Wichita State's loss to Kentucky did plenty to show who they are

If there was ever a college basketball class war, this was it.

Wichita State a dominant mid-major who coasted through a perfect regular season.

Kentucky the highly-touted preseason No. 1 who faced its fair share of ups and downs.

Wichita State a veteran-laden squad coming off a Final Four appearance.

Kentucky starting five freshmen, a totally different group from last year's which was bounced from the first round of the NIT by Robert Morris.

Wichita State full of unheralded recruits developed by coach Gregg Marshall.

Kentucky with a boatload of top-rated prospects, one of whom is projected as a top five pick in the NBA draft.

Blue blood vs. little guy.

The Shockers don't play like the little guy and were the higher seed but when it comes to tradition, history and recruiting clout they're in a different realm than their opponent Sunday, the Kentucky Wildcats.

Their matchup was one that captivated the masses and not just because it turned into the best game of the year and one of the most hard-fought in recent tournament history.

Eighth-seed Kentucky's 78-76 win over top-seed in the Midwest Wichita State wasn't compelling just because it was an upset that sent one of the nation's top four teams home before the second weekend.

Last year, Wichita State played the role that Kentucky did, knocking off a No. 1 in the tournament's first weekend. That was different. The Shockers knocked off another mid-major Gonzaga, a No. 1 seed who received many of the same complaints as the Shockers this year. When you dominate a non-power conference, questions arise about toughness or strength of victory.

Wichita State's first loss of the season answered some of those - just not in the way naysayers may argue.

Not that they were overrated or any less deserving of their No. 1 seed or that their perfect regular season was a sole consequence of a weak schedule.

No, the Shockers' heartbreaking loss showed off the basket-making of Ron Baker, scintillating skills of Cleanthony Early, precision and mettle of a team that didn't lose all year - until Sunday.

On this day, Kentucky played its best game of the season - by far. They needed a few things to happen to win: the Harrison twins to have big days, Julius Randle to put up a double-double and to limit mistakes in crunch time. They got all of those - and still Wichita State was only two points less. That's all it takes - two points, like the two that slipped away when Early narrowly mistimed what would have been an authoritative dunk late in the second half.

This loss isn't an indictment of what Wichita State aren't.

It's an indictment of what they are - a great team that played a great game and lost to an extremely talented opponent that played at its best and finally lived up to lofty expectations.

Wichita was up to the task. They just fell short but that doesn't discount 35-0. The "1" that now sits beside that 35 should be a badge of honor, a testament to a team that proved its mettle in a colossal battle.

Nine years later, Pats get vengeance at the corner spot

Ty Law has long been a mentor of Darrelle Revis.

Revis wears the No. 24 like Law, blankets receivers like Law and has now pulled a free agent crossover reminiscent of Law.

ESPN's Adam Schefter reported Wednesday night that the New England Patriots will sign Revis to a one-year, $12 million deal, just one offseason after the star corner was traded from the New York Jets after the two sides couldn't come to a new contract.

Jets fans are fuming as Revis moves north to a division rival to play for a coach who he called a "jerk" only a couple years ago.

If you're looking for a similar example, look no further than these two teams and this same position.

Jump back nearly a decade ago to 2005 - Law was cut by the Patriots after 10 seasons in New England because they didn't want to pay him more than $12 million.

Like Revis, Law was not far removed from an injury. The Jets opened their checkbooks and scooped up the corner who was long an enemy twice every football season.

Back to 2014 - the Bucs released Revis Wednesday one year after acquiring and signing him to a six-year, $96 million, non-guaranteed deal.

Who else but New England to land the man who built his island in the green and white. These two teams have a pretty rich history of snatching each other's goods.

Bill Parcells bolted New England for New York in 1997 and eventually took Hall-of-Fame running back Curtis Martin with him too. Years later, the Jets were on the other side when Bill Belichick quit after one day as their head coach and then took the same position with the Patriots.

Law played only one season with the Jets, who couldn't afford to keep his contract. He was 31 but scored a career-high 10 picks en route to a Pro Bowl selection. Revis is 28. It's yet to see how much dividend he will pay.

What's for certain is New England will again have a shutdown No. 24 lining up at corner and surely a sweet shot of vengeance slugged in front of a division foe's face.

Trading for Revis is tricky proposition

On paper it looks excellent.

Darrelle Revis, still one of the best cornerbacks in the game last season despite coming off a knee injury. ProFootballFocus graded him the top Cover-1 corner ahead of Super Bowl champion Richard Sherman.

So it's no surprise that one of the most-buzzed about rumors at the start of the NFL's new year is that the Bucs will either trade Revis or flat out release him. At this point, it seems like a near certainty that Revis will not don the pewter next season.

But you have to ponder - why would a second team in two offseasons be looking to move a player who could be so valuable on the field, who experts still consider the best at his position?

When it came to the Jets last offseason, the two sides were never going to come to a money figure that appeased both. Revis didn't want to just be paid handsomely but at a historic rate.

The Jets moved him for a first-round pick and Tampa Bay was willing to dole out $96 million over six years. Yes, none of that money is guaranteed but his yearly figures are massive.

Revis is scheduled to make $16 million in 2014 under his current contract. The next highest-paid corner, Dallas' Brandon Carr, will make just more than $10 million.

That's a lofty number, even for a team with a lot of cap space. You tie up that much money in one position and it's rarely a boon, especially for a team in search of a franchise quarterback, as those are the guys who typically warrant that type of payday.

But many fans are salivating over the prospect of their team adding Revis, similar to Nnamdi Asomugha in the 2011 offseason.

Remember him? Asomugha is out of the league now but just a few years ago he was the hot ticket, considered an elite cornerback. Philadelphia won the sweepstakes, signing Asomugha to a five-year, $60 million deal. Jets front office members were "deflated," bummed they were unable to create their monster tandem (on paper) with who else but the guy we're talking about now, Revis.

Those 2011 Eagles were supposed to have a dream secondary combining Asomugha with Asante Samuel and Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie. But that joyous offseason turned into a nightmarish regular season in which Philadelphia finished a disappointing 8-8. The darlings of free agency failed to make even the playoffs, let alone reach the Super Bowl.

Asomugha never turned out to be worth that chunk of change. In fact, he didn't even play out the entirety of that contract, cut by the Eagles after just two years and then the Niners three games into last season.

If Revis can reclaim his island, he could make a general manager's gamble look wise. But if he's even just a good corner, not an exceptional one that disrupts the offensive gameplan, then it could be an Asomugha redux.

Again, as with much of free agency, it's a case of buyer beware - and crucial to remember the Super Bowl champions build teams through quality drafting and continuity, not the biggest splashes.

Olympians with Ohio ties suffer heartbreaking finishes

Off the post of an empty net with a gold medal little more than a minute away. 

That close.

Pull out all those cliches about sports being a game of inches or decided by the narrowest of margins and they're all too fitting to describe the U.S. women's hockey team's anguishing 3-2 loss to Canada in Thursday's Olympic final.

Heartbreak probably puts this too mildly for the Americans, like Brooklyn Heights' Kelli Stack and Sheffield's Brianne McLaughlin, who spent four years training for that day, that rematch.

Canada is the women's hockey behemoth, now winners of the last four Olympic gold medals. That's a dynasty.

Yet, the U.S. knew how close they were to halting the Canadian reign.

"We go up two goals and we're just counting down the minutes," Stack told WKYC's Sara Shookman after the game.

It was the Ohioan Stack who flung that ill-fated puck down the ice, just shy of Canada's wide-open net.

Amazingly, that wasn't a first, she told SI's Richard Deitsch: "I did that once before in college, and it's the worst feeling in the world." Stack said she thought it had a chance at first but even though it narrowly missed, the U.S. was still on top.

Seconds later, Canada tied it, then won in overtime.

An inch the other way and Stack seals the deal for the Americans.

Another Olympian with ties to the Buckeye State experienced similar heartbreak in her 
event. Katie Uhlaender, whose father Ted played for the Indians and Reds, fell just .04 shy of a bronze medal in the skeleton.

"I just felt the support of America behind me," Uhlaender told the Denver Post, "and I'm just heartbroken that I lost it by four-hundredths for them."

Adversity pushed Uhlaender, who lost her dad in 2009. She disappointed in the Vancouver 
games but wrought strength from his spirit in competing the past few years.

Tears welled up in her eyes as she spoke of just how close she was to the podium.

They flowed from the eyes of the American women who again settled for a color other than gold, watching their rival Canada revel in glory.

All that's left now is to wait.

That's what's crazy about the Olympics: in seconds - or Uhleander's case hundredths of a single one - a dream can slip away, but years it takes to get another shot at capturing it.

Glory and cruelty both equally immeasurable.

Former Xavier player becoming half-court shot legend

Half-court heaves are propelling former Xavier guard Brad Redford to an iconic status in the electrifying world of media timeout contests. 

"Shooting a half-court shot without any practice shots in a shirt and tie with penny loafers on puts me in a level with few others," Redford said (tongue-in-cheek). 

Few can master the art the way Redford has, hitting half-court shots during two straight Xavier home games. 

"I would say other than myself I could only see a couple other people achieving such a feat. Possibly Chris Mullens or Rik Smits. That's probably about it," he continued.

As a senior, Redford averaged 7.6 ppg, shooting 44.6 percent from three. This season, he serves as the MC of all Xavier home contests, running events during media timeouts. 

His now infamous one is the Penn Station Hot Shot Contest, in which Redford grabs a student from the stands to take a half-court shot. If the student misses, Redford said he usually gives it a shot. 

After missing on his first two tries of the season, Redford is finding his groove.

 

So, what is the key? Practice?

"I don't really practice shooting from half court," Redford said.

Nix that idea - just messing around is about as much as he has done.

But there has to be some strategy, a secret to this awe-inspiring success.

"Visualize yourself making the shot before. Lean with whatever shoulder you shoot with and try to work it in a straight line," Redford advised. "Toss that thing up there, put a little spin on it, and say a little prayer beforehand."

Boy, he makes it sound so easy.

Maybe it's because he has been in the pressure cooker before. Last year against a ranked Memphis team, Redford nailed a three with about a minute to go to give Xavier a one-point lead. Back in high school, he remembers catching fire from three to open his senior season, hitting 11 of 13 attempts in a game.

"The half-court shots are right there with those," Redford joked.

Legends come and go. Their fame and prominence can be fleeting.

Has Redford reached his zenith? Will he ride into the sunset or go for an unheard of three straight makes?

"That decision has yet to be made."

Authentic suspense, folks. Xavier's next home game is Wednesday against DePaul.

#1 vs. #1: Why Super Bowl XLVIII is so hard to predict

A battle of colossal league powers.

Peyton Manning and his prolific offense vs. the "Legion of Boom."

Top offense vs. top defense.

Super Bowl XLVIII offers plenty of intrigue solely based on that matchup. One of the greatest quarterbacks of all-time taking on one of the greatest pass defenses in league history.

But which will win out?

Taking a look back at past Super Bowls, you can make a case for both.

Only once before has the NFL's top offense and defense squared off, back in Super Bowl XLVII between Tampa Bay and Oakland.

The Bucs dominated and stifled the Raiders that night, Jon Gruden easily conquering his ex-team to hoist the Lombardi.

But that game presented an interesting set of circumtances.

1. Gruden had coached that Oakland team just a year prior and had to know the pieces extremely well.

2. Many credited Tony Dungy and Monte Kiffin for putting together that Tampa team, and particularly the defense which so excelled.

3. Rich Gannon was a good quarterback in his heyday but he's nowhere near the echelon on which Manning resides.

This week, the AP chronicled how top units fared in the big game.

Eleven times top defensive leaders went into the Super Bowl, nine of those times they won.
Offensive leaders went into the Super Bowl a dozen times and won seven of those times, barely more than half.

Interesting.

For as much as everyone talks about how the NFL is a passing league and all about offense now, the most recent example of a top offense falling wasn't too long ago, Super Bowl XLII, when the Giants thwarted New England's perfect season.

In that game, the Giants' pass rush flustered Tom Brady and held the Pats' dynamic offense to only 14 points.

Brady's a legend whose Super Bowl lore is well-documented and a strong defense took him down.

So, that's a nod in Seattle's favor.

But what about the case for offense and the Broncos' record-setting group?

The rationale I would use is not so much about Manning's past Super Bowl experience. I don't think that matters as much as some may think.

Instead, I think a lot of how this game goes will hinge on the arm of Russell Wilson. If he can play a good enough game to support the Seattle defense, the Seahawks have a very good shot of winning.

That doesn't mean being perfect or throwing for 400 yards. Eli Manning was 19 of 34 for 255 yards, 2 TDs and an INT in the infamous big game in Glendale. But he made one of the greatest throws in Super Bowl history, escaping pressure and connecting with David Tyree to set up the game-winning touchdown to Plaxico Burress. 

Two weeks ago in the NFC Championship Game, Wilson made his own big throw, hitting Jermaine Kearse for a touchdown on a 4th and 7 in the fourth quarter. The Seahawks took the lead and would not surrender it again.

Wilson threw the ball only 25 times but that was all Seattle needed. He fumbled in the first half but didn't turn it over again. His counterpart on the other side, Niners quarterback Colin Kaepernick, fumbled and threw two interceptions.

Turnovers will be key to the outcome, as is typical. Peyton surely has to know that from his second Super Bowl with Indy, Super Bowl XLIV, as the pick six he threw to Terry Porter sealed the deal for New Orleans. Last year, in his first season in Denver, Baltimore's 2OT INT off Manning set up the game-winning field goal.

While legendary or top-notch quarterbacks don't always win the Super Bowl, they have more often then not in the past decade or so.

Sometimes winning the Super Bowl fuels the perception that inconsistent quarterbacks are elite (Eli, Joe Flacco).

A good portion of the rest of the championship quarterbacks are perennial Pro Bowlers, signal-callers in the top 5-10 of the NFL.

That list goes, starting with Super Bowl XXXVII to now: Brad Johnson, Tom Brady, Ben Roethlisberger, Peyton Manning, Eli Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, Eli Manning, Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers, Joe Flacco.

Johnson is an exception, as his defense was exceptional (defensive back Dexter Jackson was the MVP of his win). The better quarterback typically prevails, as when
Manning won his last Super Bowl over the Rex Grossman-led Bears.

Sunday, we find out if the young Wilson will go down as a Grossman-esque quarterback who couldn't play well enough to defeat a legend or if he can slay a quarterbacking Goliath, as Peyton's brother did twice.

Seattle has to have good defense to win, just as Denver has to have good offense. Those are basics for both. But without a poised performance from Wilson, maybe even one with a defining moment, it will be difficult for Seattle to earn the victory.

Richard Sherman haters -- get off your high horse

Richard Sherman has sparked moral outrage.

Yes, that's right, an NFL cornerback has people in a tizzy, upset about "lack of class."

Deadspin breaks down the atrocious comments people make about Sherman on social media. They're not appropriate to be said in the first place, let alone repeated.

Yet, even those who don't go for the lowest common denominator are missing the point.

Sherman's critics are saying he has no respect or he's a clown for his postgame interview with Erin Andrews, in which he called himself the best and ridiculed Michael Crabtree for thinking anything but that.



Here's where some have lost any semblance of perspective on this situation. Richard Sherman is a football player. He just won probably the biggest game of his life, his team is headed to the Super Bowl and he was incredibly pumped up.

To call him a "bad role model," based on one interview, which lasted less than thirty seconds, is like taking one miniscule bite of a food you had never tried before and calling it disgusting hogwash.

Sherman's story is full of depth. He was the first player from his Compton high school to earn a scholarship to Stanford. He rose out of the depths of a bad neighborhood to a place on the world's biggest stage two weeks from now.

No team wanted Sherman until the Seahawks took a chance on him in the fifth round of the 2011 NFL Draft.

So, the guy has a chip on his shoulder and wants to prove people wrong -- in his case, it's warranted.

We want our athletes to be interesting. We want sports to be fun. This is ultimately entertainment, not a symposium.

So, why flip out when someone makes it compelling to watch? 

Sherman didn't drop an F-bomb or call someone a derogatory name, as many ignorant folks across the Internet have now called him.

He showed color and personality. When Crabtree was asked if Sherman was the best cornerback in the NFL leading up to this game, he said, "No, I don't think so."

When it came down to crunch time on the field, Sherman won the battle and called out the guy he beat after the game.

It's football, not foreign policy.  It's a game where people spend three hours hitting each other. When rivals don't like each other, there's little love lost. You would be naive to expect anything else.

Too many athletes provide the same boring, canned responses interview after interview.

But then when someone actually exhibits some character, the critics hop on their soapboxes.

They bring up class and respect, as if they are the keepers of the sworn authority on these subjects.

Lighten up, folks. Andrews put it perfectly on Twitter saying, "Richard Sherman gave a candid response seconds after an emotional game."

Sherman spoke with passion.

Those who deride him for it are just speaking with hate.