A little late, but better late than never. I talked about this on my show on BlogTalkRadio, but here is my preview for Week 1 of the NFL.
Week 1 Picks
(spreads courtesy of Sporting News Today - http://today.sportingnews.com/)
Local Picks
* Philadelphia is the road favorite (1) at Carolina: CAR (win and cover)
* N.Y. Giants is the favorite (6.5) at home against Washington: NYG (win and cover)
* N.Y. Jets is a road dog (4.5) at Houston: NYJ (win and cover)
* New England favored by 10.5 points at home against Buffalo (Monday): NE (win), BUF (cover)
Big-Game Picks
* Tennessee-Pittsburgh (Thursday) (PIT -5): PIT (win and cover)
* Chicago-Green Bay (GBY -3.5): GBY (win), CHI (cover)
* Miami-Atlanta (ATL -4): MIA (win and cover)
Knockout Pool Pick - Round 1
Saints (over Lions, Saints are -13)
Game of the Week: Tennessee-Pittsburgh (Thursday)
Right off the bat, the best game of the week is the first game of the week. It will be on NBC on Thursday night. Great running backs seem to do well historically against Pittsburgh, but I am still going with Pittsburgh since they are at home and their defense is better overall.
Picking the Winners
Tennessee at Pittsburgh (Thursday): Pittsburgh
Miami at Atlanta: Atlanta
Kansas City at Baltimore: Baltimore
Philadelphia at Carolina: Philadelphia
Minnesota at Cleveland: Minnesota
Jacksonville at Indianapolis: Indianapolis
Dallas at Tampa Bay: Dallas
Detroit at New Orleans: New Orleans
N.Y. Jets at Houston: N.Y. Jets
Denver at Cincinnati: Cincinnati
San Francisco at Arizona: Arizona
Washington at N.Y. Giants: N.Y. Giants
St. Louis at Seattle: Seattle
Chicago at Green Bay (Sunday night): Green Bay
Buffalo at New England (Monday night): New England
San Diego at Oakland (Monday night): San Diego
Picking with the Spread
Minnesota (-3.5): 14 confidence points
Indianapolis (-7): 11 c-pts
Dallas (-6): 10 c-pts
New England (-10.5): 8 c-pts
Arizona (-6): 7 c-pts
N.Y. Jets (+4.5): 6 c-pts
Green Bay (-3.5): 5 c-pts
N.Y. Giants (-6.5): 4 c-pts
Miami (+4): 2 c-pts
Fantasy Start ‘Em/Sit ‘Em
Start 'Em:
* Anthony Gonzalez/Pierre Garcon (IND vs. JAX) - Jacksonville has trouble in their secondary
* Reggie Bush (NO vs. DET) - Pierre Thomas will not be 100%
* Eddie Royal (DEN vs. CIN) - Brandon Marshall is not a happy camper
Sit 'Em:
* Mark Bradley/Bobby Engram (KCY vs. BAL) - Kansas City will throw, but Baltimore will shut them down
* Jamal Lewis (CLE vs. MIN) - His big-game ability is long gone and the Vikings defense is excellent
* Laurence Maroney/Fred Taylor (NE vs. BUF) - Brady will throw the ball all over the place in his return
We will analyze these picks on our next show (#24), as well as offer a recap on Week 1 action so far, this Sunday, September 13th, from 8-9pm. Join us live on http://www.blogtalkradio.com/The-StatMan.
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Long Island Hold 'Em
If you are familiar with Texas Hold 'Em Poker, maybe you can help me with my analogy. Let's pretend the Islanders and the Town of Hempstead are engaged in a game of high-stakes poker because, well, they are. Let's call it: Long Island Hold 'Em. Sitting across the felt table from each other, looking at each other and sizing their opponent up. Just to make help you visualize this a little better, the Islanders are wearing a helmet at the table and the Town of Hempstead has donned a cowboy hat.
The Islanders have been losing for most of the game, but they are starting to gain some chips. They aren't quite what they were in earlier hands, as they had built quite a bankroll, but it was more than what they came to the party with. The Town of Hempstead quickly built up their winnings and burrowed it away. But, for as long as anyone can remember in this tournament, whatever they have won over the past hands has been squandered.
This hand will represent a sea change in the match. The winner here has to be able to outlast the other, perhaps call its enemy's bluff. If you followed this analogy so far, September 22nd is the last card to drop (the "river") and October 3rd is the call. The Islanders are going to call no matter what. Most people know they already have three of a kind and the river might give them a full house. No one knows what the Town of Hempstead is holding except the Town of Hempstead. The ToH thinks it has a lot to gain on the river, but it cannot help the ToH as much as it could help the Islanders.
We know the Islanders are all-in. The Islanders would gain more chips in the court of public opinion if the Town of Hempstead folds. If the ToH antes up and moves all of its chips to the middle of the table, it will be time for the Islanders to put up or shut up.
But, here's the dirty little secret: as long as the Islanders stay east of Manhattan, they can't lose.
That's why they are all-in and would call even if they had a pair of eights. The Town of Hempstead thinks they are negotiating with the Isles and making sure they put their money where their mouths are. An honorable request to protect its constituents. But, it would have made more sense to bring this up months ago or, at the very latest, very soon after the public hearing in August. Guess what? The Islanders do not have to. They can accuse the Town of Hempstead of stalling, a very believable accusation, and bide their time until October 3rd, when they would look like scorned lovers jilted at the altar and open their phone lines for outside the 516 area code.
The Town of Hempstead sent this letter to be sure if anything changes from what has been promised, the Town and its residents are not left in the cold. What does that mean? It means what everything else means in politics: money. If anything changes, the Town wants some skin in the game so it can get some of the money changing hands. Change the developer on the property after the shovel is in the ground? Not unless we get some money. We want all of the tax dollars you say we are going to get if this goes through. No problem, but, in Kate Murray's letter to the residents of the Town of Hempstead (thanks, IslandersIndependent.com), this was brought up now because the Town has only had eight-plus months to look at this and these provisions are part of any agreement. Why wait until month nine of this process when you know month ten means the asking price will go up? The only reason I can think of is because of pride. The Town, specifically Kate Murray, wants to set the timetable. The Town wants this to happen on their terms, not the County, and especially not a real estate developer and a sports team owner.
I have repeatedly heard this is moving fast compared to "business as usual" in the Town of Hempstead. Perhaps that is the problem. Also, this is hardly a usual situation. It represents the possible endangerment of the only major-league franchise in either Nassau or Suffolk Counties. It means jobs and fans spending money to ancillary businesses around the Nassau Coliseum would be gone, along with all of those tax dollars. If the Town of Hempstead loses the card game, it will have an empty arena with a barren parking lot around it, which is far worse than the status quo. Nothing could replace that revenue for many years, if not longer.
On October 3rd, the Islanders will surely call and most likely will take their chips and play in a higher-stakes game, a game that will be too rich for the Town of Hempstead. The Town could have made this happen before the final call and could have participated in that high-stakes game if the Town did not squander its chips over the years.
***
As an Islander fan who lives west of Manhattan in New Jersey, a move to Willets Point in Queens makes too much sense. Better infrastructure, (possibly) less politics, and a shorter trip would be something I would sign up for now. For the few thousand fans who drive west to the Coliseum from Eastern Long Island, their trip would be 20-30 minutes longer. The team would be more accessible for Bridgeport Sound Tiger supporters to see their babies play with the big boys.
Though I never lived on Long Island, I spent a lot of weekends there over the years visiting my mother's family and loved the Island. I still do. Most of the family has moved away and, outside of the Islanders, I do not have much of a reason drive past Citi Field. At the start of this latest push to keep the Islanders at the Coliseum, my vote was to keep them in Uniondale. But, my distaste for the constant politicking and blaming that has gone on since the hockey season ended, as well as the shiny new baseball stadium in Shea Stadium's old parking lot has changed my opinion. My vote now is to move the team to Queens.
Queens has made statements to the media that they would welcome them with open arms. Brooklyn's proposed Barclays Center does not seem to be moving in the right direction and may never happen. Queens might be the eventual destination for the Nets, too. Better for the Islanders to get on the ground floor and build the arena primarily with hockey in mind instead of basketball. A beautiful new stadium would not be an inconvenience for fans like a Coliseum would be under re-construction. Plus, with the Mets in town April-October, it would make Flushing a year-round destination.
The time may have come for Nassau County to be the bedroom community the Town of Hempstead and the Village of Garden City seems to wish for. Before the Town pushes all of its chips to the table, it should be careful what it wishes for, because it has a lot more to lose than the Islanders do.
The Islanders have been losing for most of the game, but they are starting to gain some chips. They aren't quite what they were in earlier hands, as they had built quite a bankroll, but it was more than what they came to the party with. The Town of Hempstead quickly built up their winnings and burrowed it away. But, for as long as anyone can remember in this tournament, whatever they have won over the past hands has been squandered.
This hand will represent a sea change in the match. The winner here has to be able to outlast the other, perhaps call its enemy's bluff. If you followed this analogy so far, September 22nd is the last card to drop (the "river") and October 3rd is the call. The Islanders are going to call no matter what. Most people know they already have three of a kind and the river might give them a full house. No one knows what the Town of Hempstead is holding except the Town of Hempstead. The ToH thinks it has a lot to gain on the river, but it cannot help the ToH as much as it could help the Islanders.
We know the Islanders are all-in. The Islanders would gain more chips in the court of public opinion if the Town of Hempstead folds. If the ToH antes up and moves all of its chips to the middle of the table, it will be time for the Islanders to put up or shut up.
But, here's the dirty little secret: as long as the Islanders stay east of Manhattan, they can't lose.
That's why they are all-in and would call even if they had a pair of eights. The Town of Hempstead thinks they are negotiating with the Isles and making sure they put their money where their mouths are. An honorable request to protect its constituents. But, it would have made more sense to bring this up months ago or, at the very latest, very soon after the public hearing in August. Guess what? The Islanders do not have to. They can accuse the Town of Hempstead of stalling, a very believable accusation, and bide their time until October 3rd, when they would look like scorned lovers jilted at the altar and open their phone lines for outside the 516 area code.
The Town of Hempstead sent this letter to be sure if anything changes from what has been promised, the Town and its residents are not left in the cold. What does that mean? It means what everything else means in politics: money. If anything changes, the Town wants some skin in the game so it can get some of the money changing hands. Change the developer on the property after the shovel is in the ground? Not unless we get some money. We want all of the tax dollars you say we are going to get if this goes through. No problem, but, in Kate Murray's letter to the residents of the Town of Hempstead (thanks, IslandersIndependent.com), this was brought up now because the Town has only had eight-plus months to look at this and these provisions are part of any agreement. Why wait until month nine of this process when you know month ten means the asking price will go up? The only reason I can think of is because of pride. The Town, specifically Kate Murray, wants to set the timetable. The Town wants this to happen on their terms, not the County, and especially not a real estate developer and a sports team owner.
I have repeatedly heard this is moving fast compared to "business as usual" in the Town of Hempstead. Perhaps that is the problem. Also, this is hardly a usual situation. It represents the possible endangerment of the only major-league franchise in either Nassau or Suffolk Counties. It means jobs and fans spending money to ancillary businesses around the Nassau Coliseum would be gone, along with all of those tax dollars. If the Town of Hempstead loses the card game, it will have an empty arena with a barren parking lot around it, which is far worse than the status quo. Nothing could replace that revenue for many years, if not longer.
On October 3rd, the Islanders will surely call and most likely will take their chips and play in a higher-stakes game, a game that will be too rich for the Town of Hempstead. The Town could have made this happen before the final call and could have participated in that high-stakes game if the Town did not squander its chips over the years.
***
As an Islander fan who lives west of Manhattan in New Jersey, a move to Willets Point in Queens makes too much sense. Better infrastructure, (possibly) less politics, and a shorter trip would be something I would sign up for now. For the few thousand fans who drive west to the Coliseum from Eastern Long Island, their trip would be 20-30 minutes longer. The team would be more accessible for Bridgeport Sound Tiger supporters to see their babies play with the big boys.
Though I never lived on Long Island, I spent a lot of weekends there over the years visiting my mother's family and loved the Island. I still do. Most of the family has moved away and, outside of the Islanders, I do not have much of a reason drive past Citi Field. At the start of this latest push to keep the Islanders at the Coliseum, my vote was to keep them in Uniondale. But, my distaste for the constant politicking and blaming that has gone on since the hockey season ended, as well as the shiny new baseball stadium in Shea Stadium's old parking lot has changed my opinion. My vote now is to move the team to Queens.
Queens has made statements to the media that they would welcome them with open arms. Brooklyn's proposed Barclays Center does not seem to be moving in the right direction and may never happen. Queens might be the eventual destination for the Nets, too. Better for the Islanders to get on the ground floor and build the arena primarily with hockey in mind instead of basketball. A beautiful new stadium would not be an inconvenience for fans like a Coliseum would be under re-construction. Plus, with the Mets in town April-October, it would make Flushing a year-round destination.
The time may have come for Nassau County to be the bedroom community the Town of Hempstead and the Village of Garden City seems to wish for. Before the Town pushes all of its chips to the table, it should be careful what it wishes for, because it has a lot more to lose than the Islanders do.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
There's a Light...Over at the Frankenstein Place
The naming of David Ortiz to the list of offenders of 2003's Major League Baseball survey testing for steroids shined a brand-new light on the performance enhancing drug controversy. He was not the first to be named, as Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, Alex Rodriguez, and Manny Ramirez have been reported by The New York Times to be on the list. In all, there are 104 names on the list and, with 30 teams, that makes an average of 3 players per team. Major League Baseball wanted to get a handle on how rampant the problem was, and the Mitchell Report found the 2003 "hit rate" was about 7.94%, or 104 of the 1310 players that appeared in a game in 2003 (643 hitters, 667 pitchers).
My guess is that every "big-market" team or team that was trying to contend in 2003 probably has more than average. Why? Two reasons are clear as to why players take PEDs: to get to the Show and to stay in the Show. The prospects and players hanging on who felt they had to get to the big leagues through questionable means probably amount to about the same for every franchise. Every farm system has those players trying to do whatever it takes to make the majors. But, big-money veterans are more likely to command big money and the teams in contention want the veteran presence on their ball club and are willing to pay handsomely for those services. So, how many juiced players did the teams in contention average? 4? 5?
One of the great "side effects" for players and an allure for PEDs is the thought of another big free agent payday. When age starts eroding their talents, get another payday by staying in the Show for a few more years. When free agency was still shiny and new, you had two big paydays: one in your late 20's and one in your early 30's. Now, you have three, and don't think that is by accident, as players in the mid-to-late 30s scored big when they peddled their services around the league.
Whether your team is a "big-market" team or not, it is all just speculation anyway. Right now, the whole PED drama is more about the trash talk if you root for one of those teams. If you root for the Red Sox before Thursday, you trash-talked the Yankees and their fans. You laughed about how their fan base was duped and how their numbers are inflated or you would be angry at the shot they cost your team from making the playoffs or winning it all. Their records and titles are tainted, you would say. You could say the same if you root for the Mets now. You could call out the teams and the fans who root for them. But, we all know that it is a matter of time before a big name who played for the Mets in 2003 is "outed". You know what they say about people in glass houses?
If a player you loved has not already been tied to "the list" or failed a test since 2003, just wait. Just about every baseball fan out there has a jersey or a poster or a piece of paraphernalia that touts a player who has or will be tied to performance enhancing drugs. The Ortiz situation has helped me arrive at a (possibly convenient) conclusion. Red Sox fans will most likely offer David Ortiz a pass, not because he may not be guilty, but because they cannot possibly fathom disliking him. We all have players we love and we may hold him up higher than we should. But, what is more important: a clean game or a beloved player? The answer is always "a clean game" until you hear a player you love is on "the list".
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Ricciardi: Crazy...Like A Fox
Only 48 hours remain before the Trading Deadline, and one day has already passed since Blue Jay GM J.P. Ricciardi's self-imposed deadline, and Roy Halladay is still in Toronto. In fact, he is slated to pitch tonight (Wednesday). Ricciardi flew open the flood gates and proclaimed that Halladay was available. Now, the pundits are saying he misread the market badly and stands to have the whole thing blow up in his face.
I am going to take the other position because, well, somebody has to.
Ricciardi knew Halladay is going to be out of Toronto after 2010 and the team will not be in a greatly different situation at this time next year. So, before he is perceived as a "rental", he knew he wanted to deal Halladay by this year's Trading Deadline on Friday in order to maximize his return. After all, 45 starts are better than 12. When Ricciardi declared that all phone lines were open and operators were standing by, the proposals came in. Ricciardi counter-proposed and asked for the moon. With so many suitors, demand greatly outweighed supply.
Kudos to Mark Shapiro, Cleveland GM, who sensed an opportunity and swooped in to unload Cliff Lee to one of those suitors, bagging four prospects in return. However, the main chips in the rumored wish list from Toronto is still intact with the Phillies. Ricciardi might come down from his initial wishes because Shapiro increased the supply, however briefly. But, Ricciardi is still well in line with bringing back more than if he enlisted a closed-bidding process for Doc's services.
Perhaps the Phillies are no longer in the Halladay Sweepstakes, though they might be able to get him for slightly less than rumored earlier (Kyle Drabek, J.A. Happ, Dominic Brown). But, the Red Sox, Dodgers, Yankees, and Angels are all interested and there is plenty of suitors to coax Ricciardi to give Halladay up. The Blue Jays will turn out better for this, maybe not short-term, but for 2011. Blue Jay fans are upset because the team crashed and burned after a hot start and Ricciardi has basically written off the 2010 campaign. But, Ricciardi's intent all along was maximizing his return for a player that would walk after 2010 anyway.
And, for that, Ricciardi can still get the job done with a fluorish.
Bern, Baby, Bern
Finally. Mets GM Omar Minaya had a busy weekend and, in the end, he came to the conclusion that the rest of the Mets constituents already knew in their heart: Tony Bernazard was a stain on the Mets franchise that had to be removed immediately.
Minaya's credibility and his relationships -- both with the media and ownership -- took a hit this week. He has always been a good baseball man, but then again, so was Bernazard. Minaya has made some good moves and he has left the organization woefully thin in other areas.
The clock is ticking for Minaya to get on the ball here or he might be gone before his extension kicks in next year. If he can pull off a deal to help the Mets now and in the future before the deadline, especially under all of this duress, most of it caused by himself, that will be a feather in his cap and the first step on a long road back to personal respectability.
But, let's shine the microscope on the whistleblower for a second: Adam Rubin. Rubin is a product of the New York Media and helps perpetuate the stereotype. If he is not tough on the Mets when he has to be, no one will read him and readers will choose from several other reporters who is willing to "tell it like it is". And, that is all Rubin did here.
This is not an indictment on Mets beat reporters or print media versus visual media. The indictment is all around us. The Media would rather be negative than positive because it sells more papers. "If it bleeds, it leads", remember?
In New York, just as in any city, the Media is the product of its readers. New Yorkers are tough, gruff, and they don't take any guff. They expect nothing else from their reporters. Anything less would make Rubin irrelevant.
Since the incident at the Monday press conference, Mets COO Jeff Wilpon, the future heir to the majority ownership stake in the Mets franchise, has spoken to quell the pen-wielding Dobermans and has also reached out to Rubin in an effort to mend fences. The New York Daily News has stated Rubin will continue to be the reporter on the Mets beat, but probably after a nice long vacation and at least a few of those aforementioned fences are mended.
Now, the clock is ticking for Minaya to get back to his job. His future, and the future of the Mets, are in the balance. Never mind how the franchise is perceived in the papers. If the reporters affected the standings, the Mets would be dead last, a mile away from the steps leading out of the cellar. But, Minaya can bail out ownership and salvage what he can from this situation by making the right move in the next couple of days.
The Mets might not be "buyers" or "sellers" this week, but Minaya is always looking for a move to improve the team now and in the future. He did this with the acquisition of Jeff Francoeur. He can do it again and the Mets players can continue to do their job by climbing back into relevance.
Minaya's credibility and his relationships -- both with the media and ownership -- took a hit this week. He has always been a good baseball man, but then again, so was Bernazard. Minaya has made some good moves and he has left the organization woefully thin in other areas.
The clock is ticking for Minaya to get on the ball here or he might be gone before his extension kicks in next year. If he can pull off a deal to help the Mets now and in the future before the deadline, especially under all of this duress, most of it caused by himself, that will be a feather in his cap and the first step on a long road back to personal respectability.
But, let's shine the microscope on the whistleblower for a second: Adam Rubin. Rubin is a product of the New York Media and helps perpetuate the stereotype. If he is not tough on the Mets when he has to be, no one will read him and readers will choose from several other reporters who is willing to "tell it like it is". And, that is all Rubin did here.
This is not an indictment on Mets beat reporters or print media versus visual media. The indictment is all around us. The Media would rather be negative than positive because it sells more papers. "If it bleeds, it leads", remember?
In New York, just as in any city, the Media is the product of its readers. New Yorkers are tough, gruff, and they don't take any guff. They expect nothing else from their reporters. Anything less would make Rubin irrelevant.
Since the incident at the Monday press conference, Mets COO Jeff Wilpon, the future heir to the majority ownership stake in the Mets franchise, has spoken to quell the pen-wielding Dobermans and has also reached out to Rubin in an effort to mend fences. The New York Daily News has stated Rubin will continue to be the reporter on the Mets beat, but probably after a nice long vacation and at least a few of those aforementioned fences are mended.
Now, the clock is ticking for Minaya to get back to his job. His future, and the future of the Mets, are in the balance. Never mind how the franchise is perceived in the papers. If the reporters affected the standings, the Mets would be dead last, a mile away from the steps leading out of the cellar. But, Minaya can bail out ownership and salvage what he can from this situation by making the right move in the next couple of days.
The Mets might not be "buyers" or "sellers" this week, but Minaya is always looking for a move to improve the team now and in the future. He did this with the acquisition of Jeff Francoeur. He can do it again and the Mets players can continue to do their job by climbing back into relevance.
Friday, July 24, 2009
When did ESPN jump the shark?
When ESPN started in 1979, it was a nobody, in the middle of nowhere, with a crazy idea. Now, they are the "Worldwide Leader in Sports", a monolith, owned by a major network (ABC), and, by extension, a major corporation (Disney). The term "selling out" might be a good description, but it is so much more than that.
As I talked about this in the waning moments of last week's show (#16), ESPN has fallen far. In this new frontier of the sports blogosphere, 24/7 updates to many sports websites, and league-owned cable networks, ESPN is not as necessary as they used to be.
The days of "The Big Show", "NHL2nite", and the halcyon days of "Baseball Tonight" are all in the rear-view mirror. Favoritism towards some teams, so centered on the Yankees at the beginning of the decade, I used to playfully call the network ESPNY. They also have showed favoritism to Boston in recent years, too. ESPN has become best buddies with the athletes and management they cover, getting athletes and other sports figures to do the "ESPN car wash" of "Mike & Mike in the Morning", "ESPN FirstTake", "Pardon the Interruption", and other TV and radio shows.
Then, there are the dreaded ESPYs. Awarding athletes to honor and spotlight the best in sports is okay, but turning the event into a red-carpet event, with the network and its reporters rubbing elbows with them shows a compromise of integrity and good reporting.
The whole situation this week with ESPN's treatment, or lack thereof, of the accusation of Ben Roethlisberger in a Lake Tahoe hotel and casino is an interesting study of how ESPN handles its bedfellows. The handling of the situation by ESPN has become the much bigger story here. I mean, the picture of Big Ben in the article on the CNN.com site even has an ESPY logo in the background! Roethlisberger is also participating in an episode of a new reality show, called "Shaq Vs." with Shaquille O'Neal on ABC, which owns ESPN, on August 8th. Also, ESPN may want to tread lightly on this issue that involves the face of the defending Super Bowl Champions considering ESPN's wedded relationship to the NFL and its Monday Night Football television package.
This all got me to thinking...when did ESPN "jump the shark"?
* Was it when Keith Olbermann left, effectively ending the SportsCenter portion of "The Big Show" and leading to countless pretenders to jump in the anchor's seat and try to yell and catch-phrase their way to super-stardom? Word was that Olbermann had an ego the size of Rhode Island, but you have to agree when Dan Patrick-Keith Olbermann tag-teamed, it was "must-watch TV".
* Was it hiring Rush Limbaugh to join the cast on "NFL Countdown"? That was a dud if there ever was one. It started poorly and went downhill from there, climaxing in a racial comment on Donovan McNabb's abilities at quarterback.
* Was it introducing the ESPYs? They now have red-carpet reporting to greet the athletes and their guests waving and smiling as they enter the event.
* Was it the 25th Anniversary cross-promotion and endless chest-thumping and retrospectives? If I see Chris Berman on the sidelines of a 49er comeback victory in the early '80s one more time, I am asking my wife to put a parental block on ESPN and not tell me the combination to unlock it.
* Was it the pre-eminence of the "sport" of poker in prime-time? ESPN has aired fringe sports since its beginnings, but that was when they did not have money or access to get the big boys on their air. They can, but they still choose to air this stuff.
* Was it the corporate synergy of "ESPN Radio", "ESPN The Magazine", ESPNZone restaurants, "ESPN on ABC"? I thought "ESPN 8: The Ocho" was a joke, but I think it really is an idea about 10 years too soon for the ESPN execs.
* Was it the rise and subsequent downfall of Fox Sports Net? FSN forced ESPN to up the ante and dumb-down its content to appeal to the masses instead of staying the course and forcing everyone else to wise up. It came and went, leaving ESPN's better days in its wake.
* Was it the ill-fated attempt at a Barry Bonds reality show? I think that is when I consciously stopped watching.
I have greatly lost interest in ESPN, mainly because of the myriad other options available to the sports fan. The funny thing is: if ESPN was not so good at what it did in its infancy and its adolescence, perhaps we would not have the options we have today.
ESPN has pulled together programming from Major League Baseball, the National Football League, the National Hockey League, and most recently, the National Basketball Association and every single Grand Slam in Tennis. Now, each sport has its own channel to dedicate programming and access to it.
ESPN Radio has formed a network across the country, simulcasting its morning show and making its hosts and contributors into celebrities. They were late to the sports radio boom, but with its sheer reach, access, and dollars, some of the smaller fish might be blown out of the water. But, satellite radio is a "big fish" answer to ESPN. Fox Sports Radio, league-run stations, as well as Sirius XM's own sports stations, are great alternatives.
The time will come where it will either cost ESPN an exorbitant amount of money to keep broadcasting major sports on its air or the leagues could air more of their own original content. For instance, when the MLB television contract with ESPN and FOX is up, MLB can charge an obscene amount of money for those networks to keep a MLB presence or else MLB Network could take a much larger position in its own product.
The monster that ESPN played a large part in creating may end up consuming them. They have made tremendous strides in covering sports, but, along with that, they have created personalities that think they are larger than the sports they cover and they have become just about unwatchable. ESPN has also helped further the new-world athlete personality by boiling down a game into a 40-second set of slam-dunks and home runs and coddling those athletes to stay on their good sides.
ESPN can still save themselves and perform a service to the sports fan, getting back into their good graces without turning them off with cross-promotion, over-promotion, and bombastic chest-thumping. They can halt the impeding exodus that indirectly points fans to get their information from the ever-growing list of alternatives.
How about showing highlights of every major sporting event, every day. You know, like in the old days? Enough with the commentary from your "experts" or puff pieces during the show.
How about retaining the right people and employing capable people to carry the SportsCenter torch? I have missed the Dan Patricks and Keith Olbermanns and Bob Leys from doing SportsCenter on a regular basis. If they soured on the product, there had to be a reason.
Nothing will happen until it has to. But, the time ESPN will have to do something may be sooner than you think.
Next show: Sunday night (7/26) at 8pm ET on BlogTalkRadio.com.
As I talked about this in the waning moments of last week's show (#16), ESPN has fallen far. In this new frontier of the sports blogosphere, 24/7 updates to many sports websites, and league-owned cable networks, ESPN is not as necessary as they used to be.
The days of "The Big Show", "NHL2nite", and the halcyon days of "Baseball Tonight" are all in the rear-view mirror. Favoritism towards some teams, so centered on the Yankees at the beginning of the decade, I used to playfully call the network ESPNY. They also have showed favoritism to Boston in recent years, too. ESPN has become best buddies with the athletes and management they cover, getting athletes and other sports figures to do the "ESPN car wash" of "Mike & Mike in the Morning", "ESPN FirstTake", "Pardon the Interruption", and other TV and radio shows.
Then, there are the dreaded ESPYs. Awarding athletes to honor and spotlight the best in sports is okay, but turning the event into a red-carpet event, with the network and its reporters rubbing elbows with them shows a compromise of integrity and good reporting.
The whole situation this week with ESPN's treatment, or lack thereof, of the accusation of Ben Roethlisberger in a Lake Tahoe hotel and casino is an interesting study of how ESPN handles its bedfellows. The handling of the situation by ESPN has become the much bigger story here. I mean, the picture of Big Ben in the article on the CNN.com site even has an ESPY logo in the background! Roethlisberger is also participating in an episode of a new reality show, called "Shaq Vs." with Shaquille O'Neal on ABC, which owns ESPN, on August 8th. Also, ESPN may want to tread lightly on this issue that involves the face of the defending Super Bowl Champions considering ESPN's wedded relationship to the NFL and its Monday Night Football television package.
This all got me to thinking...when did ESPN "jump the shark"?
* Was it when Keith Olbermann left, effectively ending the SportsCenter portion of "The Big Show" and leading to countless pretenders to jump in the anchor's seat and try to yell and catch-phrase their way to super-stardom? Word was that Olbermann had an ego the size of Rhode Island, but you have to agree when Dan Patrick-Keith Olbermann tag-teamed, it was "must-watch TV".
* Was it hiring Rush Limbaugh to join the cast on "NFL Countdown"? That was a dud if there ever was one. It started poorly and went downhill from there, climaxing in a racial comment on Donovan McNabb's abilities at quarterback.
* Was it introducing the ESPYs? They now have red-carpet reporting to greet the athletes and their guests waving and smiling as they enter the event.
* Was it the 25th Anniversary cross-promotion and endless chest-thumping and retrospectives? If I see Chris Berman on the sidelines of a 49er comeback victory in the early '80s one more time, I am asking my wife to put a parental block on ESPN and not tell me the combination to unlock it.
* Was it the pre-eminence of the "sport" of poker in prime-time? ESPN has aired fringe sports since its beginnings, but that was when they did not have money or access to get the big boys on their air. They can, but they still choose to air this stuff.
* Was it the corporate synergy of "ESPN Radio", "ESPN The Magazine", ESPNZone restaurants, "ESPN on ABC"? I thought "ESPN 8: The Ocho" was a joke, but I think it really is an idea about 10 years too soon for the ESPN execs.
* Was it the rise and subsequent downfall of Fox Sports Net? FSN forced ESPN to up the ante and dumb-down its content to appeal to the masses instead of staying the course and forcing everyone else to wise up. It came and went, leaving ESPN's better days in its wake.
* Was it the ill-fated attempt at a Barry Bonds reality show? I think that is when I consciously stopped watching.
I have greatly lost interest in ESPN, mainly because of the myriad other options available to the sports fan. The funny thing is: if ESPN was not so good at what it did in its infancy and its adolescence, perhaps we would not have the options we have today.
ESPN has pulled together programming from Major League Baseball, the National Football League, the National Hockey League, and most recently, the National Basketball Association and every single Grand Slam in Tennis. Now, each sport has its own channel to dedicate programming and access to it.
ESPN Radio has formed a network across the country, simulcasting its morning show and making its hosts and contributors into celebrities. They were late to the sports radio boom, but with its sheer reach, access, and dollars, some of the smaller fish might be blown out of the water. But, satellite radio is a "big fish" answer to ESPN. Fox Sports Radio, league-run stations, as well as Sirius XM's own sports stations, are great alternatives.
The time will come where it will either cost ESPN an exorbitant amount of money to keep broadcasting major sports on its air or the leagues could air more of their own original content. For instance, when the MLB television contract with ESPN and FOX is up, MLB can charge an obscene amount of money for those networks to keep a MLB presence or else MLB Network could take a much larger position in its own product.
The monster that ESPN played a large part in creating may end up consuming them. They have made tremendous strides in covering sports, but, along with that, they have created personalities that think they are larger than the sports they cover and they have become just about unwatchable. ESPN has also helped further the new-world athlete personality by boiling down a game into a 40-second set of slam-dunks and home runs and coddling those athletes to stay on their good sides.
ESPN can still save themselves and perform a service to the sports fan, getting back into their good graces without turning them off with cross-promotion, over-promotion, and bombastic chest-thumping. They can halt the impeding exodus that indirectly points fans to get their information from the ever-growing list of alternatives.
How about showing highlights of every major sporting event, every day. You know, like in the old days? Enough with the commentary from your "experts" or puff pieces during the show.
How about retaining the right people and employing capable people to carry the SportsCenter torch? I have missed the Dan Patricks and Keith Olbermanns and Bob Leys from doing SportsCenter on a regular basis. If they soured on the product, there had to be a reason.
Nothing will happen until it has to. But, the time ESPN will have to do something may be sooner than you think.
Next show: Sunday night (7/26) at 8pm ET on BlogTalkRadio.com.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
What Biron Means to the Islanders
First, required reading from islandersindependent.com about the Martin Biron signing and his latest take on the Rick DiPietro situation, a situation he had pegged from the start.
Martin Biron was the goalie I wished the Islanders would target out of the gate. While I was not really upset about Dwayne Roloson (he did play 63 games last year as a 39-year-old), Biron gives the Islanders a goalie tandem that could be our best goalie tandem since Glenn Healy and Mark Fitzpatrick. DiPietro can take his time and get better for good, if that is even possible at this point.
A couple of interesting notes after seeing the news breaking on Twitter and reading about this yesterday afternoon:
1. Biron and Roloson both have the same agent, Mark Witkin. The Roloson move made sense for Roloson, but, if you're Biron, are you wondering what your agent is thinking? Or is the market that dry for goaltending help? The only other potential "impact" goalie to move this offseason was Edmonton bringing in Khabibulin to replace Roloson.
2. Did Snow and Gordon make this move to make absolutely sure that DP does not come back too soon? I know the doctors and coaching staff will say one thing, but I can see DiPietro acting like a petulant teenager when he gets close to being game-ready. This way, DiPietro cannot persuade anyone and does not have to because the Islanders have major-league quality depth at the most important position in hockey.
Though the Biron deal fell into the Islanders' laps, they are also showing they are planning for more than a 12th- or 13th-place finish this year. What else do you think GM Garth Snow has up his sleeve? Alex Tanguay? A trade for Jonathan Cheechoo to help the Sharks clear out cap room? Sign Phil Kessel to an offer sheet? I've heard all of these are possible from my Twitter friends. I don't think the Islanders are done yet and they need more scoring and more grit. Grit is something that will be cheaper much closer to the season. But, scoring doesn't grow on trees.
Now, how does Islanders Country feel about the franchise goaltender? Personally, I have always liked DiPietro. I have always wanted to see him succeed and still believe he could be one of the top five goaltenders in the league for a long time. But, knowing that he put himself in front of the team by trying to play when he shouldn't put the team at a big disadvantage both before the season (no goaltending depth in the organization, thinking DP would be fine) and early in the season (DP was on the bench, but was really injured and could not play) was a bad move. It was almost as bad for the front office to believe him.
When the team got off to a rough start, the fingers were justifiably pointed at the most important position in hockey: goaltending. Yes, Joey MacDonald had a good November, but eventually, everything caught up with him. Sure, Yann Danis had some nice starts along the way, but December and January killed any chances the Islanders had of a good season.
But, look at the other side of the coin. If the Islanders had capable goaltending when DiPietro went down, maybe the Islanders are not one of the worst teams in the league, do not win the Draft Lottery, and do not select John Tavares for a franchise rebirth. Also, the organization may not have reacted this same way this offseason with respect to signing and drafting goaltenders to both fill out the Opening Night roster and replenish the farm system. If DiPietro put the team first, goaltending might actually be more of a question mark right now.
I had very low expectations for the Islanders coming into last season and I was hoping the kids learned. I said early in the year that I would be more upset with a 7-2 loss in March than I was in October (the Columbus Day game against Buffalo was bad, but I hoped we learned from it). That did not happen and they came in even lower than I expected. But, last season was a big sacrifice for everyone: players, coaches, front office, ownership, and, most of all, fans.
This year, a lot of that "learning" has to pay off. It already has in the front office, who will not be fooled again by listening to the franchise goaltender. No matter what other signings or trades the Isles make between now and October 3rd, when the season starts, guys like Kyle Okposo, Josh Bailey, Blake Comeau, Sean Bergenheim, and (gulp) Jeff Tambellini have to learn from all of this and come out the other side much better for it. Otherwise, it'll be another long season.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
