Soccer - When nothing else is on

I am once again attempting to give soccer a chance, mainly because I didn't feel like going anywhere and the U.S./Italy game was pretty much the only thing on. So, it was that or the Discovery channel showing something on killer ants. Granted, if the show on ants was two hours long, I may have chosen it. Still, while I may regret watching, I decided to record my experience for posterity.

The last time I really paid attention to the World Cup (or soccer in general) was when the Cup was here in 1994. I gave it a shot, but when the final ended up as a 0-0 tie and decided by penalty shots, I ignored it. I just don't think soccer is ever going to be that popular in the U.S., because it's what you know. Soccer's more popular in other countries because it's always been the main sport. In this country, it's always been way behind the home grown sports of football, basketball, baseball, NASCAR etc.. I can see a sport building in popularity (i.e. basketball in Europe and baseball in Latin America) if it's only competing with one major sport. Here, you've got to go through at least three.

One thing I must say before the game even starts is that it's nice the American women are getting with the soccer program, and going with the less is more clothing philosophy. Brazil has the most scantily clad fans and they are the favorites, in spite of having a player who goes by the name Kaka (Doo Doo was apparently left off this year's squad). So it's nice to see American girls trying to help Team USA along.

Watching the Italians come out, I'm reminded of a line by Minerva Mayflower in the movie Hudson Hawk. "That's why we hired the pasta slurping guinea". Of course, none of these guys actually look like Danny Aiello. Actually, as a team, they look a bit taller than the U.S. squad. In fact, the Americans are playing a couple of midgets. Hopefully, head shots won't be that important.

That's pretty funny. The Italian goalie just kneed his own teammate in the butt. And he's down and getting his butt sprayed with the numbing spray by a trainer. I wonder if the trainer had to take a class of spraying ass.

I am shocked. American Brian McBride just went down and actually came up with a bloody face from an elbow shot. Usually when I see a soccer player go down, it's after minimal contact, but they act like they just got gunned down. Come to think of it, some of the best floppers in the NBA (think Vlade Divac or Manu Ginobli), come from countries with big soccer followings. Coincidence? I think not.

Ha Ha. Italy just kicked it into their own goal. Hopefully, if the U.S. pulls out a win, the Italians are more forgiving than the Columbians. I don't know that much soccer history, but I do remember when the World Cup was here, a Columbian scored an own goal which gave the U.S. the win. He was later shot when he got back home.

Not really understanding the criteria for these red cards (ejections). The Italian guy got one for elbowing someone in the face, but the American got one for a slide tackle that was a bit late. Maybe I don't understand soccer, but there seems to be a big disparity between the degree of offence. What really gets me is the commentators keep saying the American red card was a make-up call. A make-up call? For what? The Italian red card? These same guys were saying the Italian red card was the proper call. If the Italian deserved to get tossed for his actions, but the American didn't, how is that a make-up? If that's the case, the U.S. got screwed because a make-up call was unnecessary. Was it done so the Italians wouldn't have to play 3/4 of the game down a man? In that case, why eject them anyway?

Second Half Thoughts
Without a doubt, the stupidest thing in soccer is the time. To begin with, does any other sport count up rather than down? Plus, what the Hell is stoppage time? They apparently add time to the end of the half/game to make up for when the clock should have stopped during play. Here's a thought - just stop the clock. They didn't even know how much stoppage time there was really going to be. They said they were going to add "about" two minutes of stoppage time. It ended up being 2 minutes and 13 seconds, and we didn't know that until the referees pretty much just stopped play.

This was actually one of the better soccer games that I've seen, because they didn't stall for a good chunk of the first half. The last time I tried to watch the World Cup, too many of the games were the soccer equivalent of North Carolina's pre-shot clock Four Corners offense (actually, it was just stalling, so I think calling it offense is the epitome of crap terminology). Granted, today's match is still not Phi Slamma Jamma, but at least both teams seemed intent on trying to score even if they only managed one apiece. Well, Italy scored two, but one was for us.
Great, we start the second half with another American being ejected for a late slide tackle. This is like the NBA ejecting a player for throwing a punch, and then tossing a couple more for a charging foul. If they keep this crap up, I definitely won' t be back.

The Italians are offside a lot. I looked up the rule, and it's about as clear as their yellow card rule. Now, the U.S. just had a goal negated for some kind of interference because an American was between the kicker and the goalie. Of course, the shot was from 25 yards away, and the interfering player was about dozen yards in front of the goalie. So, if that was really the correct call (I'm not trusting the clowns refereeing this game), I've got to mark this down as another stupid rule. No wonder 2-0 is a blowout in this sport.

On the plus side, I was afraid the U.S. would go into a stall while being a man down. Instead, they are still attacking. In fact, they seem to have more life than the Italians even with fewer players although guys from both sides appear about dead. Not that it does any good. The game ends (in stoppage time, of course) in a 1-1 tie.

From reading some post-game thoughts by those who know more about soccer than me, apparently we did rather well. I'm not so sure about that. I know the Italians are supposed to have great defense, and the U.S. did seem to go at the goal a lot, but we never kicked the ball into the net in almost 100 minutes of play. In soccer, a tie must not be like kissing your sister, but since I don't have a sister (or predilection for incest), I've never really understood that analogy. I will admit that unlike other soccer games I've watched, I didn't feel that I'd lost two hours of my life for this one. Heck, if a miracle happens (beat Ghana and hope Italy beats the Czech Republic), I might even try to catch the second round game for the U.S.. Of course, speculation is that the number two team out of America's grouping will end up playing Brazil with their fans in the skimpiest of outfits.

Still, I can't say I'm sold on this sport yet. First, there's that clock thing. I just don't understand how you can end a game not knowing how much time is really left. Can you imagine a basketball game ending with neither side really knowing how much time is left? Second, what's with the fouls? Modify the offside rule so you don't have it called 30 times in a match. Plus, it's rather stupid to me that you could conceivably make a team play 10 on 11 for almost the entire match. Even if you feel someone has earned an ejection, let the team substitute. This is like someone fouling out of a basketball game and the team not being able to put someone else in. Even the closest equivalent sport, hockey, only makes them a man down for a set period of time. This seems to give too much power to the referees, and probably makes it more likely a team goes into a defensive stall for a good chunk of the game. I don't see the advantage here. Lastly, what's the deal with limited substitution? I've always heard how well soccer players are conditioned (and they are), but these guys were gassed late in the game. A bunch of guys standing around sucking wind didn't make for an exciting ending.

Dumb, Dumb, Dumb

When I heard Ben Roethlisberger was hurt when his motorcycle hit a car, my first thought was who was driving the car? Marvin Lewis? My second thought was how stupid can someone be? You're making millions of dollars with the possibility of millions more playing football. Why are you jeopardizing it by riding a motorcycle a month before training camp, and doing so without a helmet? As a friend of mine who rides once said, "It's not if you'll wreck, it's when and how bad." Well, early indications are that Roethlisberger may not miss time because of it, but that just means he was incredibly lucky. Kellen Winslow was out for the entire season last year after his wreck. Jay Williams hasn't played in three years after having one.

As someone opposed to the nanny state, it's fine with me if people want to ride motorcycles, and I personally disagree with helmet laws or for that matter seat belt laws (at least for adults). If you want to mess yourself up by smashing your unprotected skull against pavement or going through a windshield, have at it. However, that doesn't mean I won't call you stupid for riding a motorcycle (especially Suzuki's fastest production model crotchrocket) without a helmet. Roethlisberger made the point last year that he was a safe rider, and he could be. So what? Motorcycles are dangerous as much for the other traffic as for their own riders. For one, they are hard to see. Plus, fender benders tend to be quite a bit more serious than if it's in a car. A small wipeout in a car is unlikely to send me head first into a curb. (When the BenOnABike issue came up last year, Joey Porter had the best comment: "The concrete is undefeated") Let's put it this way, a few years ago, my pickup was hit broadside by a woman coming out of a parking lot doing about 50 mph who just happened to not see me until it was too late. Think what would have happened if I had been on a motorcycle instead of safely ensconced inside a truck?

I just don't understand wanting to take the risk. A minor injury for me could be a huge one for an NFL quarterback. A broken hand for me would just make typing harder (two broken hands might cause me other problems). For Roethlisberger, it just might affect his ability to hold a football. If I wrecked a motorcycle even as bad as Jay Williams, I might miss a bit of work, but I wouldn't be out of work for a full year, let alone three. It probably wouldn't affect my future earnings that much either unless I came out like a vegetable (even then my coworkers might not notice). A little different for Ben. Even out for one year could have pushed back Roethlisberger's first contract extension which will be significantly more than what he gets now. A Jay Williams injury and he's viewed as damaged goods. Real smart to risk that just to have the wind blow through your hair.

If he was just an individual athlete, I would just mention the stupidity of risking your paycheck and say it's his tough luck. However, as a member of a team, there's a certain level of selfishness in such risk taking. If I had such a wreck, it might inconvenience my coworkers who have to pick up my slack while I'm healing, but it isn't likely to affect the bottom line. Even if it was someone with actual importance to the company were to miss time after an accident, it probably wouldn't ruin the company's fiscal year. If Roethlisberger had been out for the year, it would have affected a whole lot more people than him. I would pretty much write off the season for the Steelers, and I actually like Charlie Batch who would most likely be the starter in his absence. I also liked Tommy Maddox, but after his performance last year, I would cringe if he came back to be anything but third string. Yet, if Roethlisberger had torn up his knees worse than road rash (and it might still be too early to tell), that's what Pittsburgh would be looking at. Who else could they get with training camp a month away? Kerry Collins is the only quarterback of any account that's still available, and I don't see him as an upgrade over Batch. His bike riding would have put his teammates in a poor position for this year. I realize it's a free country and his neck, but I think team athletes have to recognize that when they sign a contract, they do have some responsibility to their team and teammates. One of those responsibilities is avoiding injury off the field.

Odds & Ends

I think what I found most interesting in this story about the three Gitmo prisoners committing suicide was the fact that Saudi Arabia has a Human Rights Group. That name is the biggest misnomer since the Soviet's called their official newspaper Pravda (Truth in Russian). I have to wonder if the person writing the story was able to type "Saudi Human Rights Group" with a straight face. I also like how some Saudis don't believe they killed themselves because suicide is a grave sin in Islam. Unless you take out a bunch of Jews and Christians when you do it. Then it's OK.

Does anyone really go to Sam's Club looking for a $900 purse?

I hope Phil doesn't find out about the Vietnamese karaoke story because he may try to implement it on the ski trip, and I don't want to have to write a "self-criticism" report for not singing.

Of course, he will be proud to know that the iPod is more popular with college students than beer. Actually, I think it's because the modern college student has been spoiled by overindulgent parents who give them enough money to buy hard liquor (or foo foo drinks), and they don't have to buy beer. When I was in college, bourbon was for special occasions. Beer (usually Stroh's or Keystone) was much more cost effective.

Speaking of being drunk or getting over it, some guy got quarantined on an Australian cruise ship because he was suspected of having stomach flu. He says he was just hungover. Usually it's opposite as one blames his hangover on stomach flu.

Normally, I'm OK with topless women wondering around, but not quite sure about this sheriff's deputy who got fired for it. That's a hard looking woman. And yet, in the picture (fully clothed) that was in the story, she's got her arms crossed in a "modest" pose.

To go with topless, there's bottomless as an escapee from the circus drove a motorized cart around the store with her pants down.

In the ultimate public nudity, two teachers had to quit when students saw them having sex in a classroom. Here's a thought. Wait until the school day is over. I'm sure they'll blame their public boning on a mental problem. Amsterdam just opened a clinic "for people who can't leave their joysticks alone." Although in this case, it's for video game addicts.

Although, I'm supportive of English only policies in this country and do give the proprietor credit for helping immigrants learn the language, I'm trying to figure out how you order a cheesesteak in Spanish. It's a cheesesteak. I wouldn't go to a Mexican restaurant and ask for a steak tortilla wrap instead of asking for a burrito. Of course, after that Hardee's commercial for their cheesesteak hamburger with the two Philly cab drivers that needed subtitles to be understood, I'm not sure my English will suffice there.

Of course, crime fighters are in the pizza industry. I don't find a pizza delivery guy catching a purse snatcher all that strange, but the fact that the pizza joint makes their delivery boys dress like superheroes is a bit odd. Hopefully, he won't find himself getting sued by the scumbag criminal like the guys at an Auto Zone did. With gall like that, you hope his cellmate finds him purty.

And finally, in the government is retarded segment - a town council in England is concerned about the safety problems inherent in palm trees. Not any concern like them falling over on people or the danger of someone climbing them (Keith Richards could visit) and falling out. No, they are concerned a leaf could get in someone's eye. One idiot went so far as to compare having palm trees to having a tigers running loose. Tax dollars at work.

What's the appeal?

I don't understand the hoopla over Roger Clemens pitching for the Lexington Legends. Is regular season baseball so boring that a guy coming out of retirement to play for a third place team is cause for media to descend on Lexington to see him throw three innings? Considering he's going to be around for just over half their games, how much impact can he really make? He'll probably pitch fewer than 20 games, so how many more wins will that give them (it's highly unlikely he'll win every game he starts) compared to the rest of the staff?

Why the excitement for locals? Sure, he's a great pitcher, but so what? Cincinnati is an hour away and they get good pitchers going against major leaguers. Clemens pitched three innings against development players. It might as well have been batting practice. I don't remember people getting this excited when the Bulls and Michael Jordan came to Lexington to play an exhibition in the late 90s, and they were the defending champs. They were also facing other NBA players, and yet I don't think that game was even a sellout. Someone told me Clemens pitching for the Legends was bigger because he would be pitching for the local team. That's crap. How many people know how the Legends are even doing this year? How many people know whether or not Lexington won the game he started? Plus, single A is a development league where winning is nice but secondary. That's why training and rehab starts are often done there. They don't want to disrupt the major league lineups while finding out what someone can do.

I do have to give Clemens some credit. Of all the names mentioned as possible steroid users by Jose conscious, he and Barry Bonds were the only ones that weren't called before the Congressional committee investigating steroids in baseball. Come to think of it, Clemens has pretty much been given a free pass on the steroid issue. Of course, just because he looked washed-up and out of shape at the end of his Red Sox career, but managed to turn it around and have career years up into his 40s is no reason to think steroids could be involved. That would be silly. Late career resurgence by power pitchers are very common. There's Clemens and ...... well, Clemens. Still, assuming he might take steroids during baseball's steroid era is just plain wrong. It would be like assuming steroid use when a hitter who never had more than 46 home runs during his first 14 seasons suddenly averages over 50 late in his 30s. And, coincidentally looks like he ate another player. Still, that's just unfounded suspicion. He could very well have gotten back into shape through hard work and human growth hormones.

Actually, I always figured Bonds got a lot of steroid grief for several reasons. He was connected to people at BALCO when the proverbial steroid crap hit the fan, had doubled in size, was breaking records and hadn't retired like Sosa and McGwire. Plus, he's an ass. But so is Clemens. He burns bridges whenever he leaves a team. He gets it into his contract that he doesn't have to go on road trips when he isn't scheduled to pitch. He indicated that he would want to sign with a playoff contender if he un-retired then turned down three of them to sign with a sub-.500 team that offered more money. He's so obsessed with himself that he set his latest contract at $22,000,022 because his uniform number is 22. He also gave names that begin with "K" (abbreviation for strikeouts) to all his kids. What is there about Roger Clemens that would make me root for him?

Remember when winning was the story?

I never cared much for spelling bees when we did them in class during grade school. In fact, I would usually try to botch a word early so I could go sit down and not deal with such foolishness. That's why I am completely indifferent to the National Spelling Bee and was rather shocked that they would put it on network television. I guess in some way I should admire these kids for their obsession with learning, but frankly I can't get too excited about someone spending most of their waking time memorizing words that they'll never use in regular life or probably ever hear again. Still, whatever floats your boat. Normally, I wouldn't follow any of it, but ESPN carried it for years before it moved to sister network ABC. In typical ESPN fashion, they pimp the Hell out of the show on their website and news programs, so I'm forced to.

So how did ESPN report who won this year? They felt the need to focus on the fact that the winner was the first girl to win sin 1999. How am I supposed to feel about this? Outraged that female spellers had been oppressed for the past five years? Delight that one girl was able to overcome the male dominated world of competitive spelling to pull out the win? Nope. To begin with, the male/female ratio is usually pretty evenly split, and girls have won the contest throughout history so five wins in a row by males is probably coincidental. Secondly, why would it matter anyway? The number of kids actively engaged in these things has to be incredibly small. Since only a male or female can win in any year, a short run of one gender is an anomaly signifying nothing. Yet, ESPN felt it was the most important fact to report.

Frankly, I'm just getting tired of this PC bull that permeates sports reporting. The biggest at this time of year is Danica Patrick in the Indy Racing League. She's a female in a male dominated sport, and she's cute. She's willing to pose for the men's semi-skin magazines (although I don't think she's hot enough that FHM would give her a second glance if she was Jane Nobody off the street). She's different which gives her novelty status and a much higher profile than her success (or lack of) would suggest. She's a pretty good driver and with a good team, but so far she hasn't shown me anything to indicate she'll ever be more than middle of the pack on the elite level. Still, IRL is smart to make her the face of their league over better, more accomplished drivers, because the IRL is a distant second to NASCAR in this country. In fact, without the tradition of the Indy 500, it would barely be on the auto racing map.

While I understand the IRL pushing her, I don't understand why the sports press does. Regardless about the fact that she's never won a race and only has two top five finishes (both 4th), she's always written up as a major contender. It doesn't matter where she finishes or how she runs. Every article is going to make a special note about where Patrick ended up. When I went to ESPN.com after this year's Indy 500, there was more mention of her (and her eighth place finish) than things like the fact that this was one of the most exciting finishes (which she had nothing to do with) in my memory of the race. Or that a father/son combination from the American royal family of open wheel racing (the Andrettis) almost finished first and second. Patrick was really a non-factor in the race, but you wouldn't know it by the coverage.

You can say that maybe the coverage is just giving people what they want, but there's a high level of dishonesty in the coverage when dealing with her. How many times did sports writers make the point of saying Patrick "almost" won the Indy 500 last year? A lot. The only problem with it is that it really isn't true. She was running about ninth late fairly late in the race when all the cars in front of her pitted, because they knew they probably wouldn't have enough fuel to finish the race. Patrick stayed on the track even though she was in the same shape. Her crew figured their only chance to win was to leave her out and hope for enough cautions that she wouldn't run out of fuel. She also needed them because she would have to run slower to conserve what fuel she had. She did get cautions, but it was obvious when she was in the lead that she was going to get caught. In fact, she was a lot closer to not finishing the race than she really was to winning it. If it wasn't for a caution at the end, she wouldn't have held on for fourth, and probably wouldn't have had enough fuel to finish. Yet, the intellectual dishonesty was so bad that more than one sportswriter said her pit crew told her to slow down as if to say she could have won if her crew had let her. If she hadn't slowed down, she doesn't finish. These sportswriters simply did not want to admit that her leading laps and finishing high was the product of a desperation move.

So, did it get any better this year. Not really. They couldn't hype her as almost winning because I don't think she never ran higher than fifth place. Instead, this year's refrain was that Patrick ran a better race this year (based on finishing eighth after starting tenth) and was a big factor throughout. She may have run a better race, but as I pointed out above that isn't saying a whole lot. Moving up two spots after 500 miles of racing doesn't set my world on fire unless you started third. As for being a factor, she probably wouldn't have been mentioned if she wasn't a she. She has to be considered a non-factor because she never threatened the lead or had an effect on it. In fact, Sam Hornish and Scott Dixon were both black flagged (made to pass through the pits at 60 mph rather than on the track at 200+ mph) late in the race, but still finished ahead of Patrick. Basically, she ran a nice safe race that meant she didn't wreck, but also didn't matter.

But she's a pioneer, right? Not really. Women drove in early NASCAR races of the late 40s which has to be tougher (think no power steering) than driving the high tech Indy cars of today. Other women have raced in the Indy 500 and that goes back to the 70s. So, contrary to popular belief, Patrick's only new contribution so far is that she's had pictures taken in skimpy outfits to promote herself. If she finally gets a win, okay. If she wins the IRL championship, good. If she jumps to NASCAR and wins its title, great. However, until that point, sports reporters need to honestly and objectively report on her career rather than acting as cheerleaders. When they are borderline (at best) lying about what she's done, they go beyond reporting and begin pushing an agenda.

Random Sports Thoughts

This doesn't make any sense at all. Detroit beat Cleveland on Friday to lead to a Sunday game seven. Yet, the Suns/Clippers played their game six on Thursday with game seven on Monday. Are the Clippers going to walk to Phoenix? Even worse, it means that there's going to be another 10:30 start time on Monday. Has the NBA decided they are going to be a west coast league? I may stay up past midnight to watch Monday Night Football, but not the NBA.

I was sad to see Cleveland get bounced from the playoffs today. They had LeBron. Detroit has a tendency to be boring. Still, I want Detroit to win the East, but not necessarily because of them. I really don't want the Heat to go to the Finals. I thought what Pat Riley did this year was pretty bush league. A few years back, he quit right before the season started because he didn't think the Heat were good enough to win. And they weren't after winning only 25 games the previous, so it's not illogical to think Riley quit rather than hurting his all time record. Stan Van Gundy takes over in a bad situation, but improves the record in year one. In year two, he takes the team to the best record in the East and to game 7 of the East championship. Van Gundy's reward for turning things around? Riley signs a bunch of veterans for a one year run at the title, makes Van Gundy "resign" and becomes the coach again to add to his "legacy". What an ass.
Speaking of asses, the other person who would be unhappy with a Pistons win would be Larry Brown. I used to like him, but the way he exited Detroit was pure garbage. Right in the middle of their playoff run, he was trying to engineer his way out of Motown to New York. Ironically, New York got what they deserved when they hired him by getting worse. Now, he's trying to con New York into buying him out so he can move on rather than have to coach the disaster that he helped create. If he gets a $40 million buyout after one season of helping destroy the team, he would basically be a thief.

Damn shame what happened in the Preakness. Barbaro certainly had the potential for the Triple Crown so it sucks it had to end with an injury. Even worse, it may end up being fatal. I can't say that he would have beaten Bernardini (he ran a nice race), but if he was even close to his Kentucky Derby form, I think he would have. I'm happy Keeneland is going to the Polytrack surface. Racing at Turfway indicated that breakdowns like Barbaro's can be significantly lessened on it. Some would whine about tradition, but I'm tired of seeing good horses going lame.

Speaking of horse's asses, Barry Bonds finally tied Babe Ruth's home run record. Big deal. I've never thought much of baseball's home run records if for no other reason than every field is different. Unlike Brett, I think Bonds' big problem with popularity is the little matter of him apparently lying to a grand jury about taking steroids. Well, and lying to the public about taking steroids. After all, when he set the single season record, he wasn't absolutely despised like he is now (he wasn't liked either, but that's because he's always been a dick). However, since then, the whole steroid thing blew up, and everyone tainted by it has been hurt. As popular as Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa were when they had their home run competition, neither can be found. Bonds may as well savor it, because he's always going to be thought of as the guy who late in his career doubled in size and increased his home run total by 24 over his previous best. Besides, it doesn't matter who has the home run titles, Babe Ruth will always be larger than life. He's been dead for almost 60 years, but his name is still synonymous with greatness. Bonds' will be with steroids. Ruth's legacy is saving baseball after the Black Sox scandal. Bonds is helping pushing baseball farther into irrelevancy.

Speaking of irrelevant, I was at Beef O'Brady's for lunch when Doug Flutie announced his retirement. They actually showed the press conference live on ESPN2. I realize that his Hail Mary pass to beat the Hurricanes and win the Heisman Trophy was an all time great highlight. However, the guy hasn't been a starter in five years, and while it was nice that he was able to fashion a career even though he was a midget, his retirement wasn't that big a deal. Truthfully, I was never a big fan. He always seemed to be a shameless self-promoter with an exceptionally thin skin. After the Dolphins beat the Bills in the playoffs, Jimmy Johnson smashed a box of Flutie Flakes (a cereal sold for a charity on autism which Flutie's son had), and Doug whined that it was like his autistic son had been stomped. Geez, if someone has them for breakfast, does he feel like his son was eaten? Hey, Johnson bought the box thereby donating to the charity. What's really funny now is I've seen a couple of people say that Flutie should be considered for the Pro Football Hall of Fame, and the reasoning is that it's the "pro football" not NFL Hall of Fame, and Flutie had several great years in the Canadian Football League. Please. The CFL is the CBA of pro football. No one goes to the CFL if they can make an NFL roster. Flutie is an exception in that he managed about four years as a decent starter in the NFL, and only two that I would classify as good. The rest of his NFL career was as a journeyman backup. In fact, most often top CFL players who try to transition to the NFL are lucky to be third string. So, no, being the top player in the CFL is not Hall of Fame worthy especially when your NFL career is nothing special.

Great. Here comes the Indy 500. I don't watch much open wheel racing, and I especially try to avoid IRL, because I'm just a little bit tired of the focus being a tenth place car just because a cute girl is driving it. Danica Patrick isn't a trailblazer. Women drove in the first Daytona 500 which was on a beach and before cars had power steering. If they could handle that, there's no reason they can't race in this high tech machines. I'm not trying to be mean, but I would be a little ticked off if I was a top driver on the circuit who had to spend half their time answering questions about someone who hasn't even won a race. Is it really an advancement for women in sports when her appeal is mainly that she's attractive?


I see ESPN is pushing the World Cup. I find some humor in some of the commercials like the one where England faces Argentina shortly (actually it was four years, but why mess up a good commercial) after the Falkland War. Diego Maradona leads Argentina to victory with a shot he calls "the Hand of God" goal. Actually, he knocked it in with his hand, and while I'm not real clear on many of soccer's rules (offsides befuddles me), I'm pretty sure hitting it in with your hand is illegal. Argentina goes on to win by one goal and restores their manhood. Maybe I have higher standards, but I'm not real sure I would carry a lot of pride over this like the Argentineans did. They lost the Falklands War in about three months, so winning a soccer game by a cokehead who cheated doesn't really seem to make up for it.

I don't know how much I'll watch the World Cup. If the Brazilians are playing, I may watch very closely in case they go to the stands, because hot Brazilian women like to go to soccer matches wearing very little. I'm certainly going to be rooting for America, because I'm very jingoistic, but it is soccer so I'm not sure how much I will care. I gave soccer a chance when the World Cup was played here, but became very disillusioned when a 0-0 tie had to be decided on penalty kicks in the Finals. I enjoyed playing intramural soccer in college, but I can't get into watching it. I have a bad feeling that even if the U.S. were to pull the big upset and win, professional soccer still wouldn't catch on. It would be like the Olympics used to be. People only cared about minor sports every four years. Remember the excitement of the women winning the World Cup back in 1999? It was supposed to herald in soccer's popularity. They formed the WUSA professional women's soccer league which folded in two years. The men's league, Major League Soccer, has lasted about 10 years, but it's a niche sport. You just can't force sports onto people.

Which leads to the WNBA. Based on the commercials, it's season must starting sometime soon. Got your season tickets yet?

Damn Derby

I love horse racing. Yet, the Kentucky Derby kills me every year. If I was smart, I would bet the undercard, but skip the Derby itself. There are just too many horses in the field. It looks like a traffic jam every year. If it's the best horse race in the country, a nag like Giacomo wouldn't win it like 2005. Granted, this year Barbaro is actually quite a good horse. In fact, I hope he wins the Triple Crown, because even though I didn't win money on him, he's a quality horse. Which is important. I could have handled Smarty Jones winning the Triple Crown, but not Giacomo (worst Derby winner in my lifetime) or even Funny Cide (still think Jerry Bailey blew it with Empire Maker). Of coure, I'm still ticked Afleet Alex didn't win the Derby last year. I had money on him in all three Triple Crown races.

In hindsight, I'm kicking myself for going with Lawyer Ron over Barbaro. When I make my Derby pick, I throw out most of the long shots as having no chance then work my way through the rest. I may throw a horse out because of bad post position (Brother Derek) or recent race that seems like a fluke (Sinister Minister in the Bluegrass Stakes). When I work it down, I look for somewhat of a long shot as a saver bet (this year was Point Determined), a long shot to hit the board without winning (Keyed Entry who decided to beat Sinister Minister to the punch in killing himself with a fast pace) and the horse for the big bet. I worked it down to Lawyer Ron and Barbaro. And I took Lawyer Ron.

Once again, in hindsight, I should have gone with Barbaro. Good post position, a sire I like (Dynaformer) and one of my favorite jockeys (Edgar Prado rode Birdstone at 36-1 when he beat Smarty Jones in the Belmont with my money riding on him). Instead, I let sentiment get the best of me. Lawyer Ron's recently deceased owner was from Owensboro (where I went to college), his trainer has been around 100 years (give or take a few) and he was being ridden by my grandmother's favorite jockey since Pat Day retired (John McKee used to live across the street from her). Sadly, I justified my decision by thinking Barbaro might bounce (follow a win with a poor showing) from the Florida Derby. Unfortunately, Lawyer Ron was the one that flopped.

The worst part is that I also gave Lawyer Ron to Phil, and I'll probably hear him gripe about not giving him the winner (if it was easy, I'd handicap for a living). If it makes you feel better, Phil, I probably dropped more money on the race than you did.

Day Two Thoughts

One thing that I find interesting is the Sean Salisbury segment during the draft where he's sitting with four NFL veterans (Trent Green, Torry Holt, William Henderson and Shawne Merriman) who are smarter and more charismatic than he is (not that it's a stretch). What I find interesting is they are now calling them "The Experts", but when they originally did this a few years ago (hosted by Suzy Kolber), they were the "Future GMs". What was funny was that psycho Bill Romanowski was the only "Future GM" that dressed the part by wearing a suit. Washington tackle Jon Jansen wasn't too bad in business casual. Then there was Corey Chavous and another guy (I can't remember) who were wearing throwback jerseys, ball caps and all their bling while looking hungover which is exactly the look that NFL GMs are going for. It's nice to see ESPN must have told them there was a dress code as all the "Experts" are wearing suits (without ties).

Salisbury just said he was forced out before and he mentored the younger player. Who? Stan Humphries? I can't see anywhere on his career where he was the solid starter.

Some of the blurbs that ESPN was running next to draft picks was somewhat interesting. Such as Charlie Whitehurst being the first Clemson quarterback drafted since 1979. A factoid like that tells you something about Clemson developing quarterbacks. Then you get some like Davin Joseph being the first Oklahoma player taken in the first round by Tampa Bay since Lee Roy Selmon back in the 70s. What does that tell me? Nothing. Then there are some that are really stretching to make a point. They ran one that said Anthony Fasano was the highest drafted tight end for Dallas since Jason Witten in 2003. I'll ignore the fact that Fasano as the 53rd pick was drafted higher than Witten who was 69th which "since" doesn't make sense. However, even if they were right that still is a pointless fact. It was 2003. There has only been two drafts since then, but they're making it seem like it was the days of leather helmets.

Really, how did Suzy Kolber get this job? She just said Rudi Johnson had back to back one hundred yard seasons. Plus she has a nose like Elmo. And now she's doing another segment on Marcus Vick.

Denver drafts University of Louisville defensive end Elvis Dumervil. I was glad to see Gene Washington knew how to pronounce his name. One of my favorite all time drafts was when Brett Favre was taken and his name was butchered. Think no silent V.

Did they just say Tony Dungy was a name that came up as the next commissioner of the NFL? What crack was someone smoking on that one? Do they want the NFL to be the ratings champ during the regular season, but have the Super Bowl get worse ratings than the World Series? Even if he wasn't the great choke artist that he is, what does he bring to the table to make people think he could be the NFL commissioner? He doesn't even have real executive power on the teams he coaches. He's had strong GMs at both Tampa Bay (Rich McKay) and Indianapolis (Bill Polian). That thought is just nuts.

Interesting discussion about "character" by the Experts. I think Merriman was trying to make the best point that players see a difference between on field character and off field. Teams are more interested in off field character for PR reasons, while players are more concerned with on field. You never heard any teammate complaining about Michael Irvin, because while his off field life was always bordering on disaster, he always brought it on the field. Or more recently, think about the Minnesota "Love Boat" scandal which I've always said was a complete overreaction. The Vikings management joined the press in a tizzy over it, but the team played better after it. The players knew that getting a lapdance isn't going to affect their play on the field, so it's not an important issue. By the way, if I was a taxpayer in Minnesota, I would be pissed at the prosecutor who went to a jury trial (never cheap) and came away with a misdemeanor conviction against Moe Williams for groping a stripper where the kitchen staff might see it.

About time they showed the Rockettes. Why have the draft at Radio City Music Hall (actually, they stopped having it at Madison Square Gardens because MSG management helped kill the Jets plans for a downtown stadium) if you aren't going to show the Rockettes. Of course, they followed up sexy (Rockettes) with butch (WNBA), so obviously better planning is needed.

This isn't draft related, but it's about Tony Gonzalez. I finally read part of my ESPN magazine and discovered Gonzalez was on some celebrity cooking show where he lost to Cindy Margolis. The thing is he apparently tied her when the results were first read, but the producers redid the ending to make Margolis the winner. I wonder if they thought Margolis' massive mammaries were more photogenic?

Interesting. Louisville linebacker Brandon Johnson joined fellow Cardinals Dumervil and Jason Spitz by getting drafted by Arizona. What I find interesting is that I thought he and Dumervil were going to be drafted after UL DT Montavious Stanley who is still on the board. I hope he goes soon so I can stop looking for local players until the final round since I don't see any other UL or UK players going before then.

Thoughts From The Rest of Day One

I thought Jimmy Williams was going to be a first round bust, but he fooled me. His attitude apparently caused him to drop to the second round. I see that ESPN had Williams doing an NFL draft promo, so I guess they thought he would have been in the first round. I remember a few years back when they did the same thing with Chris Simms because everyone thought he was moving up into the first round, but he ended up being the last pick on day one. I wish the NFL had put him in the Green Room. A ten hour wait is certainly funnier than a five hour one.

Green Bay trades Javon Walker for a second round pick after asking for a first round. It's pretty funny that they had been asking for a first round pick because last year, they didn't want to pay him a big contract based on two average years and one really good one. But they thought someone would give them a first round pick in exchange for Walker after he hurts his knee? Actually, I agreed with Green Bay when they didn't give him the contract. He needs to prove a bit more.

The Trey Wingo Schmo Show was discussing the fact that Vince Young will have a learning curve when he hits the NFL, and while Jaws thought he was fixable, the others were saying that he wouldn't have the time because he would be expected to play right away as a top five pick. In most cases, sure. However, Tennessee has been the exception before. Steve McNair was a number three pick just like Young, and Tennessee brought in Chris Chandler for two years to get McNair ready. I think this is an ideal situation for Young, because even though McNair is probably gone, they still have Billy Volek who could hold down the fort for a couple of years until Young is ready. Tennessee's rebuilding anyway, so why not wait on him. Young could be in trouble if he had gone to somewhere like Oakland who was hoping he would drop to them. If he wants to pick up bad habits, Aaron Brooks is the one to teach them.

ESPN.com sucks. Apparently, their servers can't keep up with the traffic when I try to go to their draft tracker. NFL.com isn't having a problem.

Lendale White goes to Tennessee. Think Vince Young will invite him over to watch a replay of the Rose Bowl?

Word is that Matt Leinart has lost at least $10 million by staying for his senior year. I think Rovell is wrong to say that we shouldn't presume Matt Leinart would go first last year. Apparently, he has forgotten that it was pretty common knowledge the 49ers were on hands and knees praying for Leinart to declare for the draft last year. They settled for Alex Smith, the luckiest man in football, because Leinart in the 2005 draft probably would have cost him that $10 million (actually more because he probably would have dropped to mid-teens). I think this is another indictment of the NFL rookie scale. There is no way you can say that a number 10 pick is worth that much more than a number 1.

Why should the Colts get a mulligan for last year as Chris Berman said? Las Vegas and ESPN may consider the Colts odds on favorites to win the AFC, but I don't. Sure they won 13 straight games to start the season, but that's their M.O. since Peyton Manning's second year. Win a lot of games. Lose in the playoffs. In the past seven years, they've won at least 10 games in six seasons. Four of those seasons were one and done in the playoffs. They've made one AFC Championship, and lost pretty badly. In fact, the closest the Colts have been to the Super Bowl since they had Johnny Unitas was in 1995 when the immortal Jim Harbaugh led Colts were within one dropped Hail Mary of winning. Oh, and that one season that they didn't win 10 games, they lost Edgerrin James to injury. You may have heard that James is now in Arizona.

Why are they talking about Marcus Vick on the first day? None of them even think he's going to be drafted. Which he shouldn't, but unlike the analysts, I'm not convinced someone won't take a chance on him. Although, Maurice Clarett and Ricky Williams have screwed a lot of players who may have character issues. Quite a few guys with such issues have dropped. Of course, this is nothing new. Randy Moss dropped a lot because of character. Warren Sapp dropped because he tested positive for pot. It seems like someone always tests positive for something at the combine, and I can't figure out why. The date of the combine isn't a secret. How tough is it to figure out when to stop and let your system clean out. My favorite this year was the Rams' third round pick Claude Wroten. This guy was busted for intent to distribute pot back in January (charges were dropped), and then he failed a drug test a month later at the combine. Let's see. I just got busted for drugs and will be at the combine soon. No reason to stop smoking weed now.

One final note of the day. I didn't think Scouts Inc did all that well in predicting the draft, but what they did afterward indicates there might be some credibility issues with them. They listed the top three players by position who are available for day two. Only problem was that Abdul Hodge from Iowa was listed as the top inside linebacker. Funny. A guy by that name, from that school and at that position was drafted by Green Bay in the third round.

First Round Thoughts

I thought it was interesting that Jets fans who were at the draft didn't seem too perturbed that they didn't draft Matt Leinart. The way it was being reported was that skipping Leinart would be a public relations disaster for the Jets. Apparently not. Jets' fans in the stands cheered the selection of Ferguson (and later booed Herm Edwards) and later did the "overrated" chant when Leinart was picked by Arizona. Granted, the guys who take the time to go to the draft may have more football knowledge and realize how much line help the Jets need. By the way, the Giants are supposed to have the much bigger New York fan base, so why don't they seem to have as big a presence at the draft?

Speaking of Leinart to Arizona, it's becoming a trend. Every time Kurt Warner seems to solidify with a new team, they draft a quarterback early. First, it was Eli Manning in New York. Now, Leinart.

The other interesting thing is that Leinart supposedly fired Leigh Steinberg because he believed he should be the number one pick and thought Tom Condon could get it done. Then, one of the reasons given for Leinart dropping in the mock drafts was the fact that changing agents late in the game makes NFL executives nervous. And suddenly, he's the 10th pick.

Why is Ray Lewis griping about not being able to make plays without his defensive tackles keeping the blockers off him? Isn't he God's gift to defense? Shouldn't he be able to knock all five offensive linemen on their butt? Maybe he wants someone in front of him to mask his declining skills.

When Merrill Hoge was talking about Antonio Cromartie (a bit of a project at cornerback drafted in the first round by San Diego), he said that the highlight films showed Cromartie making interceptions of poor passes which he won't see in the NFL. Does Hoge watch the NFL anymore? Aaron Brooks threw a pass to the referee standing behind him, and he's projected to start for the Raiders.

ESPN really covered themselves in glory with their little Sportscenter break-in where they said Vince Young would get to play with his good friend Steve McNair at Tennessee. Let's see. I know that McNair hasn't been allowed to work out at the Titans facility because they are most likely going to dump him. Shouldn't ESPN know that?

I had an interesting thought during Sean Salibury's interviews with Trent Green. ESPN should fire Salibury and hire Green. Not only is he a better QB (Salisbury's five year career numbers were 3824 yards and 19 TDs; Green averaged 4023 yards and 22 TDs in each of his five KC seasons), he doesn't come across as a dick.

Do they let the guys waiting in the Green Room drink? I think they should have an open bar and a laptop for the players. Leinart really didn't have to wait long, but wouldn't Aaron Rodgers' five hour wait last year have been so much funnier if he got hammered and started surfing porn? Or asked Suzy Kolber for a lap dance (which would have been an improvement over her interview skills)?

Thank God. When they said the Steelers traded up with the Giants, I was really hoping it was for Santonio Holmes and not Lendale White. Maybe all the problems (laziness, getting fat) White has had since the end of the season are the result of a hamstring pull that he had diagnosed by a chiropractor, but it's been reported that White blew a pre-draft drug test.

Michael Irvin is such an idiot. He felt the need to ridicule Mario Williams by asking what N.C. State's record was last year after a third member of their defense was drafted in the first round. It was 6-5, but it doesn't mean the defense (or more specifically the defensive line) was the main problem. By the way, why didn't he ask that about Florida State since they had four defensive players taken in the first round, but lost to N.C. State? His drug ravaged brain can't process information as fast as a doorknob.

Now, Ohio State just had their fourth first round pick. Considering that they are losing all their starting linebackers and most of their defensive backfield, I'm not sure why so many are picking them as the number one team next year. Granted, at Ohio State, you re-load, but still, that's a big hit.

Okay. Once again, doesn't anyone at ESPN do research? They are discussing the possibility of Lendale White dropping out of the first round, and not one of them mentioned a newspaper report of him flunking a drug test. Trey Wingo and his staff of dummies do mention character injuries, but they only mention him not working out. The workout issue dropped him to later in the first round. The drug test report is dropping him out. It doesn't matter if it's true or not. It's causing a problem for him. Finally, Ed Werner mentions it. Wouldn't it have been better when they were having a group discussion on it?

The First Pick

I'm shocked. Absolutely shocked about the Texans drafting Mario Williams. Not that they took Williams over Reggie Bush, because as I said before, I don't think there are any sure things in the draft. No, what shocks me is how bent out of shape so many analysts are because they didn't take Bush. I thought Bush as the second coming of Gale Sayers was a stretch, but I wasn't aware that he was the second coming of Sayers, Barry Sanders, and Jesus Christ himself. This is the NFL draft. Probably a third of the people drafted in the first round are going to underachieve and some will be absolute flops. It doesn't necessarily have to be caused by lack of NFL ability (Aundray Bruce, 1st pick 1988) or attitude (Ryan Leaf, 2nd pick 1998). I'm still not convinced that Ki-Jana Carter was a flop, because who knows what would have happened if he doesn't blow out his knee before playing a regular season game. Yet, predicting greatness in the NFL for a college player is silly. So many things can derail it. Even consensus picks can flop. San Diego wasn't the only one fooled by Leaf. Every team in the country had Leaf and Peyton Manning 1 and 2. Yet, it still doesn't stop the fevered hyperbole. The worst was network clown Michael Irvin (no surprise there) who had the gall to say the Texans just gave up 2000 yards and 25 to 30 touchdowns. Apparently per year. If Bush does that, he'll be the greatest NFL player of all time. Does this mean IrvinDoes that mean Irvin thinks Bush is better than Emmitt Smith? After all, even assuming the 2000 is total yards, Emmitt Smith only broke 2000 twice (never rushed for 2000). Smith also only had one season of 25 touchdowns, and only had more than 15 three times. Granted, he wasn't alone. Someone pointed out the Bills once took a defensive end with the first pick (Bruce Smith) who was an essential piece of their four straight Super Bowl appearances. Tom Jackson said Bruce Smith wasn't as important to them as Thurman Thomas. Of course, that could make it seem smarter to draft a defensive player. Thomas was a second round pick and the eighth running back taken. It might be easier to find a franchise back in later rounds. Actually, the new coach of the Texans, Gary Kubiak, came over from Denver where they specialize in turning late rounders into stars. Does that mean Bush will flop? Nope. He could easily be better than Williams. He could be the greatest player to play the game, but projecting a Hall of Fame career before he steps foot on an NFL field is ludicrous.

I was actually a little surprised the Texans took Williams over D'Brickashaw Ferguson since their offensive line is getting David Carr killed. Of course, taking Ferguson number one would have brought about my other pet peeve about the draft - THE REACH. It's a case of a team targeting a player they really like (good fit for system or fills a need) and taking them before the "consensus" indicates he should go. The conventional wisdom is that if you want a player most think should go around the 25th pick, you shouldn't "reach" and take him with the 17th pick. You should trade down and get him later. The Rams did it this year when they targeted Tye Hill who was considered a "reach" at 11, but traded down and got him at 15. However, the reason I get ticked is because when the "pundits" say a team could have traded down and drafted the guy, they neglect two things - 1) someone else right behind you could target him 2) someone has to be willing to trade with you. If you want someone, why is taking him a few picks ahead of where anyone else will take him so bad? Does it really make sense that Ferguson was considered a reach with the first pick, but still considered a top five talent? Besides, take the case of Lofa Tatupu who the Seahawks took in the second round. Most analysts projected him as a third rounder so Seattle was roundly criticized for taking him that early even though he fit a need and the system. Considering how well he played during their run to the Super Bowl, he should have been a first rounder.

Football, Football, Football

Thank God for this week. Usually the post March Madness sports scene looks like crap. I do get Keeneland and the Triple Crown, but unfortunately the races go quickly (and I lose money on them). I do catch some NBA playoffs, but since the Jazz haven't been in for a few years, I don't care too much. I would rather watch my toenails grow than watch baseball. I've been watching quite a bit of NFL Europe and Arena football which is always good fun, because I can finally find out what happened to Glenn Pakulak who used to punt the Hell out of the ball for UK. But this week turned it up a notch. Started off with UL's spring football game on Friday and will end with the NFL Draft this weekend. I get to watch the future of my favorite college team, and then comes a two day orgy of football highlights with the possibility of Mel Kiper getting into a pissing match with a team executive like when he said the Colts drafting Trev Alberts was a joke. Gotta go with Mel on that one.

Love the draft because it's so funny to see all the first rounders being talked up while guessing which ones will be busts this year (I'm betting Jimmy Williams from Virginia Tech). Every year several "players of the future" flop. Actually, I look at the three biggest names in the draft, and I wouldn't bet on any of them being a top NFL player. Reggie Bush is exciting to watch, but I'm not sure he can last as an every down back. If he can't be an every down back, you've got another Dante Hall, not another Gale Sayers. Nothing against Hall, but would anyone draft him in the first round? Rumor is that the Texans have made a deal with NC State defensive end Mario Williams which means Bush was probably asking too much money. Contrary to speculation, the questions about his parents living in a mansion on an agent's dime probably played no role in his drop. After all, why do the Texans care if Bush was violating NCAA rules? However, I think it's a good move for Houston, although probably not too popular with the home folks. But so what? I think Williams will improve the Texans more than Bush.

Speaking of fun to watch, Vince Young certainly has the pizzazz. I loved watching him play in college, but the NFL is a whole different game. The closest approximation to Young has always been Michael Vick who has filled the highlight reels but he certainly hasn't been that effective. Strangely enough the NFL managed to hold their playoffs last year without Vick. Running against college kids is one thing, but in the NFL, it can get you hurt. When Vick broke his leg, the deed wasn't done by a Ray Lewis or Michael Urlacher. It was Adalius Thomas. Not so primetime. The other question about Young is can he learn to throw? Vick really hasn't. Young's got a good arm, but he also pretty much played out of a shotgun and has a funky motion. Still, I think he's got the most (cliche alert) UPSIDE. If he can learn to throw, there's no limit to how good he can be. Unfortunately for him, he'll probably be drafted by a crap team that will throw him out early and he'll never develop. A shame.

The guy I don't see much upside in is Matt Leinart. Some are hoping that he's the next Carson Palmer, but that's crap. I don't think he's near as good as Palmer. In fact, I find irony in the fact that the Jets are reportedly hoping Leinart falls to them with the fourth pick, because the guy he reminds me of the most is Chad Pennington. Accurate arm, but average arm strength. That means he could have a good career, but I don't see him developing into an elite quarterback. Even before his arm was hanging by a thread Pennington was never what I saw as a top tier quarterback. I found it interesting that when asked why he should be a high pick, Leinart basically said because he won the Heisman and only lost two games in his college career. That's slightly better than Jason White who I think had three losses and won the Heisman. He didn't even get drafted. How impressed should I be about Leinart when he was quarterbacking the most talent stocked team in the league? Think of it this way. I'm not sure Jay Cutler is a better quarterback, and if he was put on USC that they would have still only lost two games, but I bet they still win a bunch. Put Leinart on Vanderbilt, and he might have gotten them that extra game to make a bowl last year, but I wouldn't bet money on it. One thing I would bet on is that Leinart wouldn't have finished with only two losses.

More Odds & Ends

I might have been more interested in baseball's opening day, but it was baseball and I had a nap to take.

Hindsight being 20/20, I sure am glad I never had to go to summer camp.

Or went to the john at this Denny's.

I don't know if anyone is really following the Hollywood PI case surrounding Anthony Pellicano, but I just stumbled across the most tragic story of them all. Director John McTiernan is being charged for having Pellicano wiretap a business partner. Sadly, the business partner wasn't from movies like Die Hard or The Hunt For The Red October. It was for the Rollerball remake. He could be going to jail for a bomb that could charitably be called a "Chris Klein vehicle".

Don't go to this site. It can be addictive.

This is a big ass rabbit.

If you ever wondered why Johnny can't read, it could be caused by the fact that many of the people running our education system have the common sense of an eggplant.

Am I the only one who thinks a whole lot of NFL players will become involved in holistic medicine if Ricky Williams wins his drug suspension appeal?

When I tell you I really like a horse, don't let Jon Connor talk you out of it.

They Said it:
I'm not going to get too far into the Duke lacrosse scandal until more info is known, although I'm surprised how quickly there was an assumption of guilt in the case. However, there was one quote from this article that confounded me. It was about 100 students who met the Duke president to discuss (harangue) the situation with him. Someone actually bragged "That students got up at 8:30 in the morning shows you the level of concern". Nothing says commitment to social justice like waking up well after most people have gone to work.

After a fight on Saturday night, Don King actually said "For the integrity of the sport, that has to be a disqualification" when discussing a melee that broke out. Normally, when the words "Don King", "boxing" and "integrity" are used in the same sentence, you find the word "lack".

I really shouldn't be surprised that our education system is being run by people like that guy in Indianapolis. After all, it starts at the universities. This story is from England, but there are similar stories in the states. A professor actually said that the London subway bombings that killed over 50 people weren't "terrorism", but a form of "demonstration". Not only that, but calling it terrorism does nothing but "demonise" those who boarded a civilian transport with strap on bombs in an effort to kill as many people as possible. To think I was wasting my sympathy on those who were murdered. I wish someone would go to his office and administer one of those low blows from the boxing story to him. Don't think of it as an "act of violence". Think of it as demonstration against his gross stupidity.

Odds & Ends

I thought the story about a charity executive embezzling money to, among other things, hire a professional dominatrix was strange enough. Yet, I think the more important question is why did he fly from New York to Ohio to see her? Not speaking from personal experience of course, but I certainly would have thought New York would be an easier to find paid perversions than Ohio. Well, except maybe Cincinnati. Nothing but freaks up there.

Speaking of perversions, I'm not sure the oddest part of this story about a couple microwaving a dildo to heat up a urine sample. Whoever is doing the testing must be pretty thorough if the woman felt the need for a fake organ. Of course, didn't she realize a woman whipping out a wang might lead to more questions?

To begin with, I'm not really sure that either JJ Redick or Adam Morrison is really the best college player in the country. Sure they score a lot, but do they really do anything else well? I certainly don't think they should be a lock over Randy Foye or Brandon Roy. Yet, what is really ludicrous is even trying to compare those two to Larry Bird and Magic Johnson. Anyone who thinks these two bozos are even remotely close to those two legends needs to see a doctor about some head-from-anus surgery.

Another story from the "What were you thinking?" file. A Spanish "artist" has converted a German Synagogue into a gas chamber, and apparently doesn't understand why some people might find it slightly offensive.

Of course, cluelessness is running amok in this country. I'm not just talking about teachers purchasing academic credentials. I'm talking about a school board member who is "baffled" at why the teachers were fired. I guess she thinks someone committing academic fraud would be the perfect role model for students who might be inclined to cheat.

Then there is Sharon Stone. Not to question the intellect of a Hollywood celebrity, but she surprised even me when she said Hillary Clinton was "too sexy to win" the Presidency. I can give a lot of reasons why I wouldn't vote for Hillary, but that certainly isn't one of them. Husband Bill must not think she's too sexy when you consider the "bimbo eruptions" that cropped up during his career.

Speaking of Sharon Stone, I saw a preview for her new movie Basic Instinct 2. It looks exactly like Basic Instinct 1. Of course, I'm sure I will eventually watch it, but a part of me is hoping that she used a body double at this stage of her career.

I'm usually not from the isolationist wing of the Republican Party, and I have no problem with a well managed immigration program. However, when you start waving the Mexican flag during a protest of American policy, my only response is "If you don't like it, GET THE HELL OUT".

First Round Thoughts and Opinions

I've never been a big St. Patrick's day person. I'm not Irish nor Catholic. I also don't like to wear green, so I don't know why I'm supposed to wear green and act Irish on St. Patrick's day. Actually, if I was Irish or Catholic (and especially both), the way St. Patrick's Day is celebrated would be somewhat offensive. Not only is St. Patrick an icon of Ireland, he's been sanctified by the Catholic Church. Yet, what is the expected behavior on St. Paddy's Day? Getting drunk. Doesn't really seem like the proper way to celebrate a missionary's life. Yet, there I was in an Irish Bar (McCarthy's) on St. Patrick's Day. However, there was one good thing about it. I found a lot of humor in watching a bar full of UK fans rooting for the Wildcats while wearing the colors of their opponents, UAB. I don't know who sells those silly "Gettin Lucky In Kentucky", but they made some money if they stocked up on the green ones.

I understand the thought process that led Billy Packer and Jim Nantz to mug the NCAA tournament selection committee chair, Craig Littlepage, during a post-selection interview. It does seem strange that the Missouri Valley Conference got in as many teams as the ACC. However, it's still not a good reason to be rather rude to a business partner. They didn't just disagree with Littlepage. They about called him a liar and then interrupted him when he wanted to give a simple congratulations to the teams in the tournament. Besides, considering that Packer didn't seem to know what day it was (he talked about one matchup before the pairing was announced), he's not exactly a good choice to make any argument. His theory was that at-large bids should measure a conference's historical trends which means that Wichita State should be excluded because Florida State plays in the ACC where Duke and UNC have been more successful in the tournaments than Southern Illinois. Doesn't matter whether or not Florida State is better than Wichita State (they're not), but their conference has been historically better, so they should get the automatic bid. To begin with, that argument is crap. MVC teams that make the NCAAs have to start out with low seeds meaning they play a top team out of the gate. Of course their historical trend will be worse, but it doesn't matter anyway. If the tournament is supposed to be the top 65 teams, it should do away with automatic bids. Why should the SWAC get any team in? It doesn't matter who their conference champ is, it won't be a top 65 team. The funny thing is that we're basically arguing about whether a good small conference team or a mediocre major conference team will be a double digit seed. Does it really matter? After all, since they began seeding in 1979, only two teams seeded lower than eight (11th seed LSU in 1986 and 9th seeded Penn in 1979) have ever made the Final Four. The lowest seeded team to win it all was Villanova which was an eight, but the '88 Kansas and '83 NC State teams (both 6 seeds) are the only other champs that weren't at least a four seed. So, we're talking about a bubble team which has virtually no chance of even making the Final Four, much less winning the title. I say reward the small team for a good season rather than a major school for an underwhelming one. Granted, Packer and Nantz did sort of apologize during the UK/UConn game, but what else could they do? Two of the four MVC teams, neither of whom won the conference tourney, were already in the Sweet Sixteen which is two more than the Big Ten. Hell, the only conference with more is the Big East.

Besides, CBS has the worst coverage. While watching the UK game, I could see where Murray State was tied with North Carolina with a minute left. Yet, they waited until 16 seconds were left before switching to it. I realize that the UK/UAB game was close, but there were over 10 minutes left. Why not switch? Or use that split screen they used to have?

Since I don't have a team in the tournament, I can pull for my bracket teams. So I was already happy that UConn beat UK because a loss would have killed my brackets. However, there was another reason. Phil basically shaved his head hoping it would help UK beat UAB. I was afraid if they had beaten UConn, Phil would have shaved other body parts. Which is fine if that's what he wants to do, but my real fear was that he would post the pictures, and we shouldn't have to see that.

I'm not a big fan of the "Duke Mystique", but Duke teams always play hard. With all the talent on the UConn roster, they would be unbeatable if they played as hard as Duke. Which was why I was scared to pick them to win it all. It was mindboggling to me that UL stayed closer at UConn during the regular season than they did against Rutgers or St. John's. They'll start jogging back on defense and standing around on offense. You get the feeling that Rudy Gay could take over this tournament, but he doesn't. Letting a UK team shooting 50% on threes in the second half come back from a big deficit wouldn't indicate that much of a problem, but letting Albany get a 12 point lead with 12 minutes left in the game does. It's almost like they have too much talent and figure they can always pull it out. Which they almost always do.

I didn't think I'd see a better shot in this tournament after Chris Lofton's game winner in the first round. Then I saw the game winner by Northwestern State's Jermaine Wallace's to beat Iowa. Lofton's as actually a better shot (a fall-away baseline 19 foot jumper with a man in his face), but his was drawn up. Wallace's was a rebound a miss, get stuck in the corner and bury a three. Plus, there were mitigating factors. One is that it was a huge upset by a school that some drunks (we started right after lunch and the place was already crowded) in the aforementioned Irish Bar refused to believe me when I said Northwestern State was in Louisiana. Even I couldn't tell them which city it was in. Two, they were down while the Vols were already tied and would have still had overtime. Three, it was funny to see the two Northwestern State players hugging in celebration at half court while Iowa still has a second left to get off a shot. Lucky for them, the guy with the 'fro got back on defense and kept Iowa from getting off a good shot. Needless to say, both will probably end up in next year's highlight clips to be played over and over.

I thought this was interesting. Apparently, the IU players were happy that Iowa lost in the first round because it meant that Mike Davis went farther than Steve Alford. Of course, they needed a completely inept play by San Diego State (guy gave up a turnover when he incorrectly thought he would have been called for a backcourt violation) and pass tipped directly to an open man to win. Then lost by 10 to a beatable Gonzaga who had won their previous three games by a total of 9 points. Actually, it was pretty stupid of the IU players to celebrate publicly, because even though I wouldn't hire Steve Alford (1 NCAA win in six years), Indiana might. Do you really want to tick off your next coach?

Actually, Mike Davis is lousy coach. He got lucky early when his team got hot and took him to the title game (helped by Jason Williams bricking a free throw). Since then Indiana has tried to strive for mediocrity despite having a number of talented players. Contrast that with Bruce Pearl at UT. It may seem strange that I think Tennessee's team overachieved this year. After all, they barely beat Winthrop in the first round before dropping the second to Wichita State. Still, when I look at that roster, it's got no size and relies too heavily on outside shooting and should never have won the SEC East or been a 2 seed. But it did. As much as I like Chris Lofton, that team had nothing like a Jared Jeffries who Davis inherited. Watch out for UT when Bruce Pearl gets more talent there.

This One Is For Phil

According to his review of my blog, Phil is disappointed that I stick to opinion issues and avoid the personal. As everyone knows, it hurts me greatly to disappoint Phil, so I have decided to have an entry that includes something new. Since everyone else likes to put pictures of their pets on their blogs, I have decided to put a couple of pictures of one of my pets. This is Little Guy. He is a fancy rat. He's actually the larger of my two rats, but that's because he eats anything that moves. He'll even try to eat Styrofoam if looks like popcorn.

Oh, and since Phil expects every blog to include an entry about the ski trip, I have to admit that I thought about sneaking Little Guy along and letting him loose at an opportune moment to see how people would react. Actually, what I really want to say about the ski trip is - good food, cold beer, Louisville beats Notre Dame, Steelers win the Super Bowl, nobody pissed me off. Does anyone have to ask whether I had a good time?

Another bone for Phil. The Republicans in Congress are engaged in out of control spending that would make a Democrat blush. Well, probably not, but at least Democrat aren't running as the party of low spending. It's small consolation to me that Ted Stevens and Don Young (both Republicans) haven't tried to add money to build a bridge between two Alaskan ice floes.


Interesting note - if you run the blogspot spell-checker, blog is not a word.

Aimless Thoughts While Waiting For NCAA Bracket

If you've watched any Syracuse games, you've probably heard that Gerry McNamara was recently voted the most overrated player in the Big East by Sports Illustrated (he also was voted the biggest crybaby in the Big East). That led to an obscenity laden tirade by coach Jim Boeheim (must not have asked which coach is the biggest crybaby since nothing says class like dropping the F bomb at a press conference) in which he said Syracuse would not have won 10 games without McNamara (it's tough to find a 36% shooter with a 2-1.1 assist to turnover ratio). I hope the other players thanked Jimmy for his confidence in their abilities. Does this mean that Syracuse fans should get ready for a 10 win season next year? McNamara has played well in the Big East tournament, but his disappearing act in big games during the regular season is one reason Syracuse went in as a bubble team. However, let's look at the poll. To begin with, McNamara actually tied with Rudy Gay as each had 27% of the vote. Who did the voting? One player from each Big East team, but it wasn't 16 voters because the five teams playing their first year in the Big East (Louisville, Marquette, etc) didn't get a vote because of the conference scheduling, they hadn't played every Big East team yet. What that means is the "poll" that got everyone in a tizzy was actually three players saying McNamara was overrated. I can't take a poll seriously that only includes 11 people. It looks even worse when you consider that Uconn was voted the team with the most respect for its coach even though that coach, Jim Calhoun, was voted the coach they would least like to play for.

I like ESPN's Pride of the Program blurbs. However, I don't like it enough to make a point of figuring out when everyone is on. So, it would be nice if they would at least list which moment they used for each program. I understand if they don't want to reveal a particular moment until it airs, but you would think that they could keep a running tally after they show it. Yet, if you go to ESPN's website, you wouldn't even know this programming exists. Plus, I want to know who is picking the moments. I was watching the one on Utah State, and they picked a three overtime loss to UNLV. Sure, Utah State set a record for most points in a loss, but I remember a few years back when 12th seeded Utah State knocked off Ohio State in the NCAA tournament. Do they really think Utah State fans are prouder of a high scoring loss in a regular season game than a big upset in the Big Dance?

I said in a previous post that ESPN should not have let Dick Vitale call Duke games from the moment he admitted to a magazine that Duke is his favorite team. It's one thing for a local basketball broadcast to have a certified homer on it, but ESPN is national and should avoid having an active booster of a school call their game. Especially when his loudmouth act got old years ago. The Duke/Wake Forest semifinal game was the perfect example of just how embarrassed he should be. I had just flipped over to the game just in time to miss the actual play, but hear Vitale declare that the refs made a wonderful call when they ruled a foul intentional. He said that the Wake player never went for the ball. Then, they showed the replay. Yes, a foul occurred because the Wake player did wrap his right arm around the Duke player, but he not only was going for the ball with his left hand, he actually stripped it out. You would think a competent announcer would have backtracked after seeing the replay, but not Dick. He went right ahead with his belief the call was intentional. Even better, he later followed that up with a theory that was ingenious. Wait. That's not the right word. Incredibly stupid fits much better. He addressed the midseason controversy about Duke seemingly getting favorable treatment from game officials and actually had the nerve to declare that the calls go against Duke because they are so good. I guess we shouldn't focus on how the critical calls always seem to go their way in close games, and just be happy that Duke is able to overcome such adversity.

Glad to see Rick Pitino changed his mind about going to the NIT (or had it changed for him). If he has players who are hurt, don't play them. The NIT doesn't mean much in the standings, but for an inexperienced team, it's extra practice time and at least one more competitive game. Pick up some more experience and maybe UL will score more than two points in their first ten minutes of the Big East tournament. Actually, the only reason that I could see why Pitino didn't want to play in the NIT is that it would be his second trip in his five year UL career, and he didn't want it on his resume. UL isn't paying him the big bucks for NITs.

CBS coverage is friggin' joke. At the end of the SEC championship game, they never showed a replay of Florida's Joakim Noah's block with seconds left and South Carolina down two. It looked like there might have been some contact to it (there wasn't), but CBS acted like it never happened. They showed Noah's go-ahead put back, and then showed the Florida bench reaction to it. ESPN was getting ready to show it, but they cut back to the ACC title game (which makes sense), but ESPN2 didn't cover themselves in glory either. They were talking bracketology at the half of the Southland title game, and were still talking about what a possible win by South Carolina would do to selections. Nobody thought to tell them that the game was over five minutes ago? If it was on tape, that was poor decision making, because they had to know that the game was close to ending.

The Oscars

There's a lot of things to love about the Oscars. The pomp. The pageantry. The fact that they give an Oscar for the best short animated film. The stars showing up in environmentally correct cars that were mostly loaners meaning they don't actually own a Toyota. Mega-wealthy stars getting a gift bag worth thousands of dollars. What's not to love?

Hey, Kirby Puckett died.

I didn't actually watch the Oscars (A Fistful Of Dollars was on another channel). Looking at the ratings, I wasn't the only one. I didn't really have much of an interest in the festivities, but it might be because the only movie with nominations in the major categories that I actually saw was Walk The Line. Looking at the box office numbers, I was the rule not the exception. Granted, the amount of money a movie makes obviously doesn't indicate quality. However, you would think at least one of the Best Picture nominees could have beaten The Dukes of Hazzard, although I think Brokeback Mountain did actually catch the documentary about penguins. While I didn't see any of the Best Picture nominees, I can't believe they were all better than Walk The Line, but unfortunately, the Johnny Cash biopic had two problems. One, it made money. Two, Cash spent the whole movie chasing his soulmate June Carter. It probably would have gotten an Best Picture nomination if he had spent the whole time chasing Waylon Jennings. In the end, it came as a shock to everyone that Crash beat out the gay sheepherder movie for Best Picture. Never thought I would write those words.

The Best Actor and Actress winners were somewhat expected. Reese Witherspoon won for her earnest portayal of June Carter in which she showed a side of June that I didn't know existed. Man, she was a nag. Her only real competition was Felicity Huffman who should have been in a category all her own. She should have been up for the straight-female-used-to-playing-sluts-now-playing-a-man-about-to-get-his-wang-sliced-off Oscar. She would have won that one. The Best Actor went to Philip Seymour Hoffman who surprised everyone (well, all 10 people who watched Capote) with his second (at least) portrayal of a gay man. And in this case, he wasn't creepily lusting after Dirk Diggler's johnson. I was pretty happy that he won over whoever was in Brokeback Mountain. I would hate for the makers of Capote to second guess their lack of a sodomy scene in the movie.

In the supporting category, Rachel Weisz won for the her role in The Constant Gardener which surprised me since I read she got killed at the beginning. Because of that, I will probably never watch the movie. It's got to be all flashbacks. However, it is nice to see a Hollywood movie that would take an anti-corporate viewpoint, because the only wholesome corporations are major movie studios that do all their filming in Romania to avoid union wage scales. According to George Clooney, the Oscar voters are a daring bunch. At least he alluded to that in his acceptance speech for Best Supporting Actor. After all, the movie he won for was Syriana which blamed the U.S. in general, and Big Oil, in particular, for al the world's ills. Making a movie that comes across as a liberal soundbite is tremendously courageous in Hollywood. I'm not sure Clooney can get a job parking cars there now. Of course, he could have been talking about the nomination of his movie Good Luck, and Good Night which was another one of those movies that nobody saw, but did raise awareness of that huge social problem - McCarthyism of the 1950s. After all, nothing says courage more than going after a guy who died in 1957 and was discredited in his own lifetime. Maybe his next project will be about a an aide to McCarthy during his Red Scare days who would later authorize wiretaps on Martin Luther King Jr. Somehow I doubt it since his name was Robert Kennedy. I will say one thing in Clooney's defense. At least he didn't take the opportunity to poke fun at another actor's debilitating illness.

Living On Another Planet

I often wonder why so many Americans refuse to see the problem that is Islamic fundamentalist terrorism. There seems to be a tendency to "blame the victim" rather than the perpetrator. The cartoon issue is just the most recent example. The cartoonist themselves are condemned for offending Muslims, but the Muslims who want them killed are less so. The invasion of Iraq is blamed for Islamic terrorism in the Middle East, but somehow I must have missed all those American troops were in Baghdad when the planes flew into the World Trade Center towers. The fact of the matter is that while planning was being made for that terrorist attack in Afghanistan, the mean ole U.S.A. was providing more aid to that famine stricken country than anyone else. That was in spite of them harboring Osama bin-Laden who was wanted for terrorist attacks against U.S. embassies in Africa. Many of the problems of the Middle East are blamed on Israel. Somehow, a country that is just over 8000 square miles (compared to over 6 million square miles that make up Arab countries) and has just under 7 million people, of whom almost 20% are Arabs (compared to about 300 million Arabs outside Israel) causes otherwise sane, tolerant people to strap bombs to themselves and blow up buses, pizza parlors and skyscrapers. As for the belief that the anger is over their treatment of Palestinians (who are ethnically, religiously and culturally no different from other Arabs), that's a laugh. Palestinians are treated like garbage in other Arab countries. Arabs in Israel have more rights (the right to vote) than most Arabs in Arabic countries, not to mention more rights (right to freely practice their religion) than non-Muslims in Muslim countries.

So, where's the problem? One area just might be higher education. Normally, it's political correctness run amok. I can cite numerous examples of students or faculty members facing punishment for holding politically incorrect views. One of the biggest is the recent resignation of Lawrence Summers at Harvard. It's not often that a former cabinet member of the Clinton administration is considered too conservative, but apparently this one is for the Harvard faculty. His greatest crime was saying that innate gender differences (along with discrimination and social reasons) may explain why there weren't more women in higher level faculty positions in math and science. Just because it was an academic conference and there is a body of research indicating the possibility of such things is no reason to allow anyone to deviate from the PC playground. Yet, as long as you come from the poor, discriminated Muslim population, true misogyny is fine. I just found out that an ambassador at large for the Taliban wasn't just accepted into Yale, he was actively recruited into Yale in spite of being a fourth grade dropout (although he did get a GED). I guess noting that men and women are different is far worse than representing a government that put women down to the level of livestock. Actually, that's wrong. Under the Taliban, women were worth less than livestock.

This cluelessness isn't just academia. It's also national media. A recent Newsweek article shows just how out of touch some of them are. Somehow the Dutch have become the intolerant ones because they want Muslim immigrants to actually accept their values. Values like women's rights and not brutally murdering someone on the streets because he offends an abusive culture. Yet, somehow, the Dutch are portrayed as wrong. Of course, the Newsweek writer doesn't have a clue what's going on. Back when there was rioting in France, the international press went out of their way to avoid pointing out that all the rioters seemed to be Muslims. One reporter was so clueless about what was happening that she actually referred to the Tunisian immigrants who started the whole thing as "African-Americans" which is taking the whole PC thing a bit too far. Actually, Newsweek is definitely behind because the Dutch pushback against Muslim immigration began long before the cartoons (actually, the cartoons were probably part of that). It began even before the Van Gogh murder. In 2002, Pim Fortuyn was set to make a strong showing in Dutch parliamentary elections on an anti-Muslim immigration platform, but he was murdered by an animal rights nut. The inherent stupidity of the press was very present at the time because they insisted he was a "Far Right" politician because of his views. This was in spite of the fact that he was a gay, sociology professor. Much like the Newsweek article, it was assumed that he must have been an enemy of tolerance and multiculturalism because of his anti-Muslim stance. Actually, his anti-Muslim stance was to protect the tolerance and multiculturalism of Dutch society from an immigrant community that refused to assimilate into that open society. He knew that unfettered immigration would lead to a violent sub-population opposed to the liberal Dutch society. Unfortunately, Europe is beginning to realize the same thing.

Duke Basketball

I'm not a big Duke basher. Never have been. One reason could be that Louisville hasn't played them since beating them for the 1986 Championship. I guess if UL was 1-6 against them since beating them for an NCAA basketball title (like another local college team), I might be more critical. I'm not going to hate them because they win. I wish Louisville had been as successful in the past 15 years. It's tough for me to hate Mike Krzyzewski. He's a West Point grad who was the first ACC coach to really stand up to the most irritating, sanctimonious coach to ever grace the sidelines - Dean Smith. We're talking about the man who took the "stall" and called it the Four Corners Offense. Everyone else called it boring. He always seemed to think he was special and above every other coach, whether it was name-calling opposing players or thinking he could stop the game whenever he wanted. He's also the guy who turned down his alma mater, Kansas, when they asked him to come back and coach the Jayhawks. Said he wanted to stay with the program that he built at North Carolina. Yet, when it came to Roy Williams, he shamed him into dumping the Kansas program that he had spent 15 years at in order to return to North Carolina, simply because Smith wanted him to continue his legacy. So, I have a tough time believing Smith ever did anything that wasn't for his own benefit.

So, if I have such disdain for the Tarheels, it makes it tough to really dislike Duke. In fact, I still can't figure out why white players at Duke are so hated especially by other white people. Ferry, Laettner, Hurley, Wojo and Redick have been despised, but not Hill, Dawkins, Deng or Brand. However, I cannot believe how bad ESPN got with the latest Duke-North Carolina game. Really, three different channels showing three different angles. Please. To begin with, I've never thought much of the Cameron Crazies. They pass out cheer sheets (so much for spontaneity) which means I could care less about having a camera stuck in with them. I realize ESPN has the ACC contract and Duke is a big draw, but this is way too much. They don't seem to realize perception is quickly becoming reality. I've always thought Dick Vitale should have been pulled from Duke games the moment he said Duke was his favorite team (for the record, I don't think he should call UL games because of his business relationship with Rick Pitino in horse racing). ESPN is a national network which shouldn't have a homer calling games. It's gotten so bad that one of the more objective basketball analysts is Dookie Jay Bilas. How can anyone look at it as anything other than ESPN being Duke's home network?

Other college basketball quick hits:
Does it make sense to anyone that the NCAA is supposed to be helping student-athletes by punishing schools for low graduation rates? To begin with, I've always looked at college athletes as adults, so their success or failure academically is up to them, just like it is for any other college student. However, does taking away the number of scholarships benefit the student-athlete since it means fewer scholarships available?

I can't believe that Rick Pitino has indicated that UL would pass on the NIT because Freedom Hall probably wouldn't be available for home dates. I never really believe anything he says, but if he's being honest, he's stupid. He's blamed the team's problems this year on inexperience (the same problem Carolina and Kansas are supposed to have), so why wouldn't he want extra games?

One of the most laughable things I heard was during the UK-LSU game. The commentators were saying how much the lineup change had benefited UK as Brandon Stockton started instead of Rajon Rondo (among others). Please. UK was down 12-4 when the good players came in. Considering LSU's lack of depth means all their games are close, a better start could have made a difference.

I thought Cincinnati firing Bob Huggins the way they did was garbage. The timing (at the beginning of the school year) was designed to get rid of him, but not the players. That left former assistant/interim head coach Andy Kennedy in a lousy position - win in turmoil even though your connection to Huggins means you likely won't be considered for the job. He's done a great job, but I hope he doesn't get it full time. I hope another team gives him a chance that doesn't have the crap administration that Cincinnati does.

The irony is that I heard back when Huggins was fired that Kennedy was to be an interim coach with the expectation that former Xavier coach Skip Prosser would come back to Cincinnati. Might be a harder sell now that his present team, Wake Forest, has done a backflip into the toilet and are 12th in the ACC.

Speaking of Wake Forest, am I the only one who thinks former Wake (and present South Carolina) coach Dave Odom looks like the dad from Alf?