R a n t

I've always been a believer in the idea that as much as things change, they mostly stay the same. That is to say, everything is a variation on a theme.

Elvis was evil and/or immoral.

The Beatles were immoral.

Long hair, birth control, women's rights, recreational drugs, *rock music = evil and the end of society.

Tattoos, piercings, *music = evil.

I've never bought in. Things weren't better then or worse now in terms of flat comparisons.

You can argue pesticides, lead paint, asbestos, medicine, petroleum use, etc. There are improvements, to our knowledge, and setbacks. We honestly just don't have the luxury of time and perspective to make a factual, conclusive statement.

However, I just cringe at the "news."

We have certainly always been subject to the voices of the most wealthy among us. The Federalists weren't peasant, homeless, or hapless morons. It is true that money talks. But real money makes you listen, and doesn't take no for an answer.

I just flipped past 30 seconds of "news" hosted by Sean Hannity of Fox News. Sean informed me that the "Harvard Law" president doesn't understand a recent S.C. ruling and flat out lied, or in the alternative was an innocent idiot, as to the potential effects. Forget nuclear power. Just pipe me for steam and we will solve our national energy concerns for the next 20 years.

I will not pretend to be an expert on the effects of a SC ruling so recent the ink has yet to dry. However, I'm tired of people breaking out the idiot and incompetent labels on the smartest president in 10 years. Spare me. Why are only intelligent and pragmatic presidents labeled idiots by the party that is supposed to be the high thinking, rational party? Aren't the liberals the bleeding hearts? Aren't conservatives worried about logic, finance, and practicality?

I am a moderate. I'm fiscally conservative, in terms of paying for what you determine to be worthwhile. I like a functional government that acts like a wise, well meaning god parent and is a peacekeeping force but otherwise stays out of my life, for the most part. I will listen to the morality (offered, but not demanded), and I will take the financial support if I have nowhere else to turn, but I have too much pride to get comfortable living in the basement.

My idea of peace keeping is not just police, but economic and health based support to help those on hard times and in hard places. For the right consider this; private property is only accumulated and maintained after and while basic societal needs are met. Don't fool yourself into thinking you are that important or strong. As a smart friend said considering the recent downturn: if things get much worse and education is worth less than brute force I will not survive long [insert further descriptive sailor language]. Keeping the peace starts with meeting basic needs for everyone. Continue to erode that floor and expect 50% of the population to be on police payroll.

As to fiscal responsibility, modern republicans see a one way road. An intelligent driver looks both ways.

Paying for what you expect doesn't mean simply cutting programs until they meet revenues, necessarily, but making the two match. That could mean cutting expenditures. It could also mean raising revenue. Despite the fact that taxes are the lowest they have been since, well, a long time before most people can recall, the right cannot understand how high taxes are. No matter how much is cut there is always more cutting to do. Taxorexia is a disease. The right has it.

I don't like to pay too much for anything. I'm cheap. But I recognize that budgeting means paying and cutting, not one or the other.

I am just as mad at the left. Why is the left so unwilling to consider pragmatic solutions? Why do legislative majorities and control of the White House make the far left feel invincible? Why do they force the President's hand in a way that makes the midterm and next Presidential election uncertain at best? A pragmatist, centrist, intelligent leader is made to look a fool for being what most people should want. The news cycle doesn't help. It feeds the far left, the far right, and the far out of touch by giving them only what they tuned in to hear. Affirmation.

Granted historically radio was no better. With very limited media sources, radio and news print, political leaders could abuse the bully pulpit similarly in the past. However, is it more dangerous to have a political leader potentially abuse their office, jeopardizing their credibility, or to have a moron named Glen Beck or Keith Olberman feed propaganda to people that are barely awake after working 10 hours to bring home $80 with little to no repurcussion via election? I can't be sure. Glen and Keith can feed you and feed you and feed you the BS you want to hear with no duty to negotiate, no duty to tell you how it is or should be, but only a duty to please.

I do know that the current political climate makes isolation and affirmation of completely moronic views much easier.

Rant complete.

3 close wins

The Minny game was ugly but somewhat expected. It is just plain hard to play at the barn. Illinois and Wisconsin aren't going to be much easier. However, having won at Minn and UM it becomes less important to win both the Wisc and Illinois games.

This team is as frustrating as almost any team I can remember. There is no reason to let a very bad Iowa team back in to a game and there is no reason to be down 13+ to Minny and 7 to UM. That said, all three ended with W's. The frustrating thing is this team hasn't once played to its potential. There has not been one game this season where the team has clicked on both ends for a majority of the game. I'm not talking about perfection, I'm talking about playing like Duke. If you are up by 15 at the half you should win by at least 30. We win by 5.

Raymar has finally decided to be a force. He can be nearly unstoppable because of his size and ability. Green is similar. Lucas remains the hardest player to stay in front of in the B10, and he seems to be figuring that out too.

I think a win against Wisconsin is possible if not likely now that Leuer is out. Although 3's can keep any team in a game (see: Iowa) Wisconsin is not built to shoot 29 three's per game (see: UM). I think a win either at Illinois or at Purdue is a bonus at this point.

Ummm, current record 10-10, only needs 4 more wins to make the NCAA tournament. Too bad they need to be consecutive and in the B10 tournament. They cannot make the tournament as an at large bid. There really isn't any way.

I still think Bruce Weber is going to be lucky to see his big time recruiting class hit the floor next year, at least as their coach. This team is not as bad as the record would make you think. That has been true for the last two years. It isn't a lack of talent.

Northwestern will come in this week fired up and in need of a marque win. However, without Coble, they just don't have enough to play 40 minutes at the speed MSU can push teams. NU doesn't have the depth, or talent for that matter, to beat the top teams in the conference. All that goes out the window when there are foul problems or NU hits 50%+ of their 3's.

MSU - 74
NU -- 61

Back to Back B10 Champs?

I don't want to call it too early. However, I have looked over the schedules. Things set up nicely for MSU if they can get two wins out of the following 5:

- at MN

- at OSU

- at Purdue

- at Wisc

- at Ill

Ohio State, Minny, and Purdue have already lost 3 games each. All three have played a fairly balanced schedule in terms of home and road games against both weak and difficult opponents.

Michigan has lost 2 games but one loss was to Indiana. UM also hasn't played Wisc, Purdue, or MSU at all yet.

Illinois still has an outside chance, but the 4-0 record coming into last weekend was deceiving. Illinois had beaten: NW at home (OT), Iowa at home, Indiana on the road, and Penn State at home. Hardly murderers row. Despite Demetri McCamey's thoughts to the contrary* Illinois is not that good. His coach knows better:

"[MSU has] eight starters, and every day somebody is giving them something special."

I don't know about 8 starters, but there are 7 guys that would start for almost any team in the conference. There are guys at the end of the bench that would dominate in some conferences.

Northwestern could make the tournament, but they won't win the B10. Indiana is at least a year away. Penn State is giving Iowa a run for the worst conference team ever award. (Iowa is still worse)

I don't want to jump the gun. MSU still goes on the road for 5 tough games. But win 2 of those and I have to believe they control their own destiny.

Given my choice I would take wins at Purdue and Ohio State. Win 3 and there might not even be a race. A third win? I'll take at Wisconsin, just to win at Wisconsin, but without Leuer they are not nearly as good. They are dangerous, because they will shoot 2x as many 3's, but they aren't as good consistently. I think a win at Minnesota would be more valuable. And, of course, wins at Penn State and Indiana are a must. Michigan, too, must be crushed.

MSU should come out and put a hurting on Iowa this week. Iowa, as previously mentioned, is bad. They beat Penn State somehow. I didn't watch it but my only guess is Talor Battle was being Talor Battle and forgot to 1. run plays**, 2. pass, 3. listen to anyone besides Talor Battle. Iowa got exactly what was advertised in hiring Lickliter; a mid major coach. Unfortunately Iowa is, at best, an average mid major basketball program right now. There doesn't appear to be a lot of hope on the horizon either.

This could be a chance for Nix and Sherman to get more minutes. Hell, Herzog might play.

MSU - 72

Iowa - 60

I watched Indiana beat Minny this weekend. I hate to say it, because he's family, but I wonder about Crean as a coach. I wonder how much of his success was having Dwayne Wade, McNeal, and James. All coaches benefit from players, there is no question about that. But all things being equal, or somewhat equal, coaches make a difference. Crean has a younger team, at Indiana, than Tubby at Minn. He also has a little less talent. But with a big lead IU went into a shell, ran terrible plays, and seemed to do everything wrong before pulling out an OT win. Tubby outcoached Crean. Izzo outcoached Crean. Lots of people in the Big East outcoached Crean. I just question things a little. Who knows, a year from now he might be contending for the league. The cupboards were rather bare.

The reffing continues to blow my mind. This week two plays stand out. A shot clock violation call after Kalin Lucas clearly pushed the ball halfway up the floor and lost it out of bounds (in our favor) and what appeared to be a trip from behind that turned into a step and a half, layup, and one situation. I thought I was watching the NBA. That, my friends, is continuation. Do not ruin the college game with continuation.

Also, stop rushing the floor. Michigan, yes you beat #15 Uconn. You also lost to Indiana and Alabama. You are unranked and have a very, very slim chance of making the 64. Don't rush the floor.

Indiana, you beat Minnesota in overtime at home. Neither team is ranked. It was not to win a championship. There are a dozen conference games left. Do not rush the floor. Bobby Knight would choke you right now if he could.

*McCamey said something to the effect of "we match up with [MSU] athletically but they out hustled us." Well, in short, no you don't. You might match up athletically, but your team certainly does not. That will be obvious next year when freshmen start over seniors. (great recruiting class coming in, for some coach, starting to wonder if it will be Weber)

**Battle did run one play: Talor Battle shoots from his current location. Wherever you are on the floor. Wherever you are in the shot clock. Also known as "if I'm off the bus I'm within my range.

OldZone

Because the students were gone on break, and considering the champagne crowd wasn't going to provide the needed atmosphere for the rival badgers, the MSU athletic dept threw together an izzone alumni section. Long story short; ate some decent food in the auxilary (practice) gym, listened to a Q&A with Izzone, got a t-shirt and saw the game from row 3. Not bad.

Draymond Green is very, very impressive from 200'. From 20' he's amazing. His hands have got to be the best on the team. Better than a guard. His quickness and footwork are so deceptive, at least on offense, you almost can't stop him. His defensive footwork from 12' and out was sketchy as he got crossed up a couple of times and also committed some bad perimeter fouls. He's still amazing to watch in terms of athleticism for his size.

Lucas is having a great early season when you consider the abuse he's taking. The new theory seems to be to disrupt his timing and balance. It is largely working. It isn't obvious at full speed but in replays you can see guards and help defenders bumping and jabbing at Lucas as he drives. The fouls aren't getting called and his timing and speed are neutralized. Its obvious at game speed from the 3rd row, no replay needed. If he doesn't start getting calls it could be a long season for Lucas. He's not big enough to take the bumps and probably wouldn't be as effective with more weight. Very similar to the problem Neitzel had. Neitzel tried to bulk up, and in my opinion, suffered for it. If the calls don't change I guess the only option is to bait players in to more obvious fouls with more hesitation (getting them in the air or off balance, clutching) or going Iverson. Just go hard and don't be afraid to hit the floor.

Roe is looking more explosive and decisive. The latter is more impressive than the former. Few players on this team have a mean streak and finish with any emotion. Even Summers, who can certainly explode, doesn't do it with anger. Green shows flashes of the same. You see it in his eyes where he decides, no matter where on the floor, he's going past his defender and over whoever gets in the way. And he's dunking. No layups. No floaters. "Just know if you step in front of me you are going to earn this charge." I like that. Raymar could benefit from playing with some aggression on offense. He's mismatch and needs to learn to expect contact and power through it.

I really, really like how Allen has improved on defense. He looks less like Chris Hill and more like...David Thomas. He's a good athlete that needed to work on positioning, anticipating, and focus. He was often way out of position, had no clue where his man was or was trying to end up, and would go through long streaks of not defending anyone. He looks a lot sharper. He also decided that scoring can happen inside the arc, which should improve his looks from outside the arc. Last year at this time you didn't have to even consider Allen putting it on the floor or pulling up from 10' on a drive. Now that you have to respect that, at least a little, he should get more open looks from 3. Now if he could get the shot off a little quicker...

Nix is much like Draymond in that he is a much better athlete than people might think. His footwork is there, the hands are very good, his shooting touch and confidence are just off. Obviously from the line, but also underneath. He gets some amazing shots off but misses the bunnies. Suton used to frustrate in the same ways. Make a great move, get a wide open look, and miss. Nix starts with better footwork than Suton so the improvement should come more quickly.

MSU vs Iowa today should be a blowout. I don't like teams that fire up 3's for 50% of their offense. I've said that over and over. You can lose to any team that gets hot. Hell, The Citadel almost did it this year hitting 7 3's in the first 10 minutes. Once a team gets hot from deep its almost impossible to step out far enough on defense. Hot shooters (like Respert would get) barely cross half court before pulling up. Weathering storms, converting free throws, and hitting the defensive glass are very important against the Iowa/NW/UM's of the league. Every possession counts double in these games because Iowa will run the clock down before hitting a 3 or getting to the line.

Iowa is bad, however, on defense. Roe, Summers, and Raymar should do well. Since Iowa is worst in the conference in field goal defense, giving up 46%+ from the field, they will have to step out on Lucas, Allen, and Summers. Roe and Morgan should benefit from this, as well as Green with his knack for tipping rebounds back. Summers could also step backdoor for a dunk or two on an overplay. I like MSU by quite a lot.

MSU - 75
IA --- 58

MSU Bowl Game

Well, on the bright side Dantonio has taken this team to three straight bowls.

Bad news; MSU has lost all three games.

As much as I would like to put this on the defense, based on this game and this entire season, the defense played well enough to win. It feels strange to say that.

The person that I don't enjoy blaming really deserves it this time. I hate saying it. He is the right choice at the position. He played very, very well most of the season. He won games. But this time I have to admit it.

Cousins lost the game.

Interceptions happen. They just do. Especially when the people running routes are backups, walkons, and currently listed on the roster at QB. However, Cousins two picks were bad. The first was a forced throw after the screen was read perfectly. It almost looked like his arm started to throw, his eyes read the defense, and his brain said "eh, what the hell. Let's just adjust a liiiitle bit upfield to that other green jersey." Problem being green jersey two was also covered. That ball needed to end up in row 12 seat 37.

The game was recently announced as the highest rated bowl ever broadcast on espn. Take that for what you will.

I think this team really could be good next year. A few guys got a chance in this game, because of suspensions, that may just keep the starting spot. There will be depth on the defensive line. The linebackers will still be good, although a little less talented at the top of the rotation. The skilled players will be VERY good from QB to RB and, yes, the TE's and WR's. I look for 8-9 wins next year and a good bowl game. Depending on the matchup I don't think a New Years Day bowl win is out of the question.