Mar 17th, 2008
NCAA Tournament chat: Lack of depth could doom Texas
Dallas Morning News college basketball writer Kate Hairopoulos answered questions about the NCAA Tournament in a live chat on Monday, March 17.
Kate Hairopoulos: I’ve been informed Bob Knight, Mr. ESPN, and I picked the same Final Four: UNC, Kansas, UCLA and Pitt. While I’m mulling over the other similarities the General and I share, let’s talk NCAA Tournament brackets …
redraider08: Do you think the Longhorns have a good shot at winning it all with their regional in Houston and the Final Four in San Antonio?
Kate Hairopoulos: Texas clearly got one of the best draws of the tournament. A No. 2 seed certainly didn’t hurt the Longhorns. I know a home-state advantage will be a huge boost … but it wasn’t enough to put Texas A&M through after playing the regionals in San Antonio last year. I love Texas’ starting five, but I really worry about its depth in a tournament environment. And Stanford, Pitt and Memphis are awfully good. If the Horns advance, D.J. Augustin and A.J. Abrams get more help, and the bench play improves.
Rock Chalk: Which of the Nos. 1 and 2 seeds is most vulnerable to an early-round upset?
Kate Hairopoulos: Top-seed Memphis has a really tough draw. After UTA in the first game, the Tigers could have a tough Mississippi State team with a great guard in Jamont Gordon or the Pac-10’s Oregon. Up ahead is Pitt and Texas. No. 2 seed Duke didn’t finish the season well, so it wouldn’t be shocking to see a loss to West Virginia or Xavier. Second seed Tennessee could also have trouble with underseeded Butler in the second round.
March Madness: How do you see Texas A&M faring in the tournament?
Kate Hairopoulos: Who really knows about those up-and-down Aggies? I will say that their showing in the Big 12 tournament went a long way in restoring my faith in their potential. BYU isn’t an easy first-round game – the Cougars beat Louisville and hung with North Carolina early this season. Lee Cummard was the Mountain West player of the year. If A&M does advance, it’ll face a monster of a test in UCLA. I wonder if Mark Turgeon and Kentucky coach Billy Gillispie will chat while they’re in Anaheim.
Tags: ncaa, tourney
15 Responses to “NCAA Tournament chat: Lack of depth could doom Texas”
What I find particularly odd about this piece is that it does not mention the effects on artists of orphan works laws in other countries. Canada has such a law; why not describe how it differs from the proposed U.S. law and how has it affected Canadian artists?This PDF does mention an important difference between the proposed U.S. law and the Canadian law. I found it somewhat more useful.The law that they are talking about but never actually name, by the way, appears to be the Orphan Works Act of 2006. This was never passed and it does not seem that there are currently any efforts to pass new legislation on the matter.
I think it’s a really bad bad bad idea…
designer babies -> designer talents and designer politicians -> designer president!
It’s pretty clear to me that the Clintons have come to terms with the fact that Hillary won’t get the nomination and, just as they did in 2004 (think Wes Clark), they gave it to the republicans so that she can run in 2012.
One way would be by reading the headline: Stocks Mixed. The market finished up 21 points today.This isn’t the reason to panic. There are several other reasons to be very concerned, however.
I just edumacating myself on how to spell “thier”
It was happening with plants, animails… People are next!
Everyone polled winning leads for Obama, Obama did win Texas, and you’ve got me in Ohio.1/3.
Designer babies” are the best embryos, selected over less attractive ones.who writes this crap? by “less attractive” they mean ones with cystic fibrosis and other fatal diseases. If only the author was somehow weeded out years ago.
I did educate myself. And I learned that this screed doesn’t understand basic concepts in copyright law. Here’s the worst offense: Q: Countless photographs and illustrations go unused because their owners can’t be located. Why do visual artists object to a system that would give others access to this unused content? A: Using another’s property (whether or not you assume they’re using it themselves) is not a right. You don’t have a right to use someone else’s car just because it’s parked somewhere and you can’t find them to ask how much they’d charge you to use it. Moreover it should not be an owner’s obligation to monitor the use of his car by unknown persons, track down those who might have used it, then accept whatever fee they say it’s their policy to pay whenever they use the cars of people they can’t find. Why should copyright, which is an even more personal form of private property than a car (because an artist’s copyright is self-created property) be any different?What’s wrong with this claim: the notion that photographs (etc.) are intellectual property. They are not. Various rights to use photographs are the intellectual property, and they are only granted to the extent that it is beneficial to society. They are not “rights” in the traditional sense: they are temporary grants.In Europe, copyright law is founded on the notion that people own intellectual property. It is theirs. US copyright law is very different: it is founded on the philosophy that all intellectual creation is part of the collective good. It is owned by no one. Copyright, patent, trade secret, and trademark laws were originally viewed as necessary evils in order to prevent society from foundering under secrecy and trade guilds and to enable good economic mechanisms for the benefit of all.Thus to the extent that orphaned works hinder rather than help society, their protection should be revoked. Benefit to the artist is, in a brutal but real sense, almost immaterial: the only thing to consider in copyright law is benefit to society. Does the benefit of all of us being able to use orphaned works outweigh the economic benefits society gains from artists stimulated by protection of their work, and to what degree should constraints change to enable society to have its cake and eat it too, so to speak? This is by no means an easy thing to work out.
Down with wheat!! muahahahaha
probably, Britain needs new Einsteins…
Zogby is a total hack.I can’t believe people still take him seriously after he polled winning leads for Obama in New Hampshire, Texas, and Ohio.
Plus, here's the letter that triggered the response above.