If you're a devoted reader of this site, you've been truly "informed" about why we don't have a college playoff in place. Just to keep you updated as to what is going on this week, let's take a look at what's going on in the BCS meetings this week.

Apparently, the new strategy is to make the Big 10, Pac 10 and the Rose Bowl take the fall for the fact that we don't have a Plus-1 game.

As noted here earlier, a Plus-1 game doesn't solve our problem, just like the current championship game doesn't solve our problem.

Second, haven't we seen this strategy before? For years, we didn't have a "championship" game because of the Big 10, Pac 10 and the Rose Bowl. Then these conferences "graciously" relented so we could have a "true" national championship game. Since it worked the last time, why not use it again? The "evil three" will take the lumps and they still keep the NCAA out of it.

Now, the BCS will string us along for a couple of years, blaming the "evil three" until they will finally "relent" and give us a Plus-1 game. Everyone will rejoice until the next football season when they realize this still doesn't work. Unfortunately by then, they'll be locked into a 4 year "contract" and tell us there is nothing we can do.

Tony Barnhart makes a good point on his blog about why there will be no change:

Despite the yearly angst that seems to come with the BCS and the lousy bowl matchups it produced last season, all of the leading indicators for college football are very, very good. The NCAA reports that last season more people went to college football games than ever before. And this is at a time when television is saturated with games.

The bottom line is the bottom line. College football has decided that it can live with the angst-ridden fans because, for now, all the numbers are good.

Sound familiar?

Sure, Celtic Fans are upset that they are now tied in the series against the Hawks, a team they should have swept. And they have to be worried that Kevin Garnett won't take over down the stretch. Also, if Joe Johnson can torch them like he did last night, what will LeBron do to them?

Yes, all these things are going through their minds this morning. But it had to be even more frustrating watching the "bandwagon" Atlanta fans last night. That had to really kill them.

Think about it. Anytime you read a list about best professional sports fans, the usual suspects include Boston, Chicago, and New York. However, if you see a list for worst, Atlanta usually heads the list.

There are a couple of reasons for this. One, Atlanta has no long standing sports history. Even the Braves were terrible until 1991. The Falcons, save a few Michael Vick years, have given Atlanta fans nothing. And then there is the Hawks, enough said. Second, college sports rule the roost in the South. You might not sell out a divisional playoff series for the Braves, but you'll get 50,000 for a spring practice game in Athens.

So how frustrated were Boston fans last night watching the Hawks "crowd". Here's just a sample of things that had to drive them crazy:

1. The PA announcer leading the DE-FENSE cheer.

Knowledgeable fans should know when their defense needs a boost. That cheer is something that should originate in the crowd, as they give their team that extra energy they need to shut down the mighty Celtics. Instead, they would wait for the PA announcer to give them the OK. Even better, they waited on him every time down the court.

2. Fans waiting until they have the lead to get loud.

Classic bandwagon move. Instead of sensing that a momentum change might be occurring and giving your team an extra boost, you sit on your hands until you actually get a lead. Fortunately, the Hawks were able to overcome the fans.

3. The "just bought" jersey worn over a suit.

Most Atlanta fans could care less about the Hawks, however, I'm sure there are many corporations that bought court side tickets to entertain clients. So this scene happened on Monday at some corporate office. Some middle management guy went to the person in charge of tickets and asked if anyone is using the Hawks tickets for that night. The "ticket manager" wipes the dust off of the tickets and gives him the tickets. The middle manager leaves the office and goes straight to Phillips Arena. He then decides he needs to buy a jersey and tells himself it will look fine over his dress shirt. Thus, you have the fan in the picture at the top of this post.

4. The crowd letting the time out calm them down.

Any "real" fans knows that you have to stay loud and excited during the time outs. When the game would go to commercial, Atlanta fans were rocking. When they came back from commercial, it was pretty tame. I imagined the Atlanta fans being mesmerized by the scoreboard contest that went on during the break.

5. Fans leaving right after the game.

After a "big" win, you have to stay around and let the team soak up the energy. And yes, there were a lot of fans still cheering at the end of the game. However, you could see the "stream" going up each aisle as fans were rushing to get home.

One could make the argument that those were Celtic fans that were able to get tickets because the Atlanta fans couldn't sell out the place. And that was probably true. It just proves my point even more.

The funny part about this. If the Celtics go on to win the series, which they probably will. Atlanta fans won't care about this game ever again. If the roll was reversed, Celtic fans would talk about Joe Johnson's performance forever.

I know I sound like a broken record, complaining about the fact that we don't have a Division I playoff in football. Since I feel it necessary to always remind everyone this is about money, here's one more article that came out this weekend.

The Big Ten Commissioner will attend the BCS meetings this week and oppose any "Plus One" system. And for the record, I'm not in favor of a "plus one" system. I still want a playoff system and I want the presidents and commissioners to admit the real reason they are against a playoff system.

Side note: The SEC fan in me says, "Sure you don't want a "Plus One" game. Your league has been exposed as a fraud as evidenced by the last two years getting blown out in the "Championship" game. But that's not the point here.

Again, here's one of the lame arguments made by Delany or "insert any college" president:

Delany is also certain it would lead to an eight- or 12-team playoff that would devalue the "every game counts" quality of college football's regular season.

Please! Name one important Big 10 game this year besides the Ohio State v Michigan game. And yes, I'm aware that Illinois was decent this year. The games are only important when something is at stake, which both teams would have had something at stake if a playoff system was in place.

Does anyone remember the Tennessee and Memphis basketball game this year? The atmosphere was electric and basketball has a playoff.

Again, why am I even debating this. We all need to remember this is about the fact that the BCS conferences control the TV money and they don't want the NCAA to have control of the money.

But wait, it gets even better. Ed Goren, president of Fox Sports and also the company that has exclusive negotiating rights to televising the BCS gives us this quote:

"The talk-radio guys and the sports fans with the around-the-horn arguments are overwhelmingly in favor of a new format," he said. "And three years ago I would have been one of those bobblehead dolls. But I've either been brainwashed, or educated, to another side to this story."

So he's been "educated". I wonder what kind of education he got? Here's how it went:

Presidents/Commissioners: You've got the rights to televise our National Championship game. We're not going to change as long as we're in charge, because we don't want the NCAA getting their hands on our money. If you want to keep the rights to televise our game, you'll agree with our plan.

Goren: Yes sir.

Meanwhile, the rest of us bobbleheads will continue to watch regular season games and then lose interest when the BCS games come around. And remember, ratings for 4 of the 5 games were down this year. And that's a good thing. Until the TV guys have leaverage, the BCS will remain intact.

This is a classic example of what we've been talking about here. Stern can't say what he wants to say for fear of backlash. If you have time, listen to his interview on Dan Patrick's radio program.

Just in case you don't know what's going on here. You'll need to read this first.

Under Review (UR): What's that, wacky hard working producer? We have a surprise guest on the phone? Who is it?

Wacky, Hard Working Producer: We actually have David Stern on the line.

UR: Great job. Welcome to the show, NBA commissioner David Stern.

Stern: Thanks for having me on. After I heard your interview with Kobe on Monday, I felt it was time for me to come clean with some things. It sure seems to have worked out for Kobe.

UR: We love a good conspiracy theory here at PIUR. Where do you want to start: NBA referees, the Jordan suspension, 1985 Draft Lottery?

Stern: Man, there's so many things to talk about here. You just bring up a topic and fire away?

UR: It seems to us that so many playoff series have been fixed by refereeing. Whether it's just one game or a whole series, does the NBA instruct referees to call a game a certain way in hopes that it might effect the outcome of the game?

Stern: Refereeing is a difficult task. Especially, with the speed and size of today's athlete. In fact, I have it on good authority that you might have blown a call in a 2nd & 3rd grade girls basketball game earlier this year.

UR: Mr. Stern, may we remind you that you're on here answering questions honestly. We don't want the standard answers.

Stern: Got it. But you have to admit you blew the call.

UR: Yes I did.

Stern: OK, here's the thing with refereeing. In today's game you could call a foul every time down the court. The game wasn't meant to be played as physical as it is today. You can blame the Pistons of the late 80's and the Knicks of the 90's for that.

With that being said, certain match ups are more favorable as far as TV ratings go. Think about last year. Did anyone care about San Antonio v Cleveland? On the flip side, imagine if we had a Boston v LA series in the finals this year. That would draw national interest, along with several columns stating that the NBA is back.

Keeping those two thoughts in mind. Why wouldn't we encourage refs to make calls a certain way. It's a win win for us. Even when there is a bad call, it generates so much talk around the nation that more people want to tune in.

The players still have to make plays, we just encourage certain plays to happen.

UR: Fair enough. Though, we knew it all along. On to the Jordan conspiracy. Did you suspend him from play for a year and a half for gambling?

Stern: Let's see. The top player in the league "retires", only to return 18 months later. What do you think happened?

UR: So if he was suspended, why didn't you announce it? Take a stand against gambling.

Stern: MJ was our most important brand at the time. If everyone suspected him of cheating, he would have lost all credibility, as well as our league. Look at Barry Bonds. Everyone suspects him of cheating, therefore his credibility was shot. Even before his 70 home run season, he put up some great numbers. No one will remember that because of the steroid scandal.

We wanted to give MJ a chance to come back with a clean slate. It helped all involved and to this day everything has worked out.

UR: We've got some video for you. How did you fix the NBA draft so that the Knicks would get the first pick?

Stern: If you'll notice when the envelopes are placed in the bin, one, in the middle, is placed differently. That envelope, which was weighted differently, was strategically placed so I would know which one had the Knicks in it. Unfortunately for me, the guy placing the envelopes in the bin was so nervous that he fumbled the "envelope" all over the place. What a goof!

As for why I did it, I had too. New York is the mecca of professional basketball. They needed him, much more than Golden State did. Look at the NBA right now. Do you realize what would happen if LeBron "happened" to end up in New York? We need him there. Cleveland will be fine without him in a couple of years.

UR: You're speaking as if LeBron is already gone to New York.

Stern: Um, well, yea. He will be there. New York needs him. It's a shame that the NBA is peaking again and New York isn't apart of it. We need the Garden to be rocking during the playoffs. That's the final step to getting the NBA back to where it needs to be, post Jordan.

UR: Commish, we appreciate your honesty today. We don't want to keep you too long. Any final thoughts?

Stern: The NBA. It's Fannnnnnnntastic.

A few thoughts on Shaun Alexander being cut today by the Seahawks. We'll resume the Moment of Truth Series tomorrow night.

You'll probably read or hear from some people that once Alexander got his big contract after his MVP season, he basicaly has mailed it in. They'll site evidence of not wanting to get hit and hesitating at the line. They'll also point to his lack of productivity, especially last year.

He was due to make almost $5 million this year and based on last year's productivity, he wasn't worth it. So the Seahawks had to cut him, it was their only option.

However, I want to address criticism of Alexander's play last year.

I was fortunate enough to follow Alexander's career through college. Even though he was a great college running back he stayed in Gene Stalling's dog house for years. He has always looked like a guy that wasn't giving 100%. I say looked, because he always hesistated at the line and was slow to get up from tackles. He had a 200+ yard game against LSU as a freshman (many of the highlights are included in the video link below) and didn't even start the next game.



As you can see in this video here, Alexander had plenty of highlight moments. But one thing he also had, was a great offensive line. Notice the huge holes on many of these highlight plays. If you'll notice on the majority of these plays, he's running on the left side. Notice the left tackle on the offensive line. That's Chris Samuels, who's been the starting left tackle for the Washington Redskins since forever.

So even in college, Alexander hesitated at the line in order for plays to develop. On many plays, he was able to turn a stop at the line into a 4 yard gain. Those types of plays add up over time and were what made Alexander so special. He also had a knack for getting those extra yards in the open field and using his blockers to make a 5 yard gain a 15 yard gain.




Once Alexander got to Seattle, he was in Mike Holmgren's dog house as well. Apparently for the same reasons. Holmgren and Stallings both thought he needed to work harder in practice and show more intensity in the games. Just as in college, Shaun needed a couple of years for the head coach to warm up to him.


After a few years, Alexander became the starting running back in Seattle. Again he had a dominant offensive line which allowed him to wait for holes to open up in order to get those 5 extra yards.

A couple of things have hurt him over the last few years. First, Seattle's offensive line isn't as dominant as it was over the prior years. Second, Alexander started to get older. As with all good running backs, they start to fade around age 30. Most people who haven't followed him over his entire career will say that he was "dogging" it once he got the big contract the last few years. "Look at the way he approaches the line", they would argue. I would counter that arguement with the college video linked above. He's been doing that forever, it just seems that he's a step slower and doesn't have the burst he once had.


So when you see analysts use video and show how he avoids contact and hesitates at the line, realize that he's been doing that for years. What was he supposed to do at age 30? Change his whole style of play? That just wasn't going to happen.


Hopefully he'll get picked up somewhere else and contribute. But he's probably on the downside of his career. Unfortunately in football, there's always someone else out there that has taken less punishment and is a step faster.

If you haven't read last night's post, it would probably help to read it before your read tonight's post. We'll start off with Kobe's interview, Moment of Truth Style:

Under Review: On the line we have one of the best players in basketball today, Kobe Bryant.

Kobe: If I have to be honest, I'll start off with this. Who is better than me?

UR: Well, we think you're at the top or close to it, but you could make a case for LeBron, Tim Duncan or Kevin Garnett.

Kobe: Are you crazy? They couldn't hold my jockstrap. Now let's get on with the interview. I'm only doing this because you promised to plug the fact that I'm changing jersey numbers again to #30. I want all my fans out there to go and buy a new Kobe jersey. (Pause) You've got 5 questions because I really don't have time for this.

UR: OK. At times in your career you've been compared to Michael Jordan. If both you and MJ played against each other in your prime, how do you think you would have fared?

Kobe: It should be obvious that I think a lot of MJ. On the court, I walk like him, I chew gum like him and for years I even wore a sleeve on my calf to look like him. Until the whole Colorado incident, I did everything to mimic his career. I tried to not say anything controversial to the media. I had all kinds of endorsements. When the game was on the line, I had the ball in my hands.

Since the Colorado incident, I realized that people weren't going to like me no matter what I do. Now I openly talk trash, I don't hide my mouth under my jersey like Jordan. I'll call out a teammate to the media. And I let it be known that I can't stand Shaq.

UR: That's great and all, but you didn't answer the question.

Kobe: Oh, I'd take MJ. It would be fun, but I'd beat him.

UR: Bold words.

Kobe: Hey, I'm not scared of anyone. It would have been fun to go up against him.

UR: Since you brought up Shaq, let's talk about your relationship with him for a moment.

Kobe: I get so sick of this question. But if you want to know what really happened, I'll tell you.

It became clear that I would never get the recognition that I deserve had Shaq stayed around. Everyone on the team and in the stands loved him, even though he was out of shape and kept getting injured. I was the one who carried the team through the regular season and took the money shots during the playoffs. But everyone always wanted to hear from Shaq. And I don't really understand why. He mumbles a lot when he talks.

So if people were going to see what kind of player I am, he had to go. I knew I had leverage and I made it work. In the end, you'll see that it worked out just fine.

UR: With all due respect, hasn't Shaq come out looking better than you in this whole saga?

Kobe: Nah.. Sure he won a championship in Miami, but look at him now. He's a role player on a team that should have traded for me during the off season. They'll probably get eliminated in the first round and we're going to win it all. He's washed up, done, finished. As for me, the next chapter of Kobe is just getting started.

UR: How do you answer the critics that say you're not a very good teammate?

Kobe: Who says that?

UR: Folks in the media that were upset with the trade demands you made during the off season.

Kobe: Say what you want, but all that stuff worked. We now have Gasol, and Bynum just needed a kick in the pants. Jordan had his motivational tactics back in the day, I have mine. Either way, we both got what we wanted, championships.

UR: So you're saying you'll win it all this year?

Kobe: Who can stop me? And please don't say Bruce Bowen can shut me down. He's washed up, he's done. Let him take his three pointers from the corner and get 12 points a game. I'm going to average over 30 points a night and show everyone how one player can carry a team through the finals. Gasol and the rest will get their points, but I'll make sure we win the games.

UR: Tell us what you think about Phil Jackson.

Kobe: I've got nothing for him. Have you read what he wrote about me in the book. I'll tolerate him just like MJ did in the day, but at the end of the day, this is my team. I know it, you know it, the whole world knows it. Somehow, Phil has managed to get on the gravy train and make a lot of money of me and MJ.

UR: And Shaq..

Kobe: Whatever. The point is, he doesn't do anything but give us books to read. Who has time to read books when you're dominating the league. So yes, I'll make it look like I like him in public, but I'm not forgetting what he wrote in that book.

UR: Well, I guess we've used up our allotment of questions.

Kobe: That's right, don't forget to get my new jersey number. Also, corporate sponsors, the Colorado thing is in the past. My agent is awaiting your call. Don't miss your opportunity to get me while I'm still cheap.

UR: Thanks for the honesty, Kobe.

Kobe: Whatever. (click)

I have a love/hate relationship with sports talk radio. If you love sports like me, then you love to listen to any show that talks about sports.

Unfortunately, there are too many shows that don't know how to do it right. Too many shows let the callers call in and babble on way too long, many times saying the same thing three or four times. Also, some shows don't know how to move the show along, so they'll stay on a topic way to long under the premise of "we keep getting calls about this topic". Each call says the same thing, with three out of every four callers agreeing with the show's host.

And getting the right guests on the show is important. The best guests usually are on the show on regular basis and develop a relationship with the host. They won't deliver the same "We're taking this one game at a time" response to every question. And they have a general feel for the show's audience. Also, with these guests, the host isn't afraid to ask the tough questions and the conversation feels like one that would occur at an office between two friends.

I was listening to a sports talk radio show the other day and the producer and the host were promoting the guests coming up on the show. They felt pretty good about it which led to a dialogue that went something like this:

Host: Wow that's all you could do?

Producer: Actually, coming up next hour we will have Kobe, MJ and Tiger.

Host and Producer: Ha, ha, ha

Would that actually be a good lineup for sports talk radio?

Kobe, Tiger and MJ are so image conscious that they are trained to give the perfect responses for each question. The sports talk show hosts, if they can get them on their show, are so awestruck that they won't ask the tough questions. It turns out to be all fluff and pretty boring.

It's funny. There is only one guy out there that answers every question truthfully, and that's Charles Barkley. He's actually made a career out of it. (Side note about the link. He's been talking about politics for years. I'll believe it when I see it. The Barkley-Governor story is beginning to look like the Boy who cried Wolf.) Don't you wish you could hear honesty from everyone in the sporting world? It won't happen and, if we are honest, we don't want to hear it.

Who wants to hear from their coach that, truthfully, they've got no shot against the next opponent and because of injuries they probably will be a .500 team this year? Does a Cleveland Cavalier fan want to hear LeBron say that he can't wait until his contract runs up so he can go to another market? Does any fan want to hear that their favorite player will be hitting the free agent market because they can get paid big time somewhere else?

No, we'd rather stick with the standard answers and spend the next three hours calling into shows speculating as to what will happen.

Just to have some fun, each night this week I'm going to pretend we could ask the questions and they would have to answer them "Moment of Truth" style. We'll start with the standard, boring response they would give and then we'll go from there.

I'm thinking of using Kobe, MJ, Tiger and Nick Saban. If you can think of someone better, let me know.

Coming Monday night, Kobe.

There are several items in the news worthy of being covered tonight. Unfortunately (or unfortunately depending upon how you feel about this site) none of them are worthy of a full post. So here are a few quick thoughts concerning some notable stories in the news.

How would you like the be the high school recruit that knocked over the 2006 National Championship Trophy at Florida? Here's the best line from the story:

"If you were outside the stadium, it was so loud, I think you would've heard it shatter," Charles said. "Nobody said anything for 10 minutes, then Florida assistant Coach John Hevesy said, 'What do I do? Who do I call? Did you know that was $35,000!'

Accidents happen. Who among us hasn't broken a national championship trophy in their lifetime? It will be interesting to see if he commits to Florida now.

Apparently everyone is up in arms out in LA, because UCLA has a tradition during spring practice called "ditch day". During "ditch day", the players ditch practice. The problem this year? The Bruins stink and they are installing a new offense under Rick Neuheisel. Here's one fan's reaction:

"This is exactly why USC wins and UCLA is subpar," David Wong said in an e-mail. "The culture of USC is to practice hard and play hard. UCLA's culture apparently is ditch practice and play around Westwood."

Here's the problem with that thinking. If USC were to have a "skip day", no one would complain. Everyone would think is was awesome and talk about what a great "player's coach" Pete Carroll is. Winning cures everything. UCLA has been doing this since the early 80's according to this article. It's funny how everyone has a problem with it now, when they stink. I'm not saying I'm in favor of the "ditch day". I'm just saying that if you are really against it, why are we hearing about it now?

Here's speculation as to why Derrick Rose didn't hold a press conference to announce he was going pro. And it's not because he choked at the line in the championship game.

But multiple sources close to the Memphis basketball and football programs have told CBSSports.com that Rose was recently involved in an altercation over a girl with Tiger football player Steven Black, an altercation that -- how to phrase this? -- didn't go so well for Rose. Put another way, the possible No. 1 pick in the NBA Draft spent the early part of this week looking like a person who had just been in a scrap, making the way he announced his future plans -- through a release distributed by the Memphis Sports Information department -- convenient, if not necessary.

What a week for Rose. First you lose the title game and then you allegedly get beat down by a football player. He'll get the last laugh when he's the first pick in the NBA draft.

Aaahh, the college life.

In our last two title games, (The Super Bowl and the Final Four) we had two of the most exciting plays in recent memory. Just in case you've had your head in the sand here they are:

David Tyree's catch....



And Mario Chalmers nailing the three....




It did get me to thinking that one of the things that made these plays so special was the fact that they both occured during a "sudden death" situation. Had either of these plays happened in the second game of a seven game series, they wouldn't have had the same impact. In both cases, I believe the other team would have won if they faced each other in a series. But since these games were, in effect, a "game 7", the plays took on a much more memorable meeting.

I started thinking about memorable plays in MLB and NBA playoffs. Most of the plays/games I remember occured in the "close out" game, game six or game seven.

For example, what if Bill Buckner's error occured in game 2? It would have been exciting, but everyone wouldn't remember it the same way. Same with the Bartman play, Joe Carter's walk off home run, Michael Jordan's "push-off" against the Jazz and Willis Reed coming on the court in Game seven.

This leads us to the NBA playoffs which start next week. For those of you that bailed on the NBA in the late 90's, it might be time to come back. There are several teams in the West that play great basketball and will be fun to watch. Unfortunately for those of us on the east coast, you'll have to stay up to midnight to see any of those teams play.

Now imagine if the NBA playoffs were similiar to the NCAA tournament, making every game a "Game 7". Even if you think the NBA is no good anymore, would you watch the playoffs then? In fact, most people don't watch college basketball, but suddenly they tune into the tournament. Instead of starting the playoffs in April and ending in June, the playoffs would last about three weeks.

I realize that a series tends to provide us with the better team. If a player has a bad shooting night, he can come back and redeem himself the next night. If the referees are making awful calls, teams can overcome them in a series. And if a team wins on a fluke play, it doesn't decide the entire series.

I also recognize my idea will never happen because a series generates more money. More games means additional ticket sales, tv revenue and concessions. But would revenue decrease that much if you cut the number of games back? General economics tell us that if you reduce the supply, demand will increase. If the Lakers fans now pay $1,000 for courtside tickets, what would they pay for a winner takes all against the Celtics? If we had the NBA Championship game, rather than a series, wouldn't TV viewership increase? I think we all know the answers to those questions.

I'll still be watching the playoffs, but I'll miss some games. I wouldn't if they were all "game 7''s".

Finally, if you don't believe me, check out Rex Champman's shot to send the game into overtime in 1997. Hardcore NBA fans remember this play, but if it would have happened in a decisive "game 7" it would be a household play.

I recieved a call from a friend tonight urging me to send a submission for the Paul Finebaum Sidekick contest. Since I've got no experience in talk radio, I figured I was perfect for the contest. I went ahead and sent in a submission. Hey, this could be my big break.

Here's what I sent in:

Why do you feel qualified in 50 words or less:

I write for the 528th ranked sports blog (playisunderreview.com) which is ranked right behind whydontwethrowittothetightend.com, a site dedicated to analyzing the Alabama offense. I can hold my own in intramural sports. I think I can fix Alabama basketball. I'm your man.

If you're looking on this site and you're from the Paul Finebaum Radio Network, in hindsight, I think this is what I should have said starting with the second sentence.

I live in Tuscaloosa, so I can always start a sentence with "What I'm hearing in Tuscaloosa..." and I'll have instant credibility with all Alabama fans.

Josh, this one is for you....

I ran across the headline that Joba Chamberlain is taking some time off to spend time with his ailing dad. Most people will just see that headline and move onto the next. But you shouldn't.

Joba was raised by his father who had polio. The two are very close and the story was told here in an October 2007 Sports Illustrated article. Here's some highlights of the article:

Place the pudgy boy on the gravel road. Have him throw baseballs to the father, who catches them with a glove on his right hand, tucks the ball beneath his chin, whisks off the glove, grabs the ball and throws it back with the same hand because his left one is gnarled and useless.

Don't lose patience when boys whom he was better than, back when he was a Little League All-Star at 12, pass him by at 15 and he doesn't even make his high school jayvee team as a sophomore. Stare the kid down when he vows not to accept that reserve-team jersey and say, "This is an opportunity to be a leader for those younger kids. You either take the jersey or we quit altogether. We play no more."

Stand back now. Everything's assembled. The humility. The hunger. The perspective. The ability to stay relaxed when everyone else is in a knot. The arm that's been saved from throwing too many innings and too many curves—as so many of his peers have—ripe to soon begin throwing the slider. The body that's been melting off pounds ... 20, 30, 40 ... as he runs every day in private workouts and then again with the team, and growing two inches, to 6'2".

"I'll settle for being half the dad he's been," says Joba. "I'm excited. There are so many ways I want to take this thing. I'm going to be able to help kids on the reservation. I want them to realize you don't have to be from the best to be one of the best. I want to teach them to live with their head in the clouds and to reach for the stars, that you have to, or what is your purpose?

Watch the son turn his back to the plate, look to the sky and hold his Yankees cap over his heart. Watch the father remove his Yankees cap and do the same as the tears stream down his cheeks....

Interested? I hope so. If you have the time, read the piece. It's a little lengthy, but it's well worth the read. After you read it, you'll see how close they really are. Fascinating read, I hope you enjoy.

While watching the third round of the Masters with some friends this weekend, the discussion came up about whether I was rooting for Tiger or not. I in fact, was. As I will always pull for him.

Most anti-Tiger fans are in the "I'm pulling for the underdog" camp. Which is to be expected. That's one thing we love about sports, pulling for the underdog. Early in my formative sports watching years, I would have always pulled for the underdog. But alas, I changed my tune in the mid-90's after I had spent my entire fanhood rooting against a guy named MJ.

About six months after Michael Jordan had pushed off to get a wide open shot against the Jazz to win his sixth NBA championship, I realized what I had missed. (The "push off" comment was written to raise the ire of one of my regular readers. I can see the steam rising off of his head right now.) I'm sure I was watching ESPN and seeing a montage of MJ highlights from his career. It hit my like a ton of bricks. I've had the opportunity to watch the greatest player of my lifetime play basketball and I rooted against him every time. Moreover, many times I was genuinely upset when he made one of his famous plays.

Instead of being inspired during the "flu" game, I was convinced he was faking. When he threw his hands up in disbelief after hitting a million three pointers in the first quarter, I wanted to hit him with my remote. When he made the unbelievable play against the Lakers, I was convinced he had somehow traveled. Instead of enjoying the moment, I was always bitter and upset and blamed the refs for giving him all the calls.

So forgive me if I'm on the Tiger bandwagon. I don't want to look back 20 years from now and wish I hadn't pulled for Tiger. I want to fist pump and throw my hat right along with him. I want to follow the ball into the hole with my finger pointed right at it. I don't want to look at ESPN Classic in 20 years and see Tiger make a run in the majors and think, why in the world was I rooting against this guy.

There's only one flaw in my system. MJ never lost. When he went to the championship his teams always won. So now I'm pulling for Tiger and he's going to lose from time to time. When MJ was in his prime, you knew the Bulls were going to win. As a fan pulling for the other team, I always knew that in the 4th quarter he would take over and there was nothing you could do about it.

Unfortunately, the putts won't always fall for Tiger, like on 13 today. He's going to lose, aka get 2nd place, sometimes. Oh well, I guess somehow, someway MJ is still punishing me after all of these years.

One other quick note. Here's video of Jordan "pushing off" on Russell. Notice how Jordan makes his move with 9 seconds left and he's starting at the three point line, not at the half court line. You might remember I wrote about this a could of weeks ago. Even MJ , the most clutch player in NBA history, knew that if you waited too late, you limited your options. It's ironic that everyone wants to be like him so much, and they can't because they don't understand the game.

I was able to attend Monday's practice round at Augusta National this week. This is my second year to go and visit the course. For those of you that haven't been, it is something you have to do. It's like visiting Yankee Stadium or Wrigley Field. There is just so much history there that you have to go, especially if you like golf.

Once you've been there, it gives you a whole new appreciation for the Masters. I'll spare you the stories about how perfect the golf course is, because you can assume that even if you haven't been there. Instead, I'll just give you a few other thoughts that you might not read anywhere else.

• With all of the history and tradition of the Masters, the hats that the course marshals wear just don't fit in. I'm sure there is some history behind it, but I'm not going to take some time to look it up. I guess there's such a demand that grown men would marshal in their underwear if they were asked to.


• Yes, we've all heard the stories about the cheap meals. If you haven't, you can get a sandwich for $2 and a drink for $1. But they can do that because the merchandising brings in the real money. We waited in a line similar to Disney World (seriously, the sign told us that we had 8 minutes until we entered the shop) . Since you can't get Masters merchandise anywhere else, folks were buying stuff left and right. I didn't see any one's total in the checkout line that was less than $200.


• Holes 13-17 are very close together and are bordered by huge pines. The roar from the crowd on Monday was loud, because it echos off of the trees that border the course. I can't imagine how loud it is on a Sunday afternoon when someone makes a birdie. Let there be no doubt when you're watching it, if Tiger makes a shot on Sunday, everyone will know about it.


• It's pretty wide open there and the course is hilly. On Monday, the wind was able to whip through the course pretty good. If it's windy, it will have a major impact on the tournament.


• I've seen the 18th hole played several times on TV. Again, TV doesn't do it justice. That is a major hill they are going up on the 2nd shot into the green.

• While they don't have corporate tents, there are reserved seats. If you see someone sitting in a green chair next to a green, especially on an important hole, you can bet that seat was reserved for them. Especially since you are not allowed to take a chair to the course. Yes, you can buy one while you're there, but the chances are those people aren't sitting in the reserved seats.

Just a few things to keep in mind while you're watching the Masters this weekend.

I probably spend too much time on this, but it's my goal to get the casual fan of basketball to see the whole game. By now, you're probably aware that my biggest frustration with lazy defense is the player that won't fight over the top of a screen.

Just to reemphasize my point, check out this snipet from an article in the NY Magazine about the New York Knicks. It's a lengthy read, but well worth it. Pay special attention to what the scounting report says about Stephon Marbury.

On my way out, I found a copy of the Rockets’ internal scouting report. It told all you needed to know about why these Knicks were doomed to disappoint:

Stephon Marbury: “Tends to go into or under every pick and will leave his feet on shot fakes.”

Zach Randolph: “Doesn’t work on the defensive end of the floor … slow in transition defense.”

Eddy Curry: “Gets lost on defensive rotations … labors to get back. He seems to only play hard on the offensive end of the floor.”

Jamal Crawford: “He allows dribble penetration + doesn’t expend a lot of energy on defense.”

Again, nothing good can come from being lazy and going under the screen. Watch any good defensive team and they "show" while the other player fights over the screen. If the NBA scouts know it and see it as a weakness, then why do so many college players do it?

Trent Johnson to LSU? That came out of left field, didn't it. Well, maybe not.

You could easily explain it off by looking at the money. Look what Stanford's AD had to say about the situation.

"LSU notified me that they wanted to talk with him this morning as I was leaving Tampa" following the women's Final Four, Bowlsby said. "The position probably pays twice what ours does so I expect he feels he has to listen. Trent has not informed me that he has accepted another position."

Let's look a little closer at the situation. Mike Montgomery was just hired to coach at Stanford's arch rival, California. Montgomery, who was an advisor in the Stanford athletic department, was a successful coach at Stanford until he made an unsuccessful attempt to coach in the NBA. Obviously, he has friends in the athletic department, or he wouldn't be working as an advisor for Stanford.

Now fast forward a couple of seasons. Let's just say that Montgomery turns around the Cal program. Don't you think Johnson would be compared to Montgomery every step of the way? Who would want to deal with that, especially when you can go somewhere else and earn more money.

To me, this situation was eerily similar to the Tubby Smith - Rick Pitino situation. Smith, who admittedly had underachieved his last few years at Kentucky, would always be compared to Pitino.

Or consider another ironic example. Les Miles has and will be compared to Nick Saban.

If a former coach is successful somewhere else, especially somewhere close, fans are going to assume the current situation would be better had the old coach still been there.

So good move by Johnson. I don't think any LSU fans will be comparing him to John Brady.

One other theory. He could have left because of that annoying tree.

*** Side note, after I wrote this, I found this article. I guess I'm not way off base.

Unless you've had your head in the sand, you're aware that North Carolina coach Roy Williams was in the stands at Monday night's championship game wearing a Kansas sticker. The former Kansas coach of 15 years was brave enough to sit in the stands with the same fans that booed him on Saturday night during the introductions.

You could probably search the Tar Heel message boards and find some fans upset with him, but for the most part I think fans will be fine with it. It got me to thinking, what if some other coaches did this?

So I spoke to one of the biggest Bama football fans I know. We talked about seeing Williams in the stands rooting for Kansas on Monday night. I asked him, what if Nick Saban had shown up with an LSU shirt on to watch an LSU game? Would you be OK with that?

His response. "Absolutely not!"

And I'm not surprised.

To be fair, there are some major differences here. Roy Williams was at Kansas for 15 years and North Carolina is his alma mater. Saban has had a history of moving around and Alabama is not his alma mater. Second, LSU is in the same conference as Alabama. They are quickly becoming rivals because of Saban's hiring. Kansas and UNC will only play in the tournament.

Still, there's an unspoken reason as to why Saban wouldn't get a pass. He has a history of not being at programs a long time. As much as he tells Alabama fans that he's staying until he retires, his history tells them something different. Among Alabama fans, there is a slight fear that he'll leave and go somewhere else someday. And they'll be stuck with another coach like Mike Shula

Williams on the other hand, he's shown to be pretty loyal. Plus, North Carolina fans know that a coach is not leaving the Tar Heel program to go anywhere else.

Also, there are those Alabama fans who would foolishly say, "I didn't see the Bear going to watch anyone else play." Implying that what the Bear did was Gospel. (Uh,oh this site was just shut down in Tuscaloosa.)

While we're speculating, how do you think Michigan fans would feel if Rich Rodriguez were to attend a West Virginia game one day? Don't think it's possible? Ask Kansas fans if they would ever imagine Roy Williams being in the stands with a Kansas sticker on.

If you're not from Alabama, you probably haven't thought twice about Bama Basketball this year. Sure, if you know a little about basketball, you figured that they would be down this year because Ronald Steele would be taking a medical redshirt this year. Maybe you even picked up on the story about coach Mark Gottfried's wife confronting a local talk radio show host at a home basketball game.

While everyone else has been busy making a run in the NCAA tournament, Alabama has been busy making headlines off the field. For those of you that don't follow the program, let's run them down.

Richard Hendrix, an undersized All-SEC Big Man, decides he going to test the draft waters without hiring an agent. Nothing unexpected here. Without an outside shot, he's not likely to be selected in the first round. Unfortunately for Alabama fans, we've been down this road before. Remember Kennedy Winston and Rod Grizzard? They passed up on their senior year and haven't been heard from since.

Justin Tubbs announced he was transferring. Nothing surprising here, he hasn't been playing much and most college programs have at least one guy leave a year. Although it is strange that Tubbs was a "lock-down" defensive guy last year and he hardly got a shot this year.

Rico Pickett is either suspended or he's leaving the team. It just depends on who you believe. Either way he won't be back. There has been a war of words between Pickett, his father and the Alabama coaching staff. Pickett's father claims the coaches suspended him after he announced he wanted to transfer. The coaching staff says otherwise.

University of Alabama freshman guard Rico Pickett has been suspended indefinitely from all basketball-related activities for failure to comply with team rules, according to Crimson Tide head coach Mark Gottfried in a statement issued Sunday night.

It is interesting that a press release was issued on a Sunday night in the off season. Is Gottfried trying to spin the situation as Pickett suggests? Or is Pickett another, in what is increasingly becoming a long line at Alabama, basketball player that has attitude issues and can't handle the program? Either way it doesn't look good for Gottfried and his staff.

Also, Ron Steele will also test the waters of the NBA draft. On paper, nothing is crazy about this. He's suffered from injuries the last two years and he has completed his degree. He won't hire an agent, so worst case scenario he'll come back to Alabama and play out his senior season. However, when you take a look at the whole picture, you have to ask is there something else to the story?

Has Gottfried lost his team? If Steele and Hendrix go pro, Alabama will be in a world of hurt. In all likelihood, Steele and Hendrix will be back. This will be a "hot seat" year for Gottfried. He desperately needs them to come back. However, if Steele and Hendrix decide to stay in the draft without a guarantee that they'll go in the first round, it's definitely a sign that ship is sinking fast.

What does Gottfried have to say about all of this?

“Before we get started with Ron, I want to make a comment about our team,” Gottfried said before Steele’s press conference began. “I’m really excited about how hard our team is currently working."

He goes on to talk about some other things, but most Alabama fans go numb once they hear that first statement. So the team is working hard. Most Alabama fans can tell you, we've been down that road before.

Finally! After all of the games in the tournament, we get a decent game. Since both of the semifinal games were disappointments, I expected the championship game to go the same way.

Memphis, who had been on fire since they were beaten by Tennessee, seemed to be on a crash course with destiny to throw all of my theories out of the water. That game was a wake up call for the Tigers and they seemed to be the team of destiny throughout the tournament.

Ironically, Kansas needed a wake-up call as well. The Davidson game in the Elite eight seemed to make them play more focused in the Final Four. Think about it, was anyone giving Kansas a chance headed into this weekend? They were a nice story, but they weren't peaking like North Carolina and Memphis were.

On my six hour ride back from the Masters today (more on my visit to Augusta National tomorrow), I heard every breakdown imaginable on the game tonight. In my mind, it seemed that these two teams were even in every area. The only exception being Memphis had a red hot go-to guy, Derrick Rose. I thought he would be the X-Factor and allow Memphis to win the game. Unfortunately for Memphis, that would not happen.

If you're a frequent reader of this site, you realize I've been harping on the importance of free throws since late January. It actually was never aimed at Memphis. It started with the fact that my team was horrible at shooting free throws. At that time, I did a little research and discovered that Memphis was horrible as well. Even better, when the national media picked up on the free throw situation in the middle of February (not because of anything I brought up), Calipari dismissed it and said they would hit the free throws when it mattered.

And it sure seemed like he was right. During the tournament, Memphis seemed to be a different team from the line. However, there was no pressure because they were always in control of the game.

And then it happened. Chris Douglas-Roberts missed a front end of a one-and-one late in the game tonight. He then missed two more and Rose missed one down the stretch. If they make one of those, we're never heading to overtime. You see, those points do matter. Did you see how early Bill Self when to the "Hack-a-Tiger" strategy. There was still 2 and 1/2 minutes left in the game. It allowed them to stay close.

Regardless of any injustice that you may have seen in the game as a Memphis fan, if one of those free throws goes down, the game is over. (Or Ovah as Bill Packer would say)

As for Kansas, I've been blinded by my early February prediction of UCLA to long. They really met all of my criteria for a national champion from the beginning. Especially, their efficiencies on the offensive and defensive end of the floor. In fact, after reading all of my criteria, a frequent reader of this site was confused as to why I didn't pick Kansas. I guess I wanted to be able to say I was on the UCLA bandwagon when no one else was.

Finally, something HAS to be done about the officiating in college basketball. The inconsistency on the blocking vs charging calls is at an all-time high. If you're going to allow hand checking for the entire game, don't suddenly start calling it with five minutes left to go in the game, especially when the foul is away from the ball. Is everyone OK with the way the post players are getting mugged down low? Also, how many times did we see the official get the out-of-bounds call wrong?

Have you ever been in a social situation where everyone is having a good time and then someone makes a comment that just kills the mood? Tonight, in the Kansas - North Carolina game, Billy Packer almost made himself the most hated man in Kansas.

If you didn't see it, here it is.

Kansas opens up the game on a tear. They looked quicker and more efficient. Let's face it, they were dominating the game. It was probably the best 13 minutes of basketball played by any team this season.

As a side note, apparently Kansas doesn't need a great pre-game speech from their coach. Did you see that clip of Bill Self talking to his team, telling them to relax? Brandon Rush looked like he was about to fall asleep.

Back to the game. Rush hits a three to put Kansas up 36-12 with seven minutes to play in the first half. At that point, Billy Packer declares the game is over. Nantz even gave him a chance to draw it back, but Packer stuck with his statement.

At that point, I believe a record was set for most remote controls thrown in the state of Kansas at one time. We've all seen a team run up a huge early lead and then lose it because there was so much time left on the clock. As superstitious as sports fans are, they had to be cursing Billy Packer during North Carolina's run. That clip would have been played over and over again on SportsCenter and You Tube. Packer would have never been allowed in the state of Kansas again.

Fortunately for you Kansas fans, he actually said it a little too early. North Carolina ran out of gas trying to come back and the Packer mojo didn't stick.

Also, if you want to see how Kansas kept getting a one on one situation on the block, check this out.

While we're talking about Packer, can someone please tell him that the reason UCLA wasn't giving Kevin Love the ball in the post was because Memphis was double teaming him. And since UCLA didn't have an outside shooter that could make them pay for it, they did it all night. I wish once he would have pointed it out.

Secondly, Rose is the man. He's tailor made to run the point in the NBA. I knew the game was over with 15:00 left in the first half (though I didn't announce it to the world like Packer would have) when Rose blew by Westbrook like he was a high school guard. Westbrook, whom Packer would endlessly remind us, was the Pac-10 Defensive Player of the Year. Sure Beasley scored more points for K-State, but how in the world can you not say that Rose is the best freshman in basketball this year?

Third, let's end all the Love is a great player talk. I talked about this earlier this year. He's just not that athletic. Do you think the NBA players are going to be less athletic than Memphis?

Finally, they played some old Final Four games on ESPN Classic today. Doesn't this Memphis program remind you of the old UNLV programs? And I'm not talking about the cheating that aspect of UNLV's program. They're not from a storied program, like UNC, Kansas, or UCLA. They don't play in one of the "BCS" conferences. And they have a "bad boy" mentality about them.

When I posted last week that I was excited about the Derrick Rose v Darren Collison match up, my (I'm blinded by my love for Memphis) friend argued that D.J. Augustine was much better than Collison. And since he's a much better point guard than Collison, Rose will dominate Collison.

Like most fans, I guess he discounts defense and assumes that if you can score more points than another player, you're better than them. The match-up I was referring to is Rose on offense vs Collison on defense.

Why you ask? Everything that Memphis does on offense is based on Rose's ability to take guys off the dribble. This starts the offense in motion and leads to so many opportunities for the Tigers. This video doesn't detail out everything that Rose does, but it will give you a good idea of what they do on offense.





No one will argue that Rose isn't extremely talented. In fact, he's tailor made for this offense and I think he's the best freshman in the country. I'm not sure why he gets less publicity than Beasley or Love, but I think he's better than both.

There are two ways to stop (or slow down) Memphis. First, you can play zone defense and force Memphis to shoot from the outside, which they have shown to be suspect at times. However, UCLA's strength is their M2M (man to man) defense. So I doubt they will play much zone. Second, you need a defensive minded point guard that can hang with Derrick Rose. I can think of two point guards in the country that have the speed and quickness to stay with him, Darrin Collison and Ty Lawson. There are probably more, but they aren't in the Final Four so it doesn't matter.

UCLA is known throughout the nation as having a tough defense. While some would argue (my Memphis friend) that UCLA just fouls all the time, they actually do play solid perimeter defense. The way they handle screens on the perimeter is stuff of legends. They are also long and quick. Besides Collison, they have Westbrook who is lightning fast. It's not everyday where you can find videos of UCLA playing defense on You Tube. Here's one:





The real question is, how will UCLA handle the Memphis defense. That will decide the game.


If you were too pick between these two guys to guard Rose on defense, who would you pick Augustine or Collison?

Quick note, special shout out to Coaching Better Basketball for putting these videos on the web. If you want to learn more about basketball, check out their site regularly.

Since I've peaked a lot of interest with my IU Basketball and UA Football analogy, I thought I would continue talking about the coaching hire at Indiana tonight. I love when a high profile university has a press conference to announce a new coach and he says something similar to what Crean said today at IU:

“We need everyone to understand that this is going to take some time.”

Everyone nods their head approvingly and agrees. They convince themselves that they have the right man and, in a few years, the program will be back in the right direction.

Especially when the hire is someone that exceeded their expectations. Crean is a classic example of this. No one thought Indiana was going to hire Billy Donovan or Roy Williams. In fact, most Indiana fans thought they would get stuck with a no name coach. Look at what former player Pat Graham had to say about the hire.

"When I heard Tom Crean was being named the coach, I was the happiest guy around," Graham said. "I was probably relieved more than anything else. With our people, I wasn't sure who we would get. I was afraid it might have been an assistant from Boise State or something like that."

That doesn't mean that Crean is the second coming of Coach Knight either. It just means they were able to get a coach that exceeded most fans expectations. But I'm not writing to debate whether this is a good hire or not.

It's funny how everyone defines "take some time". Alumni and fans will usually give a new coach a one year pass, whether they admit it or not. After that, they expect to see significant improvement. By the end of the second year, if things aren't improving you'll start to hear the "hot seat" talk.

Meanwhile, when the coach asks for "some time" he's probably talking about at least three years. Especially when you're coming into a situation with possible NCAA sanctions. But when you're at a high profile school, you won't get three years. To continue with my Indiana - Alabama analogy, just ask Mike Shula if he thinks he got enough time. Most people going in to the situation would say that you would need five years to get the program back on track. He got three. Do you think IU fans will settle for three years of mediocrity in the Big Ten?

Fortunately for Crean, you can turn a basketball program around quickly with one good recruiting program. Look at Ohio St. They were able to make a run to the championship game with Greg Oden. However, this year they were back in the NIT. That won't fly at a high profile school with the tradition of Indiana. LSU, which isn't a high profile basketball school, fired John Brady a year and a half after he took them to the Final Four. Oklahoma State (again not a high profile school) let Sutton go after two years. If they had a short leash, imagine what the Hoosier nation expectations will be.

Finally, you almost have to make the "time" comment don't you? Whether the fans and administration will give you the "time" or not, you have to try and temper expectations. With most of these high profile hires, the coach has about a day to decide whether he wants the job or not. If he waits too long, the media eventually finds out about it. He doesn't have time to analyze the roster. Look at what Billy Gillispie said at his press conference at Kentucky. Do you think he regretted this comment in December?

"I have had two opportunities to be a head coach and both places needed a little fixing. Well this situation has been fixed for a long time and we are just going to continue the tradition here and we are going to try to build upon that tradition and try to cut down some nets.”

Coach Crean, you're on the clock...

I'm sure on Wednesday, the top story in sports will be the hiring of Tom Crean at Indiana. The debate will rage as to whether he's a good fit. The Indiana AD will speak at a news conference in which he'll tell the world that Indiana is back. In fact, here is what a IU trustee told ESPN.com today.

"I think he's a great choice," Eskew said. "He has a Big Ten background, a Midwest background, he's recruited in the state of Indiana and he has an impeccable record, so I think Indiana is on the road to recovery."

As an Alabama alum, I can only just shake my head at Indiana and think back to 2001 and the hiring of Coach Fran. See if this story sounds familiar.

A once proud school, which has won multiple national championships, is looking for a new coach. No one has been able to live up to the expectations that a legendary predecessor has left for them. You have multiple camps, some that still believe in the "glory" days and some that think the program should move in a new direction.

The school is facing possible NCAA sanctions for actions from their previous coach. Many of the alumni and fans think that the head coaching job at their school is one of the most sought after in the country, when in reality it is not.

The school finally settles on a coach who has a pretty impressive record, however he's never competed on the "big" stage. In fact, one could argue his real success was tied to one player.

All of those things were true when Coach Fran was hired at Alabama. Fran was coming off of a 10 win season at TCU, but they happened to have a running back in the name of LaDainian Tomlinson. Alabama was facing NCAA sanctions for violations that occurred during Mike Dubose's tenure as coach. And at that time, Alabama was unable to make a big splash as they were turned down by several big names before Fran made the decision to come to Alabama.

Fran ultimately realized that the expectations were too high and he knew he couldn't win with the sanctions that were placed on Alabama. He took the money from Texas A&M and ran. Seven long years later, Alabama appears to be headed in the right direction with Saban at the helm, but only time will tell.

Now let's look at the hiring of Crean at Indiana. Indiana is not exactly giving him much to start with. D.J. White graduates (ironically he is from Tuscaloosa). Eric Gordan will go pro. And the interim coach, Dan Dikich, dismissed two starters from the team today (Can you do that?).

Also, IU should receive additional sanctions from the NCAA. IU has done a good job of placing the blame on Sampson and distancing themselves from him, however, you never know. If that happens, it's going to be hard to get McDonald's All-Americans to come to IU.

But wait, didn't Crean lead his team to the Final Four? Yes he did, but he also had Dwayne Wade leading them. Anyone see the LT similarity here? He also has a good record, but those 3 NIT appearances and several first round appearances in the NCAA tournament won't cut it at IU.

If the pattern continues, Crean will leave in a few years to try and restore another school's basketball program. Meanwhile, IU will decide they need someone with an IU background and they'll make the hire (Steve Alford?). Unfortunately, he's a nice guy but not a great coach. Finally, IU hires a coach with a national championship under his belt and the entire Hoosier nation will worship him.

For IU's sake, let's hope I'm wrong. Until then, enjoy mediocrity.