As we prepare for the Mississippi Valley St. Delta Devils tonight, here are a few things I ran into perusing the Web this morning:
I think Calipari is right about this. Anything that is good for the city of Louisville, in general, is good for the state, and I would also welcome an NBA team. It would give me an excuse to watch the NBA again with a genuine partisan interest, and also a place to go watch some basketball.
I loved this paragraph:
"It will never take away from the University of Kentucky, never, ever," he said. "It will never take dollars away, it will never take seats away."
Heh. Too right, Coach Cal. Nothing will ever put a dent in this state's love for the Wildcats. It is part of our cultural identity.
I'd love to have him back. I think he could make us an Eastern Division contender next year. But I think he should take a look, and if he is likely to go on the first day of the draft, I say go.
More after the jump ...
If you are a Kentucky fan, you have got to love this:
"What else do (they) have to do?" Calipari said. "What do you have to do? You have people to see? You got shopping? You got to hang out? No. You have nothing to do except basketball. So we'll go twice, three times a day."
Indeed. Hey, young man, you wanna get to the pros? Practice, practice, practice.
Nice to see these honors roll in, but it would be even nicer to see Kentucky win its bowl game and come back stronger next year.
This is new. I have never heard of a coach being suspended for a secondary violation, and the fact that seems to be the NCAA's ultimatum to Michigan State is interesting.
Has the Bruce Pearl suspension by the SEC started a new trend in college basketball for coaches to pay the piper by serving suspensions for violations? Clearly, Pearl's transgressions weren't "secondary," and I'm not sure I agree that Izzo's violation was secondary. But I can't recall a case in which the NCAA essentially dictated a suspension to a school. Here is what the article says about that:
"The institutional and NCAA enforcement staff concur that this was a secondary violation. We've had many of those before," Hollis said. "The penalty proscribed by the enforcement staff, however, is not a typical secondary violation penalty. In fact, it's not a typical penalty at all, as we believe it's the first of its kind.
I think it is, at least for a "secondary violation." Are we seeing a new trend here? It seems as if we are. Thoughts?
The shiftiness and deceitfulness with which Pearl runs his program doesn’t need to be rehashed, but the controversy surrounding Tennessee basketball early this season and Pearl’s eight-game suspension from SEC-conference play seems to, whether consciously or not, motivated the roller coaster-like minds of the Volunteers.
You know, why is it that writers from Ivy League schools feel so free to look down their collective noses at everyone else? The hubris of this article is breathtaking from start to finish even as the author tries to hide his disdain, or at least prevent it from overtaking the entire article.
In my opinion, authors doing analysis should leave out this type of gratuitous condescension. You want to call Pearl a bad guy? Fine, there's plenty of support for that. But keep it out of your analysis unless you're analyzing him, it makes you look like a jerk.
This coach-in-waiting stuff really doesn't mean all that much, I guess. Franklin cited the "chance to coach in the SEC" as a motivating factor.
That has to really sting over at the ACC head office. They style themselves competitive with the SEC, but when a coach leaves a mid-pack ACC program where he is sure to be head coach for the dregs of the SEC, you know that the ACC has failed to convince anyone with a brain that their conference is competitive with the SEC in football.