Avoid contact with eyes

As a teacher of rhetoric, it's part of my job to understand the concept of audience awareness. One of the things that I understand about that concept is that it can occasionally be crippling or stifling.

For example, I know for a fact that I have at least three blog readers. Unfortunately, those three blog readers don't necessarily have the same interests. This problem is exacerbated when we consider my interests, which we should because I'm the one writing these things.

If this blog were truly a personal blog, in the same vein as a personal journal or diary, I would just write about whatever I was interested in. But, since it's at least a four-person endeavor and, again, I'm aware of this fact, I occasionally ignore topics of interest to me out of kindness to my tried-and-true readers.

I can talk to myself at least as easily as I could write to myself, so I usually take that route when those topics arise.

All that to say that if I were writing for myself right now, I would almost certainly be writing about Dragon Age: Origins, which I've been playing on the reg for about two weeks now. However, since none of my known audience has much interest in that topic, I have an almost palpable desire to avoid it in this blog.

Subsequently, I don't have much to write.

Quote of the Week:

Notice the unfortunate line spacing and inconsistent understanding of complex adjectives:

"MACHINE WASH WARM

GENTLE CYCLE

WITH LIKE COLORS

ONLY NON-CHLORINE

BLEACH WHEN NEEDED

TUMBLE DRY LOW

AVOID CONTACT

WITH SKIN

TREATMENT PRODUCTS"

-My towel (emphasis mine)

Publicity stunted

Tiger Woods is talking again, and ESPN is now veritably overflowing with reports and updates on his two interviews, one with the Golf Channel and one with ESPN's Tom Rinaldi. So far, I've heard most of the Tom Rinaldi interview, but I can already assume that this is the best part (paraphrased because I'm too lazy to find the video online):

Tom Rinaldi: What happened on the night of the crash?
Tiger Woods: That's in the police report. Anything else that happened is between Elin and me, and that's private.
TR: But what made you crash the car?
TW: Again that's a private matter.
TR: If it's a private matter, then why issue a public apology?
TW: Because I owe a lot of people an apology: friends, colleagues, the public, kids who look up to me.

Tom Rinaldi is my new personal hero. What a question?

And, boy, Tiger still seems very naïve and aloof about all this. How does he still not see the hypocrisy in all of this, especially when Rinaldi smacks him in the face with it, like so much pimp love?

Here's the bottom line, Tiger: your whole life is now a public matter. And no matter how well he tries to hide all of these things – the infidelity, the crash, the rehab – they are coming or will all come to the light.

If Tiger was smart about this, instead of trying to control this information by hiding it like Nazi ancestry, he'd control the information by releasing it himself, thereby retaining some modicum of control over the shape and tone of the message. Tom Rinaldi gave Tiger a chance to do just that, but he decided, instead, to continue to take his very slim chances of maintaining his private public image.

Event of the Week:

CP3 is planning on returning to the Hornets' lineup this week. This should be important not just for Charles, but for basketball fans everywhere since Paul is genuinely fun to watch.

]s

No, that's not a new emoticon representing the emotions of a dazed Yosemite Sam.

It's brackets.

Even though the NCAA brackets don't lock until the tournament starts tomorrow around noon, I wanted to write a blog today explaining and/or talking myself out of some of my less chalky picks.

I'll start by saying that I don't know if my opinions on such things are valuable, especially since I've done considerably less research this season than in Marches past. But I have watched a lot of college basketball this season – mostly ACC and Big East since that's what's on – so I feel like my picks are a bit more informed than many of the millions of brackets that have and will be filled out before tomorrow's first jump.

First-round picks:

(9) Wake Forest over (8) Texas

Neither of these teams is particularly hot right now. Wake Forest has lost 5 of their last 6; Texas 9 of 16. This pick isn't particularly exciting or all that shocking, but I thought I'd include it since I think Ish Smith (Charles' new Chris Paul) will be a major difference in the game. Either way, I don't give the winner of this game much of a chance against Kentucky in round two.

(10) Georgia Tech over (7) Oklahoma State

I generally have a hard time picking against ACC teams, especially in early rounds. Of course, those are the teams I see the most of, so I suppose it's just a case of picking the (blue) devil I know rather than the one I don't. I'm sure Oklahoma State has some very good players. But I know that Georgia Tech has a great front line with Derrick Favors, Gani Lawal, and Zachery Peacock.

(12) Cornell over (5) Temple

I don't think I've watched a single minute of Cornell basketball this season. (Do camera crews even show up to Ivy League games or do they just set up a single stationary camera at the top of the bleachers like high school games?) But I've heard a lot about Cornell's smart (Ivy-League) play and experience over the past few days. I think Jay Bilas even put Cornell into his Final Four. I'm not willing to go that far, but I do have them as one of my 12-5 upsets.

(12) UTEP over (5) Butler

I said "one of," so obviously there is at least one more. I didn't even know what conference UTEP is in. And, again, I doubt I've seen any of their games this season. But I did see Derrick Character play at Louisville, and I'm surprised to see that he's not even UTEP's top scorer.

Second-round picks:

(12) UTEP over (4) Vanderbilt

Again, I like Character and UTEP. Vanderbilt, on the other hand, is a team I was able to watch this season but wasn't impressed with. A.J. Ogilvy, one of their key big men, struck me as moody and undisciplined: two traits that can get teams in trouble come tournament time.

(6) Xavier over (3) Pittsburgh

I really don't know anything about Xavier, but I like them here for some reason. This is one of those picks that I might need to second guess, but building good brackets is as often about chance or gut feelings as it is about research and knowledge. Or, at least, that's how I feel about it.

(5) Texas A&M over (4) Purdue

This isn't much of an upset, especially considering Purdue is playing without Robbie Hummel. In fact, I've seen a lot of first-round-loss predictions for the Hummel-less Boilermakers. I think they can get past Siena, but a deeper run will be unlikely. As a UNC fan, I feel for injury-plagued Purdue.

(5) Michigan State over (4) Maryland

I was surprised to see Michigan State with such a low seed and Maryland with such a high one. I'm hoping Michigan State justifies my surprise by taking down the Turtles.

Sweet Sixteen picks:

(4) Wisconsin over (1) Kentucky

I've watched a lot of Kentucky over this season, and I've watched a lot of Bo Ryan's Badgers in my lifetime. Here's my assessment, maybe the smartest thing I'll say all blog, maybe: a lot of Kentucky's mystique this season is based on their ability to come out and just punch their opponents in the mouth with their speed and athleticism. I think the initial push of the Wildcats' high-octane game is hard to recover from, which helps to protect Kentucky's young players when the minutes start to dwindle. Wisconsin, though, doesn't seem like a team that rattles easily. I'm not really that impressed with Wisconsin's talent, just their discipline. In fact, I don't think they could beat any other one seed or even two seed in this tournament, but I think they'd match up well against Kentucky.

(6) Xavier over (2) Kansas State

I should probably learn something about this Xavier team, since my brackets will be cheering for them for the next two weekends.

Elite Eight picks:

(2) Ohio State over (1) Kansas

I'm guessing, based on the name of his brackets ("Turner=Melo or Im Screwed"), that Bryan has this same pick, so maybe it's time to once again second guess myself. But, according to ESPN's brief write-up on Kansas, "If they have one weakness, it's when a perimeter shooting team drains 3s." That's where Jon Diebler and OSU's team .382 three-point shooting percentage come in. I'd feel even better about this pick if ESPN didn't follow that previous sentence with: "But isn't that everyone's weakness?"

(2) Villanova over (1) Duke

Bryan would blame this pick on the Jay Wright bubble, but I'm going to blame it on Duke's inability to improvise.

Final Four pick:

(2) West Virginia over (2) Ohio State

Both of these teams are very strong, and I think both have a good chance of playing in the final weekend (obviously). WVU, though, is a bit more balanced than OSU. Da'Sean Butler and Devin Ebanks may not be as skilled as Evan Turner, but I think they'd cause problems down low for the Buckeyes.

Championship game pick:

(1) Syracuse over (2) West Virginia

Scoreboard.

Quote of the Week:

"I wish it was Friday."

-Chuck Mead

March is one of the best months for Questions of the Week. Maybe I'll be motivated enough this Friday to write another blog, but I wish, instead, that it was Friday now, so I could post a Question of the Week about the tournament. If only I weren't so caught up in my own rules (but I am).

(By the way, I wrote a story on Chuck Mead that you can find here. When I planned this blog with this Quote of the Week, I knew it was from a country song, but I was guessing Alan Jackson. I think he's my go-to for country music trivia.)

(Also by the way, I recently reviewed MLB 10 The Show, which you can find here.)

Spring break! Whooo!

I've been blogging for a few years now, but I still have time for some blogging firsts. This entry will be my first ever blog written (literally) on the road. This week is spring break for UNC-Wilmington, so I've been able to do a bit of traveling with Bryan by my side (in this case in the driver's seat). Now we're on our way back to Wilmington to get back to work after about half a spring break.

We started our trip in Charlotte. Byron, who I've known since I was born, moved down there a few weeks ago, so we went to spend some time with him and go to a couple of Mikecats games. Jackling also flew in from Boston just for the weekend. That's dedication.

Friday night's game was against Kobe Bryant and the Lakers. Bryan wore his Kobe jersey, as did about half of the people in the seats.

The highlight of the night, at least according to Sportscenter, came when Kobe threw the ball off the backboard to himself and then hit a shot. It was #1 on the next day's Sportscenter, but all four of us that were at the game were shocked that it was ranked so highly, partly because it wasn't that cool and partly because the dunks at 2 and 3 were nasty. Kobe's #1 spot was an upset on the Nate Robinson first-two-years-in-the-dunk-contest level.

In the end, Kobe's #1 play wasn't worth enough points, and the Cats helped the Lakers along their recent three-game skid.

On Saturday night, we watched Charlotte take on the Golden State Warriors. Again, a large percentage of the fans in the stands were rooting against the home team, pulling, instead, for Charlotte native and former Davidson star Stephen Curry, whose dad Dell is a commentator for the Bobcats organization.

Even though I've lived within 4 hours of Charlotte for more than 20 years now, I haven't spent a lot of time there. In fact, the last time I was in the Queen City (of NC), my purpose of visit was to watch the Charlotte Hornets. So, I wouldn't really say I have my finger on the pulse of NC's largest city.

But, when I do talk to people who "know" Charlotte, they all say the same thing: Charlotte isn't a basketball city. I think there's a lot of animosity about the way George Shin left with the Hornets. NASCAR and the Panthers don't help.

Obviously there were some extenuating circumstances (Kobe and Steph Curry), but I did not see a lot of Bobcats fans in my two times in the arena. I didn't see a lot of Gerald Wallace jerseys, even though he's a current All-Star and permanent badass. Wallace looked especially dominant in person. (I did, however, see a lot of Gerald Wallace shooting sleeves, which is one of the best promotional giveaways I've ever heard of.)

So, based on my limited perspective, I'd agree that Charlotte is not a basketball city.

After the weekend, Bryan, Byron, my dad, and I went to the Eric Clapton concert in the RBC Center in Raleigh on Monday night. Monday night is a weird night for a concert, but the place was pretty slam-packed, probably in part because Roger Daltrey of The Who opened for Clapton. In other words, it was a great show.

I'm also pretty sure Kenny Powers from Eastbound & Down was in the audience. I say Kenny Powers and not Danny McBride, the actor who plays Powers, because I'm thinking that he was filming an episode of his show, which is primarily filmed in the Wilmington area. I can't be sure it was him because we were sitting pretty far away, but I'm fully expecting to see concert footage in one episode of the show's next season.

I think my favorite weekends (using the term liberally in this case) are the weekends that leave me looking forward instead of looking back. It's fun to reminisce, but it's more fun to pre-minisce.

I feel like one of my students, writing about my weekend and such. That's what they write about all the time.

Quote of the Week:

"Whooo."

-Rick Flair at Friday's Bobcats game

Touchy subject

With a whopping two votes (out of three), research about touching and success in the NBA is my democratically selected topic for today. The research from UC Berkley, which is briefly explained in this NYT article, found that successful NBA teams generally exchange touches (i.e. fist bumps, high fives, hands on shoulders) more often than bottom feeders. The theory extends to players as well; in one of the more obvious findings, Kevin Garnett was declared the touchiest player in the NBA.

Ultimately, the research team was unable to definitively determine that touching spurs success, but it can still be fun to speculate. With that mindset, I've decided to consider some other seemingly irrelevant indications of sports success.

One of the most controversial factors of late is shoe height. Despite numerous objections, Kobe Bryant decided to wear low-top shoes to play basketball, which is traditionally a no-no. According to Kobe's own research, lower shoe height does in fact lead to success (and BROKE ANKLES).

Another potential contributor, with a decidedly LA bent, might be number of movie roles. Kareem and Shaq, two of the best NBAers ever, have both appeared on the silver screen. Ray Allen and Penny Hardaway did as well. OJ Simpson can claim acting as one of his top three most notorious undertakings.

Number of celebrity wives/girlfriends per team might be a negative factor, as was the case with Jessica Simpson and Tony Romo or Madonna and the New York Yankees (although they won later in that year). But there are exceptions to this rule like Tony Parker-Longoria.

Researchers could also count the number of tattoos players have and then go even further to see if the content of the tattoo has an effect. Maybe Shaq's Superman tattoo would be more effective if it was on his chest.

On a more serious note, it would be interesting to determine if attendance has any effect on success or if this relationship is merely one-sided (since success obviously increases attendance).

Until all of this research is done, I guess players will just have to touch each other a lot if they want to be successful.

Or practice.

Event of the Week:

With a week to go in the college basketball regular season, the Battle for the Basement in the ACC is incredibly tight with UNC, NC State, and Miami tied at 4-10. Even Virginia and Boston College are statistically in the running at 5-9. When UNC and Miami meet on Tuesday night, they will be playing for both a one-game lead and a tiebreaker over each other, since this is the only time the two meet this season. With only one game to follow it, a win in that game will place the victor out of the running for last place. More importantly, it would place the victor into next season's ACC – Big Ten Challenge since the team that does finish at the bottom of the ACC is ineligible.