>>(Subtopic -- U.S. college basketball, NCAA tournament. I realize not everyone is interested in this.)
>>
>>Another day, another win for the Butler Bulldogs, the Cinderella of so many Cinderellas in this year's tournament. Yesterday's victim was Michigan State, a perennial power. Butler didn't win pretty -- their shooting percentage was in the low 30s and they went nine minutes without scoring a basket in the second half -- but they did just enough to hang on, 52-50. Their entire sports budget would probably be a line item at places like Michigan State, Florida, USC, et al. And yet they are one of two teams left standing. What a great, great story.
>>
>>Their opponent in the final will be the Duke Blue Devils. The contrast could not be starker. They are the ultimate traditional power, playing in the most prestigious conference, among the championship contenders year after year. They annually reload with a fresh batch of McDonald's All-American high school players. Like many great people or institutions, Duke basketball is both admired and reviled. (Just ask Tracy, LOL). They played very well yesterday, getting hot from behind the 3 point line and waxing West Virginia by 20. So here they are again in the championship game. Anyone in his right mind would pick them to win one more and cut down the nets.
>>
>>Then again, maybe that glass slipper really will fit a bulldog's foot tomorrow night. That's not supposed to happen, not in big time college sports. (Do you remember the year Appalachian State won the BCS Bowl? Me neither). That stuff only happens in fairy tales. Right?
>
>Nicely written. :o) I enjoyed it. Don't know about you, but I'm rootin for the underdog... :o)
>
>Here's a Fox story you might actually read:
>http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/Kriegel-Why-Duke-is-the-most-hated-team-040210
>and a local one:
>http://fayobserver.com/Articles/2010/03/29/986994.aspx
>
>:o)

We will definitely be cheering for the same team ;-)

Re Duke, I am not one of the rabid haters. I do not cheer for them, because I instinctively side with the underdog, but I don't cheer against them. Coach K. is a Chicago guy and someone I admire a lot. They were not a perennial power before he got there. Their players seem to have their heads screwed on straight. I suspect some of the animus directed at the program is in fact at Duke University as a blue blood haven. That is not necessarily the guys on the court and it sure isn't Coach K. He got his success the old fashioned way -- he worked for it.

One unexpected pleasure of watching the semis last evening was gaining a new respect for West Virginia coach Bob Huggins. My image has always been of a coach willing to bend every rule to win. He got on the map with some Cincinnati teams comprised of junior college transfers from all over the country. This year's West Virginia team appears on the surface to be more of the same -- two starters from New Jersey, two from New York, one from Rhode Island, all looking hard as nails. (Not to mention the sub from Turkey who looked like a Bond villain -- but wait a moment on that, too). No resemblance whatsoever between the team on the court and the fans in the stands other than fervency for a W to hang on the den wall. There he goes again, I thought. Wearing a warmup suit, probably gone a little too far to seed around the middle to look good in the pimpdaddy threads he used to wear.

What made me think differently was that moment when his star guard (who choked totally, but that's another topic) went down with a knee injury and Huggins got down right over him like a panicked parent. Unless he is an exceptionally skilled deceptionist that wasn't a show for the cameras. You could tell it was genuine. The TV analyst, Clark Kellogg, who does not strike me as a dupe, said this has always been the case -- Huggins may come across the wrong way but he is with every one of his players and every one of them is with him.

The clip of him as a player may have also changed my opinion. It gives him a certain credibility to have been in that arena himself.