Time for New Ballgames

Our friends at the Boston Red Sox blog, Me and Pedro Down by the Ballpark, have asked us to share our thoughts on our Cleveland Indians as part of a team-by-team season preview feature called "Know Thy Enemy" that they have been running at their fine site. Given that our last baseball season ended at the hands of the Red Sox, thinking about the Indians in view of the team from Boston seems to be as good a way as any to start thinking about our team on opening day, so check out our preliminary thoughts on the 2008 Tribe here, at Me and Pedro.

Two Dog Night

The Elite Eight begins tonight with all four number one seeds still alive and playing as favorites in this weekend's games.

Our friends at covers.com tell us that, "[o]ver the last six NCAA Tournaments, Elite Eight underdogs have gone 15-8-1 against the spread (ATS), going 2-2 ATS or better in each season. Of those 24 underdogs, 10 have won outright, including six in the last two years."

We think that this is consistent with the general trend toward parity that we have seen develop over recent years in college athletics, and we will play that trend by taking both underdogs tonight. We think that both Xavier and Louisville have the talent to win outright against UCLA and North Carolina tonight. Xavier has athletic big men who can guard Kevin Love, apparently the only Bruin who can score, and Louisville, particularly center David Padgett, really impressed us on Thursday night against Tennessee. The general public favors both UCLA (55%) and UNC (68%), but the experts at wagerline.com are split on the UNC/Louisville matchup, and favor Xavier over UCLA. This indicates that the smarter money is on the dogs tonight.

The picks: Louisville +6 over North Carolina, and Xavier +6.5 over UCLA.

Overall Picks record (6-5 (54.5%)). NCAA Hoops (5-4 (55.5%)).

We Speak for the Tree

One nice thing about us here at Cleveland Frowns is that when we make a losing pick, we sometimes tell you in the title of the post that the pick is going to lose. No such situation today. We love Stanford +2 against Texas. The majority of the action is on Texas (80% at Sportsbook.com, 66% at wagerline.com) and we’re happy to go the other way. The early action indicates generally that folks aren’t enamored with Stanford’s 7-foot Lopez twins. Perhaps these folks are stung by memories of the Collins twins, but the athletic Lopezes are different, and Texas has nobody to contend with them inside. Perhaps it is easy to not take Stanford and the Lopez twins seriously, given that they are admittedly “obsessed” with all things Disney, and lay a claim to being Michael Jackson’s biggest fans – adorning their dorm room walls with Jackson memorabilia. But the twins seem to have interesting and principled reasons for their Disney obsession, and, whatever his faults, its refreshing to see some public appreciation for Michael Jackson’s work. Perhaps this is all indication of the kind of vision that helps leaders lead teams to victory, as the twins did last week against a tough and underrated Marquette team. They did so, despite their coach Trent Johnson having been ejected by an overzealous referee just minutes into the game. Having Johnson on the bench for the whole game will only help.

Texas, on the other hand, played an ugly game against a Miami team that they were expected to beat soundly. Texas shoots a lot of threes, and has hit them so far, but they can’t hit free throws (22-39 in the Tournament so far – yikes!) which is evidence of a lack of discipline. Texas point guard DJ Augustin, a borderline NBA lottery pick, gets a lot of press, but it should be tough for him to penetrate against Stanford’s size inside (see last night’s Tennessee/Louisville matchup – ugh!). Folks are saying that Augustin’s lottery status will largely depend on his performance in this tournament. If he plans to enter the draft after this season, this adds an element of pressure. While Texas will essentially be playing a home game tonight in Houston, this information is something that every bettor will and has already taken into account, and thus, is reflected in the line.

Brook Lopez is widely considered to be a lock for the NBA lottery once he decides to enter. Now folks are saying that his brother Robin should be a lottery pick as well. We’ll take the disciplined team with two potential lottery picks over the undisciplined team with one. The pick: Stanford +2. Check back tomorrow and Sunday for Elite 8 picks.

Overall Picks record (6-4 (60%)). NCAA Hoops (5-3 (62.5%)).

Volunteering Ourselves Up for the Slaughter?

We’ve analyzed the Sweet Sixteen matchups and one team stands out as a far sweeter pick than the rest. That team plays tomorrow night. Check back tomorrow for details.

As for tonight’s games, we’ll take the Tennessee Volunteers +3 to cover against the Louisville Cardinals. We know that Louisville has demolished the competition thus far in the Tournament. We know that Tennessee has squeaked its way into the round of sixteen. We know that Louisville’s Big East looks like a tougher conference than the Volunteers’ SEC. We know that Tennessee has a question mark at the point guard position. We know that Louisville is bigger than Tennessee. And we know that Tennessee star Chris Lofton has been held to single digit scoring in the Tourney’s first two rounds and has an injured ankle. We’re picking Tennessee because the Louisville pick looks too easy. We’re always wary of the team that looked too good in their last game. And Louisville has shot the lights out in the first two rounds. How long can that last? And they’ve also been repeatedly described as a group of bad character guys who have finally bought in. This always sounds suspicious to us, generally. Finally, we like Tennessee coach Bruce Pearl, who’s not afraid to go skins. The pick: Tennessee +3. Remember to keep something in the tank for tomorrow’s play.

Overall Picks record (6-3 (66.7%)). NCAA Hoops (5-2 (71.4%)).

Garbucks

We’ll have our Sweet Sixteen picks for you by Thursday afternoon, with our Elite Eight picks to follow this weekend. Astute Cleveland Frowns commenter Ben correctly notes below that “bettors would . . . be up” if they had played our NCAA picks so far.

Until the Tourney starts back up, we have for you this uplifting story about a coffee shop operated by special-ed students at Akron’s Garfield High School, Garbucks. Garfield is the alma mater of Buckeye football star, Chris “Beanie” Wells; former Buckeye football star and current Minnesota Viking, Antoine Winfield; and loyal Cleveland Frowns grandmother and duly canonized Saint, Grandma Christine, a.k.a. Grandma.

We appreciate the efficiency of a solution that satisfies both the need for good coffee at Garfield, and the provision of practical education for special needs students, but we can’t help but wonder about the Garfield students who drink the coffee served at Garbucks. Specifically, we can’t help but note that the increased demand for coffee in high schools is a symptom of the societal illness that is the perpetual sleep deprivation of our nation’s high school and junior high students.

Stephen Moore makes a good case in the 9/1/06 Wall Street Journal: “As a father of two teenage boys, I can attest to the fact that the single greatest teen crisis in America is not drugs, alcohol, smoking or early sexual activity, but sleep deprivation. . . . The National Sleep Foundation finds that teens now average between 6.5 and seven hours of uninterrupted sleep on a weeknight and only one in five gets the recommended nine hours. . . . Studies show that spurting growth hormones in teens alter their circadian rhythm and naturally turn them into night owls, physiologically uninterested in 9:30 p.m. bedtimes and fiercely opposed to 6:15 a.m. wake-up calls. . . . Amy Wolfson, a professor at Holy Cross who studies Americans’ sleep patterns tells me: ‘The evidence is pretty clear that students in the later starting schools get more sleep and have less tardiness, fewer behavior problems, and do somewhat better in school.’” And we wonder why most teenagers are such jerks. Read the whole thing here.

As home schooled students continue to run circles around the rest with respect to academic performance, and with movements such as the one described in Moore’s piece, we are confident that we will soon enough see a wholesale restructuring of the American educational “workday” so that, whatever else, it will allow students to get more sleep.

Until then, if we’re not going to let the kids sleep, we might as well make sure they have decent coffee. And once the problem of teen sleep deprivation is fixed? They could turn Garbucks into a gourmet salad bar. GarFields of Green?

NCAA Quick Picks: Round 2, Day 2

Hope you took Wisky and Marquette to the bank yesterday. Two more picks for today:

Davidson +5 over Georgetown: Davidson has Stephen Curry going for them, and that’s about it. Their tallest player is six inches shorter than Georgetown’s 7’2 Roy Hibbert. But Stephen Curry is generally recognized as the best shooter in college basketball today. And he’s Dell Curry’s son. And there’s this from covers.com: “[Davidson Coach] Bob McKillop is the kind of coach that gets the most out of his players and can also manipulate the Xs and Os to put his team in a better position to win. He managed to overcome Gonzaga's [size] advantage (the biggest player on the Davidson roster is 6-foot-8) mainly because they were able to pressure the Gonzaga guards and keep the ball out of the paint.” Sounds good. Of all of the low seed small schools that have advanced to play high seeds, one of them should win, or at least cover. In looking at the other matchups, Davidson appears to me to be the best choice, and the most fun to pull for today. The Pick: Davidson +5.

Oklahoma +7.5 over Louisville: The line seems high for this game between two teams that play defense, and grind it out on offense. Oklahoma, unlike Kansas State, appears to be truly coming together at the end of the season after a number of fits and starts. Oklahoma is coached by former Duke star Jeff Capel, who made a terrific impression on us when he was a college player, and is likely slept on as a coach. Plus, Oklahoma has Longar Longar. We’ll take the points. The Pick: Oklahoma +7.5

Overall Picks record (5-2 (71.4%)). NCAA Hoops (3-1 (75.0%).

Don't Pass on Wisky

Number 3 seed Wisconsin (30-4) takes on 11 seed Kansas State (21-11) this afternoon in the Midwest Regional. Kansas State’s Michael Beasley is expected to be drafted first overall in this June’s NBA Draft if he declares. Bill Walker came to Kansas State with folks expecting big things from him. While he hasn’t panned out as expected, his 17 point first half against USC (22 points total) gave us a glimpse of his talent. So why is this team an 11 seed? Why did they lose 6 of their last 9 games before backing into the Tournament? Kansas State players claim that they have new life, after their coach brought extra energy into their Tournament preparation. But how long can that last? Folks are impressed with K-State’s individual talent, and with their first round upset win against USC.

But how big of an upset was it to beat USC? Tim Floyd’s USC? The same Tim Floyd who just a week or so ago decided to offer rapper Lil’ Romeo, a mediocre hoops talent, a full basketball scholarship? Floyd said that Romeo’s presence will increase the number of teenage girls in the crowd at their home games. U.S.C. star O.J. Mayo was the consensus number one recruit in the country last year, and chose USC because it was the best place from which he could “market himself.” Wrong O.J. The best place you can market yourself is in the late rounds of the NCAA Tournament. Better luck next year, if you decide to stay in school.

So yeah, we’re not buying that Kansas State has flipped the switch. They beat an overrated USC team. They won’t beat a very good Wisconsin team. Wisconsin is a disciplined team that has had two of its starters, Michael Flowers and Joe Krabbenhoft, named to the All Big Ten Defensive Team. Last year, going into the Tournament, Wisconsin was ranked second in the nation when they faced off against Ohio State in one of their final games of the regular season. In that game, their star, and consensus All-Big Ten forward Brian Butch suffered a grotesque elbow injury that kept him out of the postseason. We can be sure that the Senior will savor his chance this year.

The line started at 5, which was low, and has been bet down to 4.5 by Kansas State backers, who are, in effect, passing us the Wisky. We’ll take it. The Pick: Wisconsin -4.5.

We like Wisconsin so much that we’re hesitant to pick another today, but since we promised pickS, we’ll take 6 seed Marquette +3 over third seeded Stanford. Stanford was celebrating dunks when they had a 20 point lead over Cornell. Cornell. Marquette has three solid guards Dominic James, Wesley Matthews, and Jerel McNeal who average about 40 points and 10 assists a game. While I’m not sure I’ve ever understood this, there is that old adage about guard play being so important in the Tournament. Further, while they will be outsized against Stanford and the 7 foot Lopez twins, Marquette has experience playing against bigger teams, and neither Lopez is as big as Georgetown’s Roy Hibbart. The betting public loves Stanford here (82%), this line has been bet up from 2.5 to 3. We see enough reason to back the Golden Eagles here. The Pick: Marquette +3.


We'll take a look at tomorrow's action. If we like anything we'll post.

Home Cookin'

Golden Flashes. Damn... Can’t win ‘em all.

But you can win two out of three. In fact, two out of three is the goal. If the sucker bets didn’t win some of the time, the suckers’ money wouldn’t be there the rest of the time. It’s what makes the world go round, as they say. Or what makes the universe not collapse on itself…

But damn…Kent State. Bummer. So you see why we had planned to wait until Round 2 before we made some picks. But we couldn’t resist supporting a run with the local boys. And we’re not afraid to do it again tonight.

Tonight LeBron is all but assured of becoming the Cavaliers’ all time leading scorer – all but assured of passing the great Brad Daugherty – in front of the home crowd…his home crowd…on a most special Friday night. And it can never be more special for LeBron anywhere else but here in Cleveland. Here in Northeast Ohio, where he was born, where he is home, and where he was homeless – where he lived in his mother’s car. Where basketball meant as much to him than it could have possibly meant to anyone else. From his mother’s car, to Akron St. Vincent/St. Mary, to the ping-pong balls bouncing……just so that he would end up playing for the city and the people who could, would, and do love him the most.

And that’s why he would be a fool to leave.

Because no matter where he goes, no matter how much money Nike, Jay-Z, or anyone else promises to pay him, he will never mean more, could never mean more, than he does mean, and could mean to the people in Northeast Ohio. That means that no one could ever mean more to LeBron than we can.

And rest assured that, win or lose, the crowd at the Q will let LeBron know what he means to them tonight, and he will return the favor.

So we’ll pick the Cavs -5 tonight against the Raptors. Not because we think it’s an especially Savvy play, but because we think it’s a special one. Tonight should be one of those nights, another special chapter in what could and should be a long line of them.

So yeah, we’re picking the Cavs because we want them to win. We want to live in a world where LeBron blows us away tonight. We want to live in a world where LeBron stays a Cavalier. We want to live in a world where LeBron has no intention of leaving the Cavs, but pretends that he does so that he can sell New Yorkers some silly Yankee shoes. And if that’s not the world that we live in? It’s disposable income – we don’t pick to work, we pick to play.

Enjoy the NCAAs today folks. Our attention is on the pros tonight in Cleveland.

Check back tomorrow for Round 2 NCAA picks.

Diversion Tactics

I received the following telling email this morning from the kind folks at Sportsbook.com.

from "Sportsbook.com"
9:59 am (3½ hours ago)
date Mar 20, 2008 9:59 AM
subject Sportsbook.com’s Game of the Day: Kent State vs. UNLV (2:55 PM EST)

Hi Peter,

Here's Sportsbook.com's Game of the Day:

Against non-conference opponents, UNLV is an impressive 8-2 against the spread (ATS) this season. Additionally, the Runnin' Rebels covered four of their last five neutral site games. Kent State has been in a bit of a scoring slump, averaging just 62.2 points per game (PPG) in their last five outings. This plays to the advantage of UNLV bettors as the Rebels held their opponents to 62.1 PPG on 40.7% shooting from the field this season, including just 30.7% from beyond the arc. Considering the numbers above, it is surprising that only 41% of the early bettors are backing UNLV (+2).

Regards,

The Sportsbook.com Team

I like how the Sportsbook.com Team tell us that Kent has been in a scoring slump without telling us that their opponents have been in a bigger scoring slump. Kent has won 9 of their last 10, covering the spread in 8 of those 10 games. Of course, this is a reasonable attempt by the sportsbook to minimize its risk in an attempt to attract equal amounts of action on each side -- the same reason books change the point spread. It's interesting to think of the relationship between the Las Vegas sportsbooks, who for all intents and purposes end up setting the lines, and the offshore sportsbooks, who generally follow Vegas's lead. Obviously the offshore sportsbook would have more trouble attracting bets on the team from Las Vegas than would the Vegas sportsbooks. I wonder how, and to what extent the offshore books account for the "local" effect. Even the most seasoned professional sport bettors must be affected by their proximity to the UNLV team. Isn't it true that all politics is local? Again, if this means anything, it means that Kent should probably be a bigger favorite than it is.

Enjoy the games!

Frownie Bytes: A Tourney Pick, The NCAA, Maurice Clarett, Shelby Steele, Obama, Hillary, and Inspiring Words from Jay-Z for Eliot Spitzer

This link from Deadspin brought more than 1,000 new friends into our little orange bowl this week. Lucky for the sportsbooks, the link wasn’t posted until after Kent State soundly beat Akron in Saturday night’s MAC final. The books shouldn’t be so lucky if you check with Cleveland Frowns before you put your plays in for this weekend’s second round NCAA Tournament matchups. As for the first round, we’re generally content to see how things play out, but we think Kent is a good buy again on Thursday against the Runnin' Rebels of UNLV. Both Kent and UNLV have performed well against the spread this season, but UNLV (Nevada Las Vegas) has done so in the sportsbooks’ back yard. This should account for some extra value in a Kent play on Thursday. The betting public appears to be evenly split, with the experts on Covers.com leaning toward UNLV. This should give us even more comfort in going with Kent. Finally, Kent is led by Mike Scott, a senior with NCAA Tournament experience, and a pair of transfers who have settled well in Northeast Ohio, Hammin Quaintance, and MAC Player of the Year Al Fisher, who essentially fell into the Golden Flashes’ lap after being recruited sight unseen. This is all reason enough to believe that there’s something special about this year's Kent squad, and reason enough to pick Kent State -2.5 over UNLV.

Until this weekend, some Frownie Bytes to chew on…

More Snubs: Ohio State isn’t invited to the Big Dance this year and some folks are crying snub. Regardless of whether the Buckeyes deserved an NCAA Tourney slot, that they weren’t invited is consistent with the theory advanced in the below post – that the NCAA does not want folks to be reminded that the best college players leave for the NBA after one season, and takes this into account in the postseason tournament selection process. Last year’s Zips pointed up this fact vis a vis LeBron’s former high school teammates Dru Joyce and Romeo Travis, and this year’s Buckeyes, the first team to have three freshman selected in the top 21 picks of the NBA Draft (Oden, Conley, and Cook), provide an equally forceful reminder.

Maurice Clarett’s Livelihood: Commenter bj raised the question in the below post that perhaps Maurice Clarett “was mostly responsible for screwing up his own life.” Perhaps we ought to be hesitant to judge a man who has had his very livelihood taken away from him. Telling Clarett that he could not play football is something like telling Picasso that he couldn’t paint. Even if it was for only one year, should we really be surprised that Clarett went a bit crazy under such circumstances? What is it that they say about Idle Hands?

Steele Hard on Obama: Shelby Steele is a research fellow at Stanford’s Hoover Institution who specializes in the study of race in America. He takes the general position that “too much of what has been done since the Great Society in the name of black rights has far more to do with the moral redemption or self-satisfaction of whites than with any real improvement in the lives of blacks.” Steele has just published a book on Barack Obama called “A Bound Man: Why We Are Excited About Obama and Why He Can’t Win.” The Wall Street Journal published a hard hitting Steele piece today that gives us some insight into the title of his book. Some excerpts:

“[I]n the end, Barack Obama's candidacy is not qualitatively different from Al Sharpton's or Jesse Jackson's. Like these more irascible of his forbearers, Mr. Obama's run at the presidency is based more on the manipulation of white guilt than on substance. . . Mr. Obama flatters whites, grants them racial innocence, and hopes to ascend on the back of their gratitude. Two sides of the same coin. . . .

But bargainers have an Achilles heel. They succeed as conduits of white innocence only as long as they are largely invisible as complex human beings. They hope to become icons that can be identified with rather than seen, and their individual complexity gets in the way of this. So bargainers are always laboring to stay invisible. (We don't know the real politics or convictions of Tiger Woods or Michael Jordan or Oprah Winfrey, bargainers all.)

. . . Thus, nothing could be more dangerous to Mr. Obama's political aspirations than the revelation that he, the son of a white woman, sat Sunday after Sunday -- for 20 years -- in an Afrocentric, black nationalist church in which his own mother, not to mention other whites, could never feel comfortable. How does one "transcend" race in this church? The fact is that Barack Obama has fellow-traveled with a hate-filled, anti-American black nationalism all his adult life, failing to stand and challenge an ideology that would have no place for his own mother. And what portent of presidential judgment is it to have exposed his two daughters for their entire lives to what is, at the very least, a subtext of anti-white vitriol?”

The whole thing is worth a read. Comments are especially welcome on this piece.

Steele on Iraq: Let it be known that Steele is no one trick pony. In one of the finer pieces I’ve read on Iraq, in December 2006 Steele brilliantly argued that “America is a danger to the world in its own right, not because we are a powerful bully but because we don't fully accept who we are” He explains that:

“Only reluctant superpowers go to war with a commitment to fight until they can escape. So today the talk is of "draw-downs," "redeployments," etc. But all these options are undermined by the fact that we simply have not won the war. We have not achieved hegemony in Iraq, so there is no umbrella of American power under which a new nation might find its own democratic personality, or learn to defend itself. We have failed to give "peace in the streets" to the people we are asking to embrace the moderations of democracy. Without American hegemony, these "draw-downs" and "redeployments" are acts of outrageous moral irresponsibility, because they cede hegemony to the forces of menace--the Sunni insurgency, the Shiite militia, the Islamic extremists, the wolfish ambitions of Iran. It was America's weak application of power that made space for these forces to begin with. To now shrink the American footprint further would likely offer the country up as a killing field and embolden Islamic radicals everywhere.”

This is another one that’s worth reading in its entirety. It’s also worth noting that this was written before “The Surge.”

Primary Update: Two weeks ago I wrote about the Ohio/Texas/Rhode Island Democratic Primary results, and suggested that they might reflect that Hillary’s “experience” means that she has no choice but to be more realistic than Obama about Iraq and trade (in view of her past support for NAFTA, and her vote in support of the authorization for the war), and that voters in last week’s primaries might have appreciated this realism on the part of Clinton, even if Obama is the candidate who would end up enacting more “realistic” policies on both of these issues. I also discussed what I viewed as the other viable interpretation of the results, that is that the voters in these primaries did not perceive the difference between the candidates on these issues, but rather view them both as selling the exact same dream, and happened to view Hillary as a better salesperson for that dream last week. I framed this as the “more cynical view.”

Dan Henninger, Cleveland native and Wall Street Journal editorial page editor, subscribes to this more cynical view, and elaborated on it again in a recent column: “amid the screaming, raucous throng [at Cleveland State University], the fact remains: Her message is a downer. It is completely negative. She helps predisposed audiences to bring their resentments into sharp focus, and explode . . . It may yet turn out that this woman and hard times are a strong match to win the Democratic Party's nomination.”

The whole piece reads to me like it might have been written by a Clevelander who’s been living in New York for too long. Maybe he’s right, but with all else held equal, could folks really view Hillary as a better salesperson than Barack? I find it hard to believe that there’s not something out there that resonated with last Tuesday’s Hillary voters that goes beyond mere salesmanship If it’s not their “differences” on these two primary issues, what could it be? (Before you suggest the obvious “cynical” answer, look at the different states that each of them has won. I wonder what Henninger really thinks about the answer to this question. He doesn’t seem to be telling.)

A Huge Bummer: that Eliot Spitzer ended up resigning last week. Had he stayed on, we might have had a productive public discussion about the costs and benefits of the legal prohibition on prostitution, and more importantly, about the difference between law and morality. It’s a shame to see the man resign based on a narrative that essentially refuses to consider the worthiness of the broken law that has forced his resignation. Spitzer has a lot of money. It would have been interesting to see him let his lawyers go to work, spin this incident as the mundane, private matter that it might actually be, and go about his business governing. The fact is, we all have the right to break any law we want, even governors and former prosecutors, as long as we pay the legally mandated penalty. The legal penalty for Spitzer’s lawbreaking most certainly did not necessitate his resignation. Jay-Z’s counsel would have been useful:

"I've got great lawyers for cops so dress warm.
Charges don't stick to dude he's teflon.
I'm too sexy for jail like I'm Right Said Fred.
I'm not guilty, now gimme back my bread.
Mr. [U.S.] Attorney I'm not sure if they told you-
I'm on TV every day, where the f**k could I go to?
Plus – [Spitz] don't run, [Spitz] stand and fight.
[Spitz] a soldier, [Spitz] been fightin all his life.
So what could you do to me? It's not new to me.
Sue me; f**k you - What's a couple dollars to me?"

Perhaps they don’t prepare one to mount this kind of defense at Harvard, Princeton, and those fancy New York prep schools. While we can’t fault Spitzer for resigning given what he might be going through personally, we might hope that our next leader who finds himself in such a position due to a similar law might stand stronger against a current of irrational public condemnation.

MAC Tournament Special: LeBron, Akron's 2007 Postseason Tournament Snub, And a Pot of Golden Flashes at the End of the Rainbow

The University of Akron Zips men’s basketball program suffered a series of crushing blows at the end of last season. First, the Zips lost their chance at an automatic NCAA Tournament bid by losing to Miami of Ohio in the MAC Tournament’s championship game on a “desperation three-point bank shot” that was controversial due to a late start of the game clock on the final play. The NCAA selection committee then declined to give the Zips an at large bid to the Tourney. Finally, and shockingly, the Zips, after finishing 26-7, were left out of the 32 team NIT Tournament field.

The Zips were shocked and devastated by the NIT snub. “I just don't know how I can look my kids in the eye and explain this," said Zips Coach Keith Dambrot. "Really, what did we do wrong?" Terry Pluto wrote in the 3/21/07 Beacon Journal that Zips athletic director Mack Rhoades was so stunned by the news that he lost his voice.

The NIT explained that Akron didn’t make the cut due to its weak schedule. Others say that it was because larger schools from the bigger conferences attract better television ratings. But there is another explanation that surprisingly has not been discussed, either by the media, or by representatives of the Zips -- that is, their affiliation with LeBron James.

The Zips were led last season by MAC Player of the Year Romeo Travis, and point guard Dru Joyce III, both former teammates of LeBron at Akron’s St. Vincent/St. Mary High School. Both players have remained good friends with LeBron, and neither would be mentioned in a national telecast without mention of their LeBron connection. Coach Dambrot coached LeBron at St. V, and would have been glad if the TV announcers would have mentioned LeBron’s Zips connection. In his words: "Having the best player in the NBA around has been the great equalizer for us . . . He's been wonderful for our program. At [LeBron’s youth] camps, the kids always ask him where he would have gone to college. If I'm in the gym, he'll always look over at me, smile, and say, 'Akron.' I'm definitely not shy about selling our association to LeBron to recruits. I'd love to put a big poster up of him up in the lobby."

But LeBron is the LAST person the NCAA wants people to think about when they watch college basketball games. The best college players leave for the NBA after one season, and the exodus of talent has undoubtedly damaged the college game. The NCAA, which not coincidentally took on oversight of the NIT selection process last season, does not want fans to be reminded of this damage, or to raise any questions about the value of the monopoly that it has on the careers of basketball and football players of a certain age who, NCAA rules aside, could otherwise be using their talents to provide for their families – like LeBron did. (Note, this same monopoly was a substantial contributing factor to the destruction of Maurice Clarett's life.)

That the folks at Akron either were unaware of the potential effect of the LeBron connection on their postseason tournament chances, or thought it was a good idea not to discuss the issue after the fact, is reason enough to take the Kent State Golden Flashes -2 in tonight’s MAC Championship Game. Folks betting on Akron redemption after last season’s well-publicized “injustice” have surely influenced the line, making Kent a smaller favorite than they otherwise would be. Akron’s seeming failure to recognize or publicly acknowledge an important aspect of the nature of the injustice that it suffered leads me to believe that redemption is less likely to be forthcoming. The Pick: Kent State -2.

Buck Wild

Have a look at this remarkable piece at Kissing Suzy Kolber (KSK) about a person's story about a personal encounter with ubiquitous sportscaster Joe Buck while on vacation in Las Vegas. A piece like this shows that the line between traditional “news” sources and “just blogs” continues to blur. Whether or not this story is true, it’s worth reading if only for post author Big Daddy Drew’s concluding comment. Not sure what Drew has against Frankie Muniz, but his point is well taken.

Friend of the Frown Big Dood has a plausible take on the KSK Buck “story” -- “this sounds to me like some Tucker Max wannabe who did actually meet a pathetic Joe Buck flying solo in Vegas and then embellished like a m____f____. No way that chick said ‘looks like the buck does stop here’ right there on the spot. That's clearly a joke they thought of later on IMHO.”

If you don’t know who Tucker Max is, it’s probably worth a few minutes of your time to look at his website, if only to have a better idea about what the internet makes possible. (Note the New York Times endorsement. !?!)

Finally, all of you Obamabots out there might want to look at this piece by Dorothy Rabinowitz in yesterday's Wall Street Journal. She makes many good points -- here is one of them: "A New Yorker profile published last week quotes numerous stump speech pronouncements, among them Mrs. Obama's assertion that most Americans' lives have gotten worse since she was a girl. 'So if you want to pretend like there was some point in the last couple of decades when your life was easy, I want to meet you.' . . . America is, she has elsewhere informed audiences, a nation whose 'souls are broken.' It is a vision striking for its consistent hostility to any notion that Americans have cause for optimism and pride in their country: striking, too, for the stark and obvious absence, in this graduate of Princeton and Harvard Law School, of any sense of the reasons Americans might revere their nation and consider themselves fortunate to be its citizens."

That’s all for this week. Look for a defense of Roger Clemens early next week, then an update on Spitzer and the Democratic Primaries, and NCAA tournament picks beginning with the second round games (picks for your sportsbook, not for your bracket). Best of luck with those brackets though, and with leaving work early on Monday…and with coping with the Shamrock Shakes on Tuesday morning.

It's not a Tuber!

Yes it is. It is a tuber. Sweet potatoes -- they don’t just taste good, they’re good for you! (It's true that I’m in love with Natalie Dee.) (Also, thanks to George Matiljan for creating this useful site. Look up spinach re: calcium (note that it's easier to absorb calcium from plant than from dairy sources), and walnuts re: omega-3s. Who knew?)

A post about orange food as as good a place as any to announce that Cleveland Frowns has a new URL: www.clevelandfrowns.com The old URL will still work, but this one is easier to remember if you find yourself away from your bookmarks – like when you’re out this weekend and want to access Frowns on a friend’s mobile internet device. Easy peasy.

More posts later today...

A Vote of Confidence for Governor Spitzer

The news comes out yesterday that an FBI sting has revealed that New York Governor Eliot Spitzer patronized pricey prostitutes. The cable news hosts are indignant: “Greta, Tucker, Wolf, how could such an ethical man do such a bad thing!?!”

But what if the only thing that we can really accuse this good good lawyer of is breaking a bad bad law?

You might want to fault Spitzer for being dishonest with his wife. But what business is that of ours? No matter what either of them says publicly, none of us knows the arrangement that the two of them have between themselves. Perhaps Eliot’s tendency to “blow off steam” every so often is just what keeps his marriage healthy. Who are we to judge? And what if we assume that his family forgives him? Wasn’t Bill Clinton largely forgiven by America for doing something that was in a real sense worse (Spitzer was paying a professional, whereas Clinton had a personal relationship with a subordinate)?

But Clinton didn’t break the law, you say (at least not until he lied under oath about it). And furthermore, unlike Clinton, Spitzer was elected for his record as a prosecutor – a man of the highest ethical profile. But being ethical and obeying the law are different. An ethical person, in certain instances, has a duty to break (or refuse to prosecute) a law that he believes is unjust – it’s what kept the Underground Railroad running and speakeasies pouring. Shouldn’t we at least be somewhat relieved to know that this public servant, despite every appearance to the contrary until today, won’t let the law stop him from doing what’s right – or even just what he thinks is right at a certain particular moment?

Of course Spitzer’s solicitation(s?) was(were?) no act of civil disobedience, and there’s no need to get into the Genealogy of Morals here, but what about that law that Spitzer broke? Who’s the real victim when a consenting adult wants to pay for sex with another consenting adult who wants to be paid for it? Certainly the $5,000 an hour prostitute doesn’t want our help. One argument goes that prostitution is illegal because of the violence that sometimes goes with it – but we could still ban the violence without prohibiting the transaction. And isn’t the violence harder to detect when the whole business is taken underground?

Leaving aside a discussion of what reasonable folk argue are the proven benefits of the operations of the World's Oldest Profession, I could think of at least thirty five billion things that I’d rather have FBI agents direct their efforts toward than bringing down a high class prostitution ring – searching caves in Tora Bora, working ladles in soup kitchens, shoveling snow off of Cleveland’s sidewalks...

Instead we have them busting up victimless market transactions between consenting adults. And that’s what’s most interesting about this whole thing: Spitzer was once the scourge of Wall Street, who prosecuted a ruthless campaign against, among other things, CEO pay; i.e., a ruthless campaign against adults who wanted to pay other adults to work for them. So what goes around comes around. A lesson learned seems like the opposite of a reason for Spitzer to resign.

Update: Nice piece from Nora Ephron at Huffington Post: "New York's Senator Chuck Schumer has been heard from on the question of what is to be done about Eliot Spitzer. He has gone out on a limb to say he is sad for Spitzer's family but he isn't going to comment until Spitzer is more forthcoming. I can only suggest that Schumer has not read the indictment, since there's no way to do so without hoping that there will be nothing more forthcoming. New York's other Senator also had something to say on the subject yesterday, and it may not surprise you to hear that she somehow managed to make Senator Schumer look brave. "Let's wait and see what comes out over the next few days," Hillary Clinton said."

Faloomp! Like wow.

Loyal Cleveland Frowns reader John F. passed on this Plain Dealer piece on this morning's street collapse at Public Square, which, thankfully, resulted in no injuries to persons. I agree with John F. that the use of quotes in the piece makes for some hard hitting reporting. I've pasted the whole thing below so that you can see for yourself.

Key intersection at Public Square caves in
Posted by Brian Albrecht & Donna J. Miller March 06, 2008 08:44AM
Categories: Breaking News

"A water line break downtown caused the intersection of Ontario and Superior avenues to collapse about 7:45 this morning.

Jackie Johnson, 57, was watching water crews try to locate a shut-off valve when the pavement went "faloomp," she said. "Like wow."

Police have closed much of Public Square. Ontario is closed between Euclid and St. Clair avenues. The crater could have swallowed up to a dozen cars, an observer said.

Linda Hayes stepped out of an RTA bus near the Justice Center and shook her head at the hole. "Girl, I saw a movie like this. It's amazing. Unbelievable." Businesses on the square still have water service.

Tri-C Metro students were sent home and the campus closed at 10 a.m. because of the water main break.

The campus lacks running water, and once service is restored, the lines will have to be flushed of contaminants, a spokeswoman said."

Hard hitting indeed, but things really get good in the comments.

Wait for it...

Wait for it...

Wait for it...

"This is what happens when George Bush gives tax breaks to the rich. They move their businesses overseas then our water lines break and our streets collapse.
I think this is a huge conspiracy. All that construction that was happening at Public Square the past year was just a front to place an explosive device to go off so the water lines would burst and the streets would collapse. Then all the businesses would move out of the buildings on Public Square so they can move to China so they can get the tax breaks George Bush gives them." --Posted by thekrenz09 on 03/06/08 at 9:51AM

YES! You can't accuse us Clevelanders of not paying attention to the political process. thekrenz09 has lifted a page right out of the Obama/Hillary Economics playbook. Well done, Sir! To be fair, this guy might well have been kidding. And he takes a beating from the rest of the commenters, one of whom has a good idea:

"I think it's kinda scenic. Maybe we can build a barrier around it and use it as the new fountain on public square. Then, we can flood and freeze the area where the old fountain is and use it for ice skating, just like Rockefeller Center in NYC..." Posted by UDFlyer on 03/06/08 at 11:23AM

westparkdude blames the Clemens investigation:

"This is a perfect example of why we need to invest more of our hard earned tax dollars on infrastructure and not steroid investigations. Be glad it wasn't the innerbelt bridge." Posted by westparkdude on 03/06/08 at 10:11AM

Moonshady mounts a vigorous defense, and ends with a bang:

". . . I guess it's our fault for establishing such a great city a long time ago and we are old now, shame on us." Posted by Moonshady on 03/06/08 at 10:30AM

bbk11 disagrees:

"This city is a joke. The only thing it has going for it is our sports teams. What else is there to do around here(?)" Posted by bbk11 on 03/06/08 at 9:58AM

The blogs, bbk! You're forgetting about the blogs!

Ohio is Special

Ohio, Texas, and Rhode Island voters put the brakes on what only a week ago seemed like an unstoppable Obama ascendancy to the Democratic presidential nomination. Ohioans preferred Hillary Clinton to Obama by a margin of 10 percentage points (54%-44%), ending an twelve state streak of consecutive Obama primary victories. Clinton’s margin of victory was closer in Texas (51%-48%), and larger in Rhode Island (58%-40%). Clinton reminded us after her victory that “[a]s Ohio goes, so goes the nation.”

Yesterday's results may shed light on the true meaning of Hillary's "experience." Benevolent Cleveland Frowns supporter Ben Keeler of The Keeler Report has a take on this race that suggests that Ohio voters might rightly be proud of their choice. That is, that “Clinton tells Democrats how it is on their side. Obama tells them what they want to hear. That is why he is winning - and why he will keep employing that strategy.” This take is consistent with Obama’s bashing of Hillary on her initial support of both NAFTA and the Iraq War. Perhaps Democratic primary voters have tired of the simplistic populist dialogue between these two candidates on these issues. If so, there are reasons for them to prefer Hillary over Obama. We have good reason to distrust the candidates’ position on trade generally, and on NAFTA specifically. At least Hillary has the benefit of having supported NAFTA in the past, if she doesn’t support it fully today. Further, she demonstrates at least some nuance in her position on Iraq, in contrast with Obama, who conclusorily and implausibly reminds us that he was “right from the beginning” about one of the most complicated and grand foreign policy endeavors in world history, the greater consequences of which might not be significantly realized for many years. True, Hillary has backed down, in varying degrees, from both of these positions; but it might well be the case that her earlier positions on these issues (her “experience”) demonstrated to voters a willingness to confront reality that Obama has not yet shown. On this view, March 4th primary voters chose substance over form.

But was substance really the winner last night? It might well be the case that the voters in Ohio, Texas, and Rhode Island do not perceive the difference between the candidates that I discussed above, but rather view them both as selling the exact same dream, and simply view Hillary as a better salesperson for that dream (i.e., the primacy of “health care, public schools, green energy, the eternal shafting of the middle class, the unions, protecting Social Security and Medicare.”) A less cynical view would be, however, that voters yesterday, particularly the older, more “experienced,” voters (who overwhelmingly preferred Clinton), did notice the differences thus far projected by the candidates on Iraq and the economy. Now consider that, paradoxically, Obama might actually be less likely to follow through on potentially disastrous economic and foreign polices than would Ms. Clinton. Obama’s senior economic advisor allegedly suggested to the Canadian Ambassador that Obama only espouses his populist rhetoric in an effort to secure the Democratic nomination – in other words, Obama feels it is necessary to kowtow to the vocal “netroots/wingnuts” minority to get himself in a position (the Presidency) where he may implement the policies in which he truly believes. If this is the case, it is time for both candidates to come clean as to exactly what they are selling. To that end, we might expect the candidates to begin answering the questions about where they truly differ that they have heretofore not discussed.

Note: The Ohio cartoon posted above is by a person called Natalie Dee. I don't know where she is from, but she might just be a woman after our own heart.

Frownie Bytes

I agree with loyal Cleveland Frowns reader Big Dood, who said, “I think you’re due for a sports post now.” Currently in the works is an essay on why Roger Clemens is the most sympathetic figure in sports today. The piece will be titled “You Would Too” as in when Biggie Smalls said “you should too, if you knew, what this game would do to you.” Until then, some thoughts on the recent trades and free agent signings by the Browns and Cavs:

It was a busy week for the Browns, who signed quarterback Derek Anderson to a three-year deal and former Patriots receiver Donte Stallworth for seven years, and added defensive linemen Shaun Rogers and Corey Williams via a pair of trades. These moves in total demonstrate that GM Phil Savage knows that football teams win by controlling the line of scrimmage. As Marla Ridenour points out in today’s Beacon Journal, the Browns realized terrific results with last season’s offensive line upgrade, and hope for the same on the other side of the ball in 2008. Savage candidly proclaimed that Rogers and Williams will help the Browns more than any of the defensive linemen likely to be available with the draft picks that the Browns traded away. Time will tell if he is correct, but at the very least, both of the new defensive linemen will help some; as their performance for their previous teams was by all accounts better than any the Browns received from anyone on their d-line last season.

The primary area of concern with the new linemen is with Rogers’ character. According to Ridenour, Rogers has tremendous physical ability, but “his attitude, consistency and conditioning have often been questioned. He never speaks to the media. He once jokingly said at the Lions' complex, 'Cut me. I'm a cancer.' Last June, he allegedly groped a woman at a strip club. He served a four-game league suspension in 2006 for taking a banned dietary supplement and underwent knee surgery.” We have reason to be optimistic that Rogers won’t be nearly as much trouble in Cleveland. As Coach Romeo Crennel points out, “a lot of people need motivation to be at their best, and that’s part of coaching.” Further, the tone of any organization is set at the top. It can be argued that the Lions have the most incompetent managers of any team in recent NFL history, and that a change of scenery and better leadership in Cleveland will provide Rogers an environment in which he is more likely to settle down off the field, and thrive on it.

That the Browns did not overcommit to Derek Anderson further demonstrates that Savage understands the tremendous influence that the guys in the trenches have on the performance of the skill position players. A three year deal with $10 million guaranteed for Anderson is eminently reasonable and is nowhere close to the ridiculous deals like Matt Schaub’s that Anderson was pointing to as comparable to what he deserved. This gives Quinn another year to develop as an NFL quarterback, provides the Browns security in case of an injury, and creates a healthy competition for the Browns starting job. Anderson is no dummy. He almost certainly could have signed a longer term deal with more money elsewhere, but wherever he landed he was highly unlikely to end up on a team with as much offensive talent as the Browns. If he were to end up on another team it might easily have been proven that Anderson is much closer to a mediocre quarterback than a Pro Bowl quarterback. Of course, people can change. There’s a chance that Anderson gets hungry, realizes what’s at stake and what’s at his disposal, and elevates his game to another level next season. In any event, with Anderson and Quinn, the Browns are surely stronger at the quarterback position than they would have been with Quinn and whoever would have replaced Anderson.

One commentator has noted that the Anderson signing leaves the Browns with “one paranoid starter and one sulking backup,” a situation that could “throw a wrench” into the Browns ascent. But this signing will only play out in a negative way if the Browns are indecisive as to the results of what should be a healthy competition between the two quarterbacks. One last thing to consider regarding Anderson is that Savage likely realizes that Anderson’s value is generally overinflated, and for this reason is a trading chip that is more valuable than the late first and third round picks that the Browns would have received if they lost him in free agency. The Browns can get more for Anderson now that he’s signed to a relatively inexpensive three-year deal.

Donte Stallworth is a first-round talent with 1,000+ yard potential, and, coupled with Braylon Edwards gives the Browns a pair of deep threats who could end up in the end zone on any given play. Joe Jurevicius is a solid possession receiver, but does not have Stallworth’s game breaking potential. The concern with Stallworth is injury risk.

On the subject of injury risk, we’ll have to be patient in evaluating last week’s Cavs trade because injuries have kept the team from playing with all of its pieces in place. In addition to Ilgauskas and Boobie Gibson, who are both currently out with injuries, LeBron has been plagued with an ankle issue, Varejao has had problems, and Gooden and Hughes both missed significant time before being traded to the Bulls. At what point do we have to ask, who the hell is training these guys? The Cavs are one LeBron injury away from being a D-League squad, and LeBron’s duck-toed gait is a good recipe for future long term back problems. The obvious solution here is yoga. For now I will say that for all of the attention that athletes generally pay to their musculature, they pay shockingly little attention to the bones, tendons and ligaments that provide the underlying structure to this musculature. This will be a subject of a future post about Cleveland Frowns favorite, Kelvim Escobar. Stay tuned.