When Did Campaigning Become A Part Of The All-Star Game?

LaMarcus Aldridge, Rajon Rondo, Danny Granger, Al Jefferson, Devin Harris...

The list goes on.

These are just some of the players that have campaigns out there (either involving them or on their behalf by the organization) to try to get out the vote and get them into the NBA All-Star game.

When did this start? Don't these coaches and organizations have enough to worry about (uh, Indiana and Minnesota, I'm talking to you...) in the already arduous task of winning games? Isn't putting out a competitive product, and trying to defeat your opponent with a sound game plan enough? I guess not.

Though, despite my cynicism, some of these campaigns have been pretty good. For those of you not too familiar, here's a look at some of the more fun ones...

Chris Bosh, last year...

Again, I know they only play once a night, but, where are they finding the time to not only come up with these ideas, but film them as well? Jeez...

Al Jefferson, this year...The T-Wolves have sent out Al Jefferson-themed GPS systems to Western Conference coaches.  Included in the packages are highlight videos, road maps, and the fact that Big Al is one of only 3 humans averaging 20-10, and has the highest ppg of the trio (Duncan and Howard rounding it out).

Devin Harris...this year.  Politically-aware, humorous...and it has a Yi cameo (we can only pray he has a speaking role next time...)

How adorable is he?

Amar'e Stoudamire...this year.  Needs to brush up on his acting skills...The Shaq part though, priceless.

And lastly, the New Jersey Nets, again...Mostly ehh, but the Ryan Anderson blip, only white guy in there, is to die for.

Quickly...of these cats, who should make it?  Granger, Harris and Jefferson.  Numbers don't lie, Mr. Aldridge, 17 and 7 just ain't good enough.

New BERNing on Sports Podcast Available

In this week's podcast, Scott and I talk Super Bowl party food, Joe Torre's shot at the Yankees, and a new segment called "The Hail Mary".

Check it out by clicking HERE.

And, as always, you can find this podcast at anytime on the right of your screen in the red tab. Have a great week everybody! Enjoy the Super Bowl.

Maybe The Only Time Winning Will Get You Fired

A couple of weeks ago, the Covenant School and Dallas Academy girls' basketball teams squared off for what would appear to be a regular season matchup between two high schools in Texas.

Covenant's coach, Micah Grimes, had taken his school from 2-19 in his first year to state championship contenders last season.  This was his fourth year as head coach.

Not that out of the ordinary, yet.

Then, the game happened.  And Dallas Academy got absolutely wrecked.  We're not talking about a lopsided 30 point beating, or something similarly embarrassing.  No, this one tops the charts (and this comes from a kid that played on a team that lost once by 75).

Final Score:  100 to 0.  

I can't figure which is more improbable:  a girls' high school team scoring 100 points, or a girls' high school team not scoring any.  I'm not sure whether or not I'm supposed to be in awe or disgusted.

Apparently, the Covenant School knew exactly how to feel.  On Sunday, after Grimes posted a disagreement to the school's on-line apology to Dallas Academy, the school fired the fourth year coach. 

In a statement, Grimes maintains that despite the "wide-margined victory" (um, ya think?) his girls "played with honor and integrity and showed respect to Dallas Academy."  Yeah, right.  And Mark McGwire's brother cares more about his brother than selling a book.

How on Earth a team gets beat 100 to nothing is beyond my comprehension.  As bad as it is for the victorious coach, I'd have to imagine it's just as bad for the other side.  If I was coaching the team that was getting annihilated and I knew that we just weren't even close to good enough, it's goon squad time.  

It may not have worked out well for a certain Temple coach, but I wouldn't be having my girls hurt anyone.  Just rough 'em up.  Basketball isn't football but there has to be some level of pride.  You can't just go out there and let someone put up a century on you, while you can't get a single bucket to fall.  

Either way, mark this down in your calendar.  While all other coaches are getting fired for the normal offense of not enough winning, Micah Grimes has gotten the axe for doing too much of it.

I'm Trying To Watch This, But...

...I can't watch this coverage on Versus.

The NHL needs to get itself off Versus.  Immediately.

If you don't know what Versus is, it's a bizarre sports network that can sometimes not be found on your basic cable.  You sometimes can't even locate the channel it's so far down the list.  They show lots of outdoor shows, a show called "Sports Soup" and unfortunately, the NHL.

I'm not a regular watcher of this network, but I'm forced to watch it for the NHL All-Star weekend.  As a renewed hockey fan, I wanted to check out the five Blackhawks players participating in the weekend.  Instead of an enjoyable experience, as I expected, it has been more aggravating than anything else.

Yesterday, while watching the skills competition, they started festivities with the fastest skater competition.  Each of six skaters got to do one lap around the rink, with boundary markers show where they could navigate the ice.  Yet, the stopwatch graphic didn't work, and you couldn't tell how fast the skaters were skating until the broadcast team of Doc Emerick and Brian Engblom told you after the fact.  All you could see was a hockey player skating in a circle.  There was no suspense to see whether a record was broken or which skaeter was the fastest.  It looked like it was someone's YouTube video.

Still, I watched.  I watched as they showed the breakaway challenge, while never explaining what the skaters were supposed to accomplish.  They didn't show how much time was left until the players had five seconds left, nor did they tell you how much time they had.  So you couldn't gauge how quickly the players had to take their shots.  And it appears they're going to assume on all-star weekend they're only getting diehards to view the events.  Brutal.

But here was the kicker of the night.  Sideline reporter Chris Simpson (that's a woman) asked one all-star a question while using the word "sucks" in it.  I can see that from a talk show host, but not from a sideline reporter or a play by play guy.  She asked the player a question, "kinda sucks doesn't it?"  I don't remember the context, probably because I was so shocked by the usage of the word I blocked out the rest of the moment.

It's no secret the NHL has done a number of moronic things to decrease the popularity of their league.  But maybe the dumbest thing they ever did was associate with this terrible network.  There are students at college TV stations that probably watch this and think, "I'm good enough for this!"

Please, go back to ESPN.  I criticize them sometimes, sure, but they know how to put a sporting event on TV.

Why Records Don't Matter (In College Basketball)

Nearly ever team ranked in the Top 25 has an excellent record.  That's why they're ranked in the Top 25.

The top few teams have one loss.  The teams at the bottom of the rankings fit into one of two categories: either they are teams that no one thought would be there, so they have great records (#25 Illinois is 17-3), or they are teams that people expected to be better, haven't quite fulfilled expectations, but are still considered quality teams (#19 Notre Dame is 13-7).  So every team in that group is in the same ball park, generally.

Everyone always talks about records.  But the biggest difference between all of these teams is coaching.  Coaching determines the type of characters on a particular team.  Coaching determines philosophy on offense and defense.  Coaching determines how a player reacts when the pressure is on and a player relies on what has been drilled into him in practice by his coach.

That's why teams similar in record in college basketball can be completely different.  

They're records don't even begin to tell their stories.

(Yes, the conference a team plays in can have something to do with it.  An exceptionally talented team in a weaker conference can have a gaudy record that they might not have in a better league.  But generally speaking, in conferences of similar talent level, records are inconsequential.)

The best example of this, ironically, might be two teams that have the same colors.  Number 8 Syracuse (at least number 8 until the newest rankings come out Monday) is 17-4, while 25th-ranked Illinois is 17-3.  While they're separated by just one more Syracuse loss, they're completely different in how they're coached.  They got to their similar records in nearly opposite ways.

Syracuse is loaded with talent.  They might have enough talent that if they were better disciplined they could be the best team in the country.  Jonny Flynn and Eric Devedorf are former McDonalds High School All-Americans.  Paul Harris was a High School Jordan All-American.  They've got size on the inside with Arinze Onuaku and Rick Jackson, and the three-point shooter that every team needs in Andy Rautins.   It's that talent level that suggests to the voters that they should be among the top ten teams in the country by rank.  But they're undisciplined, they don't run an offense, and have lost three of their last four games because of it.

Illinois on the other hand is very disciplined, and lacks the talent of Syracuse.  It's debatable which player on the Fighting Illini is the best, between Demetri McCamey, Chester Frazier, or Mike Davis.    And neither player is really that good.  They don't have a player averaging more than 12.5 points per game (McCamey) and they don't have a player that appears to be equipped to play at the next level.  

But they look like a team poised to surprise people come March, thanks to their disciplined offensive and defensive approach, while Syracuse looks like a team poised to disappoint in the tournament.

It's hard to argue with the success of Syracuse coach Jim Boeheim.  The hall of fame coach has amassed 788 life time wins, which ranks him eighth on the all-time list.  The only names ahead of him are coaching legends: Bob Knight, Dean Smith, Adolph Rupp, Jim Phelan, Mike Krzyzewski and Eddie Sutton.  (And just in case you were wondering, those names are in order from most wins to least.)  Boeheim relies on his talent too much, however.  He puts too much faith in college kids to police themselves on the basketball court and to know how to set up a basket when needed late.  He often doesn't get the best out of his talent on a basis consistent enough to lead it deep into the NCAA tournament.  And with all the talent he stock piles on a yearly basis, Syracuse should be winning games in the tournament year after year.  They haven't won one in four consecutive tournaments.

Bruce Weber on the other hand doesn't have the track record of Boeheim.  He has only been a head coach for ten years.  After serving as an assistant at Western Kentucky in the 1979-1980 season, he was an assistant for the legendary Gene Keady for eighteen years at Purdue.  After a five year run at Southern Illinois where he lead the Salukis to the NCAA Tournament twice (once to the Sweet 16), he's been the coach at Illinois for just five years prior to this season.  He did lead the Fighting Illini to the National Championship in the 2004-2005 season, but he did it with Bill Self's recruits.  Now, in his sixth year, his recruits are finally there, and they're doing well.  He doesn't have the fanfare of a Boeheim, or even close.  But the mark of a Weber coached team is incredible discipline on both sides of the floor.

So when you try to compare a team that is supposed to be in the Top 25, like Syracuse, or a team not supposed to be there, like Illinois, the difference ultimately is which coach can get his players to respond best down the stretch.  While they have nearly identical records now, the team that finishes the season with the most success will likely be the team that is best coached.  Players ultimately win games in any sport, and must execute their game plans well enough to win.  But it's the coaches with the best game plans, especially in college sports, that ultimately leads their teams to victory.

Jim Boeheim has better talent than Bruce Weber.  And he has won far more games all time.  (788 for Boeheim, 248 for Weber)  But it is Weber's team, if both teams continue to play as they are, that will ultimately go further in March.   It's Weber's team that has the discipline and execution to get things done.

They're records right now, and later on, won't matter.

Hello? You Play To Win The Game?

The headline has nothing to do with the post, at least not in meaning.  But, what else do you think of when you think of Herm Edwards?

Herm was fired on Friday, for reasons that are quite obvious.  He's gone 15-33 in three seasons, he's practically ruined Larry Johnson's career (though arrogance and spitting in women's faces will also do it) by giving him such a heavy workload early on, and he's failed to develop any young quarterbacks.  Those are just among the failures.

No one is going to sit here or stand here or do anything to tell you that Edwards was or is a great coach.  He's a fun guy, players seem to enjoy him because he can relate as a former player himself, and he's good for a sound bite.  As a coach, on the field, not so much.

In his Jets days when he was at least competitive on the field of play, he was known for being way too close to the vest with his play calling.  In his Kansas City days, he was known for just being plain bad, for any number of reasons.

To many, I'd imagine, it was a head scratcher that he wasn't fired two years ago, after going 4-12.  So, on its surface firing him now isn't much of a big deal.  However, my question is, why specifically now, as in Friday, January 23rd?

Were the Chiefs waiting until all of the good assistant coaches had been scooped already?  Did they want the Steve Spagnuolo's and Rex Ryan's of the world to get hired, and then fire their coach?

What changed from say, November of 2007 to this time period that made it necessary to fire Herm now?  

I have none of the answers to these questions.  But, it's clear to me at least that when an organization makes a decision like this, boneheaded in its timing, it's just further proof of why they are a bad organization.  Good luck trying to convince Shanahan or Gruden to take over the reins there in KC. 

Good When He Wants To Be?

The buzz player in the NBA, before the LeBrons and Dwyanes and Carmelos, was a man that played north of the border.  Hailing from one of the more sacred institutions in college basketball, Vince Carter was supposed to be it.  The next big thing.

And for a while, he was.  For the first three years of his career, Carter dominated.  Dunking over people, jumping over people and then dunking on them, Carter was all over highlight reels.  He was a force and in some crazy circles because of his collegiate heritage, considered to be the next MJ.

Now, since his Airness has left the game, the public has been desperate to find some unwitting sole to fill his shoes.  No one can, no one will.  To ask Carter or LeBron or Wade or anyone else to do it is a bit much.  Still, Carter ultimately wilted under the enduring pressure to live up to his UNC predecessor.  But that wasn't what changed Carter into the man we see today.

No, it wasn't the pressure of being the next Jordan, or even all of his injuries.  Those two things contributed, sure, but the biggest issue came on a spring day in 2001.  Carter, staying true to a promise he'd made to his mother, had finished his requirements at UNC, and was going to graduate.  He wanted to walk with his classmates.

Only problem, it was the morning of an obviously enormous game for the Raptors---Game 7 of the Eastern Conference semis against the 76ers.  But still, Carter was assured that he'd be able to make it back from the ceremonies in time to play in the game.  He'd wind up missing the game-winner with 2.0 seconds left, leaving many to blame his frequent flyer miles as the reason for his poor performance.

For doing something that most athletes are condemned for not doing, Carter was punished in the public sphere.  His desire was questioned, his motives and "heart" as well. 

And so, since that point, the Carter we see now is a shell of himself.  He sleep walks through games, rehabs, and even seasons.  However, his greatness is proven in that he only once has averaged under 20 points per game, and has a career average of nearly 24 a game.  

So you may be wondering, who cares?  And if not that, why are you telling me this now?  Well, kind readers, I bring this to your attention because last night I watched VC play against the Spurs and he continued to remind me how great of a player he is when he wants to be.  Jordan railed against that cliche in a previous post, and I can't argue with him.  I hate when people say that, but it rarely is more true than with Vince Carter. 

He's one of the only players I've seen that can so effortlessly float through a game, barely making an impact, and then coming away with 25 points and 7 boards.  Then another night, drop near 40, and hit game tying and game winning shots.  

All this says about him is that he's maddeningly uninterested.  His numbers and effort this year remind us of how great he is, but yet he seems content to stay on a team building for god knows when.  

Great when he wants to be...Cliche, certainly.  But, in this situation, frustratingly true.