The next few weeks are huge for the Alabama basketball program. Truth be told, they could decide the fate of Mark Gottfried's tenure at Alabama. Currently, the team's two best players are testing the NBA waters at the Orlando Pre-Draft camp. Richard Hendrix and Ronald Steele are using this time to get evaluated and figure out if they are locks for the 1st round.

And being an Alabama fan, only about 10% of us care. The other 90% are currently e-mailing each other the countdown to kick-off and researching which current football recruits actually qualified for the 2008 season. Most Alabama fans are concerned with basketball only if Alabama has a subpar football season (which has happened often lately) and when the team starts the SEC basketball season. Other than that, they don't really care.

But they should. If Hendrix and Steele were to come back, this team could be good. With the addition of JaMychal Green, this team could contend for the SEC title. If both of those guys go, they'll have no point guard and a freshman in the post. Sounds like another subpar season with Gottfried on the hot seat.

Steele is an interesting case. He was one of the top five PG's in the nation his sophmore season. He played hurt his junior year and sat out last year in order to recover. According to an interview with Marty Blake on the Dunaway and Brown show (you can hear it here), Steele is struggling at the camp. You can tell he hasn't played competitve ball in a year. Hopefully that's true. Because Jeff Goodman at Fox Sports has Alabama fans scared, he says that Steele is still favoring his leg. Alabama fans have been down that road before. Hopefully we can believe Blake on this one.

(Side note. Gottfried was notorius for blaming Steele's injury for all of the problems this year. A friend of mine has started using Steele's knee as the blame for everything. High Gas Prices? - Steele's knee. You get the point.)

Either way, it looks like Steele will be wearing the crimson jersey next year. And depending on his knee, that could be a good or bad thing. Let's just hope Gottfried doesn't use that for an excuse.

Richard Hendrix is a different case. He seems to be performing about as well as can be expected. However, he's still not a lock for the 1st round. He has no outside shot and he's slightly undersized for his position. However, if you read this article detailing the situation by Andy Katz, you might think he already have one foot out the door.

"I have a great relationship with the staff," Hendrix said. "I loved my time at the University of Alabama, but this is an opportunity for me to show what I have and take my talent to the next level."

Alabama fans (the 10% that care about basketball) have been down this road before. We were robbed of Kennedy Winston's senior year because he thought he could be a 1st round pick. He ended up not getting drafted and is currently playing in Europe somewhere.

So here's the question I'm struggling with. Do you root against your guys at this time of the year? Should you be happy if Steele is not playing well? Should you be happy if Hendrix has a subpar showing at the pre-draft camp?

These guys are Alabama guys. I want them to do well all the time. I pull for McDyess, Horry, Wallace, and Mo Williams. Why wouldn't I pull for Steele and Hendrix? Am I being selfish if I want them back for another season?

I guess the school trumps the player. In my mind, if the player can still contribute to the school, then I want them there. If they can't (like the guys listed above), then I pull for them because they are Alabama guys. But I just don't want them to waste the opportunity. When McDyess left early, we all knew he would succeed. It was a no brainer. With Steele and Hendrix, it isn't so cut and dry. They could give me (and other Alabama fans) another solid season next year. They do us no good over in Europe or in the D-League.

Hopefully they both come back and this will be a m00t point in a couple of weeks. Either way, (as another friend likes to point out) Gottfried is still our coach.

Last week, I sent an e-mail to my friend who is a huge Bulls fan (so huge he has a Bull tattoo on his arm). Here's what it said, "The Bulls have to take Rose with the first pick right?" Below is a portion of his answer...

If they don’t, I’m out…permanently. I’m not even kidding.... If my team wastes this gift of a 1st pick on the “next Joe Smith” instead of Jason Kidd with a better jumper, better first step, and better nose for the basket… I will absolutely blow a gasket. I am already FURIOUS over them botching the D’Antoni hire. Just livid that those arrogant pricks who have never done anything except take up space on the court next to MJ (Paxson, admittedly he hit a few big shots, but he was only open or even playing in game where “big shots” could be taken because he played with MJ) or signed MJ’s paycheck (seriously, what else is Reinsdorf good for except maybe keeping Cuban from buying the Cubs) decided to play around with D’Antoni and let Walsh come in and group hug him into taking the worst job available in sports right now (seriously, wouldn’t you rather coach the Florida State chess team or do the play by play on WNBA games more, I can NOT think of a worse sports job) just cause “he felt really wanted”.

Now keep in mind that my friend is easily baited and strongly opinionated. I know the key comments that will get him fired up. Any mention of Jordan pushing off, or the Bulls having games rigged for them, or Jordan being suspended will push him overboard. However, this time time I didn't sarcastically send him the e-mail. I was just making sure I wasn't the only one that thought Rose was the logical choice.

However, just to bait him, I did compare Beasley to Ronnie Seikley, Derrick Coleman and Glen Robinson in a follow up e-mail. I'm sure this made his blood boil, as deep down, he fears that the Bulls will take Beasley.

And he has good reason to. On NBA.com they have a compilation of the best mock drafts on the net. Of the 11 mock drafts, 7 have Beasley being taken by the Bulls over Rose. I'm going on the assumption these guys know something. And if they have good reason to think that Beasley will go ahead of Rose, I would be upset if I was a Bulls fan.

This isn't to say that Beasley isn't a good player. But check out some of his weaknesses according to NBAdraft.net:

His perimeter skills, while effective against weaker competition, may not be refined enough to allow him to move over to the SF position just yet, so there are some question marks regarding his position Going right he is very shaky, and struggles dribbling the ball more than twice with his right hand … He has decent footwork in the post, but an overall lack of go-to moves, forces him to at times get out of control and to leave his feet and throw up some ill-advised shots, although his ability to create in these situations is remarkable...There is some concern about his work ethic and whether cashing huge checks before the age of 19 will have an effect on his motor.

Now compare that to Rose:

More effective in an up-tempo game, understands tempo but his speed obviously makes running logical and is still less effective in the half court...Right now relies almost exclusively on his power, handle, and quickness to get by defenders....Has the size to post up PGs all day. He shows great strength and intensity inside but has underutilized back to the basket skills … Sometimes appears to be coasting during games, though I believe this is when he is getting a feel for the tempo of the game, and he is reluctant to force things

Yes, I realize this is one site's opinion. But it's just used to help illustrate the point. Who would you rather have? Which "weaknesses" would you rather deal with?

The conventional thinking used to be that you take size whenever you can. After all, I don't see many guys that are 6'9" that live in my neighborhood. Or at the grocery store, or at the office. But 6'9" isn't actually that tall in the NBA anymore. Beasley is considered "undersized" as a power forward in the NBA. So you're not even getting that advantage with Beasley.

Remember the championship game of the NCAA tournament? If you were a Kansas fan, you'll remember every time that Rose had the ball. You just knew he would score. (And yes, I remember him missing the free throw as well. Maybe in the pros, he will have a coach that will emphasize free throws, unlike his college coach.) As a Kansas fan, were you as scared when Beasley had the ball? At least you could triple team him. With Rose, he not only has the ability to score, as a point guard, he can make his teammates better.

I'm sure you've also noticed the emergence of point guard play in the NBA as well. With the new hand check rules, a dominant point guard is essential. Do any of the current point guards on the Bulls roster scare you? Me either. That's why you have to take him if you are the Bulls.

If Beasley is undersized. Then opposing teams will be able to post him up. What about Rose? How will you attack him?

I just really don't get all the love for Beasley over Rose. I guess that's why I'm not a GM in the NBA. Well, if the Bulls take Beasley, I hope they enjoy the Derrick Coleman clone on their team.

So here's hoping the Bulls take Rose with the first pick. I'd hate for my friend to have to get the Bull tattoo removed.....

A couple of thoughts that aren't long enough for an individual post....

Apparently there is something to my theory on ARod. Mike Bacsick passed out during his child's delivery. Who's Mike Bacsick? He's the guy that gave up #756 to Barry Bonds. He's back in the minors this season. I'm telling you, I'm on to something.

Can the Pistons get Flip Saunders a booster seat for his post game press conferences? If you're not sure what I'm talking about, fast forward to 2:00 in this video. He looks like a little kid at the grown up table during thanksgiving diner.

The spread offense seems to be moving to more and more BCS schools in football. (Auburn and Michigan) It won't be long before the defenses catch up. One of the reasons the spread offense has been so successful has been the fact that "BCS" schools don't run it. It was something new to the big schools, when they faced a "small" school and they didn't have a whole offseason dedicated to figuring out how to stop it. Once more and more teams start running it, everyone is going to figure out how to shut it down. (They'll all be watching the game plan from the Ravens - Patriots Monday night game this year. Just overload the line and kill the QB.)

Kevin Love is projected to go as high as the 7th pick in the NBA draft. Am I missing something? If he was playing for any of the four teams remaining in the playoffs, wouldn't every team go straight at him? Who could he defend in the NBA? He won't be able to play defense under the basket in the pro game.

Finally, I hope everyone has been enjoying the interviews. I'm planning on trying to bring you one each week. I'll post this week's interview with Jim Dunaway on Sunday night...

Back in April, FSU did not review the contract of radio analyst Peter Tom Willis. No real reason was given, but Willis (a former QB for the Noles) had become critical of the Noles in the last few years. According to the Tallahasee Democrat:

Willis has raised the ire of FSU officials and coaches, including Bobby Bowden, in recent years for his candid evaluation of the football team — especially its offense -- as it slid out of national prominence....

...FSU won a national title in 1999 — Willis second season in the broadcast booth — and went 7-6 the past two seasons. Willis' frustration mounted with the losses and he went as far as calling the FSU offenses a "high-school offense" following the FSU-Clemson game in 2005. He allowed that his emotions got the best of him that day but added that FSU fans "are not dumb."

I heard Willis on a national radio show this week and he really didn't dispute any of these claims. He believed he was being fair in his assessment of FSU's play on the field.

Unfortunately, that's not his job. And I'm not saying it's right, but for some reason, the rules of objectivity associated with the media do not apply when you work for a school's broadcast team. Anyone that follows college sports (and professional for that matter) knows that your team's announcer and analyst have to be "homers" at all times. Why would we have two broadcasts of a game if fans didn't want to listen to a "homer" call their game? If fans want to hear someone criticize the team, then we would only have one announcing team per game.

Sure fans aren't dumb. They know when their team stinks. But we all love to hear the optimism coming out of the announcers voices. It's kind of like a family. We can talk bad about them, but we don't want to hear anyone else talk bad about them. And it's even better when an analyst is a former player, because most times he won't speak bad publicly about his "family."

It's an easy job to keep. I have no idea what the pay is like, but you'll notice people stay in those jobs forever. All you have to do is go crazy when things go well and act a little disappointed when things go bad. Leave the criticizim to the fans at home.

It does allow for some uncomfortable moments. How about the post game call-in shows after a horrible loss? A fan will call in and start his call stating his allegience to his team. (First off, I'd just like to say go Noles. And I think we're going to turn this thing around.) Then the fan will ask a question that is obvious to everyone watching/listening to the game. (Do you think our offensive is any better than Tallahassee High's Offense?) Everyone listening knows the answer, but the analyst will gloss over it and move to the next call. (Well, I think Coach Bowden will get it all figured out.) And then they move on to an elderly lady calling in who states that everyone just needs to get behind the team.

The real reason we listen to our team's broadcast is to hear the enthusiasm when things go well. Who doesn't like to hear the announcer go crazy when your team scores a touchdown? It's why so many people will turn off the national broadcast of a game and play the radio announcer while watching the game on TV. The best part is when an announcer goes overboard. So over the top that when you look back, it makes you laugh. Below is my all time favorite. It makes me laugh everytime.




So yes, Willis is right. He was being honest. And you can't blame him. He just didn't understand the job description.

While wrapping up the interview with Coach Hays (If you missed the rest of the interview, check out Part I and Part II) I tried to make a little joke. I asked him what he would do with 6 foot 170 lb shooting guard who can knock down a jumper, but can't create a shot by himself. I figured I get a response like "Make him the waterboy" or "Ask him to buy a ticket", but coach gave me a different response. Esentially, he told me that because I had a good shot, he could do something with me. (At this point, yes I'm aware that some of my friends will debate whether I have a shot or not. But come on, you've got to give me that I at least have an outside jumpshot.) Coach said we would have to have a big man to draw a double team (So if Shaq played for OCU, I would have a chance) and he would spot me up on the same side.

Hays went on to say that if you don't have a shot, you can't play. You can teach someone to play defense and you can teach them to run an offense, but if you can't put the ball in the hoop it doesn't matter. (Alabama fans will remember Evan Brock from a few years ago. He could jump out of the gym and play defense, but because he couldn't make a shot he was a liability on the offensive end.) And in the end, isn't that the name of the game? The team that scores the most wins. At times, we like to watch guys dunk. But many times the dunk is set up by the fact that the defender knows the guy can shoot, and thus, overplays him.

Hays went on to say that when teaching your child the game, the most important thing to work on is his/her jump shot. This doesn't discount the fact that athleticsm, heart, and height all play a big part. But if you can't shoot, you can't play. Have I said that enough yet?

I asked Hays if he can watch any game as a fan, or if he watches the game from a coach's perspective. After coaching as long as he has, it's hard not to watch it as a coach. He looks at offensive sets, adjustments that the coach makes, etc. Which brings me to something that probably deserves it's own post, but I'll put it here.

Several years ago I worked with a guy that played some Division III ball. He and I had several conversations about the game and he always made some great observations about certain teams, coaches, etc. So I asked him, what do you see when you watch a game? How do you know things are going to happen before they do? I was just assuming that because he used to play, he just had this sense about it. Actually, the secret is to stop watching the ball.

This has changed my enjoyment and knowledge of basketball on so many levels. When you quit focusing on the guy with the ball and watch the whole court, you start noticing who plays hard all the time. You notice which teams run plays effectively and which teams are lazy on defense. You start seeing mismatches on the court (a lot sooner than when the analyst on TV will notice it). You'll sense a run that's about to take place, which makes you seem like a prophet when it actually happens. You'll start to figure out when the coach of you team is feeding you a bunch of lies when he says his team "played hard" after a loss. You start to see which teams are well coached and which aren't. Try it during the NBA playoffs. As a buddy of mine says about anything new, "It'll change your life!"

Finally, a quick story about my interview with Coach Hays. I had planned to interview him via e-mail, like I had with Jeff Pearlman. Hays preferred a phone interview and we set up a window of time for him to call me. I actually did some research and had my notes with me, prepared to take the call at any moment. On Monday, I rushed out of my office in a hurry to take my daughter to piano practice. In my haste, I left all of my notes in my office. Since it was the end of the day, and Coach Hays said he might call me on Tuesday, I didn't go back and get my notes. (You know where this is going) Coach Hays called me while I was at my daughter's piano practice. I had no notes and nothing to write with. What was I going to do? Tell a coach of 25 years that I was unprepared? So I feel like I handled it pretty good. I probably left a few good questions off the list and I also missed some comments that would have been good to put in here.

Coach was gracious enough to spend some time with me. Just for fun, I'll keep up with OCU this year and may try to check in with him again. Thanks Coach.....

Imagine, if you will, that this is your recruiting pitch. "Hey, you're not that good. You need to come play with us." Of course, that's a little bit of an exaggeration, but that's essentially the way you have to recruit players to play NAIA ball.

If you missed the Part I of my interview with Coach Hays, you can find it here.

In my interview with Coach Hays, I asked him about the differences in recruiting between Division I and NAIA. Coach Hays said the hardest thing is convincing players they aren't D1 material. Sounds a little cruel, I know. But that's not what he's really doing. He just being honest with the guys that think they are D1 material, but really aren't.

Secondly, he said you have to be careful to not spend too much time on a player that is "out of your league" (no pun intended). Let's be honest, there is no reason for OCU to go after the 5 star and 4 star guys that you'll read about on Rivals.com. And since you only have so much time to recruit, it does you no good to waste your time on them.

Another factor that hurts recruiting to the NAIA schools, is the fact that several smaller schools have made the jump up to D1. Take a school like Belmont which used to be NAIA and now they are D1. If you're D1, you have a chance to make it to the Big Dance (and possibly upset a BCS school in the process). Obviously, players will choose those schools over the NAIA schools.

According to Hays, once a player goes through the early signing period and he hasn't received any offers from the D1 schools, he realizes that NAIA is the way to go. Suddenly, schools like OCU don't look so bad. And every once in a while, a coach will discover a hidden gem, like Jarred Merrill.

Merrill was the 2005 NAIA player of the year. Hays noticed him at his summer camp and felt like giving him a shot, even though he had played only one year of high school ball. (Interestingly, I heard Tommy Tuberville on the radio talking about the importance of camps in recruiting. With the limited exposure the players get with coaches, this is one of the best times that coaches have to evaluate players.) Merrill, a 6-4 player from Abilene, didn't get a shot from the hometown school Abilene Christian, even though his father played there. Fortunatley for Hays, Merrill grew to 6-9 while he was at OCU. And there aren't many guys that big in the NAIA ranks. As Hays would go on to say, "If you're big, you have to prove you're bad. If you're small, you have to prove you're good." You can't teach height, so a D1 school will take a chance on a 6-9 guy, while they'll let a 6-4 walk. Merrill got a tryout with the Hornets and is currently playing overseas.

Over the years, Hays has had some opportunities to move up to the D1 level to work as an assistant. He could have worked his way up the ranks to be a head coach. So I asked him why he has stayed all these years. His response? He felt like the game was a little more pure at the NAIA level. You don't have the pressure to cater to the player's every whim and you can do a little more teaching at this level. (There's a shocker! D1 players are spoiled? Who would have ever thought that?)

You also have to be a little flexible with your coaching style at the NAIA level. Whereas, Roy Williams can go out and recruit guys that will fit his fast break system, that's not always the case at this level. When asked about his coaching style, Hays said he's had to modify his strategy to fit the players he has. He's had teams that have averaged 90 points and teams that have averaged 60 points.

Tomorrow night, I'll tell you why Hays told me, "If you can't shoot, you can't play." Also, I'll tell you the real way to watch a basketball game and I'll fill you in on the colossal error I made conducting my first phone interview.

Remember a couple of months ago, when I so profoundly blasted players for going "under the screen"? Well, I've changed my tune a little bit regarding playing defense against the screen. That will happen when you have the chance to talk to someone who has 25 years head coaching experience at an NAIA school with over 660 wins.

I had the good fortune to spend about 20 minutes on the phone with Dan Hays, head basketball coach at Oklahoma Christian. (That's right, we're going to be doing more and more interviews around here at PIUR. I already had one with Jeff Pearlman. I have two more in the works. If you have someone you think would be a good interview, let me know. I'll try and work it out.) Here's a brief summary of Coach Hays's career from the OCU website:

With more than 600 victories in his coaching career, Dan Hays begins his 25th year at the helm of the Eagles. Hays ranks as the winningest coach in Oklahoma Christian history with a 513-271 record. He earned his 500th win at OC on the first day of the 2006-07 season (a 97-39 Homecoming victory over Oklahoma Wesleyan) and now owns a 651-390 overall career record.The Eagles have won six of their league-best 10 Sooner Athletic Conference championships during Hays' tenure. He has led Oklahoma Christian to six NAIA tournaments, advancing to the Sweet 16 in five of those seasons. Hays was inducted into the NAIA Hall of Fame at the 1998 national tournament and became a member of the Oklahoma Christian Athletic Hall of Fame in ceremonies on February 21, 2002. He was selected for the athletic hall of fame at Eastern New Mexico University, his alma mater, in 1996.

Since Hays has approximately 651 more coaching wins than I do, I thought he could give me some insight into the game of basketball. If you've read this site for any period of time, you'll know that I'm a huge fan of the game and I have a passion for wanting to see it played correctly. If you don't believe that, just ask my daughter's 1st grade basketball team from this year. They should be starting unsupervised offseason conditioning next week. Shooting camp will be in August and our overseas trip will begin in late September. I'm hoping it will go well.

Back to the "screen defense" I have discussed this endlessly on this site. (Maybe not as much as the BCS, but it's second.) Nothing has frustrated me more than watching a player go "under" the screen and then watch the shooter make a wide open three pointer. I've always felt it was lazy.

So with confidence I asked Coach Hays, how do you defend the screen? I just knew that he would tell me you have to fight through the screen and go over the top of it. I couldn't wait to come out and say "See, I told you so!!!!" And then he uttered the words that made my chin hit the floor, "I prefer for my players to go under the screen, with a little help from the other defender."

Um, excuse me! Don't you know that I've posted on my highly popular site that going under the screen is lazy? How could I be wrong? And then I remembered I wasn't talking to the other coaches in my daughter's basketball league, but rather a coach in the NAIA HOF. He might be on to something.

So I asked for some clarification. Just to make sure I understand.

Ideally, every coach would love to switch all screens. Unfortunately, the opposing team knows this, so they always have a Big (Have you noticed this is a trendy new term all the anlaysts are using for a big man? When did this happen? I think Rick Majeras started it.) setting the screen for a guard. If you switch, there will be a mismatch somewhere.

If you go over the top, you either run the risk of fouling the screener, or the guard beats you to the basket for a high percentage shot.

As he was explaining it to me, it hit me. The lazy defender is not the defender guarding the ball, it's the guy guarding the screener. All he has to do is help until the other defender gets around the screen. What else is he going to do? (My dad used to tell me when I was playing baseball, that I had two hands. One for the glove and the other to hold the ball in the glove. It wasn't for picking my nose or scratching my backside. I'm not sure what the appropriate analogy for guarding the screener is, but I'm sure you get the picture.)

So we'll have to start changing the defensive philosophy of my daughter's team. Also, when my favortie team gives up a three pointer because the defender went under the screen, I won't vent my frustrations at the ball defender anymore. I'll have another target.

For the next two nights, I'll have some additional insights from Coach Hays, my new favorite college coach. (and yes, it's because I talked to him. Coach K, if you want to be at the top of the list, all you have to do is e-mail me. I'm sure I could find some time.) Coming up tomorrow night, we'll talk about the differences between recruiting in the NAIA and Div I, including an interesting story about one recruit. Also, how to watch a basketball game...

I know I'm late in the game commenting about the OJ Mayo situation at USC. And really, what is should I say? When a player calls a coach and tells him he will play at that school, without being recruited by said coach, no one is surprised when trouble occurs later.

In today's knee jerk reaction to sports, I love how everyone is now against the "One and Done" (O&D) scenario for college players leaping to the NBA. It's really funny how everyone lumps all of the O&D guys into one group. Since Mayo "allegedly" received benefits from an agent, all O&D players are bad for the game of college basketball. That's what many columnists and talk radio guys would have you think. I mean why else would everyone sudenly make the argument that O&D players are bad for college basketball?

I'm not saying O&D players are good for the college game. I just saying that no one was saying that Derrick Rose was bad for the college game while he was leading Memphis to the finals. How about Kevin Love? He was the "missing piece" for UCLA this year. Or what about the run that Ohio St made last year with Greg Oden and Mike Conley? They were the new "Fab Five".

And everyone knew that these guys would be around for one year. Yet announcers, columnists and talk radio guys fawned over all of them. They would tell you how great they are and name them to All-American teams.

Now, OJ Mayo may have recieved improper benefits and everyone is against the O&D players. We're flooded with stories about the corrupt recruiting process. We hear how shoe companies are in bed with coaches and they determine where a player goes to school. And we're bombarded with opinions about how awful the O&D scenario is for the game of basketball.

Here are 5 guys that everyone knew would be O&D guys this year:

Michael Beasley

Eric Gordan

Kevin Love

OJ Mayo

Derrick Rose

The same people that are now coming out against the O&D scenario were falling all over themselves talking about these guys this year.

You can't have it both ways. If they are terrible for the game, you need to come out and say it while they are dominating the college game. If they are so horrible for the sport, let's stop seeing feature articles on these guys before the season.

Otherwise, don't lump them all in the same group. Just because Mayo may have caused some trouble, don't blame Rose and Beasley. They played great basketball this year for their teams and gave us a great year.

So those of you that are against the O&D scenario. We'll be watching next year. We'll see if you stick to your guns or not. You can't have your cake and eat it too........

You know when you're playing pick-up basketball at the gym, and the new guy shows up with goofy looking clothes and he's slightly out of shape? Someone eventually picks him up on their team and suddenly he's like MJ on the court. Everyone can't believe this guy, who's in town on business from Topeka, can really ball. He scores most of the points and wills his team to victory. The next time everyone shows up to play, he's still the talk of the court. No one can believe that he was that good. He just didn't look right.

I have to come clean with something. For years, I have felt this way about Paul Pierce. Everytime I watch him play, I think, is he really that good? How is he an All-Star? How does he score so many points? Surely, he just scores all those points because no other Celtic could. And then they add KG and Ray Allen and he's still their go-to guy.

So today, as he scored 41 points in the game 7 win against Cleveland, I took some time and analyzed why I've always felt this way about Pierce. Here's what I came up with:

The Headband

I realize that headbands are in vogue these days, but anyone that wears one seems to loose a little bit of credibility with me. I really can't explain why. However, imagine LeBron without a headband. Wouldn't he just look tougher?

But the way Pierce wears his headband is what makes it look worse. He wears it a little too high on his head which makes his head look deformed. Also, he turns the NBA logo to the side. I know this is some form of fashion statement, however, it makes him look like that goofy kid from the neighborhood. The one who never knew how to wear his hat right.

He Runs Flat Footed

After watching the game today, I think this is the biggest reason I've thought this about him. He doesn't have that "hop" in his step when he runs down court. But the more I watch the NBA, the more I realize you don't need it. Except for the time that LeBron broke away from everyone today and dunked it, when do you see guys race all the way down the court? It's more about the quick first step past a defender and a great vertical leap. If you don't think that's true, just watch Tayshaun Prince in the next series. He practically walks down the court every series, but the Pistons wouldn't be the same without him. Speaking of hops....

Vertical Leap

While he may have had an incredible vertical leap at one time, he doesn't seem to be a high flyer now. And yes this does matter. LeBron, Kobe, CP3 they can all get up. At this point in the playoffs, Pierce is going to be mentioned in the same breath with them. But he doesn't get up like them. Which leads me to the next point.

Settling for Jumpers

For some reason, defenders continue to fall for his move to the basket. He makes a move towards the basket and then steps back for a jumper. He does this all the time and defenders always seem to end up off balance against his step back jumper. Maybe he has some great moves to the basket and I don't see it. But when a player is getting all of his points on jumpers and can't make it too the rim, you just start to wonder if he's any good. You should give credit to Pierce though, he's successful at what he does.

Body Shape

Let's be real here. I think this is another reason I've always wondered why he's so good. Remember my analogy about the guy in the pickup game? That guy is usually a little out of shape isn't he? Well, Pierce doesn't exactly look like he did a couple of years ago in this picture does he? He has no real muscle definition in his arms (most NBA players do) and he's got a pretty big backside. He kind of reminds me of Antoine Walker right before he blew up. He's still strong though. He out muscled LeBron to get that loose ball late in the game, it's just the fact that he doesn't look the part.

Imagine you are playing a pick-up game with the Celtics and Cavs players. You don't know anything about any player, just the way they look and how they shot the ball while everyone was warming up. Would Pierce be picked in the top 5? Top 10? I guess this is why I always wondered why Pierce was such a good player...

or



or

"I'm fully prepared to solve this problem with high school guys," Crowe said. "Part of what caused this problem is quick fixes, and I don't want to put a band-aid on something where we've got a future where we're trying to raise the quality of this program. A band-aid won't do that."

Yes, that's from Jack Crowe, head football coach for Jacksonville State University. Those statements were made after he kicked his quarterback, Cedric Johnson, off of the football team for violating team rules. According to the student newspaper, here are some of Johnson's transgressions:

..he also was involved in at least two incidents that required Crowe's attention. In June, he was arrested on drug and weapons charges and kicked out of campus housing for the first semester. Later in the season his name was linked to another incident involving the misuse of a credit card that ultimately resulted in another player being dismissed from the team.

Sound familiar? Sure sounds like Ryan Perrilloux. In case you just came out of a coma, here's what Perrilloux has been accused of:

Perrilloux’s all-star capability has been matched by his inability to abide by team rules and sometimes the law. Since his arrival to LSU, he was first a “person of interest” in a counterfeiting investigation. Soon after, Perrilloux was caught trying to enter a casino with fake identification.

However, the versatile and talented athlete’s troubles did not end there. In November, he was involved in a fight at the Varsity and suspended from the Alabama game. He was then reinstated to the team after the game.

Then, in February, Miles put Perrilloux on what would be his longest suspension of his career at LSU. Miles said that Perrilloux warranted the suspension after missing multiple team meetings, skipping classes and arriving late for team workouts. Although he was reinstated to the football team on April 6, almost two months later, he was still not allowed to participate in the spring game.

And guess which school Perrilloux will be attending. That's right, this fall Perrillioux will be the quarterback for the Jacksonville State Gamecocks. Now the question has to be asked, why would Crowe bring in a QB that has been accused of more offenses than the QB that he just dismissed?

Because, "Winning cures Everything!"

As good as Johnson may have been, he wasn't an SEC caliber quarterback. He wasn't a 5 star player and the top ranked recruit in the nation a few years ago. He definitely wasn't quarterbacking his team to a win in the SEC championship game last year.

Oh sure, Crowe will probably say that he wants to give Perrilloux a second chance and that we don't know all of the facts. But I'm fairly certain he wouldn't bring him in if he didn't have all that talent.

Fans (and AD's for that matter) tend to overlook everything else as long as they are winning. Just ask USC. Regardless of what anyone may say, coaches are evaluated on wins and losses. Crowe realizes that he could win the conference the next two years with Perrilloux running his offense.

Perrilloux sure seems like a band-aid to me...

Check out this article from last week's Atlanta Journal Constitution regarding how much Georgia spent on their trip to the Sugar Bowl. Nothing in it is real shocking. Sure it's a lot of money, but people tend to spend a lot of money when it is not their personal money and they have a $10 million check to cover the expenses. I also feel very confident that other schools spend a similiar amount of money on a BCS bowl trip.

Here's some highlights from the article.

PRESIDENT'S PARTY
This is the official name of the group that travels with the university president. Officially, there were 50 invitees, but each is permitted to bring their spouse or a guest. Thirty-seven did, not including President Adams and his wife, Mary.
The athletic association paid for their hotel room and valet parking, gave guests and their spouses each a per diem for meals and paid for their travel to New Orleans and back via a mileage equation.
For those who stayed four days and three nights, that came to an average of $1,632.39 per guest.
Overall, it cost $137,895.88 to take the president's party to New Orleans.

There were at least two official parties hosted by the president - a soiree at Pat O'Brien's on Bourbon Street and a reception at the World War II Museum, featuring jazz singer Yvette Voelker. That cost about $28,000.

Again, the point here is not how much they spent. After all, they will receive a check for over $10 mil to cover the cost. The point is, with a playoff system, they won't have the opportunity to have an all-expense paid trip like this.

Do you hear of these types of trips for the basketball tournament? No.

First, there is always another game to play, or more importantly another location to play at. The school's party can't camp out at one location for an entire week.

Secondly, the NCAA controls the money, and the school's don't get as much. So if you don't have a big fat check coming in (like $10 mil) you can't justify taking the whole university to a game.

So why would a president be in favor of giving up control of the money and losing an all expense paid trip with his or her closest friends? Now you see why they love the bowls so much.

Last week, I thanked the great state of West Virginia for making Alabama (and Mississippi) look good. And then this article about future first round pick Tyler Stovall ran in the Birmingham News on Friday. Sure, Stovall seems like a great kid and I hope he does well. But check out what fans do in Hokes Bluff for the high school baseball games:

Hokes Bluff is a 400-student school outside of Gadsden. Its fans place their fold-up chairs to lock in their favored viewing spot several days before the team plays a big game.

Other fans dot the outfield sky in deer stands in the trees behind right field. They hoist food with strings and buckets. There's a "Hit it Here" sign complete with a bull's-eye. It has gone to every state championship series in Montgomery at Paterson Field.

Did you catch that? Deer stands in the outfield?

Here's the crazy thing. I have friends right now that I know would love to be able to say they watched a game from a deer stand in right field. Some of them are regular readers on this site and are laughing as they read this right now. They'll argue that you can probably see the game great from there, because you can get up high in the air. And that you don't have to worry about anyone obstructing your view.

If you're going to go this far, why not take the hunting theme even further? You could use all sorts of calls (turkey, duck, deer) to distract the opposing team. You could arrive at your stand hours before the game, camoflauged, and then surprise the other team in the third inning at a crucial at bat with a random loud noise. They would never know you are there, just like the deer.

I can see it now, it won't be long before the University of Alabama starts selling rights to "select" deer stands attached to the lights at Bryant Denny Stadium. Get 'em before they all run out....

Here we go "Play it Under Review" fans. I've taken a big leap here. Here's my first interview. It's with former SI writer and current ESPN.com writer Jeff Pearlman. He was gracious enough to answer a few questions I had following a story he wrote this week on ESPN.com.

A friend of mine claims that I have "man-crushes" on a couple of non-athletes. He would include Tony Kornheiser and Gus Johnson in that group. Well, you can put Jeff Pearlman in that group now. I've always enjoyed his stuff and was very gracious with his time. I wanted to start asking questions Chris Farley style (You remember when you wrote that book? That was awesome!!!) but I refrained.

I plan to try and get some additional interviews over time. Maybe I'll get better at asking questions as well. Oh well, have fun with this read. And read Pearlman's stuff. It's good.

I've linked to articles that he references in his responses, but here are all of his ESPN.com articles and you can get his Sports Illustrated articles here.

UR: The last two lines of your article on ESPN.com (Do we watch sports for the joy of the game? Or do we watch sports for the joy of humiliation? For the joy of hate?) struck a cord with me. We've always had the "My team is better than your team "hatred", but it seems that it has gotten more personal. What do you think has caused that and can anything be done to change it?

JP: We seem to live in a country that enjoys knocking people door, nowmore than ever. I'm not sure why, but just look at the presidential election, where—instead of zooming in on issues—most people (media,candidates, public) try and find the most venom to spew. In a way,maybe it symbolizes the opening up of society ... fewer and fewer verbal taboos, which is mostly good. But it leads to a lot of loudmorons making a lot of loud moronic noises.

UR: With the ability for people to contact you via e-mail, how much venom do you receive from readers when you write something that might be considered negative towards their player or team? Have any particular stories or books caused an extreme amount of hatred from the readers? Do you take into account the reaction that you might receive before you cover a story?

JP: A ton, and I don't enjoy it. I'm a bad combination—extremely thin-skinned, but also of the mindset that if someone sends you a letter, you write back. So it doesn't always work out well. I'd say the most hatred came from a column I wrote on why Delaware doesn't play Delaware State in football, which was personal (I'm a UD alum) and biting (race is a big reason). People felt as if I'd sold out, and they let me know.

Note. Here's the article he wrote about Delaware.

UR: There are blogs (and commenters on blogs) that love to spew venom toward athletes, owners, etc. Really, this seems to be the heart of the whole MSM vs Blog debate. Where do you stand on the blog vs MSM debate? Is MSM dying a slow death (as many blogs would want you to think) or are blogs just a waste of time (as the MSM would have you think)?

JP: I love blogs. LOVE them. They give everyone a voice, which is cool. But I don't see it as a competition. I never think, "Man, I better outdo X blogger." It's two separate, viable entities adding more information to the world. What's so bad about that?

UR: How do you come up with topics for your articles?

JP: I take a long run and they pop into my head. Seriously. (But I also try and read everything, poke my nose around, etc)

UR: Who's your favorite athlete/coach you've covered in your career?

JP: Sal Fasano, former Royals catcher. Great guy; humility, honesty,decency. Never cheated. Worth rooting for.

Note: Here's an article he wrote about Fasano.

UR: What has been your favorite story to cover?

JP: When I was a college sophomore, I wrote for the school paper, TheReview, as Delaware qualified for its first-ever NCAA hoops tournament. That was an absolutely magical time for me—I was like alittle kid, in that everything seemed larger than life. Delaware got stomped in the first round by Cinci, but it didn't take away the thrill. In a sense, I'm like a drug addict. I experienced that first high, and I've been trying to recapture it ever since.

UR: I'm assuming that since you write about sports, you have a "love for the game"? Has writing about sports changed that for you?

JP: Yes. I see it much more as a business. I've become jaded and, sometimes, bitter. More and more I need to remind myself that, hey,this shit is fun. So I do—I really do. And that's how, despite Wes Helms once farting in my face, I still enjoy what I do.

Note: I asked him to give me a litte more on the farting incident. Here's what I got: it smelled really, really bad. spring training clubhouse, opened his cheeks and let loose.

UR: Do you have teams you root for?

JP: The Mahopac High School Indians cross country squad. Otherwise, no. I've distanced myself from fandom. How can I cover a team and root for that team at the same time? Woefully unprofessional.

Note: He apparently ran track at his high school.

UR: And finally. Are you interested in writing a book or article about a 33 yr old accountant who happens to have some thoughts about sports so he started a blog which he updates once a day at night? :)

JP: Uh ... no.

Besides the fact that he's only 23 and, barring injury, he will probably be the greatest point guard of this generation, he seems to be a genuinely likeable guy....

If you're like me and think that gambling your money away is a huge waste of time, then I've got the site for you. Obviously by reading this site, you're aware that I love sports. But I've never gambled on sports because I think that gambling away your money is foolish (Have I made that clear yet?)

A couple of days ago, a friend of mine sent me a link to Centsports.com. Centsports starts you out with $.10 and allows you to "wager" on games like you were playing with real money. If you ever get to zero, they'll just give you a dime again.

Here's the neat thing. If you're actually able to earn up to $20, you get to keep it. If not, no loss. They make their money on the ads on the site. It's fun.

Let me say one more time. If you have a gambling problem, or feel you might, just stay away from the site. This site is very similar to the online poker sites that became popular a few years ago.

If it sounds fun, follow this link here. Yes, I'll get 5% of your earnings from referring you, but it doesn't hurt you. And besides 5% of nothing is nothing.

In all of my personal sporting experiences, I've never been the guy that can deliver in the clutch. Sure, I could hit a million shots in the driveway, but when the game started I could never be the go to guy when we needed the last basket. In the last few years, I've tried my hand at the marathon. With each race, I feel like I've trained well (even knocked out some of those 20 mile runs like they were nothing) but I've failed miserably on race day. Although to be perfectly fair, I should get a pass on last year's Chicago marathon. (Check out some video here, a man actually died during the race it was so hot.)

*Side note. This whole You Tube thing might catch on someday.

Some guys are just "clutch". They crave the spotlight and when it's on them, they thrive. They'll fail from time to time, but they're known and respected for the times they come through in the clutch. And fans love those guys. Jordan, Jeter, Woods, the list goes on and on.

And then there are guys on the other side of the fence. They seem to wilt when the pressure is on them. Sometimes they're able to come out on top, but people remember them for the fact that they weren't able to come through in the "clutch". Phil Mickelson, Karl Malone and "of course" Alex Rodriguez are some guys that come to mind. Now keep in mind, I can relate to these guys, based on my own experiences. Not that I'm on any level close to these guys in their respective sports.

But maybe they can't help it. Why do I say that? Check out this recent story about ARod and the delivery of his baby.

“As tough and big as he seems, he is real wimpy around doctors or any type of medical situation. I don’t know why I thought the birth of our child would be different. In the middle of the night, I realized that I needed to go to the hospital. I wake him up. The first thing that comes out of his mouth, ‘Can we call your mother?’ And I started, ‘No. Let’s wait and make sure that I am in labor, and make sure that, you know, it’s the middle of the night.’ And go to the hospital and everything. And finally, a few hours later, I said, ‘I think you can call my mom now.’
“Uh, and the color came back to his face when I told him he could call my mom. And then forget it. I was like not even having a baby; he was the one. The one nurse had a cold cloth on his head. The other nurse had the blood pressure on his arm. And my mother was like rubbing his back. And he is passed out on a couch. And I am there, in the middle of labor. And really, I am not being paid much attention to besides the doctor and a couple of nurses. And he is there moaning. In between pushing, I am going, ‘Honey, are you OK?’ And are you breathing? Are you OK?’ “

Now what does that have to do with being "clutch". You see, I suffer from the same problem. During my wife's first pregnancy, I passed out during the first ultrasound. (Disclaimer. The first ultrasound is not like the one you see on TV. Someone should have warned me) I get sick to my stomach anytime I enter a hospital. I hate the site of blood and have a real squeamish stomach.

And it has affected my marathons. Each race, I'm nervous and my stomach gets upset. Instead of feeling relaxed, I have a sinking feeling in my stomach and wouldn't mind either passing out or throwing up. I let it get to me mentally, and I'm done. And that's the thing about the big time events. It's all mental.

You know. I'm just wondering.....

Does ARod feel the same way in the playoffs? Is that the reason he's struggled in the postseason? Does he lose all mental focus? In April and May, he's relaxed, but as the "race day" approaches, does his stomach tie up in knots? Is he "done" before he even starts?

If the answer is yes, then I can understand. He can't help it. It's just not in his DNA.

And if you're a Yankee fan. Well, just get used to it.

Lost amid the run that the Lakers are currently on in the playoffs, is the fact that Andrew Bynum hasn't returned from his knee injury. Can you imagine this team if they added the 7 foot center who was averaging 13.1 ppg and 10.2 boards? Wouldn't they be even more incredible?

Not exactly. Actually, I'm not so sure that the Lakers aren't secretly happy that Bynum will be out of the playoffs. If Bynum were to come back at this point, were would hit fit into the system? Gasol has taken over his spot at the "go-to" post player. And since Bynum and Gasol haven't played together, how would they mesh on the court?

Chemistry is so important in basketball (see the Portland Jail Blazers from a few years ago). How many times have you seen a team add one player and it changes the dynamic of the whole squad? Many of the local (Alabama) readers of this blog, will remember when Alabama freshman Kennedy Winston was added to the team after an NCAA suspension. The team lost all cohesiveness and fell from a number one ranking to obscurity. (Others will blame coaching, but we're not hear to talk about Bama right now)

However, in keeping with our theme from last week, you'll never hear anyone from the Laker organization publicly state that they don't want Bynum back this year, for fear that his presence would disrupt the play of the team.

In Friday's Orange County Register, it was noted that Bynum will not likely join the team for the playoffs.

You'll see some quotes from several prominent Lakers and below. I've translated them for you below.

Coach Phil Jackson said Friday that he has been prepared for two months to proceed without expecting Bynum to play again this season. "I've pretty much been resigned to that fact from March on," Jackson said.

Translation: Once we acquired Gasol and saw that we were playing as well as we were with Bynum, I was hoping his injury would keep him out for the rest of the year. Next year, once those guys get a chance to play together we're going to be really good.

"Obviously, Andrew's going through a time that's very, very hard on him, especially being a young guy," teammate Pau Gasol said. "It's tough being away from the team for so long and it's unfortunate. But we want him to do what's best for himself because it's going to be best for the team, in the long run."

Translation: Man, it's unfortunate for Bynum, but he's got to put in his dues. Me, I played for Memphis and now I'm in LA filing his role. It will be best for him (and me) if he just stays out until next year. Right now, we're doing fine without him and he knows that. Since I'm the veteran, he'll have to wait his turn.

"Things happen for a reason," Bynum said. "I definitely didn't think it was going to take this long. Fortunately, we have guys that have stepped in and we have a good chance to go all the way this year. But more than that, I think our team has a chance to be great for the next 7-10 years."

Translation: I can't win. If I come back early and we play bad, then it will be my fault. If I come back and we play well, it will be because we added Gasol. I'll just sit out and wait until I can dominate in a few years and Gasol has to back me up.

Also, notice that Kobe is not quoted in the article. Essentially his quote would be, "We're winning that's all I care about. Who's Andrew Bynum?"

Yesterday's post concerning Bob Huggins 11 year contract generated a lot of interest. Unfortunately, I was looking at this from a purely athletic point of view. Who would have ever thought that politics would have something to do with what is going on in a college athletic program?

I received a comment that said this:

Google "Huggins" "Heather Bresch" "President Mike Garrison"

Having seen too many movies over the years, I was a little afraid of what I was getting myself into. I could only imagine myself walking to my car in a parking deck, when suddenly a car came out of nowhere and tried to run me over. And for the next three days I ran for my life as men in suits tried to kill me. Would I stumble upon some information that would put myself and others in fear for our lives? Would I find the missing clue as to why Rich Rodriguez left West Virginia?

After much hesitation, I went forward with the search.

At this point I just want to stop and say, thank you West Virginia. I think I speak for all Alabamians (and folks from Mississippi too) when I thank you for making us look normal.

Apparently, the president (Mike Garrison) helped award the governor's daughter a degree even though she didn't complete all the required work. Board Members have ties to everyone. Bob Huggins former roommate is on the board at WVU. I could go on and on. And if you want to see all the details, check out this very conspiracy theory like blog.

And yes, I realize this is all old news to everyone in West Virginia. But we don't get that information here in Alabama. We're more concerned that we received a commitment from a QB for the 2009 recruiting class.

I was in the wrong for making assumptions that all decisions were made based on the good of the basketball program. And I'm from Alabama! I should have known better. The moral of the story is, when something smells funny (like an 11 year contract for a coach that has never won a championship) there is probably a reason it doesn't make sense.

Maybe ole' Rich Rodriguez knew what he was doing after all.....

And if you never hear from me again, know this. It's probably not a good thing to Google "Huggins" "Heather Breach" "President Mike Garrison"

On Friday, West Virginia announced they have signed Bob Huggins to a 11- year contract and have increased his pay from $800,ooo to $1,500,000. This after Huggins led them to the national championship this year in basketball. Oh wait, that's right, they were 26-11 and made it to the Sweet 16. West Virginia administrators, who had Huggins locked up for 5 years, apparently initiated the process, according to the article. I'm certainly not an expert on West Virginia basketball, however, my first thought is, Why?

Was there a huge demand out there for Bob Huggins out there? When each of the "big" coaching jobs opened up at the end of the season (LSU, Stanford, Oklahoma St), I never heard Huggins name mentioned in any of those searches. What's the rush to lock him up if the only school that wants him is West Virginia?

Eleven years is a long time. Think about this, it seems like Tom Izzo has been at Michigan State forever. Actually, he's been the head coach for 12 years. Think about all of the changes in college basketball over that period of time. What has convinced West Virginia administrators that they need to insure that he will be their coach until he retires. Why not let this current contract run a year or two and then review the results. Remember, you can make a much better decision about the long term plans for your school once you have some additional history. Just ask Notre Dame. Do you think they are happy with the Charlie Weis contract?

This move would make much more sense if Huggins was on the level of Roy Williams or Coach K. However, Huggins track record isn't on that level. Let's look at Huggins' resume:

One Final Four appearance in 16 years (Isn't a championship the ultimate goal?)

Poor academic standards at Cincinnati

Arrested for DUI in 2004

.759 winning percentage

If you're content with poor academic standards and possibly making the Sweet 16 every year, then this was a good move.

Is West Virginia really that desperate? Do they really feel they can't get anyone to come to their school and they feel the need to lock up Huggins right now? This surely is a risky move, especially if things go sour in the next few years, as they did at one of Huggins' previous stops.

Administrators in favor of this move would point to the 4 million dollar buyout. However, haven't we heard this story before? An alumn is signed to a long-term contract with a 4 million dollar buyout. Oh that's right, Rich Rodriguez just left the the same school this offseason for Michigan. If the coach wants to leave, he's going to leave.

In an era when alumni are ready to get rid of a coach two years after a great season (see John Brady - LSU), this move just doesn't make sense. Bob Huggins must have one great agent.

I feel like Seinfeld. "What's the deal with all the names of the horses in the Kentucky Derby?" Seriously, "Cool Coal Man"? That's the best you could come up with. Actually, the horse is probably owned by someone who has made their fortune in the Coal business. And for the record, I'm definitely in favor of "Court Vision".

I could care less about the Kentucky Derby or horse racing in general. However, I'm fascinated by the names of the horses. The creativity some of the owners have put into naming the horses has been spectactular. If you're a horse owner and you're into sports, I've got a couple of great names for you. In order for the name to work, it had to be something that sounded great when the announcer is calling the race down the stretch.

For instance, "And the Band is Out on the Field!" just doesn't work as a horse name. But I think these do.

This Game is OVAH!

And you'd have to say it just like Billy Packer said it during the semi-finals this year. Could you hear the announcer down the stretch saying "This Game is (pause) Ovah" wins the Kentucky Derby.

You are Looking Live

A call made famous by Brent Musburger in the 80's and for some reason not easily available on the net. Who doesn't remember this intro followed by a shot of the field with Brent saying, "You are Looking Live". It just feels like a great horse name.

That Is a Disgusting Act

Who could forget Buck and his famous line about Moss. The funny thing about his comment is the Packers fans are notorious for mooning* the opposing team when they arrive at the stadium. It was just good natured fun.

But this line works because "Disgusting" works on two different levels. Imagine your horse wins by a landslide. How awesome would it be to hear, "That Is a Disgusting Act" wins by 20 lengths?

* Side note here. (And yes I saw Joe Posnanski do this anytime he had a random thought that needed to be added so he put it in italics rather than adding a new post) Did you know that both times Auburn has defeated the top ranked Florida Gators at the swamp, they were mooned by a Grandma? So all you Grandmas that are mooning the Auburn Tigers, please stop?

Batista with the Caaaaaaaatch

It has been openly discussed several times on this site. We have a man-crush on Gus Johnson. And the more I think about it, the more I think he would be perfect to call the Kentucky Derby. Even if you don't care about the Derby, wouldn't you tune in to see Johnson making the call. If Batista with the Caaaaaatch were to win it at the wire, I think his head would explode. Who's against this?

Send it in Jerome

Actually, there are a ton of Raftery quotes that would work here. Man2Man, The Kiss, Onions, the list goes on and on. And just for your sake, when searching for Bill Raftery clips, don't put "Man to Man" and "Kiss" in the search critieria at the same time. I'm still realing from that one.

But really, Send it in Jerome works the best. Especially if it's done in the Raftery voice.

And finally....

Hello Heisman

Just like Keith Jackson said, Goodbye and Hello Heisman. This would be perfect especially if the jockey would strike the Heisman pose at the end of each race.

Honorable mention goes to Boom Goes the Dynamite. It would work, but this clip has been shown on the internet too many times to count.

And..

Buzz Bissinger Loves Blogs. Imagine Bissinger having to read all of the articles in the "Main Stream Media" about this horse as it runs to a Triple Crown.

And here's a good one just because you have to listen to the goofball giving you play by play.