Adidas, Let Derrick Rose Speak

If you've watched even a single quarter of NBA action thus far, you've likely been lambasted with Adidas "Fast Don't Lie" ads featuring Derrick Rose and Dwight Howard. I couldn't help but notice a pretty significant difference between the two.
Ken Jeong, aka Slim Chin, dripping head to toe in gold, plays pretty much the same character he has in all of his movies. Meanwhile,  Howard gets one good line, "Beast from the regular East," and a piano-laced sing-song excerpt at the end.
What does Rose get? A crossover dribble and a smile.

Howard's Commercial



Rose's Commercial



It's feels like the folks at Adidas were worried that Rose would mess the entire commercial up if he so much as uttered a word. I'll be the first to admit that Rose isn't a good public speaker. Would it be advantageous to give him a large speaking part? Probably not.
But c'mon, they could have given him ONE good line like they did for Howard. In fact, Rose is more than capable of carrying a commercial, as he did in this NBA 2K11 commercial that was widely circulated over the internet but didn't get too much TV time.



Rose carried that commercial. Every funny moment can be attributed to him. Rondo would have never dressed up in an apron, Josh Smith would have probably eaten the decedent desserts he was cooking, but what's Iggy and Westbrook's excuse?
Given the right lines, Rose can be funny, Adidas just has to let him. Stop perpetuating the myth that Dwight Howard is funny. He's a good natured athlete who jokes around and smiles a lot, but he's not funny.
Adidas would benefit from giving Rose the floor. They have to ask themselves, would they rather have one of the best young point guards in the NBA as the face of his OWN shoe, or the guy who is best remembered from leaping out of a trunk naked in The Hangover?

Pumpkin Carving And A Thrilling Wisconsin Victory

While it may not be entirely clear in the picture above, that beautiful motion 'W' is not only carved into a pumpkin, but the work of my own doing. Nevermind that the motion 'W' trends to the left and mine seems to be trending right. I was never the best at art.
In fact, as a kid, I only drew athletes - usually Michael Jordan, Dennis Rodman, Emmitt Smith, or Deion Sanders. I also had an affinity for basketball cards. So I drew my own basketball cards, and put myself in a Bulls uniform.
Pumpkin carving was never an integral part of my childhood Halloween doings. Eating candy, particularly of the chocolate, nougat, and caramel variety, and shivering my ass off in the rain are my two fondest Halloween memories.
So when my girlfriend approached me and not asked, but told me we were going to carve pumpkins, I scoffed like Lou Piniella after one of his pitchers bunts the third strike foul. I learned from various people over the years that relationships are all about sacrifice. Sacrifice the small things and make sure that the big things, as long as the big things aren't destructive, remain a part of your life. Two hours of my time and a general dislike of the color orange and the Cucurbitaceae family fall into the 'small things' category.
It's probably a good thing I didn't carve pumpkins as a child. I would have given up within the first five minutes. It's surprisingly hard work. After about 30 minutes of digging and scraping what looked like shredded cheddar cheese, I was able to finally hallow out the thing. It came as a surprise to me that there wasn't a couple of Chilean miners buried under all the seeds and orange rubbish.

No, that's not what UW students threw up at two in the morning after celebrating the victory over Iowa. That's all of the insides we dug up.

To back-track, we actually did the pumpkin carving after UW pulled off a 31-30 road win that had me feeling how I assume Mark Dantonio felt after the Notre Dame victory. Not quite that bad, but I'm pretty sure my heart was beating irregularly for the better part of that night.
I had planned on carving out the motion 'W' all along, but should have thought the timing through a little better. What if Wisconsin had lost? A real, more than likely possibility. I might have just smashed the pumpkin in the street myself while a group of stoned and jealous twelve year-olds stared from across the street.
But I underestimated Bret Bielema's coaching and our punter, Brad Nortman. It's not often that a punter decides a game, and when they do, it's in a fairly indirect way. For instance, they repeatedly pin the other team within the 15, making them march down a long field the entire game. Rarely can you put your finger on one game changing play, and the punter is right in the middle of the action.
Down 30-24, and approaching the six minute mark, fourth and four, and Bielema decides to dial up a fake punt. It's calls like this that remind me why I'm not a head coach. I'd watched the entire game, noticed that Iowa was basically sending one man to rush the punter and dropping the rest back. I never thought to put two and two together and call a fake. Bielema did and it was a brilliant call. Nortman scampered for the longest seventeen yards of his life before he slid to the grass, avoiding contact. And boy did he get down fast.
Wisconsin would convert another fourth down on the drive en route to a Montee Ball one yard touchdown run to give his team a one point lead. Ball was the unsung hero of this game. The offense was without their two most explosive weapons, tight end Lance Kendricks, and freshman running back, James White almost the entire game.
Ball was the forgotten man in the backfield that has primarily consisted of Clay and White since the Big Ten season began. He stepped up, particularly in the passing game, catching five balls for 41 yards.

That's the motion W I cut out of the pumpkin, which unfortunately, looked better than the pumpkin itself. Now it's decomposing in a landfill somewhere.

When two teams are as evenly matched as Iowa and Wisconsin are and have been over the years, sometimes it takes a trick play to gain an advantage. I wonder if Bret Bielema is getting his Hawkeye tattoo converted into a Badger as we speak, laughing at Kirk Ferentz's time management.
As far as the pumpkin, it's not doing so good. The hanging pieces of the pumpkin (spaces in between the W's columns) have began to curl up and resemble Doctor Claw gripping his armchair. It's OK. In a few days I'll leave the pumpkin outside and let the stoned teenagers do what they will with it.

Rose And Westbrook Battle For Point Guard Supremacy

I never thought I'd say this, but in tonight's season opener, fresh off a FIBA World Championship this summer, leading the league in scoring last year, and pretty much crowned this year's MVP, Kevin Durant will not be the center of attention in tonight's game. At least not my attention, anyway. Although I do have a low attention span.
Don't sleep on Durant and Deng's match up. Deng had the best preseason of any Bull, showing the ability to consistently hit the three. That should be a great match up. But no match up shall be greater than Derrick Rose and Russel Westbrook.
Team USA teammates this summer, Rose and Westbrook seemed to have been linked the entire offseason. The question being, who is better?
Westbrook has received overwhelming support. All of a sudden, I began hearing a lot of "Westbrook is better than Rose" opinions, when that wasn't even mildly feasible after the 2009-10 season.
So I wondered where this opinion was coming from. So I went to the source. The place I always go when questionable opinions seem to have a strong following - Bill Simmons.
Wrote Simmons on ESPN.com:
"We went into this tournament thinking Rose and Rondo were the two best under-24 point guards in some order. Rondo got sent home, then Westbrook outplayed Rose so convincingly in the tournament that, at some point, everyone who loves basketball glanced around in confusion and said, "Hold on, does Oklahoma City now have the best young point guard AND the best young player in the league?"
For whatever reason, Simmons' opinions seem to gain steam quickly and are rarely questioned. Especially amongst college-aged sports fans such as myself.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but hopefully I can dispel this Westbrook > Rose myth. Yes, Westbrook scored more points than Rose in the FIBA tournament. Seventeen more to be exact, and 1.9 more points per game. Their overall shooting percentages were almost identical, Westbrook shot better from behind the arc and on the free throw line. Rose had slightly more assists, Westbrook slightly more rebounds.
Really the only thing that distinguished Westbrook was his scoring total and ability to get to the basket. People are acting like Rose hasn't show the same ability - in the NBA.
Rose switched off from point guard to shooting guard playing alongside Chauncey Billups in the starting lineup. The offense ran through Durant in that starting lineup.
Krzyzewski frequently emptied his entire bench, bringing in five new players rather than playing the starters with the reserves. Consequently, Westbrook was given more free reign on the offense. Who was the go to guy on the second team? Rudy Gay? Who ever it was, that player didn't demand touches like Durant. Westbrook was able to create for himself and penetrate, while Rose was expected to be more of a distributor.
The only time in international play that I can remember Rose playing his NBA game was in the exhibition match against Spain. On Team USA's last two possessions, Rose drove the lane, hung in the air and scored, then drove to the basket again and drew the foul. He knocked down both free throws and won the game for the USA.
The point I'm trying to get at is that international play should not be used to determine who is a better NBA player. Not only is the style of play different, but players are expected to play different roles than they normally would. I believe that Westbrook's role was fairly similar to his NBA role, whereas Rose's was not.
While both are not yet on Rondo's level, tonight's match up should add more to the best young point guard discussion. Kevin Durant deserves a day outside of the spotlight.

Tonight We Make NBA History

Every generation of basketball fans have their defining moment. That moment is what they will associate with basketball from the era they grew up.
My defining moments were twofold. The first occurred on April 16, 1996 - the day the Bulls won their NBA record 70th regular season game. At the time, I was nine years old, and didn't fully understand the significance of that record. The post game interviews on the court with Johnny "Red" Kerr, mountains of merchandise marking the event, or the fact that the Bradley Center was filled with mostly Bulls fans that night still didn't completely register with me.
It was something my dad said that night. We were watching the post game interviews and he turned to me and said, "You know, you're really lucky that you got to see Michael Jordan play."
That was it. And that's all it took.
To me, Jordan was a constant. He had been playing for the Bulls for four years before I was even born. I grew up rooting for a Championship basketball team, the best player in the world, and had no idea how unusual that was. Kind of like being born into money. You mean, everyone doesn't live in a mansion, have a maid, and a chauffeur to drive them around?
Of course, things had changed for me by 1998, now age eleven. It was pretty well known that this was going to be Jordan's last year, and the last year of the Bulls dynasty as a whole. I was a little older, and beginning to appreciate how hard it was to win as many games and championships as the Bulls did.
So when Jordan made that last shot in Utah to clinch the 1998 NBA Finals, I knew it was the end of an era, and consequently, my memories of basketball growing up.
The Bulls' 70th win and Jordan's game winner are the two moments that embody that NBA era to me.

The opening night of the 2010-11 NBA season tonight will mark a similar significance in NBA history, none of which actually has to do with what happens on the court. The Heat might win, so might the Celtics. LeBron, or Wade, or Bosh, or even all three may have a big game.
Either way, many people will overreact after the outcome of this game is decided. Celtics win and they're better than the Heat, and an NBA Finals lock. Heat lose, and they're a sham, if they win, they'll contend for 72 wins.
The fact of the matter is that the first game of the season doesn't decide anything in the NBA. This game is significant for a number of other reasons. This offseason marked the shift in power from the owners to players and the advantage of bigger markets over smaller markets despite a salary cap meant to level the playing field. It marked the changing dynamics of fans and athletes, and possibly the end of star players' competitive fire as we knew it. The Heat's opening game will bring all of these combative and sometimes confusing ideas to fruition.
If there's one thing I'm sure of it's that we won't know the significance of the Heat until about 2030. By that time, the championships, wins, and careers of the players involved will be an afterthought. We'll be able to look back at the nature of fan reactions and media coverage.
Until then, enjoy the 2010-11 NBA season. We're witnessing the most significant moment of this NBA era, we're just not sure what that significance is yet.

Just Wright - Two Rights Can Make A Wrong

We've all heard the saying "Two wrongs don't make a right." Theoretically then, two rights shouldn't make a wrong, correct? As I found out this weekend, that is most definitely not true.
How can Common, one of the greatest rappers of all time in my opinion, who gave us this classic metaphorical track, one of the greatest songs of the 90s...


and this classic DJ Premier produced cut, one of the greatest songs of the 2000s...



Coupled with basketball, the game that gave us such great moments as Michael Jordan's 1998 NBA Finals game winner...



and John Havlicek's improbable steal to seal Game 7 of the 1965 Division Finals...



Create this travesty?

To be fair, I wasn't expecting this movie to be good. One look at the movie poster is all it takes to know this film is going to be filled with supremely awkward moments. For that reason alone, I decided to rent Just Wright and watch it with my girlfriend.
Here are my Top 5 train wreck moments:
1) Scott McKnight (Common) is playing the piano while rehabbing his knee injury. Yes, he apparently plays the piano quite well. Leslie (Queen Latifah, his physical therapist who becomes his love interest) brings him a plate of some marshmallow and chocolate chip cookie concoction. Scott takes a bite and whispers to Leslie in a pseudo-smooth voice, "Incredible." Common doesn't do the romantic moments too well.
2) Scott McKnight, star player for the New Jersey Nets, injures his knee while attempting a spin move...in the All Star Game. Has anyone ever tried hard enough to warrant an injury in the All Star Game? I had to laugh at this.
3) In that same All Star Game, they were able to reel in Marv Albert, Mike Fratello, and Kenny Smith to make an appearance as the announcing team. During the pre-game analysis, Fratello says something like, "We have many great stars here tonight. Dwyane Wade, Dwight Howard, but most people are here to see Scott McKnight." Too over the top, and since when do people watch the All Star Game to see one player? Isn't every All Star kind of a big draw?
4) Dwight Howard stops by McKnight's house to inform him that the Nets are not planning on offering him a new contract. While it's funny that he'd hear this news from Howard first, that's not the best part. Howard enters the room by grabbing Common's remote control airplane mid-flight and then does a dance my girlfriend says is called "The Stanky Leg."
5) The lack of chemistry between Common and Queen Latifah. Something tells me they'd have much better chemistry in the booth. Their kiss at the end of the movie was painful to watch. You could tell neither wanted any part of that. I would have preferred to watch 100 minutes of Paula Patton.
I'm not sure if this movie was intended to be a comedy, but it gave me a few laughs. If you're in to movies that are so bad they're good, check this one out.

Bears, Badgers Face Must Win Games This Weekend

Ah, the age old question. What constitutes a must-win game? I've heard many definitions over the years and decided to narrow them down to five.
1) The Literal - This is the "win or go home" game, exactly what the Phillies were facing yesterday. Some people argue this is the only true must win game, and in a sense, they're right.
2) The Rivalry - A game between two bitter rivals that involves one really good team and one really bad team. The good team has to win not only because it's a rivalry game, but their fans will never hear the end of it. When a team is bad, the only way they can salvage their season is by beating a superior rival.
3) The Save-Face - This is the type of must win the Vikings and Cowboys played last week. Two supremely talented teams that have underachieved thus far. While they've already killed their playoff chances, they have to win to at least make it look like they haven't given up on the season.
4) The Playoff Positioning - This happens a lot in baseball. Two division foes face off in a three game series at the end of August. They're separated by only one game atop the division and this is the last time they'll play each other this season. They have to win to improve their chances of making the playoffs.
5) The Expectation Fulfillment - A game that isn't considered a must win at the time, but will be reflected upon at the end of the season when analyzing whether or not a team lived up to expectations. This is the game the Bears and Badgers will be playing this weekend.

I feel like I've mentioned the Bears' post-Bye week schedule at every opportunity I've had, and hate to keep harping on it, but I can't really avoid it. I have a pocket schedule (printed in Spanish) that sits on my desk next to the computer. While I've been reminded of how to say Sunday, Monday, and Thursday in Spanish, I'm also constantly reminded of how difficult the Bears schedule is starting November 14th. 
That Seattle loss killed them. That was a game that they should have won that they didn't, and now they're going to have to win a more difficult game later in the season.
Ten wins will be enough to make the playoffs, maybe even nine. The Bears could and should have earned seven of those wins after Week 9. 4-2 still isn't a bad position to be in, neither will 5-2, but 4-3, with their upcoming schedule, diminishes their playoff chances.
The Bears need a win and they need to protect their quarterback. If they can't do either, that 4-1 record, possible sleeper status, and increased expectations will be all for naught. I almost forgot I predicted this team to win five games this year.

The Badgers are coming off one of their biggest wins in team history. That's a good and a bad thing. The Ohio State win brought back some of the national attention that disappeared after the loss at Michigan State. The bad news is that this is a really good Iowa team, and it's not at all uncommon for a team, especially the Badgers, to have a letdown the week after a big win.
Kinnick Stadium in Iowa City is one of the most difficult stadiums to play at that nobody talks about. I vividly remember the last time the Badgers played there and it wasn't pretty. The year was 2008 and Shonn Greene ran for 217 yards and 4 touchdowns. That was the official "My team sucks this year" game of the 2008 season.
Both teams have one loss and are looking for a spot in the Rose Bowl. Iowa still has the tougher part of their schedule to go, with home match ups against Michigan State and Ohio State. The loser heads to the Outback Bowl, the winner lives to fight another day.
Iowa has won three of the last five match ups against Wisconsin. Wisconsin's two wins were by a combined margin of seven points. The first Wisconsin home game I ever attended was a 20-10 Iowa victory in the rain. This is a nice, competitive, mini-rivalry that's been going on for the past five years and I don't see any reason why this game should be any different.
Expectations are constantly modified. After a 3-0 start, the Bears were expected to make the playoffs. While any sane person shouldn't expect them to advance very far, it's more than reasonable to expect them to earn a playoff spot.
Any time Wisconsin is ranked in the Preseason Coach's Poll, the hope is that they can earn their first spot in the Rose Bowl since 1999. They're probably never going to compete for a National Championship, so the Rose Bowl is the ultimate goal.
This is a weekend of must win games. No wins? No playoffs. No Rose Bowl. No dice.

Spurs vs. Inter Milan - Champions League Game 3

"Inter needed only ten minutes to beat Tottenham."
That's what I tweeted as half-time approached, Spurs were down 4-0. At the ten minute mark, Javier Zanetti had scored within two minutes, goalkeeper Heurelho Gomes was sent off, and Samuel Eto'o stutter stepped home a penalty kick, the first of his two goals in the match. Eto'o currently leads all Champions League scorers with six.
Playing with ten men, Spurs were unable to stop Inter's controlled attack. Dejan Stankovic put the game out of reach in the 14th minute, putting his side up three. Twenty minutes later, Eto's second goal of the game only added insult to injury.
At halftime, it looked like Inter could easily push across seven or eight goals by the end of the game. Spurs certainly did not look up to the Champions League challenge, in what was probably their most meaningful game since 1962.
Not only were they going to lose, but screw their goal differential up in the process.
Thankfully, Werder and Twente drew, preserving second place for Tottenham in Group A. Tottenham played better defensively in the second half, and were able to narrow the scoring gap.
Gareth Bale was the lone bright spot in a game that desperately needed a bright spot for the visitors. Bale's speed overwhelmed Inter's defense the entire game. Although it wasn't until the 52nd minute that he was able to break through with his first goal. Bale would score two more almost identical goals, but it just wasn't enough.
Tottenham was doomed from the start, as they elected to send off Luka Modric for Gomes' red card. Spurs were already weak in the middle because Rafael van der Vaart was unable to play because of his red card last game against Twente.
The lack of a presence in the middle was evident. Bale and Lennon both played very well on the outside, but found themselves either crossing the ball to no one, or without a playmaker to create for them.
The flow of the offense should be much better with van der Vaart back for the rematch at White Hart Lane. This team lacks creativity without him.

To put things into perspective, this was a match Spurs were unlikely to win anyway. The result wasn't the issue, the fact that they looked utterly confused in the first half was. This was a game that they needed to at least show they could compete with the elite European clubs, and in the first half they couldn't.
Many fans left the game with a warm feeling because of Bale's spectacular performance, and the margin of defeat being cut to only one goal. Both feelings are fool's gold.
A loss is a loss. As long as Spurs take care of business in their remaining games against Werder and Twente, the goal differential won't come into play anyway. There's such a thing as playing well and getting beat by a better team. Spurs didn't play well.
Bale's three goals were all the result of fantastic individual efforts. One player can't beat a great team. If Spurs had scored three team oriented goals then that would have been great. Bale instead had to carry the rest of his team, and that won't get it done in the Champions League.
Hopefully eleven men, the return of van der Vaart, and a change of scenery can make a difference for Spurs in their next meeting with Inter. Either that or Bale may need to score four goals.