Who cares if a storm is a-brewing in Oklahoma City?

The NBA Season has begun, and while for many sports fans that is as exciting as a poopy-flavored lollipop, for the people in Oklahoma City, it is a thrilling prospect.

Their team, the Oklahoma City Thunder, lost the Western Conference Finals in six games to the eventual champion Dallas Mavericks. Despite the disappointment that always accompanies having your season ended with a loss, the Thunder had plenty to look forward to. They were the youngest team in the league, with two of its best young players and a nucleus of talent that seemed to genuinely enjoy playing with each other and would continue to improve. Things got even better after the lockout ended. The Thunder saw the Mavericks lose the defensive player that gave them fits in the postseason (Tyson Chandler), saw the Lakers get royally screwed by the NBA in the Chris Paul debacle, and watched the Spurs get another year older. Those were the three teams seeded higher than them in last year's Western Conference. Imagine the lofty expectations for 2012.

So imagine my surprise when, after a 4-0 start for the Thunder, all I am hearing about on Sportscenter and reading about online is whether Russell Westbrook and Kevin Durant can get along. Come on. Of course we still remember Westbrook taking bad shot after bad shot against the Mavs, but he wasn't the reason they lost. Have you forgotten that Dirk Nowitski was scoring 65 a game and shooting 99 percent from the foul line throughout the playoffs? The Thunda's fate was sealed, whether Westbrook was hitting those shots or not.

And yes, I am aware of the arguing on the sidelines that happened during the Thunder's win at Memphis in the team's third game of the season. But guess what? Westbrook was polishing off an 0-for-13-er on the night. Who wouldn't be pissed off during and after a game like that? And now, after Westbrook made several big plays down the stretch against Dallas and Durant hit a game-winning buzzer-beater, while half of Twitter was celebrating the shot, the other half could only find time to comment on the "half-hearted" hug the two players shared afterward in celebration. Get a life.

Maybe Westbrook isn't as happy as he could possibly be in Oklahoma City. But I'm not buying into some seething hatred he holds for Kevin Durant. The guys have grown up in the NBA together. They've shared immense amount of success at a young age by feeding off each other. Together. Whether or not Scott Brooks blames one for the team's failures is moot. That might represent a problem in the coach-player relationship, but the not the one between teammates.

And beyond all that, we shouldn't be worried about Westbrook leaving until at least after this season is done. The Thunder are one of four teams I would say have a legitimate shot at a championship this season (Heat, Bulls and Lakers are the other three. Really, the Lakers would need a full 58 games of good play from Andrew Bynum to be legit. That remains to be seen). Westbrook would be crazy to leave before this season is done. Even if he wants to be the alpha dog, or play in a bigger market, there is no place he could go that would give him a better title shot that OKC this year. So there's not point until after the season.

At any rate, it would be great if we could stop hearing about the discontent on the Thunder's sideline and in the locker room. I'm not buying it, and doesn't their play so far (especially KD's shot last night) deserve a bit more airtime?

Drew Brees: an Appreciation

Drew Brees broke Dan Marino's passing yards in a season record last night. He did it with a game still to play. In the process, the Saints clinched their division, and so Brees might not play depending on how Sean Payton feels about how the 49ers will do in week 17, but let it not be forgotten how unbelievable of a performance Brees has turned in this season. Despite sometimes rocky play in the first half, Brees has delivered the goods time and again in 2011; just like Montee Ball's soon-to-be touchdown record over Barry Sanders should not exist or at least have a monstrous asterisk by it, so too should Bree's passing record if he doesn't play an entire four quarters next week.

Aaron Rodgers will probably win the MVP this year, because that's how the MVP works. He and Brees' stats will finish at relatively similar levels, with each guy taking a few of the key categories that we look to for verification on quality of quarterback play (completion percentage, yards per attempt, touchdowns, interceptions, quarterback rating, Total QBR). Even as a Packers fan though, I can't argue with Brees as the MVP of the 2011 season. It wasn't even close early on, but Rodgers has opened the door in the last three or four weeks, and Brees has walked in. And above anything else, he has set a record this season. Four weeks ago, we were hearing about the possibility of Rodgers breaking the single-season completion percentage record set by Brees two years before while at the same time hearing about the impossibility of Brees keeping up his incredible passing yards-per-game pace. Now? Brees is almost three percentage points closer than Rodgers to breaking his own record, and has not missed a beat in the yards department.

It is truly one of the great accomplishments in modern sport. Despite the pass-heavy offenses we are growing accustomed to in this day of NFL Football, Brees' mark stands alone. He has thrown for 5,087 yards in 15 games this season. That's 339 passing yards per game. I don't care what happens in the NFL for the next 50 years, I'm not betting on a guy averaging 340 per game. The statistic is mindboggling. When Peyton Manning broke a record, he was the MVP. When Tom Brady broke the same record a couple years later, he won the MVP. Heck, when LaDainian Tomlinson and Shaun Alexander set records, they were MVPs. How does Brees not qualify? For a season in which his stats are more or less as good as his top competitor, he set an NFL record. To me, with a not-quite undefeated Packers team, that is the difference. Brees was transcendent, Rodgers just barely missed transcendence.

Since we won't get to see which one of them will represent the NFC in the Super Bowl before the award is given out, I'm going with MVBrees.

The Xavier Conundrum

Let me start this column by saying I can't believe it came to me to defend Tu Holloway, Chris Mack and Xavier. But some of the things that have been said about the situation are really starting to aggravate me, and I just couldn't sit idly by anymore.

First, a quick recap. Xavier and Cincinnati fought at the end of their game last week. Yancy Gates cold-cocked Kenny Frease with an absolute haymaker while Frease was in the middle of it all, seemingly trying to break things up. Frease was also stomped on after the punch. The fight spawned from Tu Holloway and a Cincinnati player talking trash to each other in a 23 point game with 9.4 seconds to play. Then Xavier freshman Dezmine Wells came over and shoved the UC player, and chaos ensued. The nation was shocked at the ugly scene after the fact. When I first saw the video of the fight shortly after it happened, I was not surprised at all to see Holloway at the root of it, nor was I surprised to see Mark Lyons screaming and gesturing throughout the fracas. I've seen the two talented guards up close plenty of times to know they are in-your-face, confrontational-type players. They talk trash. They delight in their opponents' downfall. Up til now, most of the nation gave them a pass for it, because of their prodigious talents on the court.

That is, up until their press conference after the UC game, when both Holloway and Lyons came off as unapologetic and shrugged their shoulders, saying that's who Xavier is, that's the way they play, they won't back down. The quote that has lingered in the media is Holloway describing the Xavier locker room (and therefore team) as full of "gangsters". I, like most people I know and read content from, thought Lyons and Holloway came off sounding foolish, like they had no idea what they were talking about, and that Xavier should never have let them speak to the media.

Since then, weak suspensions have been handed out. Gates' 6-game hiatus was the largest of all, and Holloway received one game. Despite his role in getting the fight going (supposedly cursing at the UC bench throughout the game, and obviously being one of two guys talking to get the melee started), I didn't see much room to argue Holloway's suspension. He didn't actually do anything other than talk. No thrown punches or elbows that I saw in the video.

At any rate, the suspensions (in particular Holloway's, because he is by far the highest-profile player affected) have been under a great deal of scrutiny since. Then Chris Mack spoke with Doug Gottlieb on ESPN radio. Among the things they talked about were Holloway's comments about gangsters and Xavier "zipping it up" at the end of games. Mack was, as one would expect, defending his player. In particular, during his interview with Gottlieb, he described Holloway as a "good kid". I had a problem with that word choice, as did many people, which I discovered later in the day. Mack was being ripped for labeling Holloway a "kid." Up til now, I had been in the same camp as most other people. But I have no problem with the use of the word "kid." I disagreed with the word "good."

Quick (maybe) sidebar: Tu Holloway is my least favorite college basketball player ever. It should be noted that as a UD fan, I have been bred to hate him, and so perhaps I am not worth listening to on the matter. But during my time with the UD paper, I sat on the sidelines and in the postgame media room, watching and listening Holloway up close for several games. I spent time in the stands watching him before that. I feel more qualified to write about him than many of the things I write about on this blog. I've seen him constantly talk trash, try to get a rise out of his opponents, act smugly on the court and act smugly after games are over. The guy is not a "good" dude in any sense of the word I can think of beyond his basketball skills. Having said that, I can completely understand why Chris Mack thinks he is a good guy, and I can even see how Holloway would come off as good if you just sat down and had a conversation with him. He is confident, talkative, charismatic--what wouldn't you like about speaking with a guy like that? Don't be fooled though, his attitude will be his downfall if he ever makes it to the next level.

So imagine my surprise when nobody had a problem with "good" but rather "kid." Certainly, Holloway is legally not a child at 22 years of age. I'm just guessing here, but I don't believe when Mack referred to him as a kid, he was thinking about any legal definition. I think what he meant was that Holloway is more immature than what most Americans expect out of an adult, just like 98 percent of 22-year-olds are. When speaking about it with my dad, I told him I had no problem with Mack calling him a kid, because I'm a kid too (same age as Tu and everything!) He told me, "No, you're an adult, you're responsible for what you say and do." Hard to argue with that. But once again, not the point that was being made. The point was, Holloway was speaking off the cuff about a high-intensity situation, and he used an unfortunate word. Young people do that. Do all you 40-plus people out there really think 20-25 year-olds are as mature as you? Holloway even corrected himself immediately afterward, saying "Not thugs, but tough guys on the court." He didn't mean gangsters with baseball bats and guns looking to commit crimes or intimidate court witnesses, and anyone who didn't get that wasn't listening. Of course Holloway is responsible for using the words he did, but he isn't trying to back down from them. He regrets using them, just like any of us regret making any bad decisions in life.

One more point about the "kid" debate. Whenever I get into a discussion with my parents about some real-life issues like finances or politics (admittedly a rare occurence), and am unwilling to back down from my position, their response is predictable. It goes something like, "Nate, you just don't understand, you don't have the experience, you haven't been in the real world, you don't get it." Essentially, because I'm young and haven't been in the world for as long, what I have to say is not as valid. (In fact, that's probably what the old-timers are thinking right now as they read this: "This young guy. He just doesn't get it.") And that's fine. (Not really; I hate that argument, but it's probably true). But that sure sounds like a "kid" to me. No, I'm not (and Tu Holloway's not) a kid in the sense that we believe in Santa Claus or are still working on our multiplication tables, but you better believe I'm still a kid when it comes to the real world. I have no idea what I'm doing. Just read this blog for evidence.

Probably even more so than me, Tu Holloway is a "real-world kid". He has gotten things his way since high school at least, because schools are always trying to please the star basketball player. That's the way it works in this world. Holloway is still going to be one of my least favorite athletes of all time when this situation blows over and the next big one comes along. But even then, I'll know, and I think you should try to understand, he's still a 22-year-old kid (or young man, whatever you prefer, they're the same thing), like me.

Mid-Major Report: 12/12

We're a few weeks into the college basketball season, and most teams have played 10-ish games. That means I feel like I have enough information to talk about the best mid-major teams in the country. Everyone has played enough games that I will believe a bit more in the various computer-ratings around the country and can see what they've done against a large enough variety of competition to attempt to compare teams from small conferences across the country that will not be playing each other at any time during this season.

A quick couple of caveats before we get into the top mid-majors in the country. On ESPN.com, Myron Medcalf's mid-major report, certain conferences, like the Atlantic 10 and Mountain West, are not included because they are not mid-majors in the sense that conferences like the Sun Belt or Patriot League are mid-majors. That is true, but I will still be including every conference aside from the Big Six. I will not be including certain teams from those conferences however. Xavier, Gonzaga and Memphis will never appear on this list despite being from mid-major conferences. Those programs recruit and play like Big Six teams, and everyone in the country is aware of them. The point of this list to clue people in to some of the teams they haven't seen on TV and who they should pay attention. Also, this list is not necessarily a reflection of which teams would win if they played head to head. In fact, in this week's list, there will be teams that have played head-to-head with the loser being higher ranked. The ranking is more a reflection of which team has earned it more so far. A team who has gone on the road and won games, or beaten tough opponents will be given more love than a team that is 11-1 with half of its wins against D-II schools. Without further ado, my top 10 so far.

10. Kent State (7-1, 61 in Ken Pomeroy rankings)
The Golden Flashes perhaps sneak into my first at number 10 because they haven't really beaten anybody this year. Unlike the other teams contending for the back end of this ranking who also haven't beaten anybody, however, Kent State has gone on the road and won, which gets you some major points in my book. The Flashes are 3-0 in true road games this year, including a 10 point win at West Virginia to start the year. They haven't played a tough schedule, but they've done the best possible with it.

9. Wichita State (7-2, 29 Pomeroy)
The Shockers came into the season with high expectations (the Missouri Valley Conference favorite) and for the most part have not disappointed. Their two losses are in neutral court games to Alabama and Temple (in overtime), two pretty good teams. Unfortunately for Wichita State, those games make up two of the three strong opponents they have played so far (the other being an 89-70 win over UNLV at home). If the Shockers were starting the week with a win in either of those games, they would almost certainly be top-five on this list, maybe top three. But you've got to win the big games. Aside from Bama, Temple and UNLV, Wichita hasn't played a team worth mentioning, and only has played one true road game. The Shockers still have plenty to prove.

8. Brigham Young (8-2, 17 Pomeroy)
BYU is the WCC's lone representative this week (Gonzaga is exluded, but probably wouldn't have cracked the top 10 anyway). The Cougars' two losses are at Utah State (when the Aggies were still looking good to open the season) and on a neutral court against Wisconsin. Both forgivable. Unfortunately, similar to Wichita State, the Cougars have played just about nobody otherwise (259th toughest non-conference schedule in Pomeroy's rankings). Still, they are by far the highest-rated team in Ken Pomeroy's rankings, and that does count for something to me after 10 games, so they edge the shockers out for the eight spot. BYU will have a chance to show what it's made of in a big game against Baylor December 17. After that, it is smooth sailing into the conference season.

7. UNLV (9-2, 24 Pomeroy)
UNLV was the undisputed top mid-major team a couple weeks ago. At that point, they were 7-0 and had just upset then-No. 1 North Carolina, and done it with relative ease in the second half. How had we all overlooked this team so egregiously? What we had failed to realize at that point was the Rebels had yet to play a true road game. Since then, they've played three. After a 2-overtime squeak-by over UC Santa Barbara, UNLV was beaten by 19 at Wichita State and 11 at Wisconsin. They scored just 51 points in Madison, despite averaging better than 80 per game this year. With their recent results taken into consideration, and the major concern about their ability on the road, UNLV drops significantly, into the seven spot.

6. Cleveland State (10-1, 69 Pomeroy)
The lowest Ken Pomeroy-ranked team in this week's poll, Cleveland State comes in at sixth because of its superb performance on the road this year. In 11 games, the Vikings have played three home games, two neutral site games, and six (!) true road games. They have won every one of those true road games, including a 61-57 decision at Vanderbilt to start the season. Vandy is typically extremely tough at home and extremely weak on the road, so the win is all the more impressive for Cleveland State. This team does have plenty of concerns, however. It is 259th in the country in scoring per game, 316th (!) in rebounding, and 172nd in field goal percentage. The rest of the country's scoring will probably come up in the coming weeks, and Cleveland State will likely trend toward the middle of the pack, but the rebounding and shooting numbers cannot stay where they are if the Vikings expect to keep winning.

5. Saint Louis (9-1, 23 Pomeroy)
The Billikens have tons of experience and looked very poised to threaten Xavier for the A-10 title early in the season. Then they lost at Loyola Marymount, and we realized that they don't have any real quality wins, despite beating big-name teams like Washington, Boston College, Villanova and Oklahoma (all those teams are down this year). Still, St. Louis is 9-1 and has some great shooters in addition to a seemingly vastly improved inside game with Brian Conklin. If they hold form in the A-10 season and turn in a 12-4 type performance, they could be looking at an at-large bid to the NCAAs.

4. San Diego State, (9-2, 58 Pomeroy)
The Aztecs figured to be in a rebuilding year after their best season ever in 2010-11. That is looking like anything but the case given what they've done so far. San Diegot State has raced to a 9-2 start, with losses coming at Baylor and a two-point decision against Creighton (see below). In the meantime, SDSU has won three true road games (including at Arizona) and beaten another top-25 ranked Pac-12 foe with a one-point victory over California. Looks like it's going to be another season with SDSU in the NCAA discussion (and my mid-major top five) all year long.

Murray State (10-0, 56 Pomeroy)
The Racers are the lone unbeaten of the bunch, and the team Ken Pomeroy says has the best chance of going undefeated this season (a result of the fact that they play in the weak Ohio Valley Conference more than the Racers being an amazing team). Whether or not that happens, Murray State has cemented itself as one of the top mid-majors in the country with a win over Memphis last night. The Racers have also won four true road games and are an excellent three-point shooting team. Like many undersized mid-major teams from the past, this one will almost certainly lose games due to poor shooting nights. But make no mistake; it's tough enough to go 10-0. These guys are the real deal.

2. Harvard (9-1, 34 Pomeroy)
Yes, Harvard. It may seem like this team is coming out of nowhere, but that's not the case. They lost the Ivy League regular season championship on a last-second shot to Princeton last year. And the Ivy League doesn't have a conference tournament, the regular season winner gets an automatic bid. Thus, Harvard had to sit around and fall out of everyone's minds while conference tournaments ran rampant across the country. The result? No at-large for the Crimson. This year, they're back with a vengeance. With the program's lone loss coming at UConn (a Final Four contender), a win over Florida State and four true road wins, Harvard is looking to seal up an at-large bid early this year. With the country taking notice (they cracked the top-25 for the first time this year), Tommy Amaker and crew appear to be in good shape.

1. Creighton (7-1, 49 Pomeroy)
Hate to have my number one team coming off a loss, but there was just no better option than the Blue Jays this week. Despite a head-scratching 80-71 setback at Saint Joseph's Creighton has been as good as any mid-major (and most teams in general) this season. They are averaging 85.1 points per game (fifth in the country), 20.5 assists per game (first) and shooting better than 51 percent from the field (fourth best). Sure, Creighton has not played the toughest competition, but in their toughest test of the year thus far, they passed, with an 85-83 win at San Diego State. That's an extremely difficult road game to play, and the Blue Jays showed they were up to the task. Since most of the other top teams in this poll had recent losses as well, Creighton tops my first mid-major top 10 of the season.

Moving Madness

Earlier in the week Jose Reyes made a crazy-expensive deal with the Marlins. As a New York Mets fan, it was sad to see Reyes go, but something I had been preparing for. On a bigger-picture scale, it was the type of signing all sports fans today have to get accustomed to. Players don't stay with the same team for their entire careers anymore; Michael Jordan and Brett Favre made sure we understood that. And teams are often more interested in moving a hot commodity who they think they can get good rebuilding value for. Sometimes, teams just don't have the money to make a move for a top-tier athlete. Whatever the reasons are, the fact remains: the professional sports landscape today is one of big business in which everybody is looking to make a move.

Still, knowing that about sports couldn't have prepared you for last night's whirlwind. December 8, 2011 is an afternoon and night I'll remember for a long time, as I read about Albert Pujols signing with the Angels in baseball, enjoyed Bill Simmons' unrest about the Celtics pursuing Chris Paul, scratched my head over Tyson Chandler likely heading to the New York Knicks, watched one of the best comedy episodes of TV I've ever seen in Community's "Regional Holiday Music" (probably the show's last shot at getting renewed for a fourth season), read that the Angels had also managed to grab pitcher CJ Wilson, heard Chris Paul was heading to the LA Lakers, and finally, found out the deal had been put on hold by the NBA because supposedly some owners thought the NBA was up to no good making another superpower team.

Not to mention there was an NFL game going on (luckily not an especially important one), college football awards being handed out, and the best hour of TV happening on FX from 10-11 p.m. Whoa.

First, take a look at the Angels. They went 86-76 last year, lost the AL West by 10 games and the AL Wildcard by 5. Signing the best position player and pitcher this offseason has got to improve their team by at five games you would think. I would figure it puts them into the discussion of the best teams in baseball. Their pitching rotation will now boast Jered Weaver, Dan Haren and Wilson, while their lineup will now boast Albert Pujols (whoever else is there doesn't really matter. They could bring up an entire Triple A roster and so long as those guys got on base every once in awhile, Pujols would make sure they came home). It is insane how much the Angels would appear to have improved with the addition of two men. What's more, is how (relatively) inexpensive it was for them. Pujols' $250 million is of course through the roof, but everyone knew that would be the case. Take a look at Wilson's deal though: 5 years, $77.5 million. AJ Burnett and John Lackey each signed deals for 5 years, $82.5 million, with the Yankees and Red Sox, respectively. Read that again. The Angels managed to sign Wilson for $5 million less than two pitchers he is better (significantly better?) than. Well done.

On the other hand, the St. Louis Cardinals are done. They lost their manager (one of the best in baseball history) to retirement, and then the best player in baseball during the offseason. Even with Adam Wainwright back in the rotation, counting on Lance Berkman and Matt Holliday to drive home at least 220 runs does not strike me as a sustainable model. But hey, St. Louis fans, you guys have enjoyed a pretty good run for awhile. Two World Series titles and seven NL Central titles since 2000 is a lot to be proud of. But it might be a bit to have anything more to cheer about.

As for the moves (or lack thereof) in the NBA, I was really surprised to hear about Tyson Chandler going to the Knicks, because signing Chandler would definitely knock the Knicks out of the running for Chris Paul. They wouldn't have the cap space or the trade fodder to make a deal for Paul happen. Perhaps the Knicks had heard through the grapevine that they were no longer in the running the for Paul, and went for the best they could get. Whatever the Knicks' reasoning, as I thought more about the signing, the more I thought it was a decent move, simply because having Tyson Chandler in the paint will make things way easier on Amare Stoudemire. Chandler will now be the guy guarding opponents' big men, and he will likely be the guy who is guarded by the opponents' center. This mean's (a)Stoudemire will be able to focus more of his efforts on offense (b) his won't have to bruise in the paint as much at either end, and (c) he'll be taking it much easier on his weak knees. That makes for a competitive Knicks team this year. Maybe not a title contender, but top 3 in the East? I could see it, especially if Dwight Howard moves and the Celtics get even older with a pissed off Rondo.

Then came the most wild news of the night. Chris Paul was traded to the Lakers, while Pau Gasol was going to the Rockets, while Lamar Odom, Kevin Martin, Luis Scola, Goran Dragic and a first-round pick were the Hornets' prize. It seemed like a fair enough trade. The Lakers get the player they wanted, the Rockets get a player they like a lot to replace Yao Ming and clear some cap space, while the Hornets get about as good a deal as they are going to get for Paul, who will be leaving at some point during or after this season.

But then the unthinkable happened. David Stern did his best Foghorn Leghorn impression and nixed the deal. "Now, hold on, I say hold on just one cotton pickin' moment!" The NBA technically owns the New Orleans Hornets right now, but was planning on allowing them to take care of themselves. Not so fast, evidently. The initial reports were that several owners had complained that the league was trying to create another superpower team at one of its signature franchises. Stern has since said "All decisions are made on the basis of what is in the best interests of the Hornets. In the case of the trade proposal that was made to the Hornets for Chris Paul, we decided, free from the influence of other NBA owners, that the team was better served with Chris in a Hornets uniform than by the outcome of the terms of that trade." Whatever reason is true, they're both moronic. First, if owners can really hold that much sway in what's going on, then the NBA is the most corrupt organization in sports. And Stern's quote is correct, but it is short-sighted. Of course the Hornets will be better with Chris Paul as their point guard. That's not the reason for this trade, though. The reason for the trade is that Chris Paul does not plan on resigning in New Orleans, so the Hornets understand it is better to move him now and get as much as possible than to have him sign elsewhere after this season and get absolutely nothing. Does Stern not get that? What the hell is going on here? What is really going on behind the scenes, because it doesn't make any sense.

Now, the news has come today that Dwight Howard is looking to go the Nets, but he had an illegal meeting with the Nets that his current team, the Orlando Magic, is protesting. Gaaaaaaahhh! But Howard says there was no meeting. Gaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh! Whatever the case is, it sounds like Superman is going to end up in New Jersey. And Mikhail Prokhorov will have the NBA's best center and second best point guard on his team's roster. Does this make the Nets an Eastern contender? Probably not? But I'd say it makes them a playoff sleeper. Howard carried the Magic to the NBA Championship series with nobody close to as good as Deron Williams as a teammate. You can't underestimate how good those two guys are.

A whooooooole lot happened yesterday. But also, a whole lot didn't happen. Whatever ends up happening, if the NBA season is half as exciting as December 8, I won't be able to stop watching.

UD vs. Alabama: Wooooooooooooooo!

That's the type of fire I've been dying to see from CJ all year.

This will not be a normal recap, cause it's coming the day after the game, but I was shocked (and pumped) to look at my phone and see that Dayton had beaten Alabama by 12. It was not a game I was expecting them to win at all. But in typical Flyer fashion, UD got itself up and played a great game, winning 74-62. Maybe with that type of win, they'll put themselves back on track.

First things first: this performance by UD will be an anomaly for the rest of the season, for a few reasons. Dayton might not shoot 60 percent from the field again, will rarely shoot 50 percent from the three again, and my two keys to the game from yesterday's post actually coming through and being keys to the game will almost certainly never happen again. But it was nice for UD to out-rebound Bama (26-20) and for Chris Johnson to have by far his best game of the season (8-9 fg, 20 points) and make me look like I know what I'm talking about. The best part about CJ's game last night appears to be that of his nine shots, just four of them were threes. So even if he had an off night from beyond the arc (say 1-4) he would have finished with 14. It's pretty simple. When the guy gets inside, he scores more.

Despite the ridiculous shooting percentage, there are things UD did this game that are sustainable, some things that they are perfectly capable of continuing the rest of the season. First is the rebounding margin. They won it. And while neither team grabbed many rebounds in total (a byproduct of UD's 60 percent shooting and Alabama's 50 percent), UD won the battle on the glass. That's important. That's what they need to be doing all the time, especially when A-10 season comes around and they aren't playing teams that are as big as Alabama. The other stat that was great to see was Dayton's 18 assists on the game. Once again, this is a slightly inflated total due to the Flyers' high shooting percentage, but when a team has 18 assists, that means it was moving the ball well all game long. So whether or not the shots are dropping at such a high clip, the offense is working well. You have to be encouraged by a stat like that.

I wasn't expecting Dayton to win this came, and yet, it feels like I should have seen this coming. I mean, isn't this the way UD has been since I can remember? Play well, play poorly on the road, have a good stretch, have a horrible stretch that causes you to scratch your head and wonder why you ever thought they were any good, then win a game against a great opponent. Yeah, that sounds about right. I'm used to that. I wish I wasn't, but I am. After this Bama win, a fan can't help but wonder why Dayton couldn't play like it did against Alabama when it was playing Miami or Buffalo, because 60 percent shooting would not have been necessary to beat either of those teams, and UD would be 8-1, looking great so far. Alas, that's not the way it's been with the Flyers for a long time, and, for now, it looks like us fans are going to have to endure that inconsistency for at least one more year.

From here on out, the non-conference is pretty weak. Dayton plays USC Upstate, Florida International, Seton Hall, Illinois-Chicago and Ole Miss. UD's record in those games absolutely cannot be worse than 4-1, with the one loss allowed against a Seton Hall team that looks...not bad this year. Really, it needs to be a 5-0 stretch. Get through that, then we're into what really matters for Dayton. A huge first game against Saint Louis, the team that has dominated them in recent years. With play like last night, Dayton can continue to make it happen against all these teams.

Dayton vs. Alabama

Fitting that while I'm at work Dayton will be playing the most important game of its non-conference season. So instead of doing a recap, I'm going to try and capture this game before it happens.

First, to make one thing clear. This game wouldn't be the most important for UD if it were not for recent events. Dayton comes into its home contest against Alabama the losers of a surprising two consecutive (bad) games. After an 84-55 loss against Buffalo and a 75-58 loss at Murray State, UD will be playing its marquee non-conference game with its season looking tenuous at best. A win over a top 15 opponent and maybe the Flyers have stopped the bleeding and are getting back on track. A loss? Well, that would mean UD has lost three straight, fallen to 5-4 and officially qualify for "reeling" status. At 5-4 nine games in, nothing short of a spectacular performance in the Atlantic 10 regular season and A-10 Tournament would have Dayton playing in any sort of postseason.

What needs to happen
Dayton's work on the glass needs to improve. Currently Dayton is 226th in the country in rebounds per game. That sits in stark contrast to what we've been accustomed to for Dayton for a long time. They have hung their hat on their rebounding for years. But that has not been the case this season. Alabama, meanwhile, is ranked 42nd in rebounding. UD is going to have to really pick up its effort on the glass if it doesn't want to get run out of the gym giving up offensive rebounds.

Chris Johnson's got to step up. CJ has been lackluster all season long. Even when he's scored, it hasn't been great. CJ has shot 36 percent for the season (34 percent from three), and he's only pulling down five boards a game. In the past, CJ has stepped up big in important games. It would be excellent if Dayton could get another 26 point, 20 rebound-type performance out of Johnson like he delivered against Duquesne two seasons ago. CJ has hit some clutch shots in big moments in the past. That hasn't been a factor this season. He has the talent to be the best player on the court tonight, but he's going to have to play a completely different game than we've seen from him this season. He's going to have be aggressive at all times: on the glass, going to the basket and occasionally hitting open shots when they are good ones to take.

Tonight's game is a huge one for the Flyers. They've got to bring their best possible game to the table. We need to see a vs. Pittsburgh-type performance. I'll be hoping to come home to some good news. I'll be rooting for Chris Johnson above all, because he's got to be dying about the way he's been playing so far. Have a good Wednesday, and go Flyers

Heisman heresy

The five finalists for the Heisman Trophy have been announced, and while I realize the Heisman doesn't seem to mean anything to anyone anymore (anyway, anytime, anywhere, anyhow), I still care about the award, if only for the reason that the voters get it wrong about as often as they get it right. Way too often, the Heisman goes to a player who was the leader on the best team in the country (Eric Crouch, Jason White, Troy Smith, to name a few). In pro sports, I believe an MVP voter should take the success of a candidate's team into more consideration. A guy from a playoff team should have a slight edge over a guy who missed the playoffs, because in the pros (for the most part), everyone is good. In college sports on the other hand, we come across all sorts of amazing players on teams that are not quite so amazing. And maybe they don't play as tough of competition as the Jason Whites of the world, but I would still prefer to see them recognized over him.

So I've been excited to see that Robert Griffin III of Baylor is projected to be the winner of this year's Heisman race. RG3 is the quarterback for the Bears, which in most years would be enough to count him out of the Heisman running before the season began. Not in 2011, though. Griffin's numbers are just too gawdy too ignore. RG3's stats this season: 3998 yards, 72.4 completion percentage, 36 touchdowns and six interceptions. Yikes. From looking over the finalists, in my mind there is no question Robert Griffin should win.

What's even more amazing though? If not for injuries, RG3 would have lost my Heisman vote to Oregon running back LaMichael James. James certainly benefits from playing in a high octane offense at Oregon, but even with missing a couple games this year, his numbers are unreal. On just 222 carries (70 less than last year), James rushed for 1646 yards. That is 7.4 yards per carry. That is ridiculous. To add to an already ridiculous running line, James averaged 12.4 yards per reception on the season. You can't help but wonder what those lines would look like had he been around for an entire season. Really, it's a travesty James wasn't invited to the ceremonies, considering his numbers are certainly better than fellow running back Trent Richardson, who had 40 more carries to make his mark.

Really, though, all of that is unimportant. All that matters in this Heisman vote is that Stanford QB Andrew Luck finishes no higher than third (fifth would be my preference, but that won't happen). Luck was a Heisman finalist last year but lost to a guy who deserved it, Cam Newton. As Luck has been lauded as the greatest NFL quarterbacking prospect since Peyton Manning ever since, his status as a great college football player has been inflated. Many "experts" have claimed that Luck is a shoe-in to take home the trophy. If that happens, it would be a disaster. Luck has been worse this season than last in every statistical category to measure quarterbacks other than TDs (35 this year, 32 last). If his season wasn't good enough to win last year, how can it be good enough this year.

If we're getting serious about it, Luck probably shouldn't have even received an invite to New York. Kellen Moore and Russell Wilson have both put together more impressive seasons at the quarterback than Luck has in 2011. They have better completeion percentages, higher yards per attempt fewer interceptions and higher quarterback ratings.

Andrew Luck may be all he's cracked up to be at the professional level. He may give the Colts 15 more years of unbelievable quarterbacking. But in 2011, at the collegiate level, he doesn't stack up. I don't have a vote, but hopefully those that do will use theirs wisely.

Tebow Up

I hated Tim Tebow when he was playing college football. It seemed like he was the only person I heard about on ESPN (when it wasn't time for Brett Favre to come out of retirement again, anyway). I heard about his great leadership, his great faith, I had to listen to the speech he gave to the media after Florida's one loss his senior year, and listen to the halftime scream-fest he laid on his teammates during the national championship game. I was sick of the guy, about as much as I've ever been sick of a sports entity. I was happy when college football ended after Tebow's senior year, because I figured I wouldn't have to hear too much about the guy again. He wasn't a big draft prospect and was not expected to have an impact on the NFL.

Well, it's happening again. All we're hearing about is how great Tebow's leadership is, how his presence has his teammates working and playing harder, how what Tebow and the Broncos are doing right now (five straight wins) is defying everything we thought we knew about being successful in the NFL. You know what, though? This time I'm enjoying it. For whatever reason, Tebow's impact on the game of football this time around is not rubbing me the wrong way. Maybe it's because every Broncos game since he took over has been fun to watch in some way, mainly because they've all been down-to-the-wire type football. If nothing else, Broncos games are exciting. Even when they're low scoring, defensive struggles, with poor offense they manage at least a couple minutes of excitement that Alabama-LSU never could (I shouldn't have brought them up. It's just going to get me upset). Maybe it's because it is immensely enjoyable to watch Merrill Hoge, Trent Dilfer, Trey Wingo and Tim Hasselbeck just sit in the studio and blather on about nothing football related when they try to explain Tebow's winning ways. The fact that he has those clowns tongue-tied is providing some classic entertainment.

Whatever the reason is, I'm on the Tebow Train as it's making its second journey across America. And I gotta say, in an AFC that has exactly zero teams I like, I'll be rooting for the Train to have an extended trip into 2012. Maybe even with a final stop in Indianapolis (no farther though, that place is still reserved for the Pack).

UD at Murray State

I can remember in my freshman year of playing intramural basketball I put together a team of high school friends and a couple guys on the floor. We were not very good, but signed up for the non-competitive league and I figured we'd be a .500-ish team with a shot at winning a game or two in the tournament.

When the season started, things weren't going well. We were a decent enough defensive team (with a little trouble on the glass due to lack of size) but beyond poor offensively. It stemmed from the fact that we were shooting something like 18 percent from the field on the season (if you can believe it, we did not have a statistician on the bench keeping track of things, so I'm guessing at the exact percentage). Sometime during our third or fourth game, Big Rob came up to me and posed the question, "Nate, what can we do man, what can we change up?" To which I responded with something like, "Well, we've got to start hitting some shots, and if we can do that, we'll be okay." This answer aggravated Big Rob, because he had heard it from me more than once before. He told me that there had to be something else, I couldn't just keep blaming our inability to score on our poor shooting. I couldn't come up with anything else good for him on the spot there, because, plain and simple, in basketball, if you aren't getting good shots and just not making them, there's not much to be done about it, I thought. Later on I came up with the brilliant solution: stop shooting. Take it to the hole, try and post up some, maybe get a foul call (an excellent idea in intramurals especially, whose officials are dreadful). Did we end up winning the championship that season? No, not even close. But with an offense that scored every now and again, we were competitive in our games and enjoying ourselves. All because of a simple thought: teams that don't shoot well shouldn't shoot the ball.

I couldn't help but revisit this thought as I watched Murray State pull away from Dayton in the second half of their game Sunday. As UD put up brick after brick (with a few airballs sprinkled in for good measure), it became painfully obvious what needed to happen; Dayton needed to have been goign to the hoop all game long. By the time anyone figured that out (Josh Benson), it was too late. Thanks to another poor effort defensively, Dayton went down badly on the road, 75-58.

The Good
Josh Benson. The big man was the only positive to take away from Sunday afternoon's game. Not even the blue away jerseys could make up for what was happening on the court. But Benson played a nice game, and had an especially good second half. The redshirt junior was 8-8 from the field, 1-1 from the foul line and finished with 17 points and six boards. Benson did most of his work around the rim, but also stepped away from the basket and hit a couple mid-range jumpers. He was the only Dayton player that had an interest in going inside, which was a good thing, because Benson knew he had a mismatch in the paint. Murray State is a good team, but severely lacking in size, and Dayton needed to take better advantage of that throughout. Benson did, so he gets some kudos. UD will need Benson to be aggressive on offense like he was in this game, but to be able to do it against better big men as well.

The Bad
Chris Johnson. One of Dayton's biggest problems as a team right now is that it only has nine scholarship players. That means that guys who are doing nothing on the court, like Luke Fabrizius, Josh Parker and yes, CJ, still have to get some playing time for sheer lack of bodies. I don't even recognize Chris Johnson anymore. He isn't shooting well, only shoots threes (1-8 from the field Sunday, 0-6 from three with an airball), does not hustle like he used to, does not rebound like he used to, isn't getting to the foul line, and when he does, not shooting them as well as he has throughout his career. It's mind-boggling. Really, it's sad, because CJ was one of my favorite Dayton players ever. Great athlete, hustles like crazy, decent scorer, makes plays all over the court that take your breath away (I never said "wow" about somebody's rebounding til I saw CJ. I imagine him at UD was like watching Rodman in the prime of his career on the glass), plays with no regard for his own body and is a quiet guy who is not looking to show the other team up when he makes a good play. Aside from the quiet part, CJ is none of those things anymore. I don't know what to do about it. I hope Archie Miller has a good idea soon.

The Defense. UD gave up 75 more points. They've now let up 75 to Murray State, 70 to Minnesota, 72 to Miami, 76 to Wake Forest and 84 to Buffalo. Part of Sunday's problems came from the fact that the Racers were on fire in the second half. But UD's defense was bad all the same. They didn't hustle to get out on shooters, and they got buried by long-range shooting in the second half. The real problem is that this seems to be the rule rather than the exception. UD's defense is just not very good, and the players aren't talented enough on offense to consistently score in the 70s and 80s. If the D doesn't improve, UD's losing streak will grow.

The Coaching. In the first half, the Flyers were a not-too-shabby 10-22 from the field. They were 2-10 from the three point line. That means they were 8-10 from inside the arc. How did Archie Miller not show that stat to his players in the locker room at halftime, circled about 1000 times, and scream, "Get the damn ball inside!"? I'll never know. What I do know, is that UD decided to take that information and shove it right in our faces, as they came out and put on a clinic in the second half, going 1-11 on three-pointers. This is a very simple concept. When you aren't shooting well, you don't keep shooting. Dayton hasn't been poor from beyond the arc this season, but its last several games have started a declining trend in shooting percentage (only against Minnesota has Dayton shot three-pointers well in its last four games).

Quitting? While watching Murray State pull away in the second half, I started rationalizing out loud with my dad. Murray State is a pretty good team, after all. They will have a great shot at an NCAA Tournament berth out of the Ohio Valley Conference, like they do every year. It was an away game, and UD is typically bad away from home. And Murray State shot well, making this a loss that was not really unexpected. It still didn't feel good, but I could understand it. Then, as Murray State scored an easy basket to make its lead 17 or 19 in a game that still had about eight minutes left, my dad muttered, "This team quits." Those words have been killing me since. Is he right? In the last two games, he has been. UD quit in the first half against Buffalo, and definitely shut it down in the second half at Murray State. In case you didn't know, that's not a quality to be excited about. It's a quality to be abhorred. The Brian Gregory/Chris Wright version of Dayton basketball had tons of flaws, but heart was never one of them. I'm not willing to say this teams lacks heart already, but that thought has entered my mind (thanks, Dad). Next time UD has a slow stretch that ends up in a big lead for its opponent, keep your eyes peeled. Dayton didn't care for the final 10 or so minutes against Murray State. That kind of shit can't ever happen again.