I was a little surprised at your answer to the post last week about college basketball's popularity being due to more whites playing than in the NBA. I think it's a huge factor. People outside big cities can easily identify with young white kids more than they can with tattoo covered, free-lancing black players in the NBA. Why do you think Duke is so loved by white sportscasters, with their statements that "Duke does it right" and "their players go to class"? Of course, it's a stereotype, but I think it goes far in explaining college ball's greater popularity than the pro game. That said, I think the talent level in the NBA is much greater and is more fun to watch and the game is far more demanding on its players than the college game.
I know Sparty is hobbled and depleted, but ever since Kalin Lucas went down the players have really rallied around each other and have played with a renewed purpose. Everyone from Delvon Roe, Draymond Green, Durrell Summers, Korie Lucious to Raymar Morgan have stepped up their game and are playing at a really high level. Considering these players were in the championship game last year and with Tom Izzo at the helm, why cant they win this thing? None of the remaining teams are as good as UNC (or even UCONN and Louisville) were last year.
No one's said they couldn't win this thing, have they? I mean, I picked against MSU against Northern Iowa and against Tennessee, based on the Lucas thing, but I don't think it's ever really a surprise when Izzo wins in March. The bigger surprise to me is that Butler is favored on Saturday. A Horizon League team favored against a Big 10 team with a berth in the national title game on the line? That seems bizarre.
Each round the Spartans win, of course, just makes it hurt that much worse for Terps fans. Georgetown has wins against half the Final Four field, and the Terps had one of the Four Finalists all but beat a week ago. And yet here I am in Fredonia, without even a thought of trying to get to Indy.
As a Maryland fan, I am disappointed ... but, hey, looking forward to next year! I have to make an observation about Duke, understanding there is little to NO love lost between us! Duke was SO quickly poo-pooed when the brackets came out. The sports talking heads said their road was "easy." And many predicted them doing down in the 32 or 16. I guess the reason I take exception to this bias is it seems to be a bias against the ACC as whole in many ways. ("Duke can't be THAT great ... they "only" came from the ACC!" Grrrrr!) So, is there any crow to be eaten regarding Duke?
Well, I'll disagree with you about the ACC. People were down on Duke, in my opinion, because we've seen Duke disappoint in March in recent years. Teams certainly seem to get in these March ruts, even as their personnel changes, and I think there was a thought that when Duke left North Carolina and faced talented teams (Georgetown, Maryland, Wisconsin, Georgia Tech), the Dukies lost.
That said, I had Duke in the Final Four in two of my three brackets. Not because I loved their chances, but because I didn't see who else was gonna make it from that bracket.
As for ACC bias, the ACC did not have a great tourney. Sure, some of these results are so close you can't really make any conference-vs-conference judgment, but when a team like Florida State goes out in the first round against Gonzaga, Clemson fails to live up to its seed, the team that tied for first in the league can't survive the first weekend, etc, this wouldn't seem to be the time to defend the ACC.
Would you care to make an actual argument as to why Duke still doesn't deserve to be in the Final Four? Seems like everyone else, including many sports media, is content to leave the argument at "They were given a cakewalk bracket."
That might have been the opinion before the tournament, but now that the games have been played, Duke: had to play the highest possible seed in each game; had to grit out a tough win against Purdue, who was in the top 10 all year and proved they still had chops even without Robbie Hummel; had to grit out an even tougher win against Baylor, who many, many people had going to the Final Four; and managed to beat Baylor even when one of Duke's best players basically didn't show up.
And no, I'm not a Duke alum or fan or apologist. I'm someone who's been lucky enough to watch the vast majority of the tournament, and I honestly want to know. If they don't deserve it, fine, but I've yet to hear an actual argument based on the way the tournament has actually shaken out.
Well, this is all semanticizing, and I'm not going to convince you in 200 words here, but the point is that even playing against the highest possible seed in each game, Duke's road seemed a bit easier. Did Purdue prove they still had chops without Hummel? They won two games, one against Siena and another in a real battle against A&M. Would you rather face that Purdue team than Tennessee or Michigan State or Maryland or Butler or Wisconsin or Temple or Cornell? I would.
Same thing with Baylor (and obviously Duke didn't have to play the highest seed in every round if they met a third seed in the Elite Eight.) Yes, Baylor is talented, but the reason many, many people had them going to the Final Four is because of a perceived weakness in Duke, so saying Duke then beat a team that people picked to go to the Final Four is sort of circular.
Look, we'll see against West Virginia. If Duke wins that game, no one will complain. If they get mashed off the court, then people will again complain. I still think Duke had the easiest path and the least deserving resume, so I still don't get it.
I'm attending Opening Day for the Nationals next week against the Phillies, and I have one request that I'd like to make with those also attending the game: I know the president is a polarizing figure right now, but when he throws out the first pitch, can we leave politics at the door and simply enjoy the game? Many thanks!
I'll pass along your wishes, but I don't know that I can endorse it. There were a lot of people who reveled in the reception GWB got when Nats Park opened, and so if anyone feels like turnabout is fair play, etc etc. And as long as people are debating whether or not to boo the Prez, they don't have to worry about whether or not to boo the players/front office.
You got to figure this is home turf for the Prez, though; I wouldn't expect many boos.
He's like the Black-Eyed Peas..no one admits to liking him, but he never, ever goes away, which means someone likes him. Have you ever met him, and if so how was the meeting? Of course this is prompted by his latest dig at Gilbert
I've never met him.
This might be the first time he's ever been compared to the Black-Eyed Peas.
I will say that no one likes Skip Bayless or Jay Marrioti or most of the yodelers, but their ability to make you anger and foamy-mouthed keeps them in business.
I've never met Marrioti or Bayless either.
Why I apologize to Mike Florio? His passive aggressive statement towards you was out of line. Generally speaking, I have a gut feeling Mike Florio is a class A jerk.
I understand the complaints, but I think he does a good job with that site. And he's been very kind to link to me many, many times over the years.
And aside from all that, I retweeted what I believed to have been a full and complete quote from him about the liklihood of the Redskins doing anything they could to nab Sam Bradford, but when he said I had skipped the part about "my gut feeling is...." then I think he could justifiably say I took his words out of context. "Gut feelings" mean nothing more than "when I was in the shower this morning, I thought..." That's a lot different than a declarative.
Butler and West Virigina at the title game. Wouldn't that be a refreshing change from the normal usual suspects tipping off? After all, ACC and Big Ten.. yawn. Seen it already. Hint: Last year.
Well, Butler will be a real draw for me, just to see if random small conference school could actually win a national championship. But, say, West Virginia vs Kansas State wouldn't have done much for me, even though they'd have been non-usual subjects. I'd have been much more interested in John Wall vs. Evan Turner. Maybe that's because of the Wizards implications. I don't see the Wiz taking Cam Thoroughman.
High jumper with a little potential like Gee? It would have only been a matter of time before he suffered a knee injury if he stayed with the Wizards. Surely he knew this when making his decision to leave
Good work by Mike Prada at Bullets Forever, ruminating on the loss of Gee and the implications for the front office.
One thing that Ted Leonsis has always always stressed is openness toward the fan base about the future; the blog helps a lot with that. I'm not sure you could say the same about the Wiz front office this year. Obviously there were a lot of times they were hamstrung by the legal process, but losing Gee and then attributing that to cap space doesn't seem to make much sense to fans.
As for Gee's decision, he gets to play in the playoffs, and he gets a non-guaranteed deal for next year, right? That's not a hard call.
Let's say the Wizards win the lottery and have the No. 1 overall pick: who do they darft?
"Dan Steinberg: Well, I think you'll be off on that ledge by yourself if you pick Duke to go to the Final Four. The past few years have made it virtually mandatory that you pick Duke to bow out ahead of schedule in the tourney. I mean, they got absolutely run off the floor against Villanova in the tourney last year, and two years ago at Verizon Center, West Virginia seemed clearly superior. Ditto with this year's meeting with Georgetown. That's three Big East opponents. The sinking suspicion you might be searching for is that the ACC is again sub-part this year, which is why Duke is now looking better I guess we'll find out in a few weeks, though."
I guess we did.
Yeah, but that was written pre-bracket, right? Or am I wrong? I was all about picking DUke to go out early until I saw the brackets, and I couldn't think of anyone else to choose out of that regional, which is why, as previously mentioned, I actually picked Duke to the Final Four. Go look at the WaPo bracket challenge; my picks are public. Duke is the only one I got right.
I still don't think they would have made it out had they been Kansas or Kentucky. Syracuse, maybe. But if I've helped you enjoy this even more, I'm very happy about that. I'm not even joking. Most of my sports-related satisfaction is over proving other people wrong, and I think them for affording me that joy.
Dan, You covered this pretty thoroughly a while back about the name change from the hapless Bullets to the hated Wizards; Wilbon said that he was pretty sure that Leonisis wanted to change the name back to the Bullets, but because of recent events, it's just not going to happen. My questions are:
1. Do you really think he wanted to change it back to the Bullets?
2. What is the likelihood of a name change now (maybe not back to the Bullets)? As much as I hate the Wiz handle, other than trying to get back the Bullets, a namechange shouldn't happen- it would be like we're back in the ABA-NBA days. Other than Utah and NO switching franchise nicknames (and then Utah going full-auto and changing it to the Bees or something), enough is enough.
I think my previously expressed opinion is that the colors will one day be changed, but the name will remain. I have no sources, facts or actual information in publicizing this opinion. Just seems to make sense to me.
I think there were a lot of motives behind the name change from Bullets, but the very public reason had to do with gun violence, and Abe Pollin backed that up with anti-violence spending. Seems to me that it's a politically tricky thing to go back to Bullets after all that. And I don't think every time a team changes ownership, fans or the league want/expect a name change.
But the colors are an abomination, and teams change their colors.Teams changed by Ted Leonsis, even.
I just learned that one of my applied mathematics professors has a photo of Christian Laettner sitting on the toilet when he was at Duke. Should I try to coerce him to put it online?
I guess I'm more interested to know why an applied mathematics professor has a photo of Christian Laettner sitting on the toilet? I don't have pictures of anyone sitting on the toilet, much less college basketball stars.
I'm glad that Laettner is no longer involved with D.C. United. Now we can all go back to our diviniely ordained feelings for the dude.
I passed you no less than 6 times at a recent Caps game and thought to myself, What Does Dan Do? Once, you were eating what appeared to be a donut, another time you were taking a picture of a jersey, three times you were staring off into space and another, you were walking. I wondered what else you do during the process of getting a story or bog idea. Would you let someone tail you and ask you questions about what you do on a typical fan-seeking, bog-related mission?
Yeah, that wasn't one of my grander evenings. I did walk around the concourse about 7,000 times, though, and you can only walk past that Dunkin Donuts so many times before you stop. Thanks for never at least stopping for small talk so it would seem like I was being useful.
My work days are basically 8-5 nowadays, so I feel like if I'm out at a night event, it's all bonus work for The Post, and I don't have to work too hard. B
Sure, if you want to tail me, that's fine, but the donuts are on you.
Which will be bigger: The NHL 2011 Winter Classic or Top Chef 7?
Sure sounds like we're going to Pittsburgh now, right? Though Leonsis counsels us that no decisions have been made. Maybe we're better off not making our Jan. 1, 2011 plans.
I've never watched Top Chef. And I'm all about reality TV, I just have enough shows in my life. So I'd choose the Caps.
Do you hate Duke like the rest of the country?
You know, I was actually rooting for the Devils against Baylor? Having seen Baylor in person at the 2008 opening round at Verizon Center, and having seen them on TV at least twice this year, and having decided at some point that the Big 12 was overrated, I said on a chat two weeks ago that people selecting Baylor to the Final Four "made me giggle," or something like that. I then repeated that in the office. So merely for Internet pride, and to prevent people from copying and pasting my words in this space, I was rooting for Duke. Amazing.
I don't know that I hate Duke. I find it a lot harder to hate college kids. I absolutely "hate" the Yankees and Cowboys more than any other teams. (And I say "hate" in quotes, because of course I'm perfectly objective, and the "hate" is merely an imagined construct to help me understand what goes on in the minds of fans.)
Does Ted Leonsis actually want to buy the Wizards, or is he being blackmailed into it? Or something else?
As much as I'd love to imagine what the "something else" might be (he was falling off a cliff two years ago, and in mid-flight made a list of 73 things he wanted to do before he hit the ground, and one of them was buy an NBA franchise featuring a star player who had recently spent time in a halfway house), yes, Ted Leonsis actually wants to buy the Wizards.
I wholeheartedly disagree with race being a factor. The reason why college basketball is more popular than the NBA is because the huge amount of drama. For many of these teams, there is no next year. Look at Maryland, the team is going to be radically different next year than this year without Vasquez, Hayes, or Milbourne, so they had only one shot at it. In a single elimination tournament, each shot matters more; there's not another game.
You can see that the players care a huge deal. At the end of every game, you see the players crying, some can't even stand. Add in the Cinderellas taking on big schools and the single elimination favoring upsets, there's just no better drama in sports.
Not that this is a realistic option, because of gate and whatever else, but would a 32-team single-elimination NBA tourney for the championship thus capture the nation in the same way? I wouldn't think so.
Also, why do college kids cry more than pro players? I mean, it's not like their DNA changes from the age of 19 to 23? And a lot of pros are younger than college kids, anyhow. I don't cry much (mostly at cheesy movies), but I don't think the frequency changed between college and post-college life. I don't get that. Do minor-league baseball players cry in the Carolina League finals? Is there a Carolina League finals?
Uh, if people wanted to watch a bunch of white people, wouldn't they watch college hockey or lacrosee or something? I get the sense that these concurring follow-up questions are usually asked by the same person who brought it up in the first place. And that this person is a weirdo.
Or they could just put a camera inside the Black Cat or something.
Watching Michigan State's run to the Final Four, I couldn't help but think, if not for a buzzer-beater this could have been Maryland. Anything can happen, but statistically speaking, Michigan State may have the easiest path to the championship game for a 5 seed since the field went to 64. They face or have faced teams seeded 12, 4, 9, 6, and 5.
Clearly you're not the only one thinking of Maryland.
But I still say Michigan State went through a tougher road than Duke. New Mexico State was obviously tougher than whatever 16 seed Duke faced in the first round. Northern Iowa was a worse seed than Cal, but I think was pretty clearly a more imposing team. Purdue and Maryland were both 4 seeds, but I think a fully healthy Maryland trumps Purdue without Hummel. That leaves Tennessee vs. Baylor. I don't have KenPom ratings for the team, or any statistical measures whatsoever, but the Saturday before Selection Sunday, I wrote down a list of teams that I wanted to put into the Elite 8, and Tennessee was on my list. Baylor wasn't. At the worse, I think Baylor's increased toughness over Tennessee is balanced out by the other three.
Dan, any chance you can get an occasional spot as one of the four journalists on ESPN's Around the Horn? You seem to have what it takes to dish out hard opinion on a variety of sports topics. And do you know the D.C. guy on there now, Kevin Blackistone?
No. There's zero chance of that. I mean, I'm like the 17th option for Washington Post Live, if that. And every time I'm on, readers tell me I have a face for radio and a voice for blogging. Plus, I only own three suits, and two of them I've owned for less than two weeks.
I've met Kevin, but we don't know each other well. I'm waiting for him, or someone at U. of Maryland, to invite me to teach a course on blogging. That I would agree to do, in about 10 seconds.
Funny that Florio actually got bitter you called him a dork. Does he want to beat you up next to the sandbox after school?
The thing is, I said that in a podcast. In the Redskins Insider podcast. About 20 minutes into a 17-hour Washington Post podcast about the Redskins.
As I said it, I was like, "he's never going to hear this, right?" And sure enough, some other nasty blogger highlighted my words, and Florio saw it, and now it lives forever. This is like the Tony Kornheiser thing, except involving non-famous people no one cares about.
The lesson is: never, ever, ever say anything interesting.
Duke's team is all white? I didn't realize.
Plus, not that I want to read back over the previous questions, but wasn't there something about tattoos in there? Pretty sure at least one or two of Duke starters (gasp!) have tats.
Obama is going to be there to chuck the first pitch. How about you? Nats prediction. 75 wins. 87 losses.
Yeah, that's my plan, although I'm working on something else that might make it impossible.
Also, not that I'm the most religious Jew in the world, but teams should be forbidden from having matinee baseball home openers on Passover. I mean, there's just too many bread products and beer products that I"d be interested in sampling.
I think 75-87 would be a real accomplishment. I'm gonna guess that's overly optimistic.
How can the Hoyas thump Butler and Duke and play WVU to the wire in the Big East final and yet still lose to the Ohio stinking BOBCATS? Oh, and I'm a die-hard Republican, but when Obama showed up to the GU-Duke game, I and everyone else chanted "U-S-A!". It just seemed nonpartisan and the right thing to do.
Wait, you're a diehard Republican and you root for Georgetown? No way!
Georgetown playing up/down to competition was about the least surprising thing in history. Or at least in the last two months of local college basketball. The Hoyas lost to Rutgers. Of course it was possible that they'd lose to Ohio.
I've noticed that the floor of every single basketball court during the NCAA tournament is absolutely identical in terms of wood, color scheme, lettering styles and paint job: Only the name of the city and arena varies. Did the NCAA truck in modular floors to lay over the existing ones? With the floors all looking the same, it was confusing during the earlier games, what with all the switching back and forth, to be able recognize immediately on which court they were playing -- not to mention it took all the regional character out of the arenas.
Yeah, that was something new. Or newish, anyhow. I'm pretty sure Eric Prisbell wrote something about that for The Post, in some sort of forum or other.
Not that different floors added all that much regional character, but what character there was was smushed out. I'm sure there was an excellent reason. I'd rather they smush out the character of having submerged floors that leave you staring at Coach K in that chair instead of watching the action. That's much, much more distracting on TV than differnet floors.
Having done the drive from near Fredonia to DC before, am I the only one who thinks that the end of civilization is where the Sheetz end and the Red Apple/Kwik-Fills begin and that the smell of the Domtar plant in Johnsonsburg, PA is the worst smell ever? Of course, if you went solely by interstate, none of this matters to you!
Southwest. Rapid Rewards.
But I like the drive. I do think if you go 90 to 79 to the turnpike, it's probably the fastest bet, plus it allows you to visit that Dunkin Donuts in Breezewood.
Dan, I really do not care if you cheer for Duke, but I do take issue with you cheering against Baylor... How can you root against a team with a Tweety and a LaceDarius on it's roster?
I think I'm bitter at them from the 2008 experience. For two reasons:
1) I pointed to them as a possible upset team based on this absurd stat about underdogs that shot a great percentage from three or something like that. I mean, I did this in print. Like, the Secretary of State might have seen my tournament advice in the paper. And Baylor then lost to Purdue by like 48 points in the most boring first-round game in tourney history.
2) I was blogging that regional, and the Baylor kids were ridiculously entertaining and media-friendly. And then they were one and done, and so I had to make do with West Virginia, and yet somehow I still missed the story that Pete Thamel wrote in the New York Times that weekend, with the WVU guys mocking Duke for the number of supposed all-Americans on the roster.
I guarantee Thamel goes back to that well somehow this week. My friend Tom Scocca described that as the "greatest game story ever." It was pretty good. Go back and look it up. And yet I missed it. And somehow I'm blaming that on Baylor. Go figure.
Dan, From a Bog perspective, would you rather see Shanahan and Allen go for the flashy Bradford pick (perhaps even trading up to do so) or stick with a relatively safe Okung-esque player at No. 4? At the same time, would the stability and (hopeful) higher winning percentage of the second option offset the Boggability of a new franchise QB in town?
The most important thing is to have winning teams. I'm no NFL genius, but it just seems to me like they're better off with a tackle. Enough other people have said that that I believe it.
That said, there's the Native American angle.....
(City Paper's Dave McKenna has publicly guaranteed that the Redskins would not touch Bradford, because of all the resulting stories about his Native heritage, and how revered he is on reservations, and the questions about "redskins" that would be raised. I happen to think this is bunk, but it has made me curious.)
re: "Also, why do college kids cry more than pro players?" For a lot of college players, it's the last shot (or for a smaller-conference team making a run, the only shot). For a pro, there's almost always next year--and you never know what uniform you'll be wearing down the road.
So then you'd assume that pros who are retiring would cry in their final playoff run.
Sophomores cry. These are kids with two years of allegiance to a college program. Pros can have 10 or 12 years of allegiance.
I think it's because of behavior norms. You see college kids crying on CBS, and so you lose and you think, better cry now. Or maybe you don't "think" it, but you know somewhere in your skull that crying is an accepted, even celebrated response.
Maybe the reason there's been so many upsets in the NCAA Tournament is that the seeding process is faulty. What do you think?
Agree. Clearly Georgetown should have been a 14 seed, having only made it to the Big East Final, while a middle of the pack MAC team like Ohio deserved probably a 4 or 5 seed.
(No, I don't agree. there are a zillion reasons that "weaker" college teams can compete with teams with better talent. You could never seed your way around that. Plus, the last few Final Fours have been dominated by high seeds, and something like 19 of the past 20 champions have been 1-4 seeds. They're doing somethign right.)
So you can sympathize with me. I'm allergic to wheat. I almost cried when they told me no more beer. But they do have wine at the stadium.
Well, I'm probably not technically supposed to drink when I'm on the clock. But I'll bear this in mind.
As for you, how are those gluten free beers? I've always wondered about that. I imagine they must be awful. I believe I would absolutely cry if I was told no more beer. I'm talking Adam Morrison after losing to UCLA style tears. That is also socially acceptable.
Dan, can you scoot over to Rochester and pick me up an RIT jersey to wear proudly around D.C. this next week?
I saw on Twitter someone said RIT to the Frozen Four was a bigger upset than Butler to the Final Four. I haven't explored that comparison. Is it true?
I don't even know RIT's nickname.
Ok, I just googled it. It's the Tigers. Gosh, what a disappointment. A school like RIT, a massive underdog, and they're the Tigers? Blech.
What....not a single Caps question? Is the rest of town holding their breath like I am, just waiting for them to get to the playoffs healthy?
This is really a grind, isn't it? At least for a while there was ostensibly the drama about clinching the top seed in the East, and the President's Trophy, but we're well past that drama. Now there's maybe Ovechkin individual goal honors, but no one really cares about that. This is just the waiting game.
So every day I check the 6-10 teams in the East, trying to figure out the best option if you combine travel ease, travel cost, story lines, liklihood of the Caps getting upset, etc. Here's my ranking:
1) Philly (Can't beat fan antics and easy travel)
2) Boston (Relatively cheap and easy, huge sports town should help our Web traffic, no chance the Caps lose)
3) Montreal (Massive fan interest, expensive travel. I'm told there's interesting, um, nightlife)
4) Rangers (I love New York, and I love the Garden, and it's easy travel, but two years in a row makes for a little bit of overdose)
5) Atlanta (last, now and forever)
Just a follow up on the comment about the basketball floors ... I had a friend in college who played on the women's team. She traveled to Delaware, who had just purchased the previous year's final 4 floor for their gym. She said that it was the best floor that she had ever played on and couldn't imagine that it would have made a difference.
Oh yeah, this was at the University of Vermont, where your daughter is supposed to go after talking about food co-ops or something like that (see closing comments from a chat several months ago).
Interesting. I love stories about irrational bitterness like this. For me, I hold a grudge against Denver so can never root for the Broncos and now I have to deal with their former coach being hired by the Redskins. My grudge is totally unrelated to football, and yet, there it is.
Wow. I don't think I've ever heard of someone having a grudge against Denver. But Mike Shanahan was fired by Denver. Doesn't that mean the city has released its hold on him? Maybe a secret part of him hates Denver, just like you do?
Did you read the Couch Slouch this past Monday? Seems that journalists are starting to 'take on' each other in public feuds etc.. Who do you have a feud with? And don't say TK. Everybody has a beef with that guy now except Wilbon and that's because they 'need' each other.
That was a good Slouch, wasn't it? Man, that dude is good at his job.
I make fun of people whose writing I don't like. If they knew this, I'm sure they would hate me, because I'm a total jerk about it. But they're mostly not famous. And I'm sure lots more people hate my writing, and my cushy gig, so they probably hate me with an intense burning spite. But I don't know about who those people are, so we don't really feud.
Anyhow who's famous enough to have a good feud with has never heard of me. And conflict makes my arms itch, so I try to avoid it.
Let's see, Colin Cowherd once said some moderately rude things about me. Does that count? I find him to be an almost unimaginably horrific talk show host. Does that help?
I know Goff hates brining this up, but do you have any sense that either of the other mayoral candidates would be more receptive than Fenty has been?
(No, I honestly don't know. If there were massive votes to be had by selling out for soccer, I think someone would have done it by now. You all need to form a PAC.)
That's called "thinking." Lawyers would bill this time.
You can't click on a thought, though. That was time I could have been spending transcribing 2003 interviews with Vinny Cerrato from San Jose radio stations.
Haven't tried one yet. But I can tell you, gluten free bread is disgusting.
It does seem like it's getting easier and easier to get gluten free products, right? I've almost bought plenty of gluten free products accidentally in recent months.
Here's my opinion which doesn't involve race. In terms of relatability, players in college ball often look like regular kids you'd see on the street. Black or white, most of them don't have freak bodies of pro athletes, with the exception of teams like Kentucky which have multiple lottery picks in their starting lineup.
That's true. But high school kids look even more regular. And middle school kids look like dribbling blogs of hormones.
No, because they got to play pro for years. The kids are more emotional because for most of them there is going to be no pro in their future. I think they see it like, I've got 4 years to do this spectacular thing. And then in one night that dream ends.
Ok, that seems touching and nice.
Anyhow, I need to go. Grandparents have been in charge of granddaughter long enough. Will be back online at some point this week, and will get right on lining up an Opening Day one-on-one with Obama at Nats Park. We can search for the best Passover food together.