IU-Michigan State: immediate reaction

Going into this game, I wasn't necessarily expecting an IU victory. I could have seen the game going either way. Both teams have their strengths, both teams have a go-to guy on offense, and I thought it was a pretty even matchup. Obviously, the game being at Michigan State gives them an advantage, and I was expecting a close game that could be won by either team.

It sort of ended how I figured it would. The 15 point win is not indicative of how close the game was throughout. I was expecting it to be closer though.

At the beginning, IU got off to a slow start, as has been their tradition this season, with the exception of the Evansville and NC State games. Michigan State had a 17 point lead at one point, and I was having strong urges to off myself. It seemed like IU was horribly failing at every aspect of the game -- they were stagnant on offense, they made poor decisions on both sides of the ball, they weren't aggressive enough defensively, and they couldn't hit any shot they took. It didn't help that Michigan State made essentially every shot they took, but that was in part due to IU's awful defense and in part due to the fact that Michigan State is a really good team.

Then, near the end of the first half, it was a complete reversal. IU had three straight unanswered three-pointers that was the beginning of a huge run to cut it to a seven point halftime deficit. All things considered, I liked the way they looked. They started playing aggressively, and they found ways to penetrate Michigan State's defense. The run continued into the second half, and at one point, IU was up by around 10. It was an incredibly impressive run -- the run was 25-2, and to do that anywhere is impressive, and to do it in the Breslin Center is even more impressive.

And just as quickly as it began, it was over. The roles reversed again, and MSU looked like the MSU from the beginning of the first half, and IU looked like the IU of the first half. No offense, lackluster defense, poor shooting. Like I said before, the 15 point victory is a little misleading, but it was still a convincing win for Michigan State.

Some positives from the game:

1. Christian Watford. He was IU's offense tonight, going for 26 points, four shy of his career high. He was 4-6 from three-point territory and added 10 rebounds for his second straight double-double. He was an absolute monster on the defensive glass and lessened Michigan State's second chance opportunities. I think that he has the potential to be first team All-Big Ten -- maybe not this year, but he has consistently produced for this team and is the guy that people should be talking about but aren't. He has vastly improved his inside game and his footwork, and he hits the open three-pointer with ease at this point. Watford needs to keep producing for this team to be successful.

2. Verdell Jones III. Verdell's stats weren't outrageously good, but he provided good leadership and hit big shots. He looked like the Verdell of his sophomore year (his most productive year) and hopefully this game can be a stepping stone to bigger and better things for the senior. His mid-range game, which is his strength, looked good tonight, and he handled the ball well for the most part. If Verdell can step into his role as a senior leader for the rest of the year and keep hitting mid-range shots, he will be successful and help this team.

3. Shutting down Draymond Green. Green has been the man for Michigan State this year, and Watford outplayed him on nearly every aspect of the game. Green was below his season averages in points and rebounds, which is mostly due to Watford's defense. This goes back to Watford having a good game, but shutting down Green is definitely a positive.

4. Rebounding. Again, this relates to Watford, but as a whole, IU matched Michigan State in rebounding totals and outrebounded them by 5 on the offensive glass. Michigan State was 6th in the nation in rebounding coming into tonight, so to match them is a good sign going forward that they are improving rebounding-wise, especially since Cody Zeller only managed 3 rebounds.

Some negatives from the game:

1. Cody Zeller. This is obviously the biggest reason why IU lost tonight. Zeller has averaged over 17 points and 7 rebounds so far this season, and managed only 4 points and 3 rebounds tonight. It was a wake-up call for the freshman, and maybe brought IU fans back to Earth a little bit. He's obviously an incredible talent, but he has a lot of work to do. It's going to be even more difficult next week, because I have to assume that he'll be playing against Jared Sullinger in a few days, which will be his biggest challenge yet. The biggest thing I'm noticing with Zeller is that he is not aggressive enough offensively. It seems like he is just waiting for someone to give him the ball instead of demanding it. He's a freshman, and he definitely has a lot of room to grow, but he needs to start upping his aggressiveness and intensity on the offensive end. Otherwise, the Big Ten is going to eat him alive.

2. Jordan Hulls. I think this was just one of those games where nothing went right for Hulls. None of his shots were falling, and he usually hits almost every shot he takes. It didn't really seem like he was doing anything wrong, but IU is not going to win any games where Hulls is only 2-10 from the field and doesn't make any three-pointers at all. I'm pretty confident he can bounce back, because he's too good of a shooter to make me believe otherwise. Hopefully he's back on his game against Ohio State.

3. The bench. Apart from Matt Roth for a brief period and Tom Pritchard defensively, none of the IU bench players did anything to impact the game positively for the Hoosiers. Elston was coming off an injury, but I'm not really sure how much it affected him and Remy Abell might as well have not played. They really missed Will Sheehey tonight, and hopefully he'll be back for the Ohio State game. Abell and Elston are a lot better than they played tonight, and I think they'll have a bounce-back game against Ohio State, assuming that Abell gets some minutes.

There are other negatives, but since nobody's going to read this anyway, I won't go into them. Basically, tonight has shown us a few things. First of all, IU needs Cody Zeller and Jordan Hulls to have good games in order to win. If Hulls isn't hitting jumpers and Zeller is a non-factor, it is going to be a long season for IU. But with all things considered, I think IU has a lot to take from this game. They were going toe-to-toe with a ranked team on the road with two of their starters being non-factors, including their best player. Will Sheehey, a key guy off the bench and one of IU's best scorers, didn't play. The bench was quiet. They made a lot of mistakes. But they fought back at the end of the first half and made it a close game. I think this game will help IU down the road, since they played in one of the toughest environments in the Big Ten. It will be interesting to see how they bounce back against Ohio State, especially Zeller.

The countdown to IU-Ohio State begins...now.

IU-Kentucky: The Aftermath

When I was sitting in my dorm room on Thursday before the game, I had weird feelings about the game on Saturday. I really wanted to go to the game, but I was too sick to make the trek down to Assembly to get a ticket. I decided that I would just stay in and watch it on TV, because I figured I knew what was going to happen. I figured that IU would hang with Kentucky until about 3 minutes to go, then Kentucky would pull away and win by double digits.

Fortunately for me, one of my brother's friends bought four tickets and, by a stroke of luck for me, one of the members of the original group couldn't make it to the game, so I got a ticket to the game. It was up in the balcony, there was an incredibly douchey Kentucky fan behind us, and I was sweating and shaking for the entire game.

It was worth it.

They had a 10 point lead in the second half. I thought it was too good to be true. Then Kentucky started coming back. We were hoping that IU would just be able to stave off the Kentucky run. It was basically survival mode from the Flags timeout until the end of the game.

When Kentucky took the lead with less than a minute to go on a basically uncontested layup, my heart stopped. I was so caught up in the moment, because I actually believed IU could win the game. I threw my pre-game thoughts out the window, and in the moment, I decided that I would be happy with nothing short of an IU victory.

Sometimes, it's so hard to come that close and come up short. I've experienced that many times before in sports. Even with the IU basketball team; two years ago, when #7 Purdue came to Assembly and IU lost by 3, and Verdell's half-court desperation shot to tie it at the buzzer rimmed out, I was so emotionally drained that I just fell onto my couch and laid there. I would have been okay with a 7 point loss. To lose a game that you were so close to winning, especially when you had no business being in that game, is heartbreaking.

But Lamb missed a free throw, and I started to believe again. Because after all the crap this program and its fans (the ones who have always been IU fans and never gave up on them) have been through, we couldn't take another heartbreaking loss. It's true that even if IU had lost by two, it's still an incredible achievement. Kentucky is by far the most talented team in the country, and to hang with them for a full 40 minutes would be remarkable.

But when Lamb missed his free throw, I could barely even watch after that. I kept muttering "Please...please...please" under my breath. When Verdell took the ball up the court, and Cody Zeller executed his screen (which is the most underrated and overlooked part of that play, because he allowed Verdell to keep moving down the court), I was so afraid that Verdell was going to take the last shot. But he dished it to Watford...and the rest is history.

As an IU fan who has never stopped following them and has supported them through 6, 10, and 12 win seasons -- seasons that were full of incredibly disappointing and embarrassing losses -- I can say, without a doubt, that I have never been happier after a sporting event. To win it the way they did...not only did they beat Kentucky, not only did they beat the number one team in the country, not only did they win it by one, not only did they hit a three to win it, not only were they down by two before the shot...I think you catch my drift.

We deserved this win as a fanbase. The players, especially Tom Pritchard, Verdell Jones, Christian Watford...hell, even Maurice Creek, who didn't even play, deserved this win. Tom Crean deserved this win. We deserved to be happy about something for once, and we deserved to be able to storm the court.

I was up in the balcony. I had to deal with an idiotic fan all night. My legs hurt, I was cramping up, my voice was gone, my throat hurt, I had a headache, and I was dripping with sweat...but I have never been happier in my life than I was after Christian Watford hit the second biggest shot in the history of Indiana basketball.

Kudos to the players, the coaches, and to the fans who stuck by their team through the absolute worst of times. You deserved it.

IU vs. Kentucky preview

At 5:15 p.m. today, the biggest game in the Tom Crean era will tip 0ff for the Hoosiers. It will be their first game against a legitimately good team this season, and the first game against a legitimately good team that they actually have a chance to win since 2007.

I want you all to know this: I will not be making a prediction for this game. Because honestly, I have no idea how it's going to go. I will provide as much insight as I can, but I'm not going to predict anything. It's also hard for me to predict IU games because, as an IU fan, I'm obviously pretty biased.

Kentucky is far and away the most talented team in the country. They are 16th in the country in points per game, 52nd in assists per game, 24th in field goal percentage, and 4th in rebounds per game. Their strongest point -- rebounding -- is IU's weakest facet of their game. IU is ranked 163rd nationally in rebounds per game, roughly 8 rebounds fewer per game than Kentucky.

If IU is going to win this game, they need to limit Kentucky's offensive rebounds. In the first half against NC State, that was pretty much the only thing keeping NC State in the game -- IU was shooting the ball well and moving the ball around, but NC State would sometimes get four offensive rebounds in a possession. If you get four chances to score in one possession, chances are that you are eventually going to score.

Cody Zeller, like in most games, is the player to watch here. He is probably going to be matched up against Anthony Davis, the 6'10 freshman who, in a game earlier this season, pulled down 15 rebounds and accumulated 8 blocks. He is a dominant presence down low, and if IU is going to win, Zeller needs to contain him and he needs to win the rebounding battle.

IU does have some things going for them: obviously, the crowd will be a huge factor (mostly because I'm going to be there), and they are one of the best shooting teams field goal percentage-wise in the country (6th nationally at 52.3% made field goals per game). If they are able to hit jump shots, specifically the three pointer, they can win this game. But they can't just throw the ball at the hoop and hope for the best. They have to get the ball to Zeller down low.

If Zeller can play his game and win the battle against Anthony Davis, IU shoots well from the field, and Kentucky's offensive rebounding is limited, then I like IU's chances. The crowd gives them a huge boost -- I know, because I've been to games where the crowd essentially won the game for them. The question is not can IU win this game -- the question is, can they execute a game plan against such a talented team? Only time well tell.

Until then, LET'S GO HOOSIERS!

Bandwagoning: Why it really shouldn't matter

NOTE: This is a guest post by good friend of IMB Pat Sebanc. You can get more insight from Pat by following him on Twitter, @PatrickRSebanc.

______________________________________________________

Considering this is a guest post, I feel like I should introduce myself to some extent. I’m Pat Sebanc, I’m a college student and I love sports; that’s really all you need to know. I’ll probably reveal more about myself as time goes on, but I don’t want to bore you with a biography (despite the fact that it would be filled with awesome stories and mind-blowing factoids). So yeah, now I’m going to get to the main reason for this post.

People are literally crazy over sports, that’s nothing new. People are dedicated to their favorite teams and people will defend those teams to the death. That’s admirable and that’s what makes sports great, but an issue I see everyday with sports is that sometimes that dedication can be a little over-the-top. As soon as a team starts getting featured on Sportscenter or Twitter or wherever they can find publicity, you see people flocking to the fan section and becoming what most people call “fair weather fans”.

They’ve known about the team, or maybe they haven’t, but now they’re supporting them and cheering for them every game. Maybe it’s just through social networking, but I’ve noticed that fans tend to get annoyed when they see people rooting for their favorite team when they know they haven’t been lifelong fans.

To me, that’s just completely backwards; I mean why WOULDN’T you want someone rooting for you favorite team? Why WOULDN’T you want another person to converse about your favorite team with? Are people seriously regressing to the caveman era and becoming that territorial, and over a sports team? I just don’t get it. I personally am ecstatic when I find another person to talk about the Red Sox (best team ever by the way, no bias) with or when I can chat it up with another Indiana native about the Pacers or Colts. To me, communicating with other fans is the coolest thing about sports. To find someone who is just as passionate about a certain team, or even just a certain sport, is just a joy to me; I’ve made numerous friends just through sports (i.e. the creators of this blog).

Now I know there’s no way that this type of behavior is going to stop because nothing ever stops, it just goes under the radar. But I feel like people should just lay off and just enjoy sports. If you want to get technical, sports are just big games played by people ten times as talented as the average person.

One example I can give where people have gotten annoyed with a newly gained fan base is the recent adoration of IU basketball. I’ll be honest, I’m a lifelong Purdue fan, almost my entire family went to Purdue, I grew up rooting for Purdue and I’ll always root for the Boilermakers. But at the same time, I’ve never been a “hater” of IU, I’ve talked trash, I’ve rooted against them in the past, but I’ve never disliked them like a normal Purdue fan might.

To me, rooting for IU is just like rooting for Butler or Notre Dame; I support any and every team from the state of Indiana. Hell, I’d even support the Fort Wayne Mad Ants if it came down to it. I just love this state and everything about it. I was a huge fan of Bob Knight, I loved his style and I still do to this day. But after Knight left and Mike Davis and Kelvin Sampson both had their respective eras at IU, I lost interest in the Hoosiers (as did a lot of people from the Hoosier state). But now that the Hoosiers are heading in a bright direction down the right path, you would think that people would embrace and encourage newfound support for a once struggling program; but in fact, I’m seeing a lot of the opposite.

I’m noticing some resentment, some anger, some frustration. As I said before, I just don’t get it. People are alienating and degrading people they should be supporting and welcoming. If one of my friends who happens to be a Yankees fan told me he was going to become a Red Sox fan, I would be happy for him. First, I’d heckle him and make countless jokes, but I wouldn’t be bitter that he became a Red Sox fan. I guess the point I’m trying to convey here is that, despite, when someone became a fan, how someone became a fan or even why someone became a fan, it shouldn’t matter. A fan is a fan, and that’s all that really should matter. If you’re a supporter of the same team as me, that’s great, I’m happy.

Now, I’m not trying to pick on IU, I mean I’m now a fan (I live in Bloomington, I basically have to [it’s not forced though, I’m truly becoming a supporter of Indiana University]). I’ve seen it in the NBA with the Pacers and I’ve seen in the NFL with numerous teams. People all over the country are just rabid with having too much pride to accept newfound fans and newfound interest. I guess I’m just noticing people don’t like when other people like the same things that they like. This kind of thing happens in music as well, people get peeved when their favorite underground artist gets on a commercial or gets a Grammy award (Bon Iver fans from 2007 have got to be PISSED!!!!).

With that being said, I’m going to conclude this with something for you guys to think about; are sports fans just gigantic hipsters who get infuriated when their team gets some form of recognition from the not-so-normal supporter? Thanks for reading and I hope to do this again. Have a good one, America.

Not so fast, Chris Paul: The David Stern story

When I first heard about the Chris Paul to the Lakers deal, I kind of freaked out a little bit. I hadn't heard any of the details; the only thing that I knew was that a backcourt of Chris Paul and Kobe Bryant was going to be frighteningly good. Since I hate the Lakers, I was not pleased. I figured it was another instance of a team in trouble unloading their star to a big market team for little to nothing in return.

Then, I actually saw the details of the trade. The Lakers were going to trade Pau Gasol to the Rockets, and the Hornets were going to get Lamar Odom, Luis Scola, Kevin Martin, Goran Dragic, and a first-round draft pick. Now, I'm not what you would call an NBA expert, but I do know that apart from Kobe Bryant, Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom are probably the next two best players on that team. It's not like they're trading Jordan Farmar straight up for Chris Paul or anything.

This trade actually would have worked out very well for the Hornets. Scola is a power forward who averaged 18.3 points per game last year, along with 8.2 rebounds, and he shot over 50% from the field. Martin has consistently averaged around 20 points per game throughout his career, with last year's totaling 23.4 ppg. Dragic has not posted astronomical numbers yet, but he is only 25 and has had moments where he has taken control of the game, like in the 2010 Western Conference semi-finals against the Spurs, where he scored 23 points in the fourth quarter to lead a comeback. The Rockets get a good player in Pau Gasol, the Lakers get Chris Paul, and the Hornets get a lot of very good players.

My question is this: what is so wrong with this trade that David Stern felt he needed to block it from happening? Obviously, it was due to basketball reasons. WHICH DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. That's like me saying that somebody can't go to the bathroom for toilet reasons. What are the toilet reasons? Are they all malfunctioning? Are there no toilets in the building? Are they all in use? I need more information than that, because I really have to take a crap.

It blows my mind that this trade gets blocked, but the Pau Gasol trade to the Lakers was allowed. That trade involved Kwame Brown, Javaris Crittenton (who I'm pretty sure just killed somebody), Aaron McKie, Marc Gasol, and two first-round draft picks. This trade was highway robbery. Where were you on that, David? Too busy enforcing a strict dress code?

The fact of the matter is that the trade that the Hornets initially accepted was probably the best offer they were going to get. They need to unload Chris Paul, because there isn't a chance in hell that he re-signs with them after this season. I don't really care how many angry letters Dan Gilbert writes in Comic Sans font: this trade is not unfair for anybody. Maybe if NBA executives pulled their heads out of their asses, the league would have actually started their season on time.

I will say that if I was an NBA GM, I would have successfully orchestrated the greatest trade in NBA history that is fair for all sides: Brandon Rush for Chris Paul, straight up. It doesn't get any fairer than that.

Me vs. Boise State haters

This is a triumphant return to the blogosphere for ol' J-Weezy and a lot has happened. The obvious thing is that IU basketball is sort of good again, but oddly enough, this is not what this post is about.

THIS POST IS ABOUT BOISE STATE. YEAH BUDDY.

Well, not necessarily specifically Boise State. Boise State serves as an example for a larger issue that I have with college football. But I'm still probably going to mention Boise State a lot.

I always hear people talk about how teams like Boise, TCU, Houston, etc. don't deserve a chance at the national championship game. And this year they're probably right. Houston got crushed at home and didn't even win their conference (hey, just like Alabama) and Boise lost at home to a lesser team also. That seems to happen almost every year; when a team like that is poised for a BCS bowl game, they blow it in the latter parts of the season.

But let's imagine that we live in a world where Boise State went undefeated this year. Let's imagine that Boise State worked their magic at the end of the TCU game this year and won 36-35 instead of losing by the same score. Is there any chance in hell the BCS selects Boise State over Alabama for the national championship?

I think not. I think, at best, Boise State is fourth, behind LSU, the aforementioned Alabama, and Oklahoma State. They COULD be ahead of OK State, but obviously this is up for debate.

So Boise State, sitting at 12-0, gets shut out of the national championship game. Again. Why? Because they play in a small conference and they don't get to play fantastic teams like Ole Miss and Tennessee throughout the year. They play a weaker schedule, sure. They crush the SEC Eastern Division champions at the beginning of the year, but we always conveniently forget the fact that Boise State always beats the "big name" team they play at the beginning of the year.

Incidentally, we also usually forget (or ignore) the fact that Boise State, in the last three years, has beaten Oregon, Virginia Tech, and of course Georgia. All of those teams are definitely big name programs. They beat them all.

This is but a small thread in the giant quilt that is the snubbing of small school teams in the national championship picture. These teams -- Boise State, TCU, Utah before their move to the Pac-12, and (to a lesser extent) Houston -- are looked down upon simply because they play in smaller conferences. Last year, Oregon (the national runner-up) had a weaker schedule than both Boise State and TCU. But they play in a big conference, so nobody cares. This is a trend.

So now we go to this year. Two very deserving teams are in the national championship this year in LSU and Alabama. Although I would have preferred Oklahoma State over Alabama, since I frequently had visions featuring the sweet embrace of death during round one of the Battle of Dropped Passes and Missed Field Goals, there is no denying Alabama's worthiness of contending for the national championship, because their defense is unbelievable. I can freely admit this, although I have a distaste for Alabama. Foreshadowing.

But, there is most definitely a debate for Oklahoma State to be in the national championship game too. The computers ranked them higher, and they have a stronger schedule and more wins against top 25 teams than Alabama does (I'm a little bit fuzzy on the details there, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong). The biggest claim that Alabama has is that their one loss was to the #1 ranked team in the country by 3 points in overtime, while OK State's loss was to unranked Iowa State in double overtime. A very valid claim.

Another claim that I have seen multiple times from multiple people, that is the driving force behind this post, is the claim that Alabama is more deserving because they beat the crap out of their inferior opponents and that, coupled with barely losing to the best team in the country (at home), makes them the most worthy.

Alabama won their 11 games by an average of 29.7 points per game. Boise State won their 11 games by an average of 27.2 points per game. Oklahoma State won their 11 games by an average of 26.2 points per game. (Oklahoma State's hindrance here is a one point win at then ranked #8 Texas A&M.)

Here is my big problem with this defense that some, not all, Alabama fans are using. This is the same argument that Boise State has, year in and year out. They don't play in the SEC or the Big 12. They play in a much less heralded conference, the MWC, which I'm pretty sure is going to be a future acronym for a Call of Duty game. Modern Warfare Clutch or something.

My point here is not that Boise State is as good as Alabama, because I don't believe that this year's team is better than Alabama. My point is that the Boise States of the world use the argument of beating inferior opponents by a lot, and they are mocked for it. Alabama fans are arguing the same point now. How is that not hypocrisy?

This is not to suggest that Alabama fans are the biggest hypocrites in the world or anything. It just so happens that this year, they're the team who has to defend their team's appearance in the national championship game. And this doesn't even necessarily pertain to fans of Alabama. Just Alabama backers, I guess.

But the fact is that it is still hypocrisy. I, for one, am perfectly okay with the defense of "my team beat the crap out of most of the teams they played" because I think that if you play a weak-ish schedule and you win all of your games by 25+ points or something, then you're probably a very good team. But you can't spend 5 years saying that it doesn't matter how much you win your games by if you still play bad teams, and then turn around and use that as a major point of defense for your team.

We always remember when Boise State loses a game. You remember the TCU loss this year and the Nevada loss last year. I remember victories over Virginia Tech and Georgia. But it goes deeper than Boise State. You remember Hawaii getting crushed by Georgia in the Sugar Bowl. I remember Boise State-Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl, Utah crushing Alabama in the Sugar Bowl, and TCU beating Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl last year in a game that was, for my money, better than the national championship game. You focus on the one loss they have and decide that they don't deserve a shot, and I focus on when they beat the best team they play all year and then lose a heartbreaker at the end of the year.

These teams have proven that they at least deserve a chance to play in the national championship. These teams HAVE beaten very good teams in big bowl games in the past. Boise State haters are just too wrapped up in making fun of Boise State to notice.

And why? Why do you do this? The only reasonable explanation I have is that you'd be embarrassed if your team lost to one of these teams, so you don't even want to play them. Because you're scared of Boise State. You're scared of the possibility of Boise State beating your team, because you know that it is very possible, so you'd rather just make fun of them all year and pray that they don't go undefeated so you don't have to live in a world where a Boise State national championship is possible.

That's the only explanation I have. And what a sad explanation that is.

The hypocrisy of Boise State haters is hilarious to me. They think their team is good because they beat of the crap out of all of their opponents, even though they don’t beat anyone that’s really that good. But if Boise State goes undefeated and, by some gift of God, plays for the national championship, everybody complains about how they don't play anyone good.

Just stop rooting against Boise State for lame reasons. I get that there are teams that some people just don't like. I have no real reason to dislike the Chicago Bears, but I hope they lose every single game. I understand that there are people like this with regards to Boise State. But I don't say that I hate the Bears because their defense hits people really hard, because that's exactly how my favorite team, the Steelers, plays defense.

It's not like everybody has to root for Boise State or anything, but don't use hypocrisy as the basis for your hatred of them.

Okay. Wow. Quite a return, huh? Excuse me for rambling, I tend to repeat myself a lot, especially when I haven't written in a while. And if you're one of these Boise State haters, don't think that I hate you and your opinions about sports or anything. Always remember that I'm friends with a lot of Purdue fans, so it's literally impossible for me to stop liking somebody due to sports-related reasons.

I'll most likely be posting stuff more now, because I actually have stuff to talk about now that 3 of my 5 favorite teams are any good now (with the Pacers remaining to be seen)...as opposed to the one team I had last year. It's always way easier to talk about sports when your teams are good.

Peace, nerds.

P.S. I need a new thing to put at the end of my posts.