Showing posts with label Sunday Reads. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sunday Reads. Show all posts

Sunday Reading: Will the NCAA Make An Example of Oregon?

Sandwiched in between the minute-by-minute updates of the NFL's labor negotiations, breakdown of the BYU Honor Code and the start of college basketball's conference tournaments have been reports that the NCAA is showing an interest in the recruiting practices for the University of Oregon's football program.

Just in case you hadn't heard - and considering most of America's media has been swimming in Charlie Sheen's Tiger Blood all week, it's understandable - the short version of the story is that Oregon paid $28,000 to two men with close ties to a pair players who committed to the school. The university says the money was paid for recruiting services, including video tapes of the players. You can read about it in-depth here.

Oregon has been forthcoming about its payment of the middle men involved in the story. Since the expenditures can be found on the state's website, it's pretty hard to deny it. On the surface it all looks pretty shady, but whether any NCAA rules were broken isn't clear.

But as George Schroeder of the Register-Guard points out, this could be the beginning of some uncertain times in Eugene.
When it comes to the NCAA, this isn’t so much about hammering Oregon. The Ducks have simply provided the opening the NCAA has been waiting for: the chance to send a message about the expanding influence of street agents in football recruiting.
At best, Oregon is guilty of nothing more than being bad comparison shoppers. Anyone involved in any aspect of college recruiting (or just anyone with good sense) will tell you that paying $25,000 for tapes is ludicrous. But financial irresponsibility isn't necessarily against NCAA rules.

What is against the rules is paying someone considered to be a street agent to funnel athletes to your institution. In the worst case scenario, that's what Oregon could be found guilty of. It's a possibility that gains legitimacy when the mother of one of the players in question expresses concern that the man her son considered a friend and mentor was paid by the school he eventually chose.

In between the two extremes is a large, murky Purgatory of NCAA investigation. As Schroeder points out (and as any USC fan can tell you), it's hard for any athletic department to hold up under deep NCAA scrutiny. Even if Oregon is cleared of any of these latest recruiting issues, what else might come up in a deep investigation.

But there is another issue at work. The scourge of street agents and AAU coaches has left a stain on college basketball recruiting and appears to be spreading to football. As such, the NCAA believes it has a chance to nip the problem in the bud. That could mean bad news to the people in Eugene (and College Station, Clemson and elsewhere). If there is a touch of impropriety, does the infraction committee drop the hammer on the schools involved?

This time, Lyles delivers NCAA's full attention

With the ongoing investigation into Cam Newton's recruitment to Auburn (and other places), the potential of having the BCS runner-up under scrutiny is the last thing college football needs.

Sunday Reading: The NBA Sky Isn't Really Falling

The idea that LeBron James taking his talents to South Beach to pair up with Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh was the beginning of the end of the NBA as we know it picked up steam again with the great ado that was last week's trade deadline.

Carmelo Anthony finally willing his way out of Denver? Utah trading Deron Williams to New Jersey before they get Carmelo'd? Chris Paul possibly landing at Madison Square Garden? Dwight Howard possibly taking his Superman act to Los Angeles?

It's unsustainable! It's unfair! It's the death of the NBA! Or is it?

On the same day the new-look Oklahoma City Thunder play the Los Angeles Lakers and the newly-paired Carmar'e (or should it be Amelo?) meet up with The Heatles, there are more than a few people thinking that we need to hold off on the doomsaying.

After all, this isn't totally unprecedented, as Harvey Araton reminds us in the New York Times:
But the concept actually did the league a world of good during the 1980s when Larry Bird’s Celtics and Magic Johnson’s Lakers had star-studded rosters that helped launch the sport into the global marketplace that eventually became Michael Jordan’s celestial airspace.
Araton argues that fans should embrace the idea of stars teaming up, remembering a not-too-distant era when top tier players each wanted Jordanesque billing and consistently had problems co-existing. What it led to was nearly a decade dominance by the Lakers, San Antonio Spurs and Detroit Pistons who were able to build their team around a pair of superstars and a cast of strong role players willing to subjugate their game for the greater cause.

So why should players catch heat for that? According to Dave Hyde of the Miami Sun-Sentinel, they shouldn't. Hyde's opinion isn't a new idea nor is it particularly radical. But it is a deep breath moment in a room full of hyperventilators.
But this fear that players are overstepping their bounds is as overstated as big-market teams suddenly destroying small-market teams. What's happening is dumb, short-sighted, mismanaged, small-market teams are being penalized.
As a fan of one of those dumb, short-sighted, mismanaged, small-market teams (when will my GS-Dubs have their moment in the sun?), I grudgingly have to accept that the franchise has been its own worst enemy for the better part of two decades now. But I also have a hard time believing that if the revenue gap continues to increase amongst the big and small market teams that we'll ever see a real diversity of teams that win championships.

Then again, that's not new either, says the Denver Post's Benjamin Hochman. Since 1980, only eight teams have won NBA titles - a number that might have stood at seven if Jordan hadn't left to play baseball. But Nuggets coach George Karl doesn't think it has to be that way. Karl wonders why a group of well-coached, unselfish role players working as a team couldn't one day hoist the Larry O'Brien Trophy.
"Why can't you win with 10 really good players? Maybe not the top five at their position, maybe not even the top 10 or top 15, but what about a guy at every position in the top 15, top 20? And they play hard and they play as a team. And then you have one of the best benches in the game. Why can't that win a championship?"
That's a wonderfully rosy statement from a guy who has been around professional basketball since debuting with the Spurs in the ABA in 1973. In theory, he's right. Why couldn't 10 really good players compete for a championship? After all, we've seen it work at the high school and college levels. But the NBA isn't college. And it damn sure isn't high school.

To build the type of team Karl envisions takes time, a luxury NBA franchises rarely afford head coaches. Thanks to the resignation of Jerry Sloan in Utah, Gregg Popovich is the NBA's longest tenured coach at 15 seasons in one place. In today's professional sports, that's an eternity. Even if you do keep a coach in place, how do you convince even a core of five players (let alone ten) to stick around?

Nonetheless, all three pieces make an interesting counter balance to the hysteria that followed the trade deadline.

This could also be something to remember as the NBA's labor fight ramps up during the summer. Initial indications are that the league will do what it can to break the union. LeBron, Kobe and Carmelo have mostly succeeded in building the teams they want to play for. With small market teams crying foul, will that forced autonomy backfire on the next crop of superstars looking for their chance to play amateur GM? Stay tuned.

Wanna stay up on the latest with New Era Radio? Check us out on Twitter!

Sunday Reading: NFL Players Get Real World Inspiration

Recently I've commented on the sometimes fractured solidarity of the NFL players as the expiration date for the league's collective bargaining agreement draws near.

News of a potential NFL work stoppage has begun to seep over from the sports sections to the business section. But in the past week, it appears that many "real world" issues are starting to find their way into the league's affairs.

Some inside and outside of the NFL Players Association have questioned union head DeMaurice Smith's ability to get a deal done without giving up major concessions. While other players have publicly expressed their support, Smith used the inspiration of the recent Egyptian revolution to help make his case and galvanize his constituents at the same time.

Via The Nation:
“You know,” he said, “we watched things unfold in a far-off country where a lot of the discussion preceding the protests was purely social media, people connecting. We have an ability to get our ‘let us play’ ad out. We know that anybody listening can type in ‘let us play’ and that ad will pop up and, frankly, if networks want to make a decision to boycott us, keep us off, those are the kind of things that get me fired up and let me know that I’m on the right side of right.”
His words were given a boost by a pair of news stories peripherally related to football later in the week. It began with the ongoing public worker protests in Wisconsin. Several current and former Green Bay Packers publicly extended their support for the unions, the most notable being All-Pro cornerback Charles Woodson.

Woodson's statement was about more than looking good in the eyes of Packer fans (although it certainly won't hurt). It was also a message to owners from one of the league's elected NFLPA player representatives about the union's resolve to fight.

The second story was the tragic suicide of former Chicago Bear Dave Duerson. Just a day after his death, reports surfaced that Duerson believed football led to a degenerative brain disease and left his brain intact in order to have it studied. The idea has strengthened current players' objections to the idea of an 18-game regular season. It should also boost the union's push for better benefits for retired players.


DeMaurice Smith: On an NFL Lockout and Inspiration From Egypt

For perhaps the first time in the history of NFL labor negotiations, the players have significant leverage. The league is reportedly earning billions every year (and was recently reported to be nearing a $2 billion extension with ESPN to continue broadcasting Monday Night Football), yet is asking the players to take a "trust us" approach over owners' claims of financial losses. The players are being asked to work more for less money while the league will still collect television revenue even if there is no football next season. 

Everything is aligned for Smith and the NFLPA to begin their stand here. If this week doesn't build player unity, what will?

Sunday Reading: Breaking Down the NFL Labor Situation

Now that the NFL season is over just about every piece of news about the league has something to do with the continuing labor negotiations and the threatened lockout. There are plenty of great insiders on the Internet with plenty of great insight on what's going on with the negotiations and predictions on what could happen next.

But the most thorough analysis of the root causes that have led us to where we are may be on a blog hosted by a group promoting Austrian School ideals.

(Don't worry, I had to look it up myself. Click here.)

In a two-part blog post, the author comments on everything from the rookie wage scale and public stadium financing to the league's stance on gambling and Roger Goodell's demagoguery. Through it all, the owners are roasted for being a staid, ineffectual billionaire boys' club riding a wave of unprecedented success created by the players, television networks and the public at large.

Via Mises Economic Blog:
The NFL produces three things: stadium debt, intellectual property, and bureaucracy. None of these things should be confused with “free market” values. The league is a prime example of what happens when you mix politically influential egos with easy credit and a media environment that largely promotes economic ignorance. You have the perfect boom business. 
But all booms eventually end. NFL acolytes — and they are presently the majority — will insist, as Homer Simpson once did, that “everything lasts forever.” One media writer I correspond with insisted to me recently the NFL will be even more popular in 20 years then it is today. Go back to 1991 and think about all of the businesses you could have said that about, incorrectly, at that time.
There was a time not long ago when sports was a separate entity from politics and economics. As the NFL and other leagues have continued to expand in both size and monetarily, they have started to intertwine with policy and finance. This is a fascinating read showing how all sides interconnect.

Behind the Lockout, Part I
Behind the Lockout, Part II

Turns out this could be as good an argument as the NFLPA could have hoped for. Maybe it can stop its members from taking shots at one another.