The Tuesday Two

I've never seen Jay Cutler throw a football. Or maybe I have and just don't remember. I don't know if he's built like Vince Young or Doug Flutie and don't know if he has an arm like Jeff George or Chad Pennington. My assumption that he's white is based on his playing at Vanderbilt and being named Jay, but I'm not as confident in my race-guessing game with Cutler as I am with, say, D'Brickashaw Ferguson. (That guy's gotta be Asian.)
So I know nothing about Jay Cutler except this: Three months ago he was a good quarterback prospect who had a decent chance of being selected late in the first round of the NFL draft. Since then he has skyrocketed up everybody's draft board and actually has people debating whether or not he should be selected ahead of Matt Leinart and Vince Young.
Before I begin ranting, let me reitirate my main point: I don't know diddly-poo about Jay Cutler. Maybe he is the best quarterback prospect in the draft and maybe he'll be the second-coming of Brett Favre as Chris Mortensen has suggested (minus the Vicodin-addiction and penchant for throwing into septuple-coverage, I assume.) However, every season a good player shoots up draft boards because of a stellar performance at the Senior Bowl or a good showing at the combine. And inevitably, this player turns out to be a gigantic bust.
Akili Smith was a solid quarterback at Oregon who was named first-team All-Pac 10 and led his team to a bowl game. After the season everyone assumed he'd be a late-first round or early-second round pick. But a great Senior Bowl and impressive combine help raise his stock so much that he went with the #3 pick overall. Today, Smith is out of football.
NFL scouts are like the Phil Mickelson of old: They overthink every decision and are more fond of taking a risk than playing it safe. Given the choice between an athletic stud with upside or a proven competitor they'll take the athletic stud with upside every time because they feel their ceiling is higher. NBA scouts do this too, which is why Josh Howard went with the #29 pick behind guys like Mickael Pietrus, Zarko Carbakapa, Travis Outlaw, Brian Cook, Ndudi Ebi and Kendrick Perikins in the 2003 draft. The scouts felt that those unknowns were a better choice than the ACC Player of the Year because they had a higher ceiling. Now, each of those guys rides the bench while Howard is the second most important player on the team with the best record in the West.
Jay Cutler is no Mickael Pietrus, but he's no Matt Leinart either. Vanderbilt went 5-6 this season, failing to qualify for a bowl game. Maybe that was the fault of the Commodore's weak defense (which ranked 72nd in the country), but Notre Dame, Memphis, Minnesota, BYU, Wisconsin, UCLA, Illinois and Northwestern all had worse defensive units and still played in the postseason.
Cutler's regular season numbers were impressive, but hardly awe-inspiring. The Vandy QB ranked 7th in the SEC in passer rating and 8th in yards-per attempt. He threw for the most yards and second-most touchdowns in the conference, but those totals become less impressive when you consider Cutler threw 84 more times than the quarterback with the second-most attempts. Sure, Cutler might have thrown for 485 more yards than D.J. Shockley, but it took him 152 more attempts to do it.
But, again, I'm not criticizing Cutler. I'm just expressing surprise that Mel Kiper now considers Jay Cutler the 12th best overall player in the draft after not having him listed among his top 25 seniors on November 23. Six juniors are ahead of Cutler on Mel's Big Board, which means Kiper believes Cutler is the 6th best senior in the draft just three months after thinking he wasn't among the top 25. Keep in mind, Cutler has played exactly zero real games since then. None. Kiper (and everyone else) has moved Cutler up his board based on the Senior Bowl alone. This has to alarm somebody, doesn't it?
Again, I'm not saying Jay Cutler is going to be an NFL bust. But it certainly won't surprise me if he is.

2) My buddy Phil sent me this story about a Romanian soccer player who was traded for about 30 pounds of meat. Isiah Thomas immediately stepped in and offered the meat a six-year, $55 million deal.

Len Pasquarelli Is A Stupid F***

Maybe Daniel Snyder kicked his dog once. Or perhaps Stephen Davis hit on his daughter. And I suppose it's possible George Preston Marshall once had beef with his grandfather. Because if not, it becomes impossible to fathom why Len Pasquarelli has so much hatred for the Washington Redskins.
It's not like Pasquarelli is an NFL owner frustrated with Snyder or a coach who resents the $2.1 million Gregg Williams is getting paid. Pasquarelli never played professional football so he can't harbor any resentment over getting cut or passed-over by the organization. And unless he really, really likes Jeff Gordon's #24 car, there's no way Len can hate Joe Gibbs, who by all accounts is one of the most gracious, good-hearted men in sports.
Yet Pasquarelli continues to dump on the Redskins at every possibility, even going so far as to create a story out of thin air, as he did yesterday.
On Saturday Joe Gibbs mentioned the Redskins were looking to trade Patrick Ramsey thus confirming a story that had already been confirmed by dozens of sources over the past two seasons. That this wasn't a big deal was lost on Pasquarelli who breathlessly led his ESPN.com story:

In one of the NFL's worst-kept secrets, Washington Redskins coach Joe Gibbs has acknowledged that the team is trying to trade former first-round quarterback Patrick Ramsey, and has granted permission to the one-time starter and his agent to seek potential trade suitors as well.

How was the Redskins desire to unload Patrick Ramsey a secret? Ramsey has been on the trade block since he was drafted. During training camp and in the middle of the season the 'Skins made overtures to other teams about him. In no possible way was Ramsey's impending departure from Washington a secret. Len Pasquarelli just wants you to think so because it makes the Redskins look like an inept, bumbling franchise if you do.
The only news yesterday was that Joe Gibbs publicly announced the Redskins were seeking to trade Ramsey. This non-story was buried on page E3 of the Washington Post, yet was given top-headline treatment yesterday on ESPN.com, probably because Pasquarelli's name was attached to the byline.
Again, the 'Skins looking to get rid of Ramsey wasn't big news because: a) everyone knew this months ago, and, b) everyone knew this months ago. Tomorrow, Len Pasquarelli is writing an exclusive story set to announce the breakup of Jessica Simpson and Nick Lachey.

Second, until the last few days, the Redskins were still seeking a second- or third-round pick in return for Ramsey, league sources said. And while that may have been a viable price tag three months ago, a buyer's market and Washington's ham-handed handling of Ramsey have probably reduced his value in the eyes of some teams interested in acquiring the four-year veteran.

This is a news article. However ham-handed Ramsey might have been handed, it's not Pasquarelli's place to insert editorial comments into this story. Every time Pasquarelli does this he loses any shred of credibility he's still hanging on to.
Pasquarelli also seems to believe that the concept of a person or organization lowering its asking price after testing the market and realizing its original price might have been too high is something exclusive to Redskins Park. Does Pasquarelli not understand the art of negotiation? Is he somehow related to Isiah Thomas?

A year or two ago, when it became obvious that Gibbs' staff wasn't enamored of Ramsey, the Redskins would almost certainly have commanded a higher price for the former Tulane star. But Washington failed to pull the trigger on a deal when Sexton could have brought them several suitors.

Notice the phrases Pasquarelli uses in this paragraph, "almost certainly" and "could have brought." This is vintage Pasquarelli: Using qualifiers to lay out his own agenda.
Pasquarelli has no proof Ramsey "almost certainly would have commended a higher price" a year or two ago, but he'd like you to believe it. The Redskins were certainly asking for more back then, but they didn't get it. (The Bears wouldn't even part with a first-round pick for Ramsey back in 2002, though, when he had yet to take an NFL snap, so it's not like teams were throwing first-round picks around like the Vikings circa 1989.)
Pasquarelli likely hasn't even entertained the possibility that Ramsey's stock has gone down because Ramsey has struggled on the field. It has to be the organization's fault.
Also, in the last sentence Pasquarelli writes, "Washington failed to pull the trigger... when Sexton could have brought them several suitors." Wait, I'm confused, Len. What did the Redskins fail to pull the trigger on. A trade or the possibility of Sexton bringing them several suitors? As Sleeping Beauty well knows, a suitor is merely a courter, not someone with whom a deal has been made.
To my knowledge, and apparently Pasquarelli's as well since he didn't mention it, Sexton merely had a list of teams who were interested in Ramsey on a superficial level and had yet to make a solid offer to the Redskins. This is vastly different than Pasquarelli's pseudo-assertion that teams were lining up for Ramsey and the Redskins brushed them off.
But let's give Pasquarelli the undeserved benefit of the doubt and say that the Redskins did indeed turn down, say, a second-round pick for Ramsey last offseason. If they had (which they didn't), there's still one little problem with Pasquarelli's criticism of the move: IT WAS THE RIGHT CHOICE.
When Brunell was named the starter there was some chatter that Ramsey would be released or traded. That was crazy-talk because it would foolish to assume Brunell would take every meaningful snap over the course of the season. NFL quarterbacks are like Faberge eggs, it was only natural to assume Brunell would get hurt at some point. And he did, in the Redskins pivotal Christmas Eve win over the Giants.
In that game, Brunell rolled his knee in the second quarter and Ramsey replaced him, performing well to help keep the Redskins in the lead and in position to control their playoff destiny. It's impossible to say what Tim Hasselbeck or Jason Campbell would have done had they been the Redskins backup, but the fact remains Ramsey was good enough to win the game. Without him, it's quite possible Washington would never have made the playoffs and advanced to the divisional round. And, in my book, that's worth 32 picks in any draft.

Gibbs sold Ramsey on the notion that he would compete for the starting job, then went out and invested a 2005 first-round pick on Auburn quarterback Jason Campbell.

First of all, Joe Gibbs didn't have to sell Patrick Ramsey on anything. Ramsey was under contract and was in no position to force a trade. Secondly, Ramsey was the starting quarterback to open the season even though everybody could see Mark Brunell was the better QB in the preseason. (Did Len Pasquarelli forget about this nugget of info? Or does he just care not to remember?)
Ramsey got hurt in the opening game against the Bears and Brunell led the team to victory. The veteran started on Monday night in week 2 against Dallas and for 56 minutes it appeared Gibbs had made the wrong choice. Brunell was erratic, looked lost and the Redskins offense was pitiful.
But the second Santana Moss caught the go-ahead touchdown pass from Brunell to complete a furious Washington comeback, the Washington Redskins had their starting quarterback for 2005.
Patrick Ramsey was given every chance to succeed as Redskins quarterback and he failed at every turn. Ramsey's turn was up. He had blown it. When you don't give anything, you shouldn't expect anything in return.
As for the Campbell drafting, I'm continually amazed by analysts criticizing teams for having the foresight to, gasp, draft for the future. When the Saints picked Deuce McCallister even with Ricky Williams on their roster, everyone questioned it. Same thing when the Chiefs had Priest Holmes yet took Larry Johnson anyway. Brunell is old, Ramsey is terrible. What did Pasquarelli want the Redskins to do, draft the ghost of Red Grange so no position player would have their feelings hurt?

Ramsey started the '05 season opener, was pulled in favor of Mark Brunell at halftime, and didn't log another start the rest of the season. The poor handling of the situation probably means that Washington will have to settle for far less now in any Ramsey trade. Even at a reduced rate the Redskins likely have to deal Ramsey or release him, since he has finally become alarmed by his status.

Erroneous! ERRONEOUS! Erroneous on both accounts! That first sentence is just a flat-out lie. I missed it the first time I read this article, but there it is in all of its fallacious black and white. Man, Len's in Jayson Blair/James Frey territory here.
Patrick Ramsey wasn't pulled in favor of Mark Brunell at halftime, he was injured four minutes into the second quarter and was replaced. At halftime Redskins trainer Bubba Tyer seemed ambivalent about Ramsey's return, which was enough for Gibbs who decided to go with Brunell. It's one thing when I thought Pasquarelli was just stupid. Now he's incompetent and stupid which is sort of like mixing liquor and beer on an empty stomach.
The next sentence is more of the same from Pasquarelli, taking editorial jabs at the team and dabbling in half-truths with little factual basis.
Yesterday my buddy Jaffe said Pasquarelli's hatred of the Redskins was "really getting out of hand. Really."
Really.

"Len Pasquarelli Is A Stupid F***" is a frequent feature on this site.

The AP 25

I have two middle names.
It’s a long story. Well, it’s not actually a long story, just a boring one. Anyway, my full name is Christopher Arthur Peter Chase. Back when I wrote for my middle school newspaper I made a point of writing “Christopher A.P. Chase” as my byline and this led to the inevitable nickname of AP. It never really caught on except with a guy one year ahead of me in school who, to this day, will still give me the “AAAAAAAAAA PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP” treatment whenever I run into him. So, in honor of Heltz and The Churchill Observer, I present the first AP 25.

1) Duke is the best team in college basketball. They will not win the National Championship. The Blue Devils are far too dependent on J.J. Redick and will have a difficult time winning five games against top competition because of that. Shelden Williams might have a 25-15 day against a small team but The Slumlord is notorious for getting shutdown by similarly sized opponents like the one’s he’ll see if Duke plays the UConn’s and Texas’ of the world. Williams defense has been atrocious this season, as I’ve detailed many times before, and he simply can’t be counted on to perform well in big games.
Georgetown provided the template for how to beat Duke; guard Redick with a taller, more athletic defender and don’t let anybody else beat you. So far only the Hoyas have knocked off the Dukies, but teams like Virginia Tech, Boston College and Florida State have all been close.
For as great as he is, it’s too much to assume Redick can give Duke five great games in the Tournament against top-notch competition. He’s bound to have an off-night (as he did against Georgia Tech Wednesday night) and good teams will capitalize on it. Hell, a bad team almost did.
Without a solid third scoring threat, Duke will be in dire straits if Redick is cold or has a quick defender on him.
Make no mistake, the Blue Devils are a one-man team. If that man has an off-night, the Dukies will make a quick exit come March.

2) I’ve been on the Villanova bandwagon since last season and won’t be getting off any time soon. Guard-play wins championships and ‘Nova has the best set in the nation. Allen Ray and Randy Foye are excellent on both ends of the court and, unlike Duke, the Cats have four scorers who can light it up in any given game. If Foye is having an off-night, Mike Nardi can easily drop 20. If Nardi’s cold, Kyle Lowry can pick up the slack.
Villanova has been battle-tested this season, learning how to win close games in the brutal Big East. Being a veteran team doesn’t hurt either.
In the past two seasons the Cats have lost 10 games. With the exception of a 15-point loss at Syracuse last year, their other nine losses have come by a total of 25 points. Conversely, Texas lost by 21 points to Oklahoma State on Sunday. If not for a bogus traveling call against Carolina in last year’s Sweet 16, the Cats would have been one win away from the Final Four.
Everything feels right about this Villanova team. I think they’re the team to beat.

3) Note to Dick Vitale: J.J. Redick stayed at Duke for his senior season because he would have been a late first-round pick, at best, not because he wanted to stay true to the NCAAs student-athlete ideal. Vitale always does this; he automatically assumes any player who stays for his senior season does so for reasons other than necessity. Redick made a practical decision: He could have gone pro after his junior season, and possibly gotten a non-guaranteed contract as a second round pick, or he could come back, improve his game and move himself into the top-half of the first-round (where he should go; if he doesn’t NBA execs are even dumber than I imagined). This is not to say Redick’s return was all about draft position, but let’s not turn him into a martyr for making the only logical decision he was presented with.

4) Redick, and not Adam Morrison, is the National Player of the Year. Morrison’s awesome but Redick is better against better competition.

5) My dislike of Skip Prosser is well-known to readers of this site. So it might come as a surprise to many that I don’t think Prosser should be fired after this season, as many have suggested. Prosser is a terrible coach and the fact that he couldn’t get into the Sweet 16 with Chris Paul running the show is proof of this. Wake has peaked under him and can only go downhill from here. But, again, he shouldn’t be fired.
Wake Forest is one of the most difficult places to win in the country. They play on Tobacco Road and have to compete with Duke, UNC and NC State for recruits. They play in the best basketball conference in the country and generally adhere to rigorous academic standards for admission. The campus is small, the enrollment is smaller (the smallest among BCS-conference schools) and the basketball history is nearly non-existent. It helps that Wake has Tim Duncan and Chris Paul starring in the NBA (as well as Josh Howard. According to John Hollinger’s PER ratings, Wake has three of the top 29 players in the league. No other college has more than one player listed that highly), but Wake isn’t exactly at the top of most recruits wish-lists. Yet Prosser has made the school a destination. He won a regular season title, had the second-best start for a coach in conference history and helped invigorate Winston-Salem enough that Lawrence Joel Coliseum was totally sold out for the season before a game was played for the first time in history. So for Prosser to be fired after one bad season despite all the good he has done for the University sets a terrible precedent and would likely make prospective coaches very wary of going to Wake Forest. “If Ron Wellman got rid of Skip Prosser after winning a regular season title, leading two teams to #2 seeds in the Tournament, getting the school their first #1 ranking in history and recruiting the best point guard prospect since Isiah Thomas,” they’ll say, “what would I have to do in order to keep my job?”
That being said, I hope Skip Prosser bolts to Cincinnati and makes this a moot point. My health can’t deal with another season of inept offense and non-existent defense.

6) Beware of Tennessee. Or should I say, be wary of Tennessee. Bruce Pearl is a great coach and will turn the Volunteers into perennial contenders. But this year they’re winning with smoke and mirrors in a terrible SEC. Beating Florida twice might look nice, but the Gators are as overrated as Coldplay.
In Ken Pomeroy’s defensive efficiency stats, Tennessee ranks 77th in the nation. This is as big a red flag as there is in college basketball. (Last year some highly ranked teams with poor efficiency ratings were Wake Forest (#76, second round exit), Gonzaga (119, second round exit) and Washington (#1 seed, #58 rating, sweet 16 exit). These are not coincidences. Of course, West Virginia had a DER of 119 and almost made the Final Four.)

7) George Washington is a mystery, but to knock them for not beating down on A-10 competition, as some have done, is quite spurious. (I read something earlier today that said as much, but now can’t remember where it was, hence the lack of link.) Intraconference competition is difficult for every good team. Duke needed a prayer buzzer beater at home to beat Virginia Tech and got bailouts from the refs against FSU and Boston College. Those results take nothing away from the Blue Devils success. Every team in the ACC looks ahead to that game and gives Duke their best effort. It’s the same thing with GW this year in the A-10. The lesser teams in that conference, the Xaviers, the St. Joes, the LaSalles, have been gunning for George Washington. Beating the Colonials is a chance for those teams to get some love on the national stage. And GW, to their credit, has stayed undefeated in the conference. Only Duke, Bucknell, Gonzaga and Memphis have made it through their conference season with an unblemished mark and each have it just as difficult (with the possible exception of Memphis because Conference USA is simply terrible.) GW will drop one soon though; the loss of Pops Mensah-Bonsu is a killer. The Colonials would be wise to rest him until the NCAAs. There’s no use in rushing him back for the A-10 Tournament.

8) Very quietly, Florida has lost three of five and five of their last ten. One month ago people were touting them as a possible #1 seed. Now a #5 seed looks more realistic. (Back in January I predicted an even lower seed for UF: “In March, when Florida is a #6 seed and gets upset by Old Dominion in the first round, people are going to wonder how the hell the Gators ever got to be ranked #2 in the nation.”) The Gators marquee wins from the Coaches vs. Cancer tournament look a lot less special now. Beating Wake Forest and Syracuse seemed great in November but… not so much anymore.

9) Today it seems like there’s only three teams that have a realistic shot of winning the National Championship: Duke, Villanova and Connecticut. Memphis hasn’t played a good team since December, Gonzaga always flames out and can’t rely on Morrison so heavily, championship teams don’t get blown out like Texas does and everyone else is just too damn streaky.
In recent memory only the 2003 Tournament was like this year is shaping up to be. Going into that Dance, everyone had either Kentucky or Arizona winning and everybody else was an afterthought. Of course, neither of those teams made the Final Four and Syracuse ended up winning on the strength of Carmelo Anthony. The moral of the story: The fewer great teams in an NCAA Tournament puts a whole bunch of teams in the mix. Conversely, if there are six or seven teams everyone is talking about, then the winner usually comes from those six or seven teams. I'm still going to pick Villanova, but don't be surprised if a team comes from out of the blue to win the whole thing.

10) Not having home-and-home matchups anymore in the ACC is just so damn sad and hurts the conference in so many ways. I get upset just thinking about it, so I’ll move on.

11) Rock Chalk Jayhawk! Behind freshman Brandon Rush, Kansas is amazingly tied for the lead in the Big 12 and could move into the top spot outright with a win over Texas this weekend.
On January 17 the Jayhawks were 10-6 overall and had lost back-to-back games against Colorado and Kansas State. Their season appeared over. Four wins later the Jayhawks were down 16 at home to Oklahoma before a furious comeback gave them a one-point win. They’ve rolled to five more victories since then (for ten overall) in a run that took them from receiving no votes in the AP poll to a #16 ranking one month later. Nobody wants to face Bill Self’s team come March.

12) Tyler Hansbrough is unstoppable and deserves every Freshman of the Year award out there, but Brandon Rush has been fantastic at Kansas and is getting about 1/10th of the pub.

13) If the Tournament committee has any sense (a big if, mind you) George Mason’s loss last night to Hofstra shouldn’t affect their Tournament status. Hofstra is 21-5 and has a 19-game home winning streak. To penalize Mason for a road loss to their conference’s second-best team would be unconscionable.

14) Maryland’s 2002 recruiting class sure didn’t turn out like Gary Williams expected. McDonald’s All-American Travis Garrison was an unqualified bust, Nik Caner-Medley’s game stayed stagnant during his four seasons as a Terp and Williams’ heralded backcourt of John Gilchrist and Chris McCray isn’t even on the team anymore.
Big things were expected out of the first Maryland class to follow the NCAA Tournament champs and they never delivered. It’s rare that a National Champion fails to make the Tournament four seasons after winning (when a completely new team is on the floor). Many programs fall a bit in the immediate years following their titles but almost always reload by the time their first post-championship class are seniors. The last school to win the Tournament and miss it four years later was, surprisingly, Duke. After winning with Christian Laettner, Bobby Hurley and Grant Hill in 1992, the Blue Devils missed the Tournament in 1996 with a similarly lackluster class that included the infamous Greg Newton and Carmen Wallace. (That’s also the year Coach K abandoned the team and left Pete Gaudet to struggle through the Devils worst season since the late ‘70s. You know, for a guy who went to West Point Coach K is sure… Alright, you’ve heard that one before.)

15) To me, watching Big Ten basketball is sort of like watching paint wait in line at the DMV. Yet there’s something unavoidable about any game that Brent Musberger is announcing. I swear, that man could call paint waiting in line at the DMV and I’d watch.

16) Everyone criticizes the BCS rankings and rightfully so. But why do we accept the RPI as gospel? Look at those rankings sometime, they’re ridiculous. Wisconsin is ahead of Illinois. Missouri St. is ahead of Georgetown. Creighton is ahead of West Virginia. Bradley is ahead of Kansas. Indiana is ahead of Hofstra. I mean, there’s no good way to rank these teams, but how can you trust something that says a ten-loss Arizona team is better than a one-loss George Washington one?

17) No need to explain why George Washington is rated so low. I see their 324th ranked non-conference strength of schedule. But still. Arizona is just terrible.

18) Wake Forest has an RPI of 104. Among the schools ranked ahead of them: Samford, Winthrop, South Alabama, Murray State, Montana and Houston. Man, that’s depressing.

19) The Wolfman once picked Southern Illinois to go to the Elite Eight.

20) What kind of tool do you have to be to get Bible verses tattooed on your body. Oh. And why am I not surprised he has an Asian character tattoo. What an unoriginal bastard. For somebody who the press always makes out to be an intellectual and a free thinker, Redick has sure chosen the most conventional (and clichéd) ways to express himself.

21) I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again: The NCAA needs to change the rule that allows players to call timeout as they’re jumping out of bounds. Frankly, I’d support a rule that says a timeout can never be called when possession is in question, but baby steps.

22) How did Connecticut get two first-place votes in the coaches poll while Villanova, fresh off a victory over the Huskies, received zero? Normally I’d go on a rant about the worthlessness of the coach’s poll, but in the AP rankings UConn got four first-place votes while ‘Nova nabbed just three. In a word: Whaaaaaa?!

23) I like GW (#6) and dislike Texas (#7), but there’s no way the Colonials are a better team than the Longhorns.

24) I forgot to mention this back in November, but me and my Jake Plummer petition were featured in the aforementioned Churchill Observer in an excellent article written by Greg Reutershan, a Churchill sophomore I’ve known for years through swimming. Keep up the good work, Greg. And my bad if you're not a sophomore.

25) If everything goes according to plan, I’m going to be an uncle on March 7. Here’s hoping my niece will bring the Deacs some much-needed good luck in the ACC Tournament.

Efird Inquires

In 1999 the traditionally staid, upper-classman Efird dorm at Wake Forest was turned into a debacherous house of vice when a record freshman class entered the Winston-Salem university and the residence life & housing office was forced to move first year students onto the upper-quad for the first time in recent history. Efird that year was like many other dorms on campuses across the country, but because just 29 freshman populated a small dorm filled with upper-class co-eds while their classmates were relegated to larger dorms across campus, Efird developed an infamous reputation at Wake and eventually forced the school’s higher-ups to temporarily ban freshman students from living in the area.
Today, former Efird residents are spread throughout the country, working mundane jobs and soldiering on through a difficult basketball season. Their college lives are in the past, yet each one would drop whatever it is they were doing at the mere mention of Punch Party VI.
This afternoon, some old Efird residents make some inquiries:

Alex Obaza
Cockeysville, MD

Don't you think Coach K should start resting J.J. Redick a little bit? Duke has locked up the regular season title and he's obviously going to get the ACC scoring record. The rest of their games between now and the NCAA tournament are meaningless (with the exception of UNC for pride). Yet, Coach K keeps him in there 40 minutes a game. Keeping in mind what happened to Kenyon Martin a few years ago is Coach K playing with fire?
Duke has clinched the ACC regular season title and all but locked up a #1 seed in the NCAA Tournament. You're right, it makes little sense to keep playing Redick for 39 minutes a game, as he’s been doing during the ACC season. In the Devils’ last seven games Redick has played 40, 37, 35, 39, 39, 43 and 40 minutes. Before that he had a run of three straight games with a full 40 minutes played.
Considering Duke will need everything Redick has if they want to win a National Championship, it makes sense for Coach K to give him a few breathers every now and then. I don’t think he will though. Oh, he might not play 40 minutes against Temple on Saturday if the Blue Devils take a big lead (although the Owls’ zone could give Duke a little trouble), but I doubt we’ll see Redick getting significant amounts of rest over Duke’s final three games.
Coach K is often in a position to rest players during the end of the season and ACC Tournament, yet he rarely does. While some coaches (like Gary Williams) view the ACC Tournament as a mere prelude to the NCAAs, Krzyzewski’s teams always play hard in the conference tourney and, more often than not, win them. He risks injuries to do so, likely believing that the Kenyon Martin incident is the exception, not the rule.

Are the Redskins going to cut Lavar Arrington and what kind of market do you think he'll command?
I have absolutely no clue what the ‘Skins are going to do with LaVar. Columns by Len Pasquarelli and John Clayton suggest the Redskins will have difficulty fielding a team due to their salary cap excesses but since cutting LaVar provides no help for 2006 (he’ll count $12 million against the cap if retained, slightly more than that if let go) and would be a killer in 2007 (assuming that year is capped under a new CBA), it’d be hard to imagine them letting him go.

What do you think is the more likely story line for the upcoming World Baseball Classic? All Star pitching staffs dominate stacked lineups or the other way around?
I thought teams were overreacting when they were publicly expressing their displeasure over players competing in the WBC. “Stop your whining,” I said, “it’s just a few games. They’ll be fine.” Then I saw the full rosters and discovered young Nats pitcher Chad Cordero was on the U.S. team, along with catcher Brian Schneider, and second baseman Jose Vidro was on Puerto Rico’s roster.
The 24-year old Cordero broke down at the end of last season, Schneider battled injuries all season and Vidro spent much of the year on the D.L. The moment I saw they were scheduled to play in the Tournament I immediately saw where those cautious teams were coming from. The last thing I want is Cordero throwing out his arm in a game against Japan and forcing the Nats to go with Mike Stanton as their closer. The mere thought of that is enough to drive me to the sauce. That’s why I think hitting will be the story of the day in the WBC. Pitchers might take a little off their fastball or drop their arm a little on the breaking stuff. Hitters can react the same way in a spring training game as they do the World Series with little fear of injury. Pitchers don’t have that luxury.

G. Paul Falkowski
Medford, NJ

Who has a better shot of winning the ACC tournament, Wake Forest or Maryland?
Wake Forest, but only because Maryland teams have a history of giving up under Gary Williams. I never criticize Gary, mind you. Even after a Valentine’s Day loss at home to Florida State in 2001 put the Terps on the NCAA bubble and people in D.C. were calling for his head, I was on Gary’s side. And I still am today. (Maryland eventually went to their first Final Four that season, by the way.) But his teams have a breaking point and I think they’ve hit it this year. Last night's loss to Florida State was an absolute killer. Even with a win at UNC this weekend (which won't happen), the Terps will be hard pressed to make a run in the ACC Tournament without Chris McCray in their backcourt.
Wake, having the “luxury” of being an 11 or 12 seed in the ACC Tournament can beat the 5th or 6th seed in the play-in game and then could beat a #3 or #4 they would face in the second round, particularly with the game taking place in their own backyard (Greensboro). None of this will happen, mind you, but Wake still has some fight left in them. Maryland has completely given up.

Has Dick Vitale ever loved another player as much as he loves JJ Redick? Does he love him more than you love dogs?
I wish I could check the tapes on this one, but I’m going to go out on a limb and say Redick is only Vitale’s second most-loved Dukie behind Steve Wojciechowski. Vitale loves Redick’s game and how it’s improved (more on that in a few days) but I think deep-down he really gets off on how tenacious Wojciechowski was and how he did so much with so little talent. It’s the “Rudy” syndrome, I think.
And no, Greg. Nobody will love anything more than I love dogs.

Are Dick Vitale and Mike Patrick the most unwatchable college basketball commentators ever to call a game?
When Coach K got his tech last night I thought Vitale was going to go all secret service on us and jump in front of the refs T signal to deflect such a penalty from the coach he loves.
Vitale has become a caricature of himself, while Patrick is arguably even worse. But lets cut Mikey P. some slack. For the past 15 years he's had to work with Dick Vitale all winter and Joe Theismann and Paul McGuire all fall. That's enough to make any man go crazy.
Maybe instead of torturing guys at Gitmo they could just send Paul McGuire down there. I bet after hearing 'watch this' and 'look here' a few dozen times those terrorists would be singing like Kelly Clarkson.
If my prayers are to be answered, Dick and Mike will call the Duke/Temple game on Saturday that you’ll be attending so I can do my 3rd annual “Evening with Dickie V”. Frankly, I’d be shocked if Vitale wasn’t at the game where J.J. Redick took over the all-time ACC scoring lead. That'd be like a father missing his daughter's wedding day.
(An underreported note: When Kobe scored his 81 points many people pointed out that Chamberlin got 100 without the three-point line (failing to realize that a nine-point line wouldn’t have helped Chamberlin since he scored most of his buckets in the paint). Yet I haven’t heard one person mention the fact that guys like Dickie Hemric, Johnny Dawkins, Jeff Lamp and Mark Price didn’t play with the three-point rule as Redick has. I’m not taking anything away from Redick - even if I wanted to take his masculinity, I'm already much too late - I’m just saying it’d be nice to hear it mentioned.)

How long will it take for the NFL and the players association reach a new labor agreement? WIll the 2007 season be uncapped? What are the odds of a lockout?
The odds of a lockout are 5%. I’m not going to put the squadoosh on it because anything can happen, but I’d be shocked if Tagliabue and Upshaw couldn’t come to an agreement. There's way too much at stake from the league and the union to engage in a pissing contest. Dan Snyder and Jerry Jones could gum up the works by insisting they be allowed to keep the money they get from tickets, local media and advertising, but they need to remember the sacrifices made by Wellington Mara and George Halas back in the '60s. The Giants and Bears could have printed their own money, but Mara and Halas agreed to revenue sharing so the Green Bays of the world could compete with the major markets. It's tough to argue with Snyder supporters who say he shouldn't have to give away the money his team earns, but there is a precedent. He's not the first owner who will have made a sacrifice. Snyder wouldn't have the opportunity to make boatloads of cash if it weren't for Mara and Halas' sacrifice. This is something he needs to remember.

Nick "Wolfman" Streit
Morton Grove, IL

How many teams from the ACC do you see making the Tournament?
Duke, Carolina and State are all locks to make the Tournament. BC is a lock too, but since you asked about “teams from the ACC,” they don’t fit the criteria. If the season ended today, only those four would make it. But don’t be surprised if UVA puts together a little run at the end of the season and sneaks in as well.

What are the Bush twins doing these days?
You’re not wrong about much, Wolfman. But – And there goes my back. I found out I had a slipped disc yesterday and apparently it’s slipping again. I’m going to have to cut this short. Jenna Bush is hotter though, Wolfman. And you know this.

Thursday Thoughts… On Wednesday!

* Everyone gives figure skating judges a hard time, but last night I found myself in full agreement with them: Sasha Cohen was definitely .03 points better than that Russian chick in the short program. Had it been a .04 difference I would have cried “fix!”. If .02 had been the margin I would have demanded an immediate inquiry since it was crystal clear that Cohen was exactly three-hundredths of a point better. I mean, that triple flip/double axel combination definitely deserved 1/33rd more of a point than Slutskaya’s. And those spins? Any idiot could see that Cohen’s were .044967% better.

* John Feinstein was on Tony Kornheiser’s radio show for the final hour today promoting his book Last Dance: Behind the Scenes at the Final Four, defending himself from a blistering New York Times review and discussing the ongoing college basketball season.
First of all, I love Feinstein’s books. After finally getting to A Season on the Brink this weekend, I’ve read all of his stuff (except for Last Dance which I ordered from Amazon today) and eagerly await each new project he releases. Feinstein is a wonderful storyteller and his unprecedented access into locker rooms and meetings helps take readers into never-before-seen worlds. He might be overly sentimental and biased towards the things he loves (Duke basketball, West Point and the Naval Academy, the Patriot League, etc.) but those are trivial details.
Nobody reads Feinstein expecting to find great literature, they read it for the stories, for the behind-the-scenes information and for general enjoyment. Anyone who criticizes Feinstein’s work (hello Jay Jennings) for not being literary enough is missing the point. He’s not trying to be Hemingway, he’s trying to be the most entertaining sportswriter out there and he has succeeded. Jennings criticism is like ripping Kelly Clarkson for not being Maria Callas.
On TK’s show this morning, Feinstein mentioned that the writer of the New York Times Book Review piece, Jay Jennings, was once passed over for a job at Sports Illustrated that eventually went to Feinstein. When Feinstein left, his assistant, Seth Davis, got the gig. This led to speculation that Jennings is still holding a grudge, which makes sense because the only explanation for the complete rip-job Jennings did is jealousy. Read the whole thing, it’s ridiculous. I understand writers at book reviews at the Times, Washington Post and L.A. Times are all pseudo-intellectual snobs who can’t be bothered with bestselling piffle, but for the editors to allow Jennings hatchet job to go through unscathed was ridiculous. The last line, “Is it too much to hope that "Last Dance" might be not just Feinstein's last 'Last' book but his last book?” is clearly a personal jab and should never have been allowed in the piece. It’s one thing not to like a book, it’s another to trash it like Jennings did.
On another note, earlier in the program Kornheiser mentioned that he agreed with Gary Williams' decision to allow Chris McCray to join in on Senior Night festivities if McCray so desires. When Feinstein came on he said McCray doesn’t deserve such an honor, and I fully agree.
Chris McCray totally let down his team and if they miss the NCAA Tournament it will largely be on his shoulders. Tonight’s game at FSU is a must-win for Maryland, not so much because it will help them get in (only a win at UNC will really help the Terps’ cause), but a loss would completely kill their chances of receiving an at-large bid. McCray belongs at Senior Night about as much as John Gilchrist does.

* At what point do we stop praising Notre Dame for playing close games that come down to the wire and begin criticizing them for losing close games that come down to the wire? The Fighting Irish aren’t exactly a scrappy bunch of overachievers playing out of their minds against superior competition. They’re a major conference team who can’t seem to win a close game. What’s the old saying; once is a fluke, twice is a coincidence, eight times is freakin’ ridiculous? Win a game, Notre Dame, and don’t complain if you don’t make the Big East Tournament. Sure, it’s ridiculous that only 12 teams get in. But if the Irish spent more time winning a damn game than complaining about the tournament’s format, they wouldn’t have to worry about that.

* Congratulations to Isiah Thomas for pulling the trigger on the Steve Francis deal. Between Francis, Stephon Marbury and Jalen Rose the Knicks now have three of the NBA's most selfish players in their backcourt and Isiah has guaranteed the team a ceiling of mediocrity for the near future. I'm sure Jay Jennings loves him though.

The Tuesday Ten

There are ten headlines currently on the front page of ESPN.com. I’ll break down each in today’s Tuesday Ten.

1) Rohbock wins silver, ends USA's sliding drought
Sliding better be a term for some other sport and not the name of a new medal event. If it’s the latter, what’s going to become an Olympic sport next, snowman building? Team snowball fight? Hands-free snow writing?
2) Pain delay: Red Sox approve Manny's late arrival
Manny’s body is due to arrive in Fort Myers on March 1st. His mind should be arriving sometime closer to Easter.
3) You're it: DE Abraham gets Jets' franchise tag
This should upset Dan Snyder, huh Len Pasquarelli?
4) Annika tops new ranking; Wie checks in at No. 3
Apparently the formula for the new women’s golf ranking puts more emphasis on Sports Illustrated articles and Sportscenter pieces than actual success on the golf course. I have no doubt, none at all, that this ranking system was implemented solely to rank Wie highly. This sentence from the AP story clinches it: “The women's ranking, sponsored by Rolex, will be published every Tuesday and used as criteria for getting into tournaments such as the LPGA Championship, the Women's British Open and the HSBC Women's World Match Play.” Translation: “There was some bitching about us allowing Michelle Wie to get into these tournaments without qualifying like everybody else, so we’re going to make these arbitrary rankings that put Wie ahead of people who actually play on the Tour and win tournaments so we won’t have to deal with the criticism any more.”
Coincidentally, the minimum number of tournaments a woman has to have competed in over two years is exactly the same number of tournaments Michelle Wie has played (15). (The men’s rankings require a minimum of 40 tournaments over 24 months.) I mean, couldn't they have made the minimum divisor ten or something so it would have been a little less obvious?
Read the article, it’s simply ridiculous. But not as ridiculous as the fact that this is the #4 story on ESPN.com.
5) Hingis wins in Dubai; Navratilova falls in doubles
Moving on…
6) Latvia loss sends USA into hockey quarterfinals
The news gets better for Team USA. Despite a pathetic 1-2-1 showing thus far in Turin, the US could lose their final opening-round game today against Russia and still make the NBA’s Eastern Conference playoffs as the #8 seed.
7) Report: Nats name in middle of trademark dispute
Somehow, some way, this has to be Linda Cropp’s fault.
8) Ex-athletes sue NCAA over scholarship cost cap
Wait, so the NCAA isn’t all about the student-athlete? I’m shocked… SHOCKED! They seem like such a fair and rational organization that cares only about their students and not making truckloads of money. Next thing you’ll be telling me that the lack of an NCAA football playoff has nothing to do with athletes missing class. Before you go there, let me just say stop it. That’s kooky-talk.
9) Torino raid found syringes, transfusion machine
“Two Austrian athletes confessed to a team official that they ‘may have used illegal methods’ at the Torino Games. It was revealed that evidence seized in a surprise sweep over the weekend included about 100 syringes, unlabeled drugs and a blood transfusion machine.”
Well, either they were using illegal methods or Courtney Love had stopped by for an unannounced visit.
10) Dogged searchers ask psychics to find whippet
Maybe they should check the Austrian’s room again.

Travelin' Man

I threw my back out yesterday. And by "throw" I mean "sat awkwardly on a sofa-bed, felt a pull and haven't been able to lift or turn my head since." I'll save you the trouble: I'm an idiot.
As a result, I spent my sleepless night catching up on my DVR backlog, finishing up A Season on the Brink (which I had surprisingly never read) and listening to the live and rerun broadcasts of the Tony Kornheiser show on the radio this morning.
Before I get back to laying on the couch in the one position that doesn't cause me to unleash a string of expletives, there's one thing I've been meaning to write for the past two weeks: Kornheiser's fear of flying is apparently going to force him to take a bus (a la John Madden) to each Monday Night Football game this season. If that's the case, what's going to happen to PTI while Tony is on a four-day bus trip to Seattle?
When ESPN announced TK's hiring, they said the Monday PTI would originate from the location of that night's game. That's well and good, but how is Kornheiser going to do the rest of the shows while on a bus? With games all over the country, it's difficult to imagine Kornheiser spending much time in D.C. during the season except for if the Redskins, Ravens or Eagles have a home game on Monday night and the next week's game is also close. There shouldn't be too many games on the west coast (Seattle, Denver and San Diego are the only teams west of Kansas City that have a realistic shot of hosting a Monday night game), but with the zig-zagging nature of the MNF schedule, Tony figures to spend most Tuesdays, some Wednesdays and a Thursday or two on the highway.
Nobody has brought up this possibility, but it would seem that PTI in its current form would be unable to air regularly during the NFL season (when the show is at its peak) if Tony is on a bus. As somebody who has probably missed only a handful of PTI episodes since the show debuted in October of 2001, this is a frightening thought.
It took PTI's producers a few years to realize guest hosts kill the show, but that might be the only way to get through the football months. (If they do go this route, Bob Ryan or David Dupree are the only acceptable options.) I suppose Tony could do remote split-screen broadcasts like the show has when Michael Wilbon is on the road (they'll have one today, as Wilbon is still in Houston), but would he do it live from the bus? Would they pull over at a rest stop? And would Tony not being in a fixed location hurt his ability to help develop each show?
Clearly ESPN has a plan in effect, but that they haven't announced it yet is a little disconcerting. PTI is the greatest sports show on television and a huge moneymaker for ESPN (why do you think they extended the show into Sportscenter?) In the coming months, the network will have to ask itself whether having Tony Kornheiser on the air for 17 Monday night's really worth killing their best program.

Len Pasquarelli Is a Stupid F***

Len Pasquarelli, the ESPN.com columnist who thought Joe Gibbs would amount to nothing in his comeback and has a personal vendetta against all things Redskins, is at it again.
In his weekly Tip Sheet, Pasquarelli makes baseless claims about Washington's impending cap troubles, effortlessly spinning pure speculation into incontrovertible fact.
The piece is genuine Pasquarelli: Written without attribution, fact or any shred of common sense. That his editors at ESPN.com allow their senior NFL writer to carry out his one-sided feud with Snyder on the site's pages is inexplicable. Pasquarelli clearly has tremendous disdain for the Redskins and their owner and his bias seeps into every word he writes about the team. Oh, it's just so ridiculous. Here's the piece:

Amid all the talk that the Washington Redskins are poised to contend for a Super Bowl title in 2006, and that owner Dan Snyder is set to pursue wide receiver Terrell Owens and defensive end John Abraham, this sobering note: According to the salary cap expert from one AFC franchise, an analyst of some note and a guy who claims to have crunched the numbers every way imaginable, the Redskins cannot get into compliance with the projected spending ceiling for next season without an extension to the collective bargaining agreement.
The expert claims there are only two players on the current Washington roster who will bring the team significant cap relief if they are released. Cutting some of the team's big-name players would actually increase the cap impact in most cases. Even reducing the 2006 base salaries of all the veteran players on the roster to the minimum levels, and guaranteeing the differences in bonuses, would still leave the Redskins about $4 million-$5 million over the cap. According to the cap expert's analysis, the Redskins might have to play with as many as 15-20 rookies, all earning the minimum salary, to squeeze close to the cap.
So all those who feel that Snyder actually hopes the league is forced to go to an uncapped season in 2007, so that he can try to buy himself a Super Bowl trophy in a manner befitting George Steinbrenner, might want to rethink that notion. Without an extension, Snyder could have trouble fielding a contending team in 2006 because of the Redskins' cap problems.

1) Who said the Redskins were going after Terrell Owens or John Abraham? The Washington Post hasn't reported this. The Washington Times hasn't reported this. No reputable news publication has made any such statements.
The Owens speculation began with Peter King. It ended there also. As for Abraham, other than a mention on the ESPN.com "Rumors" page, there has been no word of any such pursuit by Washington.
Pasquarelli including the names of the two top players on the market is a not-so-subtle reminder of Snyder's free spending reputation, a reputation he hasn't lived up to since 2000, by the way.
2) Which "AFC cap expert" is spending all his time "crunching numbers" about the Redskins? Doesn't he have a job to do for the AFC team he works for? Or by "salary cap expert" does Pasquarelli mean the guy who collects the money when the team's employees order Chinese takeout?
Vinny Cerrato and his front office crew in Ashburn are by no means perfect, but does Pasquarelli and his unnamed accomplice really think the Redskins suits in Ashburn aren't aware of this alleged cap trouble? Are we supposed to believe that an AFC cap expert and Len Pasquarelli knows more about the Redskins than the Redskins themselves?
3) As my buddy Jaffe noted, how can Pasquarelli write, "there are only two players on the current Washington roster who will bring the team significant cap relief if they are released," without naming the two players. I understand Pasquarelli's need to keep his "AFC source" confidential but why can't he mention who these two players are? Because this story is pure nonsense and has no basis in fact, that's why.
4) The Redskins are going to have 15-20 rookies on their roster next season? 15-20???!!! Think about that. Think about how freaking ridiculous that statement is. Pasquarelli is suggesting that 44% of the Redskins roster will be made up of rookies. Forty-four percent! With only five picks in the upcoming April draft, Pasquarelli actually expects the Redskins to sign 15 undrafted rookies to their roster and retain them all. In 2003 (the only year I could find info on) 59 undrafted rookies made opening day rosters... IN THE ENTIRE NFL. Now Pasquarelli thinks the Redskins are going to have 20 all by themselves? He can't actually believe this, can he?! So many follow-up lines are running through my head right now that they're all washing each other away in a wave of inanity.
Plus, since only 45 men are allowed on NFL rosters, that means means Pasquarelli thinks only 25 veterans will be on the 'Skins roster, which would be difficult considering they have 37 under contract for 2006! I'm using too many exclamation points, I need to move on!
5) Everybody loves talking about team's buying championships, but how often has that really happened? The Yankees haven't won a World Series since 2000 despite the highest payroll, by far, in baseball. (Sort of makes that "befitting of George Steinbrenner" line a little less relevant, doesn't it?) In that time the Marlins, Diamondbacks, Angels and White Sox have all won titles. How have the Mets and Orioles done during that span too? They consistently have the highest salaries in baseball yet consistently finish near the bottom of their respective divisions. The Redskins had the NFL's highest total payroll from 2000 to 2002. Total playoff appearances during that time: Zero.
Owners can spend all the money they want on salaries. But that doesn't mean they'll win a title because of it, no matter how many cheap digs Len Pasquarelli makes.
6) Every year since Snyder's infamous free agent binge that brought Deion Sanders, Bruce Smith and Marc Carrier to Washington, there have been rumors that the team would be in serious cap trouble in X amount of years. I think John Clayton has the template for an article saved on his laptop. But the Redskins cap overflow has never happened.
Every season I'm amazed how the Redskins can keep signing players to huge contracts and stay under the cap. Yet they always do and never have had to take part in a salary purge because of it. Pasqaurelli knows this, yet chooses to ignore it.
Look, I'm not claiming to have crunched the numbers. I don't know if the Redskins will spend 2006 in cap hell. Maybe they will. But I'm damn sure not going to take Len Pasquarelli's word for it.

Figure Skating: Hot or Not?

There are many signs of the decreasing importance of the Winter Olympics. The quadrennial event is getting crushed in the ratings by American Idol, viewers who are watching probably couldn't pick U.S. medal winners out of a lineup and America's most marketable stars are either jerks or have withdrawn for the Games altogether. For me, though, the worst mark on the Olympics was who the Washington Post sent to cover the games. Of the newspaper's lineup of five sports columnists, the two worst were shipped to Torino.
My enmity for Mike Wise is well documented. But only slightly less well-known is this: I hate Sally Jenkins just as much.
Unlike Wise, Jenkins is quite good for the words; it's just her opinions that are terrible. (Normally I'd go on a rant here about Jenkins father, Dan (hello nepitizz!) and how she lives in New York (which makes as much sense as the Post assigning the New York City mayoral office beat to a D.C. resident) but time is of the essence, so I'll cut to chase.)
Today, Jenkins is off the mark once again, writing that figure skating is, indeed, a sport. Below I'm pasting some excerpts from Jenkins' column and writing my rebuttal beneath. It's a cheap and easy way to go about this, but that's OK. If cheap and easy were bad, my buddy Frank wouldn't have gotten any last Saturday night. (Rimshot!)

It's time for our quadrennial Olympic debate: Can anything involving so much costume jewelry really be called an athletic pursuit? Let's get straight to the answer. Figure skating is definitely a sport. It requires more practice than golf. It's more strenuous than tennis. How many athletes have to do a quadruple jump and land on one butcher knife?

Chess requires more practice than golf and working in a coal mine is more strenuous than tennis, but I don't see Wilbon and Kornheiser arguing over whether Garry Kasparov is an athlete. As for the knife comment, my butcher Franco can jump off his cutting board, do a double back-flip over a triple-looped sausage link and land on his butcher knife all while humming the song from the tournament montage in Karate Kid. And that guy gets tired just watching that Chuck Norris/Christie Brinkley infomercial on TV, so don't tell me what he does is a sport. And he's quite aloof.

The blade of a figure skate is a quarter inch of steel, with sharpened edges.
There. That's a quarter inch. Now let's see LeBron James land on it.

Let's see Johnny Weir go to the hole with two guys in his face. Wait... Bad example.

On Thursday night, Evgeni Plushenko and Johnny Weir will skate for the gold medal in the men's long program. As you watch them, keep in mind that quarter inch. They will zip along a glaring sheet of ice at 30 mph, jump several feet in the air, spin four times and land in time for a tight turn to avoid the boards. And if they weren't wearing spangly suits made of mauve taffeta, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Jenkins is completely missing the point. Nobody says figure skating isn't a sport because skaters are dressed up like extras from Starlight Express. They're saying it's not a sport because figure skating competitions are determined by judges and any activity where a winner is decided upon by a panel of people is not a sport.

This doesn't mean figure skating isn't an intense athletic activity, it is. But so is running up the staircase of a 75-story hotel.

The skate is the toughest competitive shoe in sports. You can't find a more precarious piece of equipment...

If footwear is a determining factor in what should be a sport, I guess women walking down the sidewalk in high heels while drunk should be a medal sport at the 2008 Beijing Olympics. Have you ever walked with a chick (or been a chick) in that situation? It's like going through one of those obstacle courses on Survivor. I'm amazed anybody can walk in those things, let alone while wasted and trying to cross over subway grates.

Furthermore, skaters push athletic boundaries in their sport as hard as athletes in any Olympic endeavor.

OK, just because it's called a death spiral doesn't mean people actually die while doing it. Plus, everyone's been ice skating, it's not that hard. No non-Olympians have been hurtling down an ice chute at 90 mph wearing just lycra and a helmet except Al Roker and Matt Lauer.

There is another possible answer to this question, one that will drive Wilbon crazy: Maybe figure skating is part art. If the most powerful moments in skating are the blends of skill, strength and beauty in interpreting a piece of music, then at it's best, perhaps it's not sport but ballet.

This the most sensible line in the whole column. Ballet, like figure skating, is tremendously difficult. Ballerinas, like figure skaters, work extraordinarily hard to become the best in their field. In both activities athleticism, strength, artistic ability and precision are absolutely necessary in order to succeed. Neither are sports.

The trouble with this explanation is that it doesn't take into account that quarter inch. The skate. Or the consequences of falling.

I suppose jumping without a parachute from the space shuttle then becomes the ultimate extreme sport.

As my friend Christine Brennan says, no other sport has a more non-negotiable moment of decision. A water shot in the final round at Augusta is nothing compared with what a figure skater faces when he or she attempts a triple axel in the Olympics. There's no next tee. No third strike. No fourth down. You either land cleanly on that quarter inch, or you lose it all -- and you don't get to try again for four more years.

This is all very true (and it's not surprising Christine Brennan wrote that. She, unlike Jenkins, is a fantastic sportswriter - Although I'd venture a guess Brennan would agree about the sportiness of figure skating) however, there are many "non-negotiable moments of decision" in various other occupations. You think the wire cutter on a bomb squad doesn't deal with pressure? Or a policeman trying to decide whether to shoot a suspect? There's no do overs in those, and there's no second chances either. Pressure makes not a sport.

Those of you who don't think it's a sport should visit the rink during a practice session and check out how much tape, Icy Hot and ibuprofen is involved. See the crunches and the hours on the elliptical trainers.

I could keep making counter-examples (just ask a kindergarten teacher how much ibuprofen is involved in their job), but I've made my point. None of Jenkins' examples address the true problem with figure skating: The judges.
They're corrupt, they play favorites and the point-system is completely arbitrary. Do I have to remind you of what happened four years ago in Salt Lake?
This year, there haven't been any similar scandals, but there have been the usual baffling decisions by the judges. In the pairs figure skating long program, the woman on one of the Chinese teams fell on a difficult throw maneuver and landed hard on the ground. Her partner quickly skated over to her and led her to the wall on the opposite side where they talked to their coach. For about 45 seconds the Chinese team didn't skate. Their program appeared finished. But courageously, the team began their routine over after their break and completed it without another mistake. They were awarded the silver medal for their effort.
Let me reiterate: THEY STOPPED IN THE MIDDLE OF THEIR PROGRAM, TALKED TO THEIR COACHES, RETURNED TO THE ICE AND GOT A SILVER MEDAL! How is this possible? The chick fell. They stopped. They were done. But apparently they weren't.
Amazingly, the announcers didn't seem to mind this. They made no mention of the absurdity of a team stopping mid-routine and then re-starting and not receiving any sort of penalty. I suppose after years of covering figure skating, even the ridiculous becomes mundane.

Finally, let's do a little thought experiment: Suppose there was a rule that figure skaters had to wear nondescript national team uniforms, just as gymnasts do (instead of their little costumes) and had to skate a timed program without music, in which certain jumps, spins and other displays of controlled agility had to be included.
Suppose that, instead of some crackling rendition of "Bolero," what you heard were the sounds of their takeoffs and landings, that quarter inch impacting and carving through the ice, punctuated by incredible physical exertion.
Strip skating of the camp, and what's left is the strength, the speed and the daring. Everyone would instantly recognize it for what it is. A sport.

Don't even get me started on gymnastics, Sally.

Quick Wednesday Thoughts

Much to the chagrin of The Wolfman, who has checked the blog nine times since noon in hopes of seeing a new entry (they really have you working hard out there in San Diego, buddy), I'm not going to be able to post much today since I've been out and about all morning and afternoon. And by "out and about" I mean "standing in front of the HDTV's at Best Buy for two hours trying to convince myself that I can be happy with any TV that isn't a Sony SXRD."
Make sure to come back tomorrow when I'm planning on answering PTI's questions. I haven't done that since the show expanded to 35 minutes (terrible on so many levels, by the way), but with Wake headed towards a postseason-less, um, postseason, the NFL done for a while and spring training not starting up for another few days, I'm struggling with things to write other than "nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah, NYAH" to Bode Miller.
My Nouno (greek for Godfather of the un-Corleonesque persuasion) has requested I publicly pat myself on the back for slipping Kansas into my preseason college basketball top 25. The Jayhawks, unranked in the preseason and not receiving votes in any poll a few weeks back, are up to #22 in the AP and are positioning themselves for a run at the Big 12 title after an eight-game win streak. They're also making me look brilliant. (Just don't look where I had Louisville and Kentucky in the same rankings.)
The team I picked to win it all back in November isn't doing so bad either. Villanova just beat #1 Connecticut and is in line to receive a #1 seed come Tournament time. (Or Wake Forest, please don't look where I had Wake Forest. If I had stopped my Deacs preview after the first sentence, which read, "Scotty, I’m sad to say, I think our Deacs are a bit overrated this season," I would have looked like quite the visionary. But sadly I went on for a few more paragraphs and totally ruined all credibility I had built up after that opener.)
Alright, now I'm all riled up. It's time for a nap. After all, looking simultaneously at 30 TV's for an extended period of time is pretty stressful.

Valentine's Day Wishes

Today, on the most special of all the made-up holidays, Chris's Sports Blog has intercepted some Valentine's Day cards intended for famous sports figures. They are printed in their entirety, unedited, below:

YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

To: Coach K
From: ACC referees

Just wanted to pass along a quick note to tell you how much we love you, Mike. We were all just reminiscing about the night we met up at Red Lobster and you ordered snow crab because you thought they actually lived in the snow! That was a great night. You are so funny, Mike. That's what we love about you most, your humor. Your humor and the way you manipulate us like we're Kermit to your Jim Henson. Remember, if things should ever go wrong with your wife, we'll be here for you. Waiting. Longing. Hoping. Never forget that. And never forget what we do for you. The Final Four game against Maryland in 2001, the ACC Tournament win against Georgia Tech last year and all those games in between. We do that all for you, Mike, not because we have to, but because we want to. Helping you win completes us.

YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

To: Bode Miller
From: Karma

I'm a bitch, aren't I?

YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

To: Adam Morrison
From: Adam Morrison's Mustache

Dude, you know I love you, but I think we should see other people. No, it's not you... It's me. I'm just not where I need to be in order to make this relationship work. No, this doesn't have anything to do with the fact that all the other mustaches make fun of me. This is something I just have to do. For me. Fine, I won't lie to you Adam, it does hurt when Jake Plummer and Tom Selleck's mustache ask if the other half of me is on layaway. Or when Bill Cowher's mustache asks to see my ID whenever I try to get a drink at the bar. But that's not why I'm doing this. Next year you're going to be in the NBA. Where do I fit into your plans? Larry Bird shaved off his wispy 'stache a few years into his career. Is that what you're planning on doing with me? Maybe it is a pre-emptive strike, Adam, but what do you expect? I see the way you look at other mustaches. I know you've been searching the internet for black market Propecia and Rogaine samples. You thought I was sleeping, but I wasn't. Do you know how much that hurts? After all we've been through? I've stuck by you even when Dan Dickau has drunk-dialed me late at night and offered me a first-class plane ticket to meet him out in Boston. Did I go? No, I stayed with you, Adam. But I can't do that any more. It's time. I really wanna work this out, but I don't think you're gonna change. I do, but you don't, think it's best we go our separate ways. And yes, you can have your Usher CD back.

YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

To: Derek Jeter and Jorge Posada
From: Larry McMurtry

Thanks for inspiring me to write Brokeback Mountain. I hope you seriously consider accepting my invitation to the Oscars. If we win Best Picture I want you to be there because I know it's been so long since you both have won anything of consequence.

YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

To: Ron Mexico
From: Michael Vick

Thanks for helping me out of that jam, dawg.

YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

To: Skip Prosser
From: Ron Wellman

Roses are red,
violets are blue,
tuna is canned
and so, Skip, are you.

YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

Monday Links

- Given his past, doesn't Oklahoma State have to show Eddie Sutton the door for his latest transgression? His son, Sean, is already in line to take over the Cowboys, now would seem a logical time to make the switch.

- Bode Miller is an aloof misanthrope and I couldn't be more pleased with his medal-less run yesterday in Turin. Shaun White, on the other hand, seems like a good guy and his gregarious personality will make him the breakout star of these Olympics.

- Breaking with past tradition, NBC has been using the native spelling and prounciation of the Olympic host city instead of the Americanized version (Torino vs. Turin). I've never understood why we translate city names into English. If the Mexicans call their capital city Ciudad de Mexico, then why don't we? I know a dude named Juan but I don't call him John simply because we're in America. That's his name wherever he is. It should be the same thing with cities. This always bothered me when I would take Spanish classes in school and my teacher/professor would refer to New York as "Nueva York". That would make me so angry. Or maybe I was just upset because I sucked at Spanish and hate paella.

- I've been finding it difficult to watch Sportscenter of late. Too many PTI rip-offs (Fact of Fiction, the Coors Lite Six-Pack, etc.) and not enough highli\ghts. But I managed to watch a full 90-minute edition yesterday because of one special lady. Michelle Bonner, you have just replaced Trey Wingo as my most desired Sportscenter anchor ever.

- If an over-moussed, white ex-Dukie can't make it in coaching, what chances do the rest of us have?

- Apparently throwing child-like temper tantrums can affect Hall of Fame voting. Art Monk, take note! By the way, if Harry Carson were a real man, he wouldn't show up for the induction ceremonies in Canton this August. Of course, if Harry Carson were a real man, he wouldn't have asked to be taken off the ballot in the first place.

- Atlanta sports fan Douglas Scott S. (so he's the one!) posted a comment about Chris Paul that read, in part, "but i guess its a good thing the hawks didnt draft [Paul] b/c he'd be averaging 7 pts, 2 reb, 3 ast."
Yes, yes he would. In the first half.
Enjoy three more mediocre seasons of Marvin Williams and enjoy the subsequent decade even more, when he's an All-Star for another team. And Michael Vick should have been the MVP. Without him there's no way the Falcons would have finished close to .500. They would have been 7-9, tops.

Snow Way

My distaste for hippies and Duke is well known to regular readers of this blog. You might be surprised to hear about my enmity for meteorologists though, something I've kept closeted for fear of alienating any possible weather forecasters who might check in on this site from time to time. Today the gloves finally come off. (Actually, I'll keep them on because it's quite cold outside, even though the guy on channel 7 said it'd be mild. And you wonder why I hate him so. And I'm lying. I'm wearing mittens, not gloves.)
Question: What's the difference between a meteorologist and that crazy homeless guy who's always yelling stuff at the busy intersection?
Answer: A $1,500 suit and a green-screen.
Today, meteorologists up and down the east coast are terrifying the masses with predictions of a massive blizzard that will allegedly blanket the eastern seaboard a la the snow storm from Die Hard 2. And I'm not buying it.
Oh, I want it to snow, but I've fallen for one too many of the weatherman's blow-dried-schemes in the past to get my hopes up. While other gullible saps are running to the grocery store to stock up on massive quantities of food, water and batteries in preparation for the likely probability that six inches of snow is going to leave everyone stranded in their homes until July of 2007, I'm going to grab a 30-pack, pop in my DVD of a roaring fire and see where the weekend takes me.
My only worry is that, on the off chance the meteorologists are right for once, tomorrow's snow will keep the crowd away from the Duke-Maryland tilt at the Comcast Center. The Terps need every advantage they can get against Duke and a half-full arena ain't gonna cut it.
An empty Duke-Maryland game would be reminiscent of that old question from Philosophy 101: If J.J. Redick bricks a three and nobody is around to see it, is he still a flamer?
Maybe a storm could work in Maryland's favor though. Sometimes those strange atmospheres do help the home team. Last time the Terps had a game affected by a big snow was in 2003 after a Valentine's Day blizzard dumped 24-inches on the D.C. area. Maryland's game against Wake Forest was postponed twice due to that storm and was eventually played on a Monday in the late-afternoon in front of 12,000 rowdy fans (mostly students) and no television audience. In a battle for first place, the 13th ranked Terps dominated the 10th ranked, and eventual ACC champion, Deacons by 23 points.
Tomorrow's storm isn't supposed to rival the one from 2003, but here's hoping the result will. That, coupled with a sunny, snowless afternoon, will knock two of my most despised sets of people down a few notches. Now, if we could just do something about those damn hippies.

In Defense of Chris Paul

Ray Allen is probably going to make the All-Star team over New Orleans Hornets guard Chris Paul. If that happens, it will be a travesty.
Allen is a wonderful player and deserves serious consideration for a spot on the Western Conference bench, but if he gets the nod over Paul it will be despite having fewer assists (3.5 to 7.8), rebounds (4.3 to 5.7) and steals (1.57 to 2.20) than the likely Rookie of the Year. It’s true that Allen has a sizable advantage in points per-game (24.8 to 16.3), but Paul has the veteran beat in the most important category of all: Wins.
Allen has led the Sonics, a 2005 playoff team, to a 19-30 record so far in 2006. Paul has led the Hornets, a 17-win team last season, to a 25-23 record and the 7th seed in West.
Read that again: The Hornets had 17 wins in 82 games last year. They have 25 wins in 48 games this year. There are many factors involved in the turnaround, but at the top of the list is #3.
Headed into this year, many analysts tabbed Seattle as a playoff contender and possible winner of the Northwest conference. All analysts had New Orleans ranked as the worst team in the West.
What Paul has done there has been remarkable. He’s led a team that lost it’s only All-Star (Jamaal Magloire) and turned them into one of the better teams in the NBA.
Normally, I’d include a paragraph here about what Paul has done on the court to spark this turnaround, but since the Hornets have yet to play on national TV, I haven’t seen CP play once all season. (The Rockets, on the other hand, have the second-worst record in the West and are on TV more than Geraldo. Go figure.)
Luckily, Sports Illustrated’s Chris Ballard has seen Paul play and wrote a great piece in this week’s issue about how the rookie out of Wake Forest has managed to turn the Hornets from a doormat into a playoff contender. The article’s money quote: “The scout, not given to hyperbole, shakes his head. '[Paul] took the game over. Unbelievable!'”
Read the whole thing; it will be impossible for you not to love Chris Paul after doing so. (Unless you’re Julius Hodge.)
If the media seems to love Paul now (even if they all seemed fine with Utah drafting Deron Williams ahead of him back in June), one would think he'd be a shoo-in for the All-Star team. But many old-timers seem reluctant to let rookies play in the All-Star Game for various, yet similarly ridiculous, reasons. Marty Burns is one of them.
In a recent column for SI.com, Burns picked his All-Star reserves and wrote the following:

Chris Paul (16.3 points, 7.8 assists and 5.8 rebounds) deserves serious consideration as well, but he's a rookie who will get more chances in the future.

Burns then casts his vote for Ray Allen and goes on to call him “a proven commodity”, but stops short of saying he deserves a spot because he’s been good for so long, a tact many have used in defending their choice of Allen over Paul.
It’s one thing to think Allen is a better choice for the All-Star team than Paul. (You’d be wrong, but that’s a matter of opinion. A wrong opinion – Well, you get my point.) But to use the rationale that Paul will “have more chances in the future” is remarkably presumptuous. What if Paul shatters his knee tomorrow? What if he comes down with a case of Grant Hill-itis? What if he gets a ride to a game with Jay Williams? And what does it even matter?
All-Star selections shouldn’t be about fortune telling or past performance, they’re about who deserves a roster spot based on play this year. Snubbing Chris Paul because he’s a rookie makes as much sense as denying a deserving actor an Oscar simply because he’s never been nominated before. These things aren’t lifetime achievement awards, they’re based on merit from a select period of time.
Ray Allen is a great player, but with 12-man rosters, great players sometimes get left off All-Star teams (just ask Gilbert Arenas). It’s just a shame the great player who will probably be left off this year will be Chris Paul.

Update: Ray Allen was just named an All-Star reserve (7:16 p.m.)

The Simulcast: Eagle in Atlanta

Bill, from the excellent Boston College blog Eagle in Atlanta, invited me to his site today to answer some questions about Wake Forest basketball in anticipation of the Eagles first trip to Winston-Salem as a member of the ACC. I attempted to keep my Prosser-venom-spewing to a minimum, being a guest and all, but that lasted approximately seven words into my first response.
I'm re-posting Bill's questions (in bold) and my responses below, in case any regular readers here were still unclear as to my feelings about Skip Prosser. Check back tomorrow for thoughts on Tony Kornheiser's move to Monday Night Football, the D.C. City Council finally passing a lease for the new Nationals stadium and Wake's last-minute loss to Boston College. (Part of me thinks the Deacs will win tonight, mainly because logic dictates they can't lose every game, but until further notice I have to keep picking against them - even if Vegas somehow installs them as mere 1.5 point underdogs.)
After you're done reading my umpteenth evisceration of Skip Prosser, take a look around Bill's site. He writes great stuff about BC football and basketball and apparently does it all while juggling the demands of being a new father. I, on the other hand, can barely find time for this blog while juggling the demands of watching PTI daily. Bill, I salute you.

1. Wake Forest is easily the most disappointing team in the Conference and a lot has to go wrong to start 1-8. What do you think the biggest factors were/are in the horrendous start?
I’m not going to lie, I’m real tempted to just write “Skip Prosser” and move on to question #2, but I’ll remember I’m a guest on this blog and will conduct myself in a respectful manner forthwith. (However, I hereby reserve the right to make a joke involving J.J. Redick, A. Rod and a Brokeback Mountain matinee at any point during my future responses. I’m not made of stone, Bill.)
In developing this response, I’ve tried thinking of other possible reasons Wake has performed so poorly this season, but can’t really come up with anything other than Prosser. Clearly, the departure of Chris Paul after his sophomore season killed any chances the Deacs had of being a National Title contender in 2006, but Paul bolting to the NBA wasn’t unexpected. Nor was the graduation of Jamaal Levy, Vytas Danelius and Taron Downey. Players leave school early for the pros and guys graduate; that’s what happens in college basketball.
Wake can’t make any excuses about their pitiful play this season based on that, especially considering the Deacs roster still was pretty good without CP.
With the exception of Duke (and possibly your Eagles), Wake has the most talented team in the ACC. They boast two All-ACC players in Justin Gray and Eric Williams, have an athletic, if erratic, playmaker in Trent Strickland and had a well-regarded recruiting class come in this season. With a merely competent coach, Wake would be 4-4 in the ACC, at worst. With Prosser, they’re 1-8.
Just once it’d be nice to see Wake players move without the ball or create something with ball movement instead of driving recklessly towards the hole every possession. Sometimes I dream about Demon Deacon players boxing out on rebounds and defending the baseline. Then I wake up and watch them lose at home to Virginia Freakin’ Tech and thank my lucky stars I graduated three years ago so I don’t have to watch that crap in person.
Some other quick factors that have contributed to the Deacs brutal season:1. Free throws. As a team, the Deacs shoot 66% from the line. In pressure situations, that percentage drops to negative-four. It’s amazing how often Wake’s 80% shooter will miss two shots from the charity stripe seconds before their opponent’s 55% shooter makes both. Justin Gray hits FTs at an 84% clip, but almost every time he’s shooting the front-end of a 1-and-1 or has two big FTs late, he’ll blow it. You can set your watch to it. If you don’t already have it set to Prosser calling a timeout with 20 seconds left in the first-half to set-up a play that results in a heaved three-pointer two seconds after the buzzer sounds.
2. Trent Strickland. Whether it’s an easy, breakaway dunk missed because of an attempted 360-reverse-windmill or a contested three-point attempt with 29 seconds left on the shot clock, Strickland always manages to make the stupid play at the wrong time. Oh, he’ll tease you with an unbelievable display of athleticism or a string of drained shots, but just when you let your guard down – WHAM! - he passes the ball to Dick Vitale while calling a timeout he doesn’t have.
3. Who am I kidding, it’s all about Prosser.

2. This team still has enough talent to beat most of its remaining opponents. What does BC have to do to shut down the Deacons and avoid this becoming a trap game?
It’s true, the Deacs have the talent to win any of their remaining games (and that includes their Valentine’s Day trip to Durham). The only question is, will the effort be there?
On Saturday against UVA, Wake was out-hustled and looked generally disinterested for the entire 40 minutes. The Hoos outrebounded Wake 42-22, including 17-4 on the offensive glass. If the Deacs put forth another effort like that, this game won’t be close. However, I’d be surprised if Gray and Williams let the team give such a lackadaisical effort at home (against an ACC newbie, no less), so let’s assume they play hard. If that happens, Wake can beat BC if two of the following four things happen (man, that’s a lot of ifs):
1. Justin Gray is hot. Seven-for-eleven from three-point range hot.
2. They don’t forget about Eric Williams in the middle. Too many times this season Wake has seen their big man in the middle dominate the early portions of the game and then have inexplicably forgotten about him soon after.
3. Somebody else (Strickland, Chris Ellis, Harvey Hale, Michael Drum, Kyle Visser) steps up with a solid 18-point effort.
4. Before the game Skip Prosser gets clipped by the BC team bus. (I’m only kidding of course. There’s no way Kyle Visser will score 18 points.)
BC will find the best way to beat the Deacs is to not beat yourself. That’s about as clichéd as it gets, but it’s the truth.
Al Skinner would be wise to switch defenses often (including going to the under-utilized 1-3-1 zone) and remind his guards to get the ball inside to Craig Smith and Jared Dudley. If they can get Eric Williams in foul trouble, it will be a long night for the Deacs.
BC doesn’t seem to have an up-tempo offense and they’d be wise to stick with their half-court sets tonight. With some ball movement, they’ll be able to get open shots against Wake’s porous D. The biggest mistake the Eagles can make would be trying to push the ball up the court to take quick shots.

3. You’re pretty vocal in your criticism of Skip Prosser. Given his past flirtations (Pitt) and rumors of his future departure to Cinci, you might not have to deal with him much longer. All that being said: who is the real Skip Prosser? Handcuffed recruiter at Wake whose brilliance will be on display once he returns to a school with more “liberal admissions” or a guy who was in the right place at the right time at Xavier and is being exposed at Wake?
The real Prosser is probably somewhere in between. Nobody can deny the recruiting prowess he has had at both Xavier and Wake Forest (David West, James Posey, Justin Gray, Eric Williams and Chris Paul are just some of the talents Prosser brought to two schools with limited basketball history). And he also makes sure his guys graduate, another trait that endears him to university presidents.
But another undeniable fact about Prosser is his subpar record in the postseason. He has a 6-9 career record in the NCAA Tournament and has only made it to the Sweet 16 once in those trips (despite entering the dance twice as a #2 seed).
Prosser supporters often cite his excellent record in the ACC (prior to this season, only Duke had a better intraconference record since Prosser arrived in Winston-Salem in 2001. And Bill Guthridge was the only coach with a higher ACC winning percentage in his first three seasons), but that’s meaningless if his teams can’t win when it counts. And they don’t.
Wake was so good during conference play during Prosser’s first four seasons because their teams were great. Josh Howard won an ACC Player of the Year award and Chris Paul was a first-team All-American under Prosser. Yet neither could lead their team to the Elite Eight because once March rolled around, running the ball up-and-down the court at a breathless pace stops working and a team has to actually have some semblance of an offensive gameplan. In the regular season it was enough to try and outscore teams, defense be damned. That doesn’t work in the Tournament, as Wake Forest has found out.
If he goes somewhere else, it will likely be more of the same: Solid recruiting, regular season success and postseason disappointment. Eventually everbody there will discover Skip Prosser is a good guy, but a bad coach. Right now, nobody knows that more than fans of Wake Forest basketball.

Questions From A Wolfman

The Wolfman is a tough guy. He’s sweet like Kool-Aid most of the time, but if you ever cross him he’ll put a hurting on you so quick you won’t even have time to ask him where he got that awesome Schweppes t-shirt.
The toughness is difficult to see underneath his lovable, albeit cur-like, exterior, but it’s there. If you don’t believe me you can ask former Wake Forest forward Rafael Vidaurreta, who once found out first-hand how small packages sometimes contain the most vicious ass-kickings.
Still need proof? Look at The Wolfman's 7th grade student ID (right). Not many among us can manage to look tough while wearing an all-white rugby, but somehow The Wolfman pulls it off. Can you imagine seeing that scowling face sitting next to you every day in math class? You’d probably memorize 900 digits of Pi just on the off-chance The Wolfman might one day require such information.
Speaking of pie, The Wolfman doesn't eat it because one time he saw Jean-Claude Van Damme helping himself to a heaping slice of the cherry variety. That was right before The Wolfman administered two roundhouse kicks to Van Damme's temple for besmirching the name of an innocent girl. After licking what he thought was Van Damme's blood from his foot and realizing it was actually the pie's cherry filling, The Wolfman lost all taste for the baked dessert and has never so much as looked at a piece ever again. On Thanksgiving his mother hides her delicious pies in the crawl-space out of view just so The Wolfman won't see them, fly into a rage and start using his Uncle Murray as a punching bag like he did in the infamous Thanksgiving Throwdown of 2001.
Those seeking out a rump-roughing might want to point out the irony in The Wolfman attending a high school with the same name as the college he despises most. But honestly: How long do you think it was before The Wolfman pulled some strings (and by pulled some strings, I mean knocked heads around at a school PTA meeting) and got that bad boy changed from Notre Dame: The High School for Boys to The Mackey School? If you guessed more than nineteen seconds, you're about eighteen and five-sixths seconds off. (Why the Mackey School and not Wolfman High, you ask? Because The Wolfman doesn't advertise.)
Today, the toughest tough guy alive asks some questions about Jerome Bettis, Donovan McNabb and the 2006 NFL season. In the interest of my own well-being, I decided to answer, because if there's one thing The Wolfman hates more than Notre Dame, it's a guy with a sports blog not answering his e-mailed questions.

How excited are you that Jerome Bettis won a championship? Hooray, I know I'm excited!
Unlike you, I don’t have any particular animosity towards Bettis because he went to the greatest football university of all-time – nay – the greatest university of all-time. But even I was a little annoyed with the Bettis coverage this week. Sure, he’s a sure-fire Hall of Famer (but shouldn’t be a first-ballot guy), but I didn’t really understand the Bettis-love permeating throughout the media.
I’ll acquiesce to the fact that he’s a good guy, but that should have no bearing on the following facts:
1) Bettis isn’t (or wasn’t) as good as Barry Sanders, Eric Dickerson, Curtis Martin or Priest Holmes. And when’s the last time you heard anything about how those guys never won a Super Bowl and needed a title to validate their careers.
2) The Bus has run for over 1,200 yards in a season once since 1998. That was in 2000, also the only year during that span he his yards per-carry was over 3.9.
3) Even though the 1,000 yard benchmark, which has become the main criteria in judging any running back’s year, is a fairly easy mark to reach (one only needs to average 62.5 yards per-game over a season to get there), Bettis hasn’t hit that number since 2001. I know he’s been splitting carries with Amos Zereoue and Duce Staley, but that just proves my point further.
4) Only three times in his ten seasons with Pittsburgh has Bettis finished among the top-10 rushers in the NFL. Conversely, Ricky Watters did it six times during that stretch.
This doesn’t mean that Bettis isn’t a Hall of Famer and wasn’t a great football player; but he hasn’t been an effective back since George W. Bush moved into the White House. And he certainly isn’t a big enough star to warrant all the attention heaped on him this week.
John Elway is my most-hated football player of all-time (but at least he showed up to the Super Bowl, unlike some greedy prima-donnas), but that doesn’t change the fact that when he finally won the big game in 1997, he deserved all the accolades (even if it did take Terrell Davis to get him there.)
Bettis was a role player on Pittsburgh this season. He was hanging on to win a Championship. It’s very nice he did, but don’t forget he was still the 50th most important player on the field on Sunday.
Yet despite all that Bettis cynicism, I still loved when Hines Ward said, “I’m going to Disney World and I’m taking The Bus!” Maybe I’m just an old softie at heart, but damn if those Disney commercials don’t get me every time. (The in-game commercial with the players practicing their “I’m going to Disney World” moments was fantastic and not just because you could tell Shaun Alexander knew there was no way he’d ever get to actually say those words again.)

Has anyone gone from having such a terrible first half in the Super Bowl to being MVP as Hines Ward? He had a couple of drops in the first half, including a TD pass (where Michaels and Madden excused him for it), then the first play of the 2nd half dropped a pass, after which they showed Big Ben roll his eyes (maybe because he threw the pass low, but I think he was pissed the Ward clapped and motioned for Big Ben to get the ball up.)
I had totally forgotten about the Hines clapping incident, but I was ripping him after that too. It was so unlike Ward to leave his quarterback out to dry like that. Granted, Roethlisberger didn’t make a great pass, but a receiver like Hines has to make that catch. Maybe it was just frustration on both their parts, and I’ll give them both the benefit of the doubt, but that was a T.O.-like move from one of the classiest receivers in the league.
My question is, did Hines deserve the MVP? I’m leaning towards yes, but since Super Bowl MVP’s are often defined by one moment in the game couldn’t you have made strong cases for Willie Parker and Antwan Randle-El?
I realize Parker didn’t do anything other than his 75-yard TD run, but that’s sort of like saying Robert Horry doesn’t do anything in the NBA Finals except hit the game-winning shot. Parker’s TD was the most important play of the game; that he did little else is sort of irrelevant (especially with no other player standing out as the clear MVP). Sometimes one play makes the game.
My vote would have been for Randle-El though; he had some great 3rd down catches and threw the prettiest ball I’ve seen in a long time for the game-clinching touchdown to the eventual MVP.

Remember when Donovan and T.O did interviews making fun of the media for asking them questions about how they would get along, or when they mocked the media during their win over the Cowboys by having T.O. chase McNabb around the sidelines calling for the ball, mimicking what had happened the week before? I guess the two of them are the ones that look like the idiots now.
Only Joe Montana did more to ruin his reputation during Super Bowl week as Donovan McNabb. His interview with ESPN (and the subsequent follow-ups with teammates) exposed McNabb as an egomaniacal pushover who gets no respect in the locker room. Even ESPN can’t cover it up anymore, Donovan doesn’t have what it takes to be a big-game quarterback.
Because T.O. is such a jerk and is fully to blame for all his problems in Philly, people automatically painted Donovan as a sympathetic figure. In reality, he’s a smug and petty man who always tries to pin his problems on others. The T.O. mess only helped cover-up how ineffective Donovan is as a leader and what an arrogant, attention-loving jerk he really is.

What's the story with the horse collar rule in the NFL? I saw it happen several times this season, but I did not see it called once, why even have the rule if you're not going to call it.
Apparently the rule is: A player cannot tackle a ball-carrier from the back by the inside of his shoulder pads. Meaning, a player can still horse collar as long as he doesn’t stick his hands all the way underneath the pads.
This makes no sense. Tackling a guy from behind by grabbing his jersey collar will still result in injury as many times as tackling a guy from behind by grabbing underneath the shoulder pads. If the rule is designed to protect players, as is said, all sorts of tackling from behind should be outlawed. This might upset Eli Manning, but he can get over it by giving Derek Jeter a call.
(By the way, Roy Williams still doesn’t know how to tackle without using the horse collar. He almost ended both Tiki Barber’s and Clinton Portis’ season by doing so this year.)
Here are some other rules that the NFL should change this off-season:
1) Get rid of the tuck rule. It was wrong then, it’s still wrong now.
2) Bring back the old intentional grounding rules. The penalty should be called when a quarterback throws the ball away at any spot on the field. Having the “outside the tackle-box” rule penalizes defenses when they make a great play to rush a QB out of the pocket.
3) When a quarterback slides in the open field, the ball should be spotted at the point the QB first makes the sliding motion. (I’m pretty sure this is the rule, but it needs to be enforced. The Super Bowl refs actually did this, the first time I’ve ever seen a play like that spotted correctly. In the Seahawks-Redskins Divisional Playoff game, that crew routinely placed the ball where Hasselbeck stopped his slide, which was a good three yards behind where it should have been.) I’m no fan of allowing QBs to slide (and not get hit), by the way, but I realize why the rule is in place.
4) Keep the replay challenge system, but have the booth supervisor look at the contested plays. This will cut down on the ridiculous amount of time it takes the referee to hear the challenge, announce the challenge, walk over to the hooded monitor, watch the replay, figure out where the ball is spotted and how much time is on the clock and announce the result of the challenge.
5) Allow some contact between corners and receivers after the five-yard cushion.
6) Put a TV camera directly on the goal line so it will be clear when a ball breaks the plane. For some reason this suggestion was shot-down at the owner’s meetings last year. Had those cameras been in place, all the Seattle fans would have shut-up about the Roethlisberger touchdown and the Redskins would have had a home playoff game as well.
7) This isn’t for the NFL, but the NCAA has to change the rule that allows teams to call timeout as they’re diving out-of-bounds or when they’re scrambling for the ball on the floor. Timeouts aren’t designed to bail teams out of pressure situations. They should only be given during stoppages in play or when possession is clearly defined and not in doubt.

With football over, and the Deacs ACC cellar-dwellers, what are we today as sports fans?
Did somebody forget about a little something called the NHL?

How awesome is Chris Paul?
Last year New Orleans, with arguably a better roster (minus Paul) than this season, was 18-64 and finished 27 games out of a playoff spot. This year they already have 24 wins (in just 47 games) and are currently the 7th seed in the West (ahead of teams featuring Kobe, KG, Tracy McGrady and Mike Dunleavy Jr.)
If Paul doesn’t make the All-Star team as a reserve it will be an outrage. Frankly, if the season ended today CP would deserve MVP consideration. I’m not saying he should win it, but if Kobe is getting MVP-buzz for carrying the Lakers, why wouldn’t Paul get it for carrying the Hornets? (Did you see CP just won Western Conference Player of the Week honors too? And what's with that flaming CP3 nickname that seems to have caught-on for Paul? CP3? That's not a nickname! It sounds like a tax form or Star Wars character. From now on I'm calling Chris Paul "Prophecy" until I hear a better nickname. Suggestions?)

Do you have any early predictions for next season in the NFL?
In honor of yesterday’s final Monday Morning Quarterback column of the NFL season from Peter King, here are Ten Things I Think I Think About The 2006 NFL Season:
1) Increasing scrutiny of the referees will force the NFL to make all officials full-time employees of the league. However, this will no have effect on the overall crappiness of NFL officiating.
2) Tiki Barber will suffer an early-season injury, the Giants will finish in last place in the NFC East and Tom Coughlin will be fired.
3) Neither the Patriots nor the Colts will win the AFC. (Losing Edgerrin James will hurt Indy more than they imagine.)
4) The Washington Redskins will win the NFC East and earn a bye into the Divisional Playoffs.
5) With Al Saunders and Dick Vermeil gone, the Chiefs will struggle and fantasy owners nationwide will rue the day they picked Larry Johnson #1.
6) If Marty Schottenheimer is fired, San Diego will represent the AFC in the Super Bowl. If the Spanos family decides to retain the perennially underachieving coach, San Diego will once again have an early-playoff flameout or miss the postseason altogether.
7) With the promise of Reggie Bush in the backfield, the Houston Texans will lure some top O-line free agents. The added protection for David Carr will make him an adequate (yet not quite #1 pick worthy) QB and will have the Texans fighting for a playoff spot. Bush will contend for the NFL MVP award in his first season.
8) Terrell Owens will catch 95 balls for 1,400 yards and 10 TD for the Broncos, who will win the AFC and play in the Super Bowl.
9) There, they’ll lose to the Redskins in a rematch of SB XXII.
10) Despite playing with two broken ribs, a fractured collarbone, nine kidney stones and bamboo shoots under his nails at different points during the season, Steve McNair will only be known as the 3rd toughest guy in the world. The Wolfman and Chuck Norris will battle it out for the top-spot, but upon arriving at the showdown Norris will see The Wolfman’s 7th grade student ID and run the other way.

"Questions From A Wolfman" is an occasional feature on this site.

Super Bowl Thoughts

- Super Bowls rarely live up to the hype, but the 40th edition, played yesterday, was a rare exception: It was just as boring as everyone thought it would be. (Everyone except for Bill Simmons who, in true fashion, waited until Friday to see which way the wind was blowing, saw that everybody was hating on the match-up, and then wrote a column proclaiming how he couldn’t wait for the game because he’s so much more of a football connoisseur than the rest of us. What a putz.)
Anyway, thank goodness for beer and jello shots or else I would have turned to Puppy Bowl II during the second quarter.

- The refs didn’t lose the game for the Seahawks, the team did a fine job of that themselves. (Frankly, I wasn't even aware the calls were considered controversial until this morning when that's all anybody was talking about. More on that in a minute.)
Matt Hasselbeck played solid, but had way too many Eli Manning-esque throws. Jerramy Stevens backed up his trash-talk by dropping three catchable balls that, if caught, would have changed the complexion of the game. Shaun Alexander should fully expect to see a repo man at his house tomorrow to take back the MVP award he inexplicably was rewarded with this season. And Darrell Jackson pushed-off on a touchdown catch that he probably would have made without the shove. (Forget what everybody is saying today; if a receiver has his hands on a corner and extends his arm the refs will call this every time. Did Seahawks fans really expect an official standing right behind the play not to call Jackson for the PI? I’m not getting the outrage. The holding call on Locklear was a little dubious but, again, he put himself in a position to get it called because of his hand positioning.) And what was with the two-minute drill at the end of the first-half? Hasselbeck made Donovan McNabb look like John Elway! And Mike Holmgren and his coaching staff were thoroughly bested by Cowher and the Steelers as well. (And did Holmgren ever shake Cowher’s hand after the game? Cowher looked so pissed off waiting for him at mid-field.)

- Hines Ward was a fine MVP, but Shaun Alexander really did deserve it.

- I’m sure Jerome Bettis is a great guy, and I do like him because he seems pretty down-to-earth, but am I the only one who was put off by his “me, me, me” attitude all week? He didn’t even thank his team on the podium with Mike Tirico after the game and instead discussed how great it was for him to win and said things like “I’m a champion.”

- Troy Polamalu is as overrated as Coldplay. How many plays did he overrun yesterday? How many pump-fakes and decoy routes did he bite on? He was the worst player on the field for Pittsburgh last night and, had the team lost, it would have been largely on his coif-supporting shoulders.

- Off the Super Bowl for a minute; I wonder if Wilbon and Kornheiser still think ACC refs don’t favor Duke. I’ve seen thousands of calls go Duke’s way over the years, but the technical foul against FSU on Saturday might have been the most ridiculous. After the intentional foul (which itself was questionable), Alexander Johnson did absolutely nothing yet was T’d up along with The Slumlord, who should have been ejected for throwing a shoulder and pushing Johnson. Instead of Williams getting ejected, Johnson fouled out thanks to the tech and Duke held on. Williams, by the way, had four fouls for a bulk of the second-half and, shockingly, never fouled out.
I'm not shocked the ACC suspended the officials involved in the incident. The only shockign thing would have been if they had made the proper call in the first place.

- I’m not saying Polamalu isn’t good, by the way. But he wasn’t last night. And don’t use the ankle as an excuse, he was running fine.

- Maybe he just wanted to go upstairs and masturbate.

- I know it's time to quit when I can't even think of a decent joke about a tie-less Tom Brady wearing a velvet suit and barely getting anything on his coin toss. That should be like shooting fish in a barrel. Albeit, fish with buttholes on their chin, but in a barrel nonetheless. But I had an unexpectedly early start this morning after assuming said start would be characteristically late and festivitiating due to that belief into the wee hours of the morning and, needless to say, I'm dragging. So that's gonna do it for me for today. But I'll be back tomorrow with the Tuesday Ten.

Super Bowl XL "Preview"

I don’t care about the Super Bowl this year. I don’t care about Jerome Bettis playing in his hometown. (I wasn’t even aware Jerome Bettis had a hometown until a few weeks ago.) I don’t care about Joey Porter’s trash-talk. I don’t care about Troy Polamalu’s injury. I don’t care about Shaun Alexander’s record-breaking season. I don’t care about the resurgence of Matt Hasselbeck. (In order to have a resurgence, wouldn’t one theoretically have to have a surgence at some point?) I don’t care about Jerramy Stevens unless he’s describing why the hell his name is spelled J-E-R-R-A-M-Y. I don’t care about how Willie Parker went undrafted and went to UNC because he loved Michael Jordan. (So what, I say. My buddy Jaffe went to Michigan because he idolized Elvis Grbac, what’s the difference?) I don’t care about Mack Strong or Antwan Randel-El or Lofa Tatapu or Alan Faneca. And I certainly don’t care about the mustaches of Bill Cowher and Mike Holmgren. I just don’t care about Super Bowl XL. (OK, I’m lying. I care unequivocally about the two mustachioed coaches. But all the rest is true.)
So instead of talking about the Super Bowl today, I’m going to discuss some things I do care about… And I’ll try to throw some football talk in there too, but I promise nothing.

Thing I Care About: Gillette’s new Fusion Power razor
Saturday, January 28, 2006 is the day my life changed forever. It’s when I walked into CVS to buy a pack of Rainblo and left with the greatest invention in the history of mankind; Gillette’s five-blade Fusion razor.
After many internal discussions, I decided not to use the Fusion immediately, as I still had eight Mach3 Turbo blades to go through. Those suckers are expensive, I reasoned. But temptation, my friends, is a cruel mistress. Like a junkie in need of a fix, I couldn’t get through the day without dreaming of the Fusion. Whenever I saw a deli-slicer I couldn’t help but think of those glowing blades. When I pulled up next to a Lamborghini at a stop light, my mind was fixed on the Donckerwolkian-like curves of the Fusion and I needed a few polite honks from the cars behind me to snap out of my trance and notice the green light. And every time I walked past a hospital sterilization room, all I could see was the clean, sleek look of Gillette’s newest creation.
Never in my life have I wanted my facial hair to grow out to Wolfman-like proportions so quickly. But I needed to experience the high of breaking out my new five-bladed companion and effortlessly restoring my face to its cherubic beauty. Yet still I wait, patiently, much like Shaun Alexander does for a long-term contract from the Seahawks.

Thing I Care About: Jodie Sweetin’s Meth Addiction
I’m very happy Stephanie Tanner kicked her meth habit. (Although I don’t buy the “I got into it because I was bored” excuse. People do crossword puzzles because they’re bored. People watch TV because they’re bored. People drink because they’re bored. Bored people don’t all of a sudden say to themselves, “well, I finished my errands for the day and have nothing to do. Hmmm…. I wonder what smoking crank is like?” And why aren’t we calling meth crank anymore? Isn’t this a much better name? But I digress.)
Anyway, my real question is this: When Danny Tanner, Uncle Jesse and little Michelle staged their intervention with Stephanie, did they have the soft, piano-driven Full House end-of-episode music playing in the background? And if so, will Jerome Bettis play the same music during his pre-game speech to the Steelers about how they should win this one for him?

Thing I Care About: Cam’ron’s “Oh What A Night”
Killa Cam’s new song about the night he was shot in D.C. samples Frankie Valli’s “December 1963 (Oh, What A Night)” and the results are, predictably, fantastic. Look for this one to become huge in a few weeks. I just wonder if Seahawks safety Ken Hamlin will think the song is about him.

Thing I Care About: Chris Paul making the All-Star team
CP’s candidacy seems to be a cause celebre among NBA writers on the various sports Web sites, and I’m quite pleased about that. But I can definitely see the league snubbing Paul in favor of a more established player like Ray Allen. This would be the equivalent of having a Super Bowl with no stars and asking Tom Brady to perform the coin toss as a result. Oh wait, that’s actually happening.
What the hell is that about? When did Tom Brady become NFL royalty? Was it the goat pictures? I wonder if Ben Roethlisberger and Matt Hasselbeck are going to be starstruck by being in the presence of such greatness before the game. I mean, it’s Tom Brady! Maybe the teams will get lucky and he’ll turn water into Gatorade on the sidelines.
Does the NFL expect Brady to get a standing ovation when he is introduced? Frankly, I hope they boo the shit out of him. This is why we need a Super Bowl in Philly. And doesn’t the Golden Boy have a sports hernia? How can he possibly toss a coin? Or is he going to do a high-kick dance before the toss, then throw the coin blindly to Roy Williams who will return it for a touchdown thus ruining his season and then fake a season-ending injury afterwards? Oops, wrong sports hernia victim. Why is Donners ripping T.O. now, by the way? Isn’t it a little late for that? What’s he going to do next week, publicly denounce Bin Laden? And what was with that "black-on-black" crap? It was amusing to hear Wilbon defend McNabb on PTI yesterday after that ludicrous statement. As my buddy Falkow put it, "they could find dead teenage girls in Donovan's basement and Wilbon would still take his side." I hope this shows once and for all that Donovan is a selfish egomaniac without a shred of class. Oh, and he's overrated too. Just like the Seahawks.
Pick: Pittsburgh 34 - Seattle 23

An Unappreciated Work of Art

Art Monk's name won't be among those announced Saturday when the NFL unveils its Hall of Fame class of 2006. Nor will he be enshrined next year or the year after that. Art Monk is never going to get into the Pro Football Hall of Fame. And this is a travesty.
As more and more receivers with numbers similar to Monk become eligible for the Hall, the window of possiblity for the Washington Redskins' all-time leading receiver seems to have closed shut. After making the final-round of voting in each of his first three years of eligibility, Monk has failed to make it past the semi-finals in the past three.
With each passing year, Monk’s numbers look antiquated when compared to the gaudy stats put up by receivers currently in the offensive-friendly league. Voters might look at Monk's statistics and be unimpressed as good, but not great, receivers like Jimmy Smith and Keenan McCardell approach him in the record books. Smith is clearly not a Hall of Famer, so some will reason Art Monk shouldn’t be either.
They'll forget that Monk played in a different time though, when quarterbacks and receivers weren't protected like captains in the mob and offenses were more conservative.
Monk’s career began in 1980; to call him a contemporary of Michael Irvin simply because they played against one another is to change the meaning of the word.
Members of the Monk hatewagon (like Peter King) often argue that in 15 years Monk won't be in the Top 10 on the career receptions list. But that's not the issue. When he retired, Monk had the most catches of anybody who had every played the game - even though he played with Gary Clark, who averaged over 70 receptions per year during his stint with the Redskins.
If Monk had wanted, he could have caught 100 balls per season, but he knew that wouldn't help the team. He was content to let Clark and Ricky Sanders get their catches, as long as it led to Washington victories.
And that’s Monk’s main selling point as a Hall candidate: He was, undeniably, a winner.
Art Monk was an indispensable member of the Redskins’ three Super Bowl championship teams under Joe Gibbs. During that time, Monk and the Redskins were 16-5 in the playoffs, 3-1 in the Super Bowl and had the second-best record in the NFL behind the 49ers. Statistics can’t quantify Monk’s importance to those teams.
A huge knock on Monk is that he only made three Pro Bowls, but he should get credit for the four that his receiving mate Gary Clark went to, since it was Monk that would open up the field for Clark’s big plays. (And since when are Pro Bowls the measure of a man anyway. John Riggins only went to one and his bust is in Canton. Nobody respects the Pro Bowl, so why should HOF voters?)
It’s not like Monk’s numbers are pedestrian either. In 1984 he set the single-season reception mark with 106. Nobody in NFL history had reached 100 before and nobody would for another eight seasons. That record is long forgotten now since it has been bested on 22 separate occasions (including by legends like Brett Perriman and Terrence Mathis), but at the time it was considered a huge achievement.
When he retired Monk was the all-time leader in receptions, with 940. His 12,721 receiving yards were good for third. And until Jerry Rice bested the streak in 1998, Monk had the NFL record for most consecutive games with a catch.
Monk’s final stats (940 receptions, 12,721 yards, 68 touchdowns) were mostly accumulated (save for his ill-fated years with the Jets and Eagles in the mid-90’s) with two other excellent receivers, All-Pro Gary Clark and Ricky Sanders, lined up next to him. Also, during his Redskins career Monk caught passes from Joe Thiesmann, Mike Kruczek, Jay Schroeder, Doug Williams, Mark Rypien, Stan Humphries, Jeff Rutledge, Rich Gannon and Cary Conklin. Compare that to Jerry Rice who had Joe Montana, Steve Young and a new and improved Rich Gannon slinging balls his way during his career.
With the talent next to him, the journeymen under center and the fact that he was used mainly as a possession receiver in Joe Gibbs’ offense, it’s amazing Monk is still 5th in career receptions and 9th in receiving yards.
Those are the numbers Hall of Fame voters in support of Monk, like Michael Wilbon and Leonard Shapiro, will bring up tomorrow in Detroit. Those opposed to Monk’s induction will mention that, except for that breakout 1984, Monk didn’t have many spectacular statistical seasons in his career (he had 13 solid ones). They’ll say Monk only led the Redskins in receptions for six of his 14 seasons and never reached the endzone more than eight times. Only five times did he gain more than 1,000 receiving yards.
But those numbers shouldn't count against Monk any more than his 940 career receptions should benefit him. Monk was about more than the stats. He brought everything to the table.
Art Monk was the guy to throw to when you needed a first down. His side was the side you ran a sweep to, because you knew he'd throw the perfect block. And when it was third-and-long and Joe Gibbs needed a receiver to run a crisp route and catch any ball that came his way, he went to Monk.
If he had a huge ego, Monk could have complained about not having a bigger role in the offense or held out for more money. He could have been a diva, but that wasn’t Art Monk’s way. He didn’t need to be a superstar. Superstars need to have MVP awards, 100 touchdowns or a good endzone dance, and Monk had none of those. He was happy to let Clark and Sanders catch more touchdowns, or to see Gerald Riggs rumble into the endzone for a score. Monk cared about winning and did whatever he could to ensure that the Redskins did.
If Monk played on a team that never won a Super Bowl, than his critics would be right: He wouldn’t belong in the Hall of Fame. But Monk has three rings and the numbers to back it up. Other receivers who experienced similar Super Bowl success have been voted into Canton with worse numbers than Monk. When looking at the statistics, it’s clear Monk deserves to join them:

Lynn Swann      336 catches   5,598 yards  43 TD
John Stallworth 537 catches   8,723 yards  62 TD
Charlie Joiner  750 catches  12,146 yards  65 TD
Michael Irvin   750 catches  11,904 yards  65 TD
Art Monk        940 catches  12,721 yards  68 TD

Comparing stats in the NFL is misleading, because the game has undergone so many transformations since its inception. Listed above are three players who were veterans when Monk entered the league. Michael Irvin, who missed induction last year, but will likely get in soon, is also included.
As you can see, Monk has higher totals than all of these players. Swann and Stallworth’s numbers could be interpreted as being a bit low because they played on the same team for many of their years. But, their total catches combined don’t equal Art Monk’s.
Both Stallworth and Swann played on Super Bowl champions, like Monk, and made memorable catches during the games, unlike Monk. (Although a Monk TD catch in Super Bowl XXVI was the first overturned touchdown via instant replay in Super Bowl history. Conversely, one of the main reasons Stallworth was elected into the Hall was because of his circus catch against the Rams in Super Bowl XIV.) This is not to suggest that Swann and Stallworth are undeserving of the honor that they earned, but if they are in, why not Art?
Sports Illustrated’s Dr. Z says that a Hall of Fame wideout needs to be able to stretch the field, and Monk didn’t do that so he doesn’t belong. With all due respect to Dr. Z, saying a wideout needs to stretch the field to gain induction is like saying a quarterback needs to be mobile. Both are only one skill of the position.
Monk opened the field up for his teammates by unselfishly running the 8-yard hooks that Dr. Z decries. The Doc has to know that one doesn’t need to be a deep threat in order to be a dangerous receiver.
Now Michael Irvin is on the ballot, along with Monk, and it seems like only a matter of time before he gets into the Hall (likely next year).
Monk being left out of the Hall makes a mockery of the institution, but if Michael Irvin gets in before him then those hallowed halls will become a total joke.
In his career, Irvin had less yards, less catches and less touchdowns than Art Monk. Each has three Super Bowl rings, while Irvin has two more trips to Hawaii than Monk. (Not that Pro Bowls should be remotely considered when discussing the Hall. As stated above, everyone knows the Pro Bowl voting is a joke. I mean, come on… Michael Vick made it this year.)
The only reason that Irvin could possibly be considered a lock for the Hall while Monk will be left on the outside looking in is because Irvin was the “big play threat” in the Cowboys offense and Monk was just another possession receiver opening up the field for Gary Clark. (The numbers don't back up Irvin's reputation though.)
Of course, Michael Irvin was one of the flashier players of his era and that's why his name is often mentioned as Hall-worthy. All those flashy necklaces and earrings, three-piece suits and mink coats made Irvin memorable, as did the sordid tales of his arrests. And now, Irvin has a cushy gig on ESPN and, thus, is in the spotlight during football season.
Monk, on the other hand, probably wouldn’t be known by a majority of football fans, even though he clearly had better career numbers than Irvin. Outside of D.C., Art Monk could walk down the street without anybody recognizing him. Perhaps that’s why the momentum for his Hall candidacy has slowed in recent years. Maybe nobody votes for Art Monk because they don’t remember Art Monk.
Not that it’s all their fault. Monk isn't all that memorable because he simply wasn't all that memorable. He was never one to seek the spotlight and was never a go-to guy in the locker room for quotes. He didn’t do commercials, throw temper tantrums on the sidelines or get arrested in a hotel room with strippers and cocaine. He didn’t show up his coach by questioning the play calls or take a shot at his quarterback for not throwing him the ball. The cover spread in Sports Illustrated or the interviews on 60 Minutes? Those were for other guys. All Monk needed were those Super Bowl rings.
He deserves to be with Stallworth and Swann and Largent and Gifford and (soon-to-be) Irvin and the other great receivers in the Hall of Fame. Hopefully one day, voters will realize that Art Monk was one of the greatest wideouts to ever play in the NFL and will vote him into the place he deserves to be.
It’s a shame; if he hadn’t been so classy, if he’d celebrated his touchdowns and wore fur coats to the stadium, if he went on TV every week and talked about how great he was, maybe Art Monk wouldn’t be so easily forgotten.

(This column originally appeared on January 14, 2004. It has been updated for today. For more on Monk, check out Jamie Mottram's excellent new site ElectArtMonk.com.)

Skip Prosser Once Received The ACC Coach Of The Year Award

I've written thousands of words on this site describing Skip Prosser's total lack of coaching ability. Last night, a freshman summarized my entire argument in five sentences:

I was very confused as to what [Miami] was running. They were switching up on me, from a 1-3-1 to a [2-3] zone to a man.
Coach was calling man plays but they were in a zone, and calling zone plays when they were in a man. I was really confused. We were just trying to make plays, and when you try to make plays you take tough shots.
- Wake Forest PG Harvey Hale after last night's loss at Miami

Are you serious? You sure you still want this guy, Cincinnati? Skip might actually graduate some players, put a halt to the recruiting of known felons and can recite the alphabet flawlessly, but he'll also turn the second-most talented team in a conference into a cellar-dweller.
When a freshman calls out his coach (however inadvertently it may have been), that's never a good sign. Read the quote again. It essentially says, "I was confused out there, but I'm a freshman... I'm supposed to be confused. My coach, on the other hand, couldn't even tell when Miami was playing a zone and that confused me even more. Even Bobby Cremins, who was calling the game for Fox Sports Net and has been declared certifiably insane, realized when Miami was playing a zone. Eventually, we decided to stop listening to Coach and had to just go out and make plays, but that didn't work. That's why we lost to FREAKIN' MIAMI."
I had planned on just putting up Hale's quote and letting that percolate for the evening, but now I'm all riled up.
With 33 seconds left in the first half last night, Wake grabbed a defensive rebound and moved the ball upcourt to take the last shot. Skip Prosser called a timeout with 20 seconds remaining, the shot clock off and his Deacs up by three.
At this point, I imagine I felt like those people at the bullfight in Mexico City right before that bull hopped into the stands. I knew something disastrous was coming, I didn't want it to happen, but deep-down... I kind of did. This doesn't mean I was rooting against my Deacs, mind you, but when you've watched enough games coached by Skip Prosser you develop a Nostradamus-like sense of impending doom. This was one of those instances.
Most coaches would set-up an elaborate play that finishes with a shot attempt with about four seconds left on the clock (accounting for a miss and possible tip-in). There would be ball movement, high screens, low screens, players cutting back-and-forth on the baseline, etc. during this play.
Here's what Wake did: They inbounded the ball to Hale, who dribbled for five seconds and kicked the ball to Justin Gray at the top of the perimeter. Gray, dribbling at the three-point line, shouted and instructed Eric Williams (who had yet to quit on his team like he did in the game's final five minutes) to set a screen. Williams obliged but Gray's call alerted Miami to the coming pick and they simply stepped around it, double-covering Gray in the process. Now blanketed by two defenders, Gray tried to dribble through them, lost his handle and quickly recovered just in time to throw up a prayer that hit all backboard as time expired. THAT was the play Skip Prosser called during a timeout.
Alright, now I've gone and gotten myself all worked up. Thanks, Harvey Hale.

And thanks to the anonymous tipster who alerted me to Hale's quote in the Winston-Salem Journal.