View gallery

If I may analyze the Sixers' selection of UCLA guard Jrue Holiday from the perspective of a college basketball observer instead of a pro basketball observer...

We don't see a lot of Pac-10 basketball on the East Coast. This is in part because the conference's games are on Fox Sports Net, whose telecasts CSN doesn't always pick up, and in part because the big games are often at 10 p.m. our time.

So let's look at Holiday's stats from this past season, his only one in college basketball. Holiday averaged 8.5 points, 3.7 assists, 3.8 rebounds and 1.6 steals in an average of 27.1 mintues per game. He shot 45.0 percent from the field, 30.7 percent from three-point range and 72.6 percent from the free throw line. Collison played in 35 games this past season, starting in 34.

To me, those numbers aren't indicitative of the kind of top talent that we heard Holliday described as when he arrived at Pauley Pavilion - especially the single-digit points per game.

Then I look at this quote from Bob Cooney's live blog of the Draft:

[John] Smallwood says you had to do it, because if he was able to come straight out of high school, he would have been a number one pick. Like I said earlier, he is a guy who gives them a couple of years. He is a project with good skills. [ESPN's Jay] Bilas called him a top-ten talent. Satisfied fans?

And these quotes from Tony DiLeo:

He was one of the guys we liked. We tried to move up a little bit but couldn't, very fortunate cause he dropped to us. He's exactly what we wanted. Bug guard and can play a lot of different combinations. He could be a great fit for our team. He's a very good defender, which is rare for ayoung player. He was the top player in high school coming out.

We interviewed him in Chicago, didn't have him in for a workout because we thought he'd go in the top 10. He told us that he was never jealous of [Darren] Collison at UCLA. That was a situation where he didn't get to develop his point guard sills in his one year there. Don't want to put pressure on him. I think defensively he can come in and play. He can definitely play. We ween't looking at him to come in and make an impact next season, we're looking further ahead of that. We'ere still a work in progress as a team and we still want to do some things. He compared himself to Deron Williams of the Utah Jazz.

Well, I was under the impression that the Sixers needed point guard help right now. Holiday might not have been jealous of Darren Collison, but a lot of people expected to see Holiday put up better numbers than he did regardless of his place on the depth chart.

And in perhaps UCLA's highest-pressure game of the year, the NCAA Tournament second-round matchup against Villanova, Holiday scored only four points on 1-of-6 shooting in 27 minutes. He dished out seven assists, but also committed four turnovers.

If Holiday turns out to be as good as Deron Williams, that will be great. But Williams led Illinois to the national championship game, and in general built a far deeper resumé in college than Holliday has. That kind of experience counts a lot to me, but I know that NBA scouts often look at athleticism and upside more than past accomplishments.

(That's a polite way of saying what I really think about what's been wrong with the NBA for most of this decade.)

It's all well and good that Holliday wants to disprove some of the negative perceptions that people have of him, as he said on ESPN after his name was called. But if it was up to me, I would have chosen a more proven commodity.

Specifically, I would have taken North Carolina's Ty Lawson. When you have the chance to own the straw that stirred the most explosive drink in college basketball over the last three seasons, I don't think you should pass it up.

I don't care if he's only 5-foot-11. He's got fantastic speed, great court vision, and can score from both the lane and the perimeter. He also knows how to run system-based offenses, and Eddie Jordan is a system-based coach.

Granted, it's not the same kind of system Lawson orchestrated at Carolina, but in terms of how Jordan wants the ball to move around, I think Lawson would have handled it quite well.

And I think it's of no small significance that Lawson was taken with the very next pick by Minnesota, even if he was later traded to Denver.

After Lawson, the next three picks were Wake Forest's Jeff Teague, Virginia Commonwealth's Eric Maynor and UCLA's Darren Collison - putting the Holiday pick in even more context.

Personally, and again, I'm writing this as a college basketball observer, I think all of the above guards had better seasons than Holiday. Again, I'm using the experience-over-upside argument, but I also read in the Inquirer that Maynor was considered by scouts to be "NBA-ready."

In particular, I think Lawson and Collison were the best point guards in college basketball over the last few seasons by a considerable margin. Holiday may well have more "upside" than Collison, but Collison was a great controller of tempo and flow of the game when he was on the court.

(Though my opinion of him definitely went down a notch when he criticized Villanova's physicality after the NCAA Tournament game.)

With all that said, what matters most is how the players do on the floor from this point forward. Perhaps Holiday will turn out to be a star, and he'll become the kind of leader the 76ers envision.

But in the present tense, I would feel a lot better had the Sixers drafted Lawson.

What do you think?

One of the nice things about the summer lull in college sports news is that I get to catch up on all the magazines I didn’t have time to read during the spring.

That includes the April issue of Basketball Times, in which Hoop Scoop’s Clark Francis ranked the 50 best head coaches in college basketball. Lists like these are always great for starting conversations, so let’s have at it.

Francis doesn’t say much about his criteria, except that Rick Pitino tops the list “based on the way the Cardinals played this season.” The column was also written before the NCAA Tournament, which might be why Roy Williams came in second.

Mike Krzyzewski is third, Jim Calhoun is fourth and John Calipari is fifth. The top-ranked local coach is Villanova’s Jay Wright, who comes in 22nd. That seems a bit low to me, and I suspect it might to some of you as well.

Coaches also ranked ahead of Wright include Wisconsin’s Bo Ryan, a Chester native, at No. 12, Minnesota’s Tubby Smith at No. 13 and UNLV’s Lon Kruger at No. 18.

The coaches immediately ahead of Wright are Michigan’s John Beilein at No. 19, Gonzaga’s Mark Few at No. 20 and George Mason’s Jim Larranaga at 21. Davidson’s Bob McKillop follows Wright at No. 23, Tennessee’s Bruce Pearl is No. 24 and Georgetown’s John Thompson III at No. 25.

I personally think Kruger, Smith and Larranaga are too high. Kruger has got UNLV back on the winning track, but not anywhere close to where it was under Jerry Tarkanian, and Smith’s greatest successes came when he was at Kentucky. And I like what Larranaga has done a lot, but VCU has been the better team in the CAA since Mason’s Final Four run.

Wright, on the other hand, is ushering Villanova through a sustained period of success, and it looks like that will continue with the incoming recruiting class. I’m sure the rankings would have been different had they been conducted after the NCAA Tournament, but even without that I think Wright deserves more credit than Francis gave him.

Two other local coaches made Francis’ ranking: Temple’s Fran Dunphy at No. 48 and Phil Martelli of St. Joseph’s at No. 50. I think those ratings are fair.

Some other notable names on the list: Maryland’s Gary Williams at No. 26, Notre Dame’s Mike Brey (formerly of Delaware) at No. 36 and Siena’s Fran McCaffery at 46.

I also can’t help noting that now-former USC coach Tim Floyd was ranked No. 29. I think we can safely say that Floyd wouldn’t deserve to be in this list if it was assembled today. We don’t deal with the Pac-10 that much on here, but I think we can agree that we won’t miss him or his recruiting methods all that much.

After ranking the Top 50 coaches, Francis ranked what he called the “Next 50.” He ranked 30 “Coaches in Mid-Career” and 20 “Up-and-Coming Coaches.”

La Salle’s John Giannini made it to No. 25 on the Mid-Career list, and Penn State’s Ed DeChellis was No. 28.

Notable names included Dayton’s Bryan Gregory at No. 5; Rhode Island’s Jim Baron at No. 8; Northwestern’s Bill Carmody (formerly of Princeton) at No. 10; Cincinnati’s Mick Cronin at No. 16; American’s Jeff Jones at No. 19 and Cornell’s Steve Donahue at No. 23.

I’m not sure about Mick Cronin. Maybe he can turn Cincinnati around, but the Bearcats’ 8-10 record in the Big East this season was underwhelming. They also haven’t beaten local rival Xavier since the 2004-05 season.

Anthony Grant, who moved from VCU to Alabama in March, is the at the top of the Up-and-Coming list. Notable names include Marquette’s Buzz Williams at No. 3, Providene’s Keno Davis at No. 5, Oregon State’s Craig Robinson (Barack Obama’s brother-in-law) at No. 11.

Two former St. Joe’s assistants are on that list as well: Mike Rice (now at Robert Morris) at No. 12 and Matt Brady (James Madison) at No. 20.

One name not listed: Drexel's Bruiser Flint. Surprising? I think you can make a case for him to be somewhere in the "Next 50."

But wait, there’s more. Francis also ranked the Top 100 assistant coaches and the Top 50 “Low-to-Mid-Major” assistant coaches.

Notable names on the first list include West Virginia’s Billy Hahn, the former La Salle head coach, at No. 3; now-former Villanova assistant Pat Chambers at No. 31; Rutgers’ Jim Carr at No. 50; Temple’s Dave Duke at No. 60; Penn State’s Kurt Kanaskie at No. 81; Villanova’s Jason Donnelly at No. 83; Geoff Arnold of St. Joe’s at No. 92 and La Salle’s Walt Fuller at No. 96.

Notable names on the second list include Drexel’s Tony Chiles at No. 21; Penn’s John Gallagher at No. 32; Robert Morris’ Andy Toole (who played at Penn) at No. 36; and Delaware’s R.C. Kehoe at No. 37.

Yes, there are a lot of local names on those lists, and we know some better than others.

What do you think of all this, especially the head coach rankings?

Since I work for a mainstream media organization, I figure it makes sense for me to extend my coverage of Blogs with Balls for one more news cycle than some might think the story requires.  It's quite the trend these days, after all.

(Yes, that was sarcasm. I do have to keep getting my paycheck, you know.)

In all honesty, I think the discussion across the sports blogosphere about this past weekend is far from over. There is a lot for us all still to talk about, and while I don't know how much of the conversation will take place on this blog, I'm sure there will be plenty of other venues.

I'd like to take a moment to thank the many of you who've come here for the first time this week as a result of Blogs With Balls. If you haven't read the previous posts I've written about the conference, you'll find them at the bottom of the page.

I hope you'll stick around, and if there's stuff relating to college sports or soccer that you'd like to see on here, please let me know via email or in the comments.

So here's the third interview I did on Saturday, and there's a good reason why I saved it for the end. There's probably no bigger name in the sports blogosphere than Deadspin editor A.J. Daulerio, and it just so happens that he's a native of the Philadelphia area.

Well, maybe it's not so coincidental. Daulerio made a name for himself writing for Philadelphia magazine, which means that he's spent time as both a mainstream journalist and a full-time blogger.

In a week like this, it's not a bad perspective to have.

Question: What does it say that this event is taking place?

Answer: I think you’re finding that blogs are becoming a lot more popular and a lot more legitimate, and people are taking them seriously. It’s no longer just a hobby for people, it’s a kind of lifestyle, and possibly a career, too.

Q. Should mainstream media organizations be reporting on what’s said in the blogosphere?

A. I think you have to pick and choose. Especially after the latest incident with the Midwest Sports Fan guy [and Raul Ibanez], I think he was kind of treated a little unfairly. I understand where some things can get reckless and can take on a life of their own, but I think that was a little self-created too, by you guys.

I think everybody has to have a really good read on what’s quality and what is something that could be potentially damaging.

Q. Given your position in charge of Deadspin, I’ve noticed that a lot of people have come up to you and asked if you could link to their stuff. What’s that like?

* - It happened twice during this interview.

A. I guess it’s expected in some ways. Obviously, we have a lot of traffic that people would like to get sometimes. And that’s part of the deal, really. It just speaks to the success of the site in a lot of ways, I guess, so you can’t really be upset about it.

Q. Do you ever have mainstream media people send you their stuff asking if you could link to it?

A. Absolutely, and I think it’s happening more and more. Especially with the bigger publications. Sports Illustrated is doing it, GQ does it, Esquire does it. They all see the value in terms of taking our audience and getting our eyeballs on their pages.

Q. Do you have any sense from where you are of where the relationship between the mainstream media and the blogs is headed? On both sides, lots of people would admit that there was, at the start, the dynamic of one side versus the other. Now the walls have come down to some degree, and the two sides are sort of living with each other, if not working with each other. Where do you think it’s headed?

A. I think more and more, you’re going to see an intersection between how mainstream and blogs can work together. I think it’s already starting to happen - obviously, you guys have a blogging component to their site.

Everybody’s going to be able to do this and see how this is beneficial to really getting better stories out there and getting some more truth and geting some more opinions out there. It might be at a saturation level, but I think there is some room to grow.

Links to Previous Coverage
- Interview with Chris Lucas of Hugging Harold Reynolds
- Interview with Don Povia of Hugging Harold Reynolds
- My analysis of Blogs With Balls

Here's the second of the three interviews I did at Blogs With Balls. This one is with Chris Lucas, who co-authors Hugging Harold Reynolds with Don Povia. It's pretty long, but it's worth reading all the way through.

You can read my interview with Povia here, and my original post from the conference here.

Question: For you, what are the goals of this event?

Answer: We had goals going into it and our goals sort of changed over time. Initially we thought, let’s just get folks together. Because we have these networks and these names, but we don’t put faces to them. We all are in the same circles, but we know there are ways we could be doing this better. So it’s just a question of getting people in the same room. And then it became a question of getting people in the same larger room, and then we made the room larger and larger.

Then we realized how many people were out there who wanted the same thing, and they were just people we didn’t know. So one of the major goals was, okay, how do get everybody in the same place? And can we do it, and what would it take to do it? We want people to network obviously, but we also want people to come away with an idea of what they want to do next, and not a rehash of what happened. Because people are changing on the internet while people are here now.

So we want to let some great best practices percolate up, and we’re hoping we’re accomplishing that. I’ve talked to a couple people who have ideas now of what they want to do next. Are they trying to find new ways of distributing their content, new people to network with, [or] are they going to scrap what they’re doing and start over. We’ve really got diverse takeaways here.

Q. Is an event like this a means or an end in and of itself?

A. I think you’d have to ask the people who are here. We want it to be a means. But some folks, they just want to see some of these people, and that’s it, mission accomplished. But this is really a means. The Internet is constantly evolving, so what we do here today could be obscure in a month or a year.

We want to do this to promote the networking opportunities, but [also] to promote the quality of what we’re doing. Because there is a lot of quality content out there, and we want to support that. So I consider it a means in that sense because it’s a means of support. People who are discouraged because they aren’t getting the traffic they deserve or want, let’s show you how to do that because you’re putting out great stuff.

Q. What does it say to you when two ESPN SportsCenter anchors (David Amber and Josh Elliott) and a camera crew show up to this thing?

(I was told by Amber that there will be a feature about Blogs With Balls on “Outside the Lines,” though he didn’t give me a specific date.)

A. It’s about time. But at the same time, they’re welcome. Just because you’re late to something doesn’t mean you’re not welcome. The fact is that ESPN’s a huge company, and a lot like the Internet. It used to be, as long as you’re on it - but that was a mistake to begin with.

You need to be involved, and I think you’re seeing that with the blogs. You can’t just have a blog, you need to be involved with the communities that exist and that are developing. And whether you or not try to create those communities, that’s great too, but you need to acknowledge - and in some ways, ESPN provides legitimacy that another blog network couldn’t.

So I think part of the fact that ESPN is here should boost the people who are saying, “Oh, I get that stupid blogger stereotype of just a lonely person.” No, everyone deserves respect for what they do.

Q. One of the panelists in the discussion on the future of sports media talked about how a sports consulting firm does aggregation and research work for SportsCenter’s Blog Buzz segment in addition to working with athletes and coaches. What was your reaction to hearing that?

A. I can’t say I’m surprised or shocked. But at the same time, do I care about how they get it in there initially? Probably not. Again, be here, be involved, and realize how you can fix the way you’re doing it.

At the same time, is the company that’s working with them an objective intermediary? Who knows. But that’s why we’re doing this. The present situation is murky, it’s messy and that can be okay, but at the same time, maybe some folks will come out of this [asking] that same question and maybe that will lead to a change. Hopefully a change for the better.

Q. Given the ability for something to go viral, and given the numbers of people who maybe don't read that blog every day but who might read that one blog post, should bloggers have the license to say whatever they want?

A. Of course. And here’s the thing. You have newspapers that are saying that the reason why blogs aren’t reliable is because of that. It’s speculation, it’s liability, it’s people just mouthing off. That [mainstream media outlets] have whole research departments, we have the resources and education and knowledge and historical perspective to be arbiters of what people are saying.

Is it any different from anybody saying it in a crowded bar? No. The reporter could have heard it in a crowded bar and written it. But because it’s a blogger, we fear that this person has an audience, [and] what if it gets out? That’s not even realistic. The blogger is allowed to ask questions.

And to be perfectly frank, the questioning of [Raul] Ibanez in general - the environment exists. [Albert] Pujols acknowleged it in a Sports Illustrated piece not that long ago. So I didn’t see [the Midwest Sports Fans blog post] as being that controversial, but I think it illustrates the need for this [conference], for sure.

Q. The flip side: Should the mainstream media be employing people who report on what is said on the blogs, knowing that whether or not it is intentionally so, that reporting gives a certain legitimacy to what is being said?

A. I think that’s an interesting question, but I think it goes to a larger issue in reporting. Do you report on what someone says, and that’s it, or do you report what someone says and then debunk it, support it, or criticize, find the validity there or why it’s completely wrong?

We trust newspaper reporters and other mainstream media to judge. That goes for whether it’s a city beat, a sports beat or international affairs. We’ve gotten to this place where everyone reports on what is said, without context. This situation deserves context just as much as a G-8 summit. A lot of people say, let’s call [out] people when they’re off, but if somebody echoes a sentiment that has some truth, that’s worthy of repeating as well. But provide some context.

Q. I guess a follow-up to that would be: A lot of people say the act of making a statement has now become news in and of itself. So the reporting on what is said is considered an act of journalism.

A. And does that sound right to you? It doesn’t have to be that way. That’s something that’s easily corrected by saying, “Somebody said this, here’s why it’s wrong.” And that’s why people go to either your mainstream website or another mainstream website, because they like the objectivity of the reporting that’s done.

It’s reporting, not transcribing. I feel like we’re getting to a point where there seems to be a gray line where there shouldn’t be.

Q. Can the different standards of blogging and “mainstream journalism” be reconciled? I’ve even heard some bloggers say that mainstream reporting is a different kind of act from blogging.

A. That’s probably true. But look at Yahoo! and SBNation. You have an AP article about the Boston Red Sox, and right under it you have a link to OvertheMonster.com, which is a blog. And maybe Yahoo! took a look at SBNation and said their standards are good enough for us, so we can put these next to each other.

But the fact is that you will always have bloggers who decide that whatever the mainstream media does, I’m just going to be opposite. They relish that they can do anything. Then you have some legitimate news organizations who say they want to be more like blogs.

Q. I think I can fairly say that a lot of people in the mainstream media fear that the relationship with blogs is, or at least could become, one of substitution instead of being complementary.

A. I think any relationship that has the word fear in it is never going to be healthy. Give me an example where something based out of fear turns out to be a good situation for both parties. So if that’s the truth, then we’re all in trouble.

Bloggers need mainstream media. They need something to link to. They need content just as much as they need to create it. But at the same time, blogging remains a huge missed opportunity - still. Yahoo! the first to really try this in earnest. But if you incorporate [blogs’] content, especially well-written content, why deny people that?

Q. Who should be the judge of what’s well-written content?

A. I think well-written content shows itself pretty clearly. Now the question is, is it well-written content with foul language in there? Then it becomes an editorial issue for whoever’s writing. If you say, “We want to work with you, but we can’t,” then [the blogger] can make the decision as to either tone it down or to just stay how they are and say, “See you later.”

That just means that a conversation needs to take place, and that’s a healthy thing. Once people start talking, that element of fear that you mentions begins to diminish, I believe. That can’t be 100 percent of the time, but once people start talking, you find that there are real humans on the other side of the phone or e-mail.

But who decides well-written content in the end? Your readership, based on whether they keep coming back.

I said I'd be back today with my interviews from Blogs With Balls, and here I am. I thought I'd be able to fit them all in one post, but I realized there's just too much stuff for that to work.

So I've split them up. The first interview is with Don Povia of Hugging Harold Reynolds. In addition to being one of the organizers of the conference, Povia is the man behind the mask at HHR's Twitter feed.

If you haven't read my report from the conference yet, click here.

Question: What’s the goal of Blogs with Balls?

Answer: The one thing we’ve been really advocating for - and I think there was a perfect storm this week with the Ibanez story - is just opening up the lines of communication and facilitating that conversation. Not only among bloggers and traditional media outlets, but also advertisers, marketers that are looking to dive into new media.

The one thing that we wanted to do from the beginning is put people in one room. Put some faces on people that are blogging and that are folks you see online, and note the fact that these are real people, these are intelligent people, and they’re influential people as well. So really it was putting people in one room and really opening up conversation that was long overdue, specifically in the sports world.

Q. Is this a means or an end, as such?

A. Well, I think it’s ever-evolving. One thing that we talked about is doing this as a series and using it as a resource, because things are so rapidly changing. There’s been a lot of talk about Twitter today - in a year from now, two years from now, we won’t be using Twitter. It will be so out of date. The same thing in a couple months, a couple weeks: who knows what’s going to happen? It’s ever-evolving. So I really think it’s a maze, and this conference and ones in the future are just a platform.

Q. With the Ibanez story, you guys were involved in it, the Inquirer was involved in it. Any blogger, even the mainstream bloggers in a lot of ways, want to get their stuff read by other bloggers. They want to get it picked up and circulated, they want the attention. Do they really want the kind of attention Midwest Sports Fans got?

A. In the aftermath of all that, people were pointing at Jerod [Morris] and saying, “You’re attention-grabbing, I hope you’re happy.” I really don’t think that was the point. I really think it mushroomed into something bigger than it was. I don’t think that was his purpose. If anybody went back and read the original article, I think it’s been terribly misconstrued. I’ve had conversations with John Gonzalez about this and I don’t think [Morris] was seeking the attention, but I think he handled it well with the attention that’s been brought to it and to himself.

Q. On the flip side, should mainstream news organizations have their reporters reporting on what is being said on the blogs?

A. Well, I talked to John and I hope he doesn’t mind me relaying this. He brought up a great point when he said that whether newspapers or any other media source wants to admit it, when people are talking about it, inherently it’s news and it is relevant. So it’s not reporting on every little thing that’s put out there on the blogosphere, but if there’s a conversation going on, why ignore what people are talking about?

Q. Do you think at that this event, given that you have mainstream journalists and bloggers and PR types together, getting all these people to meet face-to-face instead of via Twitter and such can help change attitudes?

A. I think it’s a start. I’m not saying that attitudes are going to change overnight, but going back to the purpose, it’s opening up doors and making introductions. John Gonzalez articulated that well, that this is the direction that things are heading in. If that’s the case, and I believe it is, it only serves to benefit all the parties. It’s a long-overdue conversation and we’re just trying to catch up the process.

Journalists and bloggers. Notice the lack of flying tomatoes.

NEW YORK - Many of you know that in addition to writing about sports, I have a keen interest in social networking and building community online. Those two interests dovetailed yesterday in a way that I think you'll find interesting.

The popular sports blog Hugging Harold Reynolds put together a conference in Manhattan for sports bloggers, mainstream journalists, public relations types and the owners of some of the web's biggest sports fan blogging networks. It was titled Blogs With Balls, and yes, the name works on more than one level.

I was there, and so was my Philly.com colleague Sheil Kapadia of Moving the Chains fame. That wasn't coincidental - we both have a strong interest in finding ways for sports fans, especially in the Philadelphia region, to interact with us and with Philly.com's content.

There was a wide range of topics discussed, from how to monetize blogs to the future of the media to the perennial question of the relationship between bloggers and mainstream journalists.

I'm sure you won't be surprised to hear that there was much discussion of the recent controversy over whether Raul Ibanez is using performance-enhancing drugs. For those of you who did not read the Jerod Morris' blog post on Midwest Sports Fans that started the discussion, here it is.

Much was made of how mainstream media - the Inquirer included - fueled the story. Yet the discussion's tone was impressively civil, even with the copious amount of beer that was consumed by many in the room.

(Though not by me. I had work to do, right?)

While the debate over whether bloggers should be able to say whatever they want on their sites will continue for a while to come, I think three significant themes emerged from yesterday's panels.

First, no matter how many ways we find to converse with each other online, nothing matches being able to talk to someone in real life. Whether at a media conference or a ballpark clubhouse, there is something about a face-to-face conversation that Twitter and Facebook just can't match.

Second, the lines that used to divide blogs and mainstream media have been blurred considerably from where they used to be. I remember going to a conference a few years back on the conflicts between blogs and the mainstream media, and there was a sense that the two sides really were opposed to each other.

Today the mainstream media has found value in blogs - just look at Philly.com's Fan Blogroll or Page 2 of the Inquirer sports section. At the same time, bloggers are acknowledging that their work would be diminished without mainstream journalists' access to players and coaches.

(Definitely read Frank Fitzpatrick's piece in today's Inquirer for more perspective on this.)

Third, you never know when something you say will get linked up on the web and suddenly explode into something bigger than you could have ever imagined.

It doesn't mean that bloggers should necessarily restrain their opinions, but it does mean that you have to make sure you're okay with all of your words reaching a wider audience than you might expect.

A blog post you thought would get read by only 10 people might get linked up on other blogs and all of a sudden you've got 100,000 readers instead. As blogs become ever more popular, their authors are finding out that such wide exposure can be both a blessing and a curse.

(This post by Morris on Saturday is a great example, as he considers the broader ramifications of the language he used in the first post about Ibanez.)

On the whole, though, it was a great day. You can find out much more about what happened at Blogs With Balls' official website, and it's also worth reading the wide range of reactions to the conference on Twitter.

Tomorrow, I'll post interviews with two of the organizers of Blogs With Balls as well as Deadspin editor A.J. Daulerio. All three had interesting things to say about the significance of the event and where things might head from here.

The Inquirer and Daily News have formal announcement of Scottie Reynolds' return to Villanova.

The Daily News also has the details I couldn't provide yesterday on the Philly Classic. St. John's and Brown are in the field, and it looks like there are two slots left.

If you are a Villanova fan, this is good news.

At least, I would think it's good news.

ESPN.com's Dana O'Neil (yes, you might have heard of her) is reporting that Reynolds is "leaning towards" returning to the Wildcats for his senior season.

There's not much more detail in the story, but I would think that's enough to get people talking.

UPDATE: Yep, it got people talking. Within seconds of when this post firsst went up, blog reader and Associated Press local college hoops writer Dan Gelston pointed out his story in which those same words came out of Jay Wright's mouth on Thursday. O'Neil quoted an anonymous source in a story that was posted this afternoon.

Since I'm in no position to contest who said what to whom and when, let's give the benefit of the doubt on whether the quotes were taken from separate interviews.

Since I'm here, I might as well note another story I saw recently: the release of Delaware's non-conference men's basketball schedule.

Usually, the Blue Hens don't draw much hoops attention in the Philadelphia area. But they are playing at Villanova and Penn this coming fall, and opening the season at home against Temple as part of this year's Philly Classic.

That Penn game, according to the Wilmington News-Journal (which reported all of this), will be Nov. 21, a week before the Philly Classic. The Temple game will be Nov. 14 and the Villanova game will be Dec. 23.

Good for Delaware coach Monte Ross to schedule these games. You know he knows the Philadelphia area well from his time at St. Joe's and this will help raise the Hens' profile.

I also can't help noting that Delaware will play at Delaware State, which could be interesting even if the Hornets aren't that good. There is a lot of history between those two schools outside of sports, and on the court they haven't met in Dover since 1999.

In addition to the information about Delaware's schedule The News-Journal piece reveals that Siena and Virginia Tech will join the Blue Hens and Owls in this year's Philly Classic. I have heard some of the other teams involved, but I can't report their names quite yet. Sorry.

Regardles, it looks like this year's Philly Classic field is going to be strong.

Basketball on Broad Street. (John Costello/Staff file photo)

Let me acknowledge up front that I am not all that big a fan of the NBA. I pay some attention to the 76ers and I watch the playoffs when there isn't much else on TV, but I care much more about the college game and generally find it more worthwhile.

Having said that, populist speculation around drafts is a great pastime in this city, so allow me to indulge in a bit of my own. It might even make some sense, too.

From reading the various coverage of Eddie Jordan's introduction as the Sixers' new head coach, especially Dick Jerardi's analysis of the Princeton offense, it seems that the team's need for a quality shooting guard is about to become even greater.

It so happens that one of the better players at that position in the entire country this past season has spent the last four years plying his trade in an arena not very far from the Wachovia Center.

(And one which is also operated by a subsidiary of Comcast-Spectacor, come to think of it.)

Three of those aforementioned years have been spent under the tutelage of a coach who has had quite a bit of success against the Princeton offense and the variations of it that succeeded Pete Carril in Old Nassau.*

So I ask you: wouldn't Dionte Christmas look pretty good in a 76ers jersey?

Now of course, there are complications. The biggest one is that the Sixers only have one pick, the 17th in the first round, and Christmas is currently projected as a second-rounder.

There's also the small matter of needing a point guard if Andre Miller leaves, and the not-unreasonable possibility that Wayne Ellington might also be around when Ed Stefanski goes on the clock. I'm sure the Episcopal Academy grad wouldn't mind a homecoming either.

But let's debate it for the sake of debating. Does Christmas make sense for the Sixers? And assuming the Sixers' pick stays where it is, who should they take?

* Fran Dunphy was 20-15 against Princeton in his 17 seasons at Penn, lasting from 1989 to 2006. The Quakers swept the Tigers in seven of those seasons, while Princeton swept five times. Carril was Princeton's coach until 1996, followed by Bill Carmody until 2000, John Thompson III until 2005 and Joe Scott thereafter.