Like most grey areas, it depends on how you want to look at it. A recent AP report from Palm Springs, Fla., where some of the movers and shakers of the NFL were gathered to chit-chat, has Schwartz making some very interesting statements.
"Schwartz said past awards he's given out while working for the Tennessee Titans and the Lions -- baseball bats or a boxing glove for big hits -- had league approval, because they didn't have any monetary significance".
While it's easy to skim right over that statement with tacit acceptance, stop and consider it. Sure, depending on the quality of bats or boxing gloves, they might range anywhere from maybe 10 bucks to a few hundred, but they're certainly not free. Money is involved somewhere. Where do you want to draw the line?
Schwartz went on to say, "It was part of the game ball program. It wasn't part of anything else".
Careful there, Jimbo, because you're treading on thin ice. Under oath, a shrewd attorney might well grill him as to the difference between 10 bucks worth of merchandise, or a couple thousand in cash, when the objective, and the means to achieve it, are the same. I highly doubt whether a court of law would make much of a distinction between a solid gold bullet, or one made of lead, if one were to shoot somebody.
Schwartz went on. "A recognition system has been in effect for football since pee wee ball. We give out game balls..... A lot of colleges give out stickers on helmets; high schools give out stickers on helmets. There's a big difference between things like that and things like bounties".
Maybe, and maybe not. Schwartz's "testimony" seems ambiguous at best. I dare say in a court of law, Schwartz would likely get blown up on the witness stand for such remarks. The past practice and precedents set not only by him, but others who have engaged in similar activities, while freely admitting rewards have been given out since "pee wee ball" for big hits on an opponent, would certainly seem to suggest it's inherent in the very nature of the sport. And let's not kid ourselves. The NFL didn't become the gorilla in the room of American professional sports due to the footwork of offensive linemen. It's about hard-hitting action.
On that note, the NFL would seem to have some culpability in this matter, as well. They have their own TV station now. And what have they shown on occasion? A "biggest hits" program. A virtual Top Ten count down of a player getting absolutely destroyed on the field of play by an opponent hitting him. And guess what? The NFL gets a helluva lot more than a baseball bat, a boxing glove, a game ball, or a couple thousand bucks off this sort of stuff. Yet the Saints are being hammered for doing the same thing. Do you sense hypocrisy here?
NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell is in a tough spot. On the one hand, if he clamps down too much on violence in a historically violent sport, some fans will become disenchanted and stay away. (It would be like the NHL banning fighting. It might be politically correct, but good luck with how the fans would react). On the other, everything's about image these days, so he tries to placate the bleeding-hearts that think the sky is falling every time one of the players gets "jacked up" -- which was also a segment on an NFL condoned TV program, by the way. Bet we won't see that again any time soon. If Goodell navigates his way out of this mess, maybe he should get a sticker on his gold cuff links -- or something.
Conclusion? This whole thing has been way overblown. Given the current atmosphere of sports-related sex scandals, cheating here, illegal payments there, etc -- the Saints are merely the fall guys in a current hyper-sensitive media environment. Wrong place at the wrong time.
It's the NFL. Every time a guy has the ball, 11 other guys are trying to inflict great bodily harm. It's just the way it is. If you don't like it, then don't watch. Millions of others seem to enjoy it for their own reasons.
But spare me all the outrage over a thousand bucks here and there about some bounty system.
WAY overblown.
Friday, March 30, 2012
Mike Brown, Kobe, and some blond girl
Mike Brown was a bad dude. He whupped the California Kid Uriah Faber twice in mixed martial arts cage fighting. Then along came some guy named Jose Aldo, a Brazilian I think, lurking around at about the same weight, and that guy was, and is, an absolute nightmare. Like club fighters getting into the ring with Mike Tyson in his early days. That kind of nightmare.
Then there's the Mike Brown that is currently the head coach of the LA Lakers. While this Brown no doubt has extensive knowledge of the intricacies of professional basketball, he appears to inspire about the same level of intimidation as Urkel.
Brown became well known for coaching the Cleveland Cavaliers while Lebron James was still there. Then Lebron "took his talents to South Beach", Brown got axed in Cleveland; Phil Jackson, the Zen Master himself, retired as the LA Lakers coach, and alakazam -- Brown's in LA-LA-Land coaching the artists formerly known as "Show Time". Or as many NBA fans outside the glitz circle call them -- $#&@!.
Now he has to deal with Kobe Bryant, arguably the face of the franchise. Bryant certainly thinks he is, and while he's been a terrific player over the years, he's also been very selfish, not only on the court, but off it as well. On the court, sometimes it doesn't matter if Bryant is triple-teamed, which means a couple of his teammates are wide open for a pass; he'll still do a couple of spins, maybe a half-gainer with a double twist, and as he's falling away -- by God -- he's going to try to shoot the damn ball. Off the court, in interviews, Bryant comes across as thinking everything about that franchise runs through him.
Idle thought. I wonder how smug Kobe would be if he woke up and found himself traded to his current coach's former team -- Cleveland. Would that fall into the category of poetic justice? Good luck mansion hunting on the shores of Lake Erie.
Now Mike Brown, for whatever reason, has temporarily removed Kobe from the starting line-up, Perhaps it was for lack of hustle, playing defense, attitude, or maybe an internal problem. Who knows? But when a first year coach decides to bump heads with the star player -- well -- good luck with that Mike. Bad, Bad, Leroy Brown, baddest man in the whole damn town -- you're not. Did I mention Urkel?
Combine all that with fact that the Lakers aren't the class of the west anymore. It's the former Seattle Supersonics, now known as the Oklahoma City Thunder. A few hours ago, they just waltzed into LA and trashed Kobe and company in their own building. The Okies are younger and will get better. This does not bode well for the glitzers in LA. A new dynasty may well be on the horizon.
And then there's that pool-shooting blond girl that wanders into a certain sports bar once in a while. If it wasn't for the hair color, I'd swear she was a clone of Margaret Hamilton. The lady that played the wicked witch of the west in the Wizard of Oz. People that know me also know I have a couple of yorkies that I love very much. Last time that blond girl walked past me, I thought she mumbled something about -- I'll get you my pretty, and your little dogs too. And then she cackled walking away. Yikes. Who IS this woman, and why would she threaten my poor little dogs? What's even scarier is she called me pretty. Obviously, the poor thing is deranged. Next thing you know, she'll be hanging out at airports or something.
I'm thinking maybe she needs to go a couple rounds with Mike Brown. No, not the Urkel basketball coach -- the guy in the octagon. I'd gladly cough up $49.95 to see THAT one on pay-per-view. But I'm not sure who I'd bet on. Years of training and discipline are one thing. Flat out orneriness and attitude are quite another.
Idle thought..... Speaking of clones -- I'm saying point guard James Harden of the above mentioned Okla City Thunder is a younger version of Grady, from Sanford and Son. Check it out, and tell me I'm wrong.....
Then there's the Mike Brown that is currently the head coach of the LA Lakers. While this Brown no doubt has extensive knowledge of the intricacies of professional basketball, he appears to inspire about the same level of intimidation as Urkel.
Brown became well known for coaching the Cleveland Cavaliers while Lebron James was still there. Then Lebron "took his talents to South Beach", Brown got axed in Cleveland; Phil Jackson, the Zen Master himself, retired as the LA Lakers coach, and alakazam -- Brown's in LA-LA-Land coaching the artists formerly known as "Show Time". Or as many NBA fans outside the glitz circle call them -- $#&@!.
Now he has to deal with Kobe Bryant, arguably the face of the franchise. Bryant certainly thinks he is, and while he's been a terrific player over the years, he's also been very selfish, not only on the court, but off it as well. On the court, sometimes it doesn't matter if Bryant is triple-teamed, which means a couple of his teammates are wide open for a pass; he'll still do a couple of spins, maybe a half-gainer with a double twist, and as he's falling away -- by God -- he's going to try to shoot the damn ball. Off the court, in interviews, Bryant comes across as thinking everything about that franchise runs through him.
Idle thought. I wonder how smug Kobe would be if he woke up and found himself traded to his current coach's former team -- Cleveland. Would that fall into the category of poetic justice? Good luck mansion hunting on the shores of Lake Erie.
Now Mike Brown, for whatever reason, has temporarily removed Kobe from the starting line-up, Perhaps it was for lack of hustle, playing defense, attitude, or maybe an internal problem. Who knows? But when a first year coach decides to bump heads with the star player -- well -- good luck with that Mike. Bad, Bad, Leroy Brown, baddest man in the whole damn town -- you're not. Did I mention Urkel?
Combine all that with fact that the Lakers aren't the class of the west anymore. It's the former Seattle Supersonics, now known as the Oklahoma City Thunder. A few hours ago, they just waltzed into LA and trashed Kobe and company in their own building. The Okies are younger and will get better. This does not bode well for the glitzers in LA. A new dynasty may well be on the horizon.
And then there's that pool-shooting blond girl that wanders into a certain sports bar once in a while. If it wasn't for the hair color, I'd swear she was a clone of Margaret Hamilton. The lady that played the wicked witch of the west in the Wizard of Oz. People that know me also know I have a couple of yorkies that I love very much. Last time that blond girl walked past me, I thought she mumbled something about -- I'll get you my pretty, and your little dogs too. And then she cackled walking away. Yikes. Who IS this woman, and why would she threaten my poor little dogs? What's even scarier is she called me pretty. Obviously, the poor thing is deranged. Next thing you know, she'll be hanging out at airports or something.
I'm thinking maybe she needs to go a couple rounds with Mike Brown. No, not the Urkel basketball coach -- the guy in the octagon. I'd gladly cough up $49.95 to see THAT one on pay-per-view. But I'm not sure who I'd bet on. Years of training and discipline are one thing. Flat out orneriness and attitude are quite another.
Idle thought..... Speaking of clones -- I'm saying point guard James Harden of the above mentioned Okla City Thunder is a younger version of Grady, from Sanford and Son. Check it out, and tell me I'm wrong.....
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Bounties. The American way
The New Orleans Saints have certainly been big news lately with their "bounty" system having been exposed. NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has dropped the hammer on their management side, with everything from suspensions, loss of draft picks, and hefty fines. Some of the players involved are probably pretty nervous right about now, because they're next. Like the old saying goes -- Justice cometh, and that right soon.
Yet an argument has been made by some that this doesn't go far enough. They maintain the bounty system should be regarded as a criminal matter, subject to prosecution, and the penalties thereof.
What they seem to overlook is bounties have been, and still are, interwoven into the very fabric of America. An outrageous statement? I don't think so. Though there's a lot of examples, here's just a few.....
Consider the Old Wild West in America. Bounties were commonplace. Many times the poster said "dead or alive". Never mind a trial and evidence, cold blooded murder was not only accepted, but encouraged. It didn't matter if the bounty hunter(s) shot the alleged bad guy in the back, or even while he slept. Throw the corpse on a horse or wagon, bring him in, and they got their money -- no questions asked. They weren't considered criminals. Far from it. They became legends.
Fast forward. The Kennedy administration offered a bounty on Fidel Castro of Cuba. Dead or alive. During his roughly 50 year rule of Cuba, what did Fidel ever do to harm the United States? Nothing.
FF again. 9/11 hits the USA, and there's bounties everywhere after the terrorist attacks. $10 million for bin Laden, $5 million for this guy, $3 million for that guy, etc, etc. The Bush administration even made them into a deck of cards. Remember that? Dead or alive. Show us the body and here's your money. Just like the old west.
On a lower level, there's thousands of "bounty hunters" in the United States right now. Notwithstanding the Dawg show on cable TV, many of these people don't wish to be called that anymore. Nowadays, they're "skip-tracers". It's just another step in the politically correct nonsense that makes bald people "follicly challenged", and the like. That means chasing down people that have stiffed a bail bondsman and didn't show up in court. Oftentimes these bounty hunters run roughshod over a citizen's rights. But as long as they can deliver the body and get their money, no questions asked, that's all that seems to matter.
If you want to start making criminals of the people who not only offer the bounty in the first place, but do bad things to collect it -- then start in Washington DC. Maybe we should dig up all those old west heroes that still have their boots on, and have them flogged posthumously. Might as well give JFK a few lashes too. Modern day bounty hunters? Make them ring the doorbell like the Avon lady.
The Saints had a bounty system. A thousand here and a thousand there. This was amongst players that are making hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars every year. The whole mindset of the NFL is to beat the tar out of the other guys. Do you really think an extra grand or two made that much of a difference to these guys in how they played? That's chump change.
Bottom line? It's all about perception. Like most large corporations/companies, the NFL is very image conscious these days. Through the media, the public is much more aware of injuries, such as concussions, than they were in the past. Roger Goodell is trying to walk a fine line between keeping the NFL as a hard-hitting intensive sport -- which, by the way, firmly established the NFL as the king of American pro sports in the first place -- while trying to appease those that think the sky is falling every time a serious injury occurs.
As for possible criminal prosecution involving the Saints bounty program? I'll go along with that on one condition. That the people that are advocating it get charged with felonious ignorance of history, with a misdemeanor charge of wimpiness tacked on.
Those aren't laws? Well, they ought to be.
Yet an argument has been made by some that this doesn't go far enough. They maintain the bounty system should be regarded as a criminal matter, subject to prosecution, and the penalties thereof.
What they seem to overlook is bounties have been, and still are, interwoven into the very fabric of America. An outrageous statement? I don't think so. Though there's a lot of examples, here's just a few.....
Consider the Old Wild West in America. Bounties were commonplace. Many times the poster said "dead or alive". Never mind a trial and evidence, cold blooded murder was not only accepted, but encouraged. It didn't matter if the bounty hunter(s) shot the alleged bad guy in the back, or even while he slept. Throw the corpse on a horse or wagon, bring him in, and they got their money -- no questions asked. They weren't considered criminals. Far from it. They became legends.
Fast forward. The Kennedy administration offered a bounty on Fidel Castro of Cuba. Dead or alive. During his roughly 50 year rule of Cuba, what did Fidel ever do to harm the United States? Nothing.
FF again. 9/11 hits the USA, and there's bounties everywhere after the terrorist attacks. $10 million for bin Laden, $5 million for this guy, $3 million for that guy, etc, etc. The Bush administration even made them into a deck of cards. Remember that? Dead or alive. Show us the body and here's your money. Just like the old west.
On a lower level, there's thousands of "bounty hunters" in the United States right now. Notwithstanding the Dawg show on cable TV, many of these people don't wish to be called that anymore. Nowadays, they're "skip-tracers". It's just another step in the politically correct nonsense that makes bald people "follicly challenged", and the like. That means chasing down people that have stiffed a bail bondsman and didn't show up in court. Oftentimes these bounty hunters run roughshod over a citizen's rights. But as long as they can deliver the body and get their money, no questions asked, that's all that seems to matter.
If you want to start making criminals of the people who not only offer the bounty in the first place, but do bad things to collect it -- then start in Washington DC. Maybe we should dig up all those old west heroes that still have their boots on, and have them flogged posthumously. Might as well give JFK a few lashes too. Modern day bounty hunters? Make them ring the doorbell like the Avon lady.
The Saints had a bounty system. A thousand here and a thousand there. This was amongst players that are making hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars every year. The whole mindset of the NFL is to beat the tar out of the other guys. Do you really think an extra grand or two made that much of a difference to these guys in how they played? That's chump change.
Bottom line? It's all about perception. Like most large corporations/companies, the NFL is very image conscious these days. Through the media, the public is much more aware of injuries, such as concussions, than they were in the past. Roger Goodell is trying to walk a fine line between keeping the NFL as a hard-hitting intensive sport -- which, by the way, firmly established the NFL as the king of American pro sports in the first place -- while trying to appease those that think the sky is falling every time a serious injury occurs.
As for possible criminal prosecution involving the Saints bounty program? I'll go along with that on one condition. That the people that are advocating it get charged with felonious ignorance of history, with a misdemeanor charge of wimpiness tacked on.
Those aren't laws? Well, they ought to be.
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
The last chapter of Pat Summitt?
The legendary coach of Tennessee's Lady Volunteers may have coached her last game. Most are aware that Summitt was diagnosed a while back with early onset Alzheimer's/dementia. No doubt Summitt will be afforded the best modern medicine has to offer, but the sad truth is her condition won't get better -- over time it will get worse.
Without getting into all the incredible stats she and her teams have racked up in her long and illustrious career, this author is of the opinion that she accomplished something that was not only remarkable, but will be remembered as historic.
Namely, she put ladies college hoops on the sports radar screen in a big way. It's a big deal these days, and rightfully so. The ladies have been playing college basketball for a very long time, but not until the last couple decades or so were they much noticed by the mainstream sports media. Back in the "old days", the ladies would play their games in basically empty gyms, and there certainly wasn't any TV coverage.
Nowadays, cable stations are televising games, and a major network will likely jump in when they get down to their Final Four. Have they caught up to their male counterparts yet in that regard? Of course not, but they're getting there, year by year, fan by fan, inch by agonizing inch, and bravo to them.
It wouldn't have happened without Pat Summitt. One needs not look too far back in history to remember when ladies' college hoops was dominated by teams like Old Dominion and Lousiana Tech. For that matter, many schools didn't even take the sport seriously. Then along came Summitt who began building her dynasty in Knoxville. Did she win some of her early titles when the competition wasn't nearly as ferocious as it is today? Probably so, but that's the point.
Other schools started sitting up and taking notice of Summitt's success. They got more serious about their programs, including coaching staffs, recruiting, facilities, publicity, etc. They wanted a piece of the action too.
In the end, Summitt may have been a victim of her own success. Look around. Schools like UConn, Notre Dame, Stanford, and Baylor have emerged as powerhouses. Texas A&M won the national championship last year. Where did THEY come from? Tennessee, while still amongst the elite programs, no longer dominates like they once did. The competition is growing every year. And that's a good thing for the sport, Volunteer fans notwithstanding.
Unlike men's college hoops, where it's not unusual for a top seed to get knocked off in the regionals, the ladies haven't quite progressed to that point. Last year, not a single #1 seed men's team made it to the Final Four, and this year only one. Conversely, it wouldn't be much of a surprise to see all four of the ladies' #1 seeds make it this year. To date, their sport hasn't evolved to where the men's sport is. There are no Davidsons or Butlers in the world of ladies' college hoops. Yet.
But someday it will happen, and Coach Summitt will be the reason.
This is not to presume Pat Summitt's coaching career is over, but signs certainly point that way. Of late, Holly Warlick, evidently Coach Summitt's hand-picked successor, has been coaching the team, while Summitt sits passively by on the bench, saying nothing. Draw your own conclusions.
No matter how it turns out -- Pat Summitt is an American icon, and hats off to her for everything she's accomplished. Bravo.
On a personal note -- Sorry Deb. Brittney Griner and the Baylor Lady Bears were just too much. 38-0 speaks for itself, and they're routing everybody. I'd be surprised if they don't win the title. Don't stay away too long. Been keeping your stool warm. LOL
Without getting into all the incredible stats she and her teams have racked up in her long and illustrious career, this author is of the opinion that she accomplished something that was not only remarkable, but will be remembered as historic.
Namely, she put ladies college hoops on the sports radar screen in a big way. It's a big deal these days, and rightfully so. The ladies have been playing college basketball for a very long time, but not until the last couple decades or so were they much noticed by the mainstream sports media. Back in the "old days", the ladies would play their games in basically empty gyms, and there certainly wasn't any TV coverage.
Nowadays, cable stations are televising games, and a major network will likely jump in when they get down to their Final Four. Have they caught up to their male counterparts yet in that regard? Of course not, but they're getting there, year by year, fan by fan, inch by agonizing inch, and bravo to them.
It wouldn't have happened without Pat Summitt. One needs not look too far back in history to remember when ladies' college hoops was dominated by teams like Old Dominion and Lousiana Tech. For that matter, many schools didn't even take the sport seriously. Then along came Summitt who began building her dynasty in Knoxville. Did she win some of her early titles when the competition wasn't nearly as ferocious as it is today? Probably so, but that's the point.
Other schools started sitting up and taking notice of Summitt's success. They got more serious about their programs, including coaching staffs, recruiting, facilities, publicity, etc. They wanted a piece of the action too.
In the end, Summitt may have been a victim of her own success. Look around. Schools like UConn, Notre Dame, Stanford, and Baylor have emerged as powerhouses. Texas A&M won the national championship last year. Where did THEY come from? Tennessee, while still amongst the elite programs, no longer dominates like they once did. The competition is growing every year. And that's a good thing for the sport, Volunteer fans notwithstanding.
Unlike men's college hoops, where it's not unusual for a top seed to get knocked off in the regionals, the ladies haven't quite progressed to that point. Last year, not a single #1 seed men's team made it to the Final Four, and this year only one. Conversely, it wouldn't be much of a surprise to see all four of the ladies' #1 seeds make it this year. To date, their sport hasn't evolved to where the men's sport is. There are no Davidsons or Butlers in the world of ladies' college hoops. Yet.
But someday it will happen, and Coach Summitt will be the reason.
This is not to presume Pat Summitt's coaching career is over, but signs certainly point that way. Of late, Holly Warlick, evidently Coach Summitt's hand-picked successor, has been coaching the team, while Summitt sits passively by on the bench, saying nothing. Draw your own conclusions.
No matter how it turns out -- Pat Summitt is an American icon, and hats off to her for everything she's accomplished. Bravo.
On a personal note -- Sorry Deb. Brittney Griner and the Baylor Lady Bears were just too much. 38-0 speaks for itself, and they're routing everybody. I'd be surprised if they don't win the title. Don't stay away too long. Been keeping your stool warm. LOL
Monday, March 26, 2012
The Final Four. Overrated
No doubt, it's impressive for a college basketball team, be they men or women, to get to the Final Four. This is about the men. I'm still trying to figure out the women's side of things, but it's probably a fair statement to say most men have that problem for their entire lives, and never do figure it out. But I digress.
During the first couple games of the tournament, the top seeds normally cruise through cupcake competition, but when it gets to the regionals, they better bring their A game or they'll get sent packing. Ask former #1 seeds Michigan State, North Carolina, and Syracuse about that. Poof. Gone in 40 minutes.
Kentucky is the lone remaining #1 seed to make it to the Final Four this year. Last year, not a single #1 seed made it that far.
But the Final Four is just that. They've made the semi-finals. So why did all 4 teams get trophies and cut the nets down while celebrating like they're world champions? Only one is going to win it. The other three will be quickly forgotten. Don't believe me? UConn won it last year, but quick -- who were the other semifinalists? See what I mean? It doesn't matter. While they all cut the nets down upon reaching the Final Four, Kentucky, Butler, and Virginia Commonwealth are nothing more than an answer to a trivia question only a year later, when it comes to this tournament. Sure, reaching the Final Four means major exposure and publicity, being shown on TV worldwide, and no doubt a hefty check for the bean counters at the universities, but somebody has to come in fourth, and third, and second. And those three spots don't matter.
This year, Ohio State will face off with Kansas, and Kentucky has a grudge match with Louisville in the semis next Saturday. Funny thing is -- I'm guessing neither of the two winners will be getting another trophy for making the actual finals, much less cutting the nets down. They have to get ready for the "big" game on Monday night.
When teams make the Final Four, they get shirts and caps commemorating it. It's a big deal. If they win in the semis, they won't get the same memorabilia, even though they've reached a higher level. I guess it's OK to brag about being a semifinalist, but not cool to be known as an eventual runner-up. Am I the only person that thinks that's somehow strange?
Yep, the Final Four is WAY over hyped. In the end, there will be only one winner and three losers.
Period.
During the first couple games of the tournament, the top seeds normally cruise through cupcake competition, but when it gets to the regionals, they better bring their A game or they'll get sent packing. Ask former #1 seeds Michigan State, North Carolina, and Syracuse about that. Poof. Gone in 40 minutes.
Kentucky is the lone remaining #1 seed to make it to the Final Four this year. Last year, not a single #1 seed made it that far.
But the Final Four is just that. They've made the semi-finals. So why did all 4 teams get trophies and cut the nets down while celebrating like they're world champions? Only one is going to win it. The other three will be quickly forgotten. Don't believe me? UConn won it last year, but quick -- who were the other semifinalists? See what I mean? It doesn't matter. While they all cut the nets down upon reaching the Final Four, Kentucky, Butler, and Virginia Commonwealth are nothing more than an answer to a trivia question only a year later, when it comes to this tournament. Sure, reaching the Final Four means major exposure and publicity, being shown on TV worldwide, and no doubt a hefty check for the bean counters at the universities, but somebody has to come in fourth, and third, and second. And those three spots don't matter.
This year, Ohio State will face off with Kansas, and Kentucky has a grudge match with Louisville in the semis next Saturday. Funny thing is -- I'm guessing neither of the two winners will be getting another trophy for making the actual finals, much less cutting the nets down. They have to get ready for the "big" game on Monday night.
When teams make the Final Four, they get shirts and caps commemorating it. It's a big deal. If they win in the semis, they won't get the same memorabilia, even though they've reached a higher level. I guess it's OK to brag about being a semifinalist, but not cool to be known as an eventual runner-up. Am I the only person that thinks that's somehow strange?
Yep, the Final Four is WAY over hyped. In the end, there will be only one winner and three losers.
Period.
Sunday, March 25, 2012
North Carolina, Duke, and Oakland University
If my internet searches are correct, the University of North Carolina is a public institution located in Chapel Hill, with student enrollment of somewhere around 18,000+, and it encompasses about 729 acres.
One might expect Duke University to have similar stats. One couldn't be more wrong. Duke is a private university with a relatively measly student enrollment of about 6600. Roughly a third of UNC's. And here's something I found astounding -- While both UNC and Duke are listed as being located in "suburban" settings, Duke sits on a whopping 8709 acres. Talk about elbow room. There's big-time ranchers in Montana and Texas that can't boast that kind of spread. That's an acre and a third per student. Conversely, doing the math, UNC is packing them in like sardines at 24 students per acre.
On the yearly cost to attend, with tuition, fees, room and board, etc., UNC averages about $20,000 for "in-staters", but zaps the out-of staters for double that. That doesn't seem right, but it must be legal somehow.
Then again, Duke, as a private university, seems to have a one size fits all when it comes to those costs. But it's upwards of $55,000 a year. That's a big cha-ching, but hey, the groundskeepers alone trying to maintain 8700 acres have to cost them a fortune.
Oakland University is public and has a student enrollment of 18,000+ while sitting on 1500 acres of pristine land. But nobody seems to know for sure what town they're in. Evidently, in their infinite wisdom, the local yokel politicos have created a border that runs through their campus. Some of it is in Rochester Hills, and some in Auburn Hills. It must be an election year. OU averages about $21,000 for Michigan residents, but like UNC, they bang the out-of-staters to the tune of about $33,000.
So what does all this have to do with sports? All three schools play Division 1 men's basketball. Duke and North Carolina are well known powerhouses, and have been for decades. Oakland, while relatively new to D1, is still trying to get a little respect, but they're light years from becoming a serious contender in the annual NCAA hoops tourney.
It's weird when you think about it. Oakland has about the same student population as UNC, and twice the acreage, but they have a second class basketball arena and can't even field a football team. Perhaps that has something to do with not having a facility for them to play in. A golf course, yes. A football venue, no. Heck, the Indianapolis Motor Speedway has a golf course on the infield, but how many sports fans care about that?
UNC has a football team, and they're pretty good some years, but few would consider it to be an elite program. Duke, with a third of the student population of UNC and Oakland, a whole bunch of land, and exorbitant tuition rates, has a football team, but they're never any good. No hot-shot high school kid wants to go to Duke to play football, full ride or not.
Duke has been a power house in men's basketball for decades. Despite their early exit from the NCAA tournament this year, an anomaly, they will likely remain so well into the future. On top of that, Duke's ladies' hoops team is consistently amongst the best in the nation. So what has the athletic department at Oakland University been doing all these years, besides watching the world go by?
Three times the student population of Duke, and they can't come anywhere near competing with them, let alone beating them, in ANY sport? And don't tell me it's about academics, because I'll laugh. You name the field of study, and which university's degree do you think would be more impressive in the real world to have on a graduate's resume?
Like sports, it's not even a close call.
One might expect Duke University to have similar stats. One couldn't be more wrong. Duke is a private university with a relatively measly student enrollment of about 6600. Roughly a third of UNC's. And here's something I found astounding -- While both UNC and Duke are listed as being located in "suburban" settings, Duke sits on a whopping 8709 acres. Talk about elbow room. There's big-time ranchers in Montana and Texas that can't boast that kind of spread. That's an acre and a third per student. Conversely, doing the math, UNC is packing them in like sardines at 24 students per acre.
On the yearly cost to attend, with tuition, fees, room and board, etc., UNC averages about $20,000 for "in-staters", but zaps the out-of staters for double that. That doesn't seem right, but it must be legal somehow.
Then again, Duke, as a private university, seems to have a one size fits all when it comes to those costs. But it's upwards of $55,000 a year. That's a big cha-ching, but hey, the groundskeepers alone trying to maintain 8700 acres have to cost them a fortune.
Oakland University is public and has a student enrollment of 18,000+ while sitting on 1500 acres of pristine land. But nobody seems to know for sure what town they're in. Evidently, in their infinite wisdom, the local yokel politicos have created a border that runs through their campus. Some of it is in Rochester Hills, and some in Auburn Hills. It must be an election year. OU averages about $21,000 for Michigan residents, but like UNC, they bang the out-of-staters to the tune of about $33,000.
So what does all this have to do with sports? All three schools play Division 1 men's basketball. Duke and North Carolina are well known powerhouses, and have been for decades. Oakland, while relatively new to D1, is still trying to get a little respect, but they're light years from becoming a serious contender in the annual NCAA hoops tourney.
It's weird when you think about it. Oakland has about the same student population as UNC, and twice the acreage, but they have a second class basketball arena and can't even field a football team. Perhaps that has something to do with not having a facility for them to play in. A golf course, yes. A football venue, no. Heck, the Indianapolis Motor Speedway has a golf course on the infield, but how many sports fans care about that?
UNC has a football team, and they're pretty good some years, but few would consider it to be an elite program. Duke, with a third of the student population of UNC and Oakland, a whole bunch of land, and exorbitant tuition rates, has a football team, but they're never any good. No hot-shot high school kid wants to go to Duke to play football, full ride or not.
Duke has been a power house in men's basketball for decades. Despite their early exit from the NCAA tournament this year, an anomaly, they will likely remain so well into the future. On top of that, Duke's ladies' hoops team is consistently amongst the best in the nation. So what has the athletic department at Oakland University been doing all these years, besides watching the world go by?
Three times the student population of Duke, and they can't come anywhere near competing with them, let alone beating them, in ANY sport? And don't tell me it's about academics, because I'll laugh. You name the field of study, and which university's degree do you think would be more impressive in the real world to have on a graduate's resume?
Like sports, it's not even a close call.
Friday, March 23, 2012
The Elite and the Delete of NCAA hoops
Wow. Not so lowly 13 seed Ohio U came within a bobcat's whisker of putting North Carolina's tar heels into high heels, and whisking them right off the dance floor. Could you imagine the repercussions if that had happened? Definitely elite viewing for TV fans. As were most of the other games, but like the one mentioned above, in the end, the higher seed prevailed.
As for delete? I've been feeling this rant coming on, so please excuse me while I get it out of my system.
Uh oh, wait a second..... It could be that actor Alec Baldwin, who's been seen repeatedly during the tournament with those silly Capital One commercials, the intended object of my rant, has fallen to his death off a cliff in New Zealand while filming a movie.
Assuming the early reports from New Zealand are accurate, I didn't know that when I sat down to write this post, just a couple minutes ago. So nevermind about the delete thing. It was meant to be about the commercials, not someone's life, but it still wouldn't be appropriate if the sad news bears out to be indeed valid. Because no other news organizations have picked up on it yet, I hope this is just another cheap publicity stunt, or yet another internet prank. If so, I will be back with a vengeance regarding those commercials. For now, I just hope he's OK.
However, as they say, I suppose the show must go on. Some interesting match-ups loom in the regional finals. Syracuse/Ohio State should be a dandy. Same with North Carolina/Kansas. If Louisville keeps playing the way they have been, they should have little trouble dispatching Florida. And who's going to bet against Kentucky when they take on Baylor?
But anything can happen. A lower-seeded team could get hot shooting 3s while the favorite is merely average. A key player here or there could get in foul trouble, or worse yet, injured. You never know.
I dare say the juiciest potential match-up would be in the national semi-finals. Louisville vs Kentucky. Both teams from the same state. A rivalry as good as it gets. Head coaches Rick Pitino vs John Calipari, two high-profile guys that aren't exactly known to have life-long loyalties to any one city or team. Both make ridiculous salaries, both probably spend more on clothes than your average CEO or First Lady, and despite all the yelling, and racing up and down the sidelines during the course of a game -- neither ever has a hair out of place. And, of course, both are thought of amongst some as merely hired guns -- mercenaries. If it comes to that, in my opinion, it's too bad one of them has to win.
Idle thought -- Roy Williams, the head coach of North Carolina for the last few years, sure talks a lot different these days than he did when he was with Kansas. The southern drawl and all, y'all. Yet coach Mike Krzyzewski of Duke, just down the road from UNC, has been there forever, and still no southern accent. What's up with that?
As for delete? I've been feeling this rant coming on, so please excuse me while I get it out of my system.
Uh oh, wait a second..... It could be that actor Alec Baldwin, who's been seen repeatedly during the tournament with those silly Capital One commercials, the intended object of my rant, has fallen to his death off a cliff in New Zealand while filming a movie.
Assuming the early reports from New Zealand are accurate, I didn't know that when I sat down to write this post, just a couple minutes ago. So nevermind about the delete thing. It was meant to be about the commercials, not someone's life, but it still wouldn't be appropriate if the sad news bears out to be indeed valid. Because no other news organizations have picked up on it yet, I hope this is just another cheap publicity stunt, or yet another internet prank. If so, I will be back with a vengeance regarding those commercials. For now, I just hope he's OK.
However, as they say, I suppose the show must go on. Some interesting match-ups loom in the regional finals. Syracuse/Ohio State should be a dandy. Same with North Carolina/Kansas. If Louisville keeps playing the way they have been, they should have little trouble dispatching Florida. And who's going to bet against Kentucky when they take on Baylor?
But anything can happen. A lower-seeded team could get hot shooting 3s while the favorite is merely average. A key player here or there could get in foul trouble, or worse yet, injured. You never know.
I dare say the juiciest potential match-up would be in the national semi-finals. Louisville vs Kentucky. Both teams from the same state. A rivalry as good as it gets. Head coaches Rick Pitino vs John Calipari, two high-profile guys that aren't exactly known to have life-long loyalties to any one city or team. Both make ridiculous salaries, both probably spend more on clothes than your average CEO or First Lady, and despite all the yelling, and racing up and down the sidelines during the course of a game -- neither ever has a hair out of place. And, of course, both are thought of amongst some as merely hired guns -- mercenaries. If it comes to that, in my opinion, it's too bad one of them has to win.
Idle thought -- Roy Williams, the head coach of North Carolina for the last few years, sure talks a lot different these days than he did when he was with Kansas. The southern drawl and all, y'all. Yet coach Mike Krzyzewski of Duke, just down the road from UNC, has been there forever, and still no southern accent. What's up with that?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)