2.10.03
Zuerst: A quick thought about Rush Limbaugh. Neal Boortz says it well. I see nothing racist about his statement that "The media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well." I also find it curious that this allegation of drug abuse by Mr Limbaugh comes out now. Many folks on the left scream about the "vast right-wing conspiracy". Call me Oliver Stone, but the fact of the matter is that it appears that the NYDN is just repeating news found in the National Enquirer. I guess that all those "LIsa Marie has alien baby" may have credibility after all. Either that or the NYDN is out to trash its competition.
College Football: More thoughts about the ACC: In an earlier journal entry, I mentioned that teams such as Syracuse and BC aren't really a good fit because they're northeastern schools, and playing primarily schools from a different region would harm recruiting. To this end, I pointed to Penn State. In analysing the choices for the ACC, I failed to remember that this was, at base, about money, and failed to mention the fact that major markets can help secure larger TV deals (the ACC's current TV deals, with ESPN, Raycom/JP, and ABC, expire in 2005 unless I'm mistaken). And BC still wants in - apparently they feel they can make more money in the ACC than in an 8-team football league and 16-team basketball league. Having said that, and acknowledging the fact that BC would bring a major market (Boston) into the ACC fold, I still think that it would be a mistake for BC to enter the league. Perhaps BC would bring in more money by joining the ACC. However, there are 12 teams at the football trough in the ACC, up from the 8 in the Big East. Now, there may be more in the football trough, due to a conference championship game, but is it enough to bring it to the Big East level per capita? Perhaps the biggest question is whether the TV deal will be more lucrative and in so being will raise TV revenues to a level that is competitive with the Big East per capita level. Another issue is travel costs: BC, in the Big East, has had opponents relatively close to Boston: Syracuse, Connecticut, Rutgers, Temple (football), St. John's (basketball), etc. In the ACC, the nearest member is Maryland, about 400 miles away as the crow flies. One of the other nearest is Virginia Tech, which was one of the farthest members in the Big East; indeed, only Miami was farther. Something to think about. And I think that the biggest TV deals involve rivalries and conference championships; the SEC, which distributed about $50m for football and basketball TV revenues last year, has built its reputation on its fierce rivalries. Its only major markets are Atlanta, New Orleans and Miami. The last time a TV contract was negotiated, the Big East had the whole Boston-Washington megalopolis corridor, which includes New York and Philadelphia. It also had Pittsburgh, Miami, Chicago (ND basketball). They got $15m for football from ABC and ESPN. I can't imagine that they got $37m for baskeball contracts. I can't even imagine that they got the $33m or so they would need to pay members proportionately (sharing football money with football schools, basketball money with b'ball schools) what SEC schools made. Maybe big markets aren't as important as thought. Eh. But what do I know.
On to my picks:
Will comment on my pro picks tomorrow. Ryan.
College Football: More thoughts about the ACC: In an earlier journal entry, I mentioned that teams such as Syracuse and BC aren't really a good fit because they're northeastern schools, and playing primarily schools from a different region would harm recruiting. To this end, I pointed to Penn State. In analysing the choices for the ACC, I failed to remember that this was, at base, about money, and failed to mention the fact that major markets can help secure larger TV deals (the ACC's current TV deals, with ESPN, Raycom/JP, and ABC, expire in 2005 unless I'm mistaken). And BC still wants in - apparently they feel they can make more money in the ACC than in an 8-team football league and 16-team basketball league. Having said that, and acknowledging the fact that BC would bring a major market (Boston) into the ACC fold, I still think that it would be a mistake for BC to enter the league. Perhaps BC would bring in more money by joining the ACC. However, there are 12 teams at the football trough in the ACC, up from the 8 in the Big East. Now, there may be more in the football trough, due to a conference championship game, but is it enough to bring it to the Big East level per capita? Perhaps the biggest question is whether the TV deal will be more lucrative and in so being will raise TV revenues to a level that is competitive with the Big East per capita level. Another issue is travel costs: BC, in the Big East, has had opponents relatively close to Boston: Syracuse, Connecticut, Rutgers, Temple (football), St. John's (basketball), etc. In the ACC, the nearest member is Maryland, about 400 miles away as the crow flies. One of the other nearest is Virginia Tech, which was one of the farthest members in the Big East; indeed, only Miami was farther. Something to think about. And I think that the biggest TV deals involve rivalries and conference championships; the SEC, which distributed about $50m for football and basketball TV revenues last year, has built its reputation on its fierce rivalries. Its only major markets are Atlanta, New Orleans and Miami. The last time a TV contract was negotiated, the Big East had the whole Boston-Washington megalopolis corridor, which includes New York and Philadelphia. It also had Pittsburgh, Miami, Chicago (ND basketball). They got $15m for football from ABC and ESPN. I can't imagine that they got $37m for baskeball contracts. I can't even imagine that they got the $33m or so they would need to pay members proportionately (sharing football money with football schools, basketball money with b'ball schools) what SEC schools made. Maybe big markets aren't as important as thought. Eh. But what do I know.
On to my picks:
- Miami and WVU are tied at half at 10. I'm surprised. I figured this would be a blowout for Miami at home. Shows what I know. I'd still pick Miami, but, as the game has started, I'll stay away from it.
- Va Tech will hammer Rutgers. Rutgers is 3-1, having lost at Michigan St. (no shame in that), and has won against Buffalo, Army and Navy. The three teams have a combined 2-11 record, with the two wins (both by Navy at home) against VMI (I-AA, recently left the Southern Conferene for the Big South; the SoCon is, often as not, the toughest football conference in I-AA, having such powers as App State, Furman and East Tenn. St. Marshall was, until they made the jump, in the SoCon) and Eastern Michigan (MAC doormat). Va Tech has gone undefeated thus far and this won't really be a test.
- Tennessee will beat Auburn. Maybe Auburn has put all the early-season unpleasantness behind them, but their two victories have come against Vandy (at least it's a conference game) and Western Kentucky (I-AA powerhouse). Tennessee has beaten a talented Florida team, and beat South Carolina in a classic "sandwich" game last week; a "sandwich" game is a game that most people expect you to win, between two much tougher games. Oftentimes, teams overlook the middle game, much to their peril.
- Northwestern has beaten Kansas, NU has beaten Duke (which isn't that impressive), NU should have beaten Air Force but for a late comeback, and its only really bad loss was against Miami of Ohio. Every team that NU has played thus far, with the exception of Duke, is getting votes in the polls, though only Ohio St and Air Force are ranked. Minnesota, on the other hand, has played nobody. And a mediocre Penn St. doesn't count. And this is the sandwich for Minnesota (Michigan goes to Minneapolis next week). Northwestern beats Minnesota in Evanston.
- Michigan beats Iowa. Couple of reasons, both emotional: Iowa destroyed Michigan last year in Ann Arbor, so U-M's looking for revenge. And Iowa wasn't ever really in it at Michigan St.
- Ugh. I have a game with two teams ranked in the teens, neither of which can really win the big game. Ugh. I'll take Texas to beat Kansas State, if only because the game is in Austin. But if there's a way that both can lose the big game, these two coaches will find it.
- Bonus CIC Pick!: Air Force beats Navy. Air Force is undefeated, and Navy is 2-2, losing at Rutgers by 3 touchdowns last week. I see nothing other than rivalry and service academy pride to suggest that Navy will keep this close. Maybe that's enough, but I don't think so.
Will comment on my pro picks tomorrow. Ryan.
Comments:
Post a Comment
