This and That

I have not written in awhile, much to the delight of many, but here to share a few thoughts on this and that today.

Marriage and Blending Families

I have been married for a month now, and the hardest thing for me is blending families. My boys are at a different stage of their lives than Candice's daughter, so this makes coordinating schedules and getting family time difficult. Plus my boys and me are not used to having girls around, just as Candice and her daughter are not used to having boys around. For me, having a woman around is certainly a change of pace. Learning each other's quirks, habits and preference is an adjustment. Learning to work with her as a team is both fun and challenging. But these are challenges that can be overcome. I would much rather face this challenge than be single. Like I said in an earlier entry, marriage is not for everyone, but it is for me.

Paul Ryan's Speech
After reading the text of Rep. Ryan's speech last night that he hit all the points he needed to hit. Of course, the commentary on the speech was quite predictable. Conservative pundits loved it, liberal pundits hated it. Click on this link for a complete text of the speech. The best line from the speech, in describing the Obama presidency was, "(n)ow all that’s left is a presidency adrift, surviving on slogans that already seem tired, grasping at a moment that has already passed, like a ship trying to sail on yesterday’s wind." I like Paul Ryan. I like that he had the guts to put out a plan as a valid alternative to what the Democrats were offering. However, his speech did not tell the whole truth. For instance, in talking about Medicare, he said, "You see, even with all the hidden taxes to pay for the health care takeover, even with new taxes on nearly a million small businesses, the planners in Washington still didn’t have enough money. They needed more. They needed hundreds of billions more. So, they just took it all away from Medicare. Seven hundred and sixteen billion dollars, funneled out of Medicare by President Obama." While this statement is factually correct, Ryan's original plan (since modified) called for cuts in Medicare to finance a tax cut. He did not mention this, as you might expect.

This was consistent throughout his speech. From the Bowles-Simpson debt reduction committee, "He created a bipartisan debt commission. They came back with an urgent report. He thanked them, sent them on their way, and then did exactly nothing." Which is factually true. He did not mention that he was on the committee and voted against the committee final report since it would be seen as his endorsement of ObamaCare. (Click here to see what Erksine Bowles, Bill Clinton's White House Chief of Staff, thinks of Ryan). I think Ryan could have been more forthcoming with some of his statements. Overall I give his speech a B. It hit the President in a fair and firm manner, but some more disclosure was required.

Tax Cuts

After some pondering, which I am prone to do, I do not believe the tax cuts advocated by the Republicans at this time will have a beneficial economic impact. I believe that tax policy should simultaneously do two things: 1) maximize government revenue, and 2) maintain a prosperous economy. Tax cuts today would reduce revenue, and there would be no economic benefit. With S&P 500 companies holding record cash, there is already plenty of money available to invest in new businesses and plenty of money available to create jobs. Why are theses companies holding onto the cash? The answers all point back to the Obama Administration and its policies, and to the lack of confidence the business community possesses regarding the Administration. A tax cut on upper income people would be more productive if there was a slew of great ideas waiting to be unleashed on the market with no capital available to make that happen. However, there is plenty of cash available, but risk investors are clearly waiting for a more favorable environment in which to invest. Once businesses and investors have a more favorable outlook for the economy, we could see a terrific recovery.

Campaign Rhetoric

I get a kick out of liberal commentators that can recite scripture and verse why Romney/Ryan should be not elected. Some reasons are valid, some are absurd. But I cannot find one that can tell me why the President deserves re-election. What has to be even more depressing for liberals and Democrats is that the President's main focus seems to be....his opponent's tax returns! Really? He does realize his own Secretary of the Treasury (and IRS regulator #1) is a confirmed tax cheat? You would expect the tax return rhetoric from low level partisan hacks (re: Swift boats), but not from the President. He is the imcumbent. He has a record. He should run on his record and state his case for re-election based on that record. The fact that he spends so much of his time trying to define his opponent says two things: 1) his record is not worth running on; 2) he and his Administration are intellectually bankrupt. They have no answers and no solutions.

College Football

College football starts this weekend, and it certainly marks an exciting time on the calendar for me. I truly enjoy college football, but this season sure feels different. Conference realignment has taken some terrific rivalries off the schedule this year. Missouri, for example, could play the next 100 years in the SEC and not come close to the rivalry they shared with Kansas. Same with Texas A&M and Texas. These type of regional rivalries are fun, and part of what seperates college sports from their bretheren in the professional ranks. College football, and college basketball, will not be the same without these rivalries.

Mom of the Year Award...NOT!

A recent contestant on the show "Toddlers and Tiaras", a four-year-old named Destiny came out on stage smoking a fake cigarette, a la Olivia Newton John from "Grease". Huh? First, I find it appalling that a four-year-old is even in a beauty pagent. Second, said four-year-old is glamourizing smoking? And Mom is proud of all this? And we wonder why it is a screwed up world. Let the kid be a kid. If she wants to dress up, let her play with Mom's clothes but do not put this on display for the world to see. It is unfair to the child, and no parent should be allowed to put their own stupidity on display.

Stupidest Politician of the Year Award

This is not even close. Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo) takes the cake for his "legitimate rape" and "the female body has ways to shut these things down" comments. I thought the President's "you didn't build that" comment was a classic. And it was. But Akin takes stupidity and insensitivity to levels never before imagined. And he even stayed in the race! Does Rep. Akin really thinks he will win? Akin does not just win Stupidest Politician of the Year Award, he has earned a lifetime honor in this Hall of Shame.

Thoughts on Freedom

"Give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775

This week, the United States of America will celebrate its 236th anniversary of Independence from Great Britain. We will celebrate the freedom that to this day is still unique to America. It is a freedom that came to us at a great cost, and I thank the courage of those who stood against the greatest empire of their day.

Roots of Revolution

The idea of an American revolution was really, I believe, an intersecting of the Enlightenment thinkers and a series of unpopular taxes imposed by the British Parliament on the colonial Americans. The Seven Years War (between France and Great Britain, which included what we know as the French and Indian War) concluded in 1763 with a decisive British victory, but an empty British treasury and a huge national debt. The British government felt they needed to impose more taxes to raise the necessary revenue needed to house British soldiers in the American colonies. The soldiers would be needed to protect the American frontier from hostile Indians. Since the soldiers were there to protect the colonists, Parliament felt it necessary to tax the colonists for such protection.

The British Parliament passed the Sugar Act of 1764 as a first step to taxing the colonists. This tax was actually a revision of the Molasses Act of 1733, and the Sugar Act actually cut the tax rate versus the Molasses Act. The colonists objected on economic grounds, but soon they realized that the Sugar Act was unconstitutional under British law. The British constitution forbade taxation without parliamentary representation. Since the colonists did not have the right to elect members of Parliament to represent their interests, they felt that Britain could not impose taxes. The constitutional question came to a boil with the passage of the Stamp Act of 1765. The colonists fiercely protested this law, and it was repealed in 1766. However, Parliament also passed the Declartory Act, in which it expressly gave itself the power to tax the colonists as they saw fit. The colonists saw themselves as British subjects, and therefore, privileged to the same rights as their fellow Englismen across the sea. However, it was clear that the English government did not view the Americans as having the full rights of English citizens.

As the British government imposed more and more taxes on the colonists, the tide turned from "taxation without representation" and gaining the Rights of Englishmen to political independence. The presence of British soldiers on the streets and in their homes became revolting and hated. This ultimately led to the First Continental Congress in 1774 to address grievances with the British government. However, open rebellion flared up in 1775 in Massachusetts. A Second Continental Congress was convened in 1776 with the express purpose of seeking political independence from Great Britain.

Classical Liberalism and Natural Rights

While the American people were rising up against the British, an intellectual movement known as the Enlightenment was taking place in Europe which embraced "classical liberalism". While there were several leading Enlightenment thinkers, John Locke was likely most influential in forming American political philosophy. Classical liberalism respected the natural rights of man which were originally defined in John Locke's Second Treatise on Government (published 1689) as life, liberty and property. Classical liberalism, as applied to government included limited government, due process, seperation of powers and the freedoms of speech, press, peacable assembly, religion and freedom in the market place. Under classical liberalism, government served three main purposes: protect against foreign invaders, protect citizens against the taking of life, liberty and property and build public institutions that the private economy could not provide profitably.

One of America's leading Enlightenment thinkers of that day was a young Virginian named Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson was already established as a leading thinker of his day when he was handed the primary assignment by the Second Continental Congress of writing a declaration of independence from Great Britain. Jefferson was heavily influenced by Locke's Second Treatise. Jefferson starts the second paragraph with a phrase borrowed straight from Locke (with a slight modification..."pursuit of Happiness replaces "property"): "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..." To think that Jefferson was a mere 33 years old at the time!

The ideas that men are created equal, with unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of Happiness (or property if you will) were new ideas at the time of the Enlightenment. Europe was ruled by monarchs, with entrenched aristocracies and a rigid social structure. The idea that a person could, through education and hard work, advance his social or economic status to the highest echelons of society was unheard of. The ideals that Jefferson put forth in this document were truly revolutionary.

Freedom - The American Ideal

America was the first nation founded on the ideal of freedom. The British were finally defeated in 1781, with the final treaty signed in 1783. It would take another four years, but in the summer of 1787, the United States would announce a new constitution based on the classical liberalism of the Englightenment. The government would be divided into three branches, with each branch's power checked. Then, with the help of Patrick Henry, 10 amendments to the Constitution, known as the Bill of Rights, were added that ensured the individual freedoms that so many people fought and died for.

Today the freedoms that we take for granted, such as freedom of speech and freedom of the press are still way too unique in this world. The United States was truly blessed to have a generation of leaders who understood the benefits of enterprise and the evils of tyrants and worked tirelessly to ensure the survival of this republic. Today, the world still looks to the United States as a beacon of hope, as a place where you can better your life.

Warnings

Freedom is not free. We have all heard this before. Thomas Jefferson gave us many warnings to heed regarding our freedom.

“Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”

“The Price of Freedom is Eternal Vigilance.”

“If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as a sorry state as the souls who live under tyranny.”

"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

“A government afraid of its citizens is a Democracy. Citizens afraid of government is tyranny!”

“My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.”

There are others, too. He warned us to look out for the government that wishes to take care of us. They have the best intentions, but eventually, they chip away at our freedoms ever so slowly until they take it all and manage our lives from a central location. The inevitable result of this government, according to Jefferson, is tyranny. The tyrant chips away at our freedoms, grabs more and more power for himself. Then he announces his tyranny as a victory for the people.

As you can see, I am a big fan of Thomas Jefferson's political philosophy. More than anyone, he embraced freedom. I find it interesting that he wanted what he considered his three greatest accomplishments carved on his tombstone: Author of the Declaration of Independence, Author of the Statute of Virginia for religious freedom, and Father of the University of Virginia. He did not consider being President of the United States worthy of being remembered for.

The American Dream

Embrace freedom. Realize this is what the American Dream is all about. I have defined the American Dream as building a life for yourself and your family that is rich and rewarding, however you choose to define it. It may be through the pursuit of financial wealth or it may come from the collective effort, along with your fellow citizens, to make your community a better place to live. And realize that freedom is a precious gift. Life, liberty and pursuit of happiness are our natural, unalienable rights. No government can confer these. But a government can take all these natural rights away. Embrace your freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of peacable assembly, freedom of religion and freedom to pursue your dream in the market place. And be wary of the government that would chip away at any of these freedoms.

Celebrate America this Independence Day! Celebrate the splendor of her freedom. Enjoy the cookouts, the family gatherings, and especially the fireworks. Give thanks to God for the richness of His blessings in allowing us to live in freedom!

Words of Impact

Words have meaning and they can sometimes stick around much longer than the speaker ever intended. What brought this to mind was reflecting on an almost off-handed remark that resonated with me at the time and never left. The words date all the way back to September 1989 when I was at Baylor. I was a member of a business fraternity, Alpha Kappa Psi, while at Baylor and we were interviewing rushees for membership. This was typically a very long day, and quite honestly, I was not paying much attention at the time. The interviews tend to run together, the questions and answers all start sounding the same, and most of the energy needed to be devoted to the voting going on later that day.

I remember that were interviewing a young lady named Gigi Pitzer, and I remember to this day the question was generally along the lines of "If you could be anyone in the world, dead or alive, who would it be?" I remember that as soon as I heard the question the thought that went through my head was, "I wish for once that someone would answer that they would just like to be themselves." No sooner had this thought crossed my mind than Ms. Pitzer said she would just like to be herself. She said this in a very matter of fact way, like she couldn't imagine being anyone else. Plus, she added, she rather liked herself. The answer projected boldness and confidence. And left a mark on me. Here I am, almost 23 years later, remarking on these words that she has probably long since forgotten.

To this day, I love the way she answered the question. Many of us would likely choose to be some great historical figure, whether it be someone like an Abraham Lincoln or George Washington, a Jesus Christ, or a Winston Churchill. But she was happy with herself. I am not sure what possessed Ms. Pitzer to answer the question the way she did. How many of us would have answered that we would just like to be ourselves? The more I think about it, the more it makes sense to me. Besides, we all have gifts to offer, whether our brains, our time, or our talent. And we all the ability to positively impact those around us such as a child, a co-worker, or the bigger world around us. Remember, words have impact, and sometimes they last a long, long time. Thank you Gigi!

The Moral Dilemma

This post is primarily directed at those who are, or have been, parents of teenagers.  I have wrestled with this idea since I first heard it about 6 or 7 years ago.  In all that time, I still do not even know my answer to this dilemma.

The dilemma is this:  as my sons enter their peak sexual years, should I provide them with condoms that they can have access to with no questions asked as they go out on dates?  On the one hand, it will prevent unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases.  On the other hand, am I enabling an activity that I cannot condone? 

I do not want my sons having sex at this time in their lives.  I know that I cannot stop them, regardless of past teachings.  Abstinence is the only 100% guarantee that there will be no unplanned pregnancies and no diseases.  The kids do not understand the power of sex.  At this age, boys think they are bullet proof.  They do not understand what AIDS truly means (that it is largely a death sentence).  They do not understand the power it holds over a young woman's feelings.  What would happen if one of my sons got a young lady pregnant?  Neither of them has the tools, skill set or maturity to provide for it.  I cannot tell the young lady which way to go on abortion/adaption/keep the child, even though she would be carrying my grandchild.  Part of my problem here is that my parents never discussed any of this with me.  Maybe for some people, this is a no brainer. Maybe there are considerations here that I am not thinking of (excuse me for ending a sentence in a preposition).  Parents, your perspectives are much appreciated.

To Love and Cherish Candice

"Husbands love your wives as Christ has loved the church, giving himself up for her." Ephesians 5:25, Paul's letter to the church in Ephesus

Warning, this post is going to get sappy.  Yes, I am in love and proud to admit it.  I am about to embark on a new life with Candice Brooke, and I could not be happier about it, nor more excited.  I am getting married to her July 28, and a new life begins for me, one full of hope and promise.

I must admit, I never cared much for being single.  Oh sure, I learned to piece together a life of sorts.  Perhaps there were opportunities I failed to exploit.  Tough to take advantage of all opportunities when you are a full time single parent of two very young kids.  My two sons have sustained me these past thirteen years more than I know.  But there times I needed love and support they simply could not provide.  I knew I had a good marriage before, but likely did not fully appreciate just how good.  Being single the past thirteen years has given me perspective.  A perspective that I hope leads to an even greater appreciation of Candice and the diligence to never take her for granted and to love her endlessly.

Marriage is not for everyone.  This I know.  But it is for me.  My life's experiences have taught me this.  I knew this back in 1991 and I have never lost that knowledge about myself.  In 2012, I know this about myself more than ever.  I am so grateful for Candice's love.  I have felt it in so many ways, and it heals the soul in ways being single cannot.  Yes, I will need my moments alone.  That's part of my personality.  And she will need her time away from me.  But even with my "single" time, I most look forward to being married to Candice.

I do not mean to idealize marriage and make it something that it is not.  I know we face many turbulent days ahead over issues that likely have not even surfaced yet, even with several marriage counseling sessions.  We will fight.  We will each have strong opinions about stuff, whether it's the color we paint the bedroom walls to whose kid started the fight and how to punish it.  I might have an offhanded remark meant to be funny that will hurt her feelings.  I would never intentionally do that, but it will happen at times.  She would hurt my feelings at times too, if I had any.  At the end of the day, I still love Candice.  It's easy to say I always will, but after the past 13 years, with my life's experiences, my appreciation for the blessing that she is to me will not be forgotten and I will always love her.

Men, I come back to the verse at the top.  If you are married, love your wife, treasure her.  The grass is not greener on the other side.  Remember why you married her.  Never lose the passion for her.  For those of you in great marriages, congratulations!  You have worked hard to make a truly extraordinary life for each other.  After my life's experiences the past thirteen years, I will always be grateful to Candice, will love her forever, and hope that I never take her for granted.   And together, make a truly extraordinary life!  I love you, Candice!

In Defense of Roy Williams

This comment may draw the ire of many Kansas Jayhawk basketball fans, but I will say it anyway: I am a Roy Williams fan. Now, the vast majority of KU fans have moved on, and retain fond memories of Mr. Williams's time at KU. Sadly, there are still a sizable minority that have not forgiven Williams for leaving. How sad. I am thankful for all the wonderful things he did for the KU program. KU would not have near the program it has today were it not for Roy Williams. For that, KU fans should be grateful and should honor Mr. Williams accordingly.

My gratitude to Mr. Williams dates back to October 31, 1988, before he ever coached a game for KU. That was the day the NCAA leveled sanctions against the KU program for violations that occured during Larry Brown's tenure. KU was prohibited from defending its 1988 NCAA Championship, having a post-season ban placed on it. However, that was not the worst penalty. The NCAA also leveled the KU program by prohibiting the university from hosting on campus recruiting visits for the entire 1989 calendar year. The NCAA designed these penalties to cripple the KU program for at least 5 years. In other words, it would be a long time before KU would contend for the national championship, right? Wrong, thanks to Mr. Williams, and a little bit of luck.

KU entered the 1988-89 season with just 9 eligible scholarship players, so the recruiting restrictions were particularly harsh at a time when KU needed players. But Mr. Williams refused to feel sorry for himself or for the KU program. He vowed that KU would win under his guidance and that they would win the right way. Now, it needs to be remembered that his hiring was not universally welcome at KU. Many KU boosters thought that the Jayhawks, as defending national champions, could hire a big time coach to come in and continue the winning ways re-established by Larry Brown. Hiring the #2 assistant coach off the North Carolina staff was not what the KU faithful had in mind. More than a few KU boosters complained that the Jayhawks went from having the best coach in the country to having the third best in the state of Kansas. KU wound up the 1988-89 season with a 19-12 record, going 6-8 in the Big 8 Conference.

Predictably, after the NCAA sanctions were announced, Williams's first recruiting class fell apart. Thomas Hill changed his mind and went to Duke. Harold Miner changed his mind and went to USC. Only Adonis Jordan kept his commitment to KU (thank you Adonis!). Coach Williams did sign Terry Brown and Pekka Markannen in the spring 1989 class. Then, for the fall 1989 recruiting season, Williams did find some luck. Kansas City and Wichita were both loaded with talent. Kansas City had Jevon Crudup (who went to Missouri), Chris Lindley and Patrick Richey (who both went to KU) while Wichita had Cortez Barnes and Steve Woodbury (who both signed with KU). Williams also signed a power forward from Little Rock named Richard Scott who never saw the KU campus before signing. In a bit of bad luck, Barnes did not qualify academically and Lindley lost a foot in a train accident; neither ever played a game at KU.

So what happened over the next four years, in which the NCAA had targeted the KU program for erosion? KU won 113 games, three Big 8 championships, went 43-13 overall in Big 8 Conference games and went to two Final Fours! Williams would go on to win 418 games, 9 conference championships and appear in four Final Fours, finishing runner-up twice. Only Phog Allen himself has hung more banners in Allen Fieldhouse than Williams. But in those moments, in those days after KU was sanctioned by the NCAA, Williams saved the KU program from inevitable decline, and in fact enhanced the program. That took a lot of doing, and for what he did during that time KU fans should be forever grateful.

But KU fans turned on Williams after he left. Of course, some of the hurt is natural when someone of such public importance leaves. He told the world that he couldn't turn down Coach Smith twice. But think about this. In 2000, he stayed. Dr. Bob Frederick was still KU's Athletic Director, the man who took a chance and hired Williams in 1988. Williams always maintained his loyalty to Frederick, and by extension to KU. In 2001, Frederick was forced out, and KU hired Al Bohl to replace him. Williams did not get along with Bohl. Ultimately, KU fired Bohl in a last ditch effort to keep Williams. At that point the KU athletic department was a great big circus. If you found yourself working for a person you could not stand, and a longtime friend came calling with a job offer, wouldn't you look hard at taking the new job? That's where Williams was in April 2003. And if my employer was a circus, I would look for exits fast! When long time friend Dick Baddour (North Carolina's AD) came with an offer of more money, a bigger basketball budget a great deal of stability and the opportunity to return home, Williams would have been a fool to say no

Meanwhile, KU was damn lucky to get Bill Self. After KU fired Al Bohl, former Kansas City Power & Light CEO Drue Jennings was hired as the interim AD. How many of you would take a job not knowing who your boss would be? Yet Bill Self took the KU job not knowing who his boss at KU would be. Self also had the pieces in place at Illinois, the nucleus of a team that would eventually be the national runner-up in 2005 (ironically to Roy Williams's North Carolina team).

So why do KU fans still carry a grudge against Williams? This is obviously insulting to Williams, but also insulting to the KU basketball program and to man who succeeded Williams, Bill Self. For to carry the grudge means that you believe the KU program suffered, and is still suffering, because Williams departed. In fact, KU has won 8 consecutive Big 12 Conference championships, and an NCAA Tournament championship since Williams left. I also find it interesting that when KU met North Carolina in the 2008 Final Four, Williams's former KU players were all Jayhawks that day. I believe this is testament to the character of Williams that instilled a sense of loyalty to the institution in his players. The loyalty was not to Roy Williams, but to KU.

On a more personal level, Mr. Williams may have saved my Dad's life. In 1999, after my Dad retired, my Dad and his wife thought it would be fun to take road trips to watch KU play basketball games in other conference venues. Coach Williams gave my Dad some time and they discussed the various venues in the Big 12. For the record, Williams's favorite road venue was Oklahoma State, but he did also strongly advise my Dad to never see a KU game at Missouri. Williams just flat out told my Dad that he would be taking his life into his own hands if he attended a game at Missouri. Thank you Roy Williams for keeping my Dad and his wife from harm!

Bill Self has taken the KU program to the mountaintop. But let KU fans not forget to take the time to honor Williams for stepping up and keeping the KU program on top when a lesser man would have slip down the slippery slope the NCAA had set up for him. Does anyone really believe that Bill Self would be the KU coach today if Roy Williams had failed in those first five years? I do not. Does anyone believe that KU would be the perrenial national championship contender that it is today if Roy Williams had failed in his first five years? I do not. Thank you and God bless you Roy Williams. Oh, one more thing...on Sunday, it is Rock Chalk Jayhawk KU!!

March Madness

It's Selection Sunday as I write this, the day the NCAA men's basketball tournament field is announced. I love filling out my bracket after the field has been announced. Something about matching wits with other "experts" in the field, whether they are co-workers, family members or the million who will play the ESPN Bracket Challenge for an opportunity to win $1 million that brings out the competitive juices in me (and apparently, many others). However, by the end of that first weekend, my bracket has been shredded by the on-court results (I am usually good for about 20-22 correct calls out of 32 first round games), and I can just enjoy the rest of tournament. But it sure is fun to fill out that bracket. I do believe there some simple rules to follow to fill out a successful bracket.

Calling the Upsets
Predicting the first round upset is the most enjoyable, and challenging, part of filling out the bracket. Upsets happen every year, but correctly calling the upsets is quite difficult. First, the easy rule to follow: Do not ever pick a #16 seed to defeat a #1 seed. It has never happened. In the 27 previous tournaments with the modern format, the #1 seed is 108-0 against the #16 seed. Do not count on it happening anytime soon. Next, do not pick the #15 seed to beat the #2 seed. In the modern format, this has happened 4 times, none since 2001. Do not count on it happening again. The most common upset usually occurs in the 5-12 first round match-up. Why? This match-up usually matches a low ranking member of a power conference (the #12 seed) against a mid major or against a team that posted a glossy record in an overrated power conference. Look for your opportunities here. Other upsets occur when an underrated mid major team is playing against an overrated power conference team. In any event, do not predict your first round upsets to win in the second round. This could save your bracket.

Who Do You Pick To Go Deep?
This is always a dilemma because some highly ranked teams inevitably fall early in the tournament and picking which ones will survive can be tricky. Here, you have to look at coaches. Some coaches seem to do very well no matter what while others have consistently disappointed. In this day and age, the coaches who regularly perform well in the tournament are Coach K at Duke (11 Final Fours), Roy Williams at North Carolina (7 Final Fours), Tom Izzo at Michigan State (6 Final Fours) and Rick Pitino at Louisville (5 Final Fours). For my money, Izzo is the best tournament coach in the field. At a minimum, you are safe to pick these coaches teams to "play to their seed". All coaches have their tournament disappointments, but these coaches are not likely to ruin your brackets with early round defeats. Coaches who have consistently disappointed are Bill Self at Kansas, Fran Dunphy at Temple and Tom Crean at Indiana. I would not pick these guys to go deep into the tournament.

The next factor to look at is experience. Teams that are junior and senior dominated tend to go farther than freshman and sophomore laden teams. When looking particularly at the mid majors, those with lots of experience can win games and go deep in tournament. Another factor that play into a deep tournament run is the strength of a team's guard play. A strong point guard can control the tempo of the game and will always get the ball into the hands of his teams best scorers at crunch time. As I look at the 2012 tournament, I believe that strong guard play and experience can take a team like Missouri far into the tournament while weak guard play can leave a team like Kansas vulnerable to an early round upset. Experience could work against a team like Kentucky, but help a team like Syracuse.

Sizing Up 2012
Overall, the top two teams are Kentucky and Syracuse. I do not see any noticeable differences between the two. Syracuse has more experience, but Kentucky has more talent and they have a coach who has been to two Final Fours. What are some of the possible upsets in the first round? Well since I spotlighted the 5-12 match up, I really like Long Beach State to beat New Mexico. Other possible upsets include NC State over San Diego State. If California makes it past South Florida, then I could see Cal beating Temple (another 5-12 match up). Another underdog that no one on TV is talking about is St. Mary's, which I think could give Kansas a lot of trouble in the second round. South Dakota State will give Baylor trouble in their match up, but I think BU pulls out an ugly win. Of the Big 12 teams, Missouri will go the farthest in this tournament. I think the Tigers will meet their match in Michigan State. As I said earlier, Tom Izzo is the best tournament coach out there right now.

In the end, the Final Four could be like 2008, with all four #1's making the Final Four. Back in December, I predicted that North Carolina would win it all. I have changed my mind. In the end, Syracuse will be cutting down the nets in New Orleans.