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?

Winter Olympics - The Ugly

Actually, I only saw a few ugly moments during the Olympics. The most embarrassing one was Lindsey Jacobellis. For those who didn't pay attention, she was the heavy favorite to win the snowboard cross event which is where four people race down an obstacle course on snowboards. She was already spotlighted by being in that stupid VISA commercial where she relaxes after being told that someone stole her VISA checkcard. So she gets a huge lead (couldn't even see the second snowboarder), decides to showboat with a little trick on the second to last jump, and ends up falling on her ass. She was so far ahead at that point, she still won silver, but her little stunt cost her a gold. I probably should have put her under "The Bad" because she came up with some ridiculous excuse that she was really only trying to stabalize herself. However, unlike Bode Miller, she did seem intent on doing her best to win. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if she wasn't thinking of her sponsor, because that would have made a nice commercial moment. It was funny to see her compared to other athletes who bombed out like this, because there really isn't anyone like her. Guys like Bill Buckner weren't showboating. They just screwed up. Leon Lett was showboating, but it was late in a game in which the Cowboys were beating the crap out of Buffalo. Short of a Dallas forfeit, there was no way the Bills were going to win that game.

I think the NHL may want to rethink letting their players participate in the Olympics after the Canadian team was heavily favored, but bombed out before the medal round. I don't really care about hockey, but it really seems dumb to take a break right in the middle of the NHL season to let guys go play hockey at the Olympics. It's a bit different from basketball where the Olympics are during the summer which means no league time is lost, but there are some similarities. One reason that the U.S. basketball team failed in the last Olympics was how the team was picked. When the top American NBA players didn't want to play, they started picking people with name value to sell jerseys regardless of how well they would play as a team or how suited they were for international play (no true point guard, poor three point shooting). The other problem was that they hadn't done much practicing together. The Olympic hockey teams that had nothing but NHL players got in one practice together before they played. Gee, wonder why they lost.

From a personal point of view, the ugliest was the sniping done by speedskaters Shani Davis and Chad Hedrick. I really like speedskating, so I don't like to see it trivialized by two guys moaning and groaning. Once again, for those not paying attention, Chad Hedrick was entered in five speedskating events which means if he got gold in all of them, he would tie Eric Heiden. Shani Davis had been planning to win the 1000 meter race (which he did), and didn't want to skate in the pursuit (three guys skating single file as a team with the time stopping when the third man crosses the line) because it was two days before the 1000 meter and he was worried skating the pursuit would hurt his chances. Hedrick knew not having Davis would hurt the U.S. in the pursuit, so he let it publicly be known that he thinks Davis should take every opportunity to help win a medal for America. Contrary to the expectations of misinformed people, I take the side of paranoid, outspoken black (first to win a winter Olympic medal) Davis over the rah-rah America, good ole boy from Texas Hedrick. I've never speedskated, so I don't know how much wear it takes out of your legs, but it's alot just looking at guys who skate one event. If Davis believes that skating the pursuit would cost him a gold in the 1000 meter, I'm not going to argue. Plus, I think Hedrick was being disingenuous when he said Davis was forsaking America. More like he thinks Davis is forsaking Hedrick's quest for five golds. After all, why would he be forsaking the U.S. if he sacrifices 1000 meter gold for pursuit gold? The U.S. tally is the same. Plus, Hedrick was also in the 1000, so maybe he wasn't being so altruistic. If Davis also skates the pursuit, it could have helped Hedrick in the 1000. Besides, Hedrick has really been lacking in graciousness when he loses. A bronze isn't good enough for him. He never congratulated Davis for winning anything. He kept bringing up the pursuit. After one silver medal showing, he talked about how he has more heart than anyone else. Get a grip. I think the worst was after the 1500 meter race in which it was portrayed as a showdown between Davis and Hedrick who had both won a gold medal, but Italian Enrico Fabris beat them both for gold and leaving silver for Davis and bronze for Hedrick. Davis skated over to congratulate Fabris on his win. Hedrick found a television camera to blame his loss on skating too many endurance races while Fabris and Davis just did sprints. Guess what wasn't acceptable as an excuse for Davis is for him.

Winter Olympics - The Bad

Want to know what I disliked the most about the Winter Olympics coverage? The coverage. NBC did a horrible job, and yet wondered why their ratings were bad. As I said before, I wanted to watch events that I normally can't see throughout the year. Yet, NBC assumed that I wanted to watch figure skating and ice hockey. Two sports that are shown throughout the year. Of course, I can't figure out why they thought hockey would be watched. Most people didn't know the NHL went on strike, so if they aren't watching professional hockey, why would they watch amateur hockey (with professionals)? As for ice skating, you can watch that all fall, because that's ESPN's counter-programming to Monday Night Football. Yet, NBC thinks I want to watch that. The other problem is the scheduling. I realize NBC has a problem because the European location means most of the events are on tape which means I had to avoid ESPN.com while goofing off at work so I wouldn't know the results before I got home. Still, there was another scheduling problem. Mainly, I didn't know when the events I wanted to see might be on. I'd look at the schedule and seven sports would be listed from 8 to midnight. That would be fine if they had them in half hour blocs, but they didn't. It would be 8 minutes of speedskating (that I wanted to watch) followed by 11 minutes of ice skating (which I didn't want to watch and half the time wasn't even the event, but some crap human interest story). So I either sit through some garbage I don't want to see while waiting for something I do want to see or flip back and forth with something else and possibly miss it. Yes, Phil, I know I could get Tivo and solve this problem and make my life much more wonderful.

I've said before I don't get too worked up about U.S. success in the Olympics, so I don't put too much stock in calling someone a "bust". After all, a lot of Americans are hyped going into the games only because they are Americans, not because they are necessarily the best. Just because you're the "best chance" for a U.S. medal in your sport doesn't mean you are one of the top three in it. Plus, you are competing against others who have considered tops in that sport, not to mention those athletes who pick the Olympics to have their great moment in the sun (or at night since a lot of events seemed to be after dark). However, there was one dud. I'll be honest, I didn't care much for Bode Miller before the Olympics. As most people know, I'm not big on liberal views, but I don't dislike liberals (for some reason, a lot of my friends are liberals). However, Miller belongs to that group of liberals I despise - the limousine liberal. Usually limousine liberals are like "environmentalist" Laurie David who rails against SUVs, but only flies on private planes. Or a John Kerry who says the rich (including him) don't pay enough in taxes, but when given the opportunity to pay more, doesn't. Miller fits right in. He wants to be seen as a rebel skier who hates corporations and the rich and thinks the Olympics are "money driven". However, that doesn't stop him from making about $5 million a year from endorsements by non-corporations like Nike. Oh wait, Nike is very large corporation. Of course, he also hates the spotlight, but never shies away from it (video game, radio show, website, autobiography released just in time for the Olympics), unless he's just lost another race. I realize that endorsements are the lifeblood for many Olympic competitors, but others American skiers seem to make do (by "make do" I mean win medals) without taking money from every company that comes along. Hell, he's a paid endorser for Barilla pasta. Personally, I think it's great that a skier can make $5 million at his sport, but to pretend you don't care about money while pimping yourself out to just about anybody makes you a hypocrite.

Actually, if he was just a hypocrite, I wouldn't concern myself with his losing every race he entered. After all, he may have been the World Cup champion, but he'd won one (I think) race this past year, so why should he be considered the favorite. He was overhyped, but he did nothing to downplay it. The problem is his reaction after the races. First, he kept trying to sneak off. I'm willing to bet his face would have been pressed up against every camera he could find if he won. Second, he didn't even seem to care while he was racing or after. I wouldn't have had a problem if he said he was just beaten by skiers who were better that day, but, he tried to say that he lost because he tried too hard. Then he took it to the next level. His Olympics have to be viewed as a success (despite being 0-fer) because "he rocked" on the local bar scene, and "got to party and socialize at an Olympic level". I'm all for athletes enjoying the Olympic experience, but if your only Olympic goal is getting drunk in local bars, why not pay your own way there (as I pointed out, he can afford it) and let someone who does care about winning have your spot on the team? Well, except Nike probably wouldn't have signed him if he was going to skip the Olympics. Of course, Bode is a common man who doesn't care about money or fame and just wants to live his own lifestyle. Of course, I'm not sure how many ski bums without $5 million endorsement deals can afford a lifestyle that includes golf outings to Dubai.

Winter Olympics - The Good

I've never been a big fan of reality television, so I don't understand how a televised karaoke contest beats anything in the ratings, but I'm still shocked how "American Idol" can beat the Winter Olympics so badly. I realize that outside of ice skating, hockey and snowboarding, none of the sports in Winter Olympics get airtime when the Games aren't on. However, that's what I like about it. I could never watch ski jumping or bobsled as if they were football or basketball or even volleyball, but I do like to see it occasionally which is why I really like the Olympics. It's the same way with the summer Olympics. I'm pretty indifferent to Olympic basketball because I watch NBA and college all year. I do watch the summer Games for things like wrestling and swimming which I can't see year round, nor would I follow that closely if they did.

However, there are other sports that I always like to watch and wish they would show more often. One that I really like is speedskating. I prefer short track because of the wipeouts, but I would even watch long-track if ESPN showed it year round. Short track is exciting because the close proximity of the racers and the fact that every race is close at the end. Long track doesn't have the proximity, but it's interesting to see the skaters looking like they are about to die while trying to gut out the end of an endurance race. Considering how little interest there is in this country for speedskating outside of the Olympics, I think the U.S. skaters are phenomenal. Chad Hedrick, Joey Cheek and Shani Davis all came away with a gold and silver medal (Hedrick also had a bronze). Apolo Anton Ohno is really the only big name short track speedskater on the U.S. team, but he came away with a gold and bronze individually while anchoring the bronze medal relay team. For the record, the short track relay is the wildest event in the Olympics. It' s no wonder short track is now hugely popular in Asia. That race looks like the proverbial Chinese fire drill.

Another sport I really like to watch is, believe or not, curling. When it first came out in the Olympics, I thought it was silly. Shuffleboard on ice. However, when I really began to look at the rules and understand it better, it really became interesting. Yes, there is some aspect of shuffleboard to it, but there is also shades of bowling (think of the big hook shots some bowlers make) and pool (good angles can take out multiple opposing rocks). Plus, strategy is huge. The only problem I have is one game takes about three hours. Cut down on the time it takes, and I would watch curling all the time (not that it will ever be on all the time). The U.S. men's team had a great Olympics taking home the bronze when no one expected them to even make the medal round.

Actually, one of the things I like most about the Winter Olympics is that I don't have to worry about my innate jingoism. That means I can watch most events without really worrying too much about where the U.S. athletes are, because they are probably way behind. Outside of snowboarding and women's figure skating (most of which I don't watch), the U.S. isn't considered a power in most winter events. Sure, the alpine skiing teams (think downhill and slalom, not ski jumping or cross country) were expected to do much better than they did, but they had two gold medals which is two more than the last Olympics where they only had two silver. Besides, few people in this country pay that much attention to skiing events outside the Olympics. However, in Europe, it's huge. They actually said during ski jumping that in Austria, you can make a living as a professional ski jumper. How can the U.S. compete with that? I can't imagine too many athletes growing up in the U.S. wanting to be ski jumpers. So, with most events, I don't feel too bad when the U.S. isn't competitive. The other advantage is that when the U.S. does win in one of their non-competitive sports, it's a bonus. I doubt you can ever have a "Miracle On Ice" moment for the U.S. again, because they'll probably never be underdogs like that again. Still, it's nice to have some Cinderellas.

Tale Of Two Vice Presidents

I'll be honest. I don't understand the "outrage" over Dick Cheney waiting 18 hours to alert the Washington press corp about his hunting accident. To begin with, he's the vice president. While Cheney has been more influential than most, it's still not a job with major policy implications. I understand it's a story because (to the best of my knowledge) it's the first time a sitting Vice President has shot anyone since Aaron Burr. However, I don't understand why it's imperative that he immediately call the media after a hunting accident. Hunting accidents are bad, but they happen. Would it have the same impact if he had hit him with a car? Probably not. As a Boy Scout and member of an ROTC air rifle team, I understand the importance of gun safety, and that is what this story comes down to. Unless you are an idiot in North Carolina (talk about low standards to be a staff writer) or a Democrat anywhere, this issue boils down to, at worst, the Vice President not practicing proper hunting etiquette. It certainly is very important to Cheney and Harry Whittington (the guy he wounded). However, it has no policy implications. It is totally removed from any governing connection. So, while the Vice President shooting someone is a story, it's shouldn't be the only thing being reported. I believe Cheney is right. The national press is pissed because the scoop went to a newspaper in Corpus Christi instead of the NY Times or Washington Post.

Yet, this short term story is huge, while the one about former VP Al Gore is ignored. If you think about it, Aaron Burr wasn't just the last VP who shot someone in while in office. He was also the last former VP who was tried for treason. No, I'm not advocating Gore be charged with treason. For one, Saudi Arabia is a somewhat ally so treason doesn't really apply. Yes, I realize that their citizenry seems to be pretty anti-American/pro al-Qaeda, but I think the fall of the House of Saud would make Saudi Arabia even more anti-American. That wouldn't be good. Two, I'm a big believer in free speech. However, I think what Gore did was certainly disloyal. He was also stupid. Much like my previous post about offended Muslims, I have to laugh about anyone who would complain to a Middle East audience about the "mistreatment" of anyone. I don't even have to go into why Gore is a liar for saying the U.S. "indiscriminately" rounded up Muslims for visa violations (if we had done this in August 2001, maybe we would have stopped a fairly large terrorist attack). The simple fact is that until we start cutting off hands for petty theft, the U.S. has a long way to go to match the mistreatment Arabs suffer under the Saudi government (or most other Middle East governments). Actually, try worshipping as a Christian there. For a former VP to attack the U.S. while in a foreign country that shreds Bibles is absurd. I'm not going to say that the U.S. is perfect. It's not. We have faults. However, there is a reason immigrant boats seem to go one way (to the U.S. for the morons at home). Contrary to the opinion of the American Left (as represented by Al Gore), Muslims/Arabs have more rights in the United States than Muslims/Arabs in Muslim/Arab countries. Bad mouthing America to a Saudi audience isn't treason, but it is crass. And I think it's certainly more of a PR hit for the U.S. than a hunting accident. For any Democrats in the audience, Al gore is your boy. Aren't you proud?

You've Got To Be Kidding Me

I don't think I need to describe the uproar from a Danish newspaper publishing some editorial cartoons depicting Muhammad in an unflattering light. Needless to say, the Muslim world is in flames with calls for death and apologies (not necessarily in that order) in spite of the fact that the event took place months ago . I actually believe that the media (whether news or entertainment) should make an effort not to be offensive towards religious beliefs. Of course, I've gotten used to disparaging treatment of Christians and its beliefs in Western pop culture and the press. It's fine if you have a fuzzy New Age type of Christianity, but if you hold traditional Christian beliefs, you'll quickly be marginalized as an extremist member of the "Religious Right". It's not just hard news. It's become routine for sportswriters to ridicule the religious beliefs of athletes. Pop culture is even worse. I would have to think really hard to remember a character with traditional Christian beliefs who was not portrayed in a derogatory manner in a major motion picture. They are usually portrayed as a hate-monger or a hypocrite who espouses one thing while doing something else. On TV, NBC was going to have Britney Spears guest-star as a bible-thumping cook with a show called "Cruci-fixins", a concept that I find highly offensive considering what the Crucifixion means to Christianity. Fortunately, NBC did decide that maybe it wasn't such a good idea, but the fact that it was talked about enough in-house that it made it to a press release makes me believe it was going to happen before the backlash. I don't think I have to explain why Marilyn Manson may be slightly offensive to Christians, but now Kanye West just had his picture on the cover of Rolling Stone magazine looking like Jesus. This country has gotten to the point that if you make "art" that seems to have the intent to offend Christians, you'll get a government grant, but if you make art that has a hint of positive Christianity to it, it will be banned. Yet, somehow, Christians have managed to survive all of this without rioting and arson. Compare the protests to the Muhammad cartoons with the protests of the NBC show "Book of Daniel" which many Christians found offensive for having a pill-popping priest who talks to a morally ambiguous Christ. Muslim protesters rioted, got killed, burned down embassies and threatened to murder anyone involved with the printing of the cartoons. Did Christian activists burn down NBC affiliates or threaten to behead Aidan Quinn? Did they insist that the President apologize for NBC or pass laws to censor NBC's content? No. They wrote letters, and then didn't watch the show so it got canceled due to bad ratings.

Actually, the extreme reaction of Muslims isn't the worst part of this story. It's the sheer hypocrisy of Muslims, especially those in the Middle East, to complain of a lack of sensitivity towards Muslims. There is no place in the world that is more intolerant of other religions than Muslim countries. Which is more offensive: some tasteless (at worst) cartoons by a newspaper or official Palestinian television saying Jews are descended from monkeys and pigs? Cartoons or an official Egyptian government newspaper accusing Jews of using Arab blood to make Passover bread? Cartoons or the destruction of two ancient Buddha statues? Cartoons or forcing Nigerian Christians to live under Islamic law? Cartoons or the return of Dhimmi status for non-Muslims in Muslim countries? Cartoons or the beheading of Christian schoolgirls in Indonesia? Cartoons or the complete lack of religious freedom in Iran, Sudan or Saudi Arabia (a country where 15 schoolgirls died in a fire when the religious police would not let them escape because they weren't wearing their robes and headscarves)?

Do you see a pattern here? Muslim leaders are demanding the type of "tolerance" towards their religion from western countries that is completely absent in the Muslim world. And most likely will be absent in Europe when Muslims become the majority. Sadly, the world is capitulating. Editors have been fired for printing the cartoons. A newspaper website was shut down by the Swedish government for displaying the cartoons. Western political leaders are apologizing (for something they didn't do). The increasingly irrelevant UN wants to join the European Union in condemning the cartoons unlike the more serious issues mentioned in the last paragraph that the UN has made a career of ignoring. Think of how out of whack this has become. Cartoons are being condemned not the violence and death threats. It's a sad day when the concept of free expression must take a backseat to the sensibilities of the culture that glorifies suicide bombers.

I think my favorite reaction is that of the EU when they declared they are thinking of enforcing a "media code". It included this wonderful quote from one of their moronic commissioners - "The press will give the Muslim world the message: We are aware of the consequences of exercising the right of free expression. We can and are ready to self-regulate that right." I think the real message he is giving is "we are your bitch". Does this idiot realize what he is saying? He's giving a veto to Muslim activists over free speech and press because of hurt feelings. What's next? The implementation of Sharia because Muslims are offended by secular law? This isn't sensitivity to religion. This is surrender. Does anybody believe that this "media code" will be used to protect the sensitivities of non-Muslim religions? Of course not. Christians and Jews have a tendency not to riot over perceived slights. Plus, kowtowing to Muslims while showing indifference to other religions can be plainly seen already in England. Political correctness has run amok to the point that one council has banned pig related items (i.e. figures, calendars) in their office including Piglet from Winnie-the-Pooh. Why? Muslims think pigs are impure animals, so seeing a pig may offend them. Well, guess what? Devout Jews consider pigs to be impure also. Where was the concern for them? I think it's obvious that the Muslim world is different place from the western world. Unfortunately, they seem to be Hell-bent on making their world our world. Sadly, our gutless leaders are helping them as much as they can.

Other NFL Stuff

I thought the move from ABC to ESPN wouldn't be a dramatic change for Monday Night Football, but I crapped out on that one. One good change is that the game will start a half hour earlier. However, that's about the only good thing I've heard. Originally, Al Michaels was supposed to be paired in the booth with Joe Theisman. I had managed to convince myself that it wouldn't be that bad. Hey, Al Michaels is one of the best in the business, and maybe Joe Theisman won't be so stupid without Paul McGuire and Mike Patrick. That one bright spot is down the tubes. Al Michaels is going to NBC to do the Sunday night game. Granted, I would try to get out too if they were going to stick me in a box with Theisman. Mike Tirico is replacing him which isn't terrible as Tirico is a decent play by play guy. However, ESPN decided to drive the bus right over a cliff by adding Tony Kornheiser to the team. WTF? Was Stephan A Smith not available? Isn't Joe enough stupidity for one booth? I have never been able to watch an entire episode of "Pardon The Interruption" because of the inanity of the hosts. The last thing I want to listen to during a football game is Kornheiser's spewing nonsense. After all, this is the guy who once declared on his radio show that he would vote for Bill Bradley for President because he had played basketball. Nothing like a good rational argument to make yourself look like an intellectual giant. I see nothing good coming from this (as do 54% of the voters on ESPN.com), but I actually saw one writer compare Kornheiser to Howard Cosell, although it was Dan Shanoff who writes for ESPN.com (no bias there). Since he quit MNF in 1984, I didn't really get to hear much of Cosell, but from that little bit plus some recordings, I don't see what the attraction was. He sounded like a rambler who tried much too hard to be cute. Not exactly what I'm looking for while watching a game. Since I love watching football, I won't be turning the game off, but I have a feeling I will be muting it.

I was glad to see Warren Moon get elected to the Hall of Fame. He saved my butt one year in fantasy football.

I don't care what reasons Terry Bradshaw and Joe Montana had for missing the Super Bowl ceremony of the past MVPs. Having all the previous Super Bowl MVPs together seems pretty historic, but they used the hackneyed "family consideration" as their excuse not to be there (although reports are the appearance fees weren't enough especially for Montana who apparently wanted $100,000). I read that Montana told Stephen A Smith (no way I would have watched it) he had moved beyond football. Sure, I wonder if his accountant says the same thing since Montana makes paid appearances all the time. There is the possibility that autograph shows want Montana there for reasons other than his football career. Call me a cynic, but I believe money really was the reason.

This is a pre-Super Bowl story. Donovan McNabb finally responded to Terrell Owens by saying Owens attacks on him were worse because he's black. I took McNabb's side in his Owens' problems, but his reasoning is absurd. Why should Owens' attacks on McNabb be any worse than the things he said about Jeff Garcia just because McNabb is black? I doubt very seriously that Owens was thinking about race in any way. He was just acting like a dick because he is a dick.

Super Bowl

Time to talk about the Super Bowl. Was it just me or did the commercials seem pretty lame this year? Sure, there were some pretty good ones. Budweiser had some nice ones. The hidden fridge. The beer scavenger hunt. Guys pretending to fix the roof while goofing off. The little Clydesdale trying to pull the wagon. A few really stood out. The guy using the beer to keep from being mauled by a bear, but his friend grabs it and runs off. The sheared sheep as a streaker running on the field where the Clydesdale are playing football. The best was the touch football where a hot chick tells a guy she's going to be open, then he decks her after the catch. Ameriquest had some really funny ones with the doctor killing a fly with the defibrillator paddle and the woman on the plane who falls on the guys lap. Funny stuff. My personal favorite was the Mastercard commercial with MacGyver. However, the rest weren't so good. CareerBuilder wasn't bad. Their two commercials were good, but not Super Bowl good. It wasn't much different from the ones they run during the year. Which was a real problem. Too many didn't stand out. Gillette had another commercial about how advanced their newest razor is. Whoop-dee-doo. Emerald nuts had another one that came up with an acronym that was stupid. Motorola now has a cell phone that looks like a rock. Will the excitement ever end? And I still can't figure out what was up with the people biohazard suits. The most disappointing were two areas - cars and colas. Diet Pepsi had a pretty good one with Jackie Chan and a Diet Pepsi can making a movie. There other one was odd to say the least. To begin with, who the Hell cares about Puff Daddy? The second, does calling something "brown and bubbly" make you want to buy it? The other cola ad was for Sierra Mist. It bombed the moment I realized it had Kathy Griffith (mistakenly called a comedienne even though she isn't funny) and one of those schmucks whose only job now seems to be commentary on the VH1 "I Love The Whatever Decade We're Showcasing This Week". None of the car commercials stood out at all. Toyota with the bilingual dad? Boring. Another Tacoma commercial showing it's tough? Yawn. Hot chick mudflap logo looking at a Honda pickup? Why not get a real hot chick. That Cadillac surfacing on a model's runway? Looked expensive, but the commercial sucked. Actually, there was a car commercial that stood out. The Hummer that was spawned by some dinosaur type monster and a giant tin man was just bizarre. And finally, the Burger King commercial must be mentioned because it was the most elaborate production with some Ziegfield Follies dance show about the Whopper. Oh, and it sucked.

Almost forgot. There was a football game in which the Steelers won their fifth Super Bowl. I'll give the Seahawk fans the complaint about the offensive pass interference. While technically, Darrell Jackson did push off, it was clearly ticky-tacky. So, I'll call the final score 21-14. As for the other disputed calls, I don't know if Sean Locklear held on a long pass play for the Seahawks, but I'm not buying anyone who says that he didn't. Maybe Gatlinburg's ABC (which probably means Knoxville) left off a replay, but the only one I saw showed the play from the back which means I only saw one of Locklear's hands. I don't see them both, I can't say he wasn't holding. And complaints about the Roethlisberger touchdown are laughable. There is no way to tell whether the ball crossed the goal line from the replay. So, how can you say the Steelers got a break? As for me, the ball in his arm hit the ground a couple of inches from the goal line, but where it is at the point doesn't matter. The defensive player hit Roethlisberger's arm straight on as he was diving for the end zone. Physics tell me that his arm was probably pushed back instead of stopped dead which makes me believe the ball was over the goal line at some point. Besides, the Steelers didn't get all the calls. One of Jerramy Stevens' dropped passes (I can't remember which one of many) looked like a catch and fumble to me, but the refs called it an incomplete pass. Speaking of which, I thought Stevens should have been the MVP. His four drops really helped the Steelers out. He almost dropped his touchdown catch. I don't know why Joey Porter thought he was soft. I have to laugh about Mike Holmgren blaming the refs for the loss. The last thing he wants is to explain why the Seahawks looked so inept at the end of both halves. I was beginning to wonder if they had ever run a two minute drill before.