I admittedly haven't spent hours upon hours watching the Tourney so far. From what I have seen though, is it me or does it seem the teams having success share a few things in common? Well, why don't we boil those 'things' down to a single something. It's a word that isn't sexy. It's an idea that often seems to have disappeared from the lexicon of coaches at the college level. Yes, Coach Dale, I'm talking about THE FUNDAMENTALS.
Sure, talent is the ultimate equalizer. To believe that a team is going to take on Kentucky and blow them out of the building because they can run a picture perfect pick-and-roll is obviously ridiculous. However, maybe the teams oozing with gifted athletes and individual superstars can take a few cues from early round action, and teams like Cornell, St. Mary's, Purdue, Northern Iowa, Washington, Syracuse and Ohio.
The talent level surely varies vastly even among these five teams. Yet, there are common threads. Unselfishness is an unmistakable theme. In all cases, so is defense. These also so happen to be squads where executing backdoor cuts, screening away from the ball and continually moving off the ball seem to take place with much greater consistency. It's probably not coincidence that the number of offensive rebounds, jump balls, floor burns and other "hustle" plays similarly seemed more prevalent in watching some of these schols compete.
It's a model teams like Georgetown and UTEP (yes, I realize they were a lower seed) might have benefited from following a bit closer. Villanova looks like it could learn a little as well. In this case, their opponent is providing a real-time first-person lesson.
A back screen may not be as scintillating as an alley oop, and an offensive rebound surely doesn't have the flair of a killer crossover. But maybe some of those stacked teams should have their stars stop looking to light it up themselves on every possession and instead see what a little ball movement can do. We're not demanding four passes before a shot here, but maybe two?
The NCAA Tourney is big business. That goes for sponsors and marketers, too. And while I was slightly perturbed at having to continually wait for coaches to heap praise on Capital One's "Ivan Brothers" while trying to get some updates, I found myself strangely compelled to click on the URL. For those who do, you are immediately taken not to a heavily-branded commercial site lauding the benefits of owning a Capital One credit card but, rather, to a thoroughly entertaining Capital One YouTube channel. The opening video housed there is below. Kudos on some entertaining content from the folks at Capital One. Chickens in the pen!
Occasionally, small throwaway phrases catch your attention. Such is the case with the following excerpt from Deadspin's morning roundup:
"Phoenix put up an NBA season-high 152 points against the T-Wolves, as every sports writer dusts off the word "rout." But really, what else can you call it? Certainly not an NBA game, when Darko Milicic led all Wolves starters with a -12 +/-."
Tracking...totally...makes sense...Darko was on the court in garbage time...with all the scrubs on the floor in a blowout...wait, a second starter? Did you say Darko Milicic led all Wolves starters??!!!
/frantically looking up box score /confirming Darko did in fact start last night's game
Honestly, I'm speechless. No need to go dumping on our boy Darko. The Knicks traded Milicic to the Wolves for veteran Brian Cardinal who they promptly waived. So, clearly, Knicks brass felt highly of the former #2 overall pick out of Serbia. Now, the current edition of the Knicks is nothing to write home about. But how bad are the Wolves that Darko is part of your starting five? Am I the only one slightly shocked by this? No need to answer...
Sometimes I really hate the media. They make stories out of nothing. And, occasionally, they do it so well that I find myself illogically gravitating to those ridiculous "news" items and following them with disproportionate interest. For example, Tim Tebow will throw a football tomorrow. Yes, the former Heisman trophy winning quarterback is scheduled to throw the pigskin he chucked around hundreds of times for thousands of yards in college. Stop. The. Presses. Seriously, stop. Never have I recalled a Pro Day workout with as much hype. Is it ridiculous? Absolutely. Will it change anything about anything? In the grand scheme of things, not so much. Tebow's draft stock? Perhaps. The most annoying part? As much as I want to completely ignore the story, I'm strangely intrigued.
Yes, it's absurd that you can say "Tebow 2.0," and I actually know you're talking about a revamped throwing motion and can rattle off the cast of ex-coaches and professional football gurus and quarterbacking experts who have enveloped Tim in their blanket of drop back pro-style knowledge. Yes, I'm beyond curious. Why? Here goes...
1. As much as I can see why people can't stand him, I like Tim Tebow. 2. I think I want to see him succeed (*I think*) 3. I really want to see how and if years of doing something one way can be changed over the course of weeks and thousands of reps 4. The kid's a freak and the idea of seeing if he can play quarterback in the NFL is still strangely interesting (I have little doubt he could, and may, thrive at another position) 5. As much as the media has broken down his Senior Bowl performance, combines and Wonderlic, it's fascinating to ponder the sheer tonnage of coverage that is going to come about on the account of his throwing a football tomorrow
There will be suckers everywhere heading online to discover if the legend of Tim Tebow has only grown following a miraculous passer transformation. I will be one of those suckers. Because tomorrow...Tim Tebow shall throw.
A surefire Hall of Famer is heading to New York. Did we mention it's to the Jets? Last time this happened, my giddiness should've been tempered. I should have known a bit better. Still, we were staring Kellen Clemens right in the face, and the indecisive one seemed a low-risk, high-reward gift from the heavens. In retrospect, he was neither bearer of misery nor messiah. I am almost two years older and wiser now. Perhaps that gives me a clearer head in assessing the latest superstar name addition to the Jets - LaDainian Tomlinson.
Gut reaction? I like it. I am under no illusions that this is the old L.T., and I've at times knocked his toughness (maybe without warrant). Regardless, though, this is a man who still knows how to run the football (as well as some other things on the field), and the departure of Thomas Jones has made this a not-nonsensical move. Assuming the Jets find a way to keep Leon around...and assuming Washington is most of the player he was pre-injury...and assuming the Shonn Greene of the second half is really ready to shoulder the load...it's a great move.
Buried amid those assumptions, of course, is a whole lotta funky stuff and uncertainty. For starters, one can debate the dismissal of Thomas Jones who, despite being a tad older, was infinitely more productive than LT this past year. Throw in the reality of an uncapped year, and I can't argue with those who feel getting rid of TJ was a mistake - even some of the guys in the locker room (particularly them).
Fact is...Jones is a Chief. Given said fact, there are not many more attractive, proven running back entities out there in the free agent market. Let's even assume that entity is only a 730 yard, 12 TD entity. I'm OK with that as my back-up. Sure, we're floating back towards assumption land, but nothing is certain in this league. As of this second, though, the Jets have three talented, versatile running backs who can put the ball in the end zone on the ground for a team that desires nothing more than to "ground and pound."
Bringing a three-time MVP and five-time Pro Bowler into the mix, who has a nose for the endzone, can catch the ball out of the backfield and, hopefully, still play the role of feature back if duty calls, is not a bad thing. Does his 3.3 YPC average from last year cause me some trepidation? Sure. Does the idea of LT playing on the East Coast in crappy, colder weather make me think twice. It has to. But, for now, I'm in.
Let's see what the kid's still got in the tank. I'm of the mind it's not as empty as folks would have you believe. I tend to believe that a new line that ranks among the league's best (if not at the top) and a little chip on the shoulder might produce some intriguing results. LT and a slimmer Ryan heading back to NY this summer? Whudda thunk it. Should be some interesting sights from the Green and White nation. I, for one, am already raring to go.
Just wrapped up watching a phenomenal SEC Championship game between the 'Cats and Dogs. I would've loved to have seen Mississippi St. win it in regulation and punch that automatic bid ticket. After this afternoon's game, it will be actually brutal for those kids if the committee leaves them on the outside looking in. As Calipari said, if Kentucky's a #1 seed, then how good is this Miss. St. team? Certainly tourney-worthy one could easily argue following today's performance.
All that said, did anyone else watching that game pick up anything strange regarding the telecast? To kick off the game, ESPN/ABC showed one of those pump-you-up highlight reels set to Tim McGraw's "How Bad Do You Want It?" Makes sense. Good country song for the SEC tilt down in Nashville with the thematically appropriate lyrics in the refrain: "how bad do you want it? how bad do you need it?"
In most cases, the opening montage would be the last you hear of those lyrics. Except for this afternoon, Jimmy Dykes adopted those 10 words and repeated them - AD NAUSEAM - throughout the game. Seriously, it was easily uttered 10 times to the point where you could almost subconciously feel Brad Nessler inner monologue decrying: "Really, can we not think of any other way to put context around the action on the floor?"
My only logical conclusion is that Dykes was part of a clandestine marketing deal to help spur sales of McGraw's single. I wonder how much he gets for each sale on iTunes. How bad do you want it? How bad do you need it?!
Editor's Note: This is a blog that often leans toward satire, so I wanted to make it clear (amazing these disclaimers are often needed) that this is in jest. Although, it was a whole lot of times, you've got to admit.
In what is easily the single biggest question NCAA pundits across the country are contemplating this morning...where will my Cornell Big Red wind up in the brackets when they're revealed later this evening?
Forget about top seeds and the overall number one. Spare me talk of bubble busters, mid-majors and conference tallies. I'm most interested in my alma mater's first round destination and tourney seed. Why the inordinate amount of interest you ask?
For those of you who may have missed it, the Big Red locked up their third consecutive Ivy League title and another automatic bid to the Dance. So what, right? Just give me a post to indulge in fantasy OK? The difference is this year Cornell has a legit chance to win a tournament game for the first time -- ever. The Big Red finished the season with a 27-4 mark, only dropping one in the conference.
I've stated their "resume" before, but this is not your typical run-of-the-mill Ivy entry. The Big Red took on a respect-worthy out-of-conference slate that included games against Alabama, Seton Hall, Syracuse, Kansas, St. Johns, St. Joe's, etc. Their near-upset at Kansas showed the country that this senior-laden team is worth paying attention to. So, now the only question is what seed awaits?
In Lunardi's last bracket, the Big Red occupies a #11 slot and is matched up against Xavier. Tonight, CBS will have cameras poised on Newman Arena in Ithaca, N.Y. as Cornell waits to see where they'll be heading. That sentence is hard enough to reconcile for a graduate who has zero hoops memories from four years on the hill. Three straight trips to the big show is more than this alumnus could ask for. But, if we're on the topic of making requests, how 'bout 2010 for their first NCAA tournament win?
I admittedly haven't spent hours upon hours watching the Tourney so far. From what I have seen though, is it me or does it seem the teams having success share a few things in common? Well, why don't we boil those 'things' down to a single something. It's a word that isn't sexy. It's an idea that often seems to have disappeared from the lexicon of coaches at the college level. Yes, Coach Dale, I'm talking about THE FUNDAMENTALS.
Posts
