From: kevink@fugitive.soac.bellcore.com (Kevin Klinge)
Subject: Re: NCAA basketball
Organization: Bell Communications Research
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 92 15:39:55 GMT

In article <1992Apr7.141114.13527@noose.ecn.purdue.edu>, ehlerswm@hackney.ecn.purdue.edu (William Mark Ehlers) writes:
|> 
|> 2. Hey loosier fans.  Where is that list of embarassing actions by the Purdue
|> coaching staff.  The only reply that has been mentioned is the throwing of the
|> jacket, but hey that is a public service.

You've got a point.  I was interested to see what that poster was referring
to as well.  Haven't seen anything substantial either.

|> 3. Duke may not have played like a champion (whatever that means), but they
|> won 6 games in the tourney and are champs.  I was rooting for Michigan, but I
|> still realize that Duke took them out of their game.  Also, even though Duke
|> wasn't playing their best, they still managed to play when it counted to win.
|> Congradulations to Duke.

Agreed.  Duke was the favorite, and they came through.  Michigan, a team
that got little respect by the selection committee by being seeded 6th in 
their region while being ranked #15 in the country at the time, surprised many 
in getting to where they did.  For my own expectations of this team going into 
the tourney, having them go all the way to the final game was great to see and 
leaves lots of hope for this group in the future.  I can't see how any 
Michigan student/alum could be upset today after seeing a great tournament 
performance from the team.  

I simply laugh at the attempt of those few out there (mostly non-Duke 
affiliated too) who think they can rub one loss in our faces, in a tournament 
our team wasn't even expected to emerge from in our own region.  This Michigan 
team has gone too far these past couple of weeks for me to be upset.  Again, 
congrats to Duke.

|>   [talk on differences between CBS and ESPN coverage]
|>                                            They are getting better.  Hell,
|> this year at least they showed afternoon games in the first round unlike last
|> year.  So they are trying, maybe they will eat some crow and get ESPN's 

Actually, CBS did show first round afternoon games last year too, so this
wasn't the first for them.  I agree with your analysis on the differences
in coverage though.  I much prefer ESPN's job, in conjunction with the local
affiliates for the early round action.  I don't mind CBS as much for the 
later rounds when the games are fewer, but IMHO they really are over their
heads when trying to do the first round games.

BTW, if we all had a dollar for every time Billy Packer mentioned "Laettner"
during his broadcast of a game (even when he isn't scoring), we'd be pretty 
rich people...  I don't mind Laettner at all, but Packer's behavior was just 
too biased for my taste.  It would have been nice to see more neutral coverage 
last night.  I was surprised to see Billy wasn't wearing an ACC sweatshirt
when the camera panned over...

-- 

Kevin H. Klinge
Bell Communications Research
kevink@soac.bellcore.com

 \\\\    ////////////////////////      ||||\\      //||||
  \\\\  ////////////////////////        |||\\\    ///|||
   \\\\////       /////                 ||| \\\  /// |||
    \\\///       /////                  |||  \\\///  |||
     \\//       /////                  |||||  \\//  |||||