Well, you can see it coming already: Tiger is going to win the Masters.
I guess it should have been obvious that Tiger would make his return and shoot the best 1st-round score at the Masters of his career, to an adoring gallery. Just, to see it happen though...insane. Obviously, it leads today's SN column.
If he is in contention on Sunday afternoon, it really will be the most-watched golf event in history.
More you'll find in today's column:
*Brad Stevens will coach as many of the 12 years' of extension at Butler as he'll get until Indiana inevitably fires Tom Crean and hires Stevens.
*Vernon Wells: Still the worst contract in baseball? (Probably, yes. But still: 4 HR already?)
*When LeBron and Kobe are "resting," their teams are tanking the game. This is just as bad as the Colts resting Peyton in Week 17 -- lot less outrage, though.
*Bulls-Raptors battle for East 8-seed. It's supposed to be this big symbolism for showing Bosh why he should sign with their team, but doesn't everyone know he's going to the Knicks?
*Of the CBB players who declared for the draft yesterday, I'm in an internal battle to figure out which prospect will be a bigger dud in the NBA: Willie Warren or Avery Bradley?
*It cannot possibly surprise you that Tim Tebow is on the cover of EA NCAA Football '11. He's been a lock for that since the 2007 season.
*Speaking of Tebow, Vikings coach Brad Childress is in Gainesville today for an Urban Meyer coaching clinic, so naturally it's time to speculate that the Vikings might take Tebow with the No. 30 pick. Can you imagine Brett Favre and Tim Tebow on the same team? It's the kind of Venn Diagram that would make many fans' heads explode.
More in the column today. All eyes on Tiger. More later and throughout the weekend.
-- D.S.
Friday, April 09, 2010
Thursday, April 08, 2010
Quickie: Tiger Ad, Kentucky 5, More
That Tiger ad is creepy. But say this for Earl Woods: Even from the grave, he asks better questions and makes more salient points than you'll hear from golf media this week -- and certainly the broadcast teams. Of course, Tiger leads today's SN column.
More you'll find:
*Kentucky sends 5 to NBA Draft: They're all going to go in the Top 20 (possibly Top 15), too, which makes the decisions a no-brainer. (I'll bet Orton goes ahead of Patterson or Bledsoe.)
Between Wall, Turner and Cousins, the Top 3 of the Draft declared yesterday.
*I think it's safe to say that Curtis Granderson is a Yankees fan favorite.
*More impressive milestone: Don Nelson setting the all-time career wins record or the Bobcats making the playoffs for the first time?
*A not-too-far-off comparison between NFL draft prospects and Idol Top 9 (not my analysis, but I approve).
Tons more in the column today. Sorry for the short post. More later.
-- D.S.
More you'll find:
*Kentucky sends 5 to NBA Draft: They're all going to go in the Top 20 (possibly Top 15), too, which makes the decisions a no-brainer. (I'll bet Orton goes ahead of Patterson or Bledsoe.)
Between Wall, Turner and Cousins, the Top 3 of the Draft declared yesterday.
*I think it's safe to say that Curtis Granderson is a Yankees fan favorite.
*More impressive milestone: Don Nelson setting the all-time career wins record or the Bobcats making the playoffs for the first time?
*A not-too-far-off comparison between NFL draft prospects and Idol Top 9 (not my analysis, but I approve).
Tons more in the column today. Sorry for the short post. More later.
-- D.S.
Wednesday, April 07, 2010
04/07 Quickie: UConn, Red Sox, Messi
How can you NOT be impressed by UConn's second straight undefeated national title season? Unprecedented. What made it all the more interesting: That 12-point 1st half against Stanford, the ultimate WTF? moment in sports this year.
That's the lead of today's SN column, which has a lot more:
*Duke wins the game, Brad Stevens wins America.
*How's that "run prevention" strategy working out for the Red Sox?
*Jazz-Thunder was the best game of the year in the NBA.
*Any mock draft that doesn't even acknowledge that Tim Tebow is very likely going to go in the 1st round is intellectually fraudulent.
*Lionel Messi. This is why you need to watch every Argentina game in the World Cup this year.
*Based on my experience watching what Bill Carmody has done going from Princeton to Northwestern, I don't expect much from Steve Donahue. At least he sold high.
*Hank Aaron loves Jason Heyward. Everyone loves Jason Heyward.
*Why would anyone ever expect the Masters broadcasters to talk about Tiger's off-course storyline? If that will bother you, watch with the sound off.
(But it's ludicrous to suggest that people are going to be tuning in to watch everyone else. 90 percent of fans will tune in to find out how Tiger is doing.)
Complete SN column here. More later.
-- D.S.
That's the lead of today's SN column, which has a lot more:
*Duke wins the game, Brad Stevens wins America.
*How's that "run prevention" strategy working out for the Red Sox?
*Jazz-Thunder was the best game of the year in the NBA.
*Any mock draft that doesn't even acknowledge that Tim Tebow is very likely going to go in the 1st round is intellectually fraudulent.
*Lionel Messi. This is why you need to watch every Argentina game in the World Cup this year.
*Based on my experience watching what Bill Carmody has done going from Princeton to Northwestern, I don't expect much from Steve Donahue. At least he sold high.
*Hank Aaron loves Jason Heyward. Everyone loves Jason Heyward.
*Why would anyone ever expect the Masters broadcasters to talk about Tiger's off-course storyline? If that will bother you, watch with the sound off.
(But it's ludicrous to suggest that people are going to be tuning in to watch everyone else. 90 percent of fans will tune in to find out how Tiger is doing.)
Complete SN column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Tuesday, April 06, 2010
Daily Quickie Readers Challenge Final
Congrats to N. Jansen, whose "neily27" entry rode Duke's national title to a crushing championship in the 2010 Daily Quickie Readers group of the Tournament Challenge.
Jansen's bracket not only included Duke as the champ, but included Butler (!!!) and West Virginia in the Final Four.
ESPN.com ranks Jansen's bracket as the 775th best in the entire field of umpteen million brackets.
Jansen: Email me to claim the coveted prize -- a guest-post on DanShanoff.com, to be redeemed at your convenience.
As for me, I finished 256th out of 414. My place in the 37th percentile is roughly twice where I finished a year ago, so I presume that qualifies as progress.
Mrs. Quickie finished 22nd overall (3rd among folks who didn't pick Duke as champ) and in the 93rd percentile nationally. (Did I marry well or what?)
President Obama didn't come close to last year's finish in the 80th percentile -- he barely cracked the 50th percentile. Then again, not having any Final Four teams will do that for you.
If you used the National Bracket, things weren't much better -- again, a function of the N.B. being very chalk-heavy. And yet, if I had followed it, I would have finished in the 60th percentile.
In my bracket autopsy of vicious hindsight, I shouldn't have doubted Tom Izzo. I should have doubted Kentucky's freshmen. I had the right idea in the West, taking Butler to the Elite Eight -- if I was sure Onuaku was going to be out, oh what could have been!
And as for Duke, I let blind loathing -- not to mention memories of the past few years' Tournament debacles -- cloud the evidence that was plain from Ken Pomeroy's advanced stats: Duke had the best combination of offense and defense in the country, by a wide margin.
I always stumble in the same way: I allow myself to be too influenced by what happened last year. So, naturally, next year I won't doubt Duke, and they'll go back to losing. Or I'll take Butler all the way, only to have them stumble early as a 1- or 2-seed.
The only constant -- besides my wife kicking my ass -- is that I continue to talk myself into dumb choices. After last season's debacle, this season I figured I would go "safe," and it totally backfired. I don't know where I go from here.
But, as always, I appreciate all of you joining me in bracket madness. This was as fun -- and unpredictable -- a year as we could have asked for.
Next year: 96. Maybe that will be my format....
-- D.S.
Jansen's bracket not only included Duke as the champ, but included Butler (!!!) and West Virginia in the Final Four.
ESPN.com ranks Jansen's bracket as the 775th best in the entire field of umpteen million brackets.
Jansen: Email me to claim the coveted prize -- a guest-post on DanShanoff.com, to be redeemed at your convenience.
As for me, I finished 256th out of 414. My place in the 37th percentile is roughly twice where I finished a year ago, so I presume that qualifies as progress.
Mrs. Quickie finished 22nd overall (3rd among folks who didn't pick Duke as champ) and in the 93rd percentile nationally. (Did I marry well or what?)
President Obama didn't come close to last year's finish in the 80th percentile -- he barely cracked the 50th percentile. Then again, not having any Final Four teams will do that for you.
If you used the National Bracket, things weren't much better -- again, a function of the N.B. being very chalk-heavy. And yet, if I had followed it, I would have finished in the 60th percentile.
In my bracket autopsy of vicious hindsight, I shouldn't have doubted Tom Izzo. I should have doubted Kentucky's freshmen. I had the right idea in the West, taking Butler to the Elite Eight -- if I was sure Onuaku was going to be out, oh what could have been!
And as for Duke, I let blind loathing -- not to mention memories of the past few years' Tournament debacles -- cloud the evidence that was plain from Ken Pomeroy's advanced stats: Duke had the best combination of offense and defense in the country, by a wide margin.
I always stumble in the same way: I allow myself to be too influenced by what happened last year. So, naturally, next year I won't doubt Duke, and they'll go back to losing. Or I'll take Butler all the way, only to have them stumble early as a 1- or 2-seed.
The only constant -- besides my wife kicking my ass -- is that I continue to talk myself into dumb choices. After last season's debacle, this season I figured I would go "safe," and it totally backfired. I don't know where I go from here.
But, as always, I appreciate all of you joining me in bracket madness. This was as fun -- and unpredictable -- a year as we could have asked for.
Next year: 96. Maybe that will be my format....
-- D.S.
04/06 Quickie: Duke, Butler, MLB Openers
Anyone else think that Gordon Hayward's half-court shot was going in? I did.
It was the most memorable missed shot in the history of basketball, capping one of the best championship games in the history of college hoops.
I really thought it was going in.
Not to diminish Duke -- although that's the popular sentiment -- but when we look back at the 2010 Tournament, the first thing to come to mind will be Butler.
That's not to say Duke wasn't as worthy of a champ as any team this season. They had the best combination of offense and defense in the country this season -- and, unlike other would-be contenders like Kansas or Kentucky, didn't choke early.
I might even say that this Duke team was relatively likeable -- I said "relatively." But for whatever reason, this group was OK. (It might have a little to do with my longtime sympathy for Jon Scheyer, but it probably goes beyond that. The way they won -- yeah, including a few iffy calls -- earned our respect, even if it was paired with crushing disappointment that Butler didn't pull it off.)
Here's the crazy part: Butler will surely miss Veazey (and Jukes!), but they will be even better next season. Is it so crazy, based on this Tournament run, to install them as the No. 1 team in the country next year? Hardly. Certainly no crazier than me making Boise State my No. 1 team in football for next season, based in large part by the way they performed last season (and that they return almost everyone).
And so the college hoops season is over -- and, with it, the 65-team era of the NCAA Tournament. Obviously, I'm not as averse to the change as many many others, but it will be a change. This was a good way for this era to end.
(By the way, I really enjoyed the Jennifer Hudson version of One Shining Moment, but it was appalling that CBS included multiple shots of Hudson herself in the montage. Whose idea was that? If hers, CBS should have passed; if CBS's, someone should be demoted.)
Tons in the SN column today: MLB Opening Day (J-Hey! Pujols! Halladay! Buehrle!), Tiger press conference, UConn women preview. For a Tebow-Nike reaction, click here.
More later.
-- D.S.
It was the most memorable missed shot in the history of basketball, capping one of the best championship games in the history of college hoops.
I really thought it was going in.
Not to diminish Duke -- although that's the popular sentiment -- but when we look back at the 2010 Tournament, the first thing to come to mind will be Butler.
That's not to say Duke wasn't as worthy of a champ as any team this season. They had the best combination of offense and defense in the country this season -- and, unlike other would-be contenders like Kansas or Kentucky, didn't choke early.
I might even say that this Duke team was relatively likeable -- I said "relatively." But for whatever reason, this group was OK. (It might have a little to do with my longtime sympathy for Jon Scheyer, but it probably goes beyond that. The way they won -- yeah, including a few iffy calls -- earned our respect, even if it was paired with crushing disappointment that Butler didn't pull it off.)
Here's the crazy part: Butler will surely miss Veazey (and Jukes!), but they will be even better next season. Is it so crazy, based on this Tournament run, to install them as the No. 1 team in the country next year? Hardly. Certainly no crazier than me making Boise State my No. 1 team in football for next season, based in large part by the way they performed last season (and that they return almost everyone).
And so the college hoops season is over -- and, with it, the 65-team era of the NCAA Tournament. Obviously, I'm not as averse to the change as many many others, but it will be a change. This was a good way for this era to end.
(By the way, I really enjoyed the Jennifer Hudson version of One Shining Moment, but it was appalling that CBS included multiple shots of Hudson herself in the montage. Whose idea was that? If hers, CBS should have passed; if CBS's, someone should be demoted.)
Tons in the SN column today: MLB Opening Day (J-Hey! Pujols! Halladay! Buehrle!), Tiger press conference, UConn women preview. For a Tebow-Nike reaction, click here.
More later.
-- D.S.
Monday, April 05, 2010
2010 MLB Predictions and Picks
2010 MLB Predictions and Picks:
World Series Champ: Red Sox over Phillies
AL East: Yankees
AL Central: White Sox
AL West: Angels
AL Wild Card: Red Sox
ALCS: Red Sox over Yankees
AL MVP: Alex Rodriguez
AL Cy Young: Felix Hernandez
AL Rookie: Brian Matusz
NL East: Phillies
NL Central: Cardinals
NL West: Rockies
NL Wild Card: Braves
NLCS: Phillies over Cardinals
NL MVP: Albert Pujols
NL Cy: Roy Halladay
NL Rookie: Jason Heyward/Stephen Strasburg
My Favorite Storylines:
*Roy Halladay on the Phillies
*Stephen Strasburg and Jason Heyward
*Rays trying to crash AL East lockdown
*Can Greinke repeat his '09 season?
*I obviously don't buy the Mariners, though I want to.
*Bigger AL X-Factor: John Lackey or Jake Peavy?
(I know I'm missing something...)
Baseball books I'm reading right now:
"Are We Winning?" by Will Leitch (out in May)
"Mint Condition" by Dave Jamieson (out now)
Season Highlight:
I will be taking my older son to his first MLB game in mid-July: Cubs-Phillies at Wrigley Field. Can't wait for that.
Let's get your predictions in the Comments -- playoff picks, award-winners and your favorite storylines for the season.
-- D.S.
World Series Champ: Red Sox over Phillies
AL East: Yankees
AL Central: White Sox
AL West: Angels
AL Wild Card: Red Sox
ALCS: Red Sox over Yankees
AL MVP: Alex Rodriguez
AL Cy Young: Felix Hernandez
AL Rookie: Brian Matusz
NL East: Phillies
NL Central: Cardinals
NL West: Rockies
NL Wild Card: Braves
NLCS: Phillies over Cardinals
NL MVP: Albert Pujols
NL Cy: Roy Halladay
NL Rookie: Jason Heyward/Stephen Strasburg
My Favorite Storylines:
*Roy Halladay on the Phillies
*Stephen Strasburg and Jason Heyward
*Rays trying to crash AL East lockdown
*Can Greinke repeat his '09 season?
*I obviously don't buy the Mariners, though I want to.
*Bigger AL X-Factor: John Lackey or Jake Peavy?
(I know I'm missing something...)
Baseball books I'm reading right now:
"Are We Winning?" by Will Leitch (out in May)
"Mint Condition" by Dave Jamieson (out now)
Season Highlight:
I will be taking my older son to his first MLB game in mid-July: Cubs-Phillies at Wrigley Field. Can't wait for that.
Let's get your predictions in the Comments -- playoff picks, award-winners and your favorite storylines for the season.
-- D.S.
04/05 Quickie: Butler, McNabb, Tiger, MLB
Wow: When MLB Opening Day is the FOURTH-biggest story of the day, it's a loaded day.
*Butler-Duke: Rooting for Butler, lamentably picking Duke. But in today's SN column, I argue that Butler will have historical resonance on its side, meaning: Even if Duke wins, we will remember this Butler team for its run to the title game.
(This is pretty rare in sports. In college hoops, I think Duke was involved in one of the other instances of this: 1992, when we remember the Fab Five -- national runners-up -- more than we do the Duke team that beat them. Obviously, we remember that Duke team won back-to-back titles, but the '92 season was defined by the Fab Five, even in ultimate defeat. UPDATE: Great comment that it was the '93 Michigan team that may have been better remembered than the '92 version, although I'm partial to the whole "freshmen" angle. But yes: '92 was Duke-Kentucky.)
*McNabb traded to the Redskins: Despite growing up in DC, I'm not a Skins fan. And while Philly sports fans are slightly more tolerable than Boston sports fans, that doesn't mean they engender my support. If you're like me, you can enjoy both fan bases not knowing HOW to react right now. (Ironically, I kind of like Donovan McNabb, going back to his days at Syracuse. Hope he finds success in DC -- best-case scenario, he has a Favrian renaissance.)
*Tiger meets media at the Masters: First, Augusta National -- and Team Tiger -- will ensure that he gets treated nicely by the media today. Not sure that's necessary, because -- second -- the mainstream sports media has always wanted to gush about Tiger and brush off his scandal. The media event will be a frenzy because it's Tiger, but I don't have high expectations. Augusta Nat'l is going to go back to the old blockade strategy for Tiger.
*MLB Opening Day: The 4th story of the day? Really? This deserves to have its own spot at the top -- maybe during the day, it will get all the attention because of the day games that are in play. I completely mis-timed doing my MLB preview in the SN column, so I'm going to post my MLB predictions and picks here at around 11:00 or 11:30 this morning.
I'll give a preview: The team I pick to win the World Series is the team that won last night. But among today's storylines, the debut of Halladay as a Phillie and the debut of Heyward as a Brave are the ones I have my eye on.
Oh, and the UConn women are about to finalize themselves as the greatest team in women's college basketball history -- and one of the great teams in sports history, period. They won their Final Four game by 20 -- and it felt close.
Complete SN column here. More later this morning.
-- D.S.
*Butler-Duke: Rooting for Butler, lamentably picking Duke. But in today's SN column, I argue that Butler will have historical resonance on its side, meaning: Even if Duke wins, we will remember this Butler team for its run to the title game.
(This is pretty rare in sports. In college hoops, I think Duke was involved in one of the other instances of this: 1992, when we remember the Fab Five -- national runners-up -- more than we do the Duke team that beat them. Obviously, we remember that Duke team won back-to-back titles, but the '92 season was defined by the Fab Five, even in ultimate defeat. UPDATE: Great comment that it was the '93 Michigan team that may have been better remembered than the '92 version, although I'm partial to the whole "freshmen" angle. But yes: '92 was Duke-Kentucky.)
*McNabb traded to the Redskins: Despite growing up in DC, I'm not a Skins fan. And while Philly sports fans are slightly more tolerable than Boston sports fans, that doesn't mean they engender my support. If you're like me, you can enjoy both fan bases not knowing HOW to react right now. (Ironically, I kind of like Donovan McNabb, going back to his days at Syracuse. Hope he finds success in DC -- best-case scenario, he has a Favrian renaissance.)
*Tiger meets media at the Masters: First, Augusta National -- and Team Tiger -- will ensure that he gets treated nicely by the media today. Not sure that's necessary, because -- second -- the mainstream sports media has always wanted to gush about Tiger and brush off his scandal. The media event will be a frenzy because it's Tiger, but I don't have high expectations. Augusta Nat'l is going to go back to the old blockade strategy for Tiger.
*MLB Opening Day: The 4th story of the day? Really? This deserves to have its own spot at the top -- maybe during the day, it will get all the attention because of the day games that are in play. I completely mis-timed doing my MLB preview in the SN column, so I'm going to post my MLB predictions and picks here at around 11:00 or 11:30 this morning.
I'll give a preview: The team I pick to win the World Series is the team that won last night. But among today's storylines, the debut of Halladay as a Phillie and the debut of Heyward as a Brave are the ones I have my eye on.
Oh, and the UConn women are about to finalize themselves as the greatest team in women's college basketball history -- and one of the great teams in sports history, period. They won their Final Four game by 20 -- and it felt close.
Complete SN column here. More later this morning.
-- D.S.
Sunday, April 04, 2010
Sunday (Butler) Quickie
Let's start with this: Mrs. Quickie is currently 5th out of more than 400 entries in the Daily Quickie Readers group. Now, she'll get passed by dozens if Duke wins. But if Butler wins, she will have a Top 5 finish in the pool this year. That's amazing.
More coming tomorrow, but my general thesis is that -- at this point -- Butler wins, no matter what happens on Monday night.
In this case, if Butler loses, they will still be the team/story we all remember from the 2010 season. If Butler wins... well, it would arguably be the biggest championship story in college sports history (and on the short list for all sports, all time).
That said: I don't think Butler will win. Make no mistake: I am ROOTING for Butler. But as good as their defense is, their offense last night against MSU was impotent. I'll credit MSU's defense to some extent, but....
Duke, meanwhile, carved up a very good, very physical West Virginia defense, while stifling the 'Eers with their own D. This Duke team is VERY good, and I think they match up particularly well with Butler.
You all know I'm a Duke hater; regardless, this team looks like a champion. (Which will make it all the more awesome if Butler can pull off the upset -- but it would be a huge upset.)
For all the Butler drama, the most riveting moment of the night was Bob Huggins hovering over the fallen Da'Sean Butler, faces just inches apart, with Huggins stroking the cheek of the inconsolable Butler.
In one image, it became the defining moment of Bob Huggins' career. I have never been a Huggins fan, but that moment displayed a level of coaching empathy you NEVER see publicly.
More (very briefly):
Yankees-Red Sox open MLB season tonight: Holler at me when the NCAA Tournament is over tomorrow night, then I'll be ready to engage fully in baseball.
Thunder clinch playoff spot: It is one of the most dramatic leaps in recent NBA history.
Happy Easter, to those of you celebrating. I will have a Cadbury Creme Egg (or few) to celebrate on your behalf.
-- D.S.
More coming tomorrow, but my general thesis is that -- at this point -- Butler wins, no matter what happens on Monday night.
In this case, if Butler loses, they will still be the team/story we all remember from the 2010 season. If Butler wins... well, it would arguably be the biggest championship story in college sports history (and on the short list for all sports, all time).
That said: I don't think Butler will win. Make no mistake: I am ROOTING for Butler. But as good as their defense is, their offense last night against MSU was impotent. I'll credit MSU's defense to some extent, but....
Duke, meanwhile, carved up a very good, very physical West Virginia defense, while stifling the 'Eers with their own D. This Duke team is VERY good, and I think they match up particularly well with Butler.
You all know I'm a Duke hater; regardless, this team looks like a champion. (Which will make it all the more awesome if Butler can pull off the upset -- but it would be a huge upset.)
For all the Butler drama, the most riveting moment of the night was Bob Huggins hovering over the fallen Da'Sean Butler, faces just inches apart, with Huggins stroking the cheek of the inconsolable Butler.
In one image, it became the defining moment of Bob Huggins' career. I have never been a Huggins fan, but that moment displayed a level of coaching empathy you NEVER see publicly.
More (very briefly):
Yankees-Red Sox open MLB season tonight: Holler at me when the NCAA Tournament is over tomorrow night, then I'll be ready to engage fully in baseball.
Thunder clinch playoff spot: It is one of the most dramatic leaps in recent NBA history.
Happy Easter, to those of you celebrating. I will have a Cadbury Creme Egg (or few) to celebrate on your behalf.
-- D.S.
Saturday, April 03, 2010
Saturday (Final Four) Quickie
Final Four Saturday: As discussed yesterday, no one can confidently predict who will win either game -- which makes it so much more interesting. I'm sticking with Butler-Duke.
(Rooting interest? Butler, definitely -- unless you're a Michigan State fan, how could you NOT root for Butler? On the other side, West Virginia -- although I'd rather see Butler win a national title by beating Duke than beating WVU. But I can't stomach a Duke national title.)
Bracket Update: I enter the day in the 40th percentile. I have a feeling I can only go down from here -- can't possibly reach the 18th percentile nadir from last year, right? RIGHT?!?!
Lakers lock up Kobe for 3 years beyond next season: That puts the Lakers' window for more titles at 5 seasons, if you include this season. The Lakers have 3 years to find a succession plan.
Cavs beat Hawks: Eastern Conference semifinals preview? Not sure the Hawks are ready to take down the Cavs, but then again, I'm not sure the Cavs are ready to take down the Magic.
Redskins sign Willie Parker: What a Snyder-esque twist on Shanahan's old model of RB-by-committee, which used to use otherwise anonymous RBs. Now, they use washed-up star RBs.
Cripes: That story about the Notre Dame recruit is horrible.
Doesn't the Indianapolis Star know that defacing photos with Photoshop is for blogs? And, for the record, most bloggers are FAR more clever with their defacing.
-- D.S.
(Rooting interest? Butler, definitely -- unless you're a Michigan State fan, how could you NOT root for Butler? On the other side, West Virginia -- although I'd rather see Butler win a national title by beating Duke than beating WVU. But I can't stomach a Duke national title.)
Bracket Update: I enter the day in the 40th percentile. I have a feeling I can only go down from here -- can't possibly reach the 18th percentile nadir from last year, right? RIGHT?!?!
Lakers lock up Kobe for 3 years beyond next season: That puts the Lakers' window for more titles at 5 seasons, if you include this season. The Lakers have 3 years to find a succession plan.
Cavs beat Hawks: Eastern Conference semifinals preview? Not sure the Hawks are ready to take down the Cavs, but then again, I'm not sure the Cavs are ready to take down the Magic.
Redskins sign Willie Parker: What a Snyder-esque twist on Shanahan's old model of RB-by-committee, which used to use otherwise anonymous RBs. Now, they use washed-up star RBs.
Cripes: That story about the Notre Dame recruit is horrible.
Doesn't the Indianapolis Star know that defacing photos with Photoshop is for blogs? And, for the record, most bloggers are FAR more clever with their defacing.
-- D.S.
Friday, April 02, 2010
On NCAA Expansion to 96 Teams
Let's review why expanding the NCAA Tournament isn't the end of the world, as so many hysterical college hoops pundits would have you believe:
*The 64-team bracket is "perfect!" Actually, the NCAA Tournament is not beloved for the number of teams included.
It is beloved for its upsets, its buzzer-beaters, its weekday workday diversion in the first round and its promotion of socially acceptable gambling (or the ability to compete with your friends and co-workers).
Expansion doesn't change that. If anything, you will get more of all of them with an extra 32 games.
(And it doesn't preclude major upsets either: Northern Iowa over Kansas will still happen, whether Kansas has played a 1st-round game or not. Speaking of 1-seeds, the idea that the 1-seed ALWAYS beats the 16-seed is a huge flaw in the Tournament's current format. If anything, I think that with an expanded field, you'll see more top seeds lose in their first game than before, because they will be playing a team that just finished up a tense do-or-die play-in game. "Bye" teams in the Top 32 who come out sluggish could find their Tournaments over quickly. As soon as we see a bunch of top teams fall in their 1st game, the critics' wailing will be drowned out by fans' cheering.)
The essential qualities of the NCAA Tournament -- rather than some arbitrary number -- are born out by the fact that the Tournament has expanded from 8 to 16 to 32 to 48 to 64 to 65. And I'm sure the pundits either have -- or would have -- complained all along the way. In vain.
And, by the way: Pundits who fret about how the new bracket will make filling out office-pool sheets more difficult have apparently not tried filling out a bracket online, like 99.9 percent of the world now does. ESPN, CBSSports.com and Yahoo will make it VERY easy to fill out the expanded bracket -- even if their columnists rail on about hating the idea -- because they have a vested interest in making it easy to fill it out.
*"It devalues the regular season!" Actually, you'd have to say FURTHER devalues the regular season, because the ascension of the 64-team tournament devalued the regular season a long time ago.
The reality is that most fans don't pay attention to college basketball until March anyway. And, aside from the die-hard fans who make up about 5 percent of the fans who follow March Madness, those that do tune in before March are watching marquee games between powerhouse teams whose inclusion in the NCAA Tournament field isn't in doubt.
If anything, people watch before March to get a sneak peek of teams they should be betting on IN March. And with 32 more teams, that means that fans who want to know the field have to watch that much regular-season basketball. Meanwhile, the chance to earn a bye gets expanded beyond the four 1-seeds to the Top 32 teams in the country -- something worth playing for in January and February.
(And, yes, there will still even be a "Bubble" -- it just slides down the list. It is arguable whether the incessant Bubble talk is even good for the sport. And don't argue about "quality"; the Bubble has never been about "good/bad" -- just "in/out.")
*"The quality of the extra 32 teams they let in will dilute the pool!" Let's see: If Ohio can beat Georgetown, I'd be curious how the 8 teams that finished ahead of Ohio in the MAC might do. Most early-round NCAA games aren't exactly pretty basketball played at high levels; they're street fights. Let's go back to the foundational point: As long as games are close at the finish or won on buzzer-beaters or feature seed upsets or "no-name" schools beating "name" schools, fans will be happy. And that will happen frequently -- perhaps more often, given the general parity between teams ranked between 1 and 100.
*"It's just about money!" (Yeah? And? So is everything else.)
*"But what about the children!?" (Oh please. Any pundit who brings this up is acting as cynically as the NCAA.)
*"Fans hate it!" Well, they hate it when they are asked about it in a poll attached to a pundit's column that says "NCAA SUCKS!!!" It's the hoops-pundit equivalent of shouting "Death panels!"
Pundits ignore the essential elements of the Tournament that fans love -- upsets, buzzer-beaters, gambling, skipping work -- because that relatively superficial reality devalues their own life's passion. There is a fundamental (and not entirely irrational) fear of irrelevancy at work here.
(Don't worry, pundits! Your jobs are totally safe! In fact, you're more necessary than ever if there are more teams in the Tournament! But first you really have to respect the fans more than you do.)
You get the sense that the college hoops pundits freaking out over expansion have one fear that overrides everything else: That they will expand the Tournament and fans will actually LIKE it. Or, at the very least, fans won't care. Fans will still enjoy the Tournament for all the fundamental reasons that make it great. Coincidentally, all the reasons that the pundits overlook or ignore.
Again, what bothers me most is the knee-jerk intractability of the pundits -- they don't even allow for the idea of expansion to make SOME sense or have ANY benefit. It is all doomsday, when -- clearly -- it's not.
They look and sound ridiculous for it -- and will look even more ridiculous a year from now, when everyone is totally satisfied with the new system. And even though I like the 64-team format very much, it takes a fundamental misunderstanding of fans and why the Tournament is so beloved -- ironic, given that these pundits claim to know and love the game -- to rail against expansion in the way they have.
-- D.S.
For some good arguments, read John Gasaway here and an NYT roundtable here.
*The 64-team bracket is "perfect!" Actually, the NCAA Tournament is not beloved for the number of teams included.
It is beloved for its upsets, its buzzer-beaters, its weekday workday diversion in the first round and its promotion of socially acceptable gambling (or the ability to compete with your friends and co-workers).
Expansion doesn't change that. If anything, you will get more of all of them with an extra 32 games.
(And it doesn't preclude major upsets either: Northern Iowa over Kansas will still happen, whether Kansas has played a 1st-round game or not. Speaking of 1-seeds, the idea that the 1-seed ALWAYS beats the 16-seed is a huge flaw in the Tournament's current format. If anything, I think that with an expanded field, you'll see more top seeds lose in their first game than before, because they will be playing a team that just finished up a tense do-or-die play-in game. "Bye" teams in the Top 32 who come out sluggish could find their Tournaments over quickly. As soon as we see a bunch of top teams fall in their 1st game, the critics' wailing will be drowned out by fans' cheering.)
The essential qualities of the NCAA Tournament -- rather than some arbitrary number -- are born out by the fact that the Tournament has expanded from 8 to 16 to 32 to 48 to 64 to 65. And I'm sure the pundits either have -- or would have -- complained all along the way. In vain.
And, by the way: Pundits who fret about how the new bracket will make filling out office-pool sheets more difficult have apparently not tried filling out a bracket online, like 99.9 percent of the world now does. ESPN, CBSSports.com and Yahoo will make it VERY easy to fill out the expanded bracket -- even if their columnists rail on about hating the idea -- because they have a vested interest in making it easy to fill it out.
*"It devalues the regular season!" Actually, you'd have to say FURTHER devalues the regular season, because the ascension of the 64-team tournament devalued the regular season a long time ago.
The reality is that most fans don't pay attention to college basketball until March anyway. And, aside from the die-hard fans who make up about 5 percent of the fans who follow March Madness, those that do tune in before March are watching marquee games between powerhouse teams whose inclusion in the NCAA Tournament field isn't in doubt.
If anything, people watch before March to get a sneak peek of teams they should be betting on IN March. And with 32 more teams, that means that fans who want to know the field have to watch that much regular-season basketball. Meanwhile, the chance to earn a bye gets expanded beyond the four 1-seeds to the Top 32 teams in the country -- something worth playing for in January and February.
(And, yes, there will still even be a "Bubble" -- it just slides down the list. It is arguable whether the incessant Bubble talk is even good for the sport. And don't argue about "quality"; the Bubble has never been about "good/bad" -- just "in/out.")
*"The quality of the extra 32 teams they let in will dilute the pool!" Let's see: If Ohio can beat Georgetown, I'd be curious how the 8 teams that finished ahead of Ohio in the MAC might do. Most early-round NCAA games aren't exactly pretty basketball played at high levels; they're street fights. Let's go back to the foundational point: As long as games are close at the finish or won on buzzer-beaters or feature seed upsets or "no-name" schools beating "name" schools, fans will be happy. And that will happen frequently -- perhaps more often, given the general parity between teams ranked between 1 and 100.
*"It's just about money!" (Yeah? And? So is everything else.)
*"But what about the children!?" (Oh please. Any pundit who brings this up is acting as cynically as the NCAA.)
*"Fans hate it!" Well, they hate it when they are asked about it in a poll attached to a pundit's column that says "NCAA SUCKS!!!" It's the hoops-pundit equivalent of shouting "Death panels!"
Pundits ignore the essential elements of the Tournament that fans love -- upsets, buzzer-beaters, gambling, skipping work -- because that relatively superficial reality devalues their own life's passion. There is a fundamental (and not entirely irrational) fear of irrelevancy at work here.
(Don't worry, pundits! Your jobs are totally safe! In fact, you're more necessary than ever if there are more teams in the Tournament! But first you really have to respect the fans more than you do.)
You get the sense that the college hoops pundits freaking out over expansion have one fear that overrides everything else: That they will expand the Tournament and fans will actually LIKE it. Or, at the very least, fans won't care. Fans will still enjoy the Tournament for all the fundamental reasons that make it great. Coincidentally, all the reasons that the pundits overlook or ignore.
Again, what bothers me most is the knee-jerk intractability of the pundits -- they don't even allow for the idea of expansion to make SOME sense or have ANY benefit. It is all doomsday, when -- clearly -- it's not.
They look and sound ridiculous for it -- and will look even more ridiculous a year from now, when everyone is totally satisfied with the new system. And even though I like the 64-team format very much, it takes a fundamental misunderstanding of fans and why the Tournament is so beloved -- ironic, given that these pundits claim to know and love the game -- to rail against expansion in the way they have.
-- D.S.
For some good arguments, read John Gasaway here and an NYT roundtable here.
April 2 Quickie: Final Four, The 96 Thing
I'm picking Butler to beat Michigan State and Duke to beat West Virginia.
Now that it's settled that we'll actually see a Michigan State-West Virginia championship game, let's focus on the real issue:
I haven't read anyone yet who argues with certainty about the result of either semifinal. That's partly a function of compelling arguments for each team and partly a function of the sheer unpredictability of this year's Tournament.
That makes it particularly fun. I am won over by what I saw last weekend: No team went through a tougher regional path than Butler. And Duke -- perhaps with a little help from some gift calls -- proved that they aren't as chokey as previous editions.
(That said: Giving Izzo 6 days to prepare for a Tournament game feels like path to MSU winning. And we already know from 2008 that West Virginia has Duke's number in the Tournament. But, too little too late, I'm trying not to let past performance influence future results.)
I had to lead today's SN column with my Final Four preview, but if I had my choice, I would have led with yet another defense of the expansion of the NCAA Tournament to 96 teams.
I'm working on a longer argument that I'll post later, but my larger point isn't that 64 isn't great.
It's that the hysterics in the basketball media are absurd, and that expanding the Tournament won't "ruin" anything. When you look at how people actually consume college basketball -- and the NCAA Tournament -- there is nothing to suggest the dire consequences that the college hoops intelligentsia would have you believe.
Anyway, I just deleted 500 words that I was going to put here about it, because I want to save it for a separate post.
More you'll find in today's column:
*UConn over Baylor by 30?
*Aminu will go Top 10, if not Top 5.
*MLB Opener is a sneak-peek of my pick for World Series champs (but I won't tell you whether I'm picking the Yankees to repeat or the Red Sox to re-assert themselves until next week).
*If the Rams were smart, they would skip Bradford, take Suh first, then pick up Colt McCoy in the 2nd.
Check out the complete SN column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Now that it's settled that we'll actually see a Michigan State-West Virginia championship game, let's focus on the real issue:
I haven't read anyone yet who argues with certainty about the result of either semifinal. That's partly a function of compelling arguments for each team and partly a function of the sheer unpredictability of this year's Tournament.
That makes it particularly fun. I am won over by what I saw last weekend: No team went through a tougher regional path than Butler. And Duke -- perhaps with a little help from some gift calls -- proved that they aren't as chokey as previous editions.
(That said: Giving Izzo 6 days to prepare for a Tournament game feels like path to MSU winning. And we already know from 2008 that West Virginia has Duke's number in the Tournament. But, too little too late, I'm trying not to let past performance influence future results.)
I had to lead today's SN column with my Final Four preview, but if I had my choice, I would have led with yet another defense of the expansion of the NCAA Tournament to 96 teams.
I'm working on a longer argument that I'll post later, but my larger point isn't that 64 isn't great.
It's that the hysterics in the basketball media are absurd, and that expanding the Tournament won't "ruin" anything. When you look at how people actually consume college basketball -- and the NCAA Tournament -- there is nothing to suggest the dire consequences that the college hoops intelligentsia would have you believe.
Anyway, I just deleted 500 words that I was going to put here about it, because I want to save it for a separate post.
More you'll find in today's column:
*UConn over Baylor by 30?
*Aminu will go Top 10, if not Top 5.
*MLB Opener is a sneak-peek of my pick for World Series champs (but I won't tell you whether I'm picking the Yankees to repeat or the Red Sox to re-assert themselves until next week).
*If the Rams were smart, they would skip Bradford, take Suh first, then pick up Colt McCoy in the 2nd.
Check out the complete SN column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Thursday, April 01, 2010
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.
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.
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.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
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.
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.
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.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
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.
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.
Monday, March 29, 2010
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.
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, March 28, 2010
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.
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, March 27, 2010
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.
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.
Friday, March 26, 2010
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.
*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.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
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.
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.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
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.
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.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
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.
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.
Monday, March 22, 2010
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.
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, March 21, 2010
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.
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.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
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.
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.
*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.
Friday, March 19, 2010
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.
*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.
*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.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
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.
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.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
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.
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:
Check out the entire column here. More later.
-- D.S.
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.
Monday, March 15, 2010
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.
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.
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.
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.
Sunday, March 14, 2010
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.
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.
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
