How It Should Have Ended

Kansas had proved me wrong all tournament, why would I have thought things would be any different late in the 4th quarter on Monday night?

Memphis up 9 with under 2 minutes to go felt like a lock, but Kansas stormed back. The furious comeback was capped by Mario Chalmers 3 point shot, which tied the game with only 2 seconds left.

Now on to the real story, no not the OT win by the Jayhawks, but the strategy employed by Memphis at the end of regulation. There were two controversial subjects: No. 1, should Memphis have called a timeout after hitting the FT to go up by 3? And, No. 2, should Memphis have fouled to prevent Chalmers' game tying 3?

The answer to both questions is . . . YES!

This was the National Championship. You don't take chances on this stage.

The timeout is probably the more controversial of the two topics. Kansas was out of TO's and calling one would give them a chance to draw up a play. However, people that are using this argument are forgetting one key point. Memphis was not going to allow Kansas to get off a shot! The Tigers should've used their timeout and made it clear to all players that they were to foul when the ball was near the half line.

Calipari claims they were trying to foul, but I'm not sure I'm buying it. I believe that he wanted his players to foul, but It didn't appear that a single player on the floor for Memphis got that message.

It hurts me to say it, because I like Calipari as a coach, but he simply blew it. Combine the coaching error with horrendous foul shooting down the stretch, and it equals a monumental meltdown that will be remembered forever by fans of both the Tigers and Jayhawks.

Then There Were Two

The Final 4 was cut in half on Saturday night, and I'll be the first to admit, I could not have been more wrong about Kansas. I gave the Jayhawks very little respect heading into the tournament, and gave them even less going into Saturday's game against the Tar Heels. Much to my surprise, Kansas proved to be quicker, bigger, stronger, and much better defensively.

With approximately 7 minutes left in the first half, Billy Packer declared the game "over". This rubbed me the wrong way, much like a lot of what comes out of Packer's mouth. However, his assessment held true, even with a Carolina rally narrowing the lead down to 4 midway through the 2nd half.

Hansbrough was held in check, Ty Lawson didn't show up, and UNC shot only 36% from the field.

In the early game, Memphis' guards (Rose and CDR combined for 53 points) outplayed UCLA's duo of Collison and Westbrook. Darren Collison was especially shaky, fouling out with only 2 points, and 5 turnovers (compared to only 4 assists).

What can be taken away from Saturday night's showdowns?

• Memphis is even more athletic than I previously thought. This was evident in the way they blew by the defensive minded Bruins for a number of easy layups.
• Memphis looked sharp at the foul line, hitting 20 for 23 against UCLA.
• Kansas' mauling of the Heels makes Davidson's performance even more impressive.
• While I'm not a huge fan of either Memphis or Kansas, Monday's championship should be fast paced and intense.
• Note to North Carolina: When you reach the Final 4, you need to come ready to play from the opening tip. It's a shame that they wasted this opportunity by coming out so lethargic.
  

AP Player of the Year Announced . . . What a Joke!

First off, I have no problem with Tyler Hansbrough being named player of the year by the AP. He's the best player on one of the top 4 teams in the country. He consistently brings his best night in and night out. He scores, rebounds, defends, and hustles. I don't care who the best NBA prospect is, I care about who is the best college basketball player this season. With that as the primary criteria, I don't see how anyone can have too much of issue with Hansbrough's selection.

Ok, now on to my gripe. Only 3 players received votes for the award . . . that's right, only THREE! Psycho T received 56, Michael Beasley brought in 15 votes, and Memphis' Chris Douglas-Roberts got one vote.

The lopsided favoritism showed towards Hansbrough and Beasley is just another example of how little credibility the AP has when it comes to handing out awards and top 25 polling.

CDR with 1 vote? No votes for Kevin Love? No votes for Stephen Curry? No votes for Brook Lopez or DJ Augustin? Call me a cynic, but something tells me these voters got a little caught up in the hype.

Memphis Suspends Allen

5'10 PG, Andre Allen has been suspended for the Final Four due to a failed drug test. Allen plays about 14 minutes per game for the Tigers and is averaging 3 points and 2 assists per game.


First off, what a disappointing way for a senior to end his career. Memphis is on the brink of a national championship, with Allen playing an important role in their run to the Final 4. I wonder if the "high" was worth it?

Second, will this affect Memphis' chances in San Antonio? With Allen out, the Tigers rotation will be altered. If Derrick Rose gets into foul trouble, difficulties could arise. But . . .

Memphis has incredible athleticism, and plays a style of offense that doesn't require a traditional point guard. It's these two issues that lead me to believe Allen's absence will not be a determining factor in San Antonio.

I Hate Baseball: The Marlins Made Me Do It

This is not a rare sight at a Florida Marlins game. A lone fan finding an entire section all to himself. Why does no one care? And, more importantly, why do I hate baseball?

It's supposed to be America's past time, and plenty of people seem to enjoy the game, so how in the world did I come to dislike it so strongly? Here's my theory . . .

First, the Marlins inaugural season came in 1993, when I was 8 years old. I was playing little league, and was having some fun with it. All of the ingredients were there to welcome me into baseball fandom. There was excitement surrounding the team (sure they sucked, but no one cared), enthusiasm in the stands, and an overall positive feeling at the ballpark.

Then, in 1994 came the strike. Florida was getting better, on pace to finish 72-90 (an 8 game improvement over their 1993 campaign), and the fans allegiance to their team was growing. All of a sudden, the season is over, there's no MLB post season, and things would never be the same again.

The Fish drew an average of 37,330 fans in their first two years, a number that would never be duplicated. In their two World Series winning seasons, the Marlins averaged only 22,600 per game. Baseball was new to the South Florida fans in 1993, and we all jumped on the bandwagon. The strike put a stop to the wagon, and we all jumped off, leaving our passion for baseball behind.

Through 15 years of existence, the Marlins have won 2 World Series Championships and followed each with a major sell off of all the team's talent. Florida's had the lowest payroll for the past two years, trying to scrape by on a minimalist's budget while waiting on a new stadium (that may never come). Losing is one thing, but not even trying to win is another. Fans have been left out to dry by the franchise for the past 2 years, and have lost nearly all emotional attachment they once held for their hometown team.

Will a new stadium save the Marlins, bring South Floridians back to the ballpark, and more importantly make me love this game one more time? There will be excitement in the air again, mixed with the smell of stadium hot dogs and green grass, the stadium will be full, and management will be motivated to put a competitive product on the field. Plus, it won't hurt that a retractable roof will protect those in attendance from the 95 degree heat and future chemotherapy appointments.

Can the Marlins bring my heart back to baseball? . . . Only time will tell, but I have my doubts.