Beware of 96!

Listen, I've been hearing some crazy stuff out there, and I just want you to know the truth because, hey, you're good people.
If anyone has tried to tell you something off-the-wall, like 96 teams in the NCAA tournament is a good idea, they're dirty liars.
No good would come of this.
Eight or sixteen teams in a college football tournament, now that's an excellent choice, but that's not what's on the table.
We're talking about adding 31 teams to a tournament that didn't need to add it's 65th team.
Don't get me wrong, I normally think more of a good thing is generally still a good thing, but this is not one of those times.
There are three possibilities for this scenario and only one of them is remotely good.
That scenario involves the proper 31 additional teams being invited, with an introductory round full of games like the one I'm watching right now between Michigan State and New Mexico State.
Underdogs hanging with and defeating the favorites could be even more abundant, as the opening round would consist mainly of middle teams from the big conferences facing champions and second teams from the mid-majors.
I think that's more of a utopian option.
The next possibility is that the tournament would allow more teams like Arkansas-Pine Bluff into the field.
Not a single Golden Lion scored in double digits against Duke Friday night, and there are plenty more teams like them in the NIT and the CBI just waiting on a tournament expansion.
What's also waiting in those lower tournaments are my third, and most likely scenario: more teams from the "power conferences."
As an ACC man, I'd love to say that everyone except UNC deserved a shot at the Big Dance this year, but that would be a lie as well.
Seth Greenberg can get his bald head as fired up as he wants, but Virginia Tech did nothing to show the committee they wanted in the field.
Yet, with the proposed expansion, the Hokies would most certainly have made it.
Furthermore, a completely undeserving Tar Heel team could've jumped all the way up to a one-seed in the NIT, and that would be a true injustice.

MLB Predictions

As Spring Training begins, many of America's top sports writers, bottom sports writers, and even the okay sports writers will begin to assess the talent present in Major League camps.

Then, one of the most inaccurate forms of journalism is formed: the predictive column.

Last year's efforts yielded such brilliant ideas as the Mets being a far-too-popular choice to win the National League.

I've never done one of these, but, this year, you will be the first to read my candid prognostication regarding the big leaguers.

The more I think about it, I've never made public my thought on eventual champions of any kind prior to the regular season.

Thus, you should feel lucky.

Or at least you'll know who not to pick.

Anyway, I'm basing my educated guesses on three main categories: pitching, hitting, and bench. The closer will count towards pitching, with the rest of the bullpen counting towards bench.

Why, you might ask?

Because I'm just making this up as I go.



AL East

Anyone who doesn't think the Yankees are the best team in this division is kidding themselves. I loathe the pinstripes as much as the next guy, but the champs reloaded nicely. The only area where I see a weakness is the bench, but, barring big injuries, that shouldn't keep them from winning the division. Meanwhile, Tampa Bay has the hitting to keep the Sox out of the postseason. In other news, I think I found three Blue Jays I'd heard of.

Projected finish: NY, TB, BOS, BAL, TOR.



AL Central

This divistion should be one of the most tightly contested races from start to finish. The addition of Johnny Damon gives Detroit the slight hitting edge, while the recent injury to Joe Nathan may be the straw that breaks the Twins' backs. Minnesota will need a big move to climb back into this division either now or by the trade deadline in July. Cleveland's roster is surprisingly mediocre, while the Royals could be this year's '08 Rays. Notice I'm not predicting it, though.

Projected finish: DET, CHI, MIN, KC, CLE



AL West

The easy no-look pick in this division is always the Angels, and they will be fairly strong this year. With a couple of moves now or later, they could steal back their own lunch money. That said, Cliff Lee and Chone Figgins make the Mariners an early favorite to take the division crown and try to get Mr. Griffey a pennant. The Rangers' lineup is impressive with Vlad and Josh Hamilton, but their pitching is a liability as usual.

Projected finish: SEA, LA, TEX, OAK



Playoffs

The Yankees sweep the White Sox and Seattle overpowers Detroit in a short series. Then, the Yanks take Seattle in six games in the Championship Series. I don't like it, but a return trip to the World Series seems inevitable for Joey G and the boys.



NL East

This could be the year that we finally get the three-team brawl between the Braves, Mets, and Phillies that some have been predicting for a few years. As for starting rotations, the Braves and Phillies have the edge, even with Javy Vasquez donning the stripes this year. Furthermore the Braves and Mets are two of the deepest teams in the league as far as reserves and bullpen go. Meanwhile, the Phillies hitting lineup is as formidable as you'll find. I can only predict this division based on how I hope it will finish. As a side note, aren't the Marlins about due to lease another World Championship sometime soon?

Projected finish: ATL, PHI, NY, WAS, FLA



NL Central

Unless something changes, this stands to be a boring division again. The Cardinals have the sweet hitting tandem of Pujols and Holliday to go with a solid starting rotation, but not much beyond that. The Cubs are fairly deep and have a good rotation as well. The other teams in this division will dabble in mediocrity for most of the year, barring some unforeseen moves by the Astros or Brewers.

Projected finish: STL, CHI, MIL, HOU, CIN, PIT

NL West

This will be a highly contested division top-to-bottom. That said, any prediction I make has the potential to be completely wrong here. Given the proven talent in the Dodgers' starting lineup and rotation, it's hard to pick against them, but the Giants and D-Backs aren't far behind. As far as depth goes these three teams have a lot of quality talent doing bench work for them. If Arizona's rotation pitches up to potential, what they lack in offensive firepower could be overcome. Still the Giants pose the biggest overall threat to Manny and friends.

Projected finish: LA, SF, ARZ, COL, SD

Playoffs

Atlanta and the Cardinals put up a classic five gamer, but the Braves' overall better pitching and stronger lineup makes the difference. Meanwhile, the Phillies go out West and take down the Dodgers. Then the Braves ride a stronger rotation past the Phillies in six games.

World Series

So yeah, I'm a homer. I picked the Braves to face the evil Yankees in the World Series. I'll go one step further and say the Braves beat the Yankees... in seven games... on a walk-off... by Chipper... in Atlanta. That's right, I'm saying the National League is going to win the All-Star Game for once because that's what this time of the year is about, hope in a team that you haven't seen play a real game yet. So whoever your team is, here's to them playing up to the potential of their talent. Unless your team is Toronto, at which point you should realize that they're really going to be terrible this year.

Just out of love...

He's been called National Champion.
He's been called "The greatest college quarterback of all time."
He's been called a hero.
He called himself the real Heisman winner.
He's been called NFL Offensive Rookie of the Year.
He's been called a flop.
He's been called crazy, even suicidal.
Anyone who watches football even casually knows who I'm talking about.
Vince Young has gone from phenom to legend back to phenom, and he now sits second on the Titans' depth chart behind the archaic Kerry Collins.
He blew off rumored emotional struggles that led to a frantic search earlier this year as a trip to a friend's house.
Even as a fan of Vince, I was skeptical about that odd adventure.
Regardless, it has been a roller coaster journey through football thus far for Vince, but his off-the-field ride took him right back to hero on Wednesday.
You see, Young was mentored through a healthy portion of his football career by Steve McNair, who, as anyone with cable or the internet knows, was shot by what seems to be his mistress on July 4.
Steve McNair was married with four kids.
Two of those kids are students at St. Paul Christian Academy, a school that had a "Dear Dads Breakfast."
According to teachers, 11-year-old Trenton and 5-year-old Tyler "were wondering what was going to happen with them" in regards to the breakfast.
Apparently Trenton and Tyler, like much of sports media, had forgotten about Vince Young's legendary capabilities when he's needed.
So Vince showed up at the restaurant where breakfast was happening, ate an omelet with the boys, signed a few autographs, and made those two boys' day.
He probably made their lives, though.
Vince summed up that, even though many have suggested he has completely lost his mind, he "gets it" better than most celebrities ever will in his quote to the Tennesseean.
"Those are my boys. I wouldn't say it was to pay anyone back; it was just out of love. Steve would do it for me. He pretty much did it for me when I was growing up. I have a history with the boys and I want to do anything I can. I am their big brother."
I'm not saying Vince Young is perfect, or he deserves to start (although he does), or that he won't ever let those boys or his fans down.
I am saying that the media outlets will probably let this story slide through the cracks before today is over in favor of something more interesting, like the latest leaked steroid user.
It's a shame because Trenton and Tyler are more important than that.
Just ask the greatest college quarterback of all time.

Dear fantasy football team,

So all you guys have been drafted to play for this illustrious franchise, the Macon Babies, and you should feel lucky. To my first round draft pick, Steve Slaton, I knew when I pre-set my player rankings and draft strategy, that the chips would fall to where you would be my guy. Yes, you are more valuable to me than Tom Brady, Donovan McNabb, Steve Smith, and Clinton Portis. Don't let all those Pro Bowls and Super Bowls get you down. Your team is perennially awful, but you are my shining star.
In week one, I need a good performance out of you. When the Eagles play the Panthers in that opening tilt, I could use a 300-399-yard game out of Donovan McNabb. A couple of touchdowns would be great, but no interceptions please. At the same time, I need Steve Smith to get over 200 yards and a couple touchdowns. Basically, I need an offensive shootout. I'm not even going to discuss how ridiculous things need to get if Portis gets injured in the preseason and I have to put in the Panthers' Jonathan Stewart.
Furthermore, Peyton Manning, you're not on my team, and, in fact, you're my opposition. Thus, a 10-40 performance with 120 yards and a touchdown would be a blessing. Especially if all 10 of those completions are to my guy Dallas Clark. That's right, please ignore Reggie Wayne and your other speedy receivers. Clark is slower, therefore more thorough. Remember the tortoise and the hare? If not, I'll give you a hint: the rabbit loses.
Otherwise, if Brady hurts his knee again, I'm gonna need you to step up JaMarcus Russ... Okay, that's a long shot. I should just stop. Good luck, guys!

-Jeremy
Owner
Macon Babies

Simply Genius

Bronson Arroyo has always been an interesting character to me.
You know, the guy who started with the Red Sox that had the long hair.
He was also the only white baseball player with braids, and he has been a singer and guitarist with produced CD's.
On the field, he's always been the type of pitcher that no one seems to be able to explain, we just know he's good.
I couldn't tell you if he's a fireballer, or if he paints the corners, or if he throws a loop-de-doo knuckleball like we all did on Nintendo games.
I just know he always seems to be successful.
Now, as it turns out, he's also a genius, and he may have used steroids.
You see, Arroyo has admitted that he's not all that careful with his supplements now, and he used to take andro and amphetamines, which have both been banned.
But they weren't when he took them.
That's the kicker that most people booing Manny, Papi, and the rest of the "Dirty 104" as I have just in the last 10 words dubbed them, don't realize.
Anyone on that 2003 list was found guilty of taking supplements that were not illegal yet or had no formalized testing or punishment.
Arroyo's stance, paraphrased:
"Yep, I took lots of stuff back then. Good stuff. Legal stuff. Was it laced with steroids? WHO KNOWS??? But it was AWESOME! In fact, I'm probably on that list from '03. Be shocking if I wasn't. If you're asking whether I'd do it again, the answer is abso-frickin'-lutely. If that stuff were legal, I'd buy the Sam's Club supersized jug. To be honest, I'm not very careful now. I don't take what's banned, but I do take anything that's not."
Do you know what that means?
If it does come out that he was on the 2003 list, no one will be shocked.
Anyone who's read the story I just read won't buy a newspaper, magazine, or tell-all book simply to find out the details about Bronson's steroid use.
No one will assume that because he was on the list, he was shooting the hard stuff into his left glute. (or perhaps the right glute; I don't know proper protocol.)
He didn't pull the Palmiero finger point, or the A-Rod "I'm sorry for what I may or may not have done that could have possibly been against a rule or statute or maybe law," or even a Papi "I think I took tainted vitamins."
He told us exactly what he took, told us what he's taking, and told us why he did what he did then and why he does what he does now.
It'll probably be taken way out of context by those who aren't used to such, but not by me.
I appreciate honesty.

Mr. James...excuse me...

So, I finally saw the Lebron James video.
I know you know the one I'm talking about.
First, it was "the video that Nike confiscated of Lebron James getting dunked on by a high schooler."
Then, it was "the video that the public had the right to see."
Next, it was "well, I mean, the camp does have a 'no outside photography or recording' policy."
Finally, it was "oh somebody leaked the video. I'm shocked. We might as well watch the footage from someone's cell phone video camera."
And this is the type of trending that is keeping me out of the sports writing industry?
I even heard Dan Patrick say that Lebron didn't get dunked on; he actually just got out of the way and let the kid have his moment.
Well, as stated, I finally saw the video, and... umm... King James got dunked on by a high schooler.
He caught a face full of shoulder, gave a "swing-and-a-miss" attempt at a block, and then stumbled backwards upon landing.
That is textbook "posterization."
Perhaps, as some talking head hypothesized, Lebron could have blocked the kid if he wanted to, but we'll never know that because Lebron, that I know of, hasn't really addressed it.
Not that it matters, since getting dunked on or dunking on someone is no indicator of actual talent, but I would love to hear the interview that would occur if Lebron and a reporter had a completely truthful and accurate conversation about the incident.
"Mr. James...excuse me...rumor has it that you got... posterized at your recent camp. Is this true?"
"Why yes I did. Haven't you seen the video? It's all over every website that calls itself a news outlet, most of which are actually run by high school dropouts with poor senses of humor and decency. (Glares menacingly at the kid wearing the star trek t-shirt and no press credentials)"
"But Mr. James, I heard Nike confiscated the tape. Don't journalists have the right to everything that happens anywhere at anytime, regardless of rules in place in those locations?"
"Well yeah, they tried to keep that tape from getting out. Truthfully, nothing that happens in a private location is any of the media's business, and the camp had a rule against recordings done by anyone other than Nike. That rule is really just for the protection of the 16-17-year-olds that are attending the camp, but it actually would've been really convenient for me this time. (insert cheesy Lebron commercial smile)"
"Lebron, some have said you let the kid dunk, but I've seen the video. He made you look pretty bad; am I right? (looks around for a high five)"
"Well truthfully, I'm probably the most naturally gifted athlete on the planet, so, were I playing at game intensity and focus, I would've sent the ball into the sixth row. But I wasn't, because it's a camp and I'm the host. Thus, that high schooler dunked on me, and it should be on a poster. Because that video is nasty."
Granted that conversation won't ever happen, but that's my take on the issue.
The King got thrown down upon, but it's not really that big of a deal.
The score is still Lebron 2,000,000...the world 1.

Clash of the Titans

I've heard much talk on sports radio over recent months about the level of parity in particular professional leagues.
The hosts on these shows begin to banter about which leagues have the most level playing field amongst its teams, then they move on to discuss whether parity is really important.
My personal stance is that, to the fan of mediocre teams, parity is paramount.
If your team just missed the MLB wild card by a game and a half or finished as the eight seed in the NBA's eastern conference and got spanked by the Cavs, it's nice to think, "My guys might have a chance next year."
For everyone else, especially league officials, total parity is like "ending women's suffrage."
The phrase itself sounds better than the meaning of the words.
Total parity means that this year's champion might be terrible next year.
See 1997 or 2003 Marlins.
Total parity means that fans just get frustrated when their Super Bowl Raiders disappear for years afterwards.
Are their Angels fans anyhwere outside of California because of that title the Halos won in 2002?
Did anyone else even remember that the Angels won a World Series in 2002?
On the flip side, how many Celtics and Lakers fan exist outside of Massachusetts and California simply because of the 1980's?
Take me for example, I've only seen the United Center once in the seven days I've ever spent in Chicago, but I still cheer for the Bulls as much as possible because of the Jordan era.
I'll go a step further and say that I wouldn't even watch the NBA now if Jordan's Bulls hadn't erased the word parity from the NBA lexicon in the mid-90s.
All that said, the NBA is building to what I think may be the best NBA season in years because, for once, parity isn't happening.
The teams that are making the biggest moves are last season's contenders.
The Lakers decided, "what we need is a grumpy, lanky dude."
Thus, Ron Artest.
The Celtics said, "We'll see your grumpy, lanky dude, and raise you a scruffy beard."
Thus, Rasheed Wallace.
Questionably, the Magic gave up a little too much, but they picked up Vince Carter, and I can't wait to see Vince jump off Dwight Howard's back for a 360 through his legs.
Even the Cavaliers signed Shaq, which is a way better deal than a lot of people realize for situational and match-up reasons.
Basically, the Eastern conference power forwards, or fours, should start a support group.
Imagine yourself having to decide who to help, your small forward who's getting destroyed by the King or your most likely undersized center that's getting pushed around by the Big Aristotle.
Have fun with that.
Also don't forget that the Rockets and Blazers have been reloading, and D-Wade is forcing the Heat's hand on some moves in Miami.
The NBA was already gaining popularity, but I think this may be one of the most interesting eras we've ever seen in sports.
This is no one or two-team race, but this is also no NFL, where contenders change year-to-year.
What we're about to see is essentially an eight-or-nine team league of contenders that fill their schedules with 20 or so minor-league teams.
I mean, does anyone actually view the Bucks and Andrew Bogut as anywhere near the same level as Kobe and the Lakers?
Personally, I love this direction.
Why?
Because I think it sounds more exciting to see Shaq, LeBron, Kobe, Pau, and Ron Artest on the same court without All-Star jerseys on than it would be to see Michael Redd and those ugly green uniforms get swept out of the second round.