The SeedSing 2016 Major League Baseball Preview

We will see you back at home in October. (or is it November now?)

Baseball season has finally begun. Our long cold winter has given way to the start of a still cold baseball season. We are talking baseball, competitive baseball. What will the season hold? Will the Kansas City Royals repeat as World Series Champions (no)? Can the Mets get back to the Fall Classic and close the deal this time (not likely)? How will the 2016 Major League Baseball season play out? Here at SeedSing we have all the answers to your specific questions, and a few predictions. Get your bets ready.

Are the Yankees and Red Sox ready to return to dominance in the AL East?

Short answer, no. Longer answer, hell no.

Let's start with the Bronx Bombers. In the off season the Yankees acquired 100+ mile per hour throwing Aroldis Chapman from the Cincinnati Reds. Chapman is the real deal and near unhittable. He is added to a bullpen that was already very good. Any team playing the Yankees can expect to score zero runs after the seventh inning.

The problem is the first six innings. The Yankees have subpar starting pitching, and that will be problematic. Most teams will be able to easily hitting the New York starters, and the defense behind the starters is old and not very good. The Yankees lineup is filled with old aging stars and is a few years away from reloading with the young talent of other teams. The only bright spot in New York, outside of a killer bullpen, is going to be watching sullen cheater Alex Rodriguez chasing down Barry Bonds (75 homers away). Enjoy that New Yorkers.

Up the coast is the Yankees hated rival the Boston Red Sox. 2015 was a disaster for Boston, nothing seemed to work. The Red Sox addressed some of those issues by getting the biggest free agent prize of the off season, starting pitcher David Price. That acquisition made a big splash, and many of the sports media (almost all east coast based) are high on the Red Sox, but Price will not be enough. There is just not enough pitching or hitting depth in Boston. This team is at least one more year away from being in the World Series conversation. The Red Sox will make some noise, but their record will hover around .500 all season.

The ESPN love for the Yankees and the Red Sox will be no match for the Tampa Bay Rays, Baltimore Orioles, and Toronto Blue Jays. Tampa always defies the odds with great young talent. Baltimore has one of the best managers in baseball in Buck Showalter and a seasoned team. Toronto has built a dominant roster coming off a very disappointing loss in last years ALCS. The Blue Jays will dominant the AL East and leave the Yankees and Red Sox scrambling for next year.

It is an even number year so the San Francisco Giants will win the NL West and the World Series?

Not this year.

The Giants, like the Yankees and Red Sox, added a big time pitcher this off season with the free agent signing of Johnny Cueto. With a team mostly intact from their 2014 World Series Championship, Cueto is a big addition. The former Cy Young runner up comes after superstar Madison Bumgarner in the rotation. The problem is that after Cueto and Bumgarner the quality of pitching goes from great to mediocre. Jeff Samardzidja has shown flashes of brilliance, but has not proven to be consistently great. After the top three the Giants have an old Jake Peavy and Matt Cain. The Giants just do not have the pitching to make another even year World Series run.

The other problem for the Giants in the NL West is that the competition has gotten a lot better. The LA Dodgers have the money, star power, and Clayton Kershaw. The Arizona Diamondbacks have made some big moves, like acquiring superstar pitcher Zack Greinke, and have one of the best hitters in baseball in Paul Goldschmidt. Both of these teams will be a challenge for the Giants, and we will see the Arizona Diamondbacks beat back the others for the NL West Crown.

Is the AL West the most worthless, and over hyped, division in all of Major League Baseball?

Yes

Every year we hear about how the LA Angels, of wherever in southern California they want to be from, will once again claim the championship. If it is not the Angels, we hear about Billy Beane and the up and coming Oakland A's. The last few years we also keep hearing about the rise of the Seattle Mariners. In the last few years these three teams have faltered to the likes of the Texas Rangers and Houston Astros. The Angels, A's, and Mariners get the headlines, but the two Texas teams are producing winners. 

The Rangers and Astros will once again battle for the AL West crown. The Rangers are old but tested and the Astros are young and uber talented. The Astros will edge out the team from Arlington and make a return trip to the MLB playoffs.

Does the NL East have the worst teams in baseball?

Close, but not quite.

The NL East is going to be ugly. The Atlanta Braves, Philadelphia Phillies, and Florida Marlins are not very good. The Mets are coming off a World Series appearance, but they are not quite a championship caliber team. The Washington Nationals are loaded, but have been perennial underachievers. The NL East is filled with teams that are rebuilding or are in "one year away" mode. The quality of play out east will be barely above AAA caliber baseball. Almost everyone of these teams will struggle all year.

All should struggle except for the Nationals. The team in DC is loaded, and has the best player in baseball in reigning NL MVP Bryce Harper. The Mets heavily benefited from a dysfunctional DC team last year. That will not happen again. With Dusty Baker at the helm in our nations capitol, the Nationals will easily win the NL east.

Is the best baseball being played in the central part of the country?

Absolutely. The NL central and AL central are the deepest divisions in baseball. Both wild card teams from each league will come from the central division.

In the NL central you have the defending champs, and 100 game winners, St. Louis Cardinals. The birds on the bat have the best front office, a great farm system, and a culture of winning. Catching up to the Cardinals is another well built team in the Pittsburgh Pirates. The Bucs have been climbing the ladder every year and are looking to make the playoffs for a third consecutive year. Coming off of an NLCS appearance in 2015, the Chicago Cubs are as loaded with talent as any team in MLB. The NL central will be a showcase for awesome baseball.

The AL central is as equally loaded as their NL brothers. First there is the defending World Series Champion Kansas City Royals. Even with a few off season losses, the Royals still have a solid championship core in place. The Detroit Tigers are rich with talent and experience. Cleveland has maybe the best manager in baseball with Terry Francona and a mix of veterans and younger players ready to emerge. The Minnesota Twins and Chicago White Sox are teams on the rise, and will not be pushovers for anyone else. 

With all the talent in both the NL and AL central divisions, someone has to win. The NL central is for the Cubs to lose with the Pirates and Cardinals taking the wild cards. The AL Central will be close with the Indians beating the Royals and Tigers for the division with the runners up going to the playoffs.

We answered your questions, now for a few predictions.

Once again, here are your 2016 MLB Playoff teams.

Division winners: AL East - Toronto Blue Jays                 NL East - Washington Nationals

                             AL Central - Cleveland Indians             NL Central - Chicago Cubs

                             AL West - Houston Astros                    NL West - Arizona Diamondbacks

                             AL Wild Cards - Kansas City Royals     NL Wild Cards - Pittsburgh Pirates

                                                        Detroit Tigers                                        St. Louis Cardinals

The Chicago Cubs and the Washington Nationals will win over 100 games each.

The Cubs and Nationals have the talent and the management to have very special seasons. Forget about what you have read, but Joe Maddon is one of the greatest MLB managers. In addition to Maddon, Theo Epstein has built a powerhouse on the northside of the windy city. Players like reigning Cy Young winner Jake Arrieta, reigning rookie of the year Kris Bryant, off season pickup Jason Heyward, and superstar Anthony Rizzo the Cubs are a dream team. Although they have to compete with St. Louis and Pittsburgh, the Cubs also have the dreadful Cincinnati Reds and Milwaukee Brewers (the two worst teams in MLB) in their division. Getting to 100 wins will not be that difficult for this dream team.

The Washington Nationals are in a similar situation as the Cubs. Their lineup, led by Bryce Harper, is formidable. Their pitching is filled with potential. New manager Dusty Baker is a wizard at getting players to achieve their potential. In addition to their manager and roster, the Nationals will benefit from a weak division. The NL east will have some of the worst teams in baseball, and the Nationals will feast on this inferior competition. The nations capitol may see a team with over 110 wins in 2016.

The Pittsburgh Pirates will win the 2016 World Series. 

The Cubs and the Nationals will win tons of games, but they will not even play in the 2016 World Series. Each of these power teams have one huge weakness that will keep them away from the top of the baseball mountain.

In the case of the Washington Nationals their Achilles heel is manager Dusty Baker. Baker has taken many teams to the playoffs (Giants, Cubs, and Reds), but has never won a championship. The issue is that Baker is great at getting players to play above their ability, but cannot game manage well. Talent will win a lot of three game series, but when the playoff starts and series are five to seven games, Dusty Baker's lack of game strategy becomes a problem. It will be a problem for Washington in 2016.

The reason the Cubs will not make the World Series is mainly about experience. Players like Arrita, Rizzo, and Bryant are insanely talented and extremely young. There is not a strong veteran presence in Chicago that can guide these phenoms. It will be wait till next year for the Cubbies once again. Plus we have to take into account the goat and a variety of curses. Sorry Cubs.

So how are the Pirates going to get through these super teams and win the World Series? Pittsburgh is built a lot like the Kansas City Royals. Homegrown talent and nice off season veteran acquisitions. Outfielder Andrew McCutchen is one of the top five players in the MLB and a certified clubhouse leader. Francisco Liriano has found a second life in the Steel City. Manager Clint Hurdle has been guiding this team out of the darkness and has them believing in themselves. When the MLB season is getting to the trade deadline, a second place team like the Pirates will be more willing to trade for veteran talent than a young team like the Cubs or the Nationals. The mixture of a great manager, a superstar player who is also a leader, and a front office willing to take a chance, will lead to the Pittsburgh Pirates beating the Toronto Blue Jays in the 2016 World Series.

Let's say the series goes 7 games. That would be exciting.

RD

RD Kulik is the Head editor for SeedSing and one of the other hosts on the X Millennial Man Podcast. He is sentimentally picking the Pirates in remembrance of a hat he once briefly owned. Do you love baseball, come write for us. 

No, "The Walking Dead" Will Never be Great Again

Time to take a barbed wire stick to "The Walking Dead"

Last night was the season finale of "The Walking Dead", and I wrote about it's hopes of me continuing to watch it afterward last week, and it was so maddeningly, infuriating, boring and a stupid waste of 90 minutes of my life. I understand that I have gotten to watch this show for free for the last seven seasons, and I understand that they don't owe me anything at all, but come on, this was absolutely atrocious and, if you call yourself a true fan, you should feel the same as me.

This finale was everything that has been wrong with this show for about 4 seasons now. It was so boring. It was wildly stretched out to inconceivable measures. The story was dumb as hell. All the lead up to Negan was for naught. I didn't care that the original survivors kept getting caught by Negan's crew. I kept checking my phone every 5 minutes to see how much time was left in the episode. I absolutely loathed all the slow, no dialogue parts. I hated the beginning part with Carl and his weirdo girlfriend. Basically, this episode, in my personal opinion, was terrible in every possible way, especially the stupid, moronic, spit in the face that was the ending.

This stunk.

That ending was so, so stupid. The show runners and writers and producers and AMC are getting way too big for their britches with all the stupid ass tease endings that they do on their scripted shows now and this "Walking Dead" finale was the high point, or low point, if you ask me, of this new trend. I thought this finale was ten times worse than the "Mad Men" series finale, and I hated the "Mad Men" series finale. This ending though, what the hell? What a load of dog crap. This was absolutely ridiculous. Sure, there may be some spoilers coming up, but not too many with the dumbass way they ended this season. Let's get into it. 

So, we finally meet Negan, with about 15 minutes left in the episode. Everyone knew he was being played by Jeffrey Dean Morgan, who is a very talented actor, but his portrayal, I thought, was way too over the top. He gives about a 10 minute speech and, instead of being filled with tension and heart pounding moments, I found it very dumb and Morgan couldn't have chewed more scenery while performing said speech. He said each word as if every single thing he said was as important as the next. In all seriousness, he was basically giving a speech about how he was going to brutally beat up, possibly murder, one of Rick's crew. It was a pointless speech for what he ended up doing. The camera kept panning around from the original survivors to Negan and his crew, and it was frustrating and very irritating. I HATED everything about this monologue. God, it was dumb as hell. Then, to decide who he is going to beat up, Negan plays the old kid game, eenie meanie minie mo, changing from person to person, with the camera showing all of the original crew. Hated this as well. Then, when he finally and mercifully picks someone, they decided to not show the viewer who he picked. They have teased a big name death all season long, and when they finally get to the scene where Negan picks someone, all we see is a fading image of Negan and his bat, Lucille. We have no idea who he may have beaten to death.

Screw you "The Walking Dead" for doing this.

This is a cop out and a slap in the face to the viewer. This show has never done this before, but this season, and last season for that case, has been all about bull shit teasing. This is so maddening. They can't promise the viewer something all season long, then not deliver. If I did something like that to my kids, promised them something, but then not deliver, I would be viewed as a mean parent. Why do shows and show writers think they can continue to do this? What gives them the right? It is the worst kind of cop out that a show can do. The people heavily involved with this show have been clearly persuaded by the uproar over the rumors of Daryl's impending death from the internet. It was rumored all season long that Daryl would be the big time character that would die, then when he got shot last week, rabid fans of the show took to the internet to openly complain that they shouldn't kill him, going as far as to start a petition. So, I think all this gave the writers a tough decision and they chose a tease ending instead of just doing what they had planned all season long. This is exactly what happened last season when they supposedly killed off Glenn, only to reveal in the next episode that he was covered by another guy being eaten by a zombie. That was bull shit and so was last nights finale. As I wrote last week, horrible things are supposed to happen in the horrible world that the "Walking Dead" creators have created. They killed off a lot of important people early on, Shane and Rick's wife to name a few, but they seem to be giving in to the mass media and public now. That really pisses me off. I can't think of another show, in the same vain as "The Walking Dead", doing what they have done over the past three or four seasons. It has been one cop out after another.

Besides this terrible excuse for the ending, the rest of this episode was a pile of garbage. I mentioned the opening scene with Carl and his girlfriend. That was dumb. All the Morgan and Carol stuff was pointless. I didn't care about the guy trying to make Carol suffer. I didn't care about Morgan finding a horse. I didn't care about Carol leaving Morgan's care. I just flat out didn't care about anything the two of them did or said to each other. It was stupid. I didn't care about Negan's crew showing up everywhere Rick's crew went. I didn't care about the preacher. I absolutely hated the "hero's" sendoff they gave to the guy with the mullet, I can't remember his name. I just didn't really care about anything that happened or about anyone in this finale, most of all being Negan. We were told all season long that he would be the "best villain ever on TV". He was going to be like no one we had seen on basic cable before. He was supposed to be great. Well, we got 15 minutes with him that seemed at times rushed, but then, at other times, very slow. He was a very uneven, very boring character. As I said before, I hated the monologue and he didn't scare or fill me with any tension whatsoever. The people most involved with the show built this character up way too much and I felt that he didn't deliver at all. Some of that is the writers fault and some is Morgan's fault. There's all kinds of blame to throw around.

In my article last week, and at the beginning of this post, I told the readers that this finale was going to be my decision maker as to if I was going to continue watching "The Walking Dead" and I can equivocally and without hesitation say that I will not be watching this show anymore. I loathed this finale and I do not care to continue watching. I had hopes that they could return to past glory, but they continued with the terrible and boring writing and stupid teaser endings that they have hung on to for the last four years. I feel like a weight is off my shoulders now that I'm done watching this show. I don't have "homework" on Sunday night anymore. This finale was terrible in every sense of the word and they lost one viewer last night. Good riddance to what has become bad rubbish.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. With his new found free time on Sunday nights, he wants to catch up on recent pop music. The guests on last week's X Millennial Man Podcast have some ideas. Like Ty's ideas? Follow him on twitter @tykulik.

The Greatest American Band Debate: What is Hip and Cool is Always Changing

So, I never really thought I was getting old until very recently. Now, I'm not old by any means. I'm 33 and I'll turn 34 near the end of 2016. But, working with younger kids has made me feel kind of old. I will reference players that I assume everyone knows, even if that everyone includes children that were born in 2010. I made a reference to Shaquille O'Neal and Shawn Kemp during basketball season, and the kids, especially the 5 and 6 year olds stared at me blankly. I didn't realize they have no idea who those guys are and Shaq is a sure fire hall of famer. But, the younger players only know of LeBron James and Steph Curry. At least most know who Michael Jordan is, even if it only means they know about his sneakers, they at least know the name.

But, sports aside, I am getting pretty old when it comes to pop music and music played on the radio. I recently sat down with my 12 and 9 year old nieces, you'll hear them on the podcast tomorrow, and the people they were telling me about, I maybe knew 1/3 or even a 1/4 of their names. I looked at them as blankly as my young athletes looked at me. I consider myself a pretty hip and knowledgeable person when it comes to music. But, with that being said, I do not care for pretty much all of modern pop music. There's a few people I enjoy. I like Hozier, I've written about Alabama Shakes and I'm a humongous Black Keys fan, but I was also told by my nieces that those aren't really pop bands and musicians. Their music is more rock they said.

This was the exact moment when I felt old.

This must have been what my parents felt like when I was listening to Puff Daddy and Mase and I told them that their music was old and stuffy and uncool. I finally understood what they said to me back then. I would get older one day, and what I like will not be popular anymore, if it ever was. I thought they were crazy, but they were right, as they always have been. My nieces threw some bands and singers at me and they may as well have been speaking a foreign language. As I said, they will name all these people on the podcast, but I still don't remember the names. I know of people like Taylor Swift, Maroon 5 and One Direction, which the 9 year old rants about, but those people weren't even really on their radar anymore. They've already moved on from these bands and found new singers and bands to adore.

While this makes me feel old, I also feel like this is a big problem with modern pop music. No one sticks around that long anymore. Sure, some will have two or even three hits, but the majority are new versions of "one hit wonders". There's so many bands and singers that have one hit song, but they never do anything after that. At least nothing that's played on the radio. This doesn't make them bad singers or bad bands, it just means they capitalize on one song and on a very young fan base who's musical taste isn't fully developed yet. This is not meant to be a slight, I just said I listened to Puff Daddy and Mase, but then I grew up and, in my opinion, I got way better taste in music.

I also listened to what my dad said and listened to the music he lent me the older and more mature I became. My dad introduced me to Bob Marley, Bob Dylan, The Beatles and Robert Johnson, among many, many others. This makes me hopeful that my nieces parents will do the same. Their dad is my oldest brother and he and I have similar taste in music. I hope he does what our dad did for me, but I also know that he plays good music, like Radiohead and TV on the Radio in their house, so the girls are being exposed to good music, they just don't recognize it yet, just like I didn't when my father was playing good music in the house.

I know they will come around at some point, with urging from their parents, but it was equally fascinating and upsetting at their knowledge of modern pop music. They both really do listen to everything they can, that's great and very fascinating. They devour as much pop music as they can. It's awesome that young kids still listen to so much music, even if it's stuff I don't care for. But, it's also upsetting because this is the first time that I have truly felt old. I just had no idea of what they were talking about at times and I was that old man berating young kids and their music these days. I feel like I will try and listen to some of the stuff they mentioned, but I know I won't like most of it, even before I listen to it. Modern pop is just not for me, but it has its many fans and its many fans are very young.

Both my nieces give some wonderful insight and they make me happy because they truly do love music. Music makes everyone happy and there is something for everyone. You will get old and young kids music will sound weird to you, but just think of how you felt when you were a kid and your folks wanted to listen to their music. It took me 33 years, but what I thought would never happen happened. I felt old, but it's not that bad. That's what's supposed to happen. As we get older things change and change can be odd and weird, but you will always have your thing and your music. That will never change.

I also would like to thank my nieces for talking to me and trying to open my mind to new music. It didn't work, but they put out an excellent effort. Listen to the podcast tomorrow because it's was a delight to record and I know everyone, be they 80 or 8, will really enjoy the two conversations I had with my two nieces. They were funny, insightful and a lot of fun to chat with, even though they made me feel old.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. Like Grandpa Simpson, Ty was once cool, but what was cool to Ty just changed, and now it is scary. Listen to the X Millennial Man Podcast tomorrow to hear the tale, and make sure you follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

We Need to Talk About Superman

I don't want to know how he feels about leaping tall buildings, I just want to watch the man fly

A few nights ago I saw Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice and left the theater kind of frustrated. I did not hate the movie like the gang of obsolete film critics so desired, I actually thought the movie was mostly enjoyable. What was so frustrating was the way actor Henry Cavill and director Zack Snyder treated the Man of Steel. There was no humor, very little humility, and no awe to the last son of Krypton. These problems were in Man of Steel and they were present once again in Batman v Superman (I will not keep writing the full title, you know what movie I am talking about). Once I took a few days to think about the movie, and tell my closest friends all about it, I started to realize that Cavill and Snyder were not ruining my love for a big screen Superman, the actual Man of Steel is what is wrong.

I adore Superman. He is far and away my favorite comic book hero. As a member of Generation X I grew up with the Christopher Reeve Superman movies. I even remember seeing the third and fourth films, and not hating film forever (they are horrible movies, do not see them). I was willing to give anything Superman a pass. By the time the "Death of Superman" comic series came out I was too old to be buying comics, but I bought those stories. I watched Lois and Clark: The New Adventures of Superman and played the horrid N 64 game. While many of my peers were moving on to Buffy the Vampire Slayer, I was watching Smallville.  In more recent years I have started to seek out Superman comics again. I am very fond of graphic novels like Red Son, Kingdom Come, and All Star Superman. Anything related to Superman and I was interested. I was especially interested in any movies that would feature the boy in blue with a red cape.

In 2006, almost twenty years after Superman IV: The Quest for Peace, we finally got a new big screen adventure for the Man of Steel. Superman Returns hit the theaters a year after Christopher Nolan and Christian Bale redeemed the film version of the Dark Knight with Batman Begins. Many people, myself included, were hoping that director Bryan Singer and actor Brandon Routh could bring the big blue boyscout into the 21st century. Unfortunately Superman Returns was a fairly boring rehash of the Richard Donner / Christopher Reeve vision for the last son of Krypton. The only new power given to the Man of Steel was the ability to be a deadbeat dad to a very confused child. Superman Returns was not considered a critical or box office success. The 20th century version of Kal-El was not ready for 21st century audiences.

In order to create a Superman for the modern movie goer, Warner Brothers tapped The Dark Knight Trilogy's Christopher Nolan to produce and Watchmen's Zack Snyder to direct the latest reboot. Relative unknown Henry Cavill was tasked with bringing to life a modern look at Clark Kent / Superman. Man of Steel opened in the summer of 2013 to tepid reviews and fairly good box office. Many of the critics disliked the movie because of it's lack of humor and the overall darkness that surrounds one of America's earliest comic book heroes. The final destructive battle between Superman, General Zod, and the other Kryptonians is often held up as the biggest failure to Man of Steel. How many people died in Metropolis? Why did Superman not take Zod to the moon and fight? Why did Superman kill Zod? I was part of the chorus of people asking these questions. I was blaming Nolan, Snyder, and Cavill for smearing the good name of my favorite superhero.

This brings me back to Batman v Superman and my overall frustration. Christopher Nolan, Zack Snyder, and Henry Cavill once again presented us with a violent and dour Superman. Even Clark Kent is humorless and jerky. I found myself getting bored and annoyed whenever Superman, and his friends like Lois Lane and Perry White were on the screen. Whenever I saw Batman/Bruce Wayne, or Wonder Woman/Diana Prince, or Alfred, I was enjoying a great movie. I personally loved Ben Affleck's performance as a violent and unhinged Dark Knight. Jeremy Irons is now my favorite Alfred ever. The little bit of time Gal Gadot gets as Diana Prince, and the criminally less amount of time she gets as Wonder Woman, are incredible. My only real problems with Batman v Superman were the parts with the Man of Steel. That was frustrating because Superman is my favorite of all the heroes. He is the best of the Super Friends, the greatest of the Justice League, and the comic book hero all others should be judged by. Why can I not get a good Superman on my big screen?

The week before I went out to see Batman v Superman, I watched Man of Steel again. I really enjoyed the movie. It had been a couple of years since I first saw it in the theater, but I feel like time has been good to that movie. The opening scenes on Krypton are awesome. Russell Crowe's Jor-El and Michael Shannon's Zod are great takes on classic characters. The action scenes are easy to follow, and quite exciting. The plot is well executed and the character motivations make perfect sense. I really enjoyed Man of Steel, I just did not care that much for Superman. Then I figured it all out. It is not Bryan Singer, Brandon Routh, Zack Snyder, or Henry Cavill that are ruining Superman. It is the character of Superman that is ruining these movies.

In the comics Superman is all powerful (most of the time) and all good (again most of the time). The Christopher Reeve films focus on Clark Kent and how he fits in a world he barely understands. The best characters in Superman I and II were Clark Kent and Lois Lane. A show like Lois and Clark was more like the 1960's Adam West Batman. The best character was Lois Lane. Smallville focused heavily on the characters around Clark Kent and explored what Superman meant to them. The best character was Lex Luthor. Superman Returns focused on nothing new and interesting and every character was worthless. Do not waste your time on this movie. Many of the great Superman comics looked at what it meant to be the Man of Steel, not who the man actually is. Red Son imagines the last son of Krypton as someone who represents truth, justice, and the Soviet way. The best characters are Lois Lane, Wonder Woman, and Batman. Kingdom Come shows us an older and bitter Superman who is ineffectual because he is out of touch, a Superman who needs his friends. The best characters are Wonder Woman, Batman, and Magog. All Star Superman has the Man of Steel facing imminent death, and it is a joyful and celebratory journey. The best characters are Lois Lane and Lex Luthor. Superman stories work best as a light hearted affair, or one of philosophical ruminations. The greatest stories about Superman focus on the people around him (mostly Lois and Lex), they focus on how Superman effects them personally.

I am not frustrated with the people bringing Superman to the big screen, I am frustrated that these people keep trying to make movies with Superman as a main character. The last son of Krypton is more interesting because of what he is to others, not because of who he is personally. Superman is super because of his unmatched power, and unmatched humanity. That does not make for a very interesting protagonist. Why does Batman distrust someone like Superman? That is an interesting tale. How does Lois Lane deal with being in love and having a relationship with someone like the Man of Steel? That is a story worth telling. How does the existence of Superman effect genius sociopaths like Lex Luthor? I would leap tall buildings to see that particular film. The people who are directly impacted by the Superman have the more interesting stories to tell. They should be the main characters in any film concerning the big blue boyscout.

We need to accept the fact that there will never be a good stand alone Superman movie. The character is too much a part of our cultural identity. When producers like Christopher Nolan, and directors like Zack Snyder try to give the Man of Steel some depth, we end up with a dour film and have a Metropolis leveled. Batman v Superman was a great film when Superman was not the focus. The final climatic battle saw the Man of Steel working with the Dark Knight and Princess Diana of Themyscira, and it was glorious. We could see Superman's awesome powers being complimented by the two other heroes. Superman is my favorite comic book hero ever because of what he means to everyone else. His purity does not need to be tinkered with. DC can own the superhero world by focusing on everyone else. We will always know that Superman is in the back ground to help out. The world of superhero movies is better off with the Man of Steel backing up all of the World's finest.

RD

RD is the Head editor at SeedSing. He will keep seeing Superman movies, and he will keep reading Superman comics, because Superman is the best. Do have a better superhero? Well let us know.

D'Angelo Russell, Nick Young, and the Disaster that is the LA Lakers

Current state of the LA Lakers

I was going to write about one of my favorite TV characters today, but that will take a backseat until next week because I have to talk about this insane LA Lakers story that broke yesterday. If you don't already know, rookie D'Angelo Russell released a recording of him talking to teammate Nick Young, I refuse to call him by his stupid nickname, of Young basically saying that he cheated on his fiancée.

Now, where to start with this whole can of worms? First of all, what Young may or may not have done or been accused of doing or joking about what he said he did, it was wrong. Don't cheat on people that you have promised to spend the rest of your life with. Only scumbags do this and it makes you a terrible, gross person. Cheaters are some of the worst people on Earth. I HATE everything when it comes to cheating. It's gross and causes a distrust you can never earn back, no matter what you do and say.

With that being said, let's get to part two. What D'Angelo Russell did was one hundred percent unethical and is every bit as wrong and as bad as cheating on your significant other. You want to talk about losing trust and faith from people, go out and secretly record a conversation with a friend and a colleague. See how much trust you can get back when you do something this shady. This is so wrong on every level. Why would Russell record this conversation? What did he stand to gain from this? Does he want to be with Young's fiancée? Does he not really like Nick Young and did he think if he leaked this conversation people would think he was a saint and a hero? There are so many questions that I would love to personally ask Russell. Let's look at each of these questions I posed here.

Number one, why record this? The only reason I can really think of, he wants Young off the team because Russell was the number two pick in the last draft and was told that the future of the Lakers would be built around him. Well, I don't know how many free agents the Lakers will attract now, when the "future" of this team is secretly recording contracts. If I was a big time free agent next year, like Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook, Andre Drummond, DeMar DeRozan, Al Horford or Harrison Barnes, I would stay away from the Lakers with a very wide breach. I wouldn't even give them a meeting, as long as Russell is still on that team. Now, these guys most likely wouldn't say stupid shit like Nick Young did, but I wouldn't want to walk into that locker room everyday fearing that someone was secretly recording me. No way.

Question two, what did he think he'd gain from this? This one, I have no idea. I don't know if he thought he'd be looked at like a good guy or a guy that catches cheaters in the act, like that host from the show "Cheaters". Side note, that show is entertaining as hell. This one question, I believe, only Russell knows the real and true answer and he will never reveal it to the public.

Question three, does he want to be with Young's fiancée? I'd say, sure, why not. She is a famous rapper with a lot of money. She is also an attractive young lady. She has a lot going for her, so why wouldn't he want to be with her. But, how many girls that were cheated on go out and be with the guy who told her that her old boyfriend was cheating? As I said before, Russell recording this conversation is as bad as what Young said he did. Why would she trust Russell when her fiancée and his teammates can't even trust him. It's a no win situation.

The fourth question seems, at least to me, was the main reason he released and recorded this conversation. He wants Young off the team. Young is a ball hog that plays no defense and has shown no signs of turning his game or attitude around. He plays with a swagger that he doesn't have. Young thinks he is a star, but he is one of the worst players in the league. He is supposed to be a shooter, but he is not very good at that. He should be in the D League, but he is a starter in the NBA for some unknown reason. Young isn't good, but neither is Russell. One, he's a rookie. Two, he also shows no sign of wanting to play defense or share the ball and he's a point guard. He'd rather drive to score than drive to pass. He is a very, very poor man's version of James Harden. Russell has shown flashes, but he has a very long way to go before he is any kind of threat in the NBA. He is not very good right now and he will need a lot of time to develop his game. He is not on other rookies from his draft class level like Karl Anthony-Towns, Kristaps Porzingis, Devin Booker or even a Trey Lyles. Those guys are so much better and have improved so much more over the year. Russell needs a lot of work, a lot more than the guys I just mentioned.

All this brings me to my main point and main problem with the current and future state of the NBA. D'Angelo Russell is 20 years old. He is still a kid, but he was given the keys to this historic franchise at way too young an age. He has also been surrounded by the Kobe Bryant retirement circus. How is any young player on that team going to develop when Bryant still wants to be the main star and story of the franchise? It's impossible and that's the way Bryant likes it. He doesn't care how bad or how much of a hole he has put the Lakers in, as long as everyone tells him how much they love and adore him. But, aside from Bryant, the only other players that are any good on this team are Julius Randle, Jordan Clarkson and Larry Nance Jr. Young stinks, as I have mentioned a couple times, Roy Hibbert stinks and is a billion years old, Brandon Bass best days are behind him, Lou Williams doesn't want to be there and hogs the ball too much and the rest of the roster is filled with guys that should be in the D League. And, the front office gave the keys to a lying, sneaky and conniving 20 year old when they drafted Russell number two overall last year. This was a HUGE misstep from a front office that has made misstep after misstep for the past three or four years. The Lakers have been a joke for a couple of years now, but they are becoming a dumpster fire. They seem to be worse off than the much maligned and much ripped apart 76ers right now. If I were a big time player, I'd rather go to the 76ers than the Lakers right now. At least on the 76ers I know my teammates won't be secretly recording me. If I were a player in the upcoming draft, I would hope and pray that the Lakers passed on me. I can't think of a worse situation for a player like Buddy Hield or Ben Simmons than to be drafted by the Lakers and have to be on the same team as D'Angelo Russell.

If I've said it once on this site, I've said it one thousand times, don't draft teenagers to be your franchise player. Teenagers and early 20 year olds do stupid shit like secretly recording conversations with their teammates because they think they can gain something from it. The whole NBA is guilty of this new trend of drafting based on potential, but with potential comes childish behavior. Like I said before, if I were a big time free agent I'd be very wary of signing with the Lakers this summer because I would not trust or want to play with Russell. He has lost any credibility that he had, if he had any at all. These established players don't want or need to worry about what a child does and this story will make it very tough for the Lakers to become relevant again. No big named free agents will sign there because of this and, as long as Russell is still there, it will be tough for the Lakers to compete again. I don't buy his "apology" that he gave yesterday, and when you get me siding with Nick Young, you've clearly done something horribly wrong and horribly shady. I'm not a Lakers fan and this story makes it that much easier for me to dislike this team. They are interrible, big time hole that may take years for them to dig out of. They stink and their players are shady people.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. He will be very happy when Kobe and is 9% shooting nights are gone from the NBA. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

The Greatest American Band Debate: The Moldy Peaches

For the greatest American band debate today, I'm going to nominate a band that is way off the realm from almost any band I've written about to date. You could call this band genre-less or you could say that they span many, many different genres of music. They play folk, rock, metal, ballads and they even rap on a few songs here and there. They also only put out one official album. They had LP's and EP's, but they only truly released one record in their short run. Now, I absolutely adore this band and they were also the first band that I heard that made me think, professional music can be easily done, if you know how to manipulate equipment the right way. They also did everything themselves. They recorded, produced, wrote and released everything on their own dime, to the best of my knowledge. This band will not be a popular pick for some, but as I said, I adore this group and I'd be remiss if I didn't recognize how influential they were and how they gave me true and real hope of becoming a professional musician. The band that I speak of is the Moldy Peaches.

I LOVE the Moldy Peaches. I first heard them when I was a teenager and my love has only grown from there, and they only have one real album. I cannot stress that fact enough. I don't know how they crept in my mind and stayed there for so long with such little material, but dammit, they have stuck around. I still listen to their self titled album in my car to this day. Sure, they released live and rare stuff that only hardcore fans of the band like myself own, but their self titled is the only real commercial record they have. And it is great. They have had as many as 11 unofficial members in the band, including Toby Goodshank, who I saw recently and he is great, but the Moldy Peaches is primarily, and most importantly, all about Kimya Dawson and Adam Green.

Everyone by now knows of Kimya Dawson. She is a folk singer that did all of the original music for the movie "Juno". She kind of blew up after that soundtrack and movie were released. It was well deserved because she has a unique voice, can play decent guitar and writes poignant, beautiful and silly songs. She has continued her musical career post Moldy Peaches very well. She tours and records new stuff to this day, but I will always love the Moldy Peaches stuff the most.

Adam Green may not be as well known as Kimya. Yes, he still plays and records, but he hasn't gotten the acclaim that his former girlfriend and bandmate has achieved. This is partly his doing and partly the industry's doing. He's very talented, but he is also heavily involved with drugs and art and making weird short films that make no sense. He does art with Macauly Caulkin. In fact, they have had a show and boutique of their drawings and paintings and they are very, very bizarre. Green has also played music with a lot of people including Ben Kweller, Binki Shapiro and Har Mar Superstar. He is a much better musician than artist or filmmaker, in my opinion. He, much like Dawson, knows how to write and craft sweet, but very silly and very weird songs. And, also much like Dawson, I enjoy his Moldy Peaches stuff the most. I have seen him live, and we discussed the show on a previous podcast, but, that show was weird and he walked off stage after playing wrong chords and singing wrong words. But, while I enjoyed the majority of his show, before he walked off stage, this was were I decided to buy not only his solo album, but the Moldy Peaches album.

So, this wacky and wild show was my gateway to one of my favorite bands. I went home the next day, listened to Green's solo album first, enjoyed it, then listened to the Moldy Peaches record and immediately adored it. It played on repeat in my car stereo and apartment for the next two or three months straight. Friends and family would come over and be very confused with what I was listening to, then that confusion would turn to, typical Ty, listening to some weird folk music. Everyone, with my brothers Seth and our editor RD being the lone exceptions, blew off this weird band I was suddenly enamored with. That didn't stop me. I listened to this record so much, I knew all the words to all the songs within a week. I love every song on this record. There are some great tracks like "Lucky Number Nine", "Nothing Came Out", "Downloading Porn With Davo", "Steak for Chicken", "Anyone Else But You", "Little Bunny Foo Foo", "Who's Got the Crack" and "Lazy Confessions". In my mind, these are all classics. These songs span all kinds of genres of music and they do it quite well, considering that they seem to be recording on either a tape recorder or an old school eight track recorder. I love that. "Lucky Number Nine" is a great, folksy opener to the album. It's very simplistic in it's skeleton, it's just drums, guitar and bass. But, Kimya Dawson's vocals are very good and Green's backing vocals are great. It's an awesome song. "Nothing Came Out" is also a very slow folk song, but it's also dirty and silly. Quintessential Moldy Peaches. "Downloading Porn With Davo" is raunchy, pop punk, silly and awesome. I'm not a big fan of pop punk music, but the Moldy Peaches do it extremely well. "Steak for Chicken" is so weird and absurd, but the music is classic rock and roll, with Green playing some really good, really underrated guitar. It's like Andy Kaufman wrote a song and the Moldy Peaches recorded it. It's a perfect marriage. "Anyone Else But You" is probably their most famous and sweetest song. You may think you don't know it, but you do. It's the song that Michael Cera and Ellen Page sing to each other at the end of "Juno". The song shows love from both the man and woman's perspective, but the woman is more aggressive and the man is a bit of a whipping boy. I absolutely adore this song. This song should be played at every wedding everywhere. It's wonderful. "Little Bunny Foo Foo", the old traditional kid song, is turned into a punk rock song, with Dawson yell singing the vocals by the end. I love it. "Who's Got the Crack" is everything that is great about Moldy Peaches. They sing slow and fast. They pay their instruments slow and fast. And the song is one of the most absurd and one of the dirtiest songs I've ever heard. It's incredibly vulgar and weird, but it is also tremendous. "Lazy Confessions" is a return to slower folk music and I absolutely love Dawson's vocals on this song. The whole album is great, but these particular songs are my favorites.

I love how weird and how primitive the Moldy Peaches were. Both Green and Dawson are still kind of primitive in their solo stuff, but nothing compares to what they did in the Moldy Peaches. Dawson has achieved more success, which isn't surprising, but I'm kind of shocked that Green isn't more famous. Anyway, I love the Moldy Peaches and I could not continue with this greatest American band debate without mentioning them. Don't listen to them with your kids, but listen by yourself and I can almost guarantee that after three or four listens, you will get what I'm saying and you will become a fan.

Did I mention that I love the Moldy Peaches.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. Do you have a greatest american band nominee? Tell us all about it. While you think of your favorite band, follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

Will "The Walking Dead" get Back to Being Great?

"The Walking Dead" has been exciting as watch this paint peel.

This Sunday, AMC will have a 90 minute "The Walking Dead" season finale. Some big things are supposed to happen in this finale we've been told. Some big name character will die, we will get to meet Negan finally and the group will be left in some kind of disarray. This seems to happen every finale, at least in the past three finales, with "The Walking Dead". Sometimes it hits, like when Beth was accidentally killed by that crazy cop at that hospital two finales ago, but it also misses. Case and point, I don't even remember how last season ended. I think Daryl may have lost his crossbow, but I honestly cannot remember anything else. I could also be wrong about Daryl as well.

For a show that started so incredibly strong, these past three seasons have been very dull and, quite frankly, boring. Yes, I'm still watching, as is most of the country, but it's staring to feel like homework and I'm beginning to not enjoy it so much anymore. They came out of the gates on fire. That opening scene in the series premiere, where Rick wakes up in an abandon hospital, and realizes something is not right in the world, is absolutely incredible. It only grew from there in the first season. The show was great, with great scenes, but it wasn't just a zombie show, it also dealt with the survivors. The show asked and tried to answer questions that included, how do we survive in this kind of world, and do we really want to survive in a world like this? I didn't want to watch this how at first, but I'm very happy my wife convinced me and I was immediately hooked. I couldn't wait for what they'd do next.

Then, in either season two or three, they found a farm and that's when the show started to turn. Yes, it was still very good and there was some excellent episodes, but when they went looking for Carol's young daughter, those specific episodes, it became very tedious. I thought, this is just a small part and they will get through this boring stuff very soon and, at first, they did. The stuff in the jail was great, Morgan returning was great, they seemed to have righted the ship. But, in the coming season, they found Alexandria.

Now, not to be this guy, but I'm totally going to be this guy, when they found Alexandria in the graphic novel, that's when it went from good to great, but the TV show just couldn't seem to find the right footing. Where the graphic novel still focused on the question of how to survive and live in this world, if that was even a good thing, the show decided it was time to start making up love stories and talk about the people to the point of tedium. They tried so hard to give Rick a relationship with some lady, who's husband was an abusive alcoholic, that I couldn't have cared less about. She also had some weirdo son that Carol befriended, I couldn't have cared less about that as well. They did too much of the point-counter point talking that worked well for them early on, but they had established a new world, and the talking made for very long and very boring episodes. I wasn't even really all that moved by the lady who ran Alexandria husband died in the finale. Spoiler alert, he was killed by Rick's new love interests crazy husband, in a fit of rage trying to fight Rick, then, with the "blessing" of the "mayor", Rick brutally murdered that man. I didn't care about any of that. The best thing about that finale was Morgan walking in right after Rick shot this guy. But, we had to wait an entire off season before we got to see anything from Morgan again. If that specific finale was supposed to make me feel something, all it did was make me angry. I didn't care about Rick and his new girlfriend and I didn't care about the original crew's plan to take over Alexandria. All I wanted, and they teased it all season, was to see Morgan, and all we got was that final shot. That was a bummer.

Then, last season happened. That last season was incredibly boring. I literally didn't care about anything that happened. I watched the season while I played on my phone, or wrote for this site. It was on, but I was half in and half out. I didn't care that Maggie was pregnant. I didn't care about the "Wolves". I didn't care that Carl had some new, weird girlfriend. I didn't care about Rick's girlfriends weird son and his relationship with Carol. I didn't care that Carol was becoming some badass that acted like a soccer mom. I did care that they barely used Michonne last season. She is awesome and when they used her, it was to be Rick's police partner. She had no huge story line or anything that important happen to her. She is the best one on the show and she was criminally under used during that season. I was ready to give up on the show after that uneventful finale I mentioned earlier, but I figured I'd give it one last shot. This show was great at one point and I thought they could do it again. I told my wife that the season premiere would be my gauge if I was going to continue or not.

Well, the premiere was very good. They got back to their roots. They focused on the story telling with the original crew. They had some awesome fight scenes. They made me care again. I was back on board. But, the second episode was pretty boring and pretty uneventful. The rest of this season has been wildly inconsistent. They've had some great episodes, but they've also had some duds. It's been very up and down. Some good stuff, the humongous fight scene in Alexandria was great, Rick finally has a cool girlfriend in Michonne, Michonne is being used more, a scene between Maggie and a guy from another town involving a trade for goods and services and meeting Negan's crew. Some bad and boring, Abraham and Rosita breaking up, the under utilization of Morgan, Rick going completely off the deep end, the character of Jesus and Carol's change of heart back to being a loner and all of the sudden a god fearing person. I just can't get my finger on what they are trying to do. In last week's episode, another spoiler alert, it ended with a gunshot in Daryl's direction and the shooter saying, "it will be okay". Some were outraged because they assumed that Daryl is dead. First of all, Daryl was never in the novel, so who cares if he is gone. And second of all, if they do kill him off, they can bring him back, just like they did, in super cheap fashion, with Glenn last season. I don't get the upheaval. People are supposed to die in a show like this. That's what happens. They also said a big name character would die. Someone important is not going to be in the upcoming season. Deal with it. We will finally get to meet Negan in Sunday's finale as well. I'm mixed on this, because I want to meet him, but I'm also wary of all the writers and showrunners saying that "he will be the best villain on TV ever". Don't say things like this, let the viewer decide. That's what they did so well early on, but now they feel that they have to sell everything and that scares me.

So, yes, I will watch all 90 minutes of the finale and I hope that it's worth it. If not, I will most likely give up on this show. It started so well, but it's been very hit or miss for the last four seasons and it's becoming tough to care and watch and pay attention every week. Hopefully they do something big and regain my full attention, but I don't think that will happen. Hopefully Negan is a great, once in a lifetime villain, but I wish the people involved weren't pushing him on me so much. I want "The Walking Dead" to be great again, but I fear it's time is up. We'll see this Sunday.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. In case of a zombie outbreak, Ty will hole up at Chesterfield Mall. Make sure the chopper is on time. Before the apocolypse you should follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

Oklahoma's Buddy Hield has Earned the Top Pick in the NBA Draft

This is the number Buddy Hield has worked for

I've done enough previews and predictions recently about the men's tournament and I was on and off with my predictions. The Big 12 and the ACC both made me look stupid. Syracuse made us all look dumb. Gonzaga really crapped the bed. Kansas blew their most recent, best shot at a title. And on and on and on. But, we have our final four of Villanova, UNC, Syracuse and Oklahoma. Today though, I'm not going to do a prediction, I'm going to talk about one player that has looked absolutely incredible and why he should be the number one overall pick in the upcoming draft. That player is Oklahoma's Buddy Hield.

I love everything that this kid has done throughout this whole tournament. I'm not an Oklahoma fan, but I'm sure as hell a Buddy Hield fan. In an era of "one and done", I couldn't be more happy that a senior, who came back to school to better his game and himself, is dominating this tournament. In fact, if you look at the final four, most of the teams important players are all upperclassmen. That's awesome. But, the best upper classmen, by a very wide margin, has been Hield. He simply cannot be stopped on the offensive end of the court. Just look back at his 8 threes and 37 point performance this past weekend against Oregon. Everything he did, be it getting open, driving to the basket, cutting to the basket, moving without the ball to get open, everything was exceptional. He looked like a man among boys, and Oregon has an older team. He played a wonderful game against Oregon. Heild also came up huge against VCU. He had a slow first half, but without him in the second half, Oklahoma would not have made the final four. He wasn't shooting well from the outside, so he drove to the basket more to score, but he also drove to pass. He did what was needed to help his team win that game. Then, when his shots started to fall, it was over for VCU. He was outstanding, especially in the second half of that game. When they played Texas A&M in the round of 32, he took total advantage of a young, inexperienced team. He scored when he wanted, he passed when he wanted and they won with ease. He was easily the smartest player on the court for, not only that game, but all of their games. And in their first round game, against CSU Bakersfield, he scored the most nonchalant 20 plus point game I'd seen. At one point, he had 4 or 5 points, I looked up ten minutes later and he had already surpassed 20 points and he did it with relative ease. He toyed with CSU Bakersfield.

Now Buddy Hield will he get to go up against a pretty good Villanova team. The Wildcats play good defense and they just beat a team that Oklahoma could not beat in Kansas. Now, Oklahoma did not beat KU this year, but Buddy Hield went off all three times they played. Nothing compared to the first showdown, the double overtime, 40 plus point performance he put up, but he still played pretty great all 3 times against a very good team. I'm very curious to see how he comes out against Villanova, but I can almost guarantee, he will get 20 plus points. This kid is just a flat out scorer.

Now, before I continue to go on about Buddy Hield's offense, he plays formidable defense, but no one knows that because his offensive prowess is phenomenal. But, he can more than hold his own on defense. He made a great block in the VCU game, perfectly timing his jump and swatting an easy layup. He is a good defender. But, he is a once in a lifetime scorer. This kid fills it up and then some. He also does well against top competition. I mentioned the KU games earlier, but he put up big games against Texas, Texas A&M and LSU among many others. He scored against everyone, no matter how they defended them.

This, among many other reasons is why I think Buddy Hield should be the number one overall pick in the draft. First of all, it's so stupid that the league has gone towards this "one and done" culture, drafting based on potential, rather than what they've shown over four years. The GM and owners all want teenagers that they can mold. But, what about guys like Tim Duncan, Shaquille O'Neal, Draymond Green and Steph Curry. All these guys spent, at least, 3 years in college and they are all great pros. In Hield's matchup against LSU, and the preconceived number one pick, Ben Simmons, Hield absolutely torched him, and he looked like the best player on the floor by a wide margin. Hield led his team to a victory, and when things got close, Hield was the one that came up big and scored the big baskets when they were needed. Hield was in control of that game and never looked flustered. Simmons, he was scared to shoot at the end of that game. He looked intimidated by Hield and his confidence. Hield looked light years ahead of Simmons, but it won't matter come draft time.

The very sad thing about this draft, Hield has had to play lights out all year just to be considered a possible lottery pick. When you look at guys "big boards" or "top draft prospects", it's filled with unproven talent like Ben Simmons, Brandon Ingram, Skal Labiessere, Jamal Murray, Amile Jefferson, Damantos Sabaonis and on and on. Buddy Hield has finally made his way into the top 20, but why isn't he number one? He has clearly proven that he is the best player in men's college basketball, but to the "experts" that talk about the draft, his name almost never comes up. What the hell? Why aren't Hield or Perry Ellis or Denzel Valentine on the top of draft boards? All three have had very successful careers that span four years of college. They are all more ready to play in the NBA than any of these 19 year old kids. I don't care what Bill Simmons or Chad Ford has to say, I'd much rather have a 22 year old that has proven himself than a 19 year old that has only 20 or 30 games under their belt. They've gotten better against better competition and have very much improved their overall games. If I were the 76ers or the Lakers or the Nets, I'd take Buddy Hield in a heart beat before I'd take Ben Simmons, especially if I wanted to win sooner, rather than later. He can help turn a team around in his first season because he has a lot more experience than a teenager and he has been through harder and tougher times. These teenagers have never been told no or been criticized by a coach because they are prized recruits and you only get them for one year, so they have to treat them with kid gloves. Buddy Hield had to go through rough patches with his team and coach, making him a much tougher and a much better prepared player than a spoiled five star, blue chip recruit.

Take a look at last years draft. Some of the "one and done" players are decent, Karl Anthony-Towns and Justise Winslow come to mind, but some of the others still need four or five more years before they even sniff an all star team. Guys like D'Angelo Russell, Jahlil Okafor and Tyus Jones could have all benefited from, at the very least, one more year of college basketball. Basically, for me, I prefer players that have experience and maturity. They make for very good NBA players much quicker than a 19 or 20 year old does. Just look at recent 3 or four year college guys like Ray Macallum and Damien Lillard. They are the two main cogs to a Trailblazers team fighting for a playoff spot when they shouldn't be even close to a playoff bound team. Then, look at the 76ers, a team that only drafts based on potential. They are historically bad because the majority of their team is immature and has very little experience. They can't or don't know how to compete with grown men in a grown man sport. So yeah, if I had the number one pick in the 2016 draft, I wouldn't even flinch. I'd grab Buddy Hield and I'd be happy and comfortable to know that my team will be better much sooner since I have a more seasoned college player that has been through thick and thin and knows how to handle himself as opposed to a teenager that has never been told no. Experience is so much more important than potential, especially in basketball.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. If any NBA scouts are looking for an early thirties well seasoned rec league player, Ty is available to help your team. Make sure you are one of Ty's followers on twitter @tykulik.

Duke Basketball Learns Bad Sportsmanship from the Top

Even the real Ducks were laughing at Duke last night

So, I was watching the Duke-Oregon game last night, and much to my delight, Oregon was pulling away late and they ended up winning by 14 points. It was glorious on so many levels. It was great for a Duke hater, such as myself, to see them get beat by double digits. It was great to see that punk ass Grayson Allen have a miserable shooting performance, and overall bad game. It was great to see that another one of these teams led by "one and done" players get ousted by an older, more experienced team. And it was great to see that dip shit Coach K sit and grimace as his young team was getting their asses beat. The only positive for them was the play of Brandon Ingram, but I even found joy watching him try to do everything and missing shots and getting his shots blocked. This game couldn't have gone any better for me, as I was hate watching this game. I don't care about Oregon either way, but I HATE everything about the Duke basketball program. Anytime they lose, that's a win for me.

What happened at the end of the game made me even happier and showed me Duke and Coach K's real personality. They know how to act like winners, but they sure as hell don't know how to take a loss. You have to be as gracious in a loss as you are in a win, but Duke basketball is the epitome of a sore loser. So, what happened, at the end of the game, Grayson Allen was moping and dribbling hard because he was upset at the outcome. Totally understandable. I've been on the side of a loss more than once or twice in a basketball game in my life and it really stinks. But, when the Oregon guard, I believe his last name is Brooks, went to give Allen a "hug" and say good game, Grayson Allen, the whiny, bitchy little baby showed up. He pushed Brooks off of him and went and whined to his coach that the Oregon guard was a sore winner. This, coming from one of the dirtiest players in men's college basketball. This coming from the same kid that intentionally trips players on opposing teams. Also, people say he was tripped by an Oregon player last night, he was not, he slipped making a move, then tried to make it look like a trip. Go back and watch the game, the defender's foot was nowhere near Allen's feet. Not even close. He lost his footing, then tried to cover it up, like a douchebag. Allen was also seen trash talking earlier in the game when he made a block. Yeah, you blocked one shot, good for you. But, where were you when Oregon was dunking all over you? Or where were you when Oregon was making three after three on you? That's right, you were playing non existent defense and their guys were destroying you on offense all night. You were a liability Grayson Allen.

Now after the game and the hug and push off, did the mighty Coach K confront his player and tell him that he needs to conduct himself in a proper manner? That's what a responsible and respectable coach should do, right? You have to discipline your own players when they act out and make a spectacle of themselves, correct? Well, Coach K did quite the opposite. He decided, in the line to shake hands after the game, it was his responsibility to confront this player that was just trying to say good game to Grayson Allen. He grabbed him and gave him a lecture about winning with class. He told him that what he did was wrong and classless. He said that his players would never do something like that had they won the game.

I say, SCREW YOU COACH K, YOU SUPREME ASSHOLE. You are the worst when it comes to everything. Sure, you are a legendary coach, but I didn't realize that you felt the responsibility to tell one of Dana Altman's players how to act. This kid does not go to Duke and has no ties with your program, so why are you lecturing him? What gives you that right? This is the exact definition of a sore loser, and it was on full display from a Hall of fame coach last night. If I was Dana Altman, I'd be absolutely livid with what coach K did last night. Imagine if the shoe was on the other foot and Altman did this to one of Duke's players, had Duke won. Major networks like ESPN, Bleacher Report, SI, ESPNU, all of them would have been crushing Altman. But, when it's the mighty Coach K, they all brush it off. What a crock.

Plus. for Coach K to have the gall to give this kid a lesson on winning with class, I mean, come on. He has coached some world class sore losers like Christian Laettner, Bobby Hurley, JJ Redick and now, Grayson Allen. The list of punk ass, whiny little brats that he has coached could go on for miles and miles. Did he ever lecture these kids in a situation where it could be seen by everyone, absolutely not. He has been too busy heaping praise on their "tenacity" and "will to win". This one little act showed me pretty much everything I needed to reaffirm my hatred and displeasure with Duke and, more importantly, Coach K. Grayson Allen is a brat, this has been well established by me on the site, but he is a child, and he isn't even close to being the best player on the team, that's Brandon Ingram. Allen definitely deserves some blame for his actions last night, but Coach K deserves to be roasted by, not only me, but every respectable journalist there is because his behavior was childish. If my four year old did something like this, I would have put him in timeout for talking out of place. Coach K had no right telling another coaches player what he thinks and how he should conduct himself. This was a low class move by a very, very low class coach. I don't care how many titles, games or gold medals you have won, because you acted like a world class asshole last night. You showed all of us Duke haters who you really are and you gave us even more ammo to attack your character.

I have something to say to Coach K, you stink and I hope Duke never wins another title while you still are the coach there. You over stepped your bounds last night and I hope you realize that what you did was childish and wrong. Screw you Duke and screw you Coach K. I'm so glad you got your asses beat by Oregon last night. It was a glorious hate watch.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man podcast. The chaos of the tournament has been wothit just for Ty to see Michigan State and Duke both lose in spectacular fashion. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

LeBron Keeps Himself from Being One of the Greatest Players of All Time

How can LeBron be unhappy in Cleveland?

I was reading stories on Bleacher Report and ESPN and SI.com yesterday, to make myself angry I'm sure, and I came across one where LeBron James said that he hopes one day in the future, he gets to play on a team with Dwayne Wade, Chris Paul and Carmelo Anthony. He said he wants to play with his friends and he feels that this ultra super team could be created with him taking a significant pay cut. He also seems to believe that they could play together for one or two years and win a ring or two. Then, I was watching "PTI", as I do everyday, and Kornheiser and Wilbon brought up this same topic and they had very differing ideas. Wilbon seems to think that this is totally okay and had no problem with it. Kornheiser was the total opposite. He said that LeBron is always looking for a better situation than he is currently in. He said that LeBron is never happy with his current team and he is always looking to pair with a super star or two.

I couldn't agree with Kornheiser more.

I know that Wilbon can't fully tell the whole story because he is, for the most part, a basketball writer and he has built relationships with these guys, but he is also, notoriously, very biased towards teams and players he likes personally. He won't say a bad word about Derrick Rose, Jahlil Okafor, anyone from Chicago really, and he won't talk bad about the Cubs, Blackhawks or Bulls, no matter how good or bad they are. He is a very, very biased journalist, and that shouldn't be how he carries himself in his profession. Kornheiser is also biased for any team from Washington, but at least he has the guts to call out super star players.

I totally agree with Tony Kornheider about LeBron and this current story. Why would he say something like this right before the playoffs? Each team has about 12 regular season games left and while he should be preparing to lead his team to the finals again, he is opining to play basketball with his friends. Also, since he returned to Cleveland two years ago, they have let him do whatever he wants to do. He wanted them to trade Anthony Bennett and Andrew Wiggins so he could play with Kevin Love. The front office obliged. He "wrote" some phony coming home letter, trying to win back the fans that burned his jersey when he first left. The front office and Sports Illustrated obliged. When he complained about Kyrie Irving not passing enough last year, he went out and passed up every shot to "prove" that he was the teams true point guard and then bad mouthed Kyrie Irving on Twitter the next day. The front office didn't say a word. When they made the finals last year, he couldn't say anything that wasn't glowing about Tristan Thompson, basically spitting in Kevin Love's face. The front office did nothing about this. This season, they started out 30-11, but LeBron was upset with David Blatt and he wanted his buddy, Tyronn Lue, to be the head coach. Within a week of LeBron openly complaining to the media, Blatt was fired. Once again, the front office obliged their star player. I remind you, Blatt helped lead this team to the finals last year and had a 30-11 record when he was let go. Lue hasn't really set the coaching world on fire, going something like 14-8 or 15-7. Those aren't Red Auerbach numbers by any standard. LeBron still goes out and openly complains to the media about Love and Irving daily. He claims it's hard to play with Love "clogging" the lane. Bull shit. Love just sits at the three point line while LeBron dribbles for 20 seconds and shoots. He complains that Irving isn't a true point guard. Sure, he doesn't pass all that much, but he is a phenomenal ball handler and a great scorer. Also, LeBron, you wanted these two guys. You told the front office to keep Irving and to go out and trade for Love. It was your idea. He then had the front office get rid of Anderson Varejo, sign Tristan Thompson to a max contract, trade for Channing Frye, re up Matthew Dellavedova and not worry about the draft. But, none of that was good enough for him because they didn't sign Joe Johnson after the Nets bought him out. He really wanted Joe Johnson, and he let the media know it.

So, in less than two years, he has gotten his way, like a spoiled rotten little brat, but he still isn't happy with what he has created. I'm not the first, and I won't be the last to say it, but he is the star player, coach and GM of the Cavs. When they do all this, at his beck and call, it makes him the guy pulling all the strings. Don't get me wrong, I think LeBron is one of the greatest players of all time. He is a champion, multiple MVP winner and will go down as one of the best of all time. But, since his return to Cleveland, I'm beginning to believe that he is a whiner, a prima donna and possibly, the most uncoachable player of all time. Then, this story comes out. Sure, it sounds nice, but I guarantee, within two months, he would be unhappy with his role on this super team. He would clash with Chris Paul because they are both ball dominant players. They both need the ball in their hands at crucial moments. Paul is also very hard headed and would definitely fight with LeBron. He is very old, in basketball terms, right now too. Carmelo Anthony is a ball hog and has proven that he can't come up in clutch moments. This would drive James nuts. I also think the amount of iso ball and threes that Anthony takes would take it's toll on James very, very quick. He has already played with Wade, and they won two championships, but he was old during their last trip to the finals as teammates, and he would be extremely old if they team up again. Wade is also only good for about 50 quality games nowadays, so just imagine how few games he would be able to give his all in a couple of years. This all sounds good and well to James now, but I know he would get frustrated and fed up quicker than he has in his return to Cleveland.

What it all sums up to, I'm sick of James complaining and blaming everyone else for the faults of the team he has personally created. Quit opining for stars and deal with the hand you picked. Sorry that the Warriors and Spurs are historically good and one thousand times better than your Cavs team, but these are the guys you wanted. And stop saying this stuff to the media because it opens you up for criticism, which you don't handle well. Stop bitching and moaning like a baby and be happy that you get to play a game for a living and you make millions upon millions of dollars doing it. You also already have two rings. Charles Barkley would trade his whole career away for one of those rings. Also, Michael Jordan never openly complained about his teammates and he also won with guys like Steve Kerr, Bill Wennington and Luc Longley. Jordan would never want to make a super team just to win a title, he would will lower level pros up to his level and win with them. This complaining and whining is why you will never be as good as Jordan. This current story also proves why you will never be at Jordan's level. You are a great, great player, but you are also a world class whiner and you always think the grass is greener elsewhere. It's very off putting.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. His basketball knowledge was acquired through years of rec league trash talk. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

Thank You Phife Dawg

I was going to write about one of my favorite bands today for the greatest American band debate but, I woke up and received a text from a friend of mine that Phife from A Tribe Called Quest had passed away. I know, I wrote a very extensive piece on ATCQ as one of the greatest American bands, but Phife's passing deserves a piece solely based on him.

I love ATCQ, but I really loved Phife. As I wrote in that blog, he was, by far, my favorite member of the group. I loved his delivery. The way he rhymed was ferocious and fiery. He could spit so fast, but you could also understand what he was saying. He was a killer on some of their most popular and famous songs. Go back and listen to him on tracks like "Stir it Up", "Stressed Out", "Can I Kick It", "Buggin Out", I mean, the list could go on and on. He had a delivery like no one else then or now in rap music. He's said that he didn't like his voice at first because it sounded so high pitched, but I loved it then and I loved it when it got gruffer. He was the best in one of the best groups of all time. Sure, he and Q Tip fought all the time, but who wouldn't get angry with someone that they've been friends with since they were toddlers. In the excellent Michael Rappaport documentary, "Beats, Rhymes and Life", I found myself siding with Phife over Q Tip in every argument that they had. He seemed like the more reasonable one of the two.

It's a shame that he's gone too because he never really did any solo work. He released one solo album in the early 2000's that's okay. But, he was working with renowned DJ, J Dilla, on a new album. That would have been tremendous. I knew that he had a lot of health issues. He had to get a new kidney awhile back and he was a severe diabetic. His diabetes was so bad, he'd miss shows and appearances because he couldn't function well enough to perform. He said himself that sugar was a drug to him. He couldn't get enough no matter how much he had. He even talked about things like Dr Pepper in his lyrics, so you know he loved sugar.

All this being said though, I thought he had so much more time left to live. He said in a recent interview that he was "in a good spot" and was "feeling pretty good". I took these words to heart. Being a fan, I just wanted him to be okay. I wanted to hear more music from him. I wanted ATCQ to get back together and perform some more live shows. I assumed all this was on the table. But, then I woke up to that text. Naturally, I had to check for myself and Google and Twitter confirmed my fears that he was gone. This is a real travesty. It's not on level of what happened yesterday in Brussels, but for the music world, this stinks. Phife will be missed deeply by myself and countless others. He was a true emcee and one of the best of all time.

Go back and read my piece on them, I heap the most praise on Phife, and it's not even close. I know I will be listening to ATCQ the rest of the day. It will make me sad, but also happy that, at the very least, I have five albums to hear Phife's great and timeless work. RIP Phife Dawg, you were a true legend and will go down as such in the future. I miss you already.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing. Follow him on twitter @tykulik.

The Movie of 2016 Will be "Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping"

The Popcorn is buttered. Now we wait

I know that there are some big movies coming out this summer. First of all, this week we have "Batman VS Superman: Dawn of Justice", which I'm not excited about at all. Go back and listen to the podcast from last week for my thoughts and complaints about it. Some big time superhero/action movies I am looking forward to come out this summer as well. Movies like "X-Men: Apocalypse" or "Captain America: Civil War". There's even some comedies that I am pumped for like "Ghostbusters" and "Keanu". But, I saw a trailer for a movie last week and it immediately stomped my excitement for any of those movies.

This movie is the one that I am most looking forward to seeing, and that's just based on a 2 minute trailer. The movie is the new Lonely Island movie, "Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping" (trailer NSFW). I am so very excited to see this movie. I love all the superhero, action and other comedies I mentioned, but none of them come remotely close to my excitement for "Popstar". The first trailer was released last week, as I said before, and it is riotous.

Andy Samberg plays the main character that is a Justin Bieber clone that calls himself Conner4Real. First things first, I love me some Andy Samberg. He was one of my favorite all time cast members while on "SNL". I absolutely adore the movie "Hot Rod", which I will touch on later. He was excellent in smaller roles in movies like "I Love You Man" and "The To Do List". He was awesome in the HBO tennis movie "7 Days in Hell", which I wrote about a long time ago. And he's so great on "Brooklyn 99". He has made so much stuff that I enjoy, even when he shows up in a crappy movie like "Grown Ups 2", I find his one scene the best scene in a terrible movie. Needless to say, I'm a huge Andy Samberg fan.

The other two members of the Lonely Island, Jorma Taccone and Akiva Schaffer, I am also a big fan of. The three of them make some hilarious parody hip hop as the Lonely Island, I own all three of their records. Go listen to songs like "I'm On a Boat", "Like A Boss", "Turtleneck and Chain", basically any music they put out. It's not only funny, but it is some damn good hip hop music. It's a parody, but it is good. The three of them are like a goofier version of the Beastie Boys, just not as talented as the Beastie Boys. But, I really like all the other stuff that Taccone and Schaffer have had their hands on. I enjoyed all the stuff they wrote and directed while a part of the writing and directing team over at "SNL". Go back and check out YouTube videos of Taccone dancing during bands rehearsals that were going to be on "SNL" that week. It's pretty hilarious. Taccone is also great in the smaller roles he takes on. He was excellent as Cupid on an episode of "Man Seeking Woman". He was great on his three episodes of "Parks and Rec" as the CEO of the internet company that takes over Pawnee in the future. He's funny and weird as Spazz on "The League". Basically, he falls in the same territory as Samberg for me. I like pretty much everything he is in and he makes it funnier and better when he shows up.

Akiva Schaffer is less in front of the camera. He is more of a writer and a director, but I pretty much like everything he does as well. I kind of enjoyed "The Watch", which he directed and whenever he directed an episode of "SNL", I could tell it was his because it was extra funny. He happens to be my favorite rapper of the three of them too. But, nothing compares to Shaeffer directing for "Hot Rod". I love, love, love this movie. It is so weird and goofy and absurd and hilarious, all at the same time. Schaffer directed this movie to perfection. He had all the actors, be it Samberg, Taccone, Danny McBride, Bill Hader, Ian McShane and even Isla Fisher, act as bizarre and as absurd as they could and they knock it out of the park. I will defend "Hot Rod" until the day I die. It is one of my all time favorite movies. It is so odd, but so damn good.

All this though, brings me back to "Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping". Schaffer directs and acts in the movie and Taccone and Samberg, more so Samberg, star in the movie. As I said before, Samberg is playing a version of Justin Bieber, but he plays it hilariously. The trailer is only two minutes, but I was able to glean from it that Connor4Real is a spoiled star and he's been that way since he was a baby. There's a scene in the trailer that shows him drumming like a pro, but he is a baby that can't even keep his head up straight. It is so funny. Connor is also a brat with an entourage that never says anything bad to him, or tell him no. He has so many people working for him and they are all yes men and women. Another scene shows him shooting baskets, he takes a no look shot, misses terribly, but everyone there tells him he made it. Again, hilarious. Joan Cusack plays his over bearing "momager" and she seems like she will be great in her role. Sarah Silverman is his publicist, and she looks super funny as well.

But, it is all about the Lonely Island guys. Samberg plays the title role and he is going to nail it. I just know he will because he is a good actor and he is a hilarious actor and this role is perfect for his comedy and his acting. I'm so excited to see him totally nail the role. Schaffer and Taccone are also super funny in the trailer as his childhood friends and future bandmates. Taccone plays his DJ who is just coasting on his friends fame. He too is a yes man and he also follows and does anything Connor tells him to do. He is the quintessential friend that is just happy to be involved and will do anything to stay friends with his ultra famous childhood friend. Schaffer plays a character that is in the boyband when they are younger, but he then moves to the woods and becomes Connor's songwriter. The scene where they show him in his woodshop, wearing all kinds of Carhartt gear, with a humongous beard, holding a birdhouse, is so funny. The screen flashes the words, "And his songwriter", and that's the next thing we see. It cracks me up every time.

As I'm sure you gathered by now, I am so, so pumped to see this movie. This has replaced all the other movies that I was excited to see. I'm still excited to see them, but not as excited as I am about "Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping". This has all the makings of a classic for me. It has over the top, silly humor. It will be raunchy and it stars three of my favorite comic actors, writers and directors working in Hollywood right now. I cannot wait for this movie and I will see it opening day, no matter what the critical reviews are. The critics hated "Hot Rod", but I love that movie and I saw it twice in the theaters. So, "Popstar" will be seen at least once by me in the theaters.

That's a promise I can, and will, easily fulfill.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. He likes to dance in his underwear while he watches Saturday Night Live, sadly we have no recording of his moves. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

Predicting the Rest of an Unpredictable Men's College Basketball Tournament

The current state of everyone's brackets

As I've done with my NBA preview, my NFL preview and my college basketball preview, I'm going to look back at what was right and wrong since the first weekend of the madness that is March is through. You can go back and read my five things I thought would happen before the tournament started and you can listen to our mini episode of the podcast to hear my initial thoughts.

Right out of the gate, I was way off about Michigan State, as was almost everyone else. They really laid an incredible egg against Middle Tennessee State. I don't want to hear about other reporters saying that MTSU was wrongly seeded and that they are a really good team either. Sure, they won 20 plus games, but just look at what happened against a very mediocre Syracuse team yesterday. Michigan State would have dismantled that same Syracuse team had they taken care of business on Friday, but they didn't. MSU got out played, out hustled and out coached by a very inferior team. This has to be the biggest upset in the history of the tournament. Sure, NC State had no business beating Houston when they had Hakeem Olajuwon and Clyde Drexler and Norfolk State beat a much better Missouri team in 2012, but this win by MTSU was, at least in my lifetime, the biggest upset ever. MSU didn't even choke away this game, MTSU just straight up beat them, never trailing. I assumed that MSU's size and experience would make, not only this game a walk through, but that they'd coast to the title. I was way wrong, but so was pretty much everyone else. MSU blew it and they lose a ton of players to graduation. This was a major shake up that busted millions of brackets all over the country.

Then, there were my thoughts on the ACC that I was way off base on as well. Of the 16 teams remaining, 6 are from the ACC. That's impressive. Miami beat Wichita State with relative ease. Sure, WSU made it close, even taking a one point lead in the second half, but Miami started and finished that game strong and they deserved to win. Notre Dame, on the other hand, has been incredibly luck in their run to the sweet sixteen. They were down 12 at halftime to Michigan, then Michigan went ice cold and they started to make some clutch shots and Michigan still had a chance at the end until Zak Irvin took a terrible three. Also, Michigan wasn't even supposed to make that a game. Then, yesterday against Stephen F Austin, they needed a miracle tip in with one second left. SFA should have won that game and all they needed to do was box a guy out and they'd still be in it. I still don't trust Notre Dame. Syracuse got lucky with their draw. They were bigger than Dayton, then they got to play MTSU. They don't impress me at all. Duke was down at halftime against UNC Wilmington and it took the refs giving them every single call in the second half for them to win in round one. Then, they come out and shot a ridiculous percentage from three against Yale, push their lead all the way up to 27 at one point in the second half, then let Yale get back in it, getting as close as four points. Duke can't rebound and they will lose soon. Virginia has looked good. They play a slower style of basketball and they play suffocating defense. They've had an easy draw, but they have looked pretty good in their two wins. They could make final four noise if they keep this play up.

The team I was hardest on, UNC, has looked really, really good. They look like the team that was the preseason number one pick and a lot of people's pick to win the title. They cruised in round one and then they absolutely throttled Providence in round two. They look scary good right now, especially since Marcus Paige is making shots. I regret not having more respect for them. They could get to the title game if they keep it up.

My two play in 11 seeds really let me down. Michigan looked sloppy against Tulsa, but they won. Then, they came out on fire in the first half against Notre Dame, but fizzled in the second half. They should have won, but they couldn't finish, that was their problem all year long. Wichita State looked really good against Vanderbilt in their play in win, but they came out completely flat and ice cold against Miami. They put themselves in too big a hole and they could never get out of it. I was let down by both these teams. Northern Iowa also had a huge choke last night when they let Texas A&M make up a 12 point deficit in 40 seconds. I said, on the podcast, I thought they could make a run, but they really blew it last night. That was probably the biggest choke job I've ever witnessed. At least Gonzaga, another double digit seed I liked, has looked pretty good. They've won both their games handily and now they get to face an inferior Syracuse team for a shot at the elite eight.

The Big 12 has been a let down for me. I thought that they'd represent 75 percent of the final four. Sure, Kansas and Oklahoma are still there and they look good too. KU has had no problem with their first two games and they should coast to the final four. And Oklahoma, while VCU put a scare in them, made in on the heels of Buddy Hield. He has to be the player of the year now after MSU and Denzel Valentine's shocking and embarrassing loss. Without Hield yesterday, Oklahoma doesn't win that game. He is a scoring machine. But, the Baylor's and West Virginia's of the world really blew it. Baylor got outplayed by Yale. Baylor was bigger, but Yale out rebounded them. Side note, if you want to see something truly great, go back and watch the Baylor postgame conference when a reporter asked a Baylor player how they got out rebounded by Yale. This player's response is priceless and hilarious. Baylor would have crushed Duke had they taken care of business, but now we will never know. West Virginia looked bad in their opener. SFA did anything it wanted at anytime against WVU. I thought WVU had final four potential, but has Bob Huggins ever really done anything of note since leaving Cincinnati except for blowing winnable games. That game was a joke and WVU looked pretty terrible.

I was also wrong about a Big Ten team winning the title. I thought it would be MSU in a cake walk. I was wrong and so was the majority of everyone else. The Big Ten still has three teams left, but who really believes Maryland or Wisconsin will win the title? I know in my preseason preview I picked Maryland, but that was a straight up guess and after watching them this past weekend, there is no way they are a championship level team. And Wisconsin got very lucky in both games. They were ice cold against Pitt, but Pitt was even colder. Then, they hit a buzzer beater to beat Xavier. That play was beautiful, but it should have never happened. That charge that was called on Xavier was one of the worst calls in a basketball game at any level. That ref wanted to determine the outcome of the game and that should never be the case. But, that terrible call let us witness one of the best in bounds plays of all time. There is no way either of Maryland or Wisconsin wins the title. Indiana, on the other hand, I do believe in. I had them picked to beat Kentucky and they looked decent doing it. They made big plays when they needed to and got stops when they needed to. They are the Big Ten's best shot at a title this year. 

Where we stand now, we have 6 ACC teams, 3 Big Ten Teams, 3 Big 12 teams, 1 Big East team, 1 SEC team, 1 Pac 12 team and 1 mid major. The way I see it now, the Big 12 is not getting all three in, but they have an excellent shot at 2. Iowa State will probably lose to Virginia later this week, KU should have no problem with Maryland, then they will get the winner of Miami-Villanova, which should be another cake walk for them. Oklahoma gets a very young and inexperienced Texas A&M team they should beat, then the winner of Oregon, the most overrated one seed of all time perhaps, and Duke, who I have ZERO trust in. They can win their next two games with ease. Unfortunately for the Big Ten, Maryland will probably lose to KU, Wisconsin can and should beat Notre Dame, but then they get the winner of Indiana-UNC who would crush them, and that leaves Indiana, and they have to face a red hot UNC team right now and I just don't see them beating UNC. The ACC's best shot, of the 6 remaining teams they have left, is either UNC or Virginia. I think Miami will have it's hands full with Villanova. Duke will probably lose to Oregon. Syracuse is going to get destroyed by Gonzaga. But, Virginia should beat Iowa State, setting up a showdown with Gonzaga, in what would be a great game. And UNC, if they beat Indiana, will coast over either Notre Dame or Wisconsin. UNC has the easiest and most likely path for an ACC team. Sorry Pac 12, Oregon will not represent your conference in the final four. St, Joe's should have won last night, but either Duke or the winner of Texas A&M-Oklahoma will end your season. Same thing for the SEC. A&M is too young and too inexperienced and they also got incredibly lucky to still be in this tournament, their season will end soon enough. Villanova will be its usual choking self soon, probably against Miami. They will find a way to lose because that is what they do. Which leaves me with Gonzaga. I love Gonzaga this year and they have been very impressive thus far. They will beat Syracuse which will most likely set them up against Virginia. I think they can easily win that game and go to the final four. They are playing top notch basketball at the right time.

So, if I have to pick a final four with the 16 remaining teams, I will go with KU in the South, Oklahoma in the West, UNC in the East and Gonzaga in the Midwest. I think from those four teams, KU and UNC will play for the title and I think KU wins. That's how I see it now. I will admit that this tournament has been fun to watch. While it may not always be appealing to your eyes, at least there's been buzzer beaters and upsets galore after the first weekend. Hopefully, that continues throughout the rest of this wacky and wild tournament.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man podcast. He takes gret solace in the fact that not only his, but every realistic person out there, has a busted bracket. It is madness if you are not following Ty on twitter @tykulik.

Batman v. Batman v. Batman. A Millennial View on the Dark Knight

Just hanging out waiting for a new Batman movie

With the new Batman and Superman movie coming out soon, which I'm not looking forward to, I went back and watched almost all the "Batman" movies and I have to say, at least for my generation, the Christopher Nolan trilogy is, hands down, the best.

Don't get me wrong, I love the two that Tim Burton did. He created a visual of Gotham City that was 100 percent what I imagined it looked like. Michael Keaton as Batman was absolutely phenomenal. Those movies were great. Keaton was awesome, Jack Nicholson as the Joker was great, Christopher Walken was good, Michelle Pffeifer was very good looking and played Catwoman very well and Danny DeVito's portrayal as the Penguin still scares me to this day. Those were all very good, but they were before my time. I didn't see them until I was in my teens, so I didn't understand the relevance and revival of the "superhero" movie. Tim Burton brought the superhero movie back from the dead after the disaster that was "Superman 3" and "Superman 4".

The first Batman movie I saw, and was excited to see, in the theaters was "Batman Forever". I was excited about this, not for Val Kilmer as Batman, but the fact that Jim Carrey was cast as the Riddler. I also thought that Tommy Lee Jones as Two Face was a weird choice that could be either good or bad, no in between. Needless to say, "Batman Forever" was a disappointment. I did not enjoy anything about this movie. Kilmer was very blah as Batman, Tommy Lee Jones was downright terrible as Two Face and Jim Carrey just couldn't find the common ground between the campiness of the TV show, starring Adam West, which I really enjoy, and the seriousness of the real world that Batman lives in. He tried, but he failed. I was pretty upset that I wasted my parents money and my friends time by making them see this movie with me.

Then, Joel Schumacher made the god awful "Batman and Robin". This movie has been beaten to death, and rightfully so. "Batman and Robin" is an abomination. It is one of the worst movies that has ever been made. Everyone knows it and everyone agrees. It's a pile of garbage. Every decision from the director, writers, producers and actors is baffling and terrible. It is so, so bad. But, the one good thing that came out of the trash heap that is "Batman and Robin", they had to completely scrap whatever Schumacher had planned next and basically start all over again.

They waited a pretty long time, but in 2005, Christopher Nolan released part one of his trilogy, "Batman Begins". This movie came out around the same time that "Star Wars Episode Three" came out. I think readers and listeners of the site and podcast know which movie I was more excited about. But, I didn't really know who Christopher Nolan was. I had heard of him and had seen the movie "Memento", which is great, but I was a bit concerned how he would handle a superhero movie. I also didn't know all that much about Christian Bale. I hadn't really heard of him at that point. I knew he was in "American Psycho" and that he was in the very underrated "The Machinist", but other than that, I couldn't have picked him out of a lineup. So, I was cautious with my optimism about the new direction. Then, I saw "Batman Begins" and it totally revived the Caped Crusader from the dead. This was a very good, well written and well acted movie. What I enjoyed most about the new direction was the fact that Nolan didn't focus on making a superhero movie, instead, he made a crime drama that happened to have a superhero as the main character. Nolan also brought to life how psychotic and how weird Batman truly is. I mean, as a child he saw his parents murdered and then he grows up to become a vigilante that dresses like a bat. That's pretty insane. Nolan and Bale brought that to life. Nolan's version of Gotham was darker than Burton's. He took what Tim Burton created and improved on in dramatically, in my opinion. I love Burton's vision, and he created this world, but Nolan made it better. I also really enjoyed that Nolan didn't feel that he had to have a big time villain as the bad guy in part one of his trilogy. Sure, Ra's Al-Ghul was there, but Scarecrow is the bad guy in this movie and he is terrifying. The scenes where he makes people go crazy are very scary and when Batman turns the tables and infects Scarecrow with craziness, one of the coolest, yet scariest scenes in a movie that I've ever seen. Nalon also set up that in the next movie the Joker would be there. Also, before I get to the next movie, Gary Oldman is awesome as Commissioner Gordon. Great casting choice.

A couple of years later, we got "The Dark Knight". This movie is a masterpiece, a la "The Godfather" or "Goodfellas" or even a movie like "Heat". Nolan took the crime drama and used it so perfectly in "The Dark Knight". This is such a wonderful, classic movie that my son will look back on like I look back on "The Godfather". Bale is, once again, tremendous as Batman. He exudes the psychotic, yet classy side of Bruce Wayne so well. He toes that line to perfection. But, the absolute star of this movie is Heath Ledger as the Joker. I mean, he won an Oscar for this role. How many "superhero" movies can claim that they have an Oscar winner? Ledger's portrayal of the Joker is timeless. He is crazy and ruthless and solely focused on his goal of destroying Gotham City. Scenes like when he makes a "pencil disappear", classic. Or, when the movie opens and there's the big bank robbery and bad guys are killing other bad guys, awesome. The scene where he slides down a mountain of cash, pours gasoline all over it and burns it, wonderful. His cronies look at him with a bewildered look and he plainly and straight faced tells them, that he doesn't care about money, he only cares about destruction, is so great. But, the best scene is when he is in the jail, talking to Batman telling him that they are the same person, I mean, the speech he gives is incredible and the viewer finds themselves agreeing with the Joker. Batman is crazy and it took a speech from an equally crazy villain for all of us to realize it. Batman and the Joker are the same person, with the only difference being that Batman claims to fight for justice, where the Joker just wants destruction. It is such a bummer, on so many levels, that Heath Ledger passed away, because his version of the Joker could have appeared in the third installment of the franchise. He was never killed in "The Dark Knight", in fact, Batman refuses to kill him while holding over a ledge, instead pulling him back and making him suffer the consequence of what he's done and what he has created. "The Dark Knight" is legendary.

I didn't know how Nolan would follow up his true gem, but I feel he did an excellent job with "The Dark Knight Rises". I know it's hard to follow a masterpiece, just look at "The Godfather Part Three", but Nolan did it right. In "The Dark Knight Rises", we were introduced to the real Bane, not the stupid one in "Batman and Robin". This Bane, played by Tom Hardy, was a well thought out character that had a backstory and everything. The great thing about Bane, he was very similar to the Joker, where they both wanted the same thing, destruction of Gotham, but they both tell Batman that they are the same person. Batman is just as crazy as the Joker and Bane and it took Nolan telling us this in two movies and I love it. Bane is such a cool bad guy. This movie had another great opening scene, where Bane and his cronies hijack a plane mid air, is so cool. I was immediately on board for the next 2 and a half hours. I couldn't wait to see where they took this movie and how they ended it. It was so good the rest of the way. Anne Hathaway was very good as Catwoman. Gary Oldman was crushing it again as Commissioner Gordon. Joseph Gordon Levitt was very good as John Blake, AKA Robin. Marion Coittilard was good as the villain Talia Al-Ghul. but, no one was as good as Tom Hardy as Bane. He was the absolute star of this movie. And, much like "The Dark Knight", I found myself siding with the bad guy, Bane, in this movie. I actually wanted him to "take control" and to crush Gotham City. I really enjoyed "The Dark Knight Rises", no, it's not as good as "The Dark Knight", but it's damn close.

Christopher Nolan revived Batman from the dead. Christian Bale did his part, but it was Nolan's directing and writing that really made these three movies great and made them classics for my generation, the millennials. I will watch these movies for the rest of my life, and I will enjoy more each time. Nolan made relatable bad guys that people have rightful reasons to root for and I love that. These three particular Batman movies are classics and will be talked about for the rest of time when superhero and just flat out movies are talked about. They are the best.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. He will tell you all about on tomorrow's installment of the X Millennial Man Podcast, make sure you lend your ears. Read more from Ty on his twitter @tykulik.

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.