Sorry to anyone who checked out my blog. I posted it wrong at first. Now its good.

I read in the paper that the UWashington Huskies nearly took out the UConn Huskies, and Calhoun had some things to say about his team of the "never seen this before" variety. That was a last-second comeback, from memory. Did that take the last steam out of a UConn team that was perhaps, for some reason or other, running on emotional fumes and lacking some of the grit of other Calhoun teams?

Good question. When I saw UCONN play during the year I actually did not think they would win. Although they are talented they were missing something. I can't put my finger on it. I think during the tournament they were feeling the pressure of expectation and they never really relaxed. Or maybe they thought they could win simply because they had the most talent. You just knew that somewhere along the line, they were not going to be able to pull it out. On another note I think the referees gave a little bit of a competitive advantage to UCONN in the Washington game. Almost as if UCONN was supposed to win and Washington had to take it. 5 Washington players had 4 fouls and 2 eventually fould out. That is a lot. This was not so in the Mason Game. I think the refs were a little more fair.

I played on a football team like this in high school in my junior year. We were very good. Very talented. We had about 22 seniors and actually I was only 1 of 4 kids who were not seniors who saw the field. We blew alot of teams out, but we also won a lot of games in the last minute. We had an overtime victory and an amazing 21 point comeback with 5 minutes left the game. In the end talent was not enough. We loss in the Sectional semifinals. In my senior year. I was 1 of only 6 seniors on my team and we made it to the sectional finals. We loss, but we made it with way less talent.

Don't get me wrong George Mason upsetting UConn is one of the biggest ever in the tournament, however, UConn has played down to it's opponents all season. This is why I didn't think UConn would win the whole thing. I think yesterday was a combination of UConn playing down to George Mason and George Mason playing up to UConn (the Patriots have been playing up all tournament). When this happens in college basketball the team that is well coached and smarter usually wins, in this case the George Mason Patriots. I think UConn got use to hearing that they were best most talented team and expected the tournament to be easy, and the tournament is never easy.

I was really hoping today's blog would be as juicy as yesterdays was. I live for Good gossip & great debates.
Anyway, great blog. Damn the Pistons for their lose. I was deeply angered.

I agree with your feelings on UCONN, but I respectfully disagree about George Mason. I think they were simply better than MIchigan State, UNC and North Carolina. Given UCONN's talent it is hard to say they're better, but certainly UCONN did not gibe the game away. Mason came back from being down by 12 at one point and did you see the plays they were making down the stretch and in OT. The pull up jumpers and hook shots. It was AWESOME BABY with a capital A!!

Sorry I could not produce any gossip material today, but one the greatest sporting events I have ever witnessed took place yesterday from a historical standpoint. Sorry about the Pistons. Here's my extremely technical sports definition for wyh they lost. They could not knock down the three ball. The starters just looked flat for most of the game. The Pistons had their lowest point totals for a half and a quarter in that game, with 10 and 35. They bench is what really got them back in it and I wonder if he would have went with the bench down the stretch if they might have had a better chance at winning. But you can't tell Chauncey Billups and Big Ben to take a seat when the game is on the line.

I'll give you that they are better than Mich. St and Wichita State. Michigan State should have been better but they have been a mystery all year. For some reason they just couldn't get it together. I honestly couldn't tell you a single thing about Wichita State other than it's in Kansas (i think). As for UNC, I don't think George Mason beats them in a five game series. Lucky for them they don't have to. You gotta remember that UNC was coming into the tournament hot and supposely clicking at the right time. This is why I think the Patriots had a little luck in that game (keep in mind I didn't see GMU/UNC game, being that it was St. Patty's day).

How would you rank George Mason?

Does he break the top 10?

How does a guy who doesn't break the top 10 in something get a school named after him?

Was Byron Scott your favorite player on the Showtime Lakers? Ron Harper on the Bulls of the 90s? Mickey Hatcher on the '88 Dodgers? Did Ken Norton Jr. bring the Niners their last championship?

Just curious.

for the record I did see the UNC/Mason Game because out west that game prolly came on at 1 pm for me. I think they were better and would probably would win a 5 game series in my opinion. Besides Hansborough and a few threes from Wes Miller. I think you think these teams should be better, but they blew out Mich State and beat UNC down the strecth. Witchita handled Seton Hall and Tennessee and they blew them out too. I'm telling you man, you don't win that many games agaunst this quality of opponent and still be considered lucky. These guys are good. I took them yesterday...with the points that is.

First of all I have no idea who the hell George Mason is and actally I have yet to meet someone who does. If you know, enlighten me. But to answer your question, given the outlining reasons, he probably should not have a school named after him, but who am I to talk.

My favorite player on the showtime Lakers would have to be Michael Cooper. The high socks and lock down defense. I however think Ervin Magic Johnson is the greatest player of all times.

I hated the Bulls in the 90's. I didn't like Jordan for a long time as a matter of fact.

You got me on the Dodgers. I was a young guy back then and I was not completely into baseball yet except for the New York Mets. I mean I can name all them dudes. Dykstra, McReynolds, Hojo, Mackey Sasser,Frank Viola, Terry Teuffel, etc.

As for Ken Norton he definitely helped because he came from Dallas, the Niners biggest threat. But beating the Chargers really was not an exceptional feat. They also improved the defensive backfield with Deion and you got to love Merton Hanks. I think more than anything it was the deterioration of the Cowboys. As a Cowboy fan I do not like Ken Norton. He was a traitor. If I am not mistaken, he now coaches at USC. He went to college at UCLA. I guess old habits die hard.

I'll have to take your word for how good they are considering I only saw them play UConn and Wichita State.

Its funny you say that because I am not sure they can beat Florida. Right now they are 5.5 dogs. Normally I can't tell if an underdog will win, but I just have a good feeling about them or just feel they will keep it close. When I look at a matchup I look at the line. Right now I am leaning toward the Pats.

I am going to accept O'Ceall's brief disertation on GEorge Mason as fact. He's sounds like he is a worthy namesake of an institution of higher learning. Good for him.