Tulsa and Michigan Represent the Poor Quality of Play in Men's College Basketball

A visual representation of the Tulsa - Michigan basketball game

Yes, the tournament has started and yes, I'm spending time inside watching when it's in the mid 60's and sunny outside today and yes, I've already talked about the tournament at great length, but last nights Tulsa-Michigan game was the epitome of how terrible men's college basketball has been all year.

Tulsa and Michigan were two teams that had at least 20 wins, they both had double digit losses, but they also had 20 plus wins and they beat teams like Maryland, Purdue, Texas and SMU. By all accounts, those four teams are pretty good. They were all ranked for most of the season and three of the four are higher seeds in the tournament, with SMU being the lone team not in, but that's because they gave themselves a post season ban and have been recruiting illegally for years. SMU is a good basketball team. My point is that Tulsa and Michigan belong in the tournament. It is too bad that their game was total garbage.

 Tuning into that game last night was a mistake and painful to watch, but this whole season has been like that. I mean, I'm a humongous Michigan fan as you all know very well by now, but man, they looked downright awful last night, and they won the game. I knew it was going to be bad when I turned it on, saw Michigan had a 3-0 lead very early in the first half, then Zak Irvin put up a wide open three and missed everything badly. I was on my treadmill and I said out loud, "it's going to be a long, painful game to watch". From there on out, this was a very poorly played game by two teams that got at large bids.

Neither won their regular season conference title and neither won their conference tournament, but the selection committee deemed their resumes good enough to be part of the 68 team field. I don't think I could say that I agree with them after that game. I lobbied hard to friends and family, basically anyone that would listen, that after Michigan beat Indiana, they deserved to be in the field. Hell, I went on the mini podcast and told all the listeners I thought they could make the sweet sixteen. I was wrong. They will be lucky to keep their game against Notre Dame tomorrow night close. They were absolutely ice cold from the field, especially three point range, which is supposed to be their specialty. You'd think after going 4 of 18 from three in the first half, they'd stop shooting, but that was not the case at all. They kept firing away to the tune of 6 for 25 from three. Sure, Irvin hit a crucial three when they really needed it, but 6 of 25 is just ridiculous.

That's part of the problem currently in men's college basketball. No one shoots mid range shots or has an ability to drive for an uncontested layup. Everyone either wants to be a three point shooter or wants to have a dunk that makes it on ESPN's Top Ten plays. There is very little skill being possessed by most college players right now. They're all specialists and that's a big, big problem. The only player that looked halfway decent for the Wolverines last night was Muhammed Ali Abdur-Rahkman. He was the better option at point guard than Derrick Walton last night. He took some bad threes, but he also continued to drive to the basket all game long and he either finished, was fouled, or found an open shooter. Rahkman looked like a legit college basketball player. The rest of the players for Michigan looked rough. Well, their freshman center Moritz Wagner looked good, playing very good defense and protecting the rim, but everyone else did not look good. They won, but they looked bad doing it. 

Now, I'm not going to just rag on Michigan the whole time. As the old saying goes, "it takes two to tango", and Tulsa was more than willing to play equally terrible, pretty much unwatchable basketball. At one point in the first half, Tulsa had a 16-9 lead with about 10 minutes to go in the half. They looked like they may take control of the game, but they proceeded to score only 4 more points for the entire half. Let me say that again, THEY ONLY SCORED FOUR POINTS OVER THE NEXT 10 MINUTES! That's insane. It wasn't like Michigan was playing lock down defense and forcing turnovers, Tulsa was just missing everything they put up there. They missed open threes, open layups, free throws and many mid rage jumpers. It was appalling. This Tulsa team has 9 seniors and they couldn't hit the ocean in what turned out to be their last collegiate game. You'd think that they would have played with a bit more gusto and desire, but they just looked bad. Sure, they turned it on in the second half, but they could never pull away from Michigan, even though they shot less than 25 percent from three. Nine seniors and they played with no urgency and little to no desire.

This game was the equivalent of a junior varsity game. Put this game up against the Big Ten championship between Purdue and Michigan State and it's night and day. Purdue and MSU run offense that looks like a real offense and they play defense. They both can shoot mid range and they both feed their big men inside for hook shots and layups. Quite the opposite happened with Michigan and Tulsa. Tulsa had some big guys, but they were more concerned with trying to put spin moves on Michigan's big guys and tried circus shots and impossible dunks. Michigan totally disregarded their big men and just let their guards run everything on offense. It was atrocious.

I said this was going to be an exciting tournament, but I also said it would be painful to watch and last night just further hammered that point home for me. Both Tulsa and Michigan looked dreadful and I expect a lot of the same from the majority of this field and this tournament. There is going to be some very poorly played games that will be painful to watch at times. The fan in me was very happy that Michigan won and gets to continue their season, but the basketball player in me was appalled at what I watched last night. Gear up because this men's tournament is going to be rough.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture Editor of SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. Watching bad basketball does not make him happy, Brussels sprouts make him happy. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

The Greatest American Band Debate: The Mars Volta

For the greatest American band today, I'm going to nominate the Mars Volta. I truly adore this band, but it took awhile for me to get on board. When I first heard them, I just didn't get it. It sounded loud and weird and very distorted. I'd be lying if I didn't say, it kind of felt unlistenable. But, I gave them another try and I'm very happy that I did. I started to get it after three and four listens. I started to understand what they were doing and the type of music they were playing.

This could be a surprise to some, but Mars Volta was my first taste of prog rock. I had never heard anything like it before, so I feel like that's why it may have been so weird to me at first listen. But, before I gave them a second try, I started to listen to bands like King Crimson, Tool, Procol Harum and ELO. I allowed my musical mind to be expanded to different and newer types of music. I was instantly intrigued by both King Crimson and Tool. Those two bands are absolutely incredible. I've already made quick mention of King Crimson on the site before, but they're not eligible for this debate because they're from England. Tool, who I will most definitely write about at a later date, is eligible and they are some of the most talented and eccentric musicians that I've ever listened to and seen live. They're awesome. Procol Harum was a bit more rock heavy, but they still did prog rock stuff and it was great and way ahead of it's time. And ELO, a band that I avoided for years and years because I thought they were too poppy, is so good. People out there, give them a listen, especially if you like prog rock, because they are tremendous.

All  this new prog rock I had found made me want to give Mars Volta another chance. They also had a semi popular song come out around the same time that I revisited them. That song was "The Widow" off the album, "De-Loused in the Comatoruim". I loved the song. When I heard it on MTV, yes they still had videos and played songs once upon a time, I couldn't get enough of it and I also couldn't believe it was from a band that I once thought was not very good. The song was weird, but in a good way, loud, but in a good way and the distorted vocals and guitar were there and they were excellent. This is one time on my life when one song actually made me change my mind about a band. "The Widow" converted me to a big fan after one listen. It's a great and epic song from Mars Volta. 

After falling back in love with this band, I did some research on them so I could learn more. I learned that the two founding members, Omar Rodriguez-Lopez and Cedric Bixler-Zavala, were in a band before this called At the Drive In. I researched and listened to them, and while they are good, they lean a little more emo rock and they are not as good as Mars Volta. I also learned that Bixler-Zavala was a pretty heavy drug addict and he barely survived after At the Drive In broke up. Thankfully, he had a great friend and a real professional musician, Rodriguez-Lopez, that helped get his head back on straight and convinced him to get back to making music. After getting clean, Zivala teamed back up with Lopez and they formed Mars Volta. What a great friendship and band they had after getting clean.

Their sound was weird prog rock, and after my first misstep, I'm so glad that they stuck around long enough to make excellent and weird music. I've already mentioned "The Widow", but they also have some other great, classic prog rock songs like, "Roulette Dares", "Televators", "Viscera Eyes", "Wax Simulacra", "Goliath", "Since We've Been Wrong" and "The Malkin Jewels". Now, when listening to these songs, know that most of them are 8 minutes plus and they go in very weird and odd directions. They constantly change time signatures, chords, keys and drum beats, but it all works to perfection. Zavala's vocals are some of the loudest and most ear piercing words I've ever heard sung, but he makes it so good. Go and listen to "Roulette Dares" and "The Widow" and be blown away by how extremely awesome his singing is on those songs. It's incredible.

But, the crème de la crème of Mars Volta is Lopez's guitar playing. He is a wizard playing six strings. He does some of the weirdest and wildest stuff that anyone has ever done on guitar. He is my generations Jimi Hendrix and no, I don't think that's blasphemy. Lopez is a guitar genius. I love guys like Dan Auerbach and Tom Morello and think that they are some of the best guitar players ever, but Lopez is better. While I may like the overall music of the other guys better, the things Lopez does is like nothing I've ever heard before. He uses distortion like no one has ever used it before. His pedal board holds all kinds of different effects and noises that he manipulates wonderfully. When I saw them live about 7 years ago, I was amazed at what he was doing and I couldn't take my eyes off him while he was on stage. Lopez held my attention for the entirety of the show and I couldn't have been happier. Lopez is one of the best guitarist of all time and he is probably one of the most underrated as well. The dude is a wizard.

Mars Volta has won Grammy's and been in the Billboard 100 multiple times and they've had their albums ranked in top 100 lists by most publications, but they never seemed to get mentioned as an al time great band. Well, that changes today, because they belong in our greatest American band debate for all the reasons I mentioned above. I may not have liked them at first, but I adore them now and I will adore them forever. Mars Volta rocks.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. For ever a decade he thought height of prog rock was Styx. He has since learned of better music. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

Getting Older, and Adding Bacon, Makes One Appreciate Brussels Sprouts

Hungry?

I've been writing a lot about sports, music, television and movies lately. That's what I am supposed to write about because I'm a pop culture writer, but sometimes you have to write about something a bit off topic.

No, I'm not going to talk about the primaries today, that's RD's job (ed note: go vote).

I'm actually going to talk about a food that I feel is wildly unappreciated. This is a food that, when trying to give to a child, draws a face of disgust. Hell, I know some adults that would give the same face. But, when executed properly, this food is tremendous. The food I speak of is the brussels sprout.

Now, as a kid, I wouldn't touch one of these with a ten foot pole. They smelled weird, tasted weird and who wants to eat a mini cabbage anyway? I was not a fan. But, as recently as two years ago, a love affair with this vegetable came on strong. I was eating at a restaurant called The Block in Webster Groves, Missouri and they had an appetizer called "flash fried brussel sprouts". The rest of the table thought this sounded good and I figured, I'm in my 30's now, maybe I like brussels sprouts. It didn't hurt that there was bacon in the dish as well. In fact, the ingredients in the appetizer where, brussels sprouts, bacon, slivered almonds, cooked onions, vinegar and lemon juice.

They had me at bacon.

When the dish was served, I think I ate about 75 percent of it. It was fantastic. Sure, the bacon and lemon juice were the most prominent flavor, but the brussels sprout was definitely present. This dish made me a fan of brussels sprouts. Soon, I'd find myself buying them at the store and incorporating them in dinners at home. I'd eat them roasted, fried, cooked in butter or oil, basically, I'd eat them anyway they came. My wife has gotten very close to replicating the appetizer from The Block too. As I said, we eat them a lot, so she wanted to try and she almost has it. Sometimes there's a touch too much vinegar or lemon juice, but they're still great anyway they come out. I find myself ordering them as a side when it's on restaurants menus. I'd rather have brussel sprouts than fries, if that's an option. And when restaurants do them right, they can be the best thing for the full meal.

The main reason this topic was on my mind was the recent trip my family just took. My wife and I, our two kids and my folks just ventured up to the Wisconsin Dells for swimming and relaxation for four days. We stayed at the excellent Great Wolf Lodge and they have everything there you could want, including restaurants. They have an indoor and outdoor water park, lodging, an ice cream parlor, story time for kiddos and a bar that doubles as a restaurant. The first night we got there, instead of looking for a local restaurant, we decided to eat at the main bar/restaurant. All the food was great, but my wife and father got a side order of brussels sprouts. At this place their brussels sprouts also had bacon, but they didn't have almonds or lemon juice or onions or vinegar, they had a Dijon mustard sauce. So, it was just brussels sprouts, bacon and a Dijon sauce. Sounds minimal, but my wife let me finish her order, and they were phenomenal. The Dijon sauce was sublime. The bacon was crispy perfection and the brussels sprouts were perfectly cooked. I found myself spooning the remaining sauce into my mouth because it was so tasty. Needless to say, the three other times we went to the restaurant, my wife, myself and my dad made sure we ordered this dish. It was awesome, possibly the best thing I ate during our stay, and I ate a shit ton of cheese curds.

So, if you're on the fence, or you haven't tried them in years, give brussels sprouts a chance. Be sure to add bacon, or if you are a vegetarian, just roast them with butter and oil. Both ways of cooking really accentuate the excellent flavor of brussels sprouts. I'm a big fan now and I'm sure you will be too if you give them a fair chance.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. He hopes to one day revisit lima beans and durian. He is hoping they both are accented with bacon. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

5 Thoughts on the 2016 Men's NCAA Basketball Tournament

Gyms will start to fill up on Tuesday when the madness begins.

Instead of doing a NCAA men's tournament preview, since I've already picked two different winners in two previous blogs, I'm going to give you guys five predictions of things I think will happen in this years tournament. I will not pick a winner, but I will give you 4 or 5 or even 6 possibilities of who could win. I'm also not going to pick the player of the tournament or anything like that, I'm just going to give you five random things I think will happen in the coming weeks of games. On with the countdown.

At number 5, I don't see any ACC team making it to the final four. At first glance you might think, what about UNC or Duke or even Miami, but I think the ACC is very overrated this year. Their best team is UNC, but they've shown time and time again this year that they can choke at any time. Take their home loss against Duke earlier this year. They dominated that game, but they let Duke stick around and they got beat. UNC can't be trusted. Duke won't get out of the first weekend. If they win their first game, they will most likely play a much bigger and more experienced Baylor team that will crush them on the boards and throw around their guards like rag dolls. They will get rolled. And Miami, while they've had a great year, I just don't believe in their team. They'll get bounced quick.

My number 4 prediction, one of the 4 teams playing in the play in games for the 11 seed, be it Michigan, Tulsa, Vanderbilt or Wichita State, will get to the sweet sixteen. I have the most faith in Wichita State because they're experienced and they've gone deep in this tournament in years past. But, Vanderbilt and Michigan, if they win, could make some noise. Michigan has won some big games without their best player for most of the year, and if they're hitting their threes, they can beat almost anyone. Vandy has spent the majority of this year ranked and plays high level offense and, much like Michigan, if they're hitting shots, they will win. Tulsa is the only one of these teams I have no faith in. They don't belong in the tournament and if they beat Michigan, they will get crushed in their first round game. They lost to a very mediocre Memphis team twice this year, so that says everything I need to know about them.

My number 3 prediction, Kentucky doesn't make it out of round 2. They will win their first round game, but that would set up a showdown, most likely, with Indiana. I like Indiana in that game if it happens. Indiana has more experience and more depth and if they catch Kentucky on an off night, they will crush them. I really like Kentucky's point guard Ullis, but Yogi Ferrell is a much better and older and experienced version of him. Indiana's front court is better and could easily dominate Kentucky's young and very thin, in stature, front court. IU had better depth as well. I just don't see Kentucky beating them.

My number 2 prediction, this will be a wild and crazy and fun tournament to watch. I know that I've ragged on men's college basketball, and I still think it's borderline unwatchable, but the fact that this tournament is so wide open, while it may not be pleasing to watch, it will be interesting to see all the upsets that will happen and it will be exciting. I have no faith in a lot of the high seeds, especially Oregon as a number one, but, some lower seeded teams like Yale, Northern Iowa and Gonzaga can make some noise. I especially like Gonzaga as an 11 and I like them a lot in their first round game against Utah. Utah is good, but Gonzaga is bigger and deeper and has more tournament experience. If Northern Iowa can win their first round game, I believe they can make a run to the elite eight. And Yale, these Ivy League teams get in and they're always a tough out. Just ask our editor RD about his Princeton over UCLA pick a million years ago (ed note: Did you know that I picked #13 Princeton to beat #4 UCLA in 1996? I did.) . Or look at what Harvard did last year. Basically, this is a year where literally all 68 teams can win the whole thing if put in the right situation of get hot at the right time. Which will make this an exciting tournament.

Which brings me to my number one prediction, the Big 12 will make up 3/4 of the final four, but a Big 10 team will win. I fully believe that Kansas, Baylor, West Virginia and Oklahoma can get to the final four. KU has been lights out lately and they are the best team in all of men's college basketball. They should coast to the final four. I also believe in Oklahoma and Baylor a lot. They're both big, experienced and just flat out good. Baylor has a bunch of humongous guys in their front court that will punish smaller opponents. Oklahoma has one of, if not the, best players in Buddy Hield. That dude can put up 40 any given night and he will single handily win at least two games for the Sooners. I also like West Virginia's chances too. They play suffocating defense that frustrates teams into critical mistakes. They can do damage in the tournament. But, I believe that Michigan State has the best chance to come away with the title. They got screwed by not getting a one seed, but where they're seeded in their bracket, it's a cake walk for them. They have the best player, Denzel Valentine and they have experience and depth at all five positions. They can crush you inside and outside. They have it all. In a very weird season, they have been the one true consistent team, when at full strength.

Take these predictions as you will, but I fully believe this stuff will happen. Get ready for the tournament, fill out your brackets, and watch the craziness unfold.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. The head editor is wondering where Ty put Xavier, and why he did not say the Musketeers will win it all. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

The Ohio Problem: The Curious Case of PG Sittenfeld

Believe it or not, but there is a choice in the Ohio Democratic Party US Senate Primary

As goes Ohio, so goes the nation.

Well that is a big problem.

The Ohio problem is not unique to the fine people of the Buckeye state. National political leaders have been starving the local activists in many states for years. Ohio just seems to be the epicenter of the failed local work exhibited by the National Democratic Party. This Tuesday the Buckeye state will hold its Republican and Democratic primary elections, and the Ohio Problem has once again surfaced in the form of a Democratic primary for the US Senate.

Republican Rob Portman is currently the junior senator from the great state of Ohio. Senator Portman is not a hateful republican, just a non curious and greedy one. He was a trade representative and budget director for the George W Bush administration.  All reasonable people can agree that the Bush administration did not do a stellar job with trade and the economy. Rob Portman does not have the best resume to be a senator from any state, but not being a hateful idiot seems to help his elect-ability in Buckeye country. Senator Portman's ease of getting elected can be directly tied to the fact that the Ohio state Democratic party has been disorganized and lacks experience. For over a decade the same incompetent people have been losing elections years after year. Their only victories have been the two times President Obama carried the state. Two national wins and countless of local defeats to extremist Republicans equals a decade of no accountability. The ease of incumbent Senator Portman's reelection looked inevitable again in 2016.  The Ohio democrats seemingly could not mount any credible fight against the incumbent Republican. The 2016 election was again going to be all about the President, the rest of Ohio's democrats would be on their own.

Surprisingly a newcomer did step up to the plate for the Ohio Democratic Party in the race for the United States Senate. Cincinnati City Councilman PG (Alexander Paul George) Sittenfeld decided in early 2015 to challenge Senator Portman. No other credible challengers had emerged, and Councilman Sittenfeld stepped up for the Democrats. The Councilmen is very youthful, just over the age of 30, but a formidable fundraiser and campaigner.  Sittenfeld easily won two elections for the Cincinnati City Council, and is very active on social media and with the local press corps. If the people of Cincinnati could only name one member of council, that member would be PG Sittenfeld. His energy, bright personality, and independence has made him popular with Republicans and Democrats alike. Sittenfeld was one of the first millennial politicians that seemingly could challenge the baby boomers in the establishment.

Not long after PG Sittenfeld announced his intent to run for the US Senate, former Ohio Governor Ted Strickland threw his hat into the ring. Strickland had served in the US House of Representatives for a long time and was a one term governor for the Buckeye state.  Many political pundits thought that Governor Strickland was the only hope to defeat Senator Portman in the 2016 election. Strickland was well regarded by many in Ohio. He held an A rating from the NRA, and this man is a Democrat. He has a long history and Washington DC, and that history has given Strickland a nice pipeline for fundraising. The fact that Strickland has already won one state wide race, and was narrowly defeated in another, shows that the former Governor has good name recognition with the voters in Ohio. Ted Strickland had a clear path to the Democratic party's nomination for the US Senate.

Even with the Governor Strickland's perceived inevitability, Councilman PG Sittenfeld was not ready to concede the race. There were some new ideas coming from the youthful Cincinnatian. PG Sittenfeld was talking about things that effected the largest growing voting block, the millennials. His canidiacy was bound to bring energy and excitement not tied to the national Presidential election. PG Sittenfeld was going to excite Ohioans about issues that face Ohio.  By the time Ted Strickland filed to run for the US Senate, Sittenfeld had already brought in a campaigning staff, and he had received donations from some big donors (including Google's Eric Schmidt). The Cincinnati council member was not ready to abdicate the nomination to Governor Strickland.

Unfortunately the Ohio and National Democratic party leaders wanted to  force Sittenfeld out of the race in an undemocratic way. Soon after Ted Strickland entered the race, many state and national political leaders endorsed the former Governor. To endorse a candidate in a state primary more than a year before the election was unheard of. Many of the local Democratic activists were also encouraged to endorse Strickland over Sittenfeld. A smear campaign against the Cincinnati council member quickly followed. The state party was telling the media that Sittenfeld had promised to leave the race if Strickland decided to run.  The narrative being sold by the establishment of the Democratic party was that Sittenfeld was hurting the party's chance to pick up a senate win in 2016. The opposition to an up and coming Democrat was unprecedented. PG Sittenfeld was going to lose this election, his first loss, and it would be better for his career if he left the path clear for Ted Strickland. The Ohio Democratic Party did not want to give people a choice in the matter. 

PG Sittenfeld represents the future of the Democratic Party in Ohio. His early career in the Cincinnati City Council should bring support from the national and state party. The councilman even sided with the establishment of the Democratic Party when he changed his opposition on the Cincinnati street car project. That flip-flop, and inexplicable reasoning by the councilman to continue to spend on construction because money had already been spent, will haunt Sittenfeld his entire political career. He took that risk for the better of the party, and they have not been grateful. In many other, not as controversial areas, Sittenfeld has been a bright spot for the party. He fully embraced First Lady Michelle Obama's Keep Moving campaign. He has been outspoken on equality for the LGBTQ community. He is extremely active in the community when it comes to violence and poverty. If there is a cause important to Democrats, PG Sittenfeld has been one of their champions.

The Strickland / Sittenfeld primary contest perfectly represents how bad the Ohio Problem is. The Buckeye State will once again be home to many out of state campaign experts. The Democratic Party will once again put a great emphasis on winning Ohio for their Presidential candidate. Ted Strickland is part of the old establishment, he is seen as a nice compliment to Hillary Clinton (if she wins the nomination). PG Sittenfeld is too much of an unknown, the party does not see his value to winning Ohio. With no dedicated, experienced, political operatives in Ohio all of the political decisions for the Buckeye State are seen through the national party's needs. Councilman Sittenfeld has even fallen victim to the Ohio Problem. He has been put in a position to replace most of his locally grown campaign staff with people who do not live in Ohio. He has changed his main focus from student debt relief to gun control. This pivot in campaign strategy has netted some high profile endorsements for Sittenfeld, with most of the endorsements coming from out of state celebrities. PG Sittenfeld has been very active travelling the state and discussing his Senate run with local Democratic Party activists, but in order to stay relevant he has had to lean on influence makers who do not live in the Buckeye state. The lack of support and structure for a strong local candidate has been detrimental to PG Sittenfeld's hope to be in the United States Senate. Ted Strickland, who mainly works in Washington DC, may be from Ohio but his strength lies with his ties to the national Democratic party. Sittenfeld's support from the state is no match for Strickland's DC connections.

The Ohio Problem is still contributing to the electoral problems in the Buckeye state. Cincinnati City Council member PG Sittenfeld may seem to not have a chance to defeat former Governor Ted Strickland, but the state party has never really given the upstart Sittenfeld a chance to compete. The national Democratic Party establishment has used their outside influence in Ohio to try and make the state Senate primary as undemocratic as possible. It is frustrating that the national and state parties have tried to go out of the way to force Sittenfeld out of the race since day one. The people of Ohio deserve a fresh perspective. PG Sittenfeld can help end the Ohio Problem, if only he had a bit more local support.  The leaders of the Ohio Democratic Party may have changed, but their incompetence and fidelity to the national Democratic Party establishment is the same as it ever was. This cycle needs to end. The people of Ohio deserve to have their interests represented by politicians who focus on Ohio.  The people of Ohio deserve democracy

As goes the country, so goes Ohio. That is the core of the Ohio Problem.

RD

RD Kulik is the Head Editor for SeedSing and the host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. He is tired of the old failed ways of state parties who focus on presidential races and leave behind their own local candidates. Ohio is not alone in this practice, tell us about your state's failures in electing true leaders - write for SeedSing.

Great Movie Comedies Vol 1: "Caddyshack" & "The Big Lebowski"

The greatest jokes ever live on the reels

As you all know by now, I'm a fan of comedy. I've written and talked about it a ton both on the site and podcast. I love stand up comedy, television comedy and, today's topic, comedy movies.

Today I'm going to talk about 2 specific comedies that I adore, but there's so many others I could talk about. Movies like "Billy Madison", "This is Spinal Tap", "What We Do In The Shadows", "Napoleon Dynamite", the list could go on for days. Those are all great and all classics. I really love a good comedy. A movie that makes me belly laugh and doesn't take it self to seriously, it gets no better than that. A great example of that, "Anchorman", but that's not one of the two I will talk about today, but it deserves mentioning. There are also older, classic comedies that still hold up to this day. Movies like "Some Like It Hot" or "Duck Soup" or "Kentucky Fried Movie". All older, but all still absolutely great and worth checking out. But, the two I want to specifically talk about today are "Caddyshack" and "The Big Lebowski". Not only are these two of my favorite comedies, they're two of my favorite movies of all time. They're both timeless, hilarious and just flat out well made movies. Everyone involved with both movies really hit a home run. The actors, writers, producers and directors really struck gold.

Let's first talk about "Caddyshack". This has to be one of the most quotable movies ever made. Talk to anyone that's seen it and I guarantee they will quote something from "Caddyshack". There is so many famous lines and speeches in this movie. Bill Murray has multiple moments that are absolutely splendid. Take any scene, be it when he is pretending he's at the Masters and smashing flowers or when he is ogling the older women and telling them to "bark like a dog for me" or when he cleans the pool after what is believed to be feces floating around and he picks it up, smells it and takes a bite and exclaims that everything is okay and the rich lady passes out. Bill Murray is the star of this movie by far. But, we get excellent performances from Chevy Chase, Ted Knight, Michael O'Keefe, Sarah Holcomb and Rodney Dangerfield. Chevy Chase and Rodney Dangerfield are phenomenal in this movie. They too, much like Murray, have equally quotable lines and moments. Chevy Chase's scene when he is putting and talking to Danny Noonan(O'Keefe) about life and handing him lessons is very, very funny. And everything Dangerfield does in this movie is comedy gold. Rodney Dangerfield truly did not get the respect that he deserved. He is one of the greatest comedy actors of all time. "Caddyshack" is a classic.

"The Big Lebowski" is almost the exact opposite of "Caddyshack", but that doesn't make it less funny. Where "Caddyshack" had great improvisers and great comic actors, "The Big Lebowski" is one of the best written comedies of all time. The Cohen Brothers dabbled in comedy, with the excellent "Raising Arizona", but they're more known for their more dramatic stuff. What makes "The Big Lebowski" great, they blend drama, action, and most importantly, comedy to perfection. This has to be one of the weirdest, yet most hilarious movies I've ever watched. It is so good. It starts out great and continues to be great for two hours. It's also very weird, but that adds to its charm. Any scene involving Jeffrey Lebowski(Jeff Bridges) and Maude(Julianne Moore) is absurdist comedy gold. The scene when the two of them are talking about sex and her weird roommate is just sitting there listening, reading and laughing is genius. It's so bizarre, yet hilarious at the same time. John Goodman and Steve Busecmi are spectacular in this movie too. Goodman is the loud and obnoxious ex Vietnam vet and he is so good. When he pulls the gun on the guy for going over the line and forces him to mark it 0 is awesome. Also, when he talks about "the Jesus"(John Turturro), and his troubled criminal past, absolutely hysterical. Busecmi is great as their quiet bowling buddy that just wants to be involved. The arguments he and Goodman get into are great. Phillip Seymour Hoffman is also very good in his limited role and so is Tara Reid. But, Jeff Bridges is the star and he totally nails this character. He's so good, I associate Bridges as "The Dude", no matter what role he's playing. Everything he does is memorable and he is very believable as this stoner stuck in a crazy situation. And what makes is so well written as I wrote earlier is, everything that comes out of the actors mouths was all written. There's no improvising in a movie that seems it's almost exclusively improvised. That's some next level writing and the Cohen's are some of the best. "The Big Lebowski" is a terrific and bizarre comedy that everyone should see.

These are just two of my favorites, but I wanted to single these two out because they're different, yet equally hilarious. If you haven't seen either of them, stop what you're doing and watch them now. When you are done laughing, you will be thanking me.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. Tomorrow you can hear Ty talk all about great comedy movies on The X Millennial Man Podcast. Ty is on twitter, go follow him @tykulik.

Better Late than Never to Catch the Great "Ant-Man"

Early screen test footage

With the release of the new "Captain America: Civil War" trailer being dropped today, I want to talk about another superhero movie I recently saw and loved. Yes, it does feature one of the heroes that will appear in "Captain America: Civil War", but it's not Spiderman. That's right, Spiderman is going to be in the movie and his appearance at the very end of the trailer is awesome. Seriously, if you haven't watched the trailer yet, read this, then watch it. "Captain America: Civil War" looks like it is going to be great.

The superhero movie I want to talk about today is "Ant-Man", and yes he is going to be in the new Captain America movie, presumably fighting on Cap's side. But, "Ant-Man", in my opinion, was a really fun and very entertaining movie. I had my doubts when I heard all the stuff about the movie. I didn't think Paul Rudd could pull off a superhero. I heard that they kept pushing the release back. I didn't think an action movie about a guy that can shrink to the size of an ant seemed that cool. And when Edgar Wright said he wasn't going to direct anymore, that was almost the last straw for me. I didn't see the movie in the theaters because I thought it was going to stink and I have two young kids. When it did come out, it got pretty good reviews, clocking in at right around 80% on Rotten Tomatoes. So, my interest became piqued again. Then, I had friends and relatives tell me that it was pretty good and they thought I'd enjoy it. I kept putting it off, even renting it from Netflix, but not watching it for almost three months, but man am I glad my wife and I watched it this past weekend. I really enjoyed the hell out of it. Like I said before, it was entertaining and completely action packed. I really loved that they got right down to the action. First scene of the movie is action packed and the rest is much of the same, with some slower moments sprinkled in.

But, let's look at all the things that kept me from watching it in the theaters.

First, the Paul Rudd thing. I didn't think he could pull it off, but he is really good in his role. The thing about Paul Rudd, he is just a really good actor. He can play goofy, like "Wet Hot", he can be charming, like "They Came Together", he can be an asshole, like "Knocked Up", he can be a teen heart throb, like "Clueless" and now he can add superhero action star with "Ant-Man". Paul Rudd is awesome and I will never question his acting ability again. Second, the push back of the release date. This usually happens to movies that the studio is afraid will not do so well, but in the case of "Ant-Man", I just think they had to push it to find a new director once Edgar Wright stepped down. I also heard something about having to recast Wasp, but I think the director thing was the biggest problem. But, this director did a great job with this movie. He portrayed a world of ants that was plausible and believable. He did a great job with the fight scenes too. This was a case of a good reason to push a release date. You want to get someone that will do the movie justice. Which leads me to reason three, Edgar Wright dropping out as director. I am a huge Edgar Wright fan. I love all the stuff he does with Simon Pegg and Nick Frost. I saw "Shaun of the Dead", "Hot Fuzz" and "The World's End" all in the theaters and loved every single one. I heard they are doing another and I can't wait to see that as well. Wright is a phenomenal director, so when he dropped out, I instantly became worried. What I failed to recognize though, he stayed on as a writer and a producer. He still was involved, just not the way I thought he should be. But, after watching the movie, you can tell that he had his hand in on most of, if not all, the jokes. This made me happy that, at least, he stayed on as a writer. 

Now, my main original gripe prior to watching "Ant-Man", who in the hell would want to watch a movie about a guy that shrink to the size and control ants? Me, now, that's who. This movie pulled this off to perfection. I believed that a guy like Scott Lang(Paul Rudd), would take on a job like this so he could be with his daughter. He was a thief that just got out of jail and couldn't even keep a job at Baskin Robbins because of his past. Becoming Ant-Man was his last option in life. I also loved Michael Douglass as Dr. Henry Pym, the original Ant-Man. He was older, but wiser and still had an ass kicking attitude. Guys like Michael Douglas and Robert Redford should be thrilled when they get asked to be in superhero movies and these two are excellent in them. Evangeline Lilly, playing the new Wasp, was totally awesome. She was great as the bad guy's, Yellow Jacket, assistant that was spying on him for her father Dr. Pym and she was a total ass kicker too. The scene where she is training Lang and continues to brutally beat him is very funny. When she shows Lang how to control ants, another great scene. Lilly is great in this movie. Yellow Jacket is menacing and creepy and your typical over the top bad guy, but that is the beauty of playing bad guys in superhero movies, you're encouraged to chew scenery and this guy does it great. Then there's Lang's crew who are all very funny, especially Michael Pena.

"Ant-Man" was so good. I'd watch it again before I'd watch the second "Thor" movie, the second and third "Ironman" movies, any of the "Hulk" movies and any "Spiderman" movies, except for the first two. In fact, the only two, recent superhero movies I'd pick before "Ant-Man" would be "Avengers: Age of Ultron" and "Guardians of the Galaxy", but "Ant-Man" is a close third. If you are a fan of superhero and Marvel movies, and you haven't seen "Ant-Man" yet, check it out. It's super enjoyable and extremely entertaining.

Can't wait to see how they use him in the new Captain America movie. 

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man. He wonders if Marvel can make a good Ant Man movie, is Dazzler next? You must follow the tiny adventures of Ty on twitter @tykulik.

The Greatest American Band Debate: Captain Beefheart and His Magic Band

For the greatest American band debate I'm going to nominate Captain Beefheart and his Magic Band.

I fell in love with this band right after I discovered the Black Keys. I read an article where Dan Auerbach called Captain Beefeheart one of his biggest influences in music and I had to hear this guy immediately. It was awesome. The first record I bought was "Safe As Milk", and let me tell you, this thing is the earliest form of garage rock that I ever heard and it was totally awesome. The sound that his band made with their instruments, the distortion and reverb from guitars, the fuzzy bass, the weird drum lines and fills, and Beefheart's voice, it was incredible. I had heard stuff like this before, but not this good. I like garage music. Bands like the Black Keys, the White Stripes, the Hives, Bloc Party and the Heavy are all in my normal rotation, except for the White Stripes now, and it is all great, but it is not Captain Beefheart and his Magic Band.

Look at some of the songs on "Safe As Milk". You have stuff like "I'm Glad", "Abba Zabba", "Zig Zag Wanderer", "Grown So Ugly" and "Sure 'Nuff n Yes I Do". All classic and all very different from each other. That's the sign of a great songwriter and a great band. When you can change genres in the course of one album, that takes a boat load of talent and ingenuity. "I'm Glad" is a slower, almost love song, but with the funky instruments playing very fuzzy riffs makes it awesome. "I'm Glad" also has some beautifully written lyrics that come off as legit poetry. Beefheart opining for the good days, saying stuff like, "when we met I was sad, at times I felt really bad, but now I'm glad, I'm glad about the good times, oh, that we had". Wonderful. His backing band, almost sounding like doo wop, is such a great added bonus. "Abba Zabba" is a classic throwback rock song with Beefheart gruffly singing the words to perfection. When he needs to hit higher notes on "Abba Zabba", he knocks that out of the park as well.

Beefheart, his real name is Van Vilet, is one of the greatest writers and musicians of all time. "Zig Zag Wanderer" is your typical 60's rock and roll song made that much cooler by the Magic Band. The guitar and bass are distorted perfection and I could listen to this song over and over again. "Grown So Ugly" has some of the most unique and interesting time changes I've ever heard in one 2 and a half minute song. They start out fast with a heavy guitar riff and Beefheart screaming the lyrics, then just stop completely, come back slow for the verse, then do that over and over again for the glorious duration of the song. I love the Black Keys version of this song,  but the original is so much better and so phenomenal considering when it was recorded.

The opening track to "Safe As Milk", "Sure 'Nuff n Yes I Do" was the perfect gateway to their music for me. It starts out with a fuzzy slide guitar riff, so I'm immediately on board, and it just gets better from there, growing louder and faster and ending with a boom. This song opened my mind to true, original garage rock. Captain Beefeheart and his Magic Band have put out a ton of albums, 9 to be exact, but "Safe As Milk" is the cream of the crop for me. Don't get wrong, their other stuff is very, very good, I just really love "Safe As Milk".

What I really want to touch on for the rest of the blog is the many, many bands that they have influenced and Captain Beefheart's relationship with Frank Zappa. Let's look at the people they have influenced first, There's the afformentioned Black Keys and White Stripes, but they also made a mark with bands and musicians like PJ Harvey, Beck, Franz Ferdinand, LCD Soundsystem, Kurt Cobain, Black Francis of the Pixies, John Frusciante of the Red Hot Chili Peppers and my brother Seth's favorite, Tom Waits. That is a murderer's row of very famous singers, bands, songwriters and musicians. I mean, a guy like Beck, who bends all genres of music, calling Captain Beefheart and his Magic Band is a huge feather in their cap and shows how great of a band they truly were. Even a band like LCD Soundsysytem, that mainly dabbles in the electronica notes how influential they were and covers some of their songs on their records. They may be one of the underrated American bands as well as one of the greatest American bands. That list of people they influenced could go on and on.

Beefheart's friendship and relationship with Frank Zappa helped explain a lot of things abut his musical stylings and just the flat out bizarre stuff he did as a musician. They met each other when they were teenagers and bonded over their love for blues and R&B, according to Wikipedia. They also recorded very early, like when they both broke into the industry, and Zappa helped cultivate the Captain Beefheart persona. Before Beefeheart, Van Vilet was just your everyday studio musician and he performed live with Zappa's band, the Mothers of Invention, who I will definitely write about at another date. As they got older and grew in the industry, sometimes their friendship would turn into a rivalry, like when two brothers fight. They fought because they couldn't tour independently due to contract obligations, thanks again Wikipedia. They fought so much at this time, they wouldn't speak to each other, much like when two brothers fight. They went their separate ways for awhile, but when Zappa was diagnosed with the cancer that would eventually take his life, they reconnected. They went back to recording together in the studio and put out some great songs. Stuff like "Muffin Man" and "Willie the Pimp". They remained friends through Zappa's untimely death and I'm positive they were happy they buried the hatchet and became friends again. Anyone that can work with and be almost as musically accomplished as Frank Zappa is a genius in my book and Van Vilet AKA Captain Beefheart is just that.

I suggest, for the young kids out there, if you like the Black Keys and other similar bands, go back and check out Captain Beefeheart and his Magic Band. That was where they all got their influence.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man podcast. His early musical influences included Rockapella, The Zack Attack, and The B Sharps. Be influenced by Ty and follow him on twitter @tykulik.

The Day(s) After: Super Saturday and Tuesday 2 Edition

The Saturdays and Tuesdays are about to get a lot more Super

Looking at the results of Super Saturday and Super Tuesday 2 one can see that the Republican and Democratic Primary season is far from over. Both political parties are facing scenarios not thought of one year ago. Hillary Clinton's clear path is becoming more and more clouded. The rise, and inability to stop, Donald Trump is  becoming more and more troublesome to the Republican establishment and the national media. The 2016 primary season is making a fool out of a lot of the self identified experts. Maybe the people are really taking the power back.

On Saturday Texsas Senator Ted Cruz took his turn as the latest Republican establishment hope to take down Donald Trump. With a commanding win in Kansas and a tight upset in Maine, Cruz won the most overall delegates on the first Super Saturday. Donald Trump scored a few more small victories in Kentucky and Louisiana to pad his delegate totals, but Cruz closed the gap on the New York businessman's lead. Once the votes were tallied on Super Tuesday 2, Trump put a bit more distance between himself and Cruz with wins in Hawaii, Michigan, and Mississippi. Cruz eked out a win in Idaho and held second place in the other contests to stay in the primary race. Florida Senator Marco Rubio again underachieved on Saturday and Tuesday, winning zero delegates yesterday. All of the love and hope the Republican establishment and national media had for Rubio is evaporating quickly. Ohio Governor John Kasich finished where he normally does, far behind the leaders. With one week to go before the big winner take all prizes of Florida and Ohio, Ted Cruz is the only hope the Republican party has in derailing Trump's hold on the party's nomination for President of the United States.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton continued to separate herself from Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders for the Democratic nomination with the help of a few southern states and super delegates. Blow out wins in Mississippi and Louisiana added to Clinton's lead, while Sanders closed gap with wins in Kansas, Nebraska, Maine, and surprisingly Michigan. When the delegates are added from Super Saturday and Tuesday 2, Clinton and Sanders won almost the same amount. Where Secretary Clinton is separating herself from the Green Mountain State Senator is in the super delegates. These Democratic party officials do not need to follow the will of the people, and can vote for whomever they please. Clinton has spent years cultivating this valuable resource, and no matter how many close races Senator Sanders wins, she will still have the numbers advantage because of the super delegates. In order for Bernie Sanders to capture the Democratic nomination, he needs to win some of the big primary prizes, such as Ohio and Florida, and convince the super delegates to support his candidacy at the Democratic National Convention. That seems unlikely. 

Six months ago no one thought that Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, and Bernie Sanders would still be in this race. Cruz has received no endorsements from any of his Senate colleagues, and is generally disliked by the Republican establishment. Every week Donald Trump seems to do something that would end the political career of any other person. Bernie Sanders is constantly smeared by the national media as some sort of socialist boogeyman. Not one of these three candidates has the support of anyone of influence in the Republican and Democratic parties. How is it that we are approaching mid March, and all three men are still able to win their respective party's nomination? How did everyone get this primary season so wrong?

In the case of Donald Trump and Ted Cruz, the Republican party has been grooming their voters to hate governance. The rise of the tea party created a culture of obstructing anything that President Obama and the Democratic Party wanted to get done. There was absolutely no support for the smallest bits of bipartisanship. Then Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said in 2010 that his number one job was to make Barrack Obama a one term president. He failed. While the Democratic Party failed at supporting down ticket candidates, a new breed of obstructionist Republicans started to take office. The Glenn Becks and Fox News personalities celebrated this culture of discord. Any one who compromised was severely punished. John Boehner, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, was the highest profile casualty of the new Republican Party. Boehner's failure to lead his own party was embraced by many Republicans. Ted Cruz was celebrated by the right wing media for attempting to stop any kind of legislation that required compromise. Donald Trump just yells about how other people are losers. The Republican Party embraced these tactics, and now they want to deny their champions. The voters were trained to want the bombast of Trump, the inflexibility of Cruz. The Republican voters want demagogues, not leaders. The party created this want.

The lingering campaign of Senator Bernie Sanders represents how much the Democratic Party has wasted the potential of the millennial vote. The Clinton campaign was embarrassed by the upstart Obama in 2008, and they did everything in their power to not make the same mistake again. The Democratic National Committee purposely limited the number of debates early on to help the former Secretary of State. The Clinton campaign has been raising money for years, to the detriment of many lower profile candidates. Any other Democrat who showed an interest in running for President was quickly met with scorn from the national party. Hillary Clinton's coronation as the Democratic nominee for President was one of the most undemocratic processes in modern political history. Senator Sanders, who is not even identified as a Democrat in the U.S. Senate, was so far outside of the established party that no one took his candidacy serious. The voters who identify as Democrats, but have felt betrayed by the party, flocked to Sanders campaign. The Clinton campaign has once again underestimated the voices of the disaffected Democrats, and it is costing them votes. Many thought Sanders could only win a few small liberal New England states, and now his campaign has claimed victory in Michigan. Without the advantage of super delegates, Sanders and Clinton would be neck and neck. The mistakes of 2008 seem to be coming back to haunt Hillary Clinton. The longer Bernie Sanders stays in this race, Hillary Clinton will have more pressure to talk about issues important to the millennial vote. If she refuses to acknowledge their ideas, 2016 is going to be a reminder of 2008.

The 2016 primary season has been unpredictable for both the Republican and Democratic party. Next week Florida and Ohio may bring more clarity on who will actually be on the ballot for President in November. Can the Republicans stop Trump? It looks unlikely. Is Ted Cruz the true choice of the Republican establishment? Probably not. Will John Kasich and Marco Rubio stop wasting peoples time? We can only hope.  Will Bernie Sanders be able to ride the potential of the millennial vote to the Democratic party nomination for President of the United States? Who the heck knows? The unpredictability makes this election one for the history books. 

RD

RD Kulik is the head editor for SeedSing. He is willing to admit when he is wrong, and he has been so wrong about this election. Lend your voice to the discussion and keep SeedSing on the right and true path, write for us.

Jonathan Banks Turns Great Shows into Classic Television

New Mexico is much more beautiful with Mike Ehrmantraut in it.

I just want to take a minute to talk about how awesome of an actor Jonathan Banks is and has always been.

Jonathan Banks is new to me, the first place I saw him was on "Breaking Bad" as Mike Ehrmantraut. He was phenomenal on that show. He was the badass assistant that Gus Fring needed. He was the perfect hitman, bodyguard, money guy, basically, he was the jack of all trades, as long as it was shady. When Mike showed up in season four of "Breaking Bad", that's when that show went from great to a classic masterpiece. He really turned an already great show into absolute, must watch TV. He was so great and was almost as fun to watch as Gus. No one, and I'm including Walt and Gus and Jesse, was as good on that show as Mike was. He was awesome.

Now I'm a big fan of "Better Call Saul". I put season one in my top 5 shows of 2015, both on the podcast and on my blog. It's a really great show. I had my doubts, it was released so close to the end of "Breaking Bad", so how could they even come close to what they had with that show, but they have pulled it out. It doesn't hurt that Vince Gilligan and Peter Gould still produce and write a lot of the episodes and that the majority of the original actors appear as themselves on "Better Call Saul". That helps the show even more.

Bob Oedenkirk is the star of the show, but what makes shows like "Better Call Saul" and "Breaking Bad" so great is the fact that any number of actors can have their moments. In "Breaking Bad", it wasn't always Bryan Cranston as Walt that made it great. There was also the afformentioned Gus and Jesse, but also Krysten Ritter as Jesse's junkie girlfriend or Walt's brother in law Hank, his thieving wife Marie, Walt's wife, Skyler and, of course Saul and Mike. They all had episodes that featured their characters in pivotal roles and some of the episodes that featured these people, like when Walt watches Jesse's girlfriend choke and die on her own vomit, were compelling as any Walt heavy episode. Same thing goes for "Better Call Saul". There is plenty of episodes that focus on Saul's brother Chuck, played expertly by Michael McKean, and his struggles with electronics and paranoia and the fact that Jimmy is still a crook. There is also the stuff that features Jimmy's, that was Saul's name before he became Saul Goodman, girlfriend/work buddy Kim. She's played a pivotal role in 2 of the first 5 episodes of season 2 already. There is also Howard, who is co owner and creator of the law firm that Chuck started and Jimmy could never get a real job at.

Every episode of "Better Call Saul" is great television ,but the best episodes, and I'm including the ones that are Jimmy centric, are the ones that focus on Mike. He is wonderfully brilliant on this show. The fact that we get to see him alive again, spoiler alert, is fantastic. And man does Jonathan Banks knock it out of the park with this role. He is so god damn good. He plays the same type of character that he did on "Breaking Bad", but on "Better Call Saul", we get to see what turned him into this shady back door bag man and body guard and hit man and con artist. The episode in season one of "BCS" where we learn why he left the police was one of the best, most heart wrenching 45 minutes of television I have ever witnessed. That episode is a masterpiece and it should be shown in film and TV schools because it needs to be studied by the future TV and movie writers. It is so, so great. Go back and watch that episode. You will cry and you will feel things you never thought a TV show could make it feel. It is a work of art.

This season on "BCS", it seems that they have taken a more forward approach to making Mike more of a main character and the show is so much better for doing that. Jonathan Banks as Mike is so soft spoken and calm, yet you can see the anger and violence that he has behind those eyes. He never gets to amped up or too crazy about anything or any situation he's thrown in. He always has the same look on his face and the same tone to his voice and he carries himself with the same demeanor. He's always calm, but you better not cross him, or he will make you pay. Take an episode earlier this season. The guy from Minnesota, that he was essentially a body guard for, shows up in a humongous bright yellow hummer to go do a drug deal and Mike calmly tells him that he will not get in that car that screams arrest me and that if this guy goes to the deal alone, he will pay some kind of consequence. The guy doesn't listen and his home eventually gets robbed and his treasured baseball card collection is stolen. Mike cleans everything up for this guy in the next episode, but he is not happy about it. He did it for the money. Then, there is last nights episode, where he helps get Tucco arrested. Tucco's assistant, Nacho, wants Tucco killed and asks Mike to do it, but Mike calmly explains how this is a terrible idea for everyone involved. Instead, he hatches a plan to get Tucco arrested where no one will suspect any foul play and it works to perfection.

Jonathan Banks is a excellent actor. I'm just upset that it took for me to watch "Breaking Bad" to realize this. He was great on that show and he has been the best thing about "Better Call Saul" and I love that show. Hopefully he gets awards or at least recognition for the awesome things that he is doing on TV. Jonathan Banks is a wonderful actor.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. He forgets that Johnathan Banks taught a lot of young men about the biology of a young woman (thanks to Conan O'Brien for digging this gem up). Learn from Ty by following him on twitter @tykulik.

Ed note: We misspelled Jonathan Bank's name when the article was posted. Ty got it right, I was wrong. It has been corrected. Sorry

Ben Simmons Represents Everything that is Wrong with Men's College Basketball

The one thing the NCAA seems to be forgetting.

I know that I bag on men's college basketball a lot and today will be no exception. The game has become way too watered down. The talent level isn't nearly as good as it was, as little as 6 or 7 years ago. The "one and done" culture has ruined the game. You can't ever really figure out which players are on which big time team because the majority of that team leaves after one, or if you're lucky, two years. Kentucky, who was in the Final Four last year, lost 7 players to the pros. You read that right, 7 players left with at least 2 years of eligibility left. They're ranked in the top 25 again, and will make the tournament again, but the only player I can name that's still on the team from last year off the top of my head is point guard Tyler Ullis. He's good, but if you are a top 25 team, I should be able to name 3 of 5 starters I think. I know they had a great recruiting class, but they always do and they are always changing the roster.

This is so frustrating to me, a big time basketball fan. I love all basketball, especially the NBA, but I used to love college basketball, not anymore though. I hate the "one and done" culture and this season has been a huge reason why. All these "studs" that were going to come in and turn the top teams around have not really lived up to the task. The two best teams in college basketball, Kansas and Michigan State, have mainly upperclassmen. They're led by guys that have been there before and know how to play. Oklahoma is also a really good team, led by a senior, Buddy Hield. Those three teams I have faith in to go far in the tournament.

These teams led by freshman, teams like Duke, Kentucky and LSU, I have no faith in to make deep tourney runs, or even make the tournament. Duke will be there, but Grayson Allen(sophomore) and Brandon Ingram(freshman), will not guide them to back to back titles, they'll be lucky to make it to the first weekend. Kentucky will bow out very early because their freshman class has been a humongous disappointment and they have no upperclassmen leader, except for the oft injured Alex Poythress. And then there's LSU, the team that is the reason for this blog today.

Louisiana State University had the cream of the crop sign there, Ben Simmons. This kid was a can't miss prospect out of Australia. He was a once in a lifetime player. He could pass like Magic, shoot like Durant and run the floor like Chris Paul. He was going to bring LSU back to its glory days, when Shaq was patrolling the paint. He was compared, by every journalist no matter what publication, to all those players I mentioned above. He was supposed to be the best freshman since Kevin Durant was at Texas for one year, said Bill Simmons. This kid was going to make this season a must watch for college basketball fans. Now, with all that being said, he is a very good basketball player and he will almost certainly be the first pick in the NBA draft, but there is also some problems that have come along with this kid.

First of all, LSU has a slim, and I mean very slim, like winning the SEC tournament may be their only chance to make the NCAA tournament slim, chance at getting in. Some of this is coaching and some is the kid's fault. The coach at LSU clearly doesn't know how to use Simmons properly. He'll use him as a decoy way too often and he doesn't have the ball in his hands at critical times, even though it's clear he is the best player on the floor. But Ben Simmons sometimes seems gun shy at the end of critical games and he passes on the final shot way too much. I know he wants to be unselfish, but if you are supposed to be the best player in over a decade, you have to be selfish and take those final shots, you're team is expecting that out of you.

Then there is the fact that LSU has almost no chance of making the NCAA tournament. Most teams that have had a big time recruit like this have made the tournament and most have made very deep runs. Duke won the title with three freshman as their top guys. When Durant was at Texas I believe they made the sweet sixteen. Kentucky last year made the final four and won with an Anthony Davis led team a few years before that. Arizona, with Stanley Johnson and Rondae Hollis-Jefferson made the elite eight last year. So yeah, most of these freshman led teams make at least some noise in the NCAA tournament. Even though the NCAA doesn't recognize it, Michigan and the Fab Five made the title game in their first and second seasons. LSU though, they look like your prototypical NIT team. Good enough to be over .500, but barely. They are 18-13 as we speak, with little to no quality wins. They do not have a resume that screams at large bid, not even close. If they don't win the SEC tournament, I don't see them getting into the NCAA tournament. There are a lot of better teams that have better resumes that are more deserving of an at large bid.

Which brings me to my last and most crucial point of today. Ben Simmons was not eligible for the Wooden Award, given to the best player in men's college basketball, for "academic reasons". Some reporters, mainly ESPN and Bleacher Report, came out and said what a travesty it is that this kid won't even be considered for the award, that it was an injustice to a great player. I say, what the hell is the matter with you morons that think basketball is more important that getting good grades? I know that most of these "one and done" players don't go to go to school, but at least the ones there make the grades, or it's made to seem that they have made the grades, keeping them eligible to play. Ben Simmons has clearly not been up to snuff in the classroom which is the most important thing. It's called student athlete for a reason. There is a reason student comes first. That is the main thing you should be focused on when entering college, being a student first and an athlete second. I know, he's going to be a multi millionaire in less than 2 moths, but Jesus Christ, go to class. I guarantee that the professors will just pass you for showing up. Also, I don't think he'd even have a 10 percent chance to win the award. I'd give it to Denzel Valentine, Buddy Hield, Perry Ellis or Georges Niang before I'd even consider Ben Simmons. Those guys are all leaders on top 25 teams that should make deep tourney runs.

People in the major media, I'm looking at you Bleacher Report and ESPN, need to stop coddling this kid and make him own up to his faults. He will be the first pick in the upcoming draft, but what if he is a bust? What if he is Sam Bowie? Will the same reporters still be there for him? I doubt it. This kid is good, possibly great, but he needs to get his head on his shoulders and grow up fast if he wants to earn the money that is about to be showered upon him. He is not Steph Curry or LeBron James or Kevin Durant yet. Hell, he's not even at DeMar DeRozan or Kyle Lowry's level yet, at least those guys have proven they're real NBA players.

Screw the NCAA and screw the NBA for this stupid "one and done" culture that they've created. It's a menace and it will cheapen the NBA is 5 or 6 years. Enjoy great basketball now because the "one and done's" are coming to ruin professional basketball.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man podcast. He often wonders why these kids even bother with college, play overseas and then come to the draft. It seems so simple. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

The Greatest Television Ever: A Millennial History of Cartoons

As a child of the late 80's and the early 90's, cartoons have played a pretty pivotal role in my life. Everyone watches, and for the most part, loves at least one cartoon. They're impossible not to like and there is something for everyone. I'm not alone in this, I love cartoons, be they old or new. When I was growing up, I didn't watch too much TV. It's not that my parents forbade us from watching TV, it just wasn't really a viable option. They would send us outside when the weather was nice to play with friends and to play sports, and when it was cold outside, they always had some kind of activity for us to do, be it art, inside play, or when they would get crafty, we'd play "games" that involved cleaning the house. But, I did have friends that were allowed a lot of TV time, and when my folks would let us watch TV, I found plenty of cartoons that I thoroughly enjoyed. I was a big time Nickelodeon fan as a young child. I watched stuff like "Doug", "Rugrats", "Animaniacs" and "Pinky and the Brain". Those were my shows. They were wild and zany and goofy and just plain fun to watch. That was the type of cartoon I went for as a young child. The goofier, the better.

I know, I haven't brought up the "Simpsons" yet, but I feel like that would be unfair to the other cartoons and animated shows I watch. I've written plenty about the "Simpsons", and will write more, and I've talked about it on the podcast almost regularly. It's not only my favorite animated/cartoon show, it's my favorite show. There will be more "Simpsons" talk at later dates, I promise.

During my teen years I looked for more "grown up" cartoons. I was growing weary of the zany and the goofy things that I watched as a young child. Don't get me wrong, I still enjoyed these shows, especially "Rugrats", but I needed some older, more grown up humor. I was a teenager and the kids shows weren't doing it for me anymore. Then, when I was either 13 or 14, I was over at a friends house watching MTV and one of the greatest animated shows I laid my eyes on appeared on his TV. That show was "Beavis and Butthead". This show was AMAZING. I absolutely loved everything about this show. Beavis and Butthead were the ultimate slackers and ultimate troublemakers. They hated school and they hated pretty much everyone that they came into contact with, unless they were old enough to drink. I'm not a drinker, but when I was a teen, people that were old enough to drink, no matter how douchey they were, were cool as hell to me. Also, what teen truly likes school? Me and my friends all despised school and "Beavis and Butthead" portrayed this perfectly. This show was also bizarre and kind of started to shape my love for absurdist humor. They would do weird things during the episodes, things like playing frog baseball or helping a burnout steal things or cause some kind of trouble at school and with their elderly neighbor, basically things that teens were told not to do, they did and they did it with supreme hilarity. What made Beavis and Butthead truly excellent, they would break two or three times in the middle of the episodes and they would critique music videos. Yes, MTV used to play music videos and yes, I'm old enough to remember when they still did. This was the best part because they would absolutely rip apart boring, slow music and crappy pop songs. But, when they played a hard rocking video, Beavis and Butthead loved it and would head bang and it was glorious. "Beavis and Butthead" was a great show and it was my first true entryway to more adult humor that animated shows could pull off. I'm forever indebted to "Beavis and Butthead" for starting to shape my comedy taste.

Watching a ton of "Beavis and Butthead" made me search for more adult themed cartoons. I found things like "The Critic" and "The Tick", but Cartoon Network started showing cartoons late at night on a platform they called Adult Swim. This was a life changer for me. I discovered shows like "Space Ghost Coast to Coast" and "Harvey Birdman: Attorney at Law" and "Tom Goes to the Mayor". These shows were weird and absurd and like nothing I'd ever seen before and it was magnificent. They were so weird and so funny. I was immediately hooked on pretty much everything Adult Swim put on TV. Then, one night I stumbled across what may be my second or third all time favorite cartoon. That glorious little show was called "Aqua Teen Hunger Force".

You want to talk about absurdist humor, "Aqua Teen Hunger Force" epitomized it. The premise of the very first episode was about three "things" that were detectives. The three "things" I speak of are a life size shake called Master Shake, a hovering humongous carton of fries that was called Frylock and a childish, goopy meatball they called Meatwad. This show was so perfect for my newfound taste of comedy. The cherry on top of this great show was their neighbor, a balding, yet super hairy on the shoulders and back, gold chain wearing, always angry Carl. Carl was always mad at the Aqua Teen Hunger Force and he always loudly let it be known. Carl is one of the greatest TV characters of all time. Like I said, they were supposed to be detectives, and in the premiere, they did solve a case, but from there on out, they just had wacky adventure after wacky adventure. The show never really followed a true story line. It was basically a platform to do whatever weird and wild thing the writers of this brilliant show wanted to do. The episodes never made sense, but they were always funny. Another great thing about this show, and many others on Adult Swim, it was a short 11 minute show. They'd get in and get out and pack as many jokes as they could in 11 short minutes. "Aqua Teen Hunger Force" would always start off kind of slow for about the first 5 or 6 minutes, but that last 5 minutes was absolute gold. They always had their best jokes in that last 5 minutes and it always delivered. The thing that made this last minutes so great, Carl was usually involved in some capacity. He was always there with his anger and he would always take it out on the Aqua Teen, mainly Master Shake.

"Aqua Teen Hunger Force" is one of the greatest animated/cartoon shows to ever appear on TV. This, much like "Beavis and Butthead", one hundred percent shaped my love for comedy TV and comedy cartoons. I love the bizarre and the absurd, and "Aqua Teen" did this to perfection. If you haven't seen an episode of "Aqua Teen", do yourself a favor and binge the entire series. There's a ton of episodes, but they are only 11 minutes long, as I said before, and they are great. If you enjoy absurdist humor, you will love "Aqua Teen". It was such a great and bizarre show and they pulled it off excellently. I will forever love and thank "Aqua Teen" for showing me how far you can really take animated comedy cartoons. It's a masterpiece.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man podcast. Do you like reading about Ty's love of cartoons, well tomorrow you can hear him tell the tales on the X Millennial Man podcast. If you want more great Ty thoughts, follow him on twitter @tykulik.

Is it Time to Give Up on The OKC Thunder?

The hoop is a symbol of the current state of the Thunder

I know that in my NBA mid season review and my NBA preseason preview I had the OKC Thunder as a dark horse championship contender. Yes, they're my favorite team, but I legitimately thought, at full strength, they could compete with the Warriors, Spurs and Cavs. They have two of the five best players in the game on their team. Russell Westbrook and Kevin Durant are lights out. They are superior scorers and a threat to anyone that the opposition puts on the floor. After those two guys, with Serge Ibaka being the lone exception, they're pretty thin. Sure, Steven Adams is a good defender and rebounder and Anthony Morrow is a good shooter, but guys like Dion Waiters, Kyke Singler and Enes Kanter do not make a title contending team.

The Thunder do have the third best record in the West, and in the league I believe, but last nights game, that they absolutely blew to the Clippers, shut down any hopes of winning a title that I had. The hopes were pretty fleeting to begin with, the Warriors are historically good and the Spurs are the Spurs, but I still had hope because of Durant and Westbrook. They both played good last night, except for the dumb three that Westbrook took with 10 seconds left, but they always perform. It's the rest of the team that concerns me. In the first half of last nights game, they couldn't miss. Same couldn't be said in the second half, they were ice cold. Not only were they missing shots, but they were playing no defense and looked undisciplined. It was frustrating. They are so Dr Jekyl and Mr Hyde. The Thunder will look unbeatable during one half, but then they turn a switch and they look like a mid level Eastern Conference team the next half.

Last nights game wasn't the only time this has happened. They've looked very mediocre since the all star break ended. They can't close teams out, i.e. The Warriors game last week. They had that game won multiple times, but they couldn't close it out. Sure, Curry hit a miraculous shot to win, but the Thunder should've never been in that position. They had that game won, but they found a way to blow it. They also have trouble putting away, or even beating teams they should beat. Take the recent Pelicans game. The Pelicans have no one besides Anthony Davis, but the Thunder decided they didn't have to play hard and decided to not play defense and they lost to a very mediocre team. They've looked downright bad since the break. I don't know if it's coaching or they don't have what it takes or the talent drops off way too much after Westbrook, Durant and Ibaka, but something is wrong.

Yes, the Thunder will make the playoff and even win a round or two, but when they have to play the Spurs or Warriors, they will get scorched. I want to believe in them, but they've done nothing lately that lets me believe in them. They're in a bad funk and they need to get out of it before they get trounced in the playoffs to an inferior team.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man podcast. He wants to believe in the Thunder, but reality keeps getting in the way. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

The Day After: Super Tuesday Edition

Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, and Nebraska - You're next

It seems to be over, and yet the end seems so far away.

Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump both scored numerous Super Tuesday victories, and seemed to take a giant leap closer to their respective party's Presidential nomination. Both candidates won where they were expected to win, and lost where they were expected to lose. The momentum gained in February has carried over into March for both front runners. Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are on a course to face each other in November. Both candidates are already preparing to transition from the primaries and get ready for the national election. The end is here.  

Unfortunately the supporters of the losing candidates do not want to give up hope yet. In the case of the Democrats, the math is starting to cool the Bern down. Former Secretary of State Clinton dominated in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and won a very close Massachusetts primary.  Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders won large victories in Colorado, Minnesota, Oklahoma, and Vermont. Clinton prevailed in the larger states with more delegates, while Sanders was victorious in the less rich delegate states. Couple Clinton's win with her enormous advantage in super delegates, there is almost no possible way the Green Mountain State Senator can win. Many Democrats may think that the very existence of the super delegates is extremely undemocratic, but it is unfortunately part of the process. As long as Hillary Clinton can keep winning states, no matter the margin of victory, she will get the support of the majority of people in the established Democratic Party. Senator Sanders long shot candidacy is becoming more absurd every day. His small state victories will not be enough to overtake Clinton. People who are feeling the Bern will need to find a new obsession. Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic Nominee for President of the United States.

The establishment of the Republican Party really wishes it had super delegates. New York business man Donald Trump won in Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Massachusetts, Tennessee, Vermont, and Virginia. Trump took less than 50% of the vote in each state, but was still the candidate who finished number one. Texas Senator Ted Cruz won his home state along with Alaska and Oklahoma. Florida Senator, and establishment savior, Marco Rubio finally won his first election of the primary season with a victory in Minnesota. Even with all the victories Donald Trump has to his name, almost all of them have been close races with Mr. Trump taking well under 50% of the vote. On the day after Super Tuesday, Cruz and Rubio have enough combined delegates to beat Trump. With the addition of super delegates, the establishment of the Republican Party could really tip the scales for one of the two Senators, but alas the RNC wants to let the voters decide. A plurality seem to be deciding on Trump.

The only plan left for the RNC and elected Republicans was to rally around someone who could defeat Trump. Over the last week the core of the Republican Party, along with their national media lapdogs, started to rally around Marco Rubio. Things were so insane that Rubio was being referred to as centrist Republican. This is a man with almost no legislative accomplishments to his name and once deflected a question on the age of Earth by saying "I'm not a scientist, man". That lack of conviction and need to pander does not make for a great leader. This is the candidate the RNC is trying to elevate. The republican voters do not seem to be listening  The support and positive news coverage yielded the Florida Senator many third place finishes and one victory in the land of 10,000 lakes on Super Tuesday.

The next great hope is Cruz, and the establishment does not care for the obstructionist from the Lone Star state. While Senator Cruz did not do as poorly as Rubio on Super Tuesday, he was still almost 100 delegates behind Trump when the voting was completed. The new narrative from the RNC and media is that Ted Cruz is the only "real" republican that can defeat Trump. If Rubio, or Kasich, were to leave the race, it is believed that their support would all flood to Cruz. If that is truly the case, and it is doubtful this would happen, then the party would anoint Ted Cruz as the leader of Republicans nationwide. The Cruz candidacy would be just as, if not more, disastrous to the Republican party's national image. The Trump and Cruz supporters share a lot of the same ideas, even if Glenn Beck refuses to believe this. If Cruz is the backup plan, the Republican party is in a lot of trouble come November.

The best chance the Republicans have in defeating Trump, and saving some down ticket races, is to make sure that Donald Trump does not get the necessary number of delegates to secure the nomination. The only possible way to pull this trick off is to have Cruz and Rubio stay in the race. Trump wins a lot of primaries, but rarely gets over 40% of the vote. If Senator Cruz dropped out, many of his supporters would flock to Trump. If Rubio, or Kasich, dropped out, their supporters would probably sit out or split between the other two candidates. Keeping everyone in waters the field down, and makes it difficult for Trump to secure the nomination. Without the proper number of delegates, the heads of the Republican Party can call for a vote on new candidate at the convention in July. That is the only path available to ensure Donald Trump is not the Republican Party candidate for President of the United States.

The election of 2016 is already one for the history books. Hillary Clinton has finally broken through and figured out how to win over the needed people in the Democratic Party. Donald Trump is unbelievable still in front, but his lead is not as daunting as one would think. Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz have almost no chance to be the Republican nominee, but together they can stop Trump. It is going to be epic.

RD Kulik

RD is the Head Editor for SeedSing and the host of the X Millennial Man podcast. The political parties may not care about your voice, but we do. Write for SeedSing.

The Greatest American Band Debate: Rick Rubin and Brian Burton

SeedSing is filled with music lovers. We can not agree on who is the best band from the States. The Greatest American Band Debate will be a regular feature where we discuss and compare bands who started in the good old USA. If you have any suggestions of bands we should debate Contact us seedsing.rdk@gmail.com

In lieu of talking about another band today for the greatest American band debate, I'm going to talk about two producers. These guys are legends in the music business and without them, we would never have gotten some of the greatest bands of all time. They're both mainly producers, but one also doubles as a pretty good musician. The two people I'm going to talk about today are Rick Rubin and Brian Burton, AKA Danger Mouse.

Let's first start with Brian Burton. Danger Mouse bust onto the music scene with the legendary "Grey Album". This was a "mashup" of the Beatles "White Album" and Jay Z's "Black Album". This record was incredible. He perfectly blended Beatles with Jay Z. We had never heard anything like this before. Now, it's commonplace for DJ's and producers to do "mashups", but Danger Mouse was one of the first. This record was also impossible to come by. He didn't get permission from the powers that be to make it, so the few that got released were hard to get your hands on. You had to know someone who knew someone that had a copy just so you could get one. It's a masterpiece.

With the acclaim that followed "The Grey Album", Danger Mouse was in high demand. He began to work with a lot of artists. He, along with Cee Lo Green started the band Gnarls Barkley. An awesome concept for this band. Green did the vocals and Danger Mouse did everything else. They put out two awesome albums. The way he met Green was working with him on the "Danger Doom" album. This was Danger Mouse and MF Doom. MF Doom is an awesome, but under appreciated rapper. Their "Danger Doom" record is an excellent concept album. They used Adult Swim cartoons as their base and wrote rap songs to go along with it. Some Adult Swim people that appear are Master Shake, Harvey Birdman and Meatwad, to name a few.

Later on, Danger Mouse was called upon by the Black Keys, one of my all time favorite bands, to be the first outsider to produce one of their albums. He came to work with them on "Attack and Release", their first real ambitious album. He's since worked almost exclusively with them, making their sound more complete. He's added bass where needed and piano as a cherry on top of their unique sound. He was one of the driving forces behind their most recent and most ambitious record, "Turn Blue", and I will be forever grateful to him for making the Black Keys take some much needed steps to further their sound and push the limits.

Danger Mouse also has the band Broken Bells. This is him and Shins frontman James Mercer's side project. This is a great platform for Mercer to step away from the indie rock sound and really take some big vocal chances. He has to hit so many high notes with Broken Bells and he does great. That's something he would have never done in the Shins. Broken Bells is great.

Danger Mouse has also done work with a lot of other famous artists, Jack White, Norah Jones and Sparklehorse among many, many others. Danger Mouse is probably the second most in demand producer right now, and everything he's done so far has been pretty great. He's a top of the line producer.

The only guy that may be more in demand than Danger Mouse has got to be Rick Rubin. I mean, the dude co created Def Jam Records first of all. Just google Def Jam and look at all the ultra famous people that have been on that label, it's astonishing. He and Russell Simmons created an empire. They both created probably the best rap label of all time. Bands like Public Enemy, the Beastie Boys and Run DMC owe their fame to Simmons and Rubin. Even a guy like LL Cool J they made famous. Rubin is a total recluse, but when he emerges from his cocoon to work, this guy never disappoints. He was the producer on the "Black Album", Jay Z's best in my opinion.

Rubin has worked outside of rap music as well. His clientele includes  the Red Hot Chili Peppers, Johnny Cash, the Avett Brothers, the Dixie Chicks, Adele, Rage Against the Machine, Slayer, Mars Volta, Mick Jagger, the list could go on for days and days. He's even done stuff with Lady Gaga, Shakira and Ed Sheerhan. He has definitely expanded his grasp on all music.

The one thing you hear when people talk about working with Rubin is what a great professional he truly is. He has a knack for hearing and knowing great music. Before him, the Avett Brothers were just another run of the mill folk group. Rubin made them great. Same thing can be said about the Dixie Chicks. He produced their only listenable record. Rage Against the Machine knew they were working with a legend and let him do his thing, ending with great results. Lady Ga Ga, Shakira and Ed Sheerhan should thank their lucky stars that Rubin agreed to work with them. That's a huge compliment. Slayer and Mars Volta made their best stuff with Rubin on board. He's a genius, there's no other word that better describes him. Rubin's talent was on full display when he  got the absolute best out of an almost dead Johnny Cash. Those last two albums of his are masterpieces and a lot of that has to do with Rick Rubin being the producer.

They may not be a band, but we cannot talk great American music without mentioning these two guys that have helped produce so much of it. I can't wait to see what Danger Mouse and Rick Rubin do next.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man podcast. As a kid he thought Puff Daddy was the only producer in music. He has since become aware of others. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

Grayson Allen is Carrying on the Blue Devil Tradition

Just try and trip me, jackass

I want to take my time today to take a crack at this punk ass Duke men's basketball player, Grayson Allen.

This kid is a world class asshole. He looks like every whiny, over priveledged arrogant white kid that has played basketball at Duke. The problem with him, he isn't even in the top 25 or 30 or kids that have played at Duke. He is not that bad, but he is not some superstar that is going to set the NBA on fire in two years either. He reminds me of another white kid that was looked at as a "star" by some idiot analysts when he was in college and that kid is Aaron Craft. Does anyone remember this douchebag? Yes, I have a preconceived hatred for this kid because he played at that lame ass college full of cheaters in Columbus, Ohio, but he was not this "great" that so many analysts made him out to be. He was dirty, he was a cheap shot artist, he was a terrible shooter and he did not make that team any better. Not at all in fact. Without guys like Jared Sullinger on the same team as him, they would have been lucky to be a .500 team had Craft been their best option. He was an annoyance that hasn't made it out of the D League, so maybe he wasn't this all time great college player. I see a lot of the same thing in Grayson Allen that defined Aaron Craft. Grayson is a better shooter, but trade his shooting for Craft's defense, and you get the exact same player.

In addition to being overhyped, Grayson Allen is one of, if not the, most dirty players in all of college basketball. How many times does he get to trip opposing players before the ACC lays down some real punishment? Sure, they sent him a letter to reprimand him and deemed that sufficient, but that's a crock of shit. If this kid played anywhere else, save for Kentucky, he would have been suspended multiple games for tripping people. First of all, tripping an opponent on a hard wood floor could cause a very bad, possibly career ending injury. What if one of the two kids he tripped fell so hard they smacked their heads on the floor and were concussed? Would the ACC deem that enough of a problem to suspend him? Sure, if he played for Syracuse or North Carolina, but not for anyone on the Duke Blue Devils. Coach K is a standup guy and he doesn't teach his players to be dirty, right? Absolutely not, he has had some of the dirtiest players to ever step foot on a college basketball court, but no one in the main stream media has the guts to call him out.

Let's look at some past dirty players that the mighty Coach K has had. You have to start with Christian Laettener. He is one of the all time greatest college basketball players, but he was also one of the dirtiest. He'd kick players while they were down, he'd foul guys excessively hard when it was not needed, he was arrogant and could be a malcontent. Hell, ESPN even did a "30 For 30" on him called "I Hate Christian Laettener", that how epic his play and his dirty play was. It turned out to be a fluff piece because that's how ESPN rolls, but at least some got to show and tell about his dirty play. Later in his coaching career you can take guys like Shane Battier, Carlos Boozer and Steve Wojohoweski. These guys all came off like they were good, decent, respectable human beings on the court, but that couldn't be further from the truth. Battier was an arrogant, self righteous asshole while in college. Whenever he didn't get a call he thought he deserved, he would bitch and moan so much, that officials would give in. Carlos Boozer used to set dirty and illegal screens all the time while at Duke, but no one ever called him out on it because he was "playing the Coach K way". Steve Wojohoweski was an undersized little shit that fouled everyone on every play because that was his way of trying to get in opponents heads. Even recently you can look at players like Kyrie Irving, Greg Paulus and Jahlil Okafor. Kyrie Irving was a prized recruit who only played 11 NCAA basketball games, but was looked at as a star because of the nice things Coach K had to say about him. Now, he comes off as a diva. He couldn't lead the Cavs to the playoffs when it was his team and now that LeBron is back, and is the unquestioned leader and coach and GM, reports have come out that he is unhappy with his role and he wants to be traded. Sounds like a whiny, spoiled brat to me, AKA a Duke Blue Devil. Greg Paulus was so average at college basketball, he tried his hand at football and that was a disaster. He sounds like another kid that was given everything he wanted in life, no questions asked, and when the times got tough, he whined and complained instead of working hard at something else, AKA a Duke Blue Devil. Jahlil Okafor is proof positive of "getting way too much, way too soon". He won a title in his lone season at Duke, was looked at as the star of that team, was drafted in the lottery and now, he's making mistake after mistake, and is he really a good NBA player? First of all, without Tyus Jones and Justise Winslow, Duke doesn't even come close to even being in that title game, so no, Okafor was not the reason they won. Second, sure he ended up in a terrible situation, being picked by the 76ers, but that doesn't make it okay for him to get in bar fights and to play terrible, non existent defense. He is also a bad teammate. He clearly only cares about his stats and himself, AKA a Duke Blue Devil.

Now we have this Grayson Allen shithead. This kid may take the cream of the crop. He is the worst since Laettener, but at least Laettener could back it up with his game. Allen is mediocre at best and he is an extremely dirty player. This tripping nonsense needs to stop before he really hurts someone. It also makes the play look even worse than it has all season. It is childish and the fact that the ACC and Duke aren't doing anything about it makes it even worse. I'd take all the players, plus a lot more, that I mentioned above before I'd even consider this Allen kid and his childish behavior on the court makes me even more sure that I would not want him on my team.

So, no Dick Vitale and Jay Bilas and Seth Davis and Clark Kellogg, Grayson Allen is not a transcendent player, he is a malcontent, whiny and arrogant douchebag, AKA a Duke Blue Devil.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man podcast. He has a love hat relationship with Duke basketball, he loves when they lose and hates when they win. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

A Bad Crowd takes Away from an Awesome Gary Clark Jr.

Thank god the guitar was sober

Instead of watching the stupid Oscars last night (ed note: we will talk about how stupid they were in writing tomorrow and in talking on Wednesday), I went to a concert here in Saint Louis. I feel like I made the right decision.

I saw Gary Clark Jr at The Pageant last night and it was good and it was bad. I'll start with the bad. When you are watching a musician as talented and skilled as Gary Clark Jr, you go to watch that musician. Well, at least where my father and I were standing, that was not the case. First of all, how many drinks do people need at one two hour concert (ed note: fifteen?)? I saw the same people walk to the bar multiple times to get multiple drinks in two hours. That is a total waste of money, in my opinion, I'm not a drinker, and that mars your concert going experience. For example, three guys tried to fight each other not once, but twice because they had way too many mixed drinks and PBR. I was embarrassed for them, but they didn't seem to be embarrassed at all. Some douchebag in a white suit coat tried to start a fight twice and had the fights started, he would have gotten his ass kicked. The fact that the crew working and the police let him back in is appalling. One strike at a live concert and you should be out. That was, unfortunately, not the case last night. Two of these same guys that were trying to fight also decided that a loud, live concert was a good time for them to catch up. I mean, what the hell! It was super loud, Gary Clark Jr uses a lot of distortion, so, how could these guys converse you may ask. Well, they shouted at each other for the first 80 minutes of the show. Thankfully, there was a gentleman standing in front of my father and I that asked them to shut up because he couldn't hear. Thank you sir and screw you assholes that thought a loud rock show was the right time to chit chat. What a couple of assholes. The third and final thing that made it bad was the fact that the show seemed to be oversold. The venue was sold out, but I feel like they really stretched the limit of people allowed in one area for an extended period of time. Nothing can take you out of the groove of a song you love than multiple people bumping into you because they are drunk and they need to get to the bar to get another drink. I had to move seemingly every 2 to 3 minutes so someone could get to the bar. It was maddening. Crowds can make a show great, but they can also make it very annoying and take your attention away from the stage. What's happening on stage is the only thing that should matter at a live show, not drunken assholes, talking too loud and looking for a fight. I hope for the other people on the other side of the venue that they didn't have to deal with this nonsense last night. This could have been a great show, but the crowd around my father and I made it annoying and frustrating.

Let's get to the good part now. Gary Clark Jr is an awesome guitar player and a really good performer. He shreds guitar. When he was soloing last night, I mean my god was it incredible. He has such a knack and a skill that borders on expertise when playing complicated solos. He makes these incredibly hard solos sound easy. He has such control of his guitar and it was amazing to see him live. He opened the show with his most famous song "Bright Lights" and crushed it. The slow burn of the intro into the verse and chorus was just tremendous and then he soloed. It was awesome. It sounded like the album, but with a few added notes and some slight change to what was recorded, he made it sound ten times better. A great start to the show. He then proceeded to play mostly stuff off his first album and that made me happy. Don't get me wrong, I really like his newer album "The Story of Sonny Boy Slim", but I love every song on "Blak and Blu" and on his much loved 4 song EP. He played "Travis County" in the middle. "Travis County" is like country mixed with blues mixed with rock and roll and it is totally awesome live. You could tell he has so much fun playing this song at shows. He ripped through it, adding great solos and singing the song to perfection. I was thrilled when I heard it. He also played "Numb" a little later and that was absolutely amazing. That slow open to the song was awesome live. It is a very slow burn, then he hits a very distorted chord and that's when you know you are in for a great song. "Numb" is my favorite song by him and he destroyed it, in a good way, at this show. It was everything I hoped for and then some. He played a very elongated solo in the middle, trading riffs with his rhythm guitarist, who is also absolutely incredible, and it was a sight to see and a treat for your ears. "Numb" is phenomenal live. He even did a great cover of "If Trouble Was Money". He slowed it down a bit, but he still paid tribute to the legends that have done this song before him. Gary Clark Jr has that old timey blues sound to his voice and he uses it so very well. I loved his version of this old blues classic. Even his slower love songs that I'm not a huge fan of were wonderful live. He brought an added energy to the songs and added some solos that made them that much better. Basically, when I could hear and see him, everything he did was amazing. He has such a great stage presence and commands the attention of the audience that is there to see him, not to fight or get black out drunk.

Gary Clark Jr is great live and I highly recommend going to see him when he comes to your town. Hopefully you get a better crowd experience than my father and I did because Gary Clark Jr is incredible. He is going to be a world wide star if he continues on this path and the next time he comes to Saint Louis, hopefully it will be at a venue where they require silence and don't allow stupidity. This show would have gotten a 10 out of 10 for me if it wasn't for the dumbass people around me last night. Because of these few morons, I'd give it a 7 out of 10, but that is not a slight to Gary Clark Jr, he is amazing. Clean your act up Pageant because I'm coming to see Leon Bridges there in June and I better not have to deal with this nonsense again.

Screw the crowd around me, but Gary Clark Jr, you were awesome. Thank you for being so good that we were able to get through this show even though we had complete idiots surrounding us all night.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture Editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man podcast. This was not the first time he had to deal with a drunken idiot at a concert, go hear the tale on a classic edition of the X Millennial Man podcast. You can console Ty by following him on twitter @tykulik.

The Day After: South Carolina Edition Part 2

The cold of February gives way to slightly less cold of Super Tuesday

Can we finally close the door on feeling the Bern?

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton predictable crushed Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders in the South Carolina primary on Saturday. Clinton won almost every demographic by an extremely large margin. There was one demographic it looks like Sanders did best Clinton in,  white voters under 30. Unfortunately for the Green Mountain State Senator, that demographic accounted for less than 15% of the Democrats that voted in the primary. With wins in three out of four February primary states, and the large amount of committed delegates, Hillary Clinton is well on her way to securing the Democratic Party nomination for President of the United States.

Should Clinton be worried about Sanders once again winning the white millennial vote? According to Pew Research, the youngest millennial is now 18, and the group makes up the largest voting block in America. They have surpassed the number of baby boomers, and have their first real chance to wield political power. They unfortunately do not vote in high numbers, like the baby boomers. Most of the boomers tend to favor the older, more conservative candidates. Hillary Clinton is that candidate for the Democratic party. Bernie Sanders has excited the white millennials by talking to them directly, and they have responded by being the vocal backbone of his longshot White House candidacy. When it comes time to actually vote the millennial turnout falls below 50%, while the gen xers and baby boomers turnout well over 50%. As long as the millennials stay home, Hillary Clinton has nothing to worry about as she confidently marches toward the nomination.

President Barack Obama was the last Democrat to really ignite the passion of millennial voters, but he also had the support of nearly all of the generation x democrats. Hillary Clinton's baby boomer support kept her in the primary into the summer of 2008, but Obama's broader message carried him to victory. That message of hope has become a reality of bowing to the established political and financial institutions who are desperate to stay in power. Eight years later the gen xers have joined the boomers in near universal support for Clinton. The former first lady is also winning every minority group in the Democratic party. Bernie Sanders appeal has been limited to mainly young white liberals. That is an incredibly small group under the large diverse umbrella of the Democratic Party. This group seems fanatically drawn to Senator Sander's message of money and political corruption. This exact same idea seems to be working more for Donald Trump and the Republican primary voters. Most in the Democratic Party have accepted that Hillary Clinton is another, in a long line of, of candidates who are beholden to Wall Street and big banks. Bill Clinton was one, John Kerry another, Chris Dodd helped protect the housing industry,  and Barack Obama has gone out of his way to keep Wall Street in power. Sanders message is an important one, but it is one that the overall democratic party is not ready to face. Not yet.

Super Tuesday is fast approaching and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has a commanding lead in most of the states who will be voting. Senator Sanders is feverishly working to shore up support and eek out a few wins on March 1st, but it will not be enough. Unless over 90% of all the registered young white liberals get out and vote for Sanders, his campaign will be over by the morning of march 2nd. History says that the millennial vote will be much lower than the gen x and boomer vote. It was a fun ride, and Bernie Sanders has brought up extremely important issues, but it is over. Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic nominee for President of the United States. The Bern is starting to cool down.

RD Kulik

RD is the Head Editor for SeedSing and the host of the X Millennial Man podcast. He wishes for two things - at least one President who is not a stooge for Wall Street and for you to like SeedSing on Facebook.

Ty has Very Strong Committed Feelings for "Love"

It is nice when the show title reflects how I feel

Yesterday I finished the new Netflix show "Love" and it was totally awesome. I literally loved everything about this show. It was the perfect comedy/love story show. It was, in my opinion, so much better than another similar Netflix show, "Master of None", and I really enjoyed "Master of None".

One of the things that I enjoyed more on "Love" than "Master of None" was the female lead. Gillian Jacobs was so much better than Noel Wells. Noel Wells was very good, but she was your typical, I need a guy in my life, but when things get too serious, I'm jumping ship and moving on. Aziz Ansari is a great writer and created a great show, but Noel Wells character was pretty one dimensional and I didn't watch that show for her, I watched it for Ansari, who is awesome. Gillian Jacobs was absolutely phenomenal on "Love". In the first episode when we meet her, we immediately see that she is a troubled person, that doesn't realize it yet. She always thinks that she is right and that she is the cool one and that she has no problem, but all of those things couldn't be further from the truth. She is, for the most part, wrong 9 times out of 10. She is not cool, she is a mess that relies on other people way too much. And she has a ton of problems. She is an addict. She is addicted to drugs and alcohol and sex and love. Gillian Jacobs, her character's name is Mickey, is an absolute mess as a person. She plays this role to perfection. I believe every single moment of struggle and awkwardness and anger that she so excellently portrays. This is a real star making role for her. She is absolutely phenomenal on "Love". This is also a completely different role for her. She is not the same character she was on "Community" or "Girls" or any movie role she has had. She usually has her head on her shoulders or realizes that she is a screw up, but not on "Love". It takes her a real long time before she even considers that she may have a problem.

"Love" much like "Master of None", I know I'm comparing the two shows but they are basically the same thing released only months apart from each other so it's an easy comparison, Paul Rust co created this show and stars in it much like Ansari does for his show. Paul Rust is terrific. This is a great vehicle for his brand of comedy and his style of acting. When he is on screen, which is most of the series, you cannot take your eyes off of him. He commands the attention of the audience. Rust plays Gus, your typical nice guy that tries to hard to impress the girl. He's a hard worker, but he has a nothing job. He is a tutor on the set of a fake witch show. Pretty familiar premise for a leading man, but what Rust does with the character Gus is excellent. At first, he is a pushover. He will do whatever his girlfriend wants him to do. When they break up, he constantly blames himself although he was not in the wrong at all. When he meets Mickey, he is putty in her hands and Mickey knows this. She uses him and his kindness to her advantage and Gus is just happy that a pretty girl is talking to him. When he starts to gain confidence, after telling Mickey how he feels, his character becomes more confident, and once again, I completely believe his transformation. He is still a dork, but he is a confident dork. The growth of his character is so believable, I swear I have friends that have gone through the same transformation as we have grown up. Much like Gillian Jacobs, this is also a star making turn for Paul Rust. The two of them have been steady actors, but never been the lead in anything, save for Rust in the not as bad as I thought it was "I Love You Beth Cooper", but "Love" is the perfect platform for them to truly shine.

Jacobs and Rust  may control and demand the audiences attention, but the supporting characters are just as good. Comedic actors like Mike Mitchell, Armen Weitzman, Neil Campbell, Seth Morris and Brett Gelman are great. So are Claudia O'Dougherty, who is really, really great on this show, Charlyne Yi, Bobby Lee, Kerri Kenney and Traci Thoms. Iris Apatow is wonderful as the lead actress on the show that Rust works as a tutor for. She is a very good actress with a very bright future. There are many other supporting actors that I didn't mention that are equally as good.

"Love" is a very good show. I'd call it a great show to be honest with you. I really enjoyed "Master of None", but it felt a little long to binge, at least for my taste. "Love", on the other hand, had the same amount of episodes running the same amount of time, but I breezed through it in three days. It was such an enjoyable watch and I cannot recommend it enough. I don't want to spoil anything because I want everyone to go out and watch this show. It is very, very good and Paul Rust and Gillian Jacobs are tremendous.

I cannot wait for season two.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man podcast. He loves to binge watch old Michigan football games. Do you have twitter? So does Ty, go follow him @tykulik.

The Chaos of the College Basketball Season will Extend Well into March

This season has even our ancestors confused

As I've done with the NBA, NFL and MLB seasons, I want to check up on my preseason preview for men's college basketball and see how I did and what I think will happen now that the regular is just about done.

First of all, this season of men's college basketball has been very, very ugly. There is no clear cut best team out there. The talent pool has been incredibly watered down by this new "one and done" culture. These kids don't go to college to learn how to play team basketball anymore, they go to increase their draft position. No one plays team basketball anymore. It's all one on one and let me show you my skills to prove that I can play at the next level. Adam Silver needs to focus more on changing the age limit rule for early entry in the draft and less on the "hack a whoever" problem. Men's college basketball is becoming a joke, and until they do something to remedy the "one and done", it will remain a big, big problem.

I really dislike college basketball at the moment.

With all that being said, I still watch because it is basketball and I love basketball. As I said before, there is no clear cut top five teams. Last year it was almost a foregone conclusion that Duke, Kentucky and Wisconsin would be three fourths of the final four. Michigan State making it was a surprise, but they are also a traditional powerhouse, so was it really that surprising? Nope. This year though, it's a total crapshoot. I bet gamblers hate how wide open it is this season. There is, at least, 10 teams that have a legitimate shot at making the final four and winning the title.

I'll start with the ACC. The ACC has the team that most consider the "best" team in North Carolina, but they just lost to an unranked Duke team at home. Sometimes UNC looks like world beaters, other days they look average. Duke has been wildly inconsistent this year. They were in the top ten, fell out of the rankings completely, then beat Virginia and UNC. They are a team that relies on streaky shooters and freshman and sophomores and their underclassmen are nowhere near as good as their underclassmen last year. Virginia has experience, but they play ugly offensive basketball. Notre Dame is okay, but they will lose an early round game in the tournament. Louisville gave themselves a bogus postseason ban, due to all their sex parties and their sex depraved head coach, but I don't think they would have made much noise in the tournament anyway. Miami may be the second best team in the ACC, but they are classic tournament chokers. everyone else is mediocre. UNC should be the cream of the crop, but I have no faith in them after what happened against Duke.

The Big East has two good teams and that's it. No disrespect to Georgetown, but they peaked early. The Big East is Villanova and Xavier. They played last night and number 5 Xavier knocked off number 1 Villanova. It was a good game, but the problem with these two teams, they always get seeded very high in the tournament and they always lose way earlier than they should. They both have experience, but like I said, that experience is used to getting knocked out of the tournament early. I'd love if they proved me and everyone else wrong and made a deep tournament run because I like both these teams, but I don't think that will happen.

The SEC has been very average this year. Kentucky was supposed to be great, signing another excellent class, but they have been one of, if no the, most inconsistent team in all of men's basketball. They have no go to scorer and their stud freshman have not lived up to the preseason hype. Texas A&M is ranked, but I couldn't tell you the name of one player on that team. LSU was supposed to be awesome since they signed Ben Simmons, the overall number one high school recruit, but they might not even make the NCAA tournament. Arkansas is mediocre, Ole Miss and Mississippi State both stink and so does the rest of the conference. Kentucky will still win the SEC, but they are not the same team that they were last year.

The Big Ten, my conference that I watch, has been very unpredictable. Michigan State is supposed to be the cream of the crop, but they've had to deal with multiple injuries and very inconsistent play. They are still really good, but not as good as I thought they would be. Iowa has come out of nowhere and put themselves into the top ten, but they have lost three straight and one of those losses was to a very bad Penn State team. Maryland, my preseason pick to win the title, has been as inconsistent as Michigan State. They started out on fire this season, climbing all the way up to the number 2 ranking, but they recently lost to a Minnesota team that was winless in Big Ten play. Michigan, my team, has been without Caris Levert for most of the season but, they've beaten the teams they are supposed to beat. But, when they played quality competition, they've been absolutely run out of the gym. Michigan State, Indiana, Iowa and Xavier all beat them by double figures and made it look easy. Indiana, the current leader of the conference, has looked good, but when they have to play on the road, they are not the same team. They get every call at home, but the road, where it's called fairly, they look average. Wisconsin has come on strong lately, but I have zero faith in them and their former coach, Bo Ryan, is a world class scumbag. Even with Indiana sitting atop the conference, Michigan State and Maryland are the two best teams in the Big Ten.

The Big 12 may be the best conference in college basketball this year. Oklahoma, Kansas, West Virginia, Texas and Baylor have spent the majority of the season in the top 25. Oklahoma and Kansas look really good. They are the two teams that may be the only "sure thing" in college basketball this year. The issue is that KU has a tendency to choke, and who knows with Oklahoma, especially since Buddy Hield has been in a mini slump. West Virginia plays suffocating defense, but very poor offense. Baylor seems to be good only when playing at home and Texas is still learning Shaka Smart's system.  KU has proven twice, beating Oklahoma at home and on the road, that they are still the best team in the Big 12.

The mid majors I mentioned in my preseason preview, Witchita State and Gonzaga have been major disappointments. Witchita State had everyone back from a team that almost made the final four last year, but they have been pretty mediocre this year. And Gonzaga has fallen off a cliff. I believe I had them in my preseason final four, but they have been pretty terrible this year. The mid majors are not going to crash the final four at all this year.

Even though it's been a rough year to watch, the major conferences will be well represented in the tournament and make the final four. Like I said, this season is wide open, but I will take a crack at the final four anyway. I guess, and I cannot stress how much of this is literally a guess, UNC, Michigan State, Kansas and Oklahoma will be in the final four and Oklahoma will win it all. Once again, total guess. So, there is my almost end of the regular season wrap up for men's college basketball. The one thing that will be fun, while it will still be a rough watch, at least the tournament will be exciting and all 68 teams that make it will have a shot at the title. Hell, maybe we will finally see a 16 seed beat a 1 seed.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man podcast. This college basketball season may provide another big upset, like the Princeton UCLA game that the head editor will not shut up about. It is your duty to follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.