As an "old" member of the Fox Community, it has been more than a year, probably, since I've visited the site.  And although I have flipped through several pages of blogs, I only recognize a select few of the names who were part of the foundation of this website. 

I have no idea what Fox has done to this site.  But it's a mess.  It was once very simple.  You could navigate through the blogs easily, and it was far less cluttered. 

I wonder....do folks change just for the sake of changing?  Or has this site improved its navigatability and ease of use over the past two years?

Are there any still around from the old day?  Can you help me out here?  What the heck happened to this site?!!!!

I've often wondered which is more important to the average American sports lover...their favorite team(s) or their jobs, friends, and family. As an avid sports fan, I can honestly say that up until very recently, I had no idea just how "out of whack" my priorities were. But it wasn't necessarily anything I did. It was something someone else made me aware of through a random email.

Unless you just don't know me that well, or unless you are blind (no pun intended) and can't see my avatar, then I'll just go ahead and tell you that I'm the biggest UNC fan on the planet. I make no bones about that fact. There are games I can watch with others. However, there are other games I just need to be alone to watch. And admittedly, UNC is probably the most televised college basketball team of all time. So it's not like I'm deprived of Tar Heel air time, that's for sure. Knowing this about me, then you must also know that I'm an avid Duke (dook) hater. After all, I am a Tar Heel fan. But it wasn't until I received a random email from a Duke fan, that I began to see just how warped some of our priorities really are.

I rarely blog or even comment on this site anymore. But I did happen upon a blog that brought up the subject of Duke, and how many believe they are a fallen dynasty. So naturally, I chimed in and agreed, and threw in my two cents about how I "really" felt about the dookies. Little did I know that I would be summoned by a dookie via personal email.

Here is the quote taken directly from that email:

"I used to like the Tarheels. But due to many redneck fans like you, who put down Duke by calling them "Dook" and "Puke," I have been a stalwart Duke fan for years. I have never met more redneck and "no class" fans than the Tarheels. I mean, they are always denigrating Duke. Anyway, maybe you should take coach Roy's job. Frankly, he is one Tarheel who has "class"; so maybe you should take his job and complete the "no class" package."

Now, of course, anyone who reads this can see that this is nothing more than the pot calling the kettle black. And I've got no problem "debating" UNC and dook basketball. However, in the following days it became very evident that this guy had lost his marbles.

Apparently, he is in the process of writing a book about hatred for dook basketball. Now, I may not be a smart man, but when you become infatuated with what others think about a sports team, then I can only assume that family, work, and friends may be in for a long road. I have no idea who this guy is. I can tell you that he says he is a teacher....which I find either really scary, or highly unlikely. But the amount of personal hatred he has thrown out to UNC fans via myself, has been frightening, and apparently undetectable by him. We had several emails that went back and forth. But the more we emailed, the more I began to realize that this man was so infatuated with hatred for dook basketball, that he failed to see how it had taken over his life.

I finally just told him that enough was enough. I pointed out that he had started the whole fiasco by personally attacking me, someone he had never met, nor knew anything about. He is still in denial about this fact. And apparently he is still working on his book.

How far do we take our love for our teams? Should it be taken to the point that we personally attack those who show a disdain for "our" team. Should it be taken to the point that we take valuable time away from what's really important in life? Should we really care about those who "hate" our teams? I sure as heck don't care. And I sure as heck aint gonna write no book about it!!

 

Whew...what a night!! I don't know that I've ever been in a more electric atmosphere as I experienced in the Dean Dome last night. Yes, they were upper level corner seats. But I would have settled for the last row touchdown seats for last night's game. Unfortunately the last three games I've seen in person at the DD, our Heels have come away with losses. And to make matters even worse, all three losses were to the two teams I hate the worst...dook and UK. So as you can see, I don't get the opportunity to see my Heels in person very often, but when I do, I seem to bring some tough luck with me. So I apologize to all of my Heels fans out there. As much as I hate to say this, I think I'll stay away from the DD in these big games.

Now, on to the topic at hand. I was a bit perplexed at last night's effort from the Heels. Duke took 29 three pointers in that game. And I don't remember a single one of those three's NOT being wide open. I know this has been an ongoing debacle of sorts now for several years in Chapel Hill...."how to do a better job of guarding against the three's?" And much to my discernment, things appear to have slid even further into the abyss. We can blame the players for not getting around the screens. Heck, we can even blame the players for setting themselves up for the screens if that be the case. But I have been giving this a lot of thought. And I think I've come up with an analysis of this situation that most, if not all, UNC fans are not going to like.

I saw in the post game quotes from Roy where he was calling out Wayne for not hitting shots in game time situations. He said something along the lines of, "we have to be able to hit our shots during the game, not just in practice. If we can't do that, maybe we're not as gooda shooters as we thought we were." I'll have a link posted for his actual quote later. But I'm thinking that Roy just may need to heed his own advice. If he thinks his players are not quite as good as they think they are, and if he thinks that the effort just isn't there at times, then maybe, just maybe he needs to take a long hard look in the mirror.

We were beaten by a team that made some nifty "game time" adjustments. Roy is NOT a coach who seems to be able to make these "game time" adjustments. What we do hear from him is that he doesn't like the zone defense. But it's not just that he doesn't like it, he says he's not good at teaching it. What? Did I just read that correctly? So because you don't like the zone, and you don't like teaching the zone, you're just not going to teach it? Now, I may not be a smart man. But to me, that sounds like a lack of effort. It sounds like stubborness. And it sounds unfair to his players. Now, I'm not saying that a zone defense would have won the game for us last night. And they might still have had 29 open looks at three's. However, aside from a few half court traps last night, and a little full court pressure when the game was on the line, Roy made NO adjustments in that game. He didn't give his team a chance. And why?...because he doesn't want to put forth the effort to teach a defense that, not only would give our players a chance to breath a little, but would also throw a monkey wrench in the game plan of the opposing team.

Roy, you're a obviously a good man. You're the best recruiter in college basketball. Your players graduate. And you run a squeaky clean program that is second to none. Now, if you will just put forth a little more effort in teaching something you don't like, you may just have the opportunity to become the greatest COACH of all time. Give your boys a chance Roy. Give them the effort they deserve, and you just may get it in return!!

The Appalachian State University Mountaineers completed a dream season on Friday night by defeating the Delaware Blue Hens for the Division I-AA National Championship.  The win completed a "3-peat" for ASU (third straight National Championship) and, in the hearts of the AppState faithful, validated a win against Michigan in the "Big House" in their first game of the 2007 season.  And in an ironic twist, the Delaware uniforms were replicas of Michigan's uniforms.

 

 

 

In a year where the BCS was turned upside down by a two loss team reaching the BCS title game, the Appstate Mountaineers continued to dominate Div I-AA.  However, their domination didn't become apparent until their playmaker, quarterback Armanti Edwards returned from a shoulder injury suffered in their historic win over Michigan.  After a couple of close calls in the first couple of rounds in the playoffs, AppState totally dominated the Richmond Spiders in the semi finals and Delaware in the Championship game.  They outscored their last two opponents 104-56 to solidify their domination of Div I-AA Football. 

 

There will be arguments made as to whether AppState deserves to be considered for a final ranking in the top 25 of the Div-I polls.  After all, they received votes in the week two AP rankings after their win over Michigan.  And it would be hard to argue that they don't deserve a consideration for a final ranking in the top 25.  However, with two losses during the regular season, one to Wofford and one to Georgia Southern, it isn't likely that consideration will become a reality.  And so this crazy college football season will likely end with AppState right back where they were before the season began.....a no name school from the mountains of North Carolina still trying to put itself on the map of big time college football. 

 

 

 

 

I'm not foolish enough to believe that Appalachian State would be a Big Ten contender, simply by winning an opening season game against a #5 Michigan Wolverine team that was supposed to be a national title contender.  And I can honestly say that if they were to play Michigan 10 times with this year's roster, Michigan would likely win eight of those games.  However, that's what logic tells me and anyone else who follows big time college football.  The only problem is, the heart knows no logic.  And for one shining season, the Appalachian State Mountaineers took the Div I-AA Championship with talent....and took the heart and soul out of a Division I -A national title contender with heart. 

 

(I would like to congratulate the Delaware Blue Hens with a classy game.  I am personally embarrassed by the actions of some of the AppState fans and even some of the players.  Delaware showed nothing but class.  Head Coach K.C. Keeler is a class act and a great coach.  Delaware should be proud.) 

 

Yes, is the answer to that popular question.  Here's why justice was served...

1.  Michael Vick broke the law, plain and simple.

2.  Michael Vick was given the opportunity, initially, to confess his guilt.  He declined..and instead pleaded innocent to all charges.

3.  Michael Vick agreed to take a lie detector test.  He failed.

4.  Michael Vick, only after failing the lie detector test, confessed that he was indeed guilty of running the dog fighting ring and guilty of torturing and killing dogs that didn't perform up to "standard".

5.  As part of the plea agreement, Michael Vick was required to stay clean of drugs.  He failed a drug test after the plea.

There are those who say he was unfairly sentenced.  Some believe there are those who commit far worse crimes who are set free or who have to spend less time in prison.  One example is Mary Winkler (the preacher's wife) who murdered her husband.  She will spend less than a year behind bars.

My question is...where is your "real" beef?  Is it with the judge who sentenced Mikey V to 23 months (less than 40% of what he could have gotten)...or is it with those judges who don't serve justice by wussing out on sentences and allowing criminals to walk free...which leads me to number 6 in my reasons why justice was served.

6.  Henry Hudson was known for his harsh sentences.  This was no surprise. 

My advise to those who have problems with Mikey V's sentence is to take it up with the judges you actually have the issues with...the one's who wouldn't know justice if it were to bite them in the toosh!! 

It seems that we have those who can't make up their minds.  They complain about the O.J. trial being an injustice...and that he should have spent the rest of his life in prison.  But those very same people also complain when justice is actually served, as in the case of Mikey V....that it was too harsh.  So which way is it folks? 

You decide.

(Thanks to btroup1 who helped inspire this blog)