Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
COMING SOON
After a hiatus of sorts to handle other things and rethink the direction of this site....This site will not die. WERE on the way back and will be better than ever. Stay Tuned!
Published with Blogger-droid v1.3.6
Friday, June 4, 2010
You Know What Might Happen - But WHY???
The conference realignment shuffle has the college athletics universe all atwitter, with everybody from Joe at the barber shop to your local fishwrap to national writers speculating about which schools will end up in which conference. This is often accompanied by the requisite talk of money, tradition, and political considerations. (How else to describe the “Tech problem,” as Ohio State University President Gordon Gee emailed, as reported by the Columbus Dispatch? How else to explain Texas Tech’s reported offer of Pac 10 membership?)
One aspect that has been mostly ignored by the national media, as far as I can tell, is a discussion of why the conferences are considering expansion and what each conference’s goal might be. Yes, the money aspect is huge, and has been written about thoroughly, but there are other considerations at play.
Since the Big Ten started this ball rolling with its trial balloons, reported offers to Notre Dame, Rutgers, Missouri and Nebraska, it makes sense to start with them. For the Big Ten, the answer is simple: this is about money. But unlike the other major conferences, for the Big Ten, this is only about money. Jim Delaney’s conference is already flush with television money, but making more money would be the sole reason for the Big Ten to expand, if you believe reports that the Big Ten is not interested in expanding to 12 in order to stage a championship game.
The Big Ten has the most unique money-making system of any conference because it owns and operates its own television network. Media reports indicate that the Big Ten earns $.88 per subscriber inside its “footprint” but only $.05 outside. So for the Big Ten, the name of the game is cable subscribers – namely expanding to places that will demand the network on basic cable. Rutgers and Missouri offer a lot of potential subscribers, while Nebraska and Notre Dame offer national appeal. The only viable options for a 16th school that would potentially expand the Big Ten’s footprint would be Texas, or perhaps Syracuse or Connecticut, but Kansas would also make a lot of sense if they are left conference-less after the Pac 10 pillage of the Big XII.
The Pac 10’s interest is also money (as it will be with every conference other than the ACC, which shall be explained soon), but the left coasters also seek relevance. For most of the nation, the Pac 10 is an afterthought. Partly due to the conference’s horrible television deal that banishes its games to late Saturday night on Fox Sports, if its marquee games are televised at all, the Pac 10 suffers from underexposure, if that’s possible in this day and age, when most MAC and Sun Belt teams are nationally televised at least a couple times a year. If the Pac 10 can land Texas and Oklahoma, they can also land a major television deal. You don’t think Fox might be interested in an exclusive deal televising a couple Pac 16 games a week on its broadcast network, and a couple more on Fox Sports every week, do you? The Pac 16 will not only command Big Ten or SEC-type money if they can land Texas, Texas Tech, Texas A&M, Colorado, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State, but the conference will be instantly relevant to the rest of the college football nation, something they are desperately seeking.
The SEC’s interest in expansion would be different still. Already making gobs of money thanks to its billion dollar television deals with ESPN and CBS, the SEC doesn’t stand to significantly increase its per team distribution like the Big Ten (by virtue of its own network) or the Pac 10 (by virtue of becoming nationally relevant and taking on the Texas, Oklahoma and Colorado television markets). The SEC is already relevant, as any SEC fan will be sure to point out, as often as possible, to as many non-SEC fans as will listen. The SEC’s primary interest in expanding would be momentum, pure and simple. The SEC would not want to be the only 12 team conference in a 16-team super-conference world. If the Big Ten and the Pac 10 expand to 16 teams each, the SEC and ACC would be left to scramble to become as competitive as possible in that paradigm. The SEC would have no interest in being upstaged by the ACC.
Unlike the Big Ten and Pac 10, which need to expand their conference “footprints” to make more money, the SEC has no need to expand outward. The SEC’s television deals are already national, unlike their Midwest and left coast counterparts. Outside of Texas, which would be a huge ‘get’ for any conference, the SEC gains nothing by adding schools from outlying states such as, say, North Carolina or Texas (unless, of course, it is the University of Texas). The SEC makes its money by offering compelling games, especially in football. Therefore, it would make sense for the SEC to raid the ACC for its football schools, regardless of whether they add new television markets (which they won’t): Florida State, Clemson, Miami, and either Georgia Tech or Virginia Tech. Unlike the Big Ten and Pac 10, academics are not a consideration for a conference that already contains Mississippi State, LSU and Arkansas.
The ACC’s interest in expansion is simple: it wants to be the fourth super-conference. The Big Ten, Pac 10, and SEC’s standing as the top three conferences would be secure. The Big XII, if it existed at all (assuming the Big Ten and Pac 10 get the schools they are targeting), would not be viable as the fourth major super-conference if it is essentially the Mountain West plus the Big XII’s leftovers (Iowa State, Baylor, Kansas State, and potentially Kansas). The ACC would have issues of its own, though, if the SEC raided it for its four best football programs. Inevitably, the ACC would seek to fill the void on the east coast by snatching up the remaining Big East teams. Assuming Rutgers goes to the Big Ten, the eight remaining ACC schools would combine with the seven remaining Big East schools and would add a 16th, likely UCF, which is one of the five biggest schools in the nation and has tons of potential.
The ACC in this scenario might command more money per school than it currently receives. It’s possible that, by virtue of losing big-ticket schools like FSU and Miami that the ACC might even make less per school with the pot being split 16 ways instead of 12. No matter. The ACC, if raided by the SEC, would see a landscape where there are three super-conferences and they would be poised to be the fourth. So the ACC would be less concerned with money than with long-term health and stability. And if there is any chance that the super-conferences decided to break from the NCAA, you can bet that the ACC would want to join the SEC, Pac 10, and Big Ten, thereby keeping a seat at the big boy table.
The end result of the expansion frenzy will almost certainly be four 16-team super-conferences. Each conference has its own reason for expansion. Money, yes, but each conference’s issues and desire for expansion are unique. Regardless of why each conference might want to expand, it seems inevitable at this point that it will play out much like it has been laid out here, IF Texas decides to make a move. And it is fitting that the richest and most powerful program in college sports is the single domino that will knock over all the rest – or not.
One aspect that has been mostly ignored by the national media, as far as I can tell, is a discussion of why the conferences are considering expansion and what each conference’s goal might be. Yes, the money aspect is huge, and has been written about thoroughly, but there are other considerations at play.
Since the Big Ten started this ball rolling with its trial balloons, reported offers to Notre Dame, Rutgers, Missouri and Nebraska, it makes sense to start with them. For the Big Ten, the answer is simple: this is about money. But unlike the other major conferences, for the Big Ten, this is only about money. Jim Delaney’s conference is already flush with television money, but making more money would be the sole reason for the Big Ten to expand, if you believe reports that the Big Ten is not interested in expanding to 12 in order to stage a championship game.
The Big Ten has the most unique money-making system of any conference because it owns and operates its own television network. Media reports indicate that the Big Ten earns $.88 per subscriber inside its “footprint” but only $.05 outside. So for the Big Ten, the name of the game is cable subscribers – namely expanding to places that will demand the network on basic cable. Rutgers and Missouri offer a lot of potential subscribers, while Nebraska and Notre Dame offer national appeal. The only viable options for a 16th school that would potentially expand the Big Ten’s footprint would be Texas, or perhaps Syracuse or Connecticut, but Kansas would also make a lot of sense if they are left conference-less after the Pac 10 pillage of the Big XII.
The Pac 10’s interest is also money (as it will be with every conference other than the ACC, which shall be explained soon), but the left coasters also seek relevance. For most of the nation, the Pac 10 is an afterthought. Partly due to the conference’s horrible television deal that banishes its games to late Saturday night on Fox Sports, if its marquee games are televised at all, the Pac 10 suffers from underexposure, if that’s possible in this day and age, when most MAC and Sun Belt teams are nationally televised at least a couple times a year. If the Pac 10 can land Texas and Oklahoma, they can also land a major television deal. You don’t think Fox might be interested in an exclusive deal televising a couple Pac 16 games a week on its broadcast network, and a couple more on Fox Sports every week, do you? The Pac 16 will not only command Big Ten or SEC-type money if they can land Texas, Texas Tech, Texas A&M, Colorado, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State, but the conference will be instantly relevant to the rest of the college football nation, something they are desperately seeking.
The SEC’s interest in expansion would be different still. Already making gobs of money thanks to its billion dollar television deals with ESPN and CBS, the SEC doesn’t stand to significantly increase its per team distribution like the Big Ten (by virtue of its own network) or the Pac 10 (by virtue of becoming nationally relevant and taking on the Texas, Oklahoma and Colorado television markets). The SEC is already relevant, as any SEC fan will be sure to point out, as often as possible, to as many non-SEC fans as will listen. The SEC’s primary interest in expanding would be momentum, pure and simple. The SEC would not want to be the only 12 team conference in a 16-team super-conference world. If the Big Ten and the Pac 10 expand to 16 teams each, the SEC and ACC would be left to scramble to become as competitive as possible in that paradigm. The SEC would have no interest in being upstaged by the ACC.
Unlike the Big Ten and Pac 10, which need to expand their conference “footprints” to make more money, the SEC has no need to expand outward. The SEC’s television deals are already national, unlike their Midwest and left coast counterparts. Outside of Texas, which would be a huge ‘get’ for any conference, the SEC gains nothing by adding schools from outlying states such as, say, North Carolina or Texas (unless, of course, it is the University of Texas). The SEC makes its money by offering compelling games, especially in football. Therefore, it would make sense for the SEC to raid the ACC for its football schools, regardless of whether they add new television markets (which they won’t): Florida State, Clemson, Miami, and either Georgia Tech or Virginia Tech. Unlike the Big Ten and Pac 10, academics are not a consideration for a conference that already contains Mississippi State, LSU and Arkansas.
The ACC’s interest in expansion is simple: it wants to be the fourth super-conference. The Big Ten, Pac 10, and SEC’s standing as the top three conferences would be secure. The Big XII, if it existed at all (assuming the Big Ten and Pac 10 get the schools they are targeting), would not be viable as the fourth major super-conference if it is essentially the Mountain West plus the Big XII’s leftovers (Iowa State, Baylor, Kansas State, and potentially Kansas). The ACC would have issues of its own, though, if the SEC raided it for its four best football programs. Inevitably, the ACC would seek to fill the void on the east coast by snatching up the remaining Big East teams. Assuming Rutgers goes to the Big Ten, the eight remaining ACC schools would combine with the seven remaining Big East schools and would add a 16th, likely UCF, which is one of the five biggest schools in the nation and has tons of potential.
The ACC in this scenario might command more money per school than it currently receives. It’s possible that, by virtue of losing big-ticket schools like FSU and Miami that the ACC might even make less per school with the pot being split 16 ways instead of 12. No matter. The ACC, if raided by the SEC, would see a landscape where there are three super-conferences and they would be poised to be the fourth. So the ACC would be less concerned with money than with long-term health and stability. And if there is any chance that the super-conferences decided to break from the NCAA, you can bet that the ACC would want to join the SEC, Pac 10, and Big Ten, thereby keeping a seat at the big boy table.
The end result of the expansion frenzy will almost certainly be four 16-team super-conferences. Each conference has its own reason for expansion. Money, yes, but each conference’s issues and desire for expansion are unique. Regardless of why each conference might want to expand, it seems inevitable at this point that it will play out much like it has been laid out here, IF Texas decides to make a move. And it is fitting that the richest and most powerful program in college sports is the single domino that will knock over all the rest – or not.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
As The Conference Worlds Turn
Our next installment in the conference expansion speculation comes as a result of today’s report at the University of Texas’ Rivals affiliated site www.orangebloods.com that the Pac 10 conference has, or will soon, extend invitations to Colorado University, the University of Texas, Texas A&M University, Texas Tech University, Oklahoma University and Oklahoma State University. This is a fascinating turn of events for a number of reasons.
First, the list of schools is somewhat counterintuitive. The Pac 10, like the Big Ten, is somewhat stodgy about academics. The Pac 10 is a collection of top academic schools like Cal, UCLA, and Stanford, in addition to large state universities with excellent academic reputations. Texas Tech really doesn’t fit this mold. It is surprising that the Pac 10 would invite Texas Tech over Kansas, which is a better academic school, arguably better athletic programs, and is much easier and less expensive to travel to. (Look at a map if you don’t believe me. KU is a quick jaunt from Kansas City International Airport, while TT is a quick jaunt from, well, nowhere.)
The invites also ruins the synergy that currently exists in the Pac 10. There are two Washington schools, two Oregon schools, two Northern California schools, two Southern California schools, and two Arizona schools. Invitations to, say the two Kansas schools, the two Oklahoma schools, and Texas and Texas A&M, would keep the Pac 10’s ‘pairs’ concept. But clearly the Pac 10 has wanted Colorado from the beginning, and it makes no sense to take on weaker candidates (hello, Kansas State) just to keep a meaningless pattern.
But those are interesting side-issues. The most important and most fascinating aspect of the report is that the Pac 10 has apparently beaten the Big Ten at its own game. While the Big Ten is apparently content to take its merry time, expecting that other conferences would wait to see what it does, the Pac 10 swooped in and potentially grabbed the biggest and richest brand in college sports, the Texas Longhorns. Big Ten commissioner Jim Delaney, arguably the most powerful and savvy person in college sports, appears to have been outflanked by brand new Pac 10 commissioner Larry Scott.
Now the Big Ten may be in the position to be reactionary. If (and it is still a big ‘if’ at this point) the six schools accept the Pac 10’s reported invitations, the Big Ten would almost certainly be forced to move to 16 instead of the 14-team configuration that they are reportedly considering. And Kansas is suddenly out there, conference-less. As a reminder, the Big Ten has reportedly offered Missouri and Nebraska, in addition to Notre Dame and Rutgers, invitations. For the mathematically challenged, if all four accepted invitations, that would leave the Big Ten with 15 teams. Kansas would seem to be a natural for the 16th team.
This potentially leaves Kansas (unless the Big Ten offers), Kansas State, Iowa State, and Baylor without BCS affiliations. Neither the SEC nor the ACC would consider any of those schools if they were to expand, leaving them as mid-majors, potentially landing in an expanded Mountain West. I had expected Texas Tech, not Kansas or Kansas State, to be in this predicament, but it was almost inevitable that Baylor and Iowa State would be the big losers in the conference expansion shuffle.
If Texas accepts the Pac 10’s overtures, the SEC would also be forced to consider expansion, with the Texas and Oklahoma schools out of the picture. Would the SEC react by raiding the ACC, forcing an ACC/Big East merger, as contemplated by my earlier posts? It seems likely.
One final issue is that a four 16-team conference configuration now seems more likely than ever. This opens the door for the four mega-conferences to break away from the NCAA and its ridiculous nonsensical rules and oversight. The new group of four could institute a four-team playoff, with only the conference champions participating. (Though one might argue that, since the conferences would almost certainly all have divisions with conference championship games, that these CGs would be the first round of an eight-team playoff. No matter.)
The Pac 10’s shocking game-changer, while perhaps reacting to the Big Ten’s initial expansion talk, may then be seen as the first real step toward college sports’ new world order, apart from the NCAA. It will be a fascinating story to watch play out. It’s almost like watching the Marshall Plan play out, except this is even bigger, with more important implications!
First, the list of schools is somewhat counterintuitive. The Pac 10, like the Big Ten, is somewhat stodgy about academics. The Pac 10 is a collection of top academic schools like Cal, UCLA, and Stanford, in addition to large state universities with excellent academic reputations. Texas Tech really doesn’t fit this mold. It is surprising that the Pac 10 would invite Texas Tech over Kansas, which is a better academic school, arguably better athletic programs, and is much easier and less expensive to travel to. (Look at a map if you don’t believe me. KU is a quick jaunt from Kansas City International Airport, while TT is a quick jaunt from, well, nowhere.)
The invites also ruins the synergy that currently exists in the Pac 10. There are two Washington schools, two Oregon schools, two Northern California schools, two Southern California schools, and two Arizona schools. Invitations to, say the two Kansas schools, the two Oklahoma schools, and Texas and Texas A&M, would keep the Pac 10’s ‘pairs’ concept. But clearly the Pac 10 has wanted Colorado from the beginning, and it makes no sense to take on weaker candidates (hello, Kansas State) just to keep a meaningless pattern.
But those are interesting side-issues. The most important and most fascinating aspect of the report is that the Pac 10 has apparently beaten the Big Ten at its own game. While the Big Ten is apparently content to take its merry time, expecting that other conferences would wait to see what it does, the Pac 10 swooped in and potentially grabbed the biggest and richest brand in college sports, the Texas Longhorns. Big Ten commissioner Jim Delaney, arguably the most powerful and savvy person in college sports, appears to have been outflanked by brand new Pac 10 commissioner Larry Scott.
Now the Big Ten may be in the position to be reactionary. If (and it is still a big ‘if’ at this point) the six schools accept the Pac 10’s reported invitations, the Big Ten would almost certainly be forced to move to 16 instead of the 14-team configuration that they are reportedly considering. And Kansas is suddenly out there, conference-less. As a reminder, the Big Ten has reportedly offered Missouri and Nebraska, in addition to Notre Dame and Rutgers, invitations. For the mathematically challenged, if all four accepted invitations, that would leave the Big Ten with 15 teams. Kansas would seem to be a natural for the 16th team.
This potentially leaves Kansas (unless the Big Ten offers), Kansas State, Iowa State, and Baylor without BCS affiliations. Neither the SEC nor the ACC would consider any of those schools if they were to expand, leaving them as mid-majors, potentially landing in an expanded Mountain West. I had expected Texas Tech, not Kansas or Kansas State, to be in this predicament, but it was almost inevitable that Baylor and Iowa State would be the big losers in the conference expansion shuffle.
If Texas accepts the Pac 10’s overtures, the SEC would also be forced to consider expansion, with the Texas and Oklahoma schools out of the picture. Would the SEC react by raiding the ACC, forcing an ACC/Big East merger, as contemplated by my earlier posts? It seems likely.
One final issue is that a four 16-team conference configuration now seems more likely than ever. This opens the door for the four mega-conferences to break away from the NCAA and its ridiculous nonsensical rules and oversight. The new group of four could institute a four-team playoff, with only the conference champions participating. (Though one might argue that, since the conferences would almost certainly all have divisions with conference championship games, that these CGs would be the first round of an eight-team playoff. No matter.)
The Pac 10’s shocking game-changer, while perhaps reacting to the Big Ten’s initial expansion talk, may then be seen as the first real step toward college sports’ new world order, apart from the NCAA. It will be a fascinating story to watch play out. It’s almost like watching the Marshall Plan play out, except this is even bigger, with more important implications!
Monday, May 17, 2010
2010 NBA Conference Finals Preview
This article was originally written by Quentin Haynes on RealSportsNet.com. If you'd like to view the original article, go here.
Here we are. We have only one series left then the NBA finals. All the people who made predictions are getting to see whether they were right or wrong. We have the NBA's final four: Orlando vs Boston and Los Angeles vs Phoenix.
Orlando Vs Boston (Orlando won Season Series 3-1)
The Orlando Magic are coming into this series undefeated. With Sweeps of Charlotte and Atlanta, The Magic have done more resting then playing. Round 1, Dwight Howard
wasn't a factor but regain his superhuman abilities versus a small Atlanta team. Jameer Nelson stepped up, posting a average of 20-5-2 this postseason. Rashard Lewis and Vince Carter seem to fit into their roles perfectly. Lewis has been able to stretch defenses while Carter has been able to attack them.
The Boston Celtics come into this series after shocking fans and experts with thier domance against Cleveland. Boston, for the first time all season, looked healthy. Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce and Ray Allen have seems to regain their "Big 3" form. Rajon Rondo has stepped up and took his game to new heights. Rondo has averages of 18-11-6 this postseason.
The Matchups
Guards- The Celtics and Magic are almost dead even at this point. Ray Allen vs. Vince Carter will be very interesting. Allen is a below average defender while Carter is a average playoff performer with the "soft" label. Jameer Nelson vs Rajon Rondo could go either way. Rondo could win it the battle if he's defending Nelson all game. Rondo is a top tier defender. Nelson could win if Rondo has to play against Carter as well to make up for Allen's defensive woes. Edge- Orlando
Forwards- Matt Barnes is one of my favorite NBA players but picking him against Paul Pierce would be biased. Pierce has had his ups and downs during this postseason, but the former finals MVP will step up knowing he's four games away from playing for another championship. Kevin Garnett vs Rashard Lewis could be a wash. Garnett could punish Lewis in the low post similar to what he did against Antwan Jamison. Lewis is a master of extending the defense and forcing a bigger, slower PF to keep up with him.Edge- Boston
Center- Dwight Howard has to be the favorite. Not only has Kendrick Perkins been a foul machine these past six games, Howard has found his stride in the playoffs, posting 21 points and 13 rebounds per game in the last series. Edge- Orlando
Bench- Boston's bench exploded against Cleveland. Tony Allen allowed Rondo to get rest. Rasheed Wallace played decent and Big Baby ( Or the Ticket Stub) gave Boston some great energy. Boston, however, could use Nate Robinson and Marquis Daniels. Orlando has had the best bench in the NBA past season. Mickeal Pietrus, J.J. Redick and Marcin Gortat have played well in spot minutes for Orlando. Orlando could also use Ryan Anderson, Jason Williams and Brandon Bass as well. Edge- Orlando
Coach- Doc Rivers has a championship ring and is hungry for another. His inbound plays and plays out of timeouts are amazing. Stan Van Gundy is a tougher coach on his players. With so many options, I don't know if Van Gundy can handle the heat. Edge- Boston
Prediction- Orlando in 7
Los Angeles vs Phoenix ( L.A. won season series 3-1)
The Suns and Lakers have both impressed this postseason. With Phoenix, the Suns had to battle a tough Portland squad and swept a San Antonio team who gave Phoenix postseason woes in the past.Steve Nash and Amar'e Stoudemire have once again stepped up thier games and both seem to be dominating on pick and rolls. Jason Richardson has found his role as the shooter on the team and with bench play from Channing Frye and Jared Dudley. The Suns have been tough to beat.
Los Angeles made doubters into believers. Allowing OKC to push the series to six games, many fans believe the Lakers could lose before defending their crowns. Kobe Bryant stepped up in the series vs Utah. Kobe had four 30-point games and with countless clutch baskets in the fourth quarter. Los Angeles had no trouble stopping Utah dead in it's tracks. Pau Gasol and Andrew Bynum also stepped up with huge rebounding performances.
The Matchups
Guards: Steve Nash will tear up Derek Fisher. Fisher has been ripped up by Russell Westbrook and Deron Willams. Expect worse against Nash. The issue will be the Kobe Bryant vs. Jason Richardson matchup. Bryant will be able to get of shots off against Richardson. Richardson will need to be effective offensively to be able to provide some value for being a bad defensive matchup. Edge- Los Angeles
Forwards: Ron Artest will be at the heels of Grant Hill. Pau Gasol is too tall and skilled for Amar'e Stoudemire . I could see Stoudemire playing well offensively but not enough on defense production will hurt Stoudemire's chances of containing Pau Gasol. Edge- Los Angeles
Center: Andrew Bynum vs Robin Lopez. We all know who wins this one. Lopez should look to keep his mind on the boards. Edge- Los Angeles
Bench: Jared Dudley, Channing Frye and Goran Dragic will be huge players for Phoenix. They will alll need to step up for the starters. Lamar Odom and Shannon Brown must play well when the starters rest as well. Also, expect more Jordan Farmar, who could be a better defensive matchup for Nash. Edge- Phoenix
Coach: Phil Jackson has 10 NBA Championships as a head coach. Edge- Los Angles
Prediction: Lakers in 6
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
