I was reading an article, today, in the Washington Post about the LSU players and read the following:
"During Temple's senior season in 1974, the Tigers upset No. 6 Vanderbilt, 84-81, in Baton Rouge. Temple spent much of the game guarding Jan van Breda Kolff, who later became a college coach. When a fight broke out late in the game, Temple punched van Breda Kolff and injured him. The Tigers played the Commodores in Nashville later that season and at halftime, police informed then-LSU coach Dale Brown that they had received a threatening phone call..."
The Temple referred to in the article is Collis Temple (Sr.) The guy he punched graduated from my high school.
Yep, I'm still rooting for the UCLA Bruins and the darling of college basketball, the George Mason Patriots.
I heard the end of the latter's game, but didn't know how their play had managed to pull it off until I read the sports coverage, today.
The press reports of GMU campus excitement after the OT victory brings back a fond memory or 2 of similar experiences...
Meanwhile, I don't think badly of Florida or LSU, it's just that I'm more familiar with the other 2 schools (although not necessarily a great deal about their basketball programs). Indeed, Florida or Louisiana State U. may win the crown.
I haven't been much of a college basketball fan in recent years, as I've said before, but I have to be somewhat critical of the way that UCLA's dynasty seems to be noted by sports commentary. You get impression that some people seem to think that since UCLA once won 10 or 11 NCAA basketball championships, the current team is part of that tradition.
Give me a break! The fabled coach during the dynasty, John Wooden, retired about 30 years ago! The UCLA teams since then have had their ups and downs.
College basketball has changed over those 30 years.
And maybe what GMU's astonishing performance is suggesting is a need to develop other measures for rating teams. How can we measure motivation, cohesion, and adaptiveness? Is there a way to create reliable ratings of these factors that can aid in bracket predictions? Or, perhaps some of these measures might be better suited for continuous updating during a game. I'd like to see broadcast commentary by sports psychologists during and inbetween play.
Last night's game between UCLA and Gonzaga, had a thrilling finish (if you're a Bruins fan like me). But looking forward to tomorrow's game against Memphis, I can't help but worry, should the Tigers throw up a zone defense, that UCLA will again break down.
Meanwhile, it's fabulous for George Mason to get this far! I'm happy for the students, alums, and others affiliated with the school who are delirious with success of the team. Now Northern Virginians have something to root for besides perennial DC-area powerhouses Georgetown and Maryland. (And is GW joining the upper tier?)
Haven't followed sports in a long time, but the rise of the UCLA Bruins has caught my attention. I've been starting to follow the NCAA tournament, and watching a bunch of games.
Here are my thoughts for the 4 semifinals:
Oakland: If Memphis is as good as they say, the Tigers should handle Bradley without trading the lead.
Not sure what to say about UCLA vs. Gonzaga. I'm rooting for the Bruins, but the Zags may prevail.
Atlanta: no fave or opinion
Washington, DC: I think the Huskies will win. :-)
Meanwhile, I'm rooting for George Mason. I think the team is a showcase for local (Baltimore/Washington) overlooked talent, and I'm all for boosting the locals. Wichita State may want to avenge their previous loss to GMU, but the Shockers seemed to be missing something when I saw their last game.
Minneapolis: I pick Georgetown and BC to go head to head in a Big East battle.
This past weekend, I recorded some audio of memories of Asian Americans who became involved in APAFEC, the Asian Pacific American Federal Employees Council in DC.
It was started in the mid-70s (or possibly a little earlier) and dissolved by the mid-80s. (Got to double-check that).
In the backyard deck of someone's home, about a dozen people talked about themselves and others involvement in the organization, as well as other efforts to discuss and advocate Asian American concerns in the federal government in DC.
The session was also videotaped. And while I'd like to make a short documentary based on this session and other interviews, I'm not sure how to make it captivating.
While I could stand watching a bunch of talking heads, I'm not sure if others would. I'm worried about making things relevant to a wide audience. I guess I need to identify those audiences that might be automatically interested (i.e., those interested in government, policy-making, EEO, ethnic studies, Asian American history, and DC asian community development).
To make things visually interesting would require skillful editing and probably some attractive female or male narrator. Other pleasing visuals might include cute animals, babies, and Asian food. For comic relief, old photos of people in old fashions might do the trick.
But first, I gotta log and transcribe the talk. Need help in doing that.
Yesterday, on CSPAN radio, I heard a replay of a talk given by Jeffrey Peck on Feb. 9 at the Goethe Institute in DC. He was discussing his book, Being Jewish in the New Germany. It was fascinating, because it covered more than Jews in Germany (although that is interesting enough by itself).
It made me think back on some of the things I'd seen and heard when I visited Germany.