The Kind-Hearted Smart Aleck

While there's always a critique here and there when the NCAA Tournament Selection Committee announces the 68-team field, the criticism was bumped up a notch this year, especially from yours truly. After the field was set, most college basketball analysts rightfully complained that there was no good reason to invite Arizona State and UCLA over USC or Oklahoma over Oklahoma State. USC finished 2nd in the Pac-12, lost in the conference title game to top seeded Arizona, and both Arizona State and UCLA finished near the middle of the pack in the conference standings. Meanwhile Oklahoma State defeated Oklahoma twice during the course of the season and the Sooners struggled more during the tail end of the season than a drunk blind man struggles at the urinal. So when it comes to these gripes, I completely agree with the ESPN commentators, but that's where the agreements ended. Two teams who were fully deserving of earning a spot in the field of 68 were Middle Tennessee State and S...

It's almost here! Beginning tomorrow, March Madness will be on full display, and I can't wait! Since there isn't one or two teams that stand out to me this year, I'm thinking this tournament will be especially crazy (in a good way). Bring on the chaos! How wide open are things this year? I see these 9 teams all having a decent shot and running the table and winning the title: 2 Arizona 2 Duke 1 Gonzaga 1 Kansas 2 Kentucky 2 Louisville 1 North Carolina 3 UCLA 1 Villanova Here are four teams which have the skill and talent to make a run for it as well: 3 Florida State 5 Notre Dame 3 Oregon 4 West Virginia Lastly, here are a couple of potential sleepers: 7 Michigan 6 SMU As far as 1st round upsets go, here are ten games to keep your eyes on: 9 Michigan State over 8 Miami (Florida) 9 Seton Hall over 8 Arkansas 9 Vanderbilt over 8 Northwestern 10 Marquette over 7 South Carolina 10 Virginia Commonwealth over 7 St. Mary's 10 Wichita State ove...

I remember getting a big kick out of hearing someone tell me a couple years ago that all of Muse's songs sounded the same. Right then and there, I wanted to play for him the hard-rocking "Stockholm Syndrome" followed by the three-piece symphony, "Exogenesis". If, after hearing those songs, the guy still claimed that all of the band's songs sounded alike, I'd kindly suggest that he get his hearing checked. It's one reason I love the band's music so much - each album and each song within the album is/are its/their own adventure. Perhaps this is why some critics have liked to place labels next to Muse that they are like Radiohead or Queen or even U2. Singer Matt Bellamy even recently told Rolling Stone magazine, "We are defined by the fact that we can't be defined by anybody." I think he's right and this is both exciting, yet frustrating for die-hard Muse fans, critics and music fans in general. Let's face it - most peopl...