RUPPSRUNT

I welcome you to this meeting of the House of Representatives.

Ever since the BALCO investigation began, I have asked my self 1 question and 1 question only. Why the hell does Congress keep getting involved in professional sports? Dont we have a Trillion dollar national debt to worry about, not what Barry Bonds shot up his butt 10 years ago? And Marion Jones, if she admits to using steroids, life ban from Track and Field. But 6 months in prison? For cheating at a game? Congress should spend more time with National matters and not the Washington Nationals. With the upcoming Presidential race looming over our head its hard to believe that baseball could get more coverage on the news than the presidential race. And while our soldiers are over in Iraq risking their lives, Arlen Specter wants to know if the Patriots cheated to win the Super Bowl.

Drop the case now and let baseball and other sports self-police themselves. The Mitchell Report......good, but dont waste valuable time at Congress questioning athletes about The Clear and HGH. Get back to business, and begin doing whats right for the country.

How come every time I hear "Chad Johnson" or "Terrell Owens" or "Pacman Jones" on Sportscenter I need to count to 10 and listen to classical music? And that question is definitely rhetorical. Lets break down the term Professional Athlete.

Professional - following an occupation as a means of livelihood or for gain

Athlete - a person trained or gifted in exercises or contests involving physical agility, stamina, or strength; a participant in a sport, exercise, or game requiring physical skill.

Last time I checked, that means you get payed (thats an understatement) to play games most people stop playing during puberty. So why do I continuously see "Chad Johnson Trade Watch" and "Pacman Arrested Again"? Because they make TOO MUCH MONEY. This is a widely used stereotype and its not always true but what happens when you take a kid from the inner city, with a Quarter to his name, and sign him to a 5+ Year, 50+Mil Dollar contract. Probably something like this. Or this. Point is, throwing that much money at these kids make them see green. Look what happened to MC Hammer. he had LOADS of money for being a terrible rapper, much like Kenton Keith, and it definitely wasn't Hammer Time for long.

Millions of dollars? Classrooms? Endorsement deals? Final exams? If given choice of 2 out of 4 of these things, which would you choose? Think before you decide, or don't.

When presented the opportunity to provide for your family immediantly, you should definitely take the money. But why should you even have a choice? My POV is that the NBA should institute a rule similar to the NFL saying that a player must be in school for 3 years after high school to enter the draft. It's not that the players are not ready to enter the draft (see LeBron James, Carmelo Anthony etc.) but education is way more important.

I now put you into the position of a College Administrator. Given the choice between a Superstar basketball player who will be there for one year, and probably attend half his classes spring semester or a decent soccer player who has no intention of leaving the school before 4 years, who do you give FREE admission of your school too? I for one would rather spend my money on a hard-working 4 year syudent-athlete. The way these kids are using schools like USC and Kansas State as improved prep schools drives me crazy. How soon will it be before players opt to spend their 1 year in Europe playing pro basketball then making the move to the NBA, honestly. Its fun to watch these players play, but even better would be watching them get BETTER OVER 4 YEARS.

Players cant play basketball forever, and their playing careers could be cut short due to injuries. What then? No fall back options.

CASE 1: Michael Jordan - 3 year star at UNC, long basketball career, now one of the richest men alive due to his business savvy, not just his playing ability. Do you think he learned that in high school? No chance. He is a well-educated man that knew how to get the MOST out of his name.

On the other hand, what happens to Michael Beasley if he blows his knee Year 1 in the NBA? Marketability won't be enough to carry him and his family 20 more years, but with a college degree, doors would still be open. I dont think that these athletes should live their lives just off their name, they should have to cope with struggles through college just like a normal student.

NBA, the ball is in your court. You can save some of these kids before it is too late, lets just hope you choose the right 2 out of 4. Its a Pass or Fail test.

Alot of the debate this year has been on which teams have the best resumes and whatnot. The way I look at it, you need to see the teams play to make a good decision. I have seen UK play, I have seen Florida play, I have seen Syracuse play. I could go on and on with teams I've seen play and I could also make a list of teams I haven't seen play, that's why I wont pretend to know what Im talking about when it comes to teams like USC, Miami, or Arizona State. These are the teams I beleive DESERVE to be in the tourny. Not taking into account what any other teams have done, these teams on the court, NOT ON PAPER, should be in.

TEAMS WHO SHOULD BE IN

Kentucky 17-11 (11-4 SEC)  - Call me a homer but this Kentucky team deserves to be in. They have been undermanned all year, with everyone including Billy Clyde missing time due to injury (He missed 1-2 practices with a stomach flu). It's a real joy to see a team you've had an emotional connection too since you were young do good, especially after the fiasco that was November and December for the Kentucky Wildcats. I truly beleive, given a chance in the tournament, we could pull an upset or two. Everyone saw how we competed against UT without Big Pat.  And you know Kentucky will bring money for the NCAA and thats probably what will be the selling point, unfortunately, other deserving teams like WKU or South Alabama could be left out in the cold if UK gets in.

Florida 21-9 (8-7 SEC) - Sure they had a EASY non-con schedule, but wouldn't you if you lost your entire starting lineup and 6th man to graduation/ NBA? Sure the SEC has exposed some chinks in the Gator armor but I still beleive watching this team that they are solid. One of their weaknesses is youth, players being thrusted into the spotlight by the departure of one of the great lineups of the last 20 years in college basketball. If not this year, the Gators will be back in the tourny easily next season. Mark my words.

Houston 22-7 (11-4 C-USA) / UAB 22-8 (12-3) - Having watched both of these teams dismantle my Kentucky Wildcats in December, I have to say I was more impressed with Houston. UK dominated most of the UAB game until Robert Vaden decided to go all Reggie Miller on us in the second half. Houston, led by Robert McKiver, is a great team that SHOULD be in, but the fact that they play in a weak conference, doubled by their loss to ECU could push them out of the field. If UAB can knock of MemPis on Saturday than they should be a shoo-in for the tourney over Houston. But if UAB loses (which is more likely) than the team who goes farther in the conference tourney should be the team getting the 2nd C-USA bid.

TEAMS WHO SHOULD'NT BE IN

Syracuse 17-12 (8-9 Big East) - After watching this team blow an 11-point lead at HOME against Pittsburgh, that sealed the deal for me. This team is too centered around freshmen phenoms Donte Greene and Johnny Flynn, and that leads to an mental lapses at times, which was evident in the Pitt game. This team will be left out of the tournament barring a run in the Big East tourny.

Ohio State 18-12 (9-8 Big 10) - Sure the win vs. Purdue was huge, but can they take that victory and turn it into consistency? That's where the road ends for me, I saw a tournament team in December with a blowout win over Florida, but also saw an NIT team lose to the Fightin' Tubby's of Minnesota. If they could make the finals of the Big 10 tourny OR beat Michigan State decisively, then I might change my mind.