for most of the season, i've sort of liked what doug gottlieb added to espn studio shows. he's pretty eloquent, and he generally has things to say.

his recent spat with the big ten, regarding northern iowa athletic director rick (rich?) hartzell officiating an indiana basketball game, blowing a call in favor of wisconsin, and costing the hoosiers a win (i didn't see the game or the call, so i don't know how egregious the mistake was), was fascinating to read about. mostly because he revealed something that most people (myself included) didn't know, and that seems slightly odd: that a d-1 athletic director was also an official. he didn't accuse hartzell of cheating, and he didn't say that the big ten was crooked, but he did say that 'there could be the appearance of a conflict of interest,' or something to that effect. (was he right? uni got in...indiana didn't) i thought that was great reporting and insightful analysis.

however, i should have been wary of him in early february, when he enraged cheeseheads worldwide by (correctly) saying, "brian butch is the most disappointing (overrated?) player in the big ten."

anyway, i caught a bit of espn's bracketology (pronounced, according to voiceover guy, 'BRACKet-ology,' and not 'brack-i-TOL-ogy,' which is how i read it) today, and they cut to gliebs and resident twerp mike hall, and doug got to rant for a solid minute or two about teams that didn't get in or whatever they rant about. that's his job. but he also said 'quite frankly' two or three times during his rant. that's stephen a. smith's line. that concerns me.

i know that the ncaa tournament is one of the biggest three sports events of the year in the united states (i'd say super bowl, recent world series, then the tourney, right?), and i know there's lots of air time to fill, but i think a lot of the air time is spent on such trivialities. (of course, it's really all trivial.) the thing i hate most is the on-air hand-wringing over seedings. in most cases, a three seed is pretty close to a four seed, which means that the long-term advantage one gets from being the one seed (washington) or the two seed (kentucky) is basically negligible. the great thing about the ncaa tournament is that all you really need to do is win, and it all works out from there.

generally, i find all of this coverage (but for the 'live look-ins') to be overkill. thursday's fun, and i'm looking forward to usa today's team-by-team capsules (is that monday, wednesday, or thursday?), and i'm looking forward to a uconn-syracuse-illinois-washington final four and another syracuse title and many many many more camera angles on jim boehim's ultra-hot wife. (boehim completely outkicked his coverage...she's hotter than the levitra woman.)

i'm also looking forward to a duke collapse somewhere along the line (more satisfying, langdon blowing it in 1999, or redick doing it this year?), and a nice run from the utes. and i'm also looking forward to the "oh how great it would be for roy williams to finally get his title this year" speeches, especially after his hyper-talented group of matt doherty's recruits blows it again, largely because their coach can't do it in march. and i can't figure out which double-digit seed i want to see in the sweet sixteen, although ucla's one i'm looking at. (i'm crazy, i know, but i think they still have that 6-7 point with the afro puff.)

more nonsensical analysis coming soon, probably.

last night's bar discussion? good jewish baby names. not many, it turns out.

if you watch nothing else during the week, devote a half-hour to arrested development. it's completely off-the-wall and it moves about 100 miles an hour and it's okay if you miss jokes because something funny will happen 4 seconds later. it's pretty close to perfect tv. thank me later.