Marquis Teague plans to attend the University of Kentucky to play for John Calipari.

The waiting is over, and it is official. Marquis Teague is going to attend the University of Kentucky to be featured in John Calipari’s dribble-drive offense; he will not be a member of cardinal nation, which begs the question, why did Teague choose UK?

The answer to the question is actually quite simple, dollars, and before UK fans begin mass e-mailing me about how Calipari isn’t paying his players, that is not what I am referencing. I am referencing the dollar bills available by being a one and done player who is drafted in the lottery.

Louisville fans will bemoan the presence of World Wid Wes (if you don’t know who he is, just click the link and read on), but at this point, Calipari doesn’t need any help. He only has to point to exhibit A, B, and C. He has managed to sign the top rated point guard five years in a row (Rose, Evans, Wall, Knight, and Teague), and the first three players were all lottery picks.

So, back to the question posed in the title of this article, do championships matter in recruiting? The answer is that they haven’t mattered in a long time. When players were lining up to play for Rick Pitino at UK, it was because he was sending players to the association in droves. Now, that person is John Calipari who in one year will send almost the same number of players as Rick Pitino has in 10 years at Louisville.

You might say, “Well, at some point doesn’t not winning championships matter?” To the fanbase, yes, it will matter. But, in regard to recruiting, it doesn’t make much difference. As long as Calipari keeps sending players to the NBA in one year, he will keep getting the players, regardless of the number of elite eights and sweet sixteens that he racks up.

Canil Luke Harangody of Notre Dame drive his team to a Final Four?

Every Spring, it is as inevitable as the buttercups blooming and the birds chirping in the trees, the discussion of the NCAA bubble and which teams will make the field. But, does this discussion really matter? Can any of these teams actually make a legitimate run at the Final Four?

The long and short of it this year is a resounding yes! In a year where picking the number one seeds for the tournament is nearly impossible and no teams have truly extended themselves from the pack, any team could make the Final Four. Consider this. If you were a number one seed, would you want to play the University of Louisville as a number eight seed, a team that beat Syracuse twice? Or Notre Dame, a team that has won five consecutive games, including beating Georgetown and Marquette?

In fact, I would like to go on on record as saying that the cumulative seed of the Final Four teams will be a minimum of 12 and that very likely, it could be as high as 20. I could easily see a number 8 or higher seed making the Final Four, which leads to only one thought for me…..Let the Madness Begin!

This guy is definitely a fan! He meets all the criteria.

It seems like an odd discussion to even have, but in a state like Kentucky where college sports holds a great deal of importance to its citizens and its identity, it begs the question, what makes a fan? Is it acceptable to cheer for a team, which is not your Alma mater? What criteria exist for measuring the authenticity of fanhood?

Let me state for the record that I consider myself a fan of Western Kentucky University and the University of Louisville. With that said, though, I actively root for all the state schools. I believe in a tier system. If WKU plays Louisville, I cheer for WKU. If Louisville plays Kentucky, I cheer for Louisville. If Kentucky plays Indiana, I cheer for Kentucky.

I reject the notion that you have to have a direct connection to a university to be a fan of it. You don’t have to have attended the university, and you don’t have to have had worked at the university, especially in a state like Kentucky where our collegiate teams are our professional teams.

However, you do need to have at least some connection to the institution. Perhaps, it is proximity, family ties, or values instilled by parents, but you need something. I’m always suspect of someone who is a die-hard fan of Duke or North Carolina, but have nothing that attaches him/her to the school except for watching them on TV.

So, let’s first start with the criteria to be a fan, which are the following:

1. Connection / Relationahip to the University (direct or indirect)
2. Suffering through the hard times and remaining steadfast
3. Actively following the team through at least two outlets (you recieve a pass if you are over the age of forty) 
4. Owning at least two pieces of apparel / items promoting the institution
5. Win/Loss has had at least a small emotional impact on you at least once

ONE – As stated previously, to be a fan, you need to have something that connects you to the university. It doesn’t have to be a direct connection, but you need to have something. Maybe a cousin went to school there. Maybe a friend played on the team. Maybe you lived near the school for a few years. Some type of relationship has to exist between you and the institution.

TWO – If you have only recently joined a teams fanbase during a successful period, you are by definition a bandwagon fan. That is fine, but you should acknowledge that you are bandwagon fan, which means bragging and arrogance should be kept to a minimum. If you suffer through losing and/or hardship, but remain steadfast, then you deserve the right to celebrate the return to success and act like a poor sport when you win (but, you should fully expect others to hate you).

THREE – If you only watch games that are conveniently available on television, then you are not really a fan. At the minimum, you need to read newspaper articles as well or occasionally go to games in person or listen to radio broadcast. Additional credit is given for seeking out broadcast of games through bizarre means (online pirate broadcasts, watching the gamecast on espn.com, etc.).

FOUR – You may ask, why two items? The answer is simple. You may not be a fan of your Alma mater, but chances are you have at least one item emblazoned with the school’s name. Additionally, if you have ever went to a game with a friend of a school for which you aren’t a fan, chances are you were given a shirt, wore it, and kept it. I have lots of shirts like this, but I’m not a fan of any of these schools. If you are really a fan of a school, people know it, and they buy you items with the school’s logo on it. Plus, you put your money in things you value.

FIVE – It doesn’t have to be weeping or suicidal thoughts with a loss or rioting joyously with a win. But, if you don’t at least feel a small sense of temporary elation or momentary sorrow depending upon the outcome of a game, then you really aren’t a fan.

That’s it. That’s the criteria for being a fan. Now, in regard to the question of the necessity to be a fan of your Alma mater. I don’t think that one necessarily predicates the other, but you should not actively cheer against the institution that educated you.

I’m okay with apathy, but hatred for your alma mater seems a bit overboard (unless your school wronged you, and your vengeance for the school knows no bounds). I know people who attended the University of Kentucky, like the university, but hate the sports teams and actively cheer for all of them to lose. That seems a bit ridiculous.

I’m certain that many of you won’t agree with my criteria or assessment, and that is fine. I would argue with you, but that is probably pointless. Fans are usually (but, not always) irrational. A Louisville fan that thinks that any of their recent recruits are as good as John Wall, a Kentucky fan that doesn’t think Charlie Strong was a good hire, or a Kentucky/Louisville fan that thinks the WKU program is closer to Murray State or EKU than Louisville or Kentucky is irrational. Arguing with people like this is like arguing with a four year-old, pointless.

There are several comments and thoughts that we hear on a daily basis that are quite frankly idiotic. Entire comedic routines are built around these comments. You enter work soaking wet, and someone asks if it is raining. Someone calls you at your office and asks what you are doing. The answers to these questions are obvious, yet they are still asked.

I will never forget when a certain individual who hosts Paydirt Sports Talk and I were at a Waffle House late at night. While making small talk with the waitress, she made the comment that she likes t-shirts, to which this individual responded, “No Crap. Everyone likes t-shirts.”

As I sit and listen to the numerous explanations given for firing coaches as well as the excuses and laments of individuals who do not believe that coaches should be fired, I hear more and more t-shirt moments.

My favorite line is something to the effect that it is mainly about wins and loses. To borrow a phrase, “No Crap!”

That is like saying that we had to fire Joe from sales. Unfortunate, he was a great guy who told wonderful jokes and brought brownies on Fridays, but he hadn’t sold anything in three years. It was mainly about bringing in money.

All of us in all of our jobs are judged based upon a very small criteria. Does the doctor save patients? Does the attorney win cases? Does the mechanic fix your car?

There are certainly contributing factors that can exacerbate the issue (Gillespie dealing with the media, Eustachy drinking with young coeds) or allow us to forgive individuals for not entirely hitting the mark (Bowden’s history at FSU). But ultimately, the judgment of our efficacy comes down to one or two things. For coaches, that is of course winning!

If you don’t believe that, ask yourself if Rick Pitino would still be the coach at UL if he had a .600 record. Of course, he wouldn’t it.

Another idiotic assertion is Tommy West stating that the media should be bolstering the football team. That is not their job. The job of an independent media in a democracy is to be critical. That is what they are judged upon, not for being a positive mouthpiece for the SID at a University.

Yes, we want coaches to mold good citizens, but that is not the primary criteria for success. To borrow another phrase, “You play to win the game,” and that is and should be the ultimate factor in judging a coach.