Sports Blog Net |
- Can we let Super Bowl week be just for the Super Bowl itself??
- Superbowl Matchups Patriots vs Giants:
- It might be time to start over in Orlando
- Detroit Tigers Positional Preview: First Baseman Prince Fielder
- Peyton Manning To 49ers
- Can Anything Save the Pro Bowl?
- Enshrinement rates and the relative size of the Hall of Fame
- Mid-Major Cinderella Watch
| Can we let Super Bowl week be just for the Super Bowl itself?? Posted: 30 Jan 2012 04:08 PM PST So here we are on the week of the Super Bowl, preparing to see the New York Giants and New England Patriots do battle on Sunday. These two teams have earned the right to be the talk of the sports world this week. I look forward to a great game come Sunday. This week is dedicated to the the Super Bowl for a reason, and it's because it's one of the biggest (if not the biggest) sporting events we have in this great country of ours. So we should treat it as such. I understand that there are other stories developing in the NFL, but I don't feel those stories should take away from the two teams that are about to play for a title. Therefore, all of this stuff about the future of Colts QB Peyton Manning and the New York Jets mess should be saved for after the season. We have till late July, the start of next year's training camps, to discuss all of these off season stories. This week is for the Super Bowl itself. I understand the fact that this year's Super Bowl is taking place in Indianapolis definitely drives the Manning story. People will want to know and try to get the latest on the future of the older Manning, but can we wait for another week to see what happens with this story? Like I said, I can understand why the Manning story gets the news because of whose involved and where the Super Bowl is at. But why sports networks feel the need to talk about the Jets is way beyond me. This team underachieved in every sense and didn't even make the playoffs after two straight appearances in the AFC Championship Game, yet they get press because they have a poisonous locker room and a coach in Rex Ryan who has obviously lost control of the place. You hear about QB Mark Sanchez being attacked in the press by "unnamed sources." Are you kidding me? Why are we even paying this story any attention? If people want to come out and be heard, at least have the manhood to stand by what you say. Don't hide behind the unnamed source card. The bottom line is that the Jets have too many egos on the team, including their head coach. Too many people about themselves and not for the team results in what you got from the Jets, a team that didn't make the playoffs. There's no reason to talk about a team that didn't make the postseason and apparently have a bunch of rats on the team. I'm sure we will hear more about the Jets, starting with Ryan's annual "We're going to the Super Bowl" prediction, when the NFL Combine starts next month. But we don't need to let these rats take away from the Super Bowl. With all that said, I say let all the hype for the Super Bowl hit full throttle. Congrats to the Giants and Patriots to making it to this point. This week's for you. By Charles Taylor | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Superbowl Matchups Patriots vs Giants: Posted: 30 Jan 2012 03:54 PM PST It would be easy for me being from Boston to root for the Patriots because were born to not like any New York teams but I am not going to be bias in my study. Here is a break down of all the matchups for the big game. Quarterbacks: A couple of months ago this would be clear cut Tom Brady would have the advantage over Eli Manning but Eli has been playing unbelievable and now going into the big game he has been terrific. But the stats are in the Patriots favor as Tom Threw for 5,235 yards, 39 touchdowns, 12 interceptions and a passer rating of 105.6, not too shabby and this will be his 5th Superbowl. On the other hand Eli threw for 4,933 yards, 29 touchdowns, 16 interceptions, with a passer rating of 92.9, this will be his 2nd Superbowl and he has already beaten the Patriots once. I believe the edge goes to Brady because of big game expierence and he does not make mistakes very often. Not sold yet on Manning being able to drive the Giants down the field in the 4th trailing and the game in his hands. EDGE: Patriots Running Backs: The Giants have had the fortune of having two very good running backs in Jacobs and Bradshaw and when one was hurt the other carried the load and they did not miss a beat. On the Patriots side Ben Jarvis Green-Ellis has been the workhorse and Woodhead, Faulk, Ridley have been in his shadow. Ellis has never fumbled in his career and if the Patriots have the lead and need to run out the clock their is no one better than him for ball security. On the Giants side of things both running backs have fumbled at crucial times during games but I still believe the edge goes to the Giants because of the change of pae they both bring to the game. EDGE: Giants Wide Receivers: Wes Welker led the league again with 122 catches but who else lines up on the other side of the field? Deion Branch, Slater, or Eldeman probably would not be starters on any other team. I cannot forget to mention ocho cinco who has done zip for this team this year but has kept his mouth shut for a chance at a ring. As for the Giants what a great story in Victor Cruz maybe the best sleeper of the year, with him and Nicks and Manningham all on the field they create matchup problems for any defense. EDGE: Giants Tight Ends: No contest here as Rob Gronkowski and Aaron Hernandez are two of Brady's main weapons on offense. Gronkowski broke records and is only going to get better and Hernandez is a bull too and hard to bring down and a matchup nightmare for a linebacker to try to cover them. Jake Ballard had a solid year for the Giants and Eli got more comfotable throwing to him late in the games as a checkdown receiver. The Patriots will need Gronkowski to be healthy and use Hernandez out of the backfield again like they did against Baltimore. EDGE: Patriots Offensive Line: The Patriots O-line lost a few players but getting Brian Waters as a free agent from Kansas City helped out right away. When Koppen went down Connolly stepped right in and Mankins and Light had pro bowl years and the rookie Solder came of age. For the Giants the core of their line has been intact, Snee, Diehl and Mckenzie anchor the line and the key will be putting pressure on these quarterbacks. Brady will stay upright more than Manning! EDGE: Patriots Defensive Line: The Giants have the best front four in football period. With Tuck, Canty,Pierre-Paul and Umenyiora and when they need a rest throw in Tollefson and Joseph the Patriots will have their hands full. They are fearless and relentless and never stop moving forward towards the quarterback. The Patriots have a good line with Wilfork being the main guy who clogs up the middle, the rest since Carter went out with the knee are fill-ins as best and I believe the Giants will put two guys on Wilfork to neutralize him. EDGE: Giants Linebackers: The Giants have three good linebackers in Boley, Blackburn and Kiwanuka but I believe they will be in pass coverage a lot dealing with the tight ends and Patriots running game should benefit from this. They are very fast and go sideline to sideline very quickly. The Patriots have a young linebacker core with Mayo, Spikes and Ninkovich, the problem with them is they bite on play action most of the time and are out of position to make the play. If Manning is put into 3rd and long situations these guys will blitz him. EDGE: Even Secondary: Both teams have dealt with injuries to their secondary and have put a mash unit on the field until players were healed. The Giants have the expierence with the likes of Ross, Rolle, Phillips and Webster and although they rank towards the bottom against the pass they are a veteran unit that come up with big plays when needed. The Patriots are in a youth movement with the anchor being McCourty who along with Arrington who had 7 interceptions which tied for the league lead. The safeties are Chung and Ihedigbo who like to take risks and they have been burned by the long pass many times this year. I like the Giants corners here.... EDGE: Giants Special Teams: The punting and kicking game are pretty equal here as Mesko and Weatherford have both done a good job this year and both can put it inside the 20 when needed. As far as the kicking Gostkowski is drilling the ball and I like him in the clutch, Tynes scares me a little with the game on the line can he make the big one again with all eyes watching him? I think Gostkowski has better range and can kick the long one if needed. EDGE: Patriots Coaches: Bill Belichick is the best coach in football period. What he has done here in New England has fans all around the world following this team. What the Kraft family has gone through this year and to know one game away from winning another Superbowl, well it is breathe taking to me. Tom Coughlin is a very good coach but I remember a couple of months ago he was on the hot seat and getting ready to be fired. If one play needs to be drawn up to win the game my trust is in BILL to get it done. EDGE: Patriots Prediction: New England will win this game due to a mistake of some sorts by the Giants in the 4th quarter and they will run out the clock and Brady will win the M.V.P. Final score: New England 26-20 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| It might be time to start over in Orlando Posted: 30 Jan 2012 03:16 PM PST We knew at the start of the NBA season that we were going to see things that aren't really classified as normal. With all of these games being played in such a small amount of time, you're going to see a lot of nights where teams look like the best one night, and then the next night look like one of the worst. Having said that, there are a few teams that look like they are starting to look like the cream of the crop. The Miami Heat, Chicago Bulls and Oklahoma City Thunder come to mind when you talk about the more consistent teams. Others are consistently inconsistent, such as the Orlando Magic. Before last week, the Magic looked like a team that could contend in the Eastern Conference. Then came last week. They scored just 56 points in a 31 point blowout loss in Boston. They followed that up with a 19 point win over a good Indiana Pacers squad in Indianapolis. Then came Thursday night, when Orlando blew a 27 point lead in a 91-83 loss to the same Celtics that just blew them out a few nights before. On Friday night, they went to New Orleans and lost by 26 points to a Hornets team that is 4-16 for the season. Sunday night capped off the nightmarish week, when the Magic lost to the Pacers at home 106-85. In the midst of this horrible week, center Dwight Howard reportedly laid into his teammates for the lack of passion and effort being shown in these games. We all know that Howard wants to be traded, and now he's talking a potential trade to the Bulls to play with Derrick Rose. I think it might be time to just tear down and start over in Orlando. I feel like head coach Stan Van Gundy might have overstayed his welcome and it might be time for him to go. This present group of players look like their best years are behind them. Howard is increasingly frustrated with the effort of the players around him. One thing that I will say about Howard is that even with all of the distractions and trade rumors, he is still playing like the most dominant big man in the NBA. It's a shame that the team around him isn't giving him the help that he needs in order for the Magic to compete with the elite. There is still a lot of season left, so maybe my opinion will change as far as the Magic's season goes depending on how they do. But if I had to make a choice on it right now, I would say make some changes before it's too late. I personally think that Howard is going to leave Orlando, whether it's by trade or free agency. I would like to see Howard stay where he's at, but I just don't see it. If you're the Magic management, you have to be able to stay competitive with or without the big man. So that means they have to do what they have to in order to be relevant. The way it's looking now, it might be time to start over. By Charles Taylor | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Detroit Tigers Positional Preview: First Baseman Prince Fielder Posted: 30 Jan 2012 02:32 PM PST We begin the Detroit Tigers preview talking about what was one of the biggest and most shocking acquisitions by any team and that was the nine year, 214 million dollar contract handed out to Prince Fielder. Prince Fielder, has one of the best bats in the league, and fills a large need for the Tigers as Victor Martinez is out for the year. The question remains, what kind of impact will Prince Fielder have? For starters, he has a very strong bat but who will the new homepark, Comerica, effect the big man?
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Posted: 30 Jan 2012 09:35 AM PST  Since Peyton Manning missed the entire 2011-2012 NFL season with a neck injury and rehab, all the signs are pointing towards a split between Manning and the Indianapolis Colts. With the Colts most likely moving on by drafting a franchise quarterback in Andrew Luck or Robert Griffin III, specualtion has taken off as to where the future hall of famer will land. One of the most common names being thrown around is San Francisco. It looks logical, Manning is a great quarterback and the 49ers are closer to making the Super Bowl than any other suitors. San Francisco also has a great defense, coupled with a great running game, everything Manning would need to succeed. But the San Francisco 49ers should absolutely NOT pick up Peyton Manning. Here's six reasons why: 1) How can anyone know what performance level Manning will be at come next season? He is 36, and has not played a game in what will be about a year and a half. Manning was great, but the chances are he is not the same. He will be even less mobile and not as strong as he was. He may very well not be the accurate gunslinger he once was. Peyton Manning has been in the same offense his entire career, would he be able to adjust to an entirely new system after not playing for 15 months? 2) As fragile as Peyton and his neck will be, the 49ers offensive line has issues protecting the quarterback, a combination that could be career ending for him. Alex Smith was sacked more than any other quarterback in the league and he is a lot more mobile than Manning. There is a chance he won't make it through a whole season, or play again. 3) Who would he throw to? Great quarterbacks make average receivers and make them great. That is what Manning, Brady, Brees and rogers have all done. But Manning had Marvin Harrisson, and/then Reggie Wayne, as well as a great tight end in Dallas Clark. San Francisco has Vernon Davis. Michael Crabtree is a second string receiver anywhere else in the league right now. A big reason Smith was sacked so much was because he was forced to hold on to the ball longer due to his receivers failing to get open. Manning would again take more hits and may force throws Smith wouldn't, leading to more interceptions. 4) Signing Manning in what should be a competitve market, would mean breaking the bank to get him. It is out of character for Niners' management to spend a ton of money on one player, especially under the new regime. San Francisco already has a ton of priorities in free agency. They need and plan to re-sign several defensive players such as Carlos Rogers, Dashon Goldson, and Donte Whitner. Not to mention other key members like Ahmad Brooks, Blake Costanzo, Ted Ginn Jr., Joshua Morgan, C.J. Spillman and Adam Snyder. And what would happen if the 49ers do go all out and sign Peyton Manning to a huge contract? What happens if his neck gets hurt in the first game and all that money is gone, as well as all the players they couldn't resign because they spent the money on Manning? Signing Manning would put the 49ers in a tough financial spot, and limit how many players San Francisco can bring back. It's a risk they should not make. 5) Alex Smith. If the 49ers sign Manning, all the work Jim Harbaugh did on Smith would be all for not. Smith is rising and will only continue to get better with a full offseason, while Manning is on the downfall, aging and growing more succeptible to injuries. If Manning signs then Alex walks, making the 49ers' backup role all the more important. Colin Kaepernick is a promising player, and without a doubt the future of the franchise. But he is young and if Peyton were to fall during the season, thrusting him into the starting role could result in some lengthy growing pains, and losses. Who would have imagined this would ever be said but it's true, this is Alex Smith's team. And you have to go with Smith over Peyton Manning if you want to win in the long run. 6) Signing Peyton Manning would set the San Francisco 49ers back a couple to several years. Manning most likely has 2-3 years left in him if he's successful and stays perfectly healthy, which is a very optimistic outlook on the situation. If he does win a Super Bowl, he will retire into the sunset, leaving San Francisco lost at quarterback again. Again, Kaepernick is promising, but he lost the job to Alex Smith for a reason, he is not ready. The Niners' offense is built around protecting and possesing the ball, never turning the ball over. To ask a practical rookie to come in and not make mistakes in turnovers, as well as winning, is too much to ask. An injury or retirement on Manning's part would leave San Francisco hurting, wishing Alex was still in town. The bottom line is that that cons outweigh the pros, and the risks outweigh the rewards. And while there is a lot of talk about Peyton Manning coming to the Bay Area, I would bet that the San Francisco 49ers aren't even considering it. Harbaugh and co. are ready to move on to next season, to a Super Bowl, with their quarterback wearing #11, not #18. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Can Anything Save the Pro Bowl? Posted: 30 Jan 2012 06:00 AM PST [caption id="attachment_1894" align="alignleft" width="300" caption="My advice for watching the always-boring Pro Bowl: lie back, and think of Indy. (Photo by Kent Nishimura/Getty Images North America)"]  [/caption] NFL Pro Bowlers look like they're just going through the motions. They give about 80 percent of normal effort on offense, and even less on defense. No play looks well-executed, no player comes off as a peak athlete. A game comprised of the reputedly best players in the NFL winds up looking like anything but. People complain about this every year. But after watching Sunday's game, I wonder if anything can fix it, or if it's simply doomed. Problem: An Unclear Purpose with an Unideal CastMLB's All-Star Game awards home-field advantage for the World Series to the winner. Having that extra home game definitely matters (just ask the 2011 St. Louis Cardinals), so the All-Stars play to win. Conversely, the NBA's All-Star Game doesn't mean anything, but the league embraces that. They intentionally play up basketball's pageantry, making the All-Star Game a culmination of a weekend of fan-friendly activities and raucous after-hours parties. These All-Stars don't play to win, but they do put on a really good show. The NHL All-Stars, meanwhile, know their sport trails the NBA, NFL and MLB almost everywhere. They have to seize every opportunity to publicize themselves, which means making sure everyone comes. The truly best NHL players play in their All-Star Game (unless injured). Unlike the other three All-Star Games, the Pro Bowl has no clear purpose. If Pro Bowlers want to win the game, why does everyone half-ass every play? If they just want to put on a show, why take a knee with a minute left? And if they're trying to represent the best of the NFL, why do so many Pro Bowlers bail, often simply because they don't feel like going? Of course, some of these problems are unavoidable. It takes a full week to recover from an NFL game, so the Pro Bowl can't happen in between two regularly scheduled games, and no team wants an extra bye-week for some of their players but not all. The game has to be played towards the end of the season, and before the Super Bowl is definitely preferable to after, when America stops caring about football. The Pro Bowl can't and shouldn't move, but its timing means many of the best players always drop off. In the AFC's case Sunday, seven Patriots (eight counting the injured Andre Carter), all originally starters, bailed out last-minute.Solutions: Reward and AssuranceA reward for victory would be the first and easiest way to improve the Pro Bowl. Super Bowl locations are chosen well in advance, and many stadiums won't ever host the championship. Instead, let the Pro Bowl decide the coin toss. Whichever conference wins gets to kick or defer to start the Super Bowl. That's a real decision with legitimately strategic implications either way. Pro Bowlers might not play any harder to help out teammates who skipped the game, but any reward has to motivate more than no reward at all. Make the Pro Bowl mean something, and the effort to win it should increase. Alternatively, the NFL could build far-superior injury protection into players' contracts. Football has the unfortunate double-whammy of offering the least salary protection among the Big 4 and the highest likelihood of injury. As such, players will never try hard in a meaningless game for fear of risking their careers. Ironically, the half-assed football Pro Bowlers play to avoid injury can actually lead to more injuries. Both sides' offensive lines mentally checked out on pass-rushes Sunday, leading to three or more defenders reaching the quarterback on several plays. Although Pro Bowl rules water down the tackling, a freak accident could still occur. If players aren't worried about getting hurt, they'll play more with more energy, excitement and intensity. As it is, players approach every game terrified of a bad tackle ending their careers. Regular-season performances and championships ultimately benefit a player's earning power, but doing well in the Pro Bowl doesn't. So if nothing good can come from a Pro Bowl performance and plenty bad can, why try? The Pro Bowl suffers because its players see no upside to anything beyond a minimum effort. The game is a diluted, bloodless doppelganger of a real NFL game. Rewarding the winning conference or assuring players that an injury isn't catastrophic might raise the quality of play. Unfortunately, there isn't much in football left undecided, and owners fought tooth-and-nail for the current contractual rules. Neither are likely to change, and that means, unfortunately, neither will the Pro Bowl. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Enshrinement rates and the relative size of the Hall of Fame Posted: 30 Jan 2012 12:01 AM PST Have you noticed what's been happening recently? The Hall of Fame has been getting smaller, at least in relative size. In one way, the HOF is like the Roach Motel. Players check in but they don't check out. In absolute terms, the HOF can only get bigger. But I prefer a different view. For HOF players, as with any group, understanding who the outsiders are (and how many of them there are) is essential to defining the insiders. The size of the HOF is best considered in relative terms. With slightly more than 200 MLB players enshrined in Cooperstown out of about 17,000 who have played at the major league level, about 1.2% of players have received the game's highest honor. A metric that can be calculated is something I will call the enshrinement rate: the number of inductees, expressed as a percentage of the number of players who left the game five years earlier (allowing for the five-year lag between a player's retirement and his becoming eligible for election). Because both quantities making up this rate can vary from one year to another, let's consider enshrinement rates on a longer time scale, say, ten years. For example, for the 1960s (the years 1961 to 1970), 29 MLB players were enshrined. Newly eligible for enshrinement during this ten-year period were the 991 players whose careers ended in the years 1956 through 1965. Therefore, the enshrinement rate for the '60s was 2.9%. It does not mean that 2.9% of the '56-'65 retirees were enshrined, since the Veterans Committee honorees in the '60s were players who had retired in earlier decades. The '60s and '70s (also at 2.9%) were the high water mark for enshrinement rate. These were the years that, for better or worse, saw the most VC picks enter the Hall. In contrast, the enshrinement rate was 1.8% in the '50s, 2.2% in the '80s, and 2.1% in the '90s. More recently, we have seen a dramatic drop in the enshrinement rate, to 1.0% during the decade of the 2000s; 19 players were enshrined while 1887 players became eligible. This calculation does not include the Negro League honorees who entered by special election in 2006 and who played few, if any, games in the major leagues. While the HOF continues to grow in absolute numbers, it is now seeing a modest reduction in relative size. I do not foresee a return to the enshrinement rates of the '60s and '70s. With 30 MLB teams, about 200 players end their major league careers each year. These days, even a 2.5% enshrinement rate would mean five players getting elected annually. It's been a long time since we've seen a year in which that many new players have gone to Cooperstown. A significant elevation in enshrinement rate can probably happen only if the selection rules change. Giving the writers the opportunity to vote for more players will probably not make much difference, though, since even under the current system, many writers cast fewer than their allotted ten votes. Perhaps some elevation in enshrinement rate could come about if there were changes promoting greater activity from the VC. However, even if the induction rate were to rise to 1.5 or 2% (3 or 4 players a year) we would see only very slow growth from the current relative size of the HOF. Although the 1% enshrinement rate of the past decade presents a fairly robust Small Hall scenario, if you're a Small Hall guy you might be wishing for even lower enshrinement rates in the future. But how much lower can we go? I find it hard to imagine that between the writers and the VC we won't average at least one new player in the HOF per year, or an enshrinement rate of at least 0.5%. This would reduce the relative size of the HOF, but slowly. My best guess is that we will see enshrinement rates hovering somewhere between 1 and 1.5% in the decades ahead, which would have the HOF remaining nearly static in relative size. Even if we do see changes in the enshrinement rate, the ensuing change in the relative size of the HOF will be slow. The bottom line: if you're unhappy with the current size of the Hall of Fame, you will probably carry that unhappiness with you the rest of your days. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Posted: 29 Jan 2012 08:02 PM PST We are less than two month away from the start of March Madness, so it's time to see which Cinderella stories could emerge. The mid-major conference tournaments are the source much of the early holiday season drama, as only the tourney champion will be able to put on their dancing shoes. While almost all mid-major NCAA teams have the chance to play Cinderella come Christmas Day (aka the first round of the NCAA tourney), it is particularly special when these teams have an inspiring sentimental storyline. Often times this involves a squad making its first trip to the Big Dance (see Northern Colorado last year). Other times there is a likable coach who warms the hearts of the nation (see Pete Carril in 1994). Inevitably, when the second week of March comes around, these stories will come to fruition. In the meantime, it's worth looking at the standings and checking out which mid-major conference leaders/contenders could inspire us during ESPN's annual championship week. These are listed in alphabetical order by conference. Stony Brook (America East)- In past seasons, Maine has been the early season Cinderella tease from the America East, but now that title belongs to Stony Brook. The Seawolves have never danced before but they currently find themselves alone atop the conference standings. UMass (Atlantic 10)- It's hard to believe that this once prominent program hasn't danced in 14 years. This could be the season the Minutemen finally breakthrough, as they are currently tied atop the A-10 standings and also have an outside shot of securing an at-large bid. LaSalle (Atlantic 10)- Speaking of Atlantic 10 Cinderella stories, It's been even longer since the Explorers (great nickname!) of La Salle have gone to the Big Dance. They haven't made the tourney since 1992, but just like UMass, the Explorers are tied atop the A-10 standings. Mercer (Atlantic Sun)- Everybody thought Belmont would run away with the Atlantic Sun again this season, but the Bears of Mercer, who haven't danced since the year I was born, are currently tied for first. Mercer lost a close road game to Belmont way back in early December, but they get a revenge game at home in the season finale. Drexel (Colonial)- The Dragons haven't danced since 1996 but find themselves right in the thick of a muddled race for the Colonial regular season crown. Central Florida (Conference USA)- I have always wanted one of Michael Jordan's sons to break out of MJ's shadow and make his own significant contribution to the game of basketball. Well, Marcus would certainly do that if he could lead the Golden Knights to the big dance. Unlike last year's UCF squad, this group has used its promising early season start to win some key conference games. And even though Knights are currently on the outside looking-in, they still have legitimate shot at earning either an at-large bid or the C-USA auto bid in March. Harvard (Ivy League)- You may be wondering why the mighty Crimson are on this list, but keep in mind they still haven't danced since 1946. It would be shocking if Harvard didn't finally break their long NCAA tourney drought this season, but the Crimson did choke away the Ivy League title just last year. Loyola-MD (MAAC)- I must first confess that always get this squad confused with Loyola-IL from the Horizon League. There's a major difference between the two this season though, as Loyola-IL is 0-11 in conference play and the Greyhounds of Loyola-MD are 9-2. This program earned its one and only dance ticket way back in 1994. Norfolk State (MEAC)- Like Stony Brook, the Spartans have never danced before but are the heavy favorite to win their league title this March. This Norfolk State squad is a scary good 16 seed right now in my bracketology, as they lose by a mere two points to Marquette earlier this season. |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Sports Blog Net: A Sports Blog Network - blog about baseball, football, basketball, hockey and everything else. Posts To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 comments:
Post a Comment