in Big East tournament by leading the Orange to a fourth straight upset in the final game against Pittsburgh. He joins the likes of Patrick Ewing, Ray Allen, Terry Dehere, and John Wallace as players who have turned the Big East tournament into their own personal Big Apple Showcase.

There have been players who have scored more and players who have shot better, but no player has ever had such a direct impact on his team's results as Gerry McNamara had this week in leading the Syracuse orange to the Big East tournament. As long as the Big East continues to assemble in New York City to crown their champion, basketball fans will remember, with a smile, how great McNamara played for that one week in 2006. Not bad for a guy who is less than a week removed from being overrated.

Posted by Michael Beshara at 2:59 PM | Comments (0)

March 13, 2006

Have a Holly, Jolly Madness

To all college basketball fans, Sunday was the time to open the presents under the backboard as "Roundball Christmas" came and went. Over the next three weekends, 65 teams will try to prove their worth in the Big Dance. For now, though, it's up to us casual observers to tear down and break apart the unaltered brackets.

As with every year, the tournament field will supply plenty of arguments for analysts and fans. Which matchups have "fruitcake" written all over them? Who will accept Cinderella's glass snowshoe this year? Fortunately, we can peacefully agree to disagree, thanks to the wonderful spirit of Yule blogging. So, as I sleep and await the dawn of Thursday morning, here's what is dancing through my head.

There's always bickering about who got what seed, or some team that just got in, or those that didn't get their invite. I think the selection committee did an interesting thing this year by throwing several mid-major teams into the mix. George Mason, Bradley, and Utah State can thank the heavens for such leniency. However, the one team that shocked me most when the seeds were revealed was the Air Force Academy.

Despite their affiliation with a weaker Mountain West, I still thought the Falcons had a chance to slide into the field. Well, I had that thought until they lost in the conference tourney quarters to seventh-seeded Wyoming. This turn of events ultimately took the spot I had reserved for Cincinnati, who ended up with a .500 record in (arguably) the year's toughest league. Add in a strong RPI and SOS, and I thought the Bearcats were locks to get to the Dance, despite losing to Syracuse last week.

Speaking of the Orange, they start my rant about the seeds. Sure, once the 'Cuse beat Cincy (and especially Connecticut), they were assured an NCAA spot. However, by going on their magical run, Gerry McNamara and company vaulted to a fifth seed. What? Are you kidding? Nobody thought they would be in the tournament without pulling out a win in New York, and now they vault to a near top-four placement? I don't get it.

As high as Syracuse was in the eyes of the Indy crew, George Washington must not have meant a hill of beans. Sure, the Colonials were in a watered-down Atlantic 10. Yes, they played down the stretch without Pops Mensah-Bonsu. Then again, G.W. did win without their star player until their tourney quarterfinal loss to Temple. And Karl Hobbs did lead them to the best record in the country (26-2). It sort of makes you wonder how far the team would have dropped had they lost to Charlotte in the regular season finale.

Now, I may think some of these decisions are unfair, but I don't get the chance to debate the decisions or berate anyone who made them. That's pretty much what happened during CBS' Selection Show. After the brackets were revealed, the on-air crew did their annual spiel where they ask the committee chairperson about the final product. When it came time to turn to Jim Nantz and Billy Packer, their outrage over the Missouri Valley selections came through in earnest.

They do have the right to ask why the ACC and MVC had the same number of teams in the tournament. However, their line of questioning was based on illogical circumstances. Okay, the MVC has one win in the last three years. But did you consider that only seven teams were there in a group of 195? It's also true that the ACC has 31 wins over the same time span. Then again, that conference has had 15 bids, with most early opponents being cupcake programs from leagues like the SWAC, Ohio Valley, Ivy, and so on.

The worst was yet to come, though. At the end of the interview, it was clear that Chairman Craig Littlepage had one final comment. Nantz cut him off, not once, but twice. And before any media people go biting my head off, I know the situation. I've worked in television the last few years, and I understand that commercial breaks and programming times drive a telecast. But you can end a lengthy interview with politeness and class, something the Final Four broadcast team didn't do.

Nantz and Packer were plain rude and unprofessional in that interview, something that doesn't happen often, and hopefully won't go on in the future.

All right, enough with the unpleasant ravings from my soapbox. On to a quick peek at the bracket.

The strongest region in the tournament belongs to Minneapolis. This section has the most balanced top eight, with Big 10 regular-season champ Ohio State, tourney-tested Florida, and Boston College ready to challenge top-seed Villanova.

I think the best 8-9 contest will be surging Arkansas battling giant-killer Bucknell in Dallas. I believe the winner of this game also has a very good shot at knocking off Memphis in round two.

Two sleepers I have making it to the Sweet 16 are the Razorbacks/Bison winner and Wichita State. Tennessee is high as a two-seed, and I believe the Volunteers will be undone by a gritty Shockers squad.

The most dangerous team in the tournament is Kansas, and that's hard for me to say as a Missouri Tigers fan. Bill Self has done an outstanding job of turning his freshmen and sophomores into a group of well-winged flyers. The Jayhawks are smoking, winning 15 of their last 16.

My crystal ball is also showing me a couple of bigger upsets in the first round. If you ask anyone in the know, Michigan State has the tools to make a run. Unfortunately, they are also a highly schizophrenic machine (4-6 in their last 10). That's not something you want to rely on when facing a steady George Mason team (only three losses since Dec. 31).

And even though I might get some lashes from upstate New Yorkers, I think that Syracuse's magical run will end with a bow out courtesy of Texas A&M. The Aggies are pretty long and lean and athletic, something you need to get around that Orange manzone. It'll stay close, but A&M will pull it out late.

Finally, I'll move past the first round and get to the meat. I've got Connecticut, Florida, Texas, and UCLA getting to Indianapolis in two weeks. UConn will have too much inside presence for the Gators, and Texas holds the height and experience card over the Bruins. The Huskies and 'Horns should provide us with a fantastic championship game, but the burnt orange team doesn't have Vince Young on the court. Santa will leave a championship trophy in UConn's stocking for the third time in seven years.

I hope everyone enjoys the Madness. Hot shooting to all, and to all a slam-dunk.

Posted by Jonathan Lowe at 7:01 PM | Comments (1)

I Hate Mondays: Trade Reggie Bush?

The state of Texas already has their Bush — they don't need another.

The idea of drafting Reggie Bush definitely reddens some cheeks in a red state, but the Houston Texans can have a red-letter draft day without him.

Bush's talents as a running back are definitely one-of-a-kind, but one player does not make a team in the NFL, especially not a running back.

I'm sure you've heard it before: running backs are a dime-a-dozen.

Out of 32 teams, the only ones that might be interested in a primetime back are the Baltimore Ravens, Indianapolis Colts, New England Patriots, New York Jets, and Minnesota Vikings. Consider that two of those teams, the Jets and the Pats, have an aging starter and are just looking to groom a future replacement, and two others, the Ravens and the Colts, are permitting their superstar ball-carriers, Jamal Lewis and Edgerrin James, to walk in free agency.

James, a former NFL rushing leader, has already filled a void in Arizona, while Lewis, a one-time 2,000-yard rusher, will fill another vacancy elsewhere. On top of that, the first round of the draft alone is expected to provide at least four more starting-caliber backs to an already-saturated market. The overabundance is plain to see.

There's no shortage of capable runners, just ask the Carolina Panthers or the Green Bay Packers, who found Nick Goings and Samkon Gado buried at the bottom of their depth chart during the past couple of seasons.

And the Houston Texans, for one, are not running on empty.

Their backfield includes Domanick Davis, who accumulated over 3,100 total yards and 22 touchdowns in his first two seasons before an injury-plagued third-year kept him 24 yards short of the 1,000-yard benchmark, and Vernand Morency, a promising, explosive back, who is heading into his second professional season.

Davis still has fours years and $20 million left on his deal and even though an extension to the collective bargaining agreement has relieved salary cap restraints, there is no use in overspending and overstocking for one position.

Several teams have tested the strategy of drafting a new stud while possessing a proficient pony in the stable, but the results are not necessarily positive.

In 1999, the New Orleans Saints pawned their whole NFL draft to pickup standout running back Ricky Williams and then drafted Deuce McAllister in the first round two years later. In 2000, the St. Louis Rams were equipped with a top-tier runner in Marshall Faulk, yet they still wasted the 32nd overall pick by drafting another Trung Canidate. In 2003, the Buffalo Bills and Kansas City Chiefs were both stocked with running backs that had amassed more than 1,600 total yards, yet neither was deterred from burning first-round selections on Willis McGahee or Larry Johnson.

In all three of the four cases, the incumbent has been supplanted, and the fresher face is now the starting tailback, but each team would have been better off drafting a player to a position of need.

McAllister sat for a year, McGahee had to recover from injuries in his first pro season, and Johnson wore diapers for nearly two full seasons.

The Saints could have addressed a lingering team weakness by grooming defensive tackles like Ryan Pickett or Kris Jenkins, who were available at the time McAllister was drafted. The Bills could have bolstered their offensive line with either Kwame Harris or Eric Steinbach, and the Chiefs, for all their defensive woes, could have had three years of service from burgeoning cornerbacks Charles Tillman or Rashean Mathis by now.

As for the Rams, obviously anything would be better than Canidate at this point since he's no longer on the roster.

The Texans finished with the worst record in the NFL last season and overhauled their coaching staff shortly after. The combination of encompassing the talent shortages of a 2-14 team, along with the new regime's urgency to introduce its own personnel, only leads to more roster openings.

The defense will be switching its base from a 3-4 scheme to a 4-3 scheme, which means that a number of cogs that had a place in a porous example of the 3-4, may find that they are no longer welcome in the new system. Defensive lineman Gary Walker has already heard that message and has been released. Other players like Seth Payne, Antwan Peek, and Jason Babin will have some serious adjustments to make.

The Texans have plenty of needs. They require upgrades in their defensive front-seven, offensive line, and receiving corps, and with a consensus top-flight selection on the board, one that catches the eye of many possible suitors, it makes sense for the Texans to trade down and try to plug several leaks.

The value of the top pick is still increasing. Vince Young's less-than-wonderful Wonderlic score, combined with the incessant craze for anything Jay Cutler, could cause a scramble for quarterbacks at the top of the draft. Factor in USC's Pro Day and it becomes evident that the Texans stock is still rising in a bullish market.

The New York Jets might be their best trading partner, especially since they have somewhat settled their quarterbacking predicament for the time being. They have restructured the contract of Chad Pennington and are on the hunt for another veteran quarterback who is able to provide some competition and possibly take on the lead role. They have a tradable asset in defensive end John Abraham, whom they have been shopping, and could build a package around him to move up three spots.

The outlook for the Jets next season is fairly bleak and their fans need a reason to renew hope. Acquiring Reggie Bush would create an instant buzz and he is a much easier sell to the fans than an outstanding offensive tackle.

In a draft-day trade two years ago, when a similar class of rookies was headlined by a clear-cut top pick, the New York Giants, who also held the fourth pick of the draft, sent the San Diego Chargers a future first-round pick (which turned out to be Pro Bowl rookie linebacker Shawne Merriman), a third-round pick (placekicker Nate Kaeding), and a fifth-round pick in order to swap Philip Rivers for Eli Manning.

The Chargers are not complaining right now, and if the Texans are presented with a similar opportunity to address several needs instead of overstocking a position where they are already equipped, they should not hesitate to pull the trigger.

The Houston Texans and Reggie Bush mix like Mondays and me.

"Every day you waste is one you can never make up." — George Allen

Posted by Dave Golokhov at 11:49 AM | Comments (0)

March 11, 2006

The Teams That Will Break Hearts

It's that time of year again. Pseudo college basketball experts in all corners of the country will soon convene around their given water-coolers and pretend to know how the NCAA tournament will unfold.

Due to my gambling habit, I watch more college basketball than anyone this side of Jay Bilas. However, as much as I do I know, I still lack the crystal ball that other sports geniuses seem to possess. While I can't predict the future, I can salvage your brackets ahead of time by giving you my list of 10 high-seeded teams who will not cut the nets down in St. Louis.

And yes, I'm aware that the brackets aren't out yet, and that matchups have a lot to do with basketball, but it really doesn't matter. Everyone is going to to have to beat a couple of tough teams to win it all, and the teams below will prove incapable.

The following are teams seeded fourth or higher in Joe Lunardi's latest bracketology, in no particular order:

10) Iowa

I'll start with my alma mater. Iowa is a nice, senior-laden team with a solid backcourt. Over the next few weeks, you will hear how important these two traits are, but Iowa still lacks the offensive punch necessary to win six tough games in a three-week span. They aren't deep enough, and they will struggle if grouped with more athletic squads.

Maximum upside — Elite Eight

9) West Virginia

This team has been so trendy and public this year. I really don't get it, and I am one more ESPN feature on Kevin Pittsnogle's tattoos away from trading in my television set. They have some nice players, but they are really, really soft inside. Their gimmick 1-3-1 defense is ripe for any team that can move the ball inside. They live and die by the three, and I would be shocked if they duplicated last year's Elite 8 run.

Maximum upside — Sweet 16, could go down round one

8) UCLA

UCLA's hype this year is a product of a horrifically weak Pac-10, and the flashy name on the front of their jerseys. Jordan Farmar and Arron Afflalo get tons of publicity, and they aren't bad players, but there are plenty of comparable guard tandems out there. They will be seeded third, and will be an nice target for a six- or 11-seed in round two.

Maximum upside — Sweet 16, another round one upset alert

7) North Carolina

They are really hot lately, especially after the win over Duke. This team could be a trendy Final Four pick so long as they don't draw (UConn). They really don't have a shot, though. They are super young, and I really don't think they are even close to being as good as some people think. They might have huge upside down the line, but their success this year is a product of a weak, watered-down ACC.

Maximum upside — Elite Eight

6) Gonzaga

Sure, Adam Morrison is awesome, and his puberty ‘stache is glorious, but they don't play defense. Not a lick. They are fun to watch, but they will get blitzed by a good offensive team or by someone who has a guy capable of containing Morrison. It'd be a great story of they could make a run, but they will start to struggle in round two.

Maximum upside — Final Four with a generous draw

5) George Washington

They have all the same problems as Gonzaga, minus the fact that these guys don't have an Adam Morrison to fall back on. Temple really exposed them the other day, and I'd be lying if I said I didn't see it coming. I honestly think they have the worst shot of anyone on this list of reaching the Final Four. Doesn't help their case that their best player, Pops Mensah-Bonsu, just suffered a moderately-serious knee injury recently. Nice story, though.

Maximum upside — Round two

4) Pittsburgh

This team wasn't going to make my list. They have all the qualities that matter in March. They are tough, play defense, can score inside and out, but the problem is that Carl Krauser will be the undoing of this squad. He is a great player, but too often he tries to do it all himself. If Krauser doesn't force the issue, this team has a shot, but I have a feeling he will and in a bad spot, too.

Maximum upside — Elite Eight

3) Tennessee

They obviously can play a little if they have won all these games, but I really feel like they are too reliant on the three-point shot. Chris Lofton is their star, but his game is predicated on getting hot from outside. They lack the inside game necessary to run a potent half-court offense. Their trump card is the full-court press they utilize, but quality guard play can easily overcome this. Bruce Pearl has this program headed in the right direction, but anything more than a Sweet 16 appearance would be hoping for too much.

Maximum upside — Sweet 16, first-round casualty alert

2) Duke

This isn't your older brother's Duke team. They are solid to be sure, but they simply lack the "wow" factor that they had over the last decade or so. J.J. Redick is a good player who can surely score the ball, but where is his help on the offensive end? Josh McRoberts hasn't developed fast enough, and Sheldon Williams is a poor man's Theo Ratliff. If Lee Melchionni and Sean Dockery aren't knocking down the open looks, these guys are in huge trouble.

Maximum upside — Final Four, but I expect them to lose in the Sweet 16

1) Illinois

This was the toughest call on my list. I had it down to LSU and Illinois. I made my decision based on the fact that if these two met on a neutral court, I'd like LSU to beat Illinois. Illinois is a really nice team with plenty of tournament experience, but I just really feel like they lack the parts needed for a return Final Four trip.

Maximum upside — Elite Eight

One of these six teams will cut down the nets: UConn, Villanova, Ohio State, Memphis, LSU, or Texas

Posted by Ryan Hojnacki at 5:34 PM | Comments (1)

Do You Want Sports or EA Sports?

One of my favorite things about ESPN Classic, besides a significant dearth of Steve Levy appearances, is watching the antiquated ways in which sports were presented on television through the years. From the minimalist early days of the NFL to the slow advance of garish graphics on baseball broadcasts to the optical innovations of the NBA's coverage, the evolution of sports on television is a fascinating study.

Of course, if you ask ESPN, it's more about intelligent design. The network loves to brand its camera angles and graphic elements, as if it reinvented the wheel each time. That over-the-field camera in the NFL — that ESPN stole from the XFL, a league it refused to cover professionally — has its own brand name. The batter swinging several times in slow-motion has a name.

And now we have the latest innovation: ESPNU Full Circle, which debuted last week in the Duke/North Carolina game. Like NASCAR, which gives you cameras in each car, in the pits, wherever you want to go, ESPN provided three channels with three different perspectives on the game: the traditional half-court camera on ESPN; the "Above the Rim" camera on ESPN2; and a camera just on the Duke student section on ESPNU.

Essentially, it's the dawn of the total access pay-per-view era in basketball, only it's on expanded basic cable until the training wheels come off. This concept is nothing new. It's been talked about for years in the NFL, where broadcasting pioneers wanted to have PPV channels dedicated to offense, defense, and certain star players. ("Filmed in Vick-o-Vision!"). Seeing it applied to basketball was interesting.

I have no issue with the idea: for what we pay, they should have 25 channels for each game, with at least four dedicated to the cheerleaders. But the execution was a little troublesome. In other words, I'm still taking motion sickness pills for that "Above the Rim" camera angle.

If you didn't see the game, basically we're talking about a camera mounted on the backboard that follows the ball-handler down the court and can quickly move to another player on each pass. It literally can follow a guy from the top of the key as he drives to the basket and dunks the ball. That part's pretty cool.

But boy, does that thing have to whip around a lot to catch the action. There was a pass under the basket by Duke that caused such a jarring motion in the camera that I felt as disoriented as a Cosmonaut plummeting back to Earth in a space capsule.

Maybe I'm a traditionalist at heart, or a creature of habit at worst, but I watched the ESPN half-court feed more than anything else during the game. I think there's a fatal flaw with the "Above the Rim" concept, and it has everything to do with J.J. Redick.

The camera follows the guy with the ball, but more importantly, it doesn't follow the guys without the ball. So the camera is focused on a guy like Redick instead of the guy setting a pick for him. Plus, this angle helps solve one of television's greatest mysteries when it comes to winter team sports: how to film a player from the front, rather than the side. What a great marketing tool this camera concept is — unless your superstar is butt-ugly, I guess.

But is focusing on the ball-handler actually watching basketball? Maybe to the casual fan. For people who have logged decades watching the NBA and NCAA, and for those that have played the game, it's what's happening around the ball that really makes a game entertaining. I get more joy watching a play develop than watching a guy make a shot. With "Above the Rim," you can't see a guy make a baseline cut from the outside because the camera's on the point guard dribbling at the top of the zone. It'd be like watching an NFL game with the camera trained solely on the quarterback and never showing the offensive line or his running backs.

These camera innovations are, in a way, a reaction to what's happening on Xbox and PlayStation. The camera dangling over the football field? "Madden." The camera on top of the backboard? Another sports video game trademark. It's a good thing sports broadcasters weren't slaves to this trend 15 years ago, or Gene Larkin might have had to jump over a mushroom before winning the 1991 World Series — and saving the princess.

Look, the youth market is significant. I get that. But as a great man once asked, "Is our children learning?" What kind of fan will come from not seeing the entire court during a basketball game? Who will actually learn about the sports they're watching if the game is being presented in "Cameron Crazies Cam?"

I don't think the traditional presentation of sporting events will die off, even as these innovations are implemented.

And sometimes what seems like a great modernization is actually a train-wreck.

Say, didn't someone just write a book about that?

Greg Wyshynski is the Features Editor for SportsFan Magazine in Washington, DC, and the Senior Sports Editor for The Connection Newspapers of Northern Virginia. His book "Glow Pucks and 10-Cent Beer: The 101 Worst Ideas in Sports History" will be published in spring 2006. His columns appear every Saturday on Sports Central. You can e-mail Greg at [email protected].

Posted by Greg Wyshynski at 4:50 PM | Comments (0)

March 10, 2006

Searching For Cinderella

Cinderella has always been my favorite fairytale. How much more creative can you get, with the prince only knowing his true love by finding the woman whose slender foot fits snugly into one beautiful, missing slipper?

Every year in March, we sports fans search for our own Cinderella. Of course, the slipper comes in the form of victories at the NCAA tournament. The princes will all be at the ball. Duke, North Carolina, Illinois, UConn, and many other of college basketball's royalty will be invited to show off their best Tangos, Foxtrots, and Quicksteps, while the paupers wait their turn, hoping the proverbial slipper fits.

As we spectators watch the Big Dance from Barcaloungers and bar stools, we marvel at the skills of the princes, who regale us with their bravado and skill. At the same time, we crane our necks, to see over these giants, hoping desperately that Cinderella will sneak furtively, beguilingly forward and break free from the rest of the paupers.

Will the fairytale come true this year, we wonder? If so, who will it be? The slipper is poised in the prince's hand, waiting for Cinderella to glide into it, completely unaware that the moment that foot slides inside, it is the prince who will be vanquished, instead of whisking beautiful Cinderella away in a diamond-studded coach.

They are there on the wall, waiting their turn at the slipper. Will one step forth this season? Who will Cinderella be?

Will she be Winthrop?

The Big South champ finished with a nice 21-7 record and is tourney tested. The Eagles have now made the Big Dance six times in head coach Gregg Marshall's eight seasons. Based on this experience and another solid regular season, the Eagles will likely receive a 13 or 14 seed. With the right draw, Winthrop can win a game or two. They possess great depth. Ten guys average double-figure minutes, led by senior guard James Shuler, who doesn't even play 30. At 6-6, 220, Shuler can wreak havoc on smaller guards. A potential two- or three-seed that is not very deep, like Illinois, might struggle against Winthrop, which could use up to 12 different players. Does the chariot await a ride to round two of the Big Dance?

Is Cinderella Murray State?

Winner of the Ohio Valley Conference, the Racers sport a fine 23-6 record, including a 19-2 mark in their last 21 games. This is a team that can Quickstep even the nation's finest dancers at the ball. Coach Thad Matta, of Big 10 champ Ohio State, for example, would probably hate to see Murray State on his first-round dance card, as the Racers are one of few teams with the depth and quickness at guard to match and maybe even surpass that of the Buckeyes.

Murray State will play small most of the time and keep the tempo fast in the full-court, slowing it down slightly in the half court, in order to keep the score low. The Racers' Achilles heel may be lack of real size. If they matchup with someone big, it could be a true David and Goliath — of course, we all know who won that battle. Is the slipper slightly too large for the undersized Racers?

Will bashful Bucknell be the belle of the ball?

One of last year's giant-killers, Bucknell knocked off third-seed Kansas in 2005 and might be as high as an 11-seed this year. Once ranked in the top 25, the Bison were unbeaten in the Patriot League, going into a March 10 contest with Holy Cross. Sure to be one of the toughest defensive teams in the tournament, Bucknell held 21 teams to 60 or fewer points this season. Nine opponents mustered just 50 or below.

Unlike the other Cinderella hopefuls, Bucknell has a quality win, over Syracuse, and a legitimate star in 6-3 senior guard Charles Lee. A solid scorer, Lee can cause any team problems, especially if center Chris McNaughton is having a good day, which will make it nearly impossible to double the dangerous Lee. With Bison coach Pat Flannery rumored to be headed to a bigger job, the Bucknell players may have added incentive for a longer-than-expected dance. Perhaps a Waltz for the defensive-minded Bison.

Is it finally a 16's turn to pirouette into the second round of the Big Dance? How about a first-ever invitee? For a 16-seed to overcome the enormous odds (are there odds for something that has never happened?), the matchup would have to be right. We all know that all of the Dance's princes are not created equal. Witness 2005, when both Washington, and Duke were weak No. 1 seeds, each losing in the round of 16. There are definitely potential No. 1s who are pretenders this season. Excuse me, Duke and Memphis, are you listening? With a perfect matchup in mind, let's have this year's real Cinderella please try on the mythical slipper.

Does the shoe fit Belmont?

The Atlantic Sun winner will make its first-ever appearance in the Big Dance and could break a prince's heart, while thrilling fans nationwide, swooning at the most glorious Cinderella of all. The lone shiny coin in the Bruins' contest collection is a conference championship win over favored Lipscomb — a team with an RPI of 142. A surefire 16-seed, the Bruins enter the tournament with a winning trend, going 12-1 in their last 13 games, and entering the Big Dance gliding gracefully along can make for a better first-round spin. With this fairly shaky resume, how you may ask can Belmont pull of the biggest miracle since the 1980 Olympics?

A very offensive squad, the Bruins have scored 85 points or better 17 times and 100-plus twice. Even though a 16-seed has never made it off the wall and onto the ballroom floor at the Big Dance, I like Belmont's chances to be the first, once again, depending on the matchup. Teams that can fill it up, I believe, just have a better chance to win. If the game turns from a Tango to a shootout, the starry-eyed Bruins may feel right at home.

Two additional keys make this team very dangerous. First, they've never been to the dance, so no one will take them seriously. Ask kids from Duke or UConn who Belmont is, and they are likely to shrug their shoulders and say, "Isn't Belmont a horse race?" Lack of respect usually means poor preparation, which often means a stumbling prince on the dance floor.

Second, not only does Belmont score a lot of points, it scores them both inside and out — a very deadly tournament combination. Big center Boomer Herndon can cause lots of problems, if matched with a team that is thin in the middle, someone like, say, Villanova which has no true center or Memphis, a team that goes primarily with 6-9, 225 Shawne Williams in the middle. He could be manhandled by the 6-11, 260 Herndon. If Boomer draws a lot of attention, he may just find super sophomore Justin Hare, waiting on the perimeter for some long-ball fun.

Let us not forget, too, that nine guys will dance significant minutes for the Bruins, who lost by just 10 points to an Ohio State team that is easily one of the best in the nation.

And we spectators continue to watch, peeking around princes — peering, scrutinizing, and appraising every would-be dancer. The paupers of the NCAA. Is this the year? Will the dream glide forward and accept the prize?

With the right matchup, Cinderella, your slipper is here — you just have to put it on.

Mark Barnes is a novelist, regular contributor to fantasy football site 4for4.com, and NFL football radio analyst. He appears weekly on ESPN radio in High Point, NC and on WBAL in Baltimore, MD, where he discusses pro football and fantasy sports. Mark's novel, "The League," is the first-ever published work of fiction with a plot based on the dangers of a multi-million-dollar fantasy football league. Learn more about "The League" and Mark's work at NFLStory.com.

Posted by Mark Barnes at 1:33 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

Sports Q&A: Final Four Picks; Borg

Roscoe from Chattanooga, Tennessee writes, "What is your opinion of tennis great Bjorn Borg's decision to sell his five Wimbledon championship trophies and two prized Donnay rackets?"

Upon learning of this, my first reaction was the same as that of Borg's rival John McEnroe, "You cannot be serious!" I was so outraged that I uttered a stream of profanities, broke a vintage Wilson wooden-framed racket, and berated an English tennis official who just happened to be sitting near me in what looked like a giant baby high chair.

However, when I learned that Borg was selling his wares out of necessity and not greed, I immediately changed my tune, and placed an absurdly low bid on eBay for a couple of the trophies and a wooden racket with a tiny sweet spot that would make the coolest fly swatter ever. Needless to say, my bid was rejected and my dream of owning at least one Wimbledon men's trophy was shattered.

But who needs the men's trophy? Really, I'd much rather simply bow in front of the Duchess of York, who has to be the hottest gray-haired chick in the world. And I'd gladly high-five the Duke, as well. The Wimbledon women's trophy is the one I truly crave. It's a sterling silver plate, just begging to have a turkey served on it. And if it's one of the many owned by Steffi Graf, then I've really got to have it. Come to think of it, I would love to have anything touched by Graf, except, of course, Andre Agassi.

Anyway, back to Borg's situation. After a string of bad investments and failed businesses (I guess that would be called a double fault), Borg's bank accounts stand at "love." That means zero. But is Borg in such dire straits that he must resort to selling his trophies and rackets? Is it that bad? Shouldn't he start with some old sneakers and a headband, maybe?

Borg, along with McEnroe, made the headband fashionable thirty years ago. Now, headbands are everywhere in men's tennis. Can't one of the big tennis clothiers sign Borg to a huge contract to peddle the retro headband? I'd gladly pay $15 for a headband if it meant Borg could keep his trophies. I'd even grow my hair long and grow the distinct Borg beard. And I'm sure any tennis player with a respect for the game's past would do the same. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if some generous souls, possibly former or current players, will buy Borg's trophies and return them to him as a gift.

If that doesn't happen, then Borg could star in some tennis instructional videos, like, for example, Swedish Baselining With Bjorn Borg, or Serve and Volley With Bjorn Borg, Then Buy Him Lunch. Or, he could serve as a paid endorser for an investment firm and lend a cautionary tale of investments gone wrong. He could title the story, I Got Broke in the Third Game of the Fifth Set, Then I Went Broke.

The name "Bjorn Borg" is still marketable, so he should say the heck with investments and market himself. And, if you have to, Bjorn, rent the trophies, don't sell them. If you haven't already, create your own website, and call it bjornb.org. Your financial problems are just an obstacle in life, just like a slice serve into the body on the grass at Wimbledon. It's time to hit a winner.

James from Almonte, Ontario asks, "Who are your Final Four picks for the NCAA men's tournament?"

You mean, I've got to make four selections from a field of 65? What is this? "American Idol?" Well, if you ask Paula Abdul or Randy Jackson for those kind of specifics, you won't get it, dawg. Paula and Randy like everything. If you ask for their Final Four, you'd get 40, at the least. Now, Simon Cowell knows nothing about basketball, so don't be surprised if he's in CBS' tournament sudio offering his expert analysis. But he's not afraid to be honest, and neither am I, so here goes.

I like Connecticut and Memphis as the only number one seeds to advance to the Final Four. Why? First of all, UConn is a team characterized by all the catch phrases you hear a lot at this time of the year: deep, balanced, athletic, and tested from a tough schedule. And they have one of the nation's best dunkers, Rudy Gay. That's really why I picking them. Of course, I haven't seen the brackets yet, and this might be the year I go out on a limb and pick a No. 16 seed to pull the upset. So, if that 12-16 team that stuns everyone and wins their conference tournament is really rolling, and UConn's top eight scorers are suspended for conduct detrimental to the team, then I'm going with the upset. Otherwise, go Huskies.

Memphis also has a great dunker in Rodney Carney and the Grizzlies, I mean Tigers, can score with any team. Coach John Calipari has been to the Final Four before, and he's survived death threats from John Chaney. Can any other coach boast that claim? No, so I like Memphis.

Why am I not picking any other number ones in the Final Four? I'll start with Duke and Villanova, who are locks for top seeds despite whatever happens in their conference tournaments. I don't see Duke losing early. You can go ahead and chalk up two wins for the Devils in Greensboro, plus another in the round of 16. The regional final is where Duke runs out of gas. Duke's limitations have been exposed in their last two losses, against Florida State and North Carolina.

J.J. Redick is in a slump. Is he tired? Maybe. Is he lacking exposure to sunlight? His ghostly pale skin would answer "yes." Are these possible reasons for his slump? Probably not. I think teams have realized that if you keep Redick under thirty points,

Duke can be beat. Sure, Sheldon Williams can pickup some of the slack, but, as UNC's Tyler Hansbrough proved, Williams can be overpowered. Williams will get his 16 rebounds and 7 blocks, but not enough points to compensate if Redick is off. If we're lucky, maybe we'll get to see Duke face Gonzaga somewhere along the way, and Redick and Adam Morrison can play a game of H-O-R-S-E. The winner claims the title of college basketball's best player, and wins his choice of 90 minutes in a tanning salon, or a year's treatment of Rogaine for those hard-to-grow mustaches. (Shouldn't Adam's 'stache have grown in by now? I had that much peach fuzz in the seventh grade.)

Now, on to Villanova. Why won't the Wildcats make the Final Four? Well, for one reason, I've already got one Big East team in, Connecticut, so I can't pick another. I guess I could, but I'd need to see Rollie Massimino on the Wildcats' bench devising an impenetrable zone defense. Seriously, Villanova has enough quality guard play to put two teams in the Final Four, but I think lack of an inside game will cost them, possibly to a Big 10 team.

That leaves two other teams. I could go with Texas, but I'm apprehensive to pick a team that lost to Duke by what, 40 points? So, I won't. Could the Southeastern Conference put a team in? Yeah, but Florida is upset-prone and Tennessee is too streaky. Besides, if Tennessee does make the Final Four, then coach Bruce Pearl won't be available as a studio guest for CBS' coverage. So, sorry Vols, there's always women's basketball.

The Pac-10? If Washington couldn't make it as a No. 1 seed, as they were last year, then why should they make it this year? UCLA? A great chance for the final 16, but beyond that, I'm reluctant to pull the trigger.

The Big 10? I like Ohio State. They are a lot like Villanova, with a guard-heavy lineup, but they have a solid inside game with Terrence Dials. And, the Big 10 style of play toughens a team for the tournament, and the Buckeyes won the regular season title.

That leaves one, and this is somewhat of a longshot. I'll go with the Tar Heels. North Carolina has played themselves up the seedings board, and could be looking at a number two seed. They'll likely be playing in Greensboro, so two virtual home games should put the 'Heels in the round of 16. I think Roy Williams has positioned Carolina for a long string of consecutive final 16 appearances, just like his mentor Dean Smith did. The Tarheels are deep, and Williams has proven he can take teams to the Final Four, as well as win it all.

So, that makes my Final Four as follows: Connecticut, Memphis, Ohio State, and North Carolina.

Get Your Questions Answered!

Do you have a question or comment? Want to hurl me a string of profanities? Do you need a comprehensive analysis of your golf swing, or your stabbing motion? Then send your question/obscenities/videotape along with your name and hometown to [email protected]. You may get the answer you're looking for in the next column on Friday, March 24th.

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 1:02 PM | Comments (0)

Team USA Hoops: Gold or Bust

Never again.

Hardly words you would ever expect to hear from an athlete, a team, or an organization on the heels of earning the high honor of Olympic bronze. But this is USA basketball — the only sports organization with a more dominant history than the Boston Celtics of the '60s, the New York Yankees of the '50s, and UCLA men's basketball of the '60s and '70s. Silver is a travesty. Bronze a catastrophe.

Simply put, team USA took the gold for granted. This lack of ambition finally came back to haunt our team when we discovered in the 21st century that the rest of the world had tilted the international game in their favor. The staggering truth is that after the U.S. had laid a disastrous egg in the 2002 World Championships, finishing sixth, our country was fortunate to win Bronze in the most recent summer Olympics.

Commissioner David Stern and the other powers-that-be in the NBA and team USA were accused of not sending the best available players to Athens, but the flashiest. Why? Perhaps so they could make more millions selling team USA replica jerseys of the league's premier players. However, the end result could not be ignored, and today it seems the NBA and Team USA are serious about fielding the best possible team for 2008.

Twenty-three players have been invited for the '06 World Championships, and it seems selected wisely. If successful, this will be the same team that plays for gold in the 2008 Summer Olympics. The men here appear to meet needs that were sorely lacking in 2004, such as outside shooting and simple fundamental skills like ball-handling and rebounding. While only 12 will be able to dress for any given game, the rough draft certainly looks promising. Here now are your 2008 Olympians.

Mike Krzyzewski

Head Coach (Duke Blue Devils)

No one doubts the will, work ethic, or the motivational tactics of Duke's famed Coach K. What we must doubt however is his ability to get through to NBA level talent. Is his reality strong enough to impress upon these eight-figure egos? Perhaps under this limited format international competition and the Olympics gives them, and perhaps due to the dire straits that USA basketball is currently in, it is, but only time will truly tell.

Carmelo Anthony

Forward (Denver Nuggets)

'Melo struggled mightily at the '04 Olympics and it is somewhat of a surprise to see his name back on an Olympic roster. However, Anthony possesses a fairly consistent outside jumpshot along with his ability to penetrate. His game is fundamentally-sound and well-rounded. Perhaps it was merely a slump.

Gilbert Arenas

Guard (Washington Wizards)

An unquestioned talent, but may not have the kind of game most conducive to international basketball, which cracks down on carrying, palming, traveling, and won't allow so much as a head fake. A lot of Arenas' fancy dribbling tricks to beat his man and get to the bucket may not fly with international referees.

Shane Battier

Forward (Memphis Grizzlies)

Remember him? I bet you haven't seen him much since the last time he was starring for Coach K at Duke. Look for him to get prime minutes from his old coach and perhaps he can bring Battier back to the kind of player he was in college. His game is disciplined and fundamentally-sound, a very solid fit.

Chauncey Billups

Guard (Detroit Pistons)

Another perfect fit. Billups can shoot the lights out, elevates his game in clutch situations, can drive to the basket without being called for a travel, and is not a stranger to working within a disciplined team concept. His 2004 NBA championship ring says so.

Chris Bosh

Forward (Toronto Raptors)

Unproven and still making his way in the NBA, Bosh is coming off a strong showing at this year's all-star game (for what that's worth, anyway). He is the definition of a power forward, complete with rough raw edges in his game that have yet to be sanded out.

Bruce Bowen

Guard (San Antonio Spurs)

Defensive specialist extraordinaire. His defense is so airtight they should call him Tupperware. Anyone who watched last year's NBA Finals can attest to that. He hits three's, too, just hope Coach K remembers to take him off the floor or keep the ball out of his hands at the end of games when the other team is looking for a body to foul. Bowen is a pedestrian 57 percent shooter from the stripe for his career.

Elton Brand

Forward (Los Angeles Clippers)

After toiling for many years in Chicago, it seems Brand has finally put it all together with of all teams, the Clippers. A much-polished low-post game may mean trouble for international competition.

Kobe Bryant

Guard (Los Angeles Lakers)

For all the crap he's taken ... who's better than Kobe?

Dwight Howard

Forward/Center (Orlando Magic)

For all his talent and potential, it might not be the best idea to select a player who's had more high school games than NBA ones. May still have some kinks to work out.

LeBron James

Forward (Cleveland Cavaliers)

Hopefully, Coach K will learn from the mistakes of Larry Brown and give this man some minutes.

Antawn Jamison

Forward (Washington Wizards)

A questionable choice and at best, an x-factor. Recent history shows it's a gamble to select players who are overly-dependent on pure athleticism.

Joe Johnson

Guard/Forward (Atlanta Hawks)

To be traded from the red-hot Suns to Atlanta is beyond cruel. Perhaps a team USA invite is just what he needs ... doesn't mean he has to get major minutes, though, right?

Shawn Marion

Forward (Phoenix Suns)

Marion cannot be playing any better right now alongside Nash and Co. He has the power to post up and play inside along with the finesse to fire away from three and the discipline to know when to do which.

Brad Miller

Center (Sacramento Kings)

Another one of those "purpose" selections, Miller brings strong defense, rebounding, and toughness to the squad.

Adam Morrison

Guard (Gonzaga Bulldogs)

One of the top players in college hoops, Morrison can light up the scoreboard and seemingly do it all while playing in the West Coast Conference. But can he do it all against the best in the world?

Lamar Odom

Forward (Los Angeles Lakers)

I have to completely disagree with this choice. While an incredible talent, what has Odom done in recent years to justify this selection? More importantly, if he can't adapt to Phil Jackson's triangle, how will he ever adapt to international play? Hopefully, this problem will be evened out by 2008.

Chris Paul

Guard (Oklahoma City/New Orleans Hornets)

After an incredible '04-'05 season with Wake Forest, Paul is quietly having a solid rookie year. We will have to wait and see on this one, though.

Paul Pierce

Forward/Guard (Boston Celtics)

Yes, he is an enigma. But for now he leads his team in points, assists, rebounds, and steals per game...even if that team is Boston. Pierce wouldn’t appear to have a game suited for the international style but he was the high scorer and perhaps the only bright spot on the 2002 USA team

J. J. Redick

Guard (Duke Blue Devils)

Kid can shoot the lights out as I'm sure you all know. But as those of you who saw the Duke/Carolina game saw, he gets into streaks. He can kill his own team if he falls into a bad streak, although playing under his own Coach K is sure to get the best out of him.

Michael Redd

Guard (Milwaukee Bucks)

Incredibly talented outside shooter with skills to spare. He'll be fine.

Luke Ridnour

Guard (Seattle SuperSonics)

Adapted quite nicely to the pros in his season and a half. Capable of solid contributions for team USA, as well.

Amare Stoudemire

Center (Phoenix Suns)

Hopefully, the big man will be healthy by then. If Shaq is not going to be added to this roster, it will be up to Stoudemire to play that role. After all, he is younger, healthier, and more athletic than perhaps Shaq ever was.

Dwyane Wade

Guard (Miami Heat)

Great mid-range jump-shooter who has never shot NBA threes very well. He will certainly find that enclosed three-point line to his liking. For all his immense talent and ability to make tons of clutch buckets, he is a team player and a selfless ball distributor when need be. Just hope he doesn't try getting too creative on his dribble drives the way he does in the NBA. That'll draw a whistle or three in international play.

***

Yes, there are several noticeable snubs from this list such as Shaquille O'Neal, Allen Iverson, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, Jason Kidd, and Steve Nash. However, it is not too late just yet to make late additions to this roster and there has been talk at least of Shaq still being invited.

Although this team of 23 still has yet to be cut down to size, it is apparent that these players were selected wisely with specific roles and purposes in mind in order to find the best team as opposed to best collection of stars. If Team USA fails to win gold in 2008, it will not be because they made the same mistakes as in years past.

Posted by Bill Hazell at 12:39 PM | Comments (0)

It's the Most Wonderful Time of the Year

So it's 1:30 in the afternoon, Thursday, March 9th, and I've just left work early, as I will tomorrow and Thursday and Friday of next week, to happily indulge in some sports gluttony. Hooray! It's March Madness time!

Nothing compares to the first two rounds of the NCAA tourney. That long weekend is regarded as ethereal from sea to shining sea. But not to be overlooked are the conference tourneys, and today is the first day where the action really goes around the clock on many different channels. So I'm flipping through the half dozen or so games going on and keeping track of my thoughts here.

Earlier this morning, when I was still at work, a co-worker asked me if I thought Syracuse had a chance today against UConn. I replied that they are not nearly as talented, but they are a legendary program with a legendary coach, and anything can happen in the conference tourneys. So ... maybe.

1:37 PM — How I wish now I hadn't been so ambivalent and said yes, the 'Cuse is gonna pull off the monster upset! As of now, midway through the second half, they are up by six. I think this will have to be my "main" game, until my hometown University of Akron team takes the floor sometime after two (coming from a mid-major conference and as it's only the quarterfinals, I get to pay $10 bucks to watch the Zips play their game on the Internets).

1:40 PM — Now Syracuse leads by 10 with 10:40 to go. They're playing with a lot of confidence, very loose. I don't see them fumbling this away. It'd be the second straight year that the eight-seed beat the top seed in the Big East Conference quarterfinals (last year, it was West Virginia beating Boston College). Raise your hand if you remember that B.C. won the Big East regular season last year. Yep. Me either.

1:43 PM — Syracuse guard Eric Devendorf, a product of the famed Oak Hill Academy, is the Eminem of the Big East. If you don't understand that, look at him the next time you see 'Cuse play.

1:45 PM — Temple has A-10 top seed George Washington in a similar predicament as UConn. Temple's up by 12 with nine minutes to go.

1:49 PM — We have our first final of the day: Penn State easily beats Northwestern in the Big 10 first round and will take on Ohio State in the quarters. It's the first Big 10 tournament victory for the Nittanies in five years.

1:51 PM — Oooh ... UConn's pulled to within four with five and a half minutes and is going to the free throw line now to boot. But I can't keep it here because another game is even closer with less time left (even though UConn sunk both free throws). That would be...

1:53 PM — Miami vs Clemson in ACC first round action. Winner gets Duke tomorrow. Clemson is up by two with 2:45 to go.

1:54 PM — So if you get four offensive rebounds in one trip, as Clemson just did, and don't convert on any of them until finally you are fouled and sent to the free-throw line, do we credit you for getting the big offensive boards or do we debit you for not converting? I guess the former because Clemson sinks both free throws.

1:56 PM — 1:46 to play now, and Miami's cut it to one with a three-pointer ... getting good, especially now that the Hurricanes are getting the ball back after Clemson couldn't convert their latest free throw attempts...

1:57 PM — ...and then Miami kicks the ball out of bounds and gives it back to the Tigers.

1:59 PM — Denis Clemente, who made the three-pointer on my 1:56 PM note, makes another one and gives Miami their first lead since "early in the first half." Good stuff. Forty-seven seconds left.

2:02 PM — Miami's Guillermo Diaz has the highest arching free throw shot I've seen, but he sinks them both and now the 'Canes are up by two possessions with 32.2 seconds left.

2:03 PM — When this game is over (Clemson has cut it back to two, timeout), I won't be able to get back to Syracuse/UConn fast enough. It's tied now with 1:43 left. Temple continues to handle G-Dub.

2:06 PM — Clemson's down by three with 12 seconds left and at the line. First free throw is good. Does he miss the second on purpose? Looks like he did, but Miami gets the rebound anyway. If Anthony King makes both free throws for Miami and makes it a two-possession game again, I'm turning it straight back to Syracuse/UConn. He misses the first one. Makes the second one ... can Clemson get the three to tie? No! Got a good look, but they miss it. Miami wins, 66-63.

2:09 PM — Damn, I missed a lot. 11.2 seconds left and UConn leads by three. Syracuse ball, timeout.

2:09 PM — If Akron wins their quarterfinal matchup, they will have the misfortune of drawing the hottest team in the Mid-American Conference, Toledo, who just beat Northern Illinois by one. Must have been quite a game: The box score says Toledo outscored NIU by 16 in the first half and got outscored by 15 in the second half. That was a seven-seed beating a two-seed.

2:10 PM — Gerry McNamara for three to tie for Syracuse ... good! UConn has 5.5 seconds to score (thank God for the pause button on my TV) ... no! Who's ready for some overtime?

2:14 PM — Temple has completed their dispersal of George Washington, 68-53.

2:23 PM — The Huskies, whom for most of the extra session can't hit the ocean from the beach, finally knocks down a three to pull to within two of Syracuse with 28 seconds left.

2:24 PM — During a timeout, I see that Texas Tech is leading Kansas State by four with 1:30 remaining. So I have my next TV destination lined up now. Go K-State! Get out from under the Jayhawks' shadow! Plus, I hate Bobby Knight.

2:27 PM — UConn ably fouls a 51% free throw shooter (Darryl Watkins), but he grittily sinks both to put Syracuse back up by two possessions.

2:28 PM — Wow! What a sequence! Devendorf steals the inbounds, misses the wide-open layup, UConn rebounds, hits the three to make it 85-84, and then commits the quick foul on the inbounds. Jim Boeheim reams Devendorf for shooting the ball instead of eating it with time running out.

2:29 PM — McNamara, a 90% free throw shooter, misses his second free throw so UConn can now play for the win if they want. Fifteen seconds left.

2:30 PM — They miss, but will get the ball back after the scramble for the rebound results in a held ball call. The possession arrow favors UConn. They will inbound with 5.6 seconds left.

2:32 PM — They miss again. Syracuse wins.

2:33 PM — I call the co-worker I mentioned at the top to ask him if I get credit for calling this upset.

2:34 PM — I don't.

2:35 PM — Texas Tech now leads Kansas State 69-63 with 25.8 seconds left.

2:37 PM — Texas Tech wins.

2:38 PM — I have enough material to call this an official column, and file it. I could and would write this all day, but since I'm paying $10 bucks to watch dear old Akron, I might as well watch it without distractions.

I do love my readers ... but I love college hoops more.

So it's 1:30 in the afternoon, Thursday March 9th, and I've just left work early, as I will tomorrow and Thursday and Friday of next week, to happily indulge in some sports gluttony. Hooray! It's March Madness time!

Nothing compares to the first two rounds of the NCAA tourney. That long weekend is regarded as ethereal from sea to shining sea. But not to be overlooked are the conference tourneys, and today is the first day where the action really goes around the clock on many different channels. So I'm flipping through the half dozen or so games going on and keeping track of my thoughts here.

Earlier this morning, when I was still at work, a coworker asked me if I thought Syracuse had a chance today against UConn. I replied that they are not nearly as talented, but they are a legendary program with a legendary coach, and anything can happen in the conference tourneys. So...maybe.

1:37PM: How I wish now I hadn't been so ambivalent and said YES, the 'Cuse is gonna pull off the monster upset! As of now, midway through the second half, they are up by six. I think this will have to be my "main" game, until my hometown University of Akron team takes the floor sometime after two (coming from a mid-major conference and as it's only the quarterfinals, I get to pay ten bucks to watch the Zips play their game on the internets).

1:40PM: Now Syracuse leads by 10 with 10:40 to go. They're playing with a lot of confidence, very loose. I don't see them fumbling this away. It'd be the second straight year that the 8-seed beat the top seed in the Big East Conference quarterfinals (last year, it was West Virginia beating Boston College). Raise your hand if you remember that BC won the Big East regular season last year. Yep. Me either.

1:43PM: Syracuse guard Eric Devendorf, a product of the famed Oak Hill Academy, is the Eminem of the Big East. If you don't understand that, look at him the next time you see 'Cuse play.

1:45PM: Temple has A-10 top seed George Washington in a similar predicament as UConn. Temple's up by 12 with 9 minutes to go.

1:49PM: We have our first final of the day: Penn State easily beats Northwestern in the Big Ten first round and will take on Ohio State in the quarters. It's the first Big Ten tournament victory for the Nittanies in five years.

1:51PM: Oooh...UConn's pulled to within four with 5 and a half minutes and is going to the free throw line now to boot. But I can't keep it here because another games is even closer with less time left (even though UConn sunk both free throws). That would be...

1:53PM: Miami vs Clemson in ACC first round action. Winner gets Duke tomorrow. Clemson is up by 2 with 2:45 to go.

1:54PM: So if you get four offensive rebounds in one trip, as Clemson just did, and don't convert on any of them until finally you are fouled and sent to the free-throw line, do we credit you for getting the big offensive boards or do we debit you for not converting? I guess the former because Clemson sinks both free throws.

1:56PM: 1:46 to play now, and Miami's cut it to one with a 3-pointer...getting good, especially now that the Hurricanes are getting the ball back after Clemson couldn't convert their latest free throw attempts...

1:57PM: ...and then Miami kicks the ball out of bounds and gives it back to the Tigers.

1:59PM: Denis Clemente, who made the 3-pointer on my 1:56PM note, makes another one and gives Miami their first lead since "early in the first half." Good stuff. 47 seconds left.

2:02PM: Miami's Guillermo Diaz has the highest arcing free throw shot I've seen, but he sinks them both and now the Canes are up by two possessions with 32.2 seconds left.

2:03PM: When this game is over (Clemson has cut it back to two, timeout), I won't be able to get back to Syracuse-UConn fast enough. It's tied now with 1:43 left. Temple continues to handle G-Dub.

2:06PM: Clemson's down by three with 12 seconds left and at the line. First free throw is good. Does he miss the second on purpose? Looks like he did, but Miami gets the rebound anyway. If Anthony King makes both free throws for Miami and makes it a two possession game again, I'm turning it straight back to Syracuse-UConn. He misses the first one. Makes the second one...Can Clemson get the three to tie? No!!! Got a good look, but they miss it. Miami wins 66-63.

2:09PM: Damn, I missed a lot. 11.2 seconds left and UConn leads by three. Syracuse ball, timeout.

2:09PM: If Akron wins their quarterfinal matchup, they will have the misfortune of drawing the hottest team in the Mid-American Conference, Toledo, who just beat Northern Illinois by 1. Must have been quite a game: The box score says Toledo outscored NIU by 16 in the first half and got outscored by 15 in the second half. That was a 7-seed beating a 2-seed.

2:10PM: Gerry McNamara for three to tie for Syracuse...good! UConn has 5.5 seconds to score (thank God for the pause button on my TV)...no! Who's ready for some overtime?

2:14PM: Temple has completed their dispersal of George Washington, 68-53.

2:23PM: The Huskies, whom for most of the extra session can't hit the ocean from the beach, finally knocks down a three to pull to within two of Syracuse with 28 seconds left.

2:24PM: During a timeout, I see that Texas Tech is leading Kansas State by four with 1:30 remaining. So I have my next TV destination lined up now. Go K-State! Get out from under the Jayhawks' shadow! Plus, I hate Bobby Knight.

2:27PM: UConn ably fouls a 51% free throw shooter (Darryl Watkins), but he grittily sinks both to put Syracuse back up by two possessions.

2:28PM: Wow! What a sequence! Devendorf steals the inbounds, misses the wide-open layup, UConn rebounds and hits the three to make it 85-84 and then commits the quick foul on the inbounds. Jim Boeheim reams Devendorf for shooting the ball instead of eating it with time running out.

2:29PM: McNamara, a 90% free throw shooter, misses his second free throw so UConn can now play for the win if they want. 15 seconds left.

2:30PM: They miss, but will get the ball back after the scramble for the rebound results in a held ball call. The possession arrow favors UConn. They will inbound with 5.6 seconds left.

2:32PM: They miss again. Syracuse wins.

2:33PM: I call the coworker I mentioned at the top to ask him if I get credit for calling this upset.

2:34PM: I don't.

2:35PM: Texas Tech now leads Kansas State 69-63 with 25.8 seconds left.

2:37PM: Texas Tech wins.

2:38PM: I have enough material to call this an official column, and file it. I could and would write this all day, but since I'm paying ten bucks to watch dear old Akron, I might as well watch it without distractions.

I do love my readers...but I love college hoops more.

Posted by Kevin Beane at 11:54 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

March 9, 2006

College Stars' Standards Need Adjusting

Vince Young, Matt Leinart, and Reggie Bush should be ashamed of themselves. Not because they want a lot of money or to be famous or look good in front of others, but because they refuse to follow guidelines established for evaluating NFL draft talent. What do these guys have to hide that they won't perform as asked in the same environment everyone else has to?

Call me old-fashioned, but I guess I was ingrained with "old-fashioned" principles. As the child of a working single mom, I was raised partially by my grandparents who are both now in their nineties. My grandfather taught me a lot about work ethic and how one should conduct themselves on the job. He is a hard-working man who earned every penny he has. He has lived through two world wars and the most difficult economic time the world has ever seen. Through it all, he learned valuable life lessons that he passed down to me.

One thing he taught me about work ethic is when entering a new career or job to not expect to be paid and treated the same as the boss or someone with superior experience or seniority. When you're just starting out, you're a "rookie" and should prove yourself before demanding a raise or a company car or a corner office. One thing you certainly don't do before you get the job is dictate when, where, and how the interview will be conducted.

Hypothetical situation: I'm a writer who's applied for a job with a national magazine. The secretary calls me to set up the interview and tells me to bring a few writing samples, maybe some layout and design work I've done, and to be prepared for a "live" writing exercise. So I go to the interview and everything on paper looks great — my writing is stellar, the layout looks fantastic, and my references all have glowing remarks about my past work.

Then the boss says it's time for the live writing exercise. But I say, "I'm not going to do that here. I'd rather do it at my house on my computer and printer with the kind of paper I like." That boss would say, "Well, thanks for wasting my time and good luck finding another job."

That's what the NFL should be saying to college players like the guys mentioned above. "Hey, Vince. Ever hear of the Canadian Football League? I hear the Arena League is looking for a few good quarterbacks, Matt. Gee, Reggie, there are a lot of pro leagues in Europe. You guys don't want to do it our way, then take a hike."

Instead, they throw themselves at these guys' feet and cater to their every whim. "It's okay, Mr. Bush, you don't have to run the 40; we know you're fast 'cause we've seen you on TV. Mr. Leinart doesn't want to throw for us? That's all right. Just look at him — we know he can throw. Mr. Young only wants to throw in his own yard to his own receivers? No problem. We'll just move the team that drafts him to Austin and draft all the Texas receivers so he'll be comfortable in the NFL."

It makes me question why these guys are afraid to showcase their abilities in the venue and format the NFL demands every other draft prospect to follow. Is Leinart worried that some other QB might do better than him? Does Young fear that the guys he'd throw to at the combine would make him look bad by dropping passes? Could Bush be concerned that someone might actually be faster than him in the 40? The projected seventh-round pick can't shun the combine and demand he only work out in his home gym with his own guys, so why should the other prospects?

Then, after these guys hold their private workouts, get drafted, and get ready for training camp, they'll hold out for more money, which is a practice that really fries me. Back to the hypothetical situation above. Say the boss agrees to go to my house to conduct the writing exercise. I show him that on my computer with my printer on my paper, I can get the job done and he agrees to hire me.

But, the day before I start my new position, I call him and say I won't come to work unless I get a raise. I haven't worked a day for his company, I haven't proved what my abilities are beyond my college internship and work study jobs, and I don't even know what it's like to work in that type of environment. He'd say the same thing he should have said after the interview: "Nice try, see ya later."

Don't get me wrong; I'm not against people trying to create the best situation possible for impressing a prospective boss, or trying to get more money or advance in the company at a rapid pace. What I am against is college athletes thinking the pro league needs them in order to stay afloat and draw fans to the stadium or watch on TV. Really, the NFL needs Matt Leinart about as bad as it needed Ryan Leaf. I'm not saying Leinart should be compared to Leaf, but he was a highly sought-after quarterback who had an outstanding college career, and we all know "the rest of the story."

With more top-notch college players opting out of the dwindling number of postseason all-star games, the combine is about the only effective tool pro scouts have of evaluating talent on a level playing field (no pun intended). They don't have time to watch hundreds of hours of film on every player in the country. These players who want to conduct business on their "own terms" should be grateful that so many teams are interested in adding them to their roster, and have created an environment where they can display their talents without fear of getting injured.

What it all boils down to is star college players believing they should be treated like star pro players before they've even played a down in the NFL. When the pros start refusing to accommodate these guys and remind them that they're "entry-level" employees, maybe they'll start realizing that it is a privilege — not a right — to play at the highest level. They've earned the right to be considered among the best at the college level, and now they need to earn the right to be counted among the privileged.

Posted by Adam Russell at 8:49 PM | Comments (1)

March 8, 2006

Hold the Front Page: Barry Was Juiced

Consider the evidence. The monster-sized melon head; the bulging eyes; the mood swings and ill temper; the testimony of others to his steroid use, and, indeed, his own admission of (part) culpability. Finally, and crucially, the statistical anomaly of his post-1998 career. Face it — we don't need two guys from the San Francisco Chronicle to tell us BALCO Barry was playing dirty.

I'm sure Mark Fainaru-Wade and Lance Williams have done a fine job on "Game of Shadows." It's probably a worthy tome, but I, for one, won't be logging onto Amazon for it. Personally, I've had enough of BALCO Barry to last me a lifetime. I've had enough of his freak show antics, his selfish approach to a team sport, his moody and self-pitying nature, his pouting, his cartoon body, his bulging hate-filled eyes, and his adoring entourage of assorted children, partners, ex-partners, relatives, and hangers-on. Hell, I even hate Willie Mays at this point simply for being his godfather. Just get this guy off the field, off the back page, and into well-deserved obscurity.

If I have to hear another ESPN or FOX cretin tell me that steroids do nothing to improve hand-eye coordination, I'll give up sport and take up an interest in 12th century English church music. Why do sportscasters think the audience have an IQ of less than three figures? The sporting public are well aware that taking steroids doesn't instantly make you a world-class athlete or else we'd all try it. We are aware, however, that taking steroids give you arms the size of tree trunks and thus the ability to hit baseballs into McCovey Cove — if you have outstanding hand-eye coordination to begin with.

According to Fainura-Wade and Williams, Bonds started juicing in 1998 after he watched McGwire and Sosa slug it out for the home run record. Certainly, his stats point to this. Previous to 1998, Bonds had decent, but not outstanding power, could steal a base and work the count. His career was meandering to an end in his mid-30s with, at best, a faint hope of making Cooperstown. He needed something to kick start his career — and his earnings — before retirement. BALCO had just what he needed.

The rest is history. Some of us — and I'm proud to say I wasn't alone — hated every single second of Bonds' successful home run record chase. But I'm ashamed to say I loved every second of McGwire's. Just as Bonds is guilty as hell, so was McGwire. So was Sosa. The summer of '98, on record as reviving a sport dying a slow, painful death, was a total phoney and I fell for it, hook, line, and sinker. The only consolation is that millions of others did, too.

Apologists point to the fact that neither Bonds, McGwire, nor Sosa did anything against the rules, as baseball didn't have a steroid policy until 2002. That's not a fact that baseball should be bragging about. If it had attempted to stamp out this problem earlier, as the NFL has, Roger Maris would still hold the single-season homer record and Bonds and the others would be remembered for things other than bringing a fine sport into total disrepute.

What happens now? Firstly, the Giants need to sever ties with this fraudster. But Bonds sells tickets and without him, the Giants have little else to offer. Would you pay $40 to watch Ray Durham go 0-for-4? For the sake of franchise integrity, they need to get him off the roster or make him ride the pine.

Secondly, Giants fans need to take their heads out of their asses. They have routinely worshipped this cheat while every other sane person has winced at his every plate appearance. If the Giants wheel his dodgy knees out for a run at Babe Ruth and Hank Aaron, the fans need to show their disapproval.

Thirdly, the apologists on TV need to revise their act. Let's hear about BALCO Barry's use of the cream, the needle, and the pill every time he appears on screen instead of eulogizing about his plate discipline, strength, and pitch selection. I look forward, in particular, to the first time Joe Morgan has to deal with this. Morgan has consistently lauded Bonds over the years and, much as I admire Morgan and his opinions, it doesn't sit well with his image as an old-school traditionalist.

Finally, and most importantly, Bud Selig needs to take charge of the whole issue. The "steroid era" and its dubious records needs to be addressed. McGwire, Sosa, and Bonds need to be stripped of their drug-fuelled "achievements" with immediate effect. Roger Maris' 61 homers in a season should be reinstated as the benchmark. If not, the sport is leaving itself open to ridicule, pretty much as athletics has been since the 1980s.

Posted by Mike Round at 10:16 AM | Comments (4)

NBA Contracts: Guaranteed to Fail

Guaranteed contracts have ruined the NBA. The NFL maintains a high level of competition because every player is always competing for his job. It seems unfair that an NFL team can just cut a player because they don't want to pay his salary, but it's better than what happens in basketball. In the NBA, free agents sign six- and seven-year deals for millions of guaranteed dollars. Then they put it into cruise control and collect their loot.

This season, four of the 10 highest paid players in the league are Allan Houston, Chris Webber, Stephon Marbury, and Brian Grant. These guys convinced teams to give them huge deals a long time ago, and now they are laughing all the way to the bank. Anfernee Hardaway, Grant Hill, Keith Van Horn, Jalen Rose, Eddie Jones, Tim Thomas, and Antonio Davis are all in the top 20 (all make over $13 million this year). That's 11 out of the top 20 highest-paid players in the league who don't deserve half of what they make, less in some cases.

So, why is this a problem? First, we, as fans, are paying their salaries by buying tickets and merchandise. As a Celtics fan and regular customer at the TD Banknorth Garden, it kills me that Boston pays Raef LaFrentz $10 million per year. This argument is flawed, however, because fans can always just stop watching, like many have done. There's more going on here, though. In fact, it's crippling the league.

The problem is the way that these salaries handcuff teams. Let's use Philadelphia as an example. The 76ers owe over $30 million to Jamal Mashburn and Todd McCulloch through next season. Aaron McKie gets $19.5 million through 2008. These guys have played a combined zero minutes for the Sixers this season. Additionally, their salaries added to Chris Webber's monster deal will account for over 80% of the salary cap for Philly next season.

The NBA has a "soft" salary cap with tons of leeway (only four teams are actually under the cap this year), but there is still a realistic limit to what some teams can spend.

That limit is somewhere between $50-70 million. Only six teams spend more than $70 million and only four teams spend less than $50 million. So, when the Sixers have $23 million tied up in McCulloch, Mashburn, and McKie and another $20 million for Webber, that's $43 million in 2006-2007 wasted. McCulloch, Mashburn, and McKie should make $0 and Webber should make closer to $5 million. If that were the case, Philadelphia would have roster flexibility and would probably be able to contend.

Portland is in the same situation. The Blazers owe $160 million to Darius Miles, Zach Randolph, and Theo Ratliff. That's a lot of money and not one of these guys is an all-star. Because of this, it is unlikely Portland will be able to contend in the West until sometime around 2010.

For the casual fan, this system ruins game play. Many of the players with max contracts just mail it in. This is a major problem. How do you think Stephon Marbury would play if there were a chance he could get cut? Sure, he's got decent career numbers, but does he ever look like he's trying his best? He coasts on a losing team and collects over $16 million per season in the process.

ESPN's Stephen A. Smith even reported that Marbury's teammates hate him so much that Quentin Richardson recently wanted to fight him. Smith went on to say that Richardson's sister had to call Quentin to convince him to leave the practice facility peacefully. But the Knicks are stuck with Marbury and his enormous contract (Richardson's too, for that matter). Fans and media can complain about this, but it is what it is.

As for the teams stuck with these monster contracts, they are unable to make their clubs better through free agency. Not only that, but they cannot re-sign young talent because their money is tied up in huge veteran deals. What happens if the Knicks want to resign a quality young player like Channing Frye or Nate Robinson in a couple years? They won't be able to because they have over $136 million committed to Marbury, Richardson, Steve Francis, and Jamal Crawford.

It should be noted that the Knicks' payroll is not in the $50-70 million range. In 2005, New York paid its guys over $120 million, roughly $70 million over the cap.

The fact is that all of this negatively affects the sport. It's no surprise that the league has popularity issues. Who wants to watch a bunch of overpaid athletes compete at 50-70% of their ability?

The NBA should make all its players compete for contracts every year. Also, there should be a "hard" salary cap and realistic maximum contracts. No one should make over $10 million, and it should be based on the previous year's performance. Imagine if every player was constantly competing for money and work.

I understand that there is a players' union and a Collective Bargaining Agreement, making this plan unrealistic and impossible. But the current system won't work forever. The NBA gets less popular by day. ABC set record lows for NBA TV ratings last season. If they're not careful, it's going to be the 2004-05 NHL all over again. This means that salaries will not be affordable for the owners because revenue will be significantly lower than it was when these contracts were signed. Trailblazers' owner Paul Allen has said that his franchise will lose $100 million in the next three years, albeit in part because of a terrible lease with the city. As more owners start losing, something will have to change.

The result of escalating salaries and decreasing public interest will be a stalemate between the union and owners, perhaps even a work stoppage. Ultimately, there will have to be a much lower, "hard" salary cap.

So, how can the league get the casual fan to come back and watch? It will not be easy, and it won't be because of dress codes and alley-oops. The game play needs to improve.

Moreover, the NBA continually refuses to embrace hip-hop culture, even though it goes hand-in-hand with the current fan base. And commissioner David Stern has actively promoted the NBA abroad in order to offset diminishing interest in the U.S. This is the wrong thing to do. The league needs to be fixed here or the fate of hockey is upon it.

The NBA consists of lazy, overpaid athletes with no desire to win. They give about 50% on any given night and when their team is out of contention, they quit altogether.

This is the biggest problem facing the NBA. The talent is there, but the players aren't motivated. In fact, the only motivation for these guys is to get that big contract. I realize that for every Stephon Marbury, there is a Tim Duncan. That doesn't change the fact that 90% of NBA games are painful to watch because of lethargic, uninspired game play. And for most fans, it stinks.

Posted by Isaac Miller at 10:13 AM | Comments (12)

March 7, 2006

The Beat Goes On

Stay away from college rivalry games. That's one of the first rules I learned about gambling. There's too emotion involved in the games I was told, too much history, and most importantly, too many intangibles.

As I do with most good advice I get, I completely ignored it. It never really came back to bite me until Saturday, when Duke and North Carolina met for a second round of college basketball's greatest rivalry. I will never bet on another Duke/UNC game in my life.

The week before the game was filled with talk that the rivalry was overrated. The fact that the game was on three different channels and promoted incessantly didn't help the situation, either. It was easy to understand the overrated talk as the game wasn't shaping up to be a great one.

Carolina had made it a game earlier in the season, but surely a team that young would struggle going into the toughest home-court environment in the country to take on the top-ranked team in the country. They were going up against a Duke team with two All-Americans in their starting lineup and four seniors, so needless to say, the Duke -6 line looked very appealing.

Stacking the odds even further against UNC, SportsRant's version of Brandon Lang, A.J. Braves (the SportsRant Radio host who was 13-16 in picking games this season), was taking the Blue Devils. After watching Tennessee (+2) beat Vanderbilt by 9 and Kansas (-5) dropping K-State by 14, I couldn't have felt better going into Saturday night's game with Duke as the third team of my three-team parlay.

The game started with an emotional J.J. Redick making four of his first five shots to put Duke up 13-2. I felt like this was a safer bet than riding the moneyline on the Globetrotters to take down the Washington Generals. I started thinking about how I was going to spend my newfound wealth ($100) when Carolina started to claw its way back into the game. Then a funny thing happened, UNC stopped playing intimidated. As most people know now, Carolina ended up winning the game by seven and the four Carolina freshmen outscored the four Duke seniors 55-51 on senior night.

In retrospect, I could've been smarter about this game. After all, Duke is running out of gas, was coming off a loss, and J.J. Redick has been running on empty for games. And at least until he graduates, Duke will go as far as J.J. Redick will take them. (And can we stop the whole "J.J. and Adam should split the POY awards?" Would anyone be happy if Vince Young and Reggie Bush were co-Heisman winners? Of course not. There should be one player of the year: J.J. Redick.) If he's having an off-night, the rest of the team can rarely pick up the slack. Still, it's close to impossible to predict off-nights for players (any stock I would've put into his recent trend was offset by the fact that it was senior night).

Of course, I could've used past history as a barometer to stay the hell away from this game. The last eight games between these rivals have been decided by an average of less than four points. If there was ever going to be a lopsided game, it should've been this years. Even with Duke losing their All-Americans, all-time leading scorer in Redick, and four key players after this season, the rivalry will be stronger than ever.

On Saturday, it was the Carolina freshmen getting the playing time and the exposure. Tyler Hansbrough is going to be UNC's first freshman in program history to lead the team in scoring and rebounding and point guard Bobby Frasor hit some key shots and has played strong all year long. Danny Green and Marcus Ginyard are also starting to hit their groove on the court.

Still, Duke's freshmen are just as tough. Greg Paulus leads the ACC in assists as a freshman and another Duke starter, Josh McRoberts, is going to be a star for the Blue Devils. Naturally, most assume that UNC's duo of Hansbrough and Frasor are better, but it's impossible to compare them. Given my choice, I probably even take Paulus and McRoberts over Frasor and Hansbrough. Either way, it will be great for college basketball watching them develop over the next three seasons of college basketball's greatest rivalry.

Just remember, if you're a betting man, make sure to stay the hell away from it.

The Sports Gospel According to Mark is sponsored by BetOnSports.com. BetOnSports.com gives you the greatest sports action to bet on. Wager on football, cricket, boxing, rugby, horse racing, and more. Mark Chalifoux is also a weekly columnist for SportsFan Magazine. His columns appear every Tuesday and Thursday on Sports Central. You can e-mail Mark at [email protected].

Posted by Mark Chalifoux at 3:34 PM | Comments (0)

Hustling in the NBDL

I'm one of those people who love college basketball. I remember the names like God Shammgod and what he did to Duke in the '97 tournament and often wonder where guys like Khalid El-Amin are.

While it is known that many former college stars are grinding in leagues everywhere from Turkey to Argentina, some of the best NCAA talent of the past decade or so not to make the big tome are hooping it up right here in the U.S. in the National Basketball Development League.

While many critics have seen the NBDL as an insignificant minor league, it has been the stepping stone for NBA careers, most notably for guys like Smush Parker (Lakers) and before he was destined for rehab, Chris Andersen (Hornets). This year's current rosters features a ton of players many should be familiar with along with a surprising bunch of names with prior NBA experience or NBA-ready credentials.

Among guards there is Bracey Wright, a former star for the Indiana Hoosiers who is averaging over 21.7 ppg for the Florida Flame after having a short cup of tea with the Timberwolves. A key component to Georgia Tech's Final Four run two years ago, Will Bynum is averaging 24.3 for the Roanoke Dazzle. Meanwhile, John Lucas, who sparked Oklahoma State's Final Four run a few years back, is averaging 16.1 ppg while shooting 51% from the field for the Tulsa 66ers.

Other former college backcourt dynamos putting up great stats are Andre Barrett (Seton Hall/Florida Flame; 17 ppg, 6.6 apg), Andre Emmett (Texas Tech/Austin Toros; 12.5 ppg), Mateen Cleaves (Michigan State/Fayetville Patriots; 19.7 ppg, 7.7 apg), Aaron Miles (Kansas/Fort Worth Flyers; 8.3 ppg, 6.4 apg), Anthony Roberson (Florida/Arkansas Rimrockers; 17.7 ppg), Julius Hodge (NC State/Austin Toros; 15 ppg, 6.5 rpg), and Sharrod Ford (Clemson/Fayetville Patriots; 13 ppg, 8.4 rpg).

Two other notable names are Yuta Tabuse, who is struggling with the Albuquerque Thunderbirds (6.5ppg), and Kareem Reid, better known at Rucker Park as streetball legend "The Best Kept Secret," who is posting an respectable 12.2 ppg and 7.7 apg for the Arkansas Rimrockers.

Notable names for big men are in abundance, as well, with guys like Lawrence Roberts (Mississippi State/Arkansas Rimrockers; 20.3 ppg, 9.3 rpg), Luke Schenscher (Georgian Tech/Fort Worth Flyers; 8.4 ppg, 6.1 rpg, 1.37 bpg), former Atlanta Hawk Donta Smith (Arkansas Rimrockers; 14 ppg), former Chicago Bull Marcus Fizer (Iowa State/Austin Toros; 20.3 ppg, 7.5 rpg), and international stars Peter Ramos (Roanoke Dazzle;15 ppg, 8rpg, 1.76 bpg) and 18-year-old Ersan Ilyasova (Tulsa 66ers; 10.4 ppg, 7rpg) making waves down South.

So while teams might be fighting over table scrap players like Tim Thomas or Eric Williams that are hoping for contract buyouts, there seems to be at least a few solid options out there in the D-League. Some guys have had short runs in the NBA, but with all the names mentioned, it can be said they have big-game experience and are probably more hungry for a roster spot than those certain players already in the league who are waiting to be bought out and sign elsewhere (Tim Thomas, I'm looking at you).

March has finally arrived and Madness will soon be in full swing, but it's also a good time to reminisce on those stars of tournament past. So for those of you Illinois fans who will be wondering why James Augustine doesn't get drafted in June, don't worry, there will be a place for him to make a name in the U.S. after graduation.

Posted by Seth Berkman at 3:13 PM | Comments (0)

March 6, 2006

2006 MLB Preview: National League

Note: don't miss the 2006 American League preview by Isaac Miller!

The St. Louis Cardinals have made the playoffs five of the last six seasons. Manager Tony LaRussa's club has also won four of the last six NL Central titles. Clearly, St. Louis is the team to beat in the National League. The Cardinals have won 205 games in the last two seasons with no signs of slowing down.

There is some competition in the NL Central, though. The Brewers may surprise a lot of people this year, but they are not realistic competition for St. Louis. The Reds and Pirates are another few years from being competitive, so the Cards need to watch out for the Cubs and Astros.

The Cubs are interesting because of their starting pitchers. With healthy seasons from Mark Prior and Kerry Wood, the Cubs can make a push for the division crown. The problem is that Wood is 11-13 over the last two years. In fact, Kerry has never had more than 14 wins in a season and has a career ERA of 3.67. He has impressive strikeout numbers, but he needs to learn to win more games and protect his body. If he posts another .500 season, Chicago will not reach 75 wins.

As for Prior, he is entering his fifth season in the league. Like Wood, he has yet to pitch up to his potential. He has 719 strikeouts in four seasons, but only a record of 41-23. Remove an 18-6 2003 campaign and Prior is 23-17 for the Cubs. He needs to step up in 2006 and win between 18-21 games in order for the Cubs to make any noise in the NL.

St. Louis is looking at a third straight 100-win season. The Houston Astros will be unable to produce enough runs to win the Central. Quality pitchers like Roy Oswalt, Andy Pettitte, Brandon Backe, and Brad Lidge will ensure at least 80 wins for Houston. This number will go up to 85 or 86 if the hitting improves from 2005, a season in which the Astros hit .256 as a club. Look for Houston and Chicago to fight for second place in the division, and also battle some NL East teams for the wildcard.

The Cardinals will win between 100 and 103 games in 2006. St. Louis has 46 games against the Reds, Brewers, and Pirates. LaRussa's team also gets interleague games with Kansas City and Detroit. With 2005 NL MVP Albert Pujols and 2005 Cy Young winner Chris Carpenter on the roster, the Cardinals will cruise to the best record in baseball. There's just too much talent in St. Louis.

Then there's the NL West. There are huge holes in all five teams that make this the worst division in the majors. This is the like the NFC North or the NBA's Atlantic Division. One of these teams will make the playoffs, but don't expect more than 88 wins from the division champs.

The San Francisco Giants still have Barry Bonds, the game's best player, but age is a concern for the Giants. SS Omar Vizquel is 39, OF Moises Alou is 40, and Bonds is 42. Also on the roster is 39-year-old Steve Finley. The Giants will contend for the division, but aging veterans tend to break down over 162 games.

A bright spot for the Giants is OF Randy Winn. He was acquired by San Francisco last season and hit .359 in 58 games for the Giants. He is also solid defensively, which SF needs to be successful.

The fact remains that the Giants will go only as far as Barry Bonds takes them. If he hits .350, 40 homers, 120 RBI, and has a .500 OBP, the Giants can win 85 games. At 42-years-old, those numbers would be remarkable. That's not to say it can't happen, but look for more modest numbers from the aging Bonds. Wins in the 72-78 range is more realistic because of a weak pitching staff anchored by Jason Schmidt and Matt Morris.

So, who wins this terrible division? Don't look for Arizona or Colorado to win more than 70 games each. The Padres were two games over .500 in '05, which was good enough to win the division last year. San Diego will win 72 or 73 games in 2006, and finish third in the division. The new names on the Padres, like Mike Piazza and Mike Cameron, will not result in any more wins for San Diego.

The fact is that the Dodgers look ready to make a move in the NL West. Los Angeles had a disappointing 2005 season, finishing with just 71 wins after winning the division in 2004. L.A. has Derek Lowe and Brad Penny in the starting rotation, along with newcomers Jae Seo and Brett Tomko. Seo started 14 games for the Mets last year and went 8-2 with a 2.59 ERA. With these guys, the Dodgers should have the best rotation in the NL West.

The bullpen is stronger with the additions of Danys Baez and Lance Carter, but the biggest difference will be the return of closer Eric Gagne. He only pitched in 14 games last year, but should be healthy by Opening Day. The Dodgers might have the best bullpen in the NL if all of these guys perform well.

The Dodgers' pitching looks good, but they improved offensively as well. L.A. picked up Nomar Garciaparra, Rafael Furcal, Bill Mueller, and Kenny Lofton. The Dodgers will have a potent offense behind the likes of Hee-Seop Choi, Jeff Kent, Ricky Ledee, Jose Cruz, Jr., and the new guys. This is the best team on paper with a ceiling of around 95 wins. Look for L.A. to win the NL West with closer to 87 or 88 wins.

Last year, San Diego made the playoffs by winning 82 games. There were three teams in the NL East that missed the playoffs with better records. That's the advantage of a weak division. While Philadelphia, New York, and Florida were beating up on each other, the Padres breezed through garbage teams in the West. The 2006 NL East should be as competitive as last year, maybe more so.

Atlanta is looking for their 15th straight division title. The Braves don't look like the best team in the East, but after 14 seasons finishing on top, I would not bet against them. Atlanta showed off some great young talent in 2005. Jeff Francoeur hit .300 as a rookie last year. Adam LaRoche had career highs in home runs and RBI last year, as well. Wilson Betemit hit .305 in 2005, and has one of the quickest bats I've ever seen. He is a future all-star. There is some serious young talent in Atlanta to go with Chipper Jones, Andruw Jones, John Smoltz, and Tim Hudson.

The Braves will win 90 games in 2006. It will be interesting to see if that's enough to win the division. The Marlins let go of most of their talent during the offseason and the guys they kept will not win 75 games. The Nationals probably overachieved to finish .500 last season. There just isn't enough talent on this squad to contend in a stacked NL East.

The Phillies just missed the playoffs a season ago, winning 88 games in the process. Philadelphia will win fewer games in 2006. The problem for the Phillies was pitching last year. Starters Jon Lieber, Vicente Padilla, Randy Wolf, and Cory Lidle all had ERAs over 4.00. Philly lacks an ace on the staff and losing Billy Wagner is going to kill the bullpen. In '06, the hitting will not be able to compensate for pitching that will be worse than it was in '05. Philly will win 83 games at most, but don't be surprised if they end up with fewer wins than Washington.

Which brings us to the New York Metropolitans. The Mets have the second highest payroll in baseball and loads of talent. Anything short of a division title will be a disappointment. In addition to guys like Carlos Beltran, Kaz Matsui, David Wright, and Cliff Floyd, the Mets added Carlos Delgado and Paul Lo Duca. This lineup could be absolutely deadly.

The bullpen is dangerous as well with the additions of flamethrowers Billy Wagner and Jorge Julio. The Mets also added Chad Bradford, who can be tough on right-handed hitters. If this team can get to the seventh inning with a lead, these guys will do the rest.

The problem lies in New York's starting pitching. The Mets lost Kris Benson and Jae Seo and did not replace them. Pedro Martinez, Tom Glavine, and Victor Zambrano are the core of the rotation, but other guys are going to have to step up. If they don't get quality starts from Steve Trachsel and Aaron Heilman, the Mets will miss the playoffs.

Look for the Braves to win their 15th straight division title with 90 wins. Losing pitching coach Leo Mazzone might hurt this team over the next few years, but they still have Smoltz, Hudson, John Thompson, and Jorge Sosa in the rotation. Combined with powerful offensive guys, the Braves are the team to beat. The Mets will put together a solid season and make the playoffs as the wildcard team. New York will finish with 88 or 89 wins.

The 2006 NL playoffs will consist of the Cardinals, Dodgers, Braves, and Mets. The Mets will be beat up, having struggled through the month of September playing must-win games every night. The rested Red Birds, having clinched the NL Central in late August, will make short work of New York, winning in four games, losing Game 3 in NY.

The interesting part of all this is that the Mets and Braves will be battling for the right to play the Dodgers, in addition to the division crown. Because teams from the same division cannot play each other in the first round of the playoffs, the team that wins the NL East will get to play the Dodgers and the wildcard team, assuming it comes from the East, will play the Cardinals. That being said, the Braves are better than the Dodgers in almost every area and will win that series in three or four games.

The Braves will play the Cardinals in the National League Championship Series. Atlanta will be tired from flying across the country to play Los Angeles and will be a step slow against St. Louis. It is clear that the Cardinals are the best team in the NL, maybe in all of baseball, and when October rolls around, they're the team to beat.

Look for an exciting A's/Cards World Series. St. Louis will be the best team in baseball for the third straight year, and LaRussa's club will finally have a ring to show for it.

Posted by Isaac Miller at 9:41 PM | Comments (8)

Don't Fear the Dukies

Is anyone scared to face the Duke Blue Devils come tournament time? They shouldn't, because since their championship run back in 2001, Mike Krzyzewski's teams have consistently fallen short of the lofty goal they annually set for themselves, the NCAA title.

In 2002, as a No. 1 seed they were knocked off by a less-talented Indiana team in the round of 16. The following year, which was J.J. Redick's first, they were again sent home in the Sweet 16. This time it was as a No. 3 seed to Kansas. In Redick's second season, Duke made it to the Final Four as a No. 1 seed, but they were ousted by the Connecticut, who went on to win the title. And last year, Duke succumbed as a No. 1 seed in the round of 16, this time to a far less talented, but more determined Michigan State team.

Three of the last four years Duke has not advanced to the Elite 8, yet with the way they are obsessed over, one would find it hard to imagine that this powerhouse does not consistently make the Final Four each season.

I really wish the Blue Devils had not lost twice last week, because now it seems like I am piling on. I hope they win the ACC tournament, so all the hype can re-emerge. That way, people will be even more shocked when a rough and tumble squad does the unthinkable and knocks Duke out before the national semis for the fourth time in the last five years.

The reasons for their recent late-season decline are quite evident — fatigue. Their best player right now is J.J. Redick, and in the last four games, he is shooting field goals at a 29% clip, while managing to make a little more 22% from behind the arc. And that is a consistent trend in Redick's game — the longer the season goes, the more he wears down.

It makes sense that Redick is fatigued — he is the most marked man in the country. There might be a scoring war in the magazines, but Gonzaga is not exactly playing elite competition on a night in and night out basis. While Adam Morrison continues to light up San Diego, Redick is trying to maintain his average against some of the stiffest opposition the country has to offer.

Every team brings their strongest commitment to winning when they play Duke. The Blue Devils are the most hated team in the country, and their players pay dearly for it in March. Duke only goes seven deep, and their stars, Redick and Sheldon Williams, play an unbelievable amount of minutes. That means every game they are seeing the opposing team's best effort, and it begins to wear on the kids from Durham, as we have seen consistently for the last several years.

Last March, the formula was simple: beat Duke with tough, physical defense on Redick, lure Williams into foul trouble, and hope Daniel Ewing doesn't go off. This year, it's the same formula, except Ewing is gone, and no one else on the team is averaging more than nine points other than the aforementioned two.

So let everyone assume Duke is one of the top two teams in the country, like they do every year. Let everyone put Duke in their Final Four, because they seem to make it every year. They'll be a top seed, just like every year. And if this is indeed like every year, Duke won't be left when it's time to cut down the nets when it matters most.

Posted by Piet Van Leer at 9:02 PM | Comments (2)

March 4, 2006

In Bed With Barry Bonds

ESPiN opened her eyes, shaking away a night's sleep and rolling over on her pillow. She watched Barry as he continued his slumber, dreams of baseball immortality no doubt dancing through his mind's eye, as usual. And like every other morning, ESPiN began the day by wondering if the pillows had gotten smaller, or if Barry's head had swelled since they first met years ago.

Back then, being with Barry was something to boast about. She used to brag about how he'd see her exclusively. She used to talk about his exploits to all of her girlfriends until they demanded to hear tales of Barry's greatness at every lunch date and morning Starbucks run.

Occasionally — and this was nothing ESPiN was proud of, mind you — she would use Barry's image and his fame for her own profit. This became difficult when she'd turn her ire towards Barry, because Barry has a knack for drawing such emotions from even the most tempered souls. His egomania was infuriating. His disdain for certain social settings insulting. And his particular lack of concern for rules and regulations was disturbing — especially those he felt unfairly inhibited his growth as a professional.

To tell the truth, there weren't a whole hell of a lot of people who liked Barry — yet those same people loved hearing about him, and appreciated the significance of his existence. ESPiN knew that, too. So despite her grumblings and her moralistic stands and her constant bemoaning of his flaws, she was always the first one to remind her friends that Barry was hers and that it made her somewhat more important than if he wasn't.

But this was nothing ESPiN was proud of, mind you.

She rolled on to her back and stared at the ceiling, thinking about the greatest and worst thing that had ever shared her bed.

And she wondered when he'd leave.

***

That Barry Bonds would have a weekly reality TV show on ESPN shouldn't surprise anyone, because he's practically had one for the last several years. "SportsCenter" replays every home run he hits, and every cantankerous press conference he gives. The screaming-head newspaper columnist shows debate what pills he's taking, what drugs he's injecting, and whether he's deserving of the accolades he receives — and that ultimate honor he could earn with roughly 50 more swings of his bat.

Perhaps no other athlete has captured the imagination of sports fans in as many different ways as Bonds. We marvel at his athleticism and disapprove of his artifice. We smile at his accomplishments and scowl at his attitude. We understand his place in the game's history, but don't understand whether he deserves it.

At the same time, no other modern-day athlete has encapsulated the tremendous conflicts in any ESPN interest. He's at once the lead story, the main target, the worshiped hero, the hated villain, and one of the most sure-fire gate attractions in professional sports. There's no way to ignore the fact that Bonds has been very good to ESPN in each of these roles, whether it's as a promotional tent pole for prime-time baseball games or as a talking point on "PTI."

But there are times when these traits intersect in a way that leaves ESPN completely red-faced. Like back in 2001, when Bonds was chasing Mark McGwire's still-fresh single season home run record. The taint of steroid abuse had already begun sweeping over baseball, and the modern home run records had all but been conceded to performance-enhanced players. Bonds pursued the home run record with a fraction of the national interest that was focused on McGwire and Sammy Sosa back in 1998. Perhaps if Barry had cracked 50 homers in any of the 15 years leading up to his record mark of 73, fans wouldn't have been so quick to assume his power was born in a lab.

Yet ESPN covered Bonds's assault on the record with the same attention and overkill as it had the 1998 chase. It broke into coverage on its various networks to show every Bonds at-bat it could. And while the rest of the media questioned the validity of his feats, ESPN championed another cause in its non-stop coverage: the intentional walks teams were giving Bonds, which, of course, were bad for business. Leave that steroid stuff to the conspiracy theorists. Pitchers walking the best slugger in baseball — now that's a story!

Fast forward five years, and ESPN is still in the Barry Bonds Business. This reality show has already managed to infuriate local media in San Francisco, including Bruce Jenkins of the San Francisco Chronicle:

"So the Giants willingly climb in bed with a very sleazy concept, and worst of all, Bonds' teammates will be directly affected. They fully understand that Bonds is the show, and without him, they go nowhere. But if you're wearing the Giants uniform and a Bonds-starved ESPN camera crew is cramping your style in the clubhouse, week after week, while not caring one bit about you or anyone else on the team, it's just a little demeaning. They must find it especially appalling that management doesn't give a damn."

How dire is the emotional situation for the Giants' clubhouse? So dire that a 6-foot-2, 230-pound man, who previously had shown the kind of humility typically associated with Paris Hilton ripping up a parking ticket, became a drag-queen version of Paula Abdul for an "American Idol" spoof at Giants spring training. One of the Giants slipped up in an interview later in the day and said it was good to see that Barry could come down to the other players' level and have some fun.

Someone should probably tell him that Barry was just looking for some footage for the opening credits of his ESPN show.

***

The real jaw-dropping consequence of the reality project is that reporters who want one-on-one interviews with Bonds during the season will have to sign waivers with the show's production company so their interviews can be used on the show. Any reporter who refuses would not have the honor of interviewing Mr. Bonds in a mano-y-mano setting.

So, evidently, along with being in the Business of Barry Bonds, ESPN is now in the business of repressing First Amendment rights.

The network was quick to save face after this news broke. When the AP story ran on ESPN.com, it included this caveat:

"ESPN Original Entertainment, an entity separate from ESPN's news operation, is working with Bonds for a behind-the-scenes look at his quest for baseball's all-time home run record. ESPN said Friday its reporters would not sign the waiver."

Well, of course they wouldn't. Why should any reporter on ESPN think he or she is going to get something more substantial than what the multiple cameras will get from Barry for the reality show? And would it be in ESPN's best interests for Pedro Gomez to break news before it appears on a primetime edition of "American Barry" or whatever it's called?

Perhaps the most pathetic thing about the disclaimer above is the part about ESPN's news operations and ESPN Original Entertainment being separate entities. It's amazing how a network that's redefined corporate synergy can now claim media independence. I'm pretty sure "Season on the Brink" and that Dale Earnhardt movie were mentioned on ESPNews a few times, weren't they?

***

Back in bed, ESPiN tossed and turned, careful not to wake up Barry as he continued his peaceful slumber. Her mind flooded with contradictions, her nerves wracked with guilt. She remembered Vince Doria, a senior vice president and director of news, claiming that he and his organization "want to be thought of, first and foremost, as objective journalists." Then she recalled George Solomon, the man hired to keep those journalists objective, offering this advice: "My suggestion to ESPN would have been what I'd tell NBC News if it wanted to do a reality show with Donald Rumsfeld: 'don't.'"

Her eyes wandered to the alarm clock, which ticked another minute ahead. ESPiN said a silent prayer for it to speed up. "It'll all end one day," she thought. "Either he breaks a damn record or he breaks his damn leg. It'll all end one day, and then I can get on with my life."

She turned back to Barry as he slept. ESPiN knew it would be just a matter of time until the cameramen and the boom ops and the directors crashed into the room for another day chronicling Barry's life. He'll soon leave the bed, leave the house and head to the park. One day, when the final chapter of his story is written, she knew he wouldn't come back.

Well, until he gets his plaque, that is.

ESPiN didn't seem to mind. As long as she had a bed this large, she was confident there'd always be someone new to share it with.

Greg Wyshynski is the Features Editor for SportsFan Magazine in Washington, DC, and the Senior Sports Editor for The Connection Newspapers of Northern Virginia. His book "Glow Pucks and 10-Cent Beer: The 101 Worst Ideas in Sports History" will be published in spring 2006. His columns appear every Saturday on Sports Central. You can e-mail Greg at [email protected].

Posted by Greg Wyshynski at 9:04 PM | Comments (1)

Stuart Scott Doesn't Respect You

Stuart Scott is classless. It sounds harsh, but there is really no other way to describe him. It's one thing that it's become downright painful to watch him on TV in any fashion, but Stuart Scott has committed an unforgivable sin — he has turned his back on sports fans.

I finally began to realize this when I caught a quote from him in a recent issue of ESPN The Magazine. In his chat article, he responded to a question about fans by saying, "Booing is classless." Booing ... is classless. Not "boo-yahing," not the "boo!" you see coming from a cardboard ghost cutout on Halloween, but the booing that you hear at every single sporting event. Even now, I still can't fathom why he would say that. If he actually means and truly believes that, then it's something he should definitely keep to himself rather than insult his viewers.

Naturally, the first reaction when you see something like this is to question — is booing really classless? Could it be that Stu is right, and everyone else everywhere is wrong? When faced with great hypothetical questions, I tend to seek solace in common clichés, which sometimes leads me to ask myself ,"What would Jesus do?" In this case, I'd have to say that Jesus would be booing with the rest of us, because he seemed like a pretty cool guy. At the end of the day, there is one absolute truth regarding sports fans — everyone has booed at some point in their spectating career.

If you have ever cheered at a sporting event, more than likely you have booed at one, as well. There aren't too many of the "I'll cheer that everyone is trying hard, having fun, and that the officials are giving their strongest effort" type fans left, but that's not a problem. Booing is okay. In fact, I encourage it. Sports are meant to be emotional. You should be moved to the point where you feel like cheering and also to the point where you want to boo. Whether it be at a player that you can't stand, at a blatantly horrible call by the one official you know is trying to screw you over, or at a middle-aged fan who wrestles a 12-cent plastic basketball away from a handicapped fan, booing is normal.

Of course, there are a few occasions I would accept Scott's brilliant "booing is classless" theory:

1) Booing at third grade girls' soccer game — this is hazy, because you have to ask, why are the girls playing the sport? Do they just want to get some exercise or make some friends? Or do they want to experience what sports are like? If it's the latter, a little booing will at least give them a sense of what sports are like. However, those are rare occasions and it's better to err on the side of caution and go with the "no booing at third grade girls" rule.

2) Booing at funerals — there are no exceptions to this rule.

3) Booing during moments of silence or during the national anthem.

The sad part of Stu's comments was that there was no caveat. He didn't say, "Booing is classless ... when you are at the Special Olympics." I guess I don't understand how this happened. I know he once started as a sports fan as there aren't too many people who get into sports media without loving sports first. I also know that he's been kissing any professional athlete's tail for the past five years and has the journalistic integrity of a James Frey. Still, he's got be trying pretty damn hard to get athletes to love him if he's going to go far enough as to say that fans don't have a right to boo. I am amazed that a "SportsCenter" anchor can be so far removed from the people he works for (i.e. all sports fans).

What's next, Stu? Maybe that "cheering is classless, because cheering for one team only makes the other team realize they did something to allow their opponents to deserve cheers, and that's classless." Or maybe that "wearing your teams colors is classless, because you are just flaunting it in the face of the visiting team that they aren't good enough to support in public." Eventually, he will see even attending sports events as classless, because it will make visiting teams jealous because they don't have as many fans there.

It's true that he's the most polarizing "SportsCenter" anchor, which basically just means that people that haven't watched him on TV in the last five years like him, but anyone who has seen him on TV or who has heard of someone who may or may not know someone who has seen him on TV can all agree on one thing — Stuart Scott sucks. Still, plenty of people on TV suck, so what makes him different? The fact that he blatantly disrespects sports fans, which is something that is not to be taken lightly.

Stu, it's too late to fix this. You may not "holla back," there will be no "witness from the congregation." Most importantly, there will never be any emotional make-up that ends in a rehearsed handshake/hug/hand-pound between you and the common sports fan. You will never again be "as cool as the other side of the pillow."

The Sports Gospel According to Mark is sponsored by BetOnSports.com. BetOnSports.com gives you the greatest sports action to bet on. Wager on football, cricket, boxing, rugby, horse racing, and more. Mark Chalifoux is also a weekly columnist for SportsFan Magazine. His columns appear every Tuesday and Thursday on Sports Central. You can e-mail Mark at [email protected].

Posted by Mark Chalifoux at 6:48 PM | Comments (3)

March 3, 2006

Admit it, Barry: You Love the Attention

Ever since the Super Bowl ended and the Olympics began, it seems like the world of sports has been focused on every move of the Giants' controversial left-fielder Barry Bonds. He arrived to camp at this time. He started batting practice at that time. He spit sunflower seeds at this time. He spurned reporters at that time. He said he was retiring at this time. He said he wasn't retiring at that time.

Surprisingly, so far the biggest shock of spring training has nothing to do with anything on the field.

Barry Bonds, the all-moody, media-criticizing, seven-time National League MVP actually has a personality? Was the moon full? Were the stars aligned? Did he rub some laughter lotion on his knee? Did Victor Conte give him a prick of character?

There I was, eating dinner on Tuesday night, half-watching and half-listening to "SportsCenter," waiting for the usual clamor about Bonds to finish before the real news came on.

I thought I was hearing things when the names "Barry Bonds" and "Paula Abdul" were used in the same sentence. But then again, it was ESPN, so I shouldn't really be surprised if pop-culture made headlines, should I?

Then I saw something I don't ever want to see again. Barry in drag. Barry as a blonde. Barry smiling. I still can't decide what's more of a surprise.

Thanks to the genius idea of San Francisco's first-baseman Mark Sweeney, the Giants staged their own version of "American Idol" in which the younger players had to sing.

Though the event raised $337 for the Giants Community Fund, no amount of money could match the value of witnessing the spectacle of Bonds dressed up as Paula Abdul, one of three judges on the real TV show on FOX.

Other veterans and stars participated, such as shortstop Omar Vizquel and actor Rob Schneider, but we all know about their sense of humor.

But Barry Bonds? Who knew? For a man who doesn't like media attention, one can only ask, "What was he thinking?" Or even more, "How much is that blonde wig going for on eBay?"

This whole ordeal has to be a PR move. The 41-year-old has a good shot to make history this year, and he probably realized it'd be a lot more meaningful with the country on his side.

In 1961, people didn't want Roger Maris to be the one to break Babe Ruth's single-season record of 60 home runs because Maris wasn't a fan favorite or someone who loved the limelight like his teammate, Mickey Mantle.

In a similar fashion, people in 2006 generally don't want Bonds to be the one to pass Ruth's 714 career home run mark. His 708 homers put him third on the all-time list behind Ruth and Hank Aaron (755).

But it's really going to take a lot more than cross-dressing for fans to immediately forget the suspicion of steroid use that hangs over his head, which by the way, has grown a lot bigger (literally and figuratively) over the years.

And if you haven't seen more than enough of Bonds than you ever wanted in this past week, just wait. His new reality TV series ("Bonds on Bonds") airs on April 4 on ESPN2.

Too bad we don't need a reality show to see who the real Barry Bonds is.

Posted by Sara Normand at 2:56 PM | Comments (1)

Larry Brown, Sanitation Engineer

How much is Larry Brown being paid, again?

It's funny — high-paying jobs are high-paying for all sorts of reasons. Some, like brain surgeon, require great skill and years of training. Some, like airline pilot, come with great responsibility, particularly in times of crisis.

Some, like garbage collector (traditionally some of the highest-paid unskilled laborers), are simply unpleasant ways to spend a day. People wouldn't do them if they didn't get a decent benefits package out of the deal.

These days, Larry Brown's job at the helm of the New York Knicks falls into all three categories, and with every passing Isaiah Thomas transaction, Larry looks more and more like he should be slinging plastic bags into the back of a truck.

This week, Bijan C. Bayne wrote a column reconsidering the coaching legacies of Pat Riley and Larry Brown, and Bijan hands part of the blame for the Knicks' continued fall from grace to their newly-minted coach.

I'm not sure if he's right or wrong to dump New York's woes on Larry's lap, but what's certain is that the Knickerbockers are becoming more intriguing — you know, like an eight-car pileup on the New Jersey turnpike is intriguing — every day.

Face it, Knicks fans. You're going to reach that awful moment sooner or later. Perhaps some of you already have. It's the morning you wake up, flip your television to the nearest sports ticker, and exclaim to the world, "Damn, it must be nice to be a Clippers fan!"

At Alcoholics Anonymous, this moment is called "rock bottom." In this case, the first step toward recovery is to admit that your general manager has a problem and that you are powerless to stop his seemingly wanton destruction of a once-proud franchise.

The Knicks' recent descent from pitiful to absurd hasn't been simple or easy, and to analyze the full extent of the damage (i.e. contemplating the player-by-player ineptitude of this roster) would require many chapters and hours of therapy for the researcher.

However, it seems that the recent acquisition of Steve Francis from the Orlando Magic typifies the ice-seeking course that this ship has been charting for some time.

Don't get me wrong — I like Steve Francis. Heck, he's a three-time all-star and immediately raises the talent level on this team.

But surely Isaiah got to see the Athens Olympics! He gets NBC in his office, right? He watched a star-studded U.S. hoops team that was better at every position than each of its opponents get trampled under foot by teamwork and coordination, right?

Even if he didn't see it, I imagine Larry could give him a pretty vivid firsthand account.

With Steve Francis and Stephon Marbury in its starting backcourt, New York now has one of the most physically-talented guard units in the NBA. Will the Knicks win any more games? Well, that depends...

Do they get to play against the U.S. Olympic team?

Let's examine the numbers to view this impending disaster at ground level, shall we?

First of all, Steve Francis isn't going to revolutionize this offense. "Franchise" is scoring 16 points per game this season and shooting just over 43 percent from the floor. The shooting is the same as it ever was, but this isn't the same Francis that could pick the Rockets up and lead them to the playoffs by himself.

Perhaps that's the guy Isaiah thought he was getting. The Knicks' GM really needs to watch more basketball.

Nonetheless, Francis ability to score points isn't the question. His 16 points, coupled with Marbury's 17-plus, should take some pressure off New York's young frontcourt.

The real question here is chemistry. The Knicks can score. They put up almost 95 points a game — nothing earth-shattering, but certainly not the reason they're on pace to win 22 games.

What they can't do is pass the ball. They rank last in the league with 17.25 assists per game.

Well, if there's one word you could associate with a Starbury-Franchise backcourt, it would be "passing."

Huh? Do Knicks officials actually look at their roster before making trades? Are they even remotely familiar with the term "areas of need?"

Yes, Marbury fans, I know what you're about to say: Stephon Marbury does pass the ball.

You're right, to a certain extent. Marbury has handed out 6.5 assists per game this year, and his career mark (8.2) is a lot better than that. However, the fact remains that the Knicks are a case study in stationary basketball, and adding another gunner to the backcourt (Francis is averaging 5.5 apg) isn't going to turn them into the Phoenix Suns any time soon.

Then, there's the flip side of the passing equation. The Knicks may not be able to pass the ball to each other, but they've had opposing teams' jerseys in their crosshairs all season. The Knicks are the only team in the NBA to notch more turnovers per game than assists, a fact which is no doubt helping opponents score a whopping 101.6 points against them each night.

While Francis isn't a huge fan of the pass, he has been known to be generous with the other team. You'll find his name just a few ticks above Marbury's on the league's list of turnover fanatics. At 3.3 per game, he is the NBA's third-leading offender and so should be the perfect antidote for a Knicks offense that already struggles to hold onto the ball.

To recap, New York is a middle-of-the-road offensive team that doesn't pass, can't play defense, and gives the ball away like they're allergic to cow.

To save the day, Isaiah Thomas (and Larry Brown, if you choose) have imported Steve Francis, a free-shooting No. 2 guard who treats the word "pass" like a four-letter word (well, you get the idea) and turns the ball over more frequently than anyone currently on the roster.

What could go wrong?

Larry, keep your hands and feet inside the truck.

Posted by Zach Jones at 2:37 PM | Comments (3)

March 2, 2006

Spring Bounce-Back: Players to Watch

That time of the year is upon us once again. All the players have reported to their respective camps, with the exception of the always fashionably-late Manny Ramirez. The bats are cracking and the mitts are popping. Spring training is back and all the residents of Florida and Arizona can now rejoice.

The spring is a time of rebirth and renewal in nature and the same can be said of baseball players. Several of Major League Baseball's biggest stars are looking forward to shaking off the memories of an injury-plagued 2005 and each hold high hopes for a turnaround in 2006.

Barry Bonds

2005: .286 batting average, 5 HRs, 10 RBI in 14 games

Bonds missed nearly all of last season after going under the knife several times to try and repair his aging knees. Barry will turn 42 in July and has said that he will most likely retire at the end of this season. Bonds is just six homers away from passing Babe Ruth and 47 away from the all-time mark set by Hammerin' Hank Aaron.

It won't be that simple for Barry as he's dug quite a hole for himself over the last few seasons. His age and health, the steroid scandal, his much-publicized financial dispute with his ex-mistress, and the constant hounding he will get from the media and fans outside of San Francisco will be tough to overcome.

But the baseball field has always been a sanctuary for Barry and he can still crush the ball. The man has averaged 35 homers a year for his career and set a record with 73 homers in 2001. Barry's knees, psychological well-being, and walks will ultimately determine whether he can reach the greatest record in sports, 755 homers.

Scott Rolen

2005: .235 batting average, 5 HRs, 28 RBI in 56 games

Rolen has not played since July 21 because of a shoulder injury he sustained in a collision on the first baseline with Dodger first baseman Hee-Sop Choi. Rolen has been a crucial part of the Cardinals' franchise since coming over from the Phillies in 2002. In 2004, Rolen was a MVP candidate when he hit .314 with 34 homers and 124 RBI. That year, he also won his sixth Gold Glove while helping the Cardinals to 105 wins and a trip to the World Series.

The Cardinals' success this season will be largely dependent on Rolen's recovery. The Redbirds lost quite a bit of offense when Reggie Sanders, Mark Grudzielanek, and Rolen's backup, Abraham Nunez, departed via free agency, and when Larry Walker retired. The Cardinals need the vintage Rolen bat to protect Albert Pujols and Jim Edmonds in the lineup. They also need his glove on the corner of the infield. There is no other third baseman in the league that can compare to Scott Rolen defensively when healthy. He has won six of the last seven gold gloves at the hot corner.

Team doctors have cleared Rolen after his latest shoulder surgery in August. He's fielding and swinging pain free. But his timing will take awhile as he hasn't seen live major league pitching since July. Look for him return to form by midseason.

Torii Hunter

2005: .269 batting average, 14 HRs, 56 RBI in 98 games

Torii Hunter is arguably the best center-fielder in the game today. He is at the very least on an elite short list that includes Andruw Jones and Jim Edmonds. Hunter's defense didn't trail off last season as he won his fifth straight AL Gold Glove. However, his offensive numbers did suffer. Hunter played in only 98 games because of a fractured right ankle he sustained scaling the center-field wall in Fenway Park July 29. The injury kept him out the rest of the season.

Torii posted the fewest RBI last season since the 2000 season when he knocked in only 44. Health will always be a question for Hunter because of his fearless defensive nature and his complete disregard for his body when chasing down balls in the outfield. Hunter says he's fully-recovered from last season's set back and is poised for another big season in Minnesota.

The Twins didn't add much over the offseason, so they will be dependent on his bat to try and take a run at the defending world champion Chicago White Sox in the AL Central. They also have a young up-and-coming Cleveland Indians team to worry about this season, as well.

Keith Foulke

2005: 43 games, 5-5, 5.91 ERA, 15 saves, 34 strikeouts in 45 innings

Keith Foulke had a turbulent and injury-plagued 2005. He finally shut it down towards the end of last season due to his knees. He has since had surgery on both knees. But it wasn't just his knees that were injured. Foulke lost a lot of confidence on the mound as he got hit around last year quite a bit from the start. His 5.91 ERA was the highest since his rookie year in San Francisco and his 15 saves was the lowest since 1999.

The Red Sox don't have another true closer and they desperately need for Foulke to return to his 2004 form. The Red Sox say that Foulke is in great shape, and he claims that he feels great. Foulke was one of the biggest reasons the Red Sox were able to pull off their magical World Series run in 2004. He posted a 2.17 ERA that season with 32 saves and 83 innings logged. But in the playoffs, he was untouchable. He went 1-0 with three saves and gave up only one earned run in 11 games. And he was on the mound for the final out of the World Series.

Foulke's absence was a big reason for the Red Sox getting bounced in the first round of the playoffs last season by the Angels. If he can regain his confidence and stay healthy, the Red Sox will have a great shot of going back to the playoffs.

Roy Halladay

2005: 19 games, 12-4, 2.41 ERA, 108 strike outs in 141.2 innings

Halladay had his season ended just before the All-Star Break last year when he caught a line drive off his shin. He suffered a broken leg and was shut down for the rest of the season. When he went down, Halladay was on his way to replicating his performance in 2003 when he won the Cy Young award. He went 22-7 that year with a 3.25 ERA. He was supposed to be the AL starter in the Midsummer Classic last season, but instead, he had to watch.

The right-hander said the leg hasn't been an issue since about a month after the season ended, and coaches have been impressed with him early on in spring training. Halladay will be the ace of a reloaded Blue Jay staff this season. The Jays added free agent hurler A.J. Burnett and closer B.J. Ryan to a pretty decent staff that includes Gustavo Chacin, Ted Lilly, and Josh Towers.

With a healthy Halladay and the new acquisitions of Ryan, Burnett, Troy Glaus, Lyle Overbay, and Bengie Molina the Blue Jays have become contenders on paper in the AL East. The AL East should be more competitive than ever, and Halladay should have a great bounce-back season.

Eric Gagne

2005: 14 games, 1-0, 2.70 ERA, 8 saves in 13 innings

Since becoming a closer in 2002, "The Goon" has saved 160 games, including a NL record 55 in his Cy Young award-winning season in 2003. Last season, Gagne was lost early in the year when he underwent elbow surgery. As Gagne went down, so did the Dodgers. L.A.'s real team, not the other one from Anaheim, finished 71-91 last season compared with a playoff trip the year before when they finished 93-69.

Gagne had been the NL's version of Mariano Rivera prior to last season. Since 2002, he has held his ERA below 3.00 and posted two seasons (2002: 1.97, 2003: 1,20) below 2.00. It was initially feared that Gagne would have trouble ever recovering from his most recent surgery that he underwent in late June of last season to repair an entrapped nerve. But he's come into this spring training with great pop on his fastball and a pain-free delivery.

The Dodgers went out and spent some money this of-season after a disappointing 2005. They added some depth in the bullpen around Gagne as protection when they picked up former Tampa Bay Devil Ray closer Danys Baez. Baez had his best season as a pro last year in Tampa when he saved 41 games for one of the MLB's worst teams. The addition of Baez should ease the transition for Gagne and also give the Dodgers a nice setup man to get to Gagne. Look for Gagne to return to dominance in '06.

Posted by Chris Cornell at 10:08 PM | Comments (2)

NASCAR Top 10 Power Rankings: Week 2

Note: the quotes in this article are fictional.

1. Jimmie Johnson — Johnson followed his Daytona 500 win with a runner-up to Matt Kenseth in Fontana, maintaining his points lead, now 39 over Casey Mears. It was the second of four races without suspended crew chief Chad Knaus, who was last seen filing his federal income tax return.

"Who needs racing?" asks Knaus. "I'm getting a sweet $800,000 refund. And these fines paid to NASCAR are totally tax deductible."

"We're 2-0 without Chad," says Johnson.

Pardon me, Jimmie, but you've only won one race.

"Yeah, I know," replies Johnson, "but we're 2-0 in post-race inspections. Booyah!"

2. Matt Kenseth — Kenseth headlined four Roush Racing cars in the top 10, leading the final 32 laps for the win that boosted him to number two in the points. The fifth Roush driver, Greg Biffle, led a whopping 168 of 251 laps before engine failure sent him to the garage.

"You'll notice that I waited until Tony Stewart was in the garage before I assumed the lead," explains Kenseth. "He retired on lap 214. I took the lead on lap 219. Coincidence? I think not. Tony started the race, I finished it — in first place. Don't let our little weekend chit-chat fool you; we're still enemies."

3. Casey Mears — Mears collected his second straight top-10 finish with a seventh-place finish in the Auto Club 500. Standing 39 points behind points leader Johnson, Mears is supporting his case as the driver picked by many to have a breakout year.

"Before anyone can call me a 'breakout star,'" says Mears, "they first have to realize that I'm Casey with a 'C,' not with a 'K,' as in 'Kasey Kahne.' And although I drive the No. 42 car, I'm not Jamie McMurray, although I do favor his hair over my prison-issue crew cut."

4. Dale Earnhardt, Jr. — Earnhardt's best Fontana finish in three years was good enough for eleventh, the highest finish by a beer-sponsored car on Sunday. The No. 8 Budweiser car hovered around the top 10 for most of the day, but inevitably lacked the horsepower to challenge the leaders.

"You would think a car sponsored by a beer company whose mascot is the Clydesdale would not have a problem with horsepower," says Earnhardt. "But that's an issue for the engine shop to figure out. We have a new employee there by the name of Chad Knaus whom I'm sure can solve our problem."

5. Kasey Kahne — Kahne put his Dodge in fourth in California, and moved up to fourth in the points standings. Kahne led only one lap, lap 183, which was good for five bonus points and a free Junior Frosty at Wendy's.

"Am I driving the 2006 Charger, the 2005 Intrepid, or the 1985 Dart?" asks Kahne. "I know I drive a Dodge, but I'm not sure which one. Does it matter? Let's face it. I'm just here for the chicks, and they dig me. Did you see me with Jewel in California? She couldn't keep her eyes off of me. It's nice to see that females other than the teenyboppers are interested in me."

6. Mark Martin — Martin started the Roush Racing sweep of all three California races with a win in Saturday's Craftsman Truck Series Racetickets.com 200. On Sunday, Martin was the last of four Roush cars in the top ten with a ninth-place finish.

"If you want a fast car or truck," says Martin, "Jack Roush can put it together for you. Sure, he may look more like a golfer on the seniors' tour, but the man knows engines. Whether it's a Cup car, a Busch car, a Craftsman truck, or Jack's own souped-up 1999 Honda Civic Coupe that he street races against Vin Diesel, Ludacris, and many cast members of The Fast and the Furious on weekends, he can make it fast."

7. Ryan Newman — Newman's ill-handling Dodge matched his temperament after his Penske Dodge's problems left him a lap off the lead for a 20th-place finish. Newman fell to seventh in the points standings, 82 behind Johnson.

"You know what gets my goat?" asks Newman. "My new teammate, Kurt Busch, wins the pole and then has the nerve to refuse to share his car information with me. Now I know what Rusty Wallace must have felt after one of my poles last year."

8. Clint Bowyer — Bowyer is the highest-ranked rookie in the points, currently eighth after a solid 14th-place finish in Fontana. He's also the only NASCAR driver named "Clint," which makes him cool in my book. He also drives the No. 07 car, sponsored by Jack Daniels.

"The names 'Bowyer,' 'Clint Boyer,' in car number single-0-seven. Not to be mistaken for Agent 007, James Bond. I like my Jack straight from the bottle, not shaken, not stirred. I'm a man of international intrigue, so it's off to Mexico for the Busch Series "Beans and Rice 300."

Actually, Clint, it's the Telcel Motorola Mexico 200. But, while you're there, don't drink the water, bur I hear the racing fuel is delicious.

9. Tony Stewart — For a majority of the day, Stewart had a car that could challenge Kenseth's for supremacy, or at least get close enough to run him off the track. Then, on lap 214, the No. 20 Home Depot Chevy's engine bit the dust, and a frustrated Stewart tossed his helmet into the crowd, hitting a fan right in the face. The fan then faked like he was serious injury, and had to be carted away by several track workers and a shady personal injury lawyer.

"Dude, you've got it all wrong," says Stewart. "I didn't toss my helmet at anyone. You're thinking of Kevin Garnett of the Minnesota Timberwolves, who tossed a ball into the stands in frustration. That guy's got a temper issue, which is something with which I am totally unfamiliar. I finished last, behind the likes of Stanton Barrett, who should be handling my investment portfolio and not racing. I remained calm, and didn't run anyone off the track, although I did force a NASCAR official's golf cart into a ditch. I still got it!"

10. Brian Vickers — Vickers struggled to an 18th-place finish in California, the lowest finisher among Hendrick Motorsports drivers. He dropped two spaces to number nine in the points.

"More importantly," says Vickers, "you can see me on 'Inside Nextel Cup' on Speed Channel this season alongside Michael Waltrip and Ken Schrader. I'll be thrilled if I'll be able to get a word in edgewise with those guys."

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 9:30 PM | Comments (0)

March 1, 2006

It's Not Biased if it's True

There is a daily fight in this country between liberals and conservatives concerning the political bias in journalism in this country. It has become so pronounced that many people have to get their news from multiple sources in order to have some sense of balance in their information. You would never guess, though, that this fight would boil over to golf reporting. But, sadly, it has.

It's at this point that I need you to do a little work so you can see what I mean. An anonymous commentary written by people at Titleist that calls out Orlando Sentinel golf writer Steve Elling for his supposed bias in his recent reporting. Once you're done with that, then come back here. I'll be waiting.

If you are an avid golf fan, or reader of this column, then you know that there is a growing sentiment among golfers, fans, and journalists that golf club and ball technology is hurting the game. The style of the game has changed and many fans don't like it.

You can see the results in the smaller Nielsen numbers for televised golf. The evidence is in the decline of rounds played by amateurs in recent years. Oh yeah, don't forget that the PGA Tour had to revamp its schedule in a ploy to get more attention.

It does not take a very keen set of eyes to notice that the game is fizzling. Further, it is only too convenient that the decline in rounds played and fan-base has occurred at a time when there has never been greater technology to allow professionals to hit the ball further than ever. Journalists have put two and two together and yelled "fore" about the bad direction that the game is going because of uncurbed technology. (This serious column needed some terrible humor.)

As it turns out, I am not the only one calling it as I see it. Other golf writers — who I have great respect for — are also calling for stronger regulation of golf technology now before the game gets out of control. Apparently, the golf equipment companies have been taking notice and they feel they are being gipped. Now, they're fighting back — anonymously.

Titleist and all other equipment manufacturers are entitled to their opinion. They are allowed to believe that their technology is not hurting the game that I love. But, the truth — as unbiased as it gets — is that technology has gotten past the point of helping the game of golf. I say it, and Jack Nicklaus says it. Players and critics alike are vocal about this subject. Basically, we're not making this stuff up for profit, or a story, or any other ulterior motive. Hell, I don't even get paid to do this!

Interestingly enough, though, equipment manufacturers are making money hand over fist because of their constant drive to make the ball go further. They have a vested stake in the evolution of the golf ball and the golf club.

If the USGA and R&A introduce stricter rules for technology, then corporate profits will suffer. If people learn that the average score for an amateur has actually gotten worse in the past 10 years, despite technological advances, then it is the golf club companies that will be hurting. If people start believing the things that I and others are writing about technology, then Acushnet's stock price will fall. (Actually, it's Fortune Brands.)

Titleist and it cohorts have to fight for their profits, and journalists are an easy target. And we deserve it. Really, the scapegoat had to be journalists who have been conspiring to stick it to the golf industry for years. We just needed an opportunity and a reason to strike. Technology is a perfect reason to be critical. After all, it is our job and our passion to be skeptical, cynical, and critical of everything in the golf world. In all actuality, the only thing that journalists are doing to fuel the fire over this debate is to put the opinions of many others on paper for others to read. It just so happens that most journalists agree with those opinions.

The craziest part of this entire situation is that this Titleist commentary has no author attached to it. I cannot wag my finger at any one person in the company. But every time that Steve Elling, or Ron Sirak, or I write something, we put our name on it. We stand behind what we write and can be held accountable for our beliefs, our facts, and our style. Meanwhile, Titleist can hide behind their corporate name, their billions of dollars, and long-standing reputation.

Rather than entering into a genuine discussion about the future place of technology in the game, Titleist has decided to take the coward's route and complain. If the golf industry feels so strongly for their cause, then they can and should defend it to the death. Prove to me why golf technology is not hurting the game and I'll concede the point. Hell, I will gladly offer space in this column, on my show, and anywhere I can so that you can convince me and the public of your beliefs. Until then, Titleist is just taking potshots from afar.

Basically, Titleist is just as biased as I can be. Their bias is profit. My bias is love for a pure and good game. Who are you going to believe?

Posted by Ryan Ballengee at 9:05 PM | Comments (0)

College Basketball Thoughts Revisited

To the legions of Big East fans. I'll admit it. I was wrong — dead wrong. And I would like to apologize.

When I wrote my last column a month ago, I received countless e-mails wanting to know what type of stuff I was on to think that the Big East was a bad conference. All I can say am I made a mistake. I've watched the league closely during the last month and have come to the conclusion that this is the strongest conference in the country as we head into March Madness. The league is competitive from top to bottom and might actually get between 8-10 teams into the NCAA tournament.

Villanova and UConn have had some epic battles since I wrote my last column and they two teams epitomize how tough this league really is. The last one came Sunday when UConn posted a 14-point win over 'Nova at home, avenging a loss to the Wildcats earlier in the season. It really isn't surprising the two are ranked in the top five.

My only beef with Villanova is we sort of see this every year from them. They're real good in the beginning and then take a deep plunge once conference tournament and ultimately NCAA tournament play starts. But this year is different and it feels different. Just imagine, Villanova's solid lineup with a healthy Curtis Sumpter, who's missed the entire season due to a knee injury he suffered in the preseason. That's scary, folks.

It's amazing how a league that was basically pieced together by greedy corporate suites has become so competitive so quickly. By that, I mean the new teams. Marquette and Cincinnati have both come into the league and have made immediate impacts, with the only disappointment being an underachieving Louisville squad that has sunk to the bottom of the conference. West Virginia is solid and John Thompson III is looking more like his father everyday and has done a tremendous job in resurrecting the Georgetown program.

But the most surprising play in the conference might be from the Seton Hall Pirates. Talk about a team that never quits. At least not on consecutive nights. Of course, they don't have a chance at making the NCAA tournament, barring a Cinderella run in the Big East tourney, but some of the things they've done this season have been remarkable. This is a team that got absolutely embarrassed by Duke back in November, showing no effort and losing by 53 points. But this same team went out and got huge wins against teams like N.C. State and Syracuse.

My biggest complaint or beef is in the SEC. Let's look at Florida and coach Billy Donovan. While Donovan is a great coach and recruits excellent talent, he needs to be fired. Am I wrong, or is this about the sixth straight year where Florida has been either ranked in the top five and then fallen apart as the season winds down? Like I said, Donovan is a great coach, but his teams aren't that good when it counts. Every year, they are ranked highly and every year, they fall on their faces. Wasn't it only a couple of years ago when Florida earned the No. 1 ranking and promptly went out and loss the next night? And aside from Mike Miller saving the team in the 2000 NCAA tournament, what has Florida really done in the tournament?

Is it me, or does it seem like the pollsters elevate the Gators whenever Kentucky has sort of an off-year? Granted, Florida isn't even in first place in the conference, but everyone knows that no one cares about Tennessee men's basketball except for the players themselves. They're a good team, but they haven't earned their stripes with me yet.

So does East Coast bias really exist? I think so. I'll admit, I don't watch the Pac-10 that often. And I don't think the league is very good outside of Stanford and Arizona most years. But this year, a new breed seems on the horizon as UCLA has finally, finally, come back to forefront of the conference. Stanford and Arizona are having off years by their standards and the conference doesn't look that strong heading into the NCAA tourney. Washington has the experiences from last year, but outside of that, I don't see any of them making a real run in the tournament. But you never know with UCLA. They have such a tradition and the last couple of years haven't been to their standards. Maybe Bill Walton or someone can light a fire under the young squad come tournament time.

Posted by Andre Watson at 8:41 PM | Comments (0)