ESPN Local Comes to NYC

I want to talk about this GQ piece by Gabe Sherman that just came out about ESPN Local, but first I want to make a separate point:

In every market that ESPN has gone into with a local site, they have succeeded (if you judge your projects in absolute terms) or won (if you judge them in relative ones).

It isn't a question of whether or not ESPN can do well in local markets -- the evidence is as obvious as it is abundant: They are doing better than the newspaper incumbent.

Now, I'm not sure ESPN even cares whether it is "beating" the incumbent; I think they are focused -- appropriately -- on growing an audience and growing ad revenue.

I don't think we should distinguish between growing audience because they are getting newspaper users to switch or simply getting them to add ESPN to their rotation. Traffic is traffic.

(Newspaper editors, of course, better care about that. But, frankly, it is not ESPN's problem.)

New York presents a very different competitive landscape: In LA and Dallas, ESPN was competing on 1-paper towns. In Chicago and Boston, they entered 2-paper towns.

In New York, they will compete against 3 newspapers, a fairly aggressive sports-news cable network and at least one radio juggernaut.

Of course, the big question is: Who cares how many competitors there are? Avid fans will add ESPN to their rotation; casual fans may migrate from ESPN.com's portal to the local site. ESPN already has a radio station in New York, and they already have a huge NY-centric video library.

In other words: ESPN New York will be fine, just as they have been fine in every other market. Again: They don't need to out-traffic the Times' or Post's sports section. They don't need to poach readers. And they don't need to out-scoop anybody.

The focus of Gabriel Sherman's GQ piece was ostensibly about competition -- but I was left scratching my head. It's not sexy, but the traffic numbers speak for themselves.

(In their press release about their entry into NYC, ESPN revealed traffic numbers for their other local markets. You will NEVER hear a newspaper offer individual section traffic -- not just because the number is small compared to ESPN's, but because the number is small, period.)

I actually want to focus on another aspect of the so-called "competition" between newspaper reporters/editors and the ESPN Local reporters and editors who were hired from newspapers. Here was my takeaway from the article:

You can take the sportswriter out of newspapers but you can't take newspapers out of sportswriter.

In explaining why ESPN was making successful inroads into local online sports, Sherman unintentionally showcased why newspapers are failing:

I was baffled by the article's focus on scoops -- particularly scoops that I call "inevitable discovery." DeMarcus Ware's new contract will come out eventually.

The anecdotal focus on the ESPN editor catching up to a radio competitor who had "broken" a story explains, in very clear terms, what the problem is. They are focused on the wrong thing.

Scoops are the most overvalued asset in sports media. As fast as you can break something -- increasingly on Twitter -- I can have it. Everyone has it. Consumers have it.

ESPN's local sites -- and, for that matter, newspaper sites -- are not going to succeed or fail based on their volume of scoops -- particularly ones that everyone has within minutes anyway.

They will succeed based on creating a sense of engagement with their consumer: Analysis that tells you why the scoop matters. Depth of related things to look at -- ideally including video highlights. A reason to come back every day -- even, ideally, multiple times a day.

Despite details about the ESPN Local writers blogging and filing and updating and going "cross-platform," this is not some new-fangled workflow: THIS IS THE MINIMUM EFFORT.

What I saw was fairly relieved (or desperate) ex-newspaper people applying the same old newspaper thinking to an entirely new medium.

These newspaper folks aren't escaping newspapers' fundamental editorial problem -- they are simply taking it with them into a new medium, which can't be good for anyone.

Jason Fry pointed this out a few weeks ago: If newspapers are losing talent to ESPN, the solution is to innovate into the medium, not fight a scoop war that has been outdated for at least a decade.

And ESPN does itself no favors by telling the ex-newspaper folks to simply keep doing what they do best -- what they do best, in part, helped undermine the newspaper industry.

Obviously, there is room for breaking news that drives the news cycle and the traditional opinion column that puts it in perspective and -- yes -- even some added-value form of the classic "game story."

But ESPN has a ton of talent in-house that is unconstrained by calcified norms of newspaper sports reporting -- I hope it sends that talent out to help the ex-newspaper folks figure out a new way of thinking about how to serve consumers.

I'm not trying to indict all of ESPN Local's talent -- this was simply what Sherman portrayed in his story, and that's what I'm reacting to here. Much of ESPN Local's success is precisely because they approach coverage with ESPN.com as their framework, not LegacyNewspaper.com.

(I love a few of the things that ESPN New York is planning to do, like a fun tool that lets users create their own tabloid-style back-page headline. They should pick the 3 best submissions from users and let the other users vote, running the winner on the front of the site as the lead art.)

And I'm also not trying to indict all local newspaper coverage. Despite (or perhaps thanks to) the commitment it has to the print side, the New York Times has a terrific sports section -- and they are as forward-thinking online as any newspaper sports section in the country. And, obviously, the New York Post has a style that, in newspaper form, pioneered the compelling notion of "link-baiting" (before any of us knew what "link-baiting" was).

The point is this: Sherman's story was less about Newspaper vs. ESPN Local than it was an unintended expose that many of the same old ways and mindsets of covering teams in newspapers have migrated online, only with more job security.

-- D.S.

April 1 Quickie: Tiger, Final 4, More

Here's a thought experiment: Go back one year from today -- April 1, 2009 -- and pretend you read a news report or blog post that said, basically:

Tiger Woods cheats on his wife with more than a dozen women of various levels of reputation.

You would think it was the weakest April Fool's Day joke of all time -- so absurd it doesn't even come close to being believable. Google changing its name to "Topeka" is less far-fetched.

April Fool's Day has always been pretty lame -- in sports, it's particularly dumb, because it is so easy to come up with a fake or flimsy rumor and spread it.

For gosh sake, that's like 90 percent of sports media on NORMAL days.

But in the Post-Tiger Era (or "Post-Tiger-Scandal" Era), there isn't a prank or hoax you could pull that causes as much cognitive dissonance as this very real Tiger story.

And the Vanity Fair piece just pushes it along, with all sorts of new details. Just in time for the Masters next week.

More you'll find in today's SN column:

*96 teams in the NCAA Tournament isn't the end of the world and it doesn't ruin the event.

*No one should be surprised by the Colt McCoy accurate-but-no-arm-strength workout yesterday. That's how he rolled for his entire career -- successfully, I should add. As long as his shoulder is OK, I'm actually bullish on McCoy as a pro QB. As always: In the right system.

*I'm not big on the NBA regular season as some sort of harbinger for the playoffs -- however, I do constantly see great symbolism: Like the Thunder beating the Celtics in Boston last night.

*My starting fantasy SS is Elvis Andrus, so I'm hardly one to talk, but I'd stay away from Jose Reyes as an early-round fantasy pick.

*With his new Nike deal, LeBron staying in Cleveland just got a lot more intriguing -- as before, I think it will come down to whether or not he wins a championship there this year.

Complete SN column here. More later.

- D.S.

Tonight: Bob Hurley Documentary

I could argue that Bob Hurley is one of the best coaches in the history of basketball.

If you factor in preps, college and the pros, he has won with the best of them -- state titles (national record) and national titles (a couple of them). His teams play hard -- the "right way" -- and not necessarily under the easiest conditions.

His 2008 team at St. Anthony was, in my opinion, the best high school team of all time -- that includes a short list of the legendary Dunbar (Baltimore) '83 team and all those Stu Vetter Flint Hill teams (early 90s) and Montrose Christian teams (mid-00s). That year, St. Anthony had 6 D-1 players in the senior class alone, plus junior Dominic Cheek, who signed with Villanova.

During that season, I worked with a production company that was creating a documentary about Bob Hurley, St. Anthony and that 2008 team -- I did a bit of development work for them on the front end, but that was about the extent of my participation. But the film -- "The Street Stops Here" -- finally makes its national premiere tonight on your local PBS station -- probably 10 p.m., but check your local listings.

I had a chance to see the finished version last week at a screening, and it is excellent. It is a terrific story, with amazing footage and extremely high production values. I think you'll enjoy it. Obviously, I'm entirely biased, but if you like a good sports documentary, you'll like it. It is as good as the best of the "30 for 30" documentaries.

Check out the trailer below -- I linked to it when the trailer came out a year ago -- and tune in to watch tonight.

03/31 Quickie: Final Four, UConn, More

Mrs. Quickie -- Top 15 in the Daily Quickie Readers group of the Tournament Challenge -- cooked such a delicious Passover seder meal last night that I was inspired for the lead of today's SN column, asking "four questions" for the Final four.

I tried to be fair, but ultimately, for Duke, I was stuck with something along the lines of "Why? Why?!?!" (This, despite the fact that I have a standing invite to Jon Scheyer to attend our seder.)

More in today's column:

*UConn women: Best team ever?
*Final Four players to watch
*College hoops coaching carouseling
*Defending Dez Bryant (unexpected!)
*How can you not love Pat Venditte?

Complete SN column here. More later.

-- D.S.

03/30 Quickie: Bradford, Stanford, More

I know I said I would have a post about Sam Bradford yesterday afternoon, but it ended up being the lead of today's SN column.

The gist is this: I am willing to stipulate that Bradford has a terrific arm -- hell, he could be the best pure passer in the NFL.

My question is: What evidence is there that the guy can take 8-10 clobberings a game by NFL D-linemen, when mere BYU (or Texas) D-linemen knocked him out of last season?

It's not about whether he can make the throws -- it's whether he can take the hits. And I'm not sure I want to be on the hook for $60 million with that big of an issue left unknown.

Mostly, I don't understand why the draftniks don't make this more of an issue. It seems like a huge risk factor, even for a guy as talented as Bradford.

I'm comfortable with the comparison to Troy Aikman -- but Aikman didn't spend his final season of college football out because his shoulder couldn't take a minimal beating.

More you'll find in today's column:

*I'm not sure there is an ending to a college basketball game as insane as what happened between Stanford and Xavier last night. TWO missed open lay-ups by X, then a baseline-to-baseline buzzer-beater FTW by Stanford -- all to advance to the Final Four.

*I'm totally comfortable with Wall and Cousins as 1st-team All-Americans. Less so for Scottie Reynolds, who feels like an inertia pick. My bigger issue is that they name these teams before the NCAA Tournament -- what's the point?

*Why doesn't Oregon offer Tom Izzo $10 million a year for 10 years, guaranteed? It's not like they can't afford it. Let's see him turn that down. (I'm sure he would, but still. Some marginal raise from his current salary isn't impressive at all.)

There's a lot more in there today. See the whole thing here.

-- D.S.

03/29 Quickie: Butler, Izzo, Duke, WVU

There's plenty of time this week for Butler bandwagoneering -- by Saturday, you may hate them. You will certainly come to hate the Butler-"Hoosiers" references, which are already cliched.

For today's SN column, I needed to take an opportunity to praise Tom Izzo: My argument is that Izzo's Final Four success is the defining achievement of the last decade in college hoops. If you're willing to accept a liberal definition of "decade" stretching from 1999 to 2010, Izzo has 6 FF's in 12 years. No coach has had more success, using the currency that college hoops values most.

We are living in the Izzo Dynasty.

Of course, the column also talks about Butler. And rips Kentucky for its failure. (And, yes, the season was a failure.) And -- ugh -- praises Duke for breaking back into the Final Four.

I have convinced myself of four different national champions in the last 12 hours -- I'm rooting for Butler (and against Duke), obviously. But you can make very strong arguments for Michigan State (Izzo factor) and WVU (already shown it can beat Duke in the Tournament).

But let's get to the fun stuff: The Bracket comps.

My bracket is in the 40th percentile nationally. While this seems horrible, you have to remember that I finished in the 18th percentile last year -- so, for now, a big improvement. Relatively.

In the Daily Quickie Readers group of more than 400 entries, you will see a "Shanoff" name near the top -- that's Mrs. Quickie, currently tied for 15th and in the 97th percentile nationally.

(Obama's bracket is in the tank: He's in the 56th percentile -- missing Kansas State and Kentucky crushed his bracket. If you followed the National Bracket, you'd be in the 70th percentile -- certainly respectable, given the crazy results of this tournament.)

My lesson is that I can't win -- in the years where I go unconventional, the result is conventional; in the years where I go conventional, the result is unconventional.

The constant is that my Achilles' heel continues to be putting way too much stock in what happened last year -- or previous years. Ironic for someone so devoted to "instant history."

Of course, hindsight is a killer in bracket-picking. We can all look at this Final Four and rationalize why we should have taken them. It's a futile exercise.

Complete SN column here. More later -- I may not be able to go through the day without putting some pressure on Sam Bradford. Someone needs to.

-- D.S.

Sunday (WVU!) Quickie

Wow. Obviously, Northern Iowa over Kansas was THE upset of the Tournament, but the WAY that Kentucky lost to West Virginia was just as jaw-dropping.

Even without any 2-point shots in the 1st half, WVU played brilliantly -- precisely the kind of game (and game-plan) that an underdog needs to knock off a powerful favorite. Timely 3s. Unlikely heroes. That confounding 1-3-1 defense. Kentucky freaking out under the pressure.

Let's talk about UK for a second: Their season is a failure. Forget a championship; anything less than a Final Four trip was going to seal a season of underachievement. They have 4 NBA Lottery picks in the starting lineup -- with another NBA player or two on the bench.

But they were young. And untested. And, for the first time this Tournament, the "Big East factor" -- playing tough competition, night in and night out -- was obvious as an advantage.

It was a considerable upset, if only because it knocked Butler in the Final Four from the top of the headlines. But the Bulldogs win over K-State was hard-fought -- for the second straight game, Butler excelled in the final 2 minutes, where its opponent collapsed.

Butler in the Final Four -- let alone a Final Four in its hometown of Indianapolis -- is a tremendous storyline for the next week.

And, based on the quality of the teams that Butler beat in this regional -- 1-seed Syracuse, 2-seed Kansas State -- it would be crazy to consider them an underdog to whoever comes out of that Michigan State-Tennessee regional final.

Looking ahead to today's game: Michigan State-Tennessee is the most random regional final in a long time; either team will be a surprise in the Final Four, but the novelty of Michigan State's appearance this year is mitigated by the fact that Tom Izzo is the best Tournament coach in college hoops history.

Meanwhile, I'm sure CBS folks are rooting very hard for Duke -- they really need the marquee name in the Final Four.

I'm rooting for Baylor, for two reasons: (1) My natural anti-Duke bias, and (2) I love the idea of a no-1-seed Final Four, the antidote to the "all-1" Final Four of 2008. Frankly, I think Baylor has precisely the kind of profile of a team that has kicked Duke's ass in the Tournament recently.

Let's consider that Final Four: Butler. West Virginia. Baylor. A short-handed Michigan State or short-handed (from earlier this season) Tennessee. One of those teams -- or (shudder) Duke -- will be national champs.

Not much cachet for the majority of sports fans -- aside from Butler's faux-"Cinderella" (but very real "Hoosiers") factor -- but totally random and (mostly) unexpected.

How could you ask for more than that?

-- D.S.

Saturday (Elite 8) Quickie

Let's start with this simple proposition:

Tom Izzo is the best college basketball coach in the country. Period.

Because we judge our college basketball coaches on their success in the NCAA Tournament -- and no coach is more successful than Izzo.

He does it with championship-caliber teams. He does it with second-tier teams. He does it when we expect him to do it. And, most important, he does it when we don't expect him to do it.

Sure, Michigan State dodged a bullet in having to play Northern Iowa rather than Kansas, but - on the other hand - UNI beat Kansas. And the MSU defense locked down that clever UNI offense.

Now, Michigan State is one win -- against Tennessee, a game the Spartans should win -- from their most improbable Final Four yet of the prolific Izzo Era.

Meanwhile: So much for St. Mary's. That first-half beat-down by Baylor was one of the most devastating things I have ever seen at an elite moment of a college hoops season.

At this point, it sure looks like Baylor has precisely the kind of freakish athletes and shooters and size and fearlessness that typifies the profile of teams that bounce Duke out of the Tournament.

Oh: That was a classy move by Evan Turner to stalk off the court last night after Tennessee blocked him (cleanly) from the Elite Eight. Future endorser for Brand LeBron, I'm sure.

Today's regional finals:

Kansas State vs. Butler: Like most everyone else, I'm rooting for Butler. But Syracuse played with zero heart against the Bulldogs; K-State will play very very differently.

Kentucky vs. West Virginia: I don't buy the hype that this will be some sort of epic clash. I think UK will roll -- WVU can't keep up with Wall and Bledsoe and UK's NBA size is an ass-kicker.

Enjoy the games...

-- D.S.

03/26 Quickie: K-State, Gus Johnson, More

Beyond it leading today's SN column, last night was ridiculously amazing on a couple of levels:

*The game itself -- and you know what game I'm talking about -- was, shot-for-shot, as dramatic as they come. It lacked the shock value of Northern Iowa over Kansas, but it was a better game.

*It was all the more interesting in that the principals -- K-State and Xavier -- were hardly "brand" names of college basketball, certainly among casual/non-fans. It supports the notion that the Tournament transcends even its essential elements like upsets, Cinderellas and buzzer-beaters -- or that it has to be with the Final Four on the line.

This was, simply, a marvelous basketball game between two very good, very motivated teams.

*It completely marginalized the "marquee" game of the night -- Kentucky-Cornell. Now, partly that was because UK-Cornell was a blowout early and never really became a game. But I live in NYC and even our local CBS affiliate kept it on the K-State/Xavier game virtually all the way. I watched the entire first half of UK-Cornell -- and basically none of the 2nd. But, again, it affirms that pre-game storylines are fine, to a point. But at some point, the quality of the game itself trumps everything.

*Gus Johnson. If he wasn't already the most beloved play-by-play announcer, this just added to it with a new twist: He was a trending topic on Twitter last night. It was a classic "Gus Johnson game," and don't discount that the game was infinitely more enjoyable and memorable for it. (As a thought exercise, consider Dick Enberg calling that game. Or Jim Nantz.)

*The late finish. If this was the 7 p.m. game, it would have been great. But it would have lacked that clock-pushes-past-midnight-no-we're-not-done-yet-god-it's-late-but-how-can-you-sleep value of the 12:30 ending. Also, that it happened on a Thursday night, rather than a Friday night -- there is something extra special with a game specifically like this, about knowing you have to get up early the next morning for work or school, but just not caring, because this game is so great. Sorry, West Coasters: You miss out.

The game didn't set a new bar for upsets or Cinderella stories -- it merely set a new bar for game quality: The big 3s, the string of made free throws (totally underrated!), the intensity.

Tonight, we might see Northern Iowa continue on its Cinderella path -- I think they will beat Michigan State, but with an Izzo team in the Tournament with a week to prep, that's still a big challenge. And it would be fun to see St. Mary's beat Baylor. (In the column lead, I lay out a Butler-Northern Iowa-St. Mary's-John Wall Final Four as ideal.) But Ohio State-Tennessee? Duke-Purdue? Meh.

Then again: Kansas State-Xavier was supposed to be a "Meh" game last night. It ended up being the best game of the tournament.

See the entire SN column here. There's a lot more in there.

-- D.S.

03/25 Quickie: Cornell-Kentucky, More

As I lead in today's SN column, I am as excited about Cornell-Kentucky tonight as I have been about a college basketball game not involving personal rooting interest in years. Probably going back to George Mason-UConn in '06.

I've been thinking a lot about that Mason team -- it's the gold standard for Cinderellas and it is the bar by which we will measure Cornell.

Making the Sweet 16 is fun -- even making the Elite Eight is impressive. But immortality comes with the Final Four, and Cornell isn't even close yet.

Getting through Kentucky will resemble George Mason vs. Florida more than it will GMU-UConn -- if only because Kentucky is the closest thing I have seen in college hoops to Florida's ridiculous 3-NBA-center depth in the post.

Cousins, Patterson and Orton remind me of Noah, Horford and Richard -- and as good as Florida's guards (Green, Humphrey, Brewer) played in '06, there are plenty of good undersized PGs or sweet-shooting 2s or athletic 3s in college hoops. Few teams have NBA size -- and even fewer have THREE post players who are NBA-quality.

Now, there are a few mitigating factors: I love that Cornell has experience shooting in the Carrier Dome and Kentucky has none -- if UK has a potential scare area, it's 3-point shooting, which has been fine the past two games, but just think back to that loss to Tennessee: Missed 3s.

If Kentucky pounds the ball down low (and hyper-charges the pace behind Wall and Bledsoe), they will win -- probably handily (by 10 or more points).

If they try to win by shooting 3s... if they let Cornell dictate the pace... if UK's big men get into foul trouble... well, then Cornell can win.

They certainly have just as good of a shot -- if not better -- as George Mason did against regional 1-seed UConn back in 2006.

More you'll find in today's column:

*What will cause more problems: Syracuse's Onuaku out with an injury vs. Butler or WVU's Bryant out with injury vs. Washington. The latter, definitely.

*It's not surprising that Urban Meyer is getting vilified by the sports-media industry he threatened yesterday. I am less perturbed by what he did than others.

*MLS! (No, really!)

*Baseball change is... well, minimal!

*Rex Ryan! Arnold Palmer! Name of the Year!

See the complete column here. More later.

-- D.S.

2010 Name of the Year Bracket Released!

Annually, the best bracket of the year: The Name of the Year (NOTY) bracket. Check it out here. Not only is it the strongest field I have ever seen, but with the explosion of Twitter and Facebook, the NOTY competition should be as well-publicized as ever. My votes, forthcoming.

03/24 Quickie: Gotta Love Reform

It's a big week for reform: First, health care. Now: NFL overtime.

Longtime readers know that I have had a particular problem with the NFL's overtime system, which I have argued forever is a Super Bowl-sized disaster waiting to happen.

We nearly had it two years ago -- and we got as close as we can this past season, when the NFC title game went into OT, the Saints got the ball, kicked a field goal and that was that.

This always struck me as absurd. College football's playoff -- or non-playoff -- system has its problems, but at least they don't decide games by a coin flip.

And so today's SN column lead is in praise of the NFL owners getting shocked into submission -- the NFC title game must have freaked them into action.

I don't care what the motivation was; this was reform whose time was long overdue.

More you'll find in today's column:

*West Virginia is screwed.
*I picked the wrong San Diego State.
*UNC: 2010 NIT champs?
*Surprise: I'm no Jimmy Clausen fan.
*I think Gil is going to jail.
*Jose Canseco: Breaking news?

And then there's this -- which didn't make the column: This morning was all about the "F-bomb."

First, there was Joe Biden's "This is a big f-ing deal" to Barack Obama at the health-care reform bill signing.

But then there came a story -- first reported on PFT -- that when he took the Wonderlic, Tim Tebow asked if the players in the room could bow their heads in prayer before the test.

The response, from at least one player: "Shut the f--- up." And, apparently, the rest of the room cracked up.

Submitted without further comment.

Complete SN column here. More later.

-- D.S.

03/23 Quickie: Cornell Mania and More

This could have run tomorrow or Thursday, but I couldn't wait to dig into Cornell Mania -- Big Red is the story of the Sweet 16 week (no offense to Northern Iowa).

I can't imagine a more intriguing match-up than Cornell vs. Kentucky on Thursday night -- it might be the most-watched game of the Tournament.

I have almost -- almost -- convinced myself that Cornell will win. I think there's obviously a puncher's chance they WILL win, for a lot of reasons:

*They destroyed Wisconsin's defense, which is superior to Kentucky's.

*They nearly beat Kansas at Kansas back in January.

*Kentucky has yet to be tested... really, all year.

*The crowd should be with them.

*They shoot 3s extremely well -- and I'm not sure Kentucky does the same.

I think where I net out -- where we all probably net out -- is that we really WANT Cornell to win, in the same way we all wanted Northern Iowa to win.

I suspect that it comes down to John Wall hurtling down the court so quickly that Kentucky simply out-paces Cornell. I would run every possession and drive straight at the basket.

The notion that we are even thinking "Well, you never know..." is amazing enough.

More you'll find in today's SN column:

*UNI over Michigan State, b/c of Lucas' injury.
*Brittney Griner: 14 blocks in one game. Yikes.
*Why Illinois and VA Tech are better than Kansas.
*I would trade Donovan McNabb.
*I would go to the draft if I was Tebow.
*John Brantley IS a very good passer.
*Hope for Warriors fans.
*Hope for new NFL overtime rules.
*Hope for Erin Andrews, dancer.

-- D.S.

03/22 Quickie: How's Your Bracket?

Let's get right to the fun stuff:

As fleeting as it might be, from now until games start ending on Thursday night, I am in the 93rd percentile nationally of all brackets that are out there. This, of course, is in stark contrast to last year's finish in the 12th percentile.

Let's be clear: I'm headed for a nosedive, because I have Kansas winning the national title, and I (stupidly) picked Villanova to the Final Four. (I also had Georgetown to the Elite Eight.) That said: I picked Washington to the Sweet 16, along with Xavier and Butler. The phrase "Even a broken clock is right twice a day" comes to mind....

Astoundingly, Barack Obama is still pacing ahead of me -- 95th percentile -- even though he too has Kansas and Villanova in his Final Four, plus G'town in his Elite 8. That percentile will plummet. Meanwhile, the trusty ol' National Bracket has been tilted -- it's in the 55th percentile.

Per today's SN column, my big takeaway from the weekend -- from Northern Iowa knocking off the Tournament's prohibitive favorite to Cornell's leave-no-doubt run into the Sweet 16 -- was that, thankfully, unpredictability is back in the NCAA Tournament, after a couple years of conventionality.

If UNI can beat KU, then anything than happen: UNI can certainly beat Michigan State -- or Ohio State, for that matter. Xavier can beat K-State -- although I'm not sure anyone is playing better than Syracuse right now. St. Mary's could win 2, including a win over Duke. Why not?

(By the way: Purdue fans annoyed that I've been hammering Purdue as an "over-seed" can finally back off: Congrats on the run into the Sweet 16 -- it justifies the seeding, although I would say that given the over-seed, it's like a double-digit seed making the Sweet 16.)

And then there's the Game of the Tournament (at least, besides UNI-KU): Kentucky vs. Cornell. I was blown away at the way Cornell sliced up a Wisconsin defense that is far better than Kentucky's. That said: UK has athletes that Wisco doesn't -- and that Cornell has never seen before, even when they took Kansas to the wire in Lawrence.

However: That Cornell could keep up with Kansas -- and dominate Wisconsin -- should give them all the confidence they need to hang with Kentucky. All the pressure is on the Wildcats, and it would be an even bigger upset than UNI over Kansas.

Given the way the Tournament has unfolded, it wouldn't surprise me. And, obviously, everyone in the country besides Kentucky fans will be rooting for it.

Complete column here (Tiger talks! Mauer signs!) More later.

-- D.S.

Sunday (Kansas) Quickie

First, the fun stuff: As of the Kansas upset (see post below), no one in ESPN.com's Tournament Challenge had a perfect bracket anymore.

Despite losing Kansas (my champ pick) and Villanova (a Final Four pick), I am in the 84th percentile -- for now -- mostly thanks to picking Washington to the Sweet 16.

If you used the National Bracket, you'd be in the 50th percentile. Obama is in the 95th percentile.

The best part about the Kansas upset: All bets are off, both literally (on your bracket) and existentially (on the bracket). If KU can lose, anyone can lose, anytime.

One last point: Isn't it possible that rather than being a "no...no...YES!" event -- as most mainstream analysis is framing it -- Ali F's shot was precisely the best option possible if UNI wanted to win? Don't want to belabor it, but I'll bet the analytics bear that out.

More on tap today:

12:10: 8 Gonzaga vs. 1 Syracuse*
Kansas will be ultimate cautionary tale.
2:20 10 Georgia Tech vs. 2 Ohio St*
Suddenly, no more Kansas in the way.
2:30 5 Michigan St* vs. 4 Maryland
Ditto.
2:40 10 Mizzou vs. 2 West VA*
Probably freaked by Kansas loss.
2:50 12 Cornell vs. 4 Wisconsin*
How can you NOT root for Cornell?
4:50 6 Xavier* vs. 3 Pitt
My last Sweet 16 upset pick alive.
5:00 5 Texas A&M* vs. 4 Purdue
Make or break for Boilers. (I had Utah St.)
5:15 8 Cal vs. 1 Duke*
Shades of 1993? (No.)

If Thursday/Friday is any indication, then yesterday's insanity will yield to today's conventionality. Hope not.

-- D.S.

Shocker: Kansas Bounced in 2nd Round

Wow. What an amazing development: Kansas -- the overwhelming Tournament favorite -- bounced out in the first weekend of the Tournament.

It was an astonishingly impressive win by Northern Iowa -- and "shocking" doesn't do it justice for KU and KU fans, whose expectations were "Title or Bust" (let alone "Final Four or Bust.")

I mark it as a refreshing balancing out of the past two tournaments, which featured an all-1-seed Final Four (2008) and the overwhelming favorite winning it all (2009).

It obviously crushes a huge number of brackets, and if you picked Kentucky or Syracuse -- or anyone else, frankly (including Duke!) -- you are feeling really good.

Cranks were quick to piss on the idea that this was one of the greatest upsets in NCAA Tournament history, but I absolutely think it was, if you consider the expectations for Kansas.

There was also the obligatory knee-jerk "This is why you don't expand the Tournament!" commentary, which is actually counter-intuitive: You would see MORE huge upsets if the Top 32 teams, getting byes, had to play another 32 teams that came from a 64-team gantlet. You would certainly see them in the 2nd round, as we saw tonight.

Anyway, tonight -- hell, the rest of the week -- is not about that, or even about superlatives (as much as I want them to be).

It's about the very definition of CRAZY, BRACKET-ROCKING UPSET.

I picked KU to win it all -- as did a lot of people. And I couldn't care less about my bracket. I am just savoring the unexpected. THAT'S what the Tournament should be all about.

-- D.S.

Saturday (Bracket) Quickie

Let's get to the good stuff first. After the complete first round:

*The Daily Quickie Readers leader is 28-4.

*I am in the 37th percentile. (WTF?!)

*Obama is in the 97th percentile.

*If you used the National Bracket, you'd be in the 60th percentile.

*Yesterday was largely a dud, not just compared to Thursday but in an absolute sense. There were the two 10-7 upsets, but "10-7" is the new "9-over-8"; it's just not really an upset.

*Michigan St pushed to the finish by New Mexico St was intriguing, but didn't materialize as an actual upset. Obviously, Cornell is a great story -- but, again -- many saw it coming.

*Cal's win over Louisiville paired with Washington's win over Marquette affirms that the Pac-10 was able to nullify its entire crappy season, while helping to undermine the Big East.

*My biggest bracket whiff was picking Utah State over Texas A&M, compounded by the fact that I took Utah State to the Sweet 16. Ouch. I have 14 of 16 Sweet 16 teams left.

Today's Games, which will fill out half the Sweet 16: (My picks have a star -- 7 of the games have that team on my bracket; Ohio-Tennessee isn't, obviously, so I have to make a new day-of-game pick.)

1:00: 2 Villanova* vs. 10 St. Mary's. A true toss-up, considering the way Nova played against Robert Morris (and the way the Gaels played against Richmond). High upset potential.

3:20: 13 Murray St vs. 5 Butler*. Butler is better than Vanderbilt, and Murray St is going to find that out. But there's a reason Murray pulled the upset: Rebounding. And Butler's not big.

3:35: 14 Ohio* vs. 6 Tennessee. Well, I had Georgetown beating Ohio and Tennessee losing to San Diego St, so there's that. And Bruce Pearl's teams have been tough to match up with on that two-day turnaround. But Ohio looked REALLY good beating Georgetown. Would love to see this.

5:40: 9 Northern Iowa vs. 1 Kansas*. NIU will be a lot tougher to beat than Lehigh, but Kansas -- and all the 1-seeds -- have been buzz-saws so far.

5:45: 11 Old Dominion vs. 3 Baylor*. Baylor was the sexy pick to make a run, and it looks like a good call. ODU's early win over Notre Dame is tempered somewhat, now that we know the Big East uniformly stinks (except the regular-season and Tournament champs).

5:50: 11 Washington* vs. 3 New Mexico. My bracket looks terrible right now, but I can claim at least a minor moral victory if Washington wins, because I have them picked to get to the Sweet 16. I just don't buy New Mexico going on a deep run.

8:10: 7 BYU vs. 2 Kansas State*. Jimmer Frenette is a nationwide sensation, and the chance to watch him in action again will be fun to see. But Kansas State is a quantum leap better than Florida, and BYU is going to figure that out quickly.

8:15: 9 Wake Forest vs. 1 Kentucky*. I don't expect anything other than a UK rout. Wake has been playing with house money since that shot went down to carry them past Texas.

NCAA Round 1, Day 2 Early: Zzz?

Well, compared to yesterday -- or even in an absolute sense -- this afternoon was a snoozer.

*Saved the worst for last: Utah State busted my Spokane-South. I had U.S. to the Sweet 16. Ugh.

*Honestly, who DIDN'T have Cornell? Not really an upset -- but totally awesome, nonetheless.

*I have Wisconsin to the Sweet 16, but was actively rooting for the Wofford upset. Oh well.

*Purdue deserves some credit, but not much. Purdue partisans have to justify a 4-seed, which means that they need to not just beat a short-handed Siena, but go to the Sweet 16. (I had Siena, dammit.)

*Everything else was mostly predictable or conventional -- seriously, did you really take Clemson?

*New York City is the worst market in the 1st round evening: We're stuck with Duke-Pine Bluff and Syracuse-Vermont, likely all the way through.

(We got Cornell and Siena in the afternoon, though, which was ideal. It's not like I don't have MMOD on my computer and iPhone anyway.)

How's your bracket?

-- D.S.

Quickie: Well THAT Was a Great Start

Let's get to the fun stuff first:

*After one day, not a single entrant in the Daily Quickie Readers group still has a perfect bracket.

*Of the millions of brackets in the ESPN.com Tournament Challenge, only 51 are still perfect.

*I went 9-7, with my worst miss Georgetown (to the Elite 8) and my best save Washington (to the Sweet 16).

*The National Bracket is in the 38th percentile; Barack Obama's bracket is in the 97th percentile.

*That was the single-best first day of the Tournament of all time. The afternoon was already ridiculous, then you add in the Ohio monster upset, the Northern Iowa long-distance finish and the wild Washington upset win.

*As I wrote here yesterday, then led in my SN column this morning, yesterday reinforces that "64" has nothing to do with why the Tournament is amazing. Yesterday did not affirm that the current format shouldn't be messed with; in fact, it probably proved that expanding it won't hurt the Tournament at all -- and can only offer more benefits.

More upsets. More buzzer-beaters. More bracket-watching. More ducking out of work. More shared moments.

That's what the most hard-line anti-expansionists don't get -- no one remembers the quality of the teams, or even the quality of the games. They remember upsets (or, in the case of Robert Morris, near-upsets) and they remember great finishes.

Doubling the number of 16-game days from 2 to 4 (by going from 64 to 96) seems like a pretty good way to get more of what we all essentially love about the Tournament.

Today's column includes a complete game-by-game preview of today -- I hope that yesterday was foreshadowing, not an anomaly. An indicator that the gap between 2s and 3s and 13s and 14s and 15s has narrowed to the point that any game is a toss-up.

Things slow down dramatically after today. Yes, 8 games tomorrow and 8 games Sunday will be fun, but it isn't nearly as exciting as the mid-afternoon workday frenzy of yesterday and today.

By Monday, the field will be 16 -- from yesterday's start, let's hope that it includes plenty of upstarts. Remember: Anything more than a 5-seed in the Sweet 16 should count as a Cinderella. Obviously a double-digit seed in the Sweet 16 is a real Cinderella, and if they don't come from a power conference, they can expect the full-blown Cindy treatment.

Complete column here. More later, reacting to the afternoon set of games.

-- D.S.

NCAA Thursday Afternoon: Wow

What an afternoon of games. Wow. And, for me, the big takeaway is how much this validates the idea of expanding the Tournament -- or at least mitigating the hysterics so opposed to it.

The reason this afternoon was so terrific had nothing to do with the so-called "quality" of the teams. It had to do with:

*A lower seed beating a higher seed.
*A "no-name" beating a "name."
*Buzzer-beating finishes.
*Your judgment jeopardized/validated.

That it was "Murray State" or "Robert Morris" or "Vanderbilt" or "Villanova" -- it doesn't matter. 99 percent of fans who engage during the NCAA Tournament -- hell, 99 percent of college hoops fans who claim to love the sport -- had never seen Murray or Bobby Mo play.

What matters is that a "15" was beating a "2." Or that a "14" beat a "3." Or that you'd never heard of Murray State but heard of Vanderbilt. Or that this team won on a dramatic last-second shot. Or that your personal picks were right/wrong/whatever.

Expanding the Tournament doesn't change any of that. In fact, it multiplies it: Instead of two days of jam-packed games, upsets, buzzer-beaters and bracket affirmation, you get four days.

Expanding the Tournament might be all about the money, but it doesn't necessarily mean the idea is a bad one, when you remove the money and focus simply on the fan experience.

This is what the critics of expansion miss almost entirely. "Murray State" is a placeholder for any no-name team that wins on a buzzer-beater. "Old Dominion" is a placeholder for any lower seed that upsets a higher seed. "BYU" is a placeholder for a "have-not" beating a big-brand "have."

And "Look at me: I'm still 4-0!" or "Wow, if I had lost Villanova, my whole bracket would have been screwed, but I love it anyway!" has nothing to do with how many teams are in the tournament or what their pre-Tournament "quality" might be.

There is nothing inherent in expanding the Tournament to 96 teams that detracts from all of these basic elements of what makes the Tournament so amazing. In fact, it might just enhance it by giving us more.

That's what everyone seemed to be crying out for today: We love this. Give us more.

-- D.S.

On Florida's NCAA Tournament Return

It seems ironic that Florida could be the first team eliminated from the NCAA Tournament, given that the Gators haven't lost an NCAA Tournament game since March 2005.

Their 12-game winning streak is one shy of Duke's 13 straight from 91-93. But given Florida's brutal draw -- BYU is ripe for a Tournament win -- I think it ends this afternoon.

Because the "12-game winning streak" has, of course, the world's biggest caveat: They haven't played in the Tournament since they cut down the nets in 2007.

And this year's team is not that '07 mini-dynasty. That team is a memory -- albeit one that should continue to satisfy every Gator fan for decades, no matter how (or if) they do in the Tournament.

Obviously, I am rooting for Florida to win. But having watched enough of their games this season, I do not expect them to win. I did not pick them to win.

Then again, I didn't pick them to win in 2006 -- the exact opposite of the expectations I had for them in 2007, when it was "championship or failure."

My expectations this year couldn't be lower. A win would be improbable and most enjoyable.

But mostly, I want them to uphold the standard of of the team that created this current 12-game NCAA Tournament winning streak: Play with heart and make a game of it.

-- D.S.

Quickie: First Thursday Is Here

Last chance to sign up for the Daily Quickie Readers group of the Tournament Challenge!

I am honored and thrilled that more than 300 of you have chosen to join the group this year -- with plenty of room for more! (It remains a source of pride for me that the Quickie Readers group total from 2006 -- more than 10,000 entries -- would have been the 11th-biggest group in the Tournament Challenge this year. I'm sure many of you were a part of that.)

Today's SN column has an annual tradition: The best quick-hit viewing guide you'll find, with each game of the day laid out -- by time, the only way that matters -- and complete with prediction and typically brief-yet-shallow analysis.

Here is the big point from the column: Today is precisely the reason why the hysterics about a 96-team Tournament are overblown. Anti-96ers continue to think that "dilution" would be a problem to people. And it might -- to the 99th percentile of sports fans, the ones who follow college hoops enough to pay close attention to it before March 1. Even most of those fans probably never saw Top 10 New Mexico play a regular-season game and are guessing if they can figure out Richmond-St. Mary's.

But everyone else really dives in after Selection Sunday. And today showcases why fans really care: They get a distraction from work during the day, they get to compete/gamble with their friends or co-workers. Hopefully, they get the rush of a buzzer-beater or upset. That's it.

College basketball's media intelligentsia don't like to hear that, because it offends their sensibilities -- not to mention diminishes their life's work and passion. But it's just that simple. And whether the pairing is Kansas-Kentucky or Richmond-St. Mary's, fans will watch because the game is on during the work day and you have basically gambled on it against your friends. There are plenty of lame NCAA Tournament games; fans remember buzzer-beaters and fans remember upsets. And it doesn't matter what the names are on the front of the jerseys, as long as the higher-seed beats the lower-seed or a team wins at the last second.

That's why last night, while watching the NIT, it was so clear to me: The only difference between no one caring about Northwestern-Rhode Island and everyone caring about Northwestern-Rhode Island is calling them "NIT" games vs. "NCAA Tournament" games.

If they were on an NCAA Tournament bracket and on at 2:30 in the afternoon on a work day -- ideally featuring some kind of down-to-the-wire finish -- fans would care. It's just that simple. And 32 more games -- two more workday 16-game diversions -- would be as enthusiastically welcomed as the 16-game workday diversions that happen today and tomorrow.

There's a lot more in today's SN column, including an analysis of Tebow's Pro Day workout, which did exactly what it had to do: It shifted the conversation from "his mechanics suck" to "his mechanics are improving." All he had to do was show improvement -- ironically, the bearish draftniks themselves are responsible for that absurdly low bar. After a month of focused work with tutors and experts, they couldn't NOT improve.

Oh, and be sure to check out the Obama bracket analysis I did for Newsweek.

Enjoy what will hopefully be a wild day of games!

-- D.S.

2010 NCAA Picks: Can't Get Worse!

Let's get on the record:

After last year's debacle -- finishing in the 18th percentile -- I had "bracket-bypass" surgery: No more gorging on unfulfilling upsets.

If Kansas doesn't win it, at least I won't fail alone. For the record, my picks:

Midwest 1st: KU, UNLV, Mich St, Maryland, San Diego St, G'town, Okla St, Ohio St. 16: KU, Mich St, G'town, Ohio St. Final: KANSAS over G'town.

West 1st: Cuse, Zaga, Butler, Vandy, Xavier, Pitt, BYU, K-St. 16: Cuse, Butler, Xavier, K-St. Final: SYRACUSE over Xavier.

East 1st: Kent'y, Texas, Cornell, Wisco, Washington, New Mexico, Mizzou, West VA. 16: KY, Wisco, Washington, WVU. Final: KENTUCKY over WVU.

Midwest 1st: Duke, L'ville, Utah St., Siena, ND, Baylor, Richmond, Nova. 16: Duke, Utah St, Baylor, Nova. Final: VILLANOVA over Duke.

Champ: Kansas over Kentucky.

Daily Quickie Readers Bracket Challenge

Another reminder to sign up for the Daily Quickie Readers group of the Tournament Challenge. Now with Obama's bracket included in the field!

03/17 Quickie: Obama Bracket and More

Today is going to be a terrific day.

President Obama's NCAA Tournament bracket gets released, which last year instantly became one of my favorite March Madness traditions.

I'm going to talk to my 3-year-old's preschool class to get their picks for a half-dozen of the most contentious bracket picks.

Meanwhile, I'm tracking Tim Tebow's Pro Day in Gainesville, which goes this morning and should -- like everything else Tebow-related -- dominate NFL news today.

Oh, and I've got my fantasy baseball league draft at 5:30 today, and I'm scrambling to get caught up in time to build on last season's breakthrough middle-of-the-pack finish.

Not bad, considering that tomorrow and Friday are the best sports days of the year -- and today should really be about hanging out (and maybe clearing your work schedule for tomorrow).

Today's SN column digs into Obama's Final Four, Tebow's Pro Day, the Play-In Game (Woot: Pine Bluff!), the NIT (1-seed goes down in the 1st round!) and more. Check it out here.

Much more coming later today.

-- D.S.

Obama Bracket Final Four Announced

President Obama has released the Final Four on his bracket: Kansas, Kentucky, Kansas State and Villanova. ESPN will have the entire bracket tomorrow morning.

For some context, Obama's bracket in 2009 out-picked 80 percent of the country.

What can we read into his Final Four? I'm saving it for tomorrow's SN column, but Obama is fully on board with the KU and John Wall bandwagons and obviously (a) doubts Duke (woo!) and (b) doubts the health of Onuaku as a linchpin of a Syracuse run to Indianapolis.

-- D.S.

03/16 Quickie: Bracket Self-Doubt

Be sure to enter the Daily Quickie Readers Tournament Challenge group!

There is something comforting about the rhythm of the first week of the NCAA Tournament. The brackets come out Sunday night. There is a flood of info on Monday as you make your picks. Then, Tuesday: The self-doubt.

The lead of today's SN column highlights my biggest doubts, region-by-region, on my bracket:

*Georgetown over Ohio State
*Xavier to the Elite Eight
*Washington to the Sweet 16
*My knee-jerk Duke antipathy, which blinds me to the arguably reasonable notion that they are headed to the Final Four.

I still feel better about this bracket than any I have filled out in years -- hmm, perhaps aside from the year that Florida won its second title and I had no doubt they would win it again as I filled out my bracket.

On the other hand, aside from those few picks above, my bracket lacks those stunning reaches that make the Tournament exciting. But I have gotten over the idea of proving how smart I am through longshot Tournament bracket-picking; I'll settle for feeling middle-of-the-pack right.

More you'll find in today's column:

• My annual homage to the Play-In Game!
• Um, should we worry about the Cuse?
• Brady Quinn is delusional.
• Tiger/Masters boffo ratings? Obviously.
• Andre apologizes: He knew better.
• Cliff Lee is kind of competitive.
• I still believe in the Rockets.
• Gilbert is contrite -- let him back.
• Putting "peephole" into prison context.

Check out the entire column here. More later.

-- D.S.

Yahoo Acquiring Citizen Sports?

Coincidentally timed to my WSJ column earlier today, the WSJ's Kara Swisher floats a really interesting rumor: That Yahoo is about to acquire a major sports company, and that Citizen Sports seems like the most likely fit.

First of all, I know Jeff Ma and the Citizen Sports group, and they are brilliant, terrific people creating an absolutely phenomenal product -- they are at the leading edge. They have the Sportacular iPhone app, but for their best stuff, go to Facebook, where they understand the space as well as any company out there, including Zynga.

And what they do -- particularly in social media -- would fit snugly in Yahoo's portfolio of sports products. It's a complement -- and something that keeps pace with ESPN in the social media space.

But there's more: In the same way that Carol Bartz recognized that Jamie Mottram's sports-blog strategy was a template for other categories (News, Entertainment, etc.), the Citizen Sports platform capabilities can be leveraged for way more than sports. And it will be.

On the one hand, Citizen Sports would help Yahoo connect with their users in new and different and powerful ways. On the other, of course, there is tremendous revenue potential to unlock -- either with brand sponsorships or a la carte mobile applications.

Credit Yahoo for dipping into start-up sports media to help the company grow. And Citizen Sports would be a hell of a smart acquisition -- the $50 million Swisher is talking about seems like a great price.

I'm surprised that AOL didn't pursue this more aggressively, because it is a similarly good fit for what AOL is trying to do, esp. at that price.

Tracking, but all eyes on Carol Bartz at the World Sports Congress on Wednesday in Yahoo's LA backyard.

-- D.S.

Picking NCAA Brackets: Kansas, Duh

I just filed my annual column making my bracket picks for the Wall Street Journal. After last year's worst-ever 12th-percentile finish, I explained that my system has gone through an overhaul -- the equivalent of gastric-bypass surgery (uh, "bracket-bypass surgery?").

No more empty calories and super-sized portions, represented by too-clever-by-half over-thinking. Portion control.

I'll post it when it is live, but I'm ready to reveal my bracket now, a sneak peek for DS.com:

Champ: Kansas
Final Four: Kansas over Syracuse, Kentucky over Villanova.

Midwest:
1st Rd: 1 Kansas, 8 UNLV, 5 Mich St, 4 Maryland
11 San Diego St, 3 G'town, 7 Oklahoma St, 2 Ohio St.
Regional: Kansas, Michigan St, G'town, Ohio State.
Midwest champ: Kansas over G'town.

Analysis: Chalk (except SDSU over Tennessee). 5 Mich St over 4 Maryland isn't an upset. 3 G'town over 2 Ohio St isn't an upset (but it is iffy). Yes, Kansas has a tough path, but they are also clearly the best team in the country. This region is rugged but predictable.

West:
1st Rd: 1 Cuse, 8 Gonzaga, 5 Butler, 4 Vandy
6 Xavier, 3 Pitt, 7 BYU, 2 Kansas State
Regional: Cuse, Butler, Xavier, K-State
West champ: Cuse over Xavier

Analysis: Chalk 1st round. I don't consider Xavier over Pitt an upset, if you know X-Men's Tourney history. (Same with Xavier over K-State. OK, so I'm in the tank for Xavier.) Yes, BYU over Florida, ending the Gators' NCAA Tournament winning streak at 12.

East:
1st Rd: 1 Kentucky, 8 Texas, 12 Cornell, 4 Wisco
11 Washington, 3 New Mex, 10 Mizzou, 2 WVU
Regional: Kentucky, Wisco, Washington, WVU
East champ: Kentucky over West Virginia

Analysis: I'm suckered for Cornell (Temple is under-seeded). Wisconsin will give Kentucky its toughest game. I feel OK not buying New Mexico; but I can envision great regret taking Washington, won't I?

South:
1st Rd: 1 Duke, 9 L'ville, 12 Utah St, 13 Siena
6 Notre Dame, 3 Baylor, 7 Richmond, 2 Nova
Regional: Duke, Utah St, Baylor, Nova
South champ: Nova over Duke.

Analysis: I couldn't take Duke to win the region. You knew that. I am obsessed with the Spokane sub-region: Purdue is the worst over-seed since Cincinnati as a 1 in 2000, and Utah State will have huge "home-ish" support in Spokane. I may be a year too late on Nova, and merely trying to make up for taking UCLA over Nova in the 2nd round from last year: My debacle.

OK, let's get to your picks. Don't forget to get into the Daily Quickie Readers Tournament Challenge. The original returns!

-- D.S.

NCAA National Bracket: Early Look

Longtime readers know that I look at the "National Bracket" - the aggregation of all bracket picks - for "wisdom of the crowd" clues. In very early returns, there are few notables:

In the 1st round, there is only 1 upset: Georgia Tech over Oklahoma State. (Louisville over Cal doesn't count.)

In the 2nd round, there are two upsets, but not really: 5 Michigan State over 4 Maryland and 5 Texas A&M over (over-seeded) 4 Purdue. Both are by 54-46 percentages.

From there, the bracket is all chalk. The closest there is to an upset is Ohio State over Georgetown by a 51-49 polling margin. But, again: Chalk rules.

The National Bracket always closely correlates to the seeding, so don't look for much unconventional thinking.

Then again, if you had used the National Bracket last year, you would have outperformed 88 percent of all brackets. So there's that.

-- D.S.

Analyzing the NCAA Bracket

It's Sunday night and I've already filed my "Monday morning" column to Sporting News -- no need to wait: The entire thing is about the bracket, and within a couple hours, I knew how I was thinking about it.

I'm also putting together my annual take-you-through-my-thought-process column for the Wall Street Journal, so I don't want to "spoil" that, but here's the gist:

I'm not going to screw things up like I did last year, when I tried to be all cutesy and show how smart I was. Occam's Razor, my friends: Kansas over Kentucky, and I ain't looking back.

Much more on this in a bit, but the only things I'm sticking with are: (1) No matter what their seed, Duke will underperform. That they are a 1-seed -- and that they are on a collision course with Villanova, a movie we saw last year -- doesn't change that.

And (2) I cannot understand how Purdue earns a 4-seed. You cannot go with "resume" or "body of work" when so much of that was wrapped up in a player who is not available, and all evidence we have is that the team is not very good. Purdue losing to Siena will be a very trendy pick, and I probably will not be able to resist it -- given that even if Purdue beats Siena (or even beats the Texas A&M-Utah State winner), they ain't getting further. But I'm betting on the former.

Here we go: I'm already slipping down the rabbit hole. I could spend the next three hours writing out commentary on everything I'm thinking right now about the bracket. I'll post my Sporting News link as soon as it's ready, and otherwise will chime in with more later Monday.

This really is the best few days of the sports year, even these 72 hours before anything happens on the court. Enjoy it! How's YOUR bracket look?

-- D.S.

Daily Quickie Readers Bracket Challenge

The 2010 NCAA Tournament Bracket is out, so take one of your multiple entries and be sure to join the Daily Quickie Readers group of the Tournament Challenge.

More in a bit.

Selection Sunday (Bubble) Quickie

Countdown to 6 p.m. There are 1-2 at-large bids in play (between yesterday morning and today, two were securely claimed by UTEP and Utah St, which both lost in their respective conference finals).

Question: Did Minnesota earn its way to an at-large bid, even if they lose to Ohio State? (And if they DO beat Ohio State, which team on the Bubble definitely loses out?)

All the bracket projections seem to indicate that Mississippi State has not yet earned an at-large bid, despite beating Florida and Vandy on back-to-back days.

Speaking of Florida, the Gators seem to be that team that is most tenuously on (or off) the Bubble. (Illinois might be, too.)

Know who is really hating life? Akron. Had a chance to win their way in and lost to Ohio.

Of yesterday's Bubble teams who lost, Cal is still in -- despite the Pac-10 being terrible this year, their RPI is Top 25.

UNLV should still be in -- congrats to San Diego State, which started the week as a solid "out" and not only earned an at-large invite, but got the auto-bid.

Xavier: Definitely still in. Have been locks for weeks. (Richmond is a lock, too, even if they lose to Temple in the final.)

Georgia Tech is definitely in, even if they lose to Duke today.

Speaking of losers, it is going to be fascinating to see where Purdue gets seeded: Resume vs. reality. They are obviously not the same team they were with Hummel.

Let's review the action at the margin. If you assume Utah St and Georgia Tech are definitely in, let's call it 2 spots for these teams:

VA Tech
Florida
Illinois
Ole Miss
Mississippi St
Minnesota

Obviously, if Mississippi State and/or Minnesota win, then it is likely that Florida, VA Tech, Illinois and Ole Miss are out.

If MSU and Minnesota lose, I think it comes down to VA Tech, Florida and Illinois for 2 spots. Illinois' RPI is in the 70s; VA Tech played a PATHETIC schedule; Florida couldn't win when it mattered most.

Of the three, I could see the committee taking Illinois and Florida, punishing VA Tech for padding its schedule with terrible teams and rewarding Illinois and Florida for putting together tougher schedules.

As usual, I don't think anyone -- aside from that team's fans -- is going to cry or gripe about their team being left out. All had their chance to win 1 or 2 more games to get themselves securely in the field, and didn't.

One eye on Minnesota, one eye on Mississippi State. But otherwise, let's get to 6 p.m. already!

-- D.S.

Saturday (Bubble) Quickie

If I was on the Selection Committee, I would evaluate things like this on the Bubble this morning:

IN, for sure:
San Diego St
UNLV
Illinois
Georgia Tech
Washington/Cal loser

MAYBE:
VA Tech (apparently, a lock)
Ole Miss (apparently, a lock)
Florida (apparently, a lock)

Rhode Island (can play itself in with a win over Temple?)
Mississippi State (apparently screwed)
Minnesota (what if they beat Purdue?)

OUT:
Dayton

I don't know what to do with that SEC trio on the "Maybe" list. Ole Miss and Florida were both in, heading into yesterday. Both lost. Ole Miss was probably supposed to lose (vs. Tennessee in Nashville?) But Florida-Mississippi State was really a "play-in" situation; it is very easy for the Committee to judge two Bubble teams when they play head-to-head.

It's hard for me to laud San Diego State and UNLV for winning huge, must-win games against better teams and not smack Florida for choking when it matters most. All "bracketologist" stuff suggests Florida is still in, but it wouldn't surprise me if MSU leap-frogged them. (And yet the leading bracket projection aggregator has MSU out and not even close.)

Not many Bubble teams left that can do something to help themselves go from "out" to "in" today. Rhode Island, playing Temple. Mississippi State, apparently, needs another win in the SEC. Minnesota may have to do more than just beat Purdue today.

Every other at-large spot seems accounted for.

-- D.S.

03/12 Quickie: Bracket Already Busted

Don't forget to sign up for the Daily Quickie Readers group of the Tournament Challenge!

Last March, I set a new low for worst bracket performance of my life -- it was epically bad. Heading into this year, my feeling was: Well, at least things can't get worse!

I find new ways to undercut myself: This year, I have been extremely bullish on Syracuse winning it all -- partly because I can't resist avoiding taking the two big favorites, Kansas and Kentucky. And partly because I really do think Syracuse can win it all.

Then yesterday, they lose their 2nd straight -- but lost Onuaku to a knee injury that will probably not prohibit him from playing in the NCAA Tournament, but certainly combines with the losses to shake my confidence in taking Syracuse all the way. Cripes, I can't catch a break on this.

Nevertheless, I'm totally locked in to college basketball right now -- with three days until Selection Sunday, you probably are, too. Today's SN column starts with my Syracuse debacle, but then gets into some serious nitty-gritty at the periphery of the Bubble.

My favorite part of today's schedule: De facto "play-in" games, in which if a Bubble team wins, they're in, and if they don't, they're out. The classic: San Diego State. But put Illinois in there, too, along with Ole Miss and Mississippi State.

After last night, I think Florida is in (even if they lose to Mississippi State). Memphis is out (and I think St. John's should break the bank to try to lure Memphis coach Josh Pastner to NYC), as is UAB. Arizona State is probably out, too, after losing to Stanford in the godawful Pac-10. (Anyone else totally want to see UCLA run the table and win the league's auto-bid?)

Here is one other thing: I never would have believed that Northwestern could reach 20 wins in a season and not even REMOTELY be in the Bubble discussion. Not even a pity mention. The sorry part is that if they had gotten back even a single win from the four combined losses to Iowa, Indiana and Penn State (twice!), they would definitely be in the discussion.

I have a personal rooting interest today: Lafayette over Lehigh, because Lafayette starts Mike Gruner, who was the point guard on my high school's state-title winning basketball team five years ago (long after I was gone, but a huge source of pride).

I get this sense that even though I'm immersed in college hoops, the lead story of the morning probably should have been Tiger reportedly returning to golf for the Masters, which will be the most-watched tournament (and biggest s#!t show) in the history of golf.

Plus: If I get any say in the matter, can LaDainian Tomlinson come to New York?

Finally: I am actually bummed that Gilbert Arenas is changing his number from 0 to 6. "0" came to define Arenas as much as any number has ever defined a player. It was his brand. That things are so bad that he has to abandon that is sad. And even if he IS going to change his number, why change it to the number that LEBRON is changing his number to? Agent Zero: Stick with Zero.

Complete SN column here -- it will get you up to speed on everything college hoops, and more. More later.

-- D.S.

03/11 Quickie: Bubble, Big East, Big Ben

Don't forget to sign up for the Daily Quickie Readers group of the Tournament Challenge!

The early part of Championship Week is interesting -- I love the auto-bid games out of one-bid leagues, like that wild comeback by Montana over Weber State last night.

But things get materially interesting on/around the Bubble starting today. Seton Hall seeing any NCAA hopes pop yesterday vs. Notre Dame was an appetizer. (Um: Louisville...WTF?)

In today's SN column, I lay out the other Bubble teams with something to win -- or lose -- today: Florida. Georgia Tech. San Diego State. Memphis. Arizona State and Washington, frankly.

Tomorrow, it gets even more crazy. Most at-large spots are clinched, obviously, but at the margins, teams' seasons are on the line today and tomorrow.

(The Big East quarters, meanwhile, are typically ridiculous: 7 of the 8 quarterfinalists are NCAA Tournament teams, and the 8th just happens to be playing a grudge match against its old coach.)

Today and tomorrow are good appetizers for a week from today and tomorrow -- can you believe that the First Thursday/First Friday is only a week away? Best two days of the sports year.

More you'll find in today's column:
*NFL's most offseason improved: Ravens?
*Big Ben admits to... what, exactly?
*More bad symbolism for the Celtics.
*Tebow's Wonderlic 22 (see Teblog).
*I love "floating realignment."

Complete column here. More later. Oh, and I taped the KSK podcast last night as a guest. Should be up later today over there. I don't think I said anything too ridiculous, although I made the first public pronouncement that I think Tim Tebow won't be a 1st-round pick. (I know.)

-- D.S.

Quickie: Turner, Big East, Strassy, More

My immersion into March and its obsessive focus on college basketball continues today, pegging today's SN column lead off SN giving its National POY award to Evan Turner.

Now, I had been on the John Wall bandwagon all year -- and he remains the biggest, most exhilarating talent in college basketball and an all-time freshman -- but something clicked for me when I finally recognized that Wall plays with 3 NBA Lottery picks, including another NBA point guard. If Wall didn't go to Kentucky, Eric Bledsoe, Cousins and Patterson would have been more than enough to get Kentucky into the Top 10.

Now, if Turner wasn't available for Ohio State -- as he wasn't for four weeks -- I would be surprised if the Buckeyes could make the Tournament. He lacks Wall's ultimate sizzle, but he is far more well-rounded... and valuable to his team.

All that said: Both Turner and Wall will be judged not on their sublime regular seasons, but on how they do in the NCAA Tournament. Turner needs nothing less than a Wade-like run to the Final Four. For Wall, the Final Four is a minimum; he really needs a championship if he wants to be spoken of in the same context as Carmelo, who I think is, game-for-game, the greatest college basketball player of the modern (post-ESPN, post-64-team-tourney, post-3-point-shot) era.

Anything less, and -- absolutely -- I think less of their college careers. Just look at Kevin Durant, who was amazing in college but couldn't even get out of the first weekend of his one and only NCAA Tournament. For me, that layers in huge disappointment.

There is a reason that college hoops is defined -- quite intensely, thank you -- for March, and not for November through February. Make your mark now, or don't make it at all.

More you'll find in today's SN column:

*UConn really stinks.
*Seton Hall-ND: Should be a NCAA play-in!
*Butler saves a Bubble spot.
*Stephen Strasburg will be just fine.
*Heat < Bobcats?
*Is NASCAR heading for crisis?

See the complete column here. More later.

-- D.S.

Sloan Sports Analytics Conference Recap

In thinking about how to put the MIT Sloan Sports Analytics conference this past weekend into some kind of perspective, I'm asking myself what were the deepest impressions I was left with. And the one that stuck with me most was the people.

Start with the idea that the group totaled 1,000. That's up from 400 a year ago. In fact, they had 400 people this year on the waiting list alone, who couldn't get in. With that kind of volume, you're bound to be overwhelmed.

When I walked into the main ballroom for the opening remarks -- or the keynote panel at noon, headlined by Michael Lewis, Simmons, Cuban, Polian, Kraft, Morey -- I was blown away by the fact that we filled up the whole massive hall. In the hallways between sessions, packed. The panel for Baseball Analytics wasn't just standing room only; there was a huge line out the door, necks craning to peek in (TVs outside each room helped with overflow -- obviously, that panel needs a bigger room next year).

But it was more than the sheer volume: Everyone was so nice. So friendly. So enthusiastic. It wasn't like a business conference or an affinity conference (like for Trekkies or Star Wars people or Cubs fans), but the best of both worlds. But the main thing is that everyone was really excited to be there and to be around each other.

The huge group was divided into a couple of main segments: There were a ton of students -- college and MBA -- along with a slew of recent grads, which was part of the reason there was so much energy. I don't want to presume, but it felt like most weren't just interested in analytics as fans; they were hustling to try to make connections, to try to get jobs in a field they love.

And that's because of another key group there: Professionals. Team execs, league execs, media execs. If you want to work in a front office, there were a ton of folks to try to track down. If you want to write for a stats-oriented publication that has turned into a de facto development pipeline for front-office jobs, their editors were there.

In an era of the Theo Epstein executive tree (including Josh Byrnes and Jed Hoyer) and Tampa's dynamic duo of Matt Silverman and Andrew Friedman -- when "Prospectus" is an even better pedigree than "JD/MBA" -- the student-attendees and pros alike were a self-selecting group that sees where things are going and want to be part of it.

I had the really unique experience of sitting down for a while with a team executive I admire to an absurd degree (no, not Theo, who wasn't there, and not Morey) for a perfectly chummy chat, and at one point, his panel coordinator approached him and let him know that they had collected 250 resumes for him to take back with him.

I actually think that next year's conference could use a "Career" panel, featuring different pieces of advice. For example, my question is if a would-be future team exec is better off getting in the organization any way they can -- getting coffee, making copies, whatever -- and trying to impress from the inside... or gaining functional skills somewhere other than sports, then trying to move over. The answer is probably both; you ain't gonna learn investment banking analyst program modeling skills necessary to be a front-office contributor if you're working in the team p.r. office and hoping to work your way up.

Here's how I see it: If you really want to be a team front-office executive, you are better off spending your summer internship not fetching coffee for a team or leading stats-oriented Web site. Start your own and own the hell out of some segment of analysis. Post daily, post brilliantly, gently pass your stuff around to folks in media who would appreciate it. If it's good -- and if you're not good, you might as well not even try -- the teams will notice. There is no barrier (at least no publishing barrier) to becoming your own expert and putting your talent on display. THAT is the fast track.

(There is probably an executive education business to be created at MIT or elsewhere that is an intensive one-year program that combines case-study work of sports-industry management with analytical skills learned in an IB analyst program. In fact, that would be a hell of a combo for MIT Sloan and the Prospectus company.)

As always, the success stories of how to make it tend to include a whole lot of relationship management and not a small bit of luck/timing/serendipity. The latter, OK: Hard to control. The former? Well, that's a big reason everyone was there. I really appreciated the folks who I saw introduce themselves directly; panelists were, for the most part, entirely happy to be approached.

To be honest, I wish I had even more of that networking skill. There were a few folks there I really wanted to meet but couldn't figure out the context in which to introduce myself; I am, of course, an idiot and should have directly approached them, stuck out my hand and said hello. Even if everything else out of my mouth was embarrassing and idiotic -- certainly my anxiety, rational or not -- it really doesn't matter. If there was ever an easy space to meet someone, it was this one.

I mean, I wasn't going to stand in line for a half-hour after a panel to try to shake Mark Cuban's hand -- not that there's anything wrong with that if that's something you wanted to do. Then again, I was a complete moron not to say something to him when it was him and me and about two other people in the privacy of the panelists' break room, particularly given that we were both at the Hawks-Mavs game the week before, and if nothing else, I could say, "Hey, how about that crazy play with Jason Kidd and the Hawks coach?" Don't ask me why I didn't say anything. At other moments, I was Julie McCoy, cruise director. Just something to work on.

All I'm saying is: If the context is right, say hi. The worst thing someone can do is impolitely blow you off -- and that says a lot more about them than you. (If you think the worst-case scenario is that you'll sound like a dumbass, you are more likely than not simply letting your nerves get the best of you. Trust me: I'm worried I'll sound like a dumbass -- and often do -- constantly. And, in the end, oh well. At least I will have taken the at-bat.)

I thought the most interesting insight came from Simmons. When asked by Lewis what the analytics industry gets wrong, Bill said they don't make it consumer-friendly enough. Agreed completely. It's not that the stats are bad; it's that the messaging is awkward. Fans want to be able to experience their sports better -- the analytics community has to figure out how to communicate their concepts more clearly, because they DO make the game more fun to understand.

Here's how I'd sum it up: Unlike within the analytics community itself, there's no need to show your work; just offer up some simple sense, and that's good enough. Just make me smarter as a fan and more appreciative of the nuances of the game. I judged a research paper competition run by the conference; my favorite was a paper that compared NBA offensive strategy to driving your car in traffic. I got his point. I think that for next year, they should add a new category of essay: Explaining an advanced, interesting piece of analytics so that the average fan can get it. Frankly, there's an entire book in that for the conference if they can generate enough entries.

Ironically, I didn't spend a ton of time at the panels. In the morning, I sat in the future of sports management. After that, I kind of flitted around. At lunch, I watched the keynote panel, then I was one session away from my own panel, so I just paced around, ducking into a panel on Basketball Analytics to see Cuban, then into a panel on Social Media to see Darren Rovell and Jeff Ma put on a show.

My own panel came in the last slot of the day -- I think a lot of people left after the Lewis/Simmons/Cuban panel... either that, or they just had no interest in The Future of Sports Journalism, featuring me moderating a panel that included Henry Abbott of TrueHoop, Rob King (Editor in Chief of ESPN.com), Howard Beck (NBA reporter for the NY Times) and Jason Fry (news industry genius). But we had a good time, and hopefully the audience enjoyed themselves.

Our panel wasn't quite "analytics"-oriented, but I think the conference is better shifting to "Future of..." rather than limiting itself to "Analytics" exclusively (although that should always be the heart of the thing). But leading edge thought is what analytics is all about, and it was fun to apply that to something I care so much about. The panel was terrific -- we all got along and brought very different perspectives. The most interesting part, to me, was a brief digression we went into about something I've been arguing for years: The scoop is dead. Or, more mildly, what's the value of the scoop anymore? I feel like we could have done an hour on that alone.

After the panel, there was a brief cocktail party in the convention center that everyone enjoyed. I was able to congratulate and compliment the extraordinary team of MIT MBA students who ran the event (under the guidance of Daryl Morey and Jessica Gelman, the conference co-founders). In particular, I want to give a shout-out to Gerry Hough, who expertly and enthusiastically organized my panel. Any readers from the sports brand-management side and have any need for a smart, personable, action-oriented, talented MBA summer intern, Gerry is your woman. Email me if I can make an introduction. But all of the student organizers were terrific, and this was as well-organized of a conference as I have ever experienced.

After the drinks, I hooked up with a slew of NBA-related folks for a dinner for around 30. I can't even list everyone who was there, although in my general vicinity were Henry Abbott and Kevin Arnovitz of TrueHoop, ESPN.com NBA editor Royce Webb, the NYT's Howard Beck, ESPN PER guru John Hollinger, super-trainer and ESPN.com columnist David Thorpe, Kings assistant GM Jason Levien, Draft Express founder Jonathan Givony and ESPN's Marc Stein -- who was a good sport during our panel when Rob King and I picked him out of the crowd as an example of whether scoops matter. I knew some and had never met others. I had the chance to chat with all of them, and -- again with the theme of the weekend -- all couldn't have been more friendly to talk with. (That wasn't meant to be name-droppish -- just trying to give you some color to the non-panel part of the weekend.)

In the end, like everyone at the conference, I believe in analytics. But there is a misconception that analytics is about numbers, rather than about the intersection of numbers and people.

Analytics need people both to create them and interpret them. They need passionate folks crunching them and proselytizing them. They need people advancing the cause -- and enthusiastically lining up to be and to create the future of the cause.

This was a conference about people, and sports is a much much healthier place for having the folks I saw up in Boston coming together to talk, listen, argue, mingle, solicit and connect.

-- D.S.

3/09 Quickie: UConn, Bubble, Bradford

Start with this: Sign up NOW for the original and the best -- the Daily Quickie Readers group of the Tournament Challenge. (Just search "Daily Quickie Readers.") Now in its 8th year!

Now, to today's SN column:

*In praise of UConn 71!
*Boeheim: Appreciated!
*All-Americans: Guarded!
*Gonzaga: At-large!
*Big East: Insanely deep!
*Bradford: Doubted!
*Tebow: Loyal!
*McCoy: Mocks Suh!
*Mavs: Not the Lakers!
*Hawks: Not ready for the big time!
*Cardinals: NL Pennant or Bust!
*RichRod: 1 More Year!
*NASCAR: Conflicted!

It's a loaded column. Check it all out here. My MIT Sports Analytics Conference recap is coming a little later this morning. (Preview: I duck the numbers!)

-- D.S.

CBS Sports' Killer App: Madness Anywhere

I just tweeted this: "CBS Sports putting its March Madness live-video iPhone app on 3G rather than just WiFi is another huge milestone in the fan experience."

Let's review:

First, CBS streamed NCAA Tournament games online so you could watch them on your laptop -- meaning: at work. It was a breakthrough. No longer did you have to sneak out of work (or use vacation days) to get to the sports bar to watch games.

Next, they put it on the iPhone: This made the streaming experience portable, which was welcome -- but with a catch: You could only view it through wifi networks. Now, that's great at work or at home, but it was severely limiting if you were anywhere but those two places.

But expanding the iPhone app to any 3G connection means that I could be walking down the street, watching games. Or on a bus. Or sitting in Central Park. Or hanging out at a bar that is only showing one game. The point is that I can be anywhere.

Unfortunately, the iPad will be coming out too late to experience it as an NCAA Tournament showstopper, but I think that the bigger iteration is this 3G -- "Madness Anywhere" (that's my phrase, not CBS's).

The only caveat: It better work! Millions of other fans will join me in shelling out $9.99 for the app -- and we're counting on it working without problems.

I like that CBS Sports knows that March Madness is their killer app -- and continually expanding their platforms to take advantage of that.

-- D.S.

Quickie: March Really Starts Right Now

It's a gorgeous day in NYC today -- it feels like the perfect moment to coincide with a 4-week stretch of college basketball that starts with Championship Week (among bigger leagues), continues through Selection Sunday and the Tournament itself and finishes four weeks from today with the national title game, which -- without seeing the brackets or second-guessing myself into oblivion next Sunday night -- I'll say will be Syracuse over Kansas, in a repeat of the 2003 title-game result. But today's SN column is precisely about what a great month we're kicking off.

There's a lot more:

*John Wall: Freshman of the Year, obviously. And, I would argue, First-Team All-Time All-Freshmen. Not quite Carmelo, but more than Durant/Beasley. Yeah, I said it. (Hell, I bet there's an argument to be made that Cousins is as impactful of a freshman as Durant was.)

*Big winners in NFL Free Agency? Bears (Peppers), Giants (Rolle) and Dolphins (Dansby), obviously, but I really like the Kampmann deal for the Jags, who desperately need help with pass rush (which is ridiculous, given the high draft picks they spent on pass rushers recently).

*If you're firing umps, maybe you should consider a more robust replay system.

*Bullock/Blind Side: I think you can make the strong case that with her Oscar win (over Meryl Streep!), Sandra Bullock's character is the greatest female character in a sports movie of all time. Certainly the most-decorated, which puts her right up there with Stallone's Rocky and DeNiro's LaMotta -- both of whom earned their actors an Oscar.

Complete SN column here. More later -- still thinking about my MIT post, but there's tons out there, including a lot on TrueHoop and elsewhere.

-- D.S.

Jonah Hill Is Paul DePodesta

A little Hollywood news out of the MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference: As Rob Neyer breaks in his Monday link round-up, Michael Lewis told him that the "Moneyball" movie is full-speed ahead, with one major casting change: The role of Billy Beane sidekick Paul DePodesta will now be played by Jonah Hill. (Look: If Sandra Bullock can win an Emmy for Best Actress, over Meryl Streep, in a sports movie made for non-sports fans that became the highest-grossing sports movie ever, Hill can totally work as DePo.)

Weekend Quickie: Analytics!

Just got back from the MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference. I'm going to try to write up my thoughts tomorrow, but it was a terrific event -- as well-organized as any conference I've ever been to, with attendees (panelists and conference-goers alike) as sincere and friendly as any you'll meet. Everyone had a great time.

In the meantime, what'd I miss?

*Congrats to Winthrop and East Tennessee State, who both won auto-bids on the road.

*Syracuse won't be No. 1; Louisville may have won its way into the Tournament. Kansas confirmed it will be the No. 1 team (and probably the No. 1 overall team of the NCAA Tournament).

*Kansas State: Ouch. That's a big "buyer beware" when you're filling out your bracket.

*Anyone buying Purdue? Anyone? 4-seed. (Speaking of which: Texas... yikes. Criminy, they are terrible.)

*Good for Duke: They needed that one, not just to put themselves in position to be a 1-seed, but absolutely humiliating UNC, capping a truly terrible season for the Heels.

*Break up the Mavs!

*Any ideas how I should handle the latest Big Ben thing?

ACK! Forgot to hit "Publish" on this yesterday!

-- D.S.