Huge thanks to everyone who emailed about or retweeted or commented on yesterday's post about ESPN's push into local.
So on the eve of SEC Media Day(s) -- 800 credentialed media attending! -- my SN colleague Dave Curtis pulled out something from the old Dan Shanoff playbook:
This year's BCS mess will be... more than 2 unbeaten teams. That's the doomsday scenario that I've been projecting every year for many, many years, so naturally I took the bait and led today's SN column with it.
This season that could be Florida, the Oklahoma-Texas winner and USC. Well, probably not USC, if history holds. Maybe Penn State (cough-Iowa!-cough). Maybe VA Tech or GA Tech? Not out of the ACC, where losing when you shouldn't is part of the league charter.
Where Curtis goes a little overboard is in insisting that SIX teams would go unbeaten. Including Notre Dame! (Notre Dame?!?!)
I actually think we'll end with three: Florida, the Oklahoma-Texas winner and Boise State, which will gripe but head for the Fiesta Bowl. (As I said in the column: I'm sure Boise is a good team, but 20 teams could go unbeaten if they played Boise's schedule.)
This season seems to size up much like 2005, when a seemingly unbeatable, where-do-they-rank-all-time unbeaten USC (played this year by Florida) collided with a ridiculously good (and motivated) unbeaten champ from the Big 12 (reprising its 2005 role, Texas).
The glory that is the college football regular season is that no matter how sure I am in July that multiple teams will go unbeaten -- or how sure we all are that multiple teams will go unbeaten once we get into October -- something ALWAYS happens to obliterate our expectations.
How amazing. Just weeks away.
Meanwhile:
*Big Ben? This will quickly become a non-story.
*Favre by Friday? Let it be Friday afternoon, so I can ignore it all weekend.
*Magic rule NBA offseason: Barnes another great piece.
*Nash back in PHX: Bet he's in NYC by All-Star Break 2011.
*Will the Dodgers drop Halladay chase since Jason Schmidt won a game? (That may set a new bar for me for shallow analysis -- and that's saying something.)
Complete SN column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Monday, July 20, 2009
Varsity Dad Today: Scheduling Births Around Sports
In honor of Ross Fisher, today's big Varsity Dad post was about scheduling births around sports events. It's one thing to do it if you are competing -- how about if you are merely a fan, not wanting to miss a game? That's what I ran into last October. Anyone else have a similar experience? Check the post here.
ESPN.com vs Local Newspaper Sports
How big is ESPN’s move into local (or “hyperlocal”) online sports media? Very very big.
It was ground-breaking when they announced the pilot move into Chicago. And it’s even bigger today, when they will announce a move into New York, LA and Dallas.
So big that the New York Times put that story on its front page today.
So big that it should make the local sports outlets very very nervous.
Here is the money stat: "In less than three months, ESPN Chicago has become the city's top sports site, attracting about 590,000 unique visitors in June... Second place went to the Tribune's online sports section with 455,000 unique visitors."
The Tribune's online sports hub has been around for years, dominating the city. ESPNChicago.com has been around for...um...months. And it's already winning. (Or, perhaps, has it already won?)
Local was always a great play for ESPN -- they have the radio affiliates, ESPN.com has a ton of locally adaptable content (not to mention the promotional firehose), and -- on the flip side -- newspaper sports sites have long been neglected and/or mis-managed. That has caught up with the newspapers.
Here's an unintentionally funny quote from LA Times sports associate editor Randy Harvey: "It would be foolish to underestimate ESPN, but it comes down to resources. I don't see them being able to replicate what we do."
Do what, Randy? Cut your hockey coverage? Let marquee columnists like JA Adande leave for...oh, let's see, ESPN.com? (Um, whose content do you think will be leading ESPNLA? Let's see: You could be reading the leading columnist of LA sports on ESPNLA.com...or you could read the place he USED to work, before he bolted?) How about the way Harvey has let Bill Plaschke become more TV personality than newspaper columnist -- on...ESPN? (Again: ESPNLA will have Plaschke video from Around the Horn. What's LATimes.com got?)
The Trib's editor for digital media, Bill Adee, said this: "We are looking forward to the local sports turf battle in the weeks and months ahead." Memo to Adee: The battle seems to have been lost already. On your watch.
(And, Bill, if you think hiring Jay Mariotti will fix things, think again. Guess where Jay spends 250 afternoons a year -- and devotes most of his energy: ESPN. Instead of spending all that money on Mariotti, take his salary and cut it into 10 pieces, then go out and hire every top local blogger. I can offer that advice for free because of the confidence I have that it will go unheeded.)
What local newspaper sports editors don't get is that their reporting has become commoditized -- everyone gets the game recaps and the box scores. ESPN does a better job of presenting both, plus other kinds of stats, plus a better job of presenting the teams playing your teams.
Here's a basic case study: Does the Times think it has a lock on the Lakers? ESPNLA.com has (a) full-time TV reporters based in LA, (b) JA Adande, (c) a top Lakers blog (Forum Blue and Gold) as part of ESPN.com's TrueHoop Network, (d) a local radio affiliate and (e) the power of ESPN. Oh, and Bill Simmons is based in LA. Good night, game over.
As quickly as a good nugget can be reported by someone like the Times, a quick-acting (and inexpensive) ESPNLA intern (or low-paid editor) can have it on the ESPNLA site. It's called aggregation, and you can already find it daily on ESPN.com's Rumor Central pages. That's the craziest part: The economics of ESPN's local strategy are jaw-droppingly cheap, especially relative to local newspapers' costs.
Local newspapers' sports power was already under erosion on other fronts, besides ESPN: SB Nation has put together the best collection of team-based blogs found online, across every sport, in every market, with coverage that -- yes -- complements local news, but also goes a long way to displace it. Its distribution deal with Yahoo -- itself a traffic firehose -- amplified that power exponentially.
In an ideal world, the $8 million that SB Nation just got from Comcast includes a commitment from Comcast to use SB Nation to power its local cable affiliates' web presences. And here's one more idea for Comcast: Drop the notion of Versus as "place to find niche sports whose rights ESPN didn't want" and pivot it to be about "Your Team," leveraging Comcast's local sports networks and the new investment in SB Nation.
Meanwhile, Fanhouse, currently focused on broad national coverage, is well-positioned to leapfrog AOL's reinvention this summer with smart investments that drill down locally. When new AOL CEO Tim Armstrong (a huge sports fan, btw) talks about the success of AOL's content business, Fanhouse has to be near the top of the list. (Disclaimer: I began my career at an AOL-funded sports content start-up later acquired by AOL, and I most recently worked at an online media company whose original investor was Armstrong.)
NBC is also getting into the local sports game -- NBC has been building out their city-specific presences and, through Fanhouse alum John Ness, staffing them with quality sports-blogging talent that increases user value, drives search discoverability and gives the local TV networks something to compete with the newspaper sites.
Notice who isn't in that conversation? Newspapers. This isn't meant to be a "death-of-newspaper" pile-on. As any good sports blogger will tell you, we mostly LOVE the newspaper sport-beat reporters, as everyone should, because they are the ones who produce much the content that the rest of us spend hours and hours talking about. (That's not to say that can't change, won't change or isn't changing as I type this.)
As I wrote when ESPN first announced its intention to move into Chicago, it is brilliant -- they are serving fans of local teams as well (or better) than the longstanding newspapers in the city, at a fraction of the cost. I have no solutions for the newspaper companies -- except perhaps to suggest that they call ESPN.com and see if they can get a distribution deal via the ESPN local sites.
I have gotten a lot of emails and questions from folks about why I launched TimTeblog.com last week. For those who don't know, it is a site focused entirely on covering Tim Tebow -- credible original analysis, smart comprehensive curation, guest-posts, fun conceits.
In short: I am covering Tim Tebow as a beat -- just like someone covers Florida football or the SEC or college football generally.
It sounds a little crazy, right up until you recognize that Tebow is THE biggest story in sports for the next six months (and the three months after that, if you count his preeminent X-factor position leading up to the NFL Draft). Last week, I used the analogy of ESPN dedicating a full-time reporter to covering Barry Bonds. (Or even a journalist who spends a season "inside" with a team or player to write a book.) The feedback has been tremendously positive (maybe because fans -- Florida fans, college football fans, fans everywhere -- are intrigued by Tebow).
And, guess what? If you're looking for Tebow coverage, my blog is the best destination you'll find online. Better than the hometown Gainesville Sun. Better than the leading Florida football blogs. Better than Yahoo's college football blog. Better than ESPN. Why? Because Tebow is my entire focus -- you are better off checking my coverage, because I'll have everything those folks have PLUS everything else created by everyone else. (Properly credited, of course!)
What I don't have for my Tebow site is a major distribution avenue -- yet. It is increasingly showing up high on Google Searches. It will get linked from Florida football blogs (or other folks dropping in to cover something about Tebow); with that comes increased credibility and visibility -- the direct traffic will come when fans who want great analysis of Tim Tebow (or just a one-stop shop for their Tebow news) hear about the site and give it a try, then satisfied, make it a habit. And I can (and will) strike a partnership deal with a mainstream sports site that would benefit from expertly produced full-time coverage of the biggest single ongoing story in sports this fall.
In that respect, it is my own "hyperlocal" product -- "hyperlocal" reinterpreted. "Local" isn't where you live, necessarily; it is what you care about, in a very specific way. Just ask the 590,000 fans of Chicago sports -- many (even most) of whom probably don't live in Chicago but care passionately about their Chicago teams.
And are now being more than well-served by ESPN.
More as this continues to develop.
-- D.S.
UPDATE: Good read from SBJ/SBD about the pressure on leagues that decreased newspaper staffing/coverage creates. The alternative take is that the leagues should be partnering more aggressively with the innovators -- and obviously embracing more innovation themselves.
(Ironic detail: Lynn Hoppes, the former president of the Associated Press Sports Editors, is quoted; a couple months ago, he left newspapers to run my alma mater, ESPN.com's Page 2.)
It was ground-breaking when they announced the pilot move into Chicago. And it’s even bigger today, when they will announce a move into New York, LA and Dallas.
So big that the New York Times put that story on its front page today.
So big that it should make the local sports outlets very very nervous.
Here is the money stat: "In less than three months, ESPN Chicago has become the city's top sports site, attracting about 590,000 unique visitors in June... Second place went to the Tribune's online sports section with 455,000 unique visitors."
The Tribune's online sports hub has been around for years, dominating the city. ESPNChicago.com has been around for...um...months. And it's already winning. (Or, perhaps, has it already won?)
Local was always a great play for ESPN -- they have the radio affiliates, ESPN.com has a ton of locally adaptable content (not to mention the promotional firehose), and -- on the flip side -- newspaper sports sites have long been neglected and/or mis-managed. That has caught up with the newspapers.
Here's an unintentionally funny quote from LA Times sports associate editor Randy Harvey: "It would be foolish to underestimate ESPN, but it comes down to resources. I don't see them being able to replicate what we do."
Do what, Randy? Cut your hockey coverage? Let marquee columnists like JA Adande leave for...oh, let's see, ESPN.com? (Um, whose content do you think will be leading ESPNLA? Let's see: You could be reading the leading columnist of LA sports on ESPNLA.com...or you could read the place he USED to work, before he bolted?) How about the way Harvey has let Bill Plaschke become more TV personality than newspaper columnist -- on...ESPN? (Again: ESPNLA will have Plaschke video from Around the Horn. What's LATimes.com got?)
The Trib's editor for digital media, Bill Adee, said this: "We are looking forward to the local sports turf battle in the weeks and months ahead." Memo to Adee: The battle seems to have been lost already. On your watch.
(And, Bill, if you think hiring Jay Mariotti will fix things, think again. Guess where Jay spends 250 afternoons a year -- and devotes most of his energy: ESPN. Instead of spending all that money on Mariotti, take his salary and cut it into 10 pieces, then go out and hire every top local blogger. I can offer that advice for free because of the confidence I have that it will go unheeded.)
What local newspaper sports editors don't get is that their reporting has become commoditized -- everyone gets the game recaps and the box scores. ESPN does a better job of presenting both, plus other kinds of stats, plus a better job of presenting the teams playing your teams.
Here's a basic case study: Does the Times think it has a lock on the Lakers? ESPNLA.com has (a) full-time TV reporters based in LA, (b) JA Adande, (c) a top Lakers blog (Forum Blue and Gold) as part of ESPN.com's TrueHoop Network, (d) a local radio affiliate and (e) the power of ESPN. Oh, and Bill Simmons is based in LA. Good night, game over.
As quickly as a good nugget can be reported by someone like the Times, a quick-acting (and inexpensive) ESPNLA intern (or low-paid editor) can have it on the ESPNLA site. It's called aggregation, and you can already find it daily on ESPN.com's Rumor Central pages. That's the craziest part: The economics of ESPN's local strategy are jaw-droppingly cheap, especially relative to local newspapers' costs.
Local newspapers' sports power was already under erosion on other fronts, besides ESPN: SB Nation has put together the best collection of team-based blogs found online, across every sport, in every market, with coverage that -- yes -- complements local news, but also goes a long way to displace it. Its distribution deal with Yahoo -- itself a traffic firehose -- amplified that power exponentially.
In an ideal world, the $8 million that SB Nation just got from Comcast includes a commitment from Comcast to use SB Nation to power its local cable affiliates' web presences. And here's one more idea for Comcast: Drop the notion of Versus as "place to find niche sports whose rights ESPN didn't want" and pivot it to be about "Your Team," leveraging Comcast's local sports networks and the new investment in SB Nation.
Meanwhile, Fanhouse, currently focused on broad national coverage, is well-positioned to leapfrog AOL's reinvention this summer with smart investments that drill down locally. When new AOL CEO Tim Armstrong (a huge sports fan, btw) talks about the success of AOL's content business, Fanhouse has to be near the top of the list. (Disclaimer: I began my career at an AOL-funded sports content start-up later acquired by AOL, and I most recently worked at an online media company whose original investor was Armstrong.)
NBC is also getting into the local sports game -- NBC has been building out their city-specific presences and, through Fanhouse alum John Ness, staffing them with quality sports-blogging talent that increases user value, drives search discoverability and gives the local TV networks something to compete with the newspaper sites.
Notice who isn't in that conversation? Newspapers. This isn't meant to be a "death-of-newspaper" pile-on. As any good sports blogger will tell you, we mostly LOVE the newspaper sport-beat reporters, as everyone should, because they are the ones who produce much the content that the rest of us spend hours and hours talking about. (That's not to say that can't change, won't change or isn't changing as I type this.)
As I wrote when ESPN first announced its intention to move into Chicago, it is brilliant -- they are serving fans of local teams as well (or better) than the longstanding newspapers in the city, at a fraction of the cost. I have no solutions for the newspaper companies -- except perhaps to suggest that they call ESPN.com and see if they can get a distribution deal via the ESPN local sites.
I have gotten a lot of emails and questions from folks about why I launched TimTeblog.com last week. For those who don't know, it is a site focused entirely on covering Tim Tebow -- credible original analysis, smart comprehensive curation, guest-posts, fun conceits.
In short: I am covering Tim Tebow as a beat -- just like someone covers Florida football or the SEC or college football generally.
It sounds a little crazy, right up until you recognize that Tebow is THE biggest story in sports for the next six months (and the three months after that, if you count his preeminent X-factor position leading up to the NFL Draft). Last week, I used the analogy of ESPN dedicating a full-time reporter to covering Barry Bonds. (Or even a journalist who spends a season "inside" with a team or player to write a book.) The feedback has been tremendously positive (maybe because fans -- Florida fans, college football fans, fans everywhere -- are intrigued by Tebow).
And, guess what? If you're looking for Tebow coverage, my blog is the best destination you'll find online. Better than the hometown Gainesville Sun. Better than the leading Florida football blogs. Better than Yahoo's college football blog. Better than ESPN. Why? Because Tebow is my entire focus -- you are better off checking my coverage, because I'll have everything those folks have PLUS everything else created by everyone else. (Properly credited, of course!)
What I don't have for my Tebow site is a major distribution avenue -- yet. It is increasingly showing up high on Google Searches. It will get linked from Florida football blogs (or other folks dropping in to cover something about Tebow); with that comes increased credibility and visibility -- the direct traffic will come when fans who want great analysis of Tim Tebow (or just a one-stop shop for their Tebow news) hear about the site and give it a try, then satisfied, make it a habit. And I can (and will) strike a partnership deal with a mainstream sports site that would benefit from expertly produced full-time coverage of the biggest single ongoing story in sports this fall.
In that respect, it is my own "hyperlocal" product -- "hyperlocal" reinterpreted. "Local" isn't where you live, necessarily; it is what you care about, in a very specific way. Just ask the 590,000 fans of Chicago sports -- many (even most) of whom probably don't live in Chicago but care passionately about their Chicago teams.
And are now being more than well-served by ESPN.
More as this continues to develop.
-- D.S.
UPDATE: Good read from SBJ/SBD about the pressure on leagues that decreased newspaper staffing/coverage creates. The alternative take is that the leagues should be partnering more aggressively with the innovators -- and obviously embracing more innovation themselves.
(Ironic detail: Lynn Hoppes, the former president of the Associated Press Sports Editors, is quoted; a couple months ago, he left newspapers to run my alma mater, ESPN.com's Page 2.)
Monday 07/20 Quickie: Tom Watson,
Vick, Favre, Halladay, Jamario, More
How could I NOT lead today's SN column with Tom Watson? Let's discuss:
*When was the last time a championship RUNNER-UP eclipsed the champ?
*This was the greatest moment of Tom Watson's ridiculously awesome career. It's incredible: He rewrote the basic story of his career, 10-20 years after it really peaked.
*What was more improbable: Watson or that a Tiger-less golf tournament would have huge buzz?
*Tiger topping Nicklaus's major title total is easy; let's see Woods finish as the runner-up at a major at age 59.
(At a minimum, I think that if Tiger had any ideas about not playing into his late-50s, they are gone now -- I'll bet he is already feeling competitive about topping Watson in 25 years.)
Truly, this was a transcendent moment in sports -- certainly this year, probably this decade, arguably among golf's all-time great moments.
How many golf results -- how many sports results -- do you truly remember vividly? I think that "Remember Watson in '09?" will stand as one of those.
More you'll find in today's column:
*Is today the day that teams start working the media to soften their fans for a Vick signing?
*If Roy Halladay was going to peak his trade value, shutting down the Red Sox would do it.
*Jamario Moon would be the Cavs' "stretch-four" (ie, Rashard Lewis) stopper. I know he's a little undersized, but he is as high-energy as anyone in the league.
*I'm not dissing Stewart Cink -- at the very least, the guy is tied to one of the most memorable golf results ever. And he is the best golfer about Twitter, so I always was a fan. (566,000 followers!)
Complete SN column here. More later, and more posts all day (and from the weekend) across Varsity Dad and TimTeblog.
-- D.S.
*When was the last time a championship RUNNER-UP eclipsed the champ?
*This was the greatest moment of Tom Watson's ridiculously awesome career. It's incredible: He rewrote the basic story of his career, 10-20 years after it really peaked.
*What was more improbable: Watson or that a Tiger-less golf tournament would have huge buzz?
*Tiger topping Nicklaus's major title total is easy; let's see Woods finish as the runner-up at a major at age 59.
(At a minimum, I think that if Tiger had any ideas about not playing into his late-50s, they are gone now -- I'll bet he is already feeling competitive about topping Watson in 25 years.)
Truly, this was a transcendent moment in sports -- certainly this year, probably this decade, arguably among golf's all-time great moments.
How many golf results -- how many sports results -- do you truly remember vividly? I think that "Remember Watson in '09?" will stand as one of those.
More you'll find in today's column:
*Is today the day that teams start working the media to soften their fans for a Vick signing?
*If Roy Halladay was going to peak his trade value, shutting down the Red Sox would do it.
*Jamario Moon would be the Cavs' "stretch-four" (ie, Rashard Lewis) stopper. I know he's a little undersized, but he is as high-energy as anyone in the league.
*I'm not dissing Stewart Cink -- at the very least, the guy is tied to one of the most memorable golf results ever. And he is the best golfer about Twitter, so I always was a fan. (566,000 followers!)
Complete SN column here. More later, and more posts all day (and from the weekend) across Varsity Dad and TimTeblog.
-- D.S.
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Sunday Mania: Tom Watson
Friday, it was: "How can you not be watching/rooting for Tom Watson?"
Saturday, it was "How can you NOT be watching/ROOTING for TOM WATSON?!?"
Sunday morning, it will be "AAAAH! TOM WATSON RULES!"
This is certainly the biggest sports story of the month. The real question is where it ends: If Watson wins the British Open, it would be one of the Top 3 sports stories of the year so far -- I'd put it behind the Steelers winning the Super Bowl but ahead of UNC or the Penguins winning titles. And, yes, probably even ahead of Florida winning the CFB national title.
It would be the most interesting golf result of all time. Bigger than Tiger at the Masters in '97. Bigger than Tiger at the US Open in 08. I'm not golf expert, but I cannot think of a comp.
In this era of Twitter/blogging/TV-yakkers/cynicism, this 59-year-old has turned back the clock. Literally.
Again: How can you NOT be rooting for Tom Watson?
-- D.S.
Saturday, it was "How can you NOT be watching/ROOTING for TOM WATSON?!?"
Sunday morning, it will be "AAAAH! TOM WATSON RULES!"
This is certainly the biggest sports story of the month. The real question is where it ends: If Watson wins the British Open, it would be one of the Top 3 sports stories of the year so far -- I'd put it behind the Steelers winning the Super Bowl but ahead of UNC or the Penguins winning titles. And, yes, probably even ahead of Florida winning the CFB national title.
It would be the most interesting golf result of all time. Bigger than Tiger at the Masters in '97. Bigger than Tiger at the US Open in 08. I'm not golf expert, but I cannot think of a comp.
In this era of Twitter/blogging/TV-yakkers/cynicism, this 59-year-old has turned back the clock. Literally.
Again: How can you NOT be rooting for Tom Watson?
-- D.S.
Saturday, July 18, 2009
On The Erin Andrews Video
First: Good for her (or her lawyers) for releasing this.
Second: AJ's post-mortem post about this must be read.
Third: I suspect that we have reached an irrevocable BC/AD moment in the "Erin Andrews" thing.
BC: (Mostly) fun blogger meme, because of the whole "Erin Pageviews" or "Wow, she covers sports and is really attractive" (which I have long-argued is totally mis-read anyway).
AD: Give it up, folks -- the objectification has resulted in something going too far. Maybe I'm mis-reading and in a few months, folks will go back to posting pics.
But my sense is that the meme crossed a boundary -- a truly unfortunate one -- and it will, by necessity, self-correct in the other direction.
-- D.S.
Second: AJ's post-mortem post about this must be read.
Third: I suspect that we have reached an irrevocable BC/AD moment in the "Erin Andrews" thing.
BC: (Mostly) fun blogger meme, because of the whole "Erin Pageviews" or "Wow, she covers sports and is really attractive" (which I have long-argued is totally mis-read anyway).
AD: Give it up, folks -- the objectification has resulted in something going too far. Maybe I'm mis-reading and in a few months, folks will go back to posting pics.
But my sense is that the meme crossed a boundary -- a truly unfortunate one -- and it will, by necessity, self-correct in the other direction.
-- D.S.
Saturday 07/18 (Very) Quickie
Now, more than ever: How can you NOT be rooting for Tom Watson? This is the most interesting non-Tiger thing to happen in golf in recent memory.
(It actually helps mitigate the fact that Tiger missed the cut, which is among the most interesting Tiger things to happen in golf in recent memory.)
-- D.S.
(It actually helps mitigate the fact that Tiger missed the cut, which is among the most interesting Tiger things to happen in golf in recent memory.)
-- D.S.
Friday, July 17, 2009
Friday 07/17 Quickie: Manny,
Watson, Holtz, Beckham, Millsap, More
First of all, it's a relief to get these past 72 hours over. Beyond launching a new blog, this past Wednesday and Thursday (leading into Friday morning) were the slowest 48 hours of the sports year.
So it's a great time to take yesterday's Manny LA homecoming and put it in perspective in the lead of today's SN column: Let's end this "Fans don't care about PEDs" once and for all. They don't. MSM, please stop bringing it up.
(Although it gave me an excuse to trot out my favorite poll response of all time -- back on ESPN.com about 7 or 8 years ago, fans were asked what the worst offense in baseball is. "Cheating with steroids" finished behind the No. 1 answer: Lollygagging. Best. Response. Ever.)
But it's a testament to sports that even during this ridiculously slow stretch, there's still a lot to talk about:
*How can you NOT love Tom Watson? It's like your grandpa at the top of the leaderboard.
*Jazz keep Millsap: OK, they HAVE to trade Boozer now, right? Get him to Miami, with Odom -- Wade re-signs, and Miami is suddenly an elite contender for a half-decade.
*Ricky Rubio wearing down? Sounds like he's resigned to the idea that Minnesota won't let him go. That still doesn't explain how/why the T'wolves will play Jonny Flynn, too. (Flynn has been very good in Summer League.)
*Speaking of summer league, two words: Anthony. Morrow.
*Congratulations to Pat Fitzgerald on being enshrined in the College Football Hall of Fame. I don't know where to rank him precisely, but he is one of the best defensive players in college football history, and his run between 95 and 96 -- two-time National Defensive Player of the Year -- remains elite.
*Go to the column, scroll down and click on the link for the new Patton Oswalt sports movie. It looks really good -- particularly for a sports movie.
*David Beckham's MLS return? Zzz. But Grant Wahl's new book ABOUT Beckham -- "The Beckham Experiment" -- is a must-read by one of the best sportswriters in the country (how many others are versatile enough to write passionately and expertly about both college hoops and soccer?) I'm halfway through and really enjoying it.
*I really am going to try to limit my cross-promotion between DS.com and TimTeblog.com -- but when there's a decent national Tebow story, it would be intellectually dishonest for me not to bring it up (and many of you will likely appreciate the decrease in pure Tebow posts here, too!)
Anyway: The SEC Coaches came out with their preseason all-conference team... and one coach didn't put Tebow on the 1st team. Now, it wasn't Urban Meyer -- coaches can't vote for their own players. And it wasn't Houston Nutt -- he couldn't vote for Jevan Snead anyway. But someone presumably felt like Snead was better than Tebow -- I think Snead is very good (and he will likely be a higher NFL Draft pick than Tebow, too), but it is ludicrous to pick him ahead of Tebow.
The odds-on choice for the snub is, of course, Lane Kiffin, but I wouldn't be surprised if someone else did it. (Saban? Petrino? Spurrier?) This would all be resolved, of course, if coaches had to make their ballots public. This secret-ballot thing is ludicrous.
Complete SN column here. For those not checking the blog(s) this weekend, have an enjoyable one. For those staying in touch, more later -- across the entire "Shanoff network" of blogs.
-- D.S.
So it's a great time to take yesterday's Manny LA homecoming and put it in perspective in the lead of today's SN column: Let's end this "Fans don't care about PEDs" once and for all. They don't. MSM, please stop bringing it up.
(Although it gave me an excuse to trot out my favorite poll response of all time -- back on ESPN.com about 7 or 8 years ago, fans were asked what the worst offense in baseball is. "Cheating with steroids" finished behind the No. 1 answer: Lollygagging. Best. Response. Ever.)
But it's a testament to sports that even during this ridiculously slow stretch, there's still a lot to talk about:
*How can you NOT love Tom Watson? It's like your grandpa at the top of the leaderboard.
*Jazz keep Millsap: OK, they HAVE to trade Boozer now, right? Get him to Miami, with Odom -- Wade re-signs, and Miami is suddenly an elite contender for a half-decade.
*Ricky Rubio wearing down? Sounds like he's resigned to the idea that Minnesota won't let him go. That still doesn't explain how/why the T'wolves will play Jonny Flynn, too. (Flynn has been very good in Summer League.)
*Speaking of summer league, two words: Anthony. Morrow.
*Congratulations to Pat Fitzgerald on being enshrined in the College Football Hall of Fame. I don't know where to rank him precisely, but he is one of the best defensive players in college football history, and his run between 95 and 96 -- two-time National Defensive Player of the Year -- remains elite.
*Go to the column, scroll down and click on the link for the new Patton Oswalt sports movie. It looks really good -- particularly for a sports movie.
*David Beckham's MLS return? Zzz. But Grant Wahl's new book ABOUT Beckham -- "The Beckham Experiment" -- is a must-read by one of the best sportswriters in the country (how many others are versatile enough to write passionately and expertly about both college hoops and soccer?) I'm halfway through and really enjoying it.
*I really am going to try to limit my cross-promotion between DS.com and TimTeblog.com -- but when there's a decent national Tebow story, it would be intellectually dishonest for me not to bring it up (and many of you will likely appreciate the decrease in pure Tebow posts here, too!)
Anyway: The SEC Coaches came out with their preseason all-conference team... and one coach didn't put Tebow on the 1st team. Now, it wasn't Urban Meyer -- coaches can't vote for their own players. And it wasn't Houston Nutt -- he couldn't vote for Jevan Snead anyway. But someone presumably felt like Snead was better than Tebow -- I think Snead is very good (and he will likely be a higher NFL Draft pick than Tebow, too), but it is ludicrous to pick him ahead of Tebow.
The odds-on choice for the snub is, of course, Lane Kiffin, but I wouldn't be surprised if someone else did it. (Saban? Petrino? Spurrier?) This would all be resolved, of course, if coaches had to make their ballots public. This secret-ballot thing is ludicrous.
Complete SN column here. For those not checking the blog(s) this weekend, have an enjoyable one. For those staying in touch, more later -- across the entire "Shanoff network" of blogs.
-- D.S.
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Thursday 07/16 Quickie: ESPYs
Phelps, Favre, MLB 2nd Half, Odom
How fortuitous that the day I launch a blog dedicated to coverage of Tim Tebow, he wins an ESPY as Best Male College Athlete.
But he wasn't the big winner at the ESPYs. That would be Michael Phelps, who cleaned up with 5, including Best Male Athlete -- an award owned by Tiger over the past few years.
Obviously, Phelps was the most deserving winner this year. As was Larry Fitzgerald as Best NFL Player -- one thing the ESPYs have over traditional sport awards? The playoffs count.
But the biggest differentiator -- and why I like the ESPYs and led today's SN column with them: It's the fans' vote. Call it a popularity contest if you want, but I'd rather have the fans voting than so-called "experts." (Even designating someone as "expert" is offensive, when most fans know just as much, if not more.)
So kudos to ESPN on having the ESPYs on the Slowest Sports Day of the Year. But why not run it live last night, when fans had nothing better to watch? By Sunday's broadcast, everyone knows who won.
More you'll find in today's column:
*Roy Halladay is MLB's biggest 2nd-half X-factor.
*If the Heat sign Odom and Boozer, Wade owes them a long-term commitment NOW.
*Summer-league star: Austin Daye
*Possible names for a new sitcom about fantasy football.
And a lot more.
Complete column here. More later.
-- D.S.
But he wasn't the big winner at the ESPYs. That would be Michael Phelps, who cleaned up with 5, including Best Male Athlete -- an award owned by Tiger over the past few years.
Obviously, Phelps was the most deserving winner this year. As was Larry Fitzgerald as Best NFL Player -- one thing the ESPYs have over traditional sport awards? The playoffs count.
But the biggest differentiator -- and why I like the ESPYs and led today's SN column with them: It's the fans' vote. Call it a popularity contest if you want, but I'd rather have the fans voting than so-called "experts." (Even designating someone as "expert" is offensive, when most fans know just as much, if not more.)
So kudos to ESPN on having the ESPYs on the Slowest Sports Day of the Year. But why not run it live last night, when fans had nothing better to watch? By Sunday's broadcast, everyone knows who won.
More you'll find in today's column:
*Roy Halladay is MLB's biggest 2nd-half X-factor.
*If the Heat sign Odom and Boozer, Wade owes them a long-term commitment NOW.
*Summer-league star: Austin Daye
*Possible names for a new sitcom about fantasy football.
And a lot more.
Complete column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Need A Fix During Today's Slow Sports Day?
Try VarsityDad.com or TimTeblog.com
So today might be the Slowest Sports Day of the Year. What better day to re-launch one blog... and launch another?
(1) Varsity Dad: If you have kids -- or will one day have kids, or remember how your relationship with either of your parents impacted your sports fandom -- I encourage you to check out the new-and-improved Varsity Dad, the ultimate site for the intersection of sports and parenting -- now with updates multiple times per day!
(2) TimTeblog.com: Would you look at that? Someone went out and launched a blog dedicated to...Tim Tebow! (Wow, seems pretty loaded with posts already -- this looks like the ultimate site for all things Tebow, but created with editorial credibility, not fanboyism, in mind.) Who would possibly have the reputable curation skills to go with the obsessive interest... aha!
(Are the blogs for everyone? No. But what blog is? But if either is for you: I hope you like them -- and check back often. And, if you would, pass along to any friends or colleagues who might like them.)
-- D.S.
(If you had "July 15" in the office pool for "When will Dan launch a Tim Tebow blog?" please collect your ample prize money.)
(1) Varsity Dad: If you have kids -- or will one day have kids, or remember how your relationship with either of your parents impacted your sports fandom -- I encourage you to check out the new-and-improved Varsity Dad, the ultimate site for the intersection of sports and parenting -- now with updates multiple times per day!
(2) TimTeblog.com: Would you look at that? Someone went out and launched a blog dedicated to...Tim Tebow! (Wow, seems pretty loaded with posts already -- this looks like the ultimate site for all things Tebow, but created with editorial credibility, not fanboyism, in mind.) Who would possibly have the reputable curation skills to go with the obsessive interest... aha!
(Are the blogs for everyone? No. But what blog is? But if either is for you: I hope you like them -- and check back often. And, if you would, pass along to any friends or colleagues who might like them.)
-- D.S.
(If you had "July 15" in the office pool for "When will Dan launch a Tim Tebow blog?" please collect your ample prize money.)
Wednesday 07/15 Quickie:
The Slowest Day of the Sports Year?
Perhaps the Slowest Day of the Sports Year -- which today arguably is, per my SN column -- should be some sort of holiday among sports fans.
Either (a) discover something new and interesting online or (b) perhaps go outside, during the hours you'd normally be scouring the Web for sports news, fantasy management, etc.
I have two suggestions, coming shortly.
-- D.S.
Either (a) discover something new and interesting online or (b) perhaps go outside, during the hours you'd normally be scouring the Web for sports news, fantasy management, etc.
I have two suggestions, coming shortly.
-- D.S.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Tuesday 07/14 Quickie: More Pujols,
Prince, President Obama, Griffin, Meyer
I let Albert Pujols write the lead of today's SN column. No, seriously. (Well, not quite in the way that you think -- but everything he said yesterday lines up with your standard columnist structure.)
Otherwise, that HR Derby was a dud, wasn't it? I love the Nelson Cruz story, though. Breaking through at 29 after less than a full season's worth of career ABs -- you don't see that happen very often.
I'm betting President Obama grooves that first pitch tonight to Pujols -- then goes into the booth and puts out at least one pro-White Sox comment. I approve in advance of Joe Buck slurpery.
Blake Griffin -- yes, the real deal. But Tyreke Evans (33-9-8) continues to look like the most talented (highest ceiling) player in the draft class. And Stephen Curry shoots too much.
Urban Meyer isn't going to Notre Dame. "Ever." That's a pretty strong statement. He has a long career ahead of him, and even as a die-hard Florida fan, I don't expect him to stay at UF forever.
I expect him to win a bunch more national titles, then coach the Patriots as Bill Belichick's hand-picked successor. Then, when that no longer satisfies him -- let's call it the standard college god-coach NFL tenure of plus/minus 4 years -- he will have his choice of college jobs.
I guarantee you at that point that Notre Dame will fire whoever their coach is to hire Meyer, if he'll have them. The "Ever" statement implies that he would never even accept that job.
I am interpreting it as the idea that Urban Meyer would never "Ever" go to Notre Dame directly from Florida. (After all, consider the unlikelihood back in 2000 that Steve Spurrier would "Ever" coach another team in the SEC East.)
Still, I think it's fun that he is willing to address it head-on.
Watch this storyline: Delaware wants to be able to have fans bet on single NFL games, not just parlays. That could be huge for the state.
By the way, just in time for tomorrow's annual "Slowest Day of the Sports Year," I believe I will be ready to announce not one but TWO big pieces of news. One won't be THAT much of a surprise; the other? Hmm: Not a surprise, per se, but probably will trigger something like bemused shock.
Complete SN column here.
-- D.S.
Otherwise, that HR Derby was a dud, wasn't it? I love the Nelson Cruz story, though. Breaking through at 29 after less than a full season's worth of career ABs -- you don't see that happen very often.
I'm betting President Obama grooves that first pitch tonight to Pujols -- then goes into the booth and puts out at least one pro-White Sox comment. I approve in advance of Joe Buck slurpery.
Blake Griffin -- yes, the real deal. But Tyreke Evans (33-9-8) continues to look like the most talented (highest ceiling) player in the draft class. And Stephen Curry shoots too much.
Urban Meyer isn't going to Notre Dame. "Ever." That's a pretty strong statement. He has a long career ahead of him, and even as a die-hard Florida fan, I don't expect him to stay at UF forever.
I expect him to win a bunch more national titles, then coach the Patriots as Bill Belichick's hand-picked successor. Then, when that no longer satisfies him -- let's call it the standard college god-coach NFL tenure of plus/minus 4 years -- he will have his choice of college jobs.
I guarantee you at that point that Notre Dame will fire whoever their coach is to hire Meyer, if he'll have them. The "Ever" statement implies that he would never even accept that job.
I am interpreting it as the idea that Urban Meyer would never "Ever" go to Notre Dame directly from Florida. (After all, consider the unlikelihood back in 2000 that Steve Spurrier would "Ever" coach another team in the SEC East.)
Still, I think it's fun that he is willing to address it head-on.
Watch this storyline: Delaware wants to be able to have fans bet on single NFL games, not just parlays. That could be huge for the state.
By the way, just in time for tomorrow's annual "Slowest Day of the Sports Year," I believe I will be ready to announce not one but TWO big pieces of news. One won't be THAT much of a surprise; the other? Hmm: Not a surprise, per se, but probably will trigger something like bemused shock.
Complete SN column here.
-- D.S.
Monday, July 13, 2009
The Ultimate Varsity Dad Ad
I'm really trying not to mingle DanShanoff.com posts with Varsity Dad posts, but I just saw this ad during the Home Run Derby that probably captures the spirit of Varsity Dad better than anything. (State Farm: Call me!)
Varsity Dad Cross-Post: HR Derby
Check out Varsity Dad today for a breakdown of the Home Run Derby, one of the most Varsity Dad-friendly sports events of the year.
-- D.S.
-- D.S.
"I'm Not Going To Notre Dame. Ever"
"I'm Not Going to Notre Dame. Ever."
That's Urban Meyer, making things pretty clear about his future at Florida.
(Note he didn't say: "I'm not going to the New England Patriots. After Bill Belichick retires in a few years. And Belichick and Bob Kraft hand-pick me as his successor. With Tebow replacing Brady.")
Sorry, Notre Dame fans. (Keep telling yourselves that Charlie Weis has things looking up!)
-- D.S.
That's Urban Meyer, making things pretty clear about his future at Florida.
(Note he didn't say: "I'm not going to the New England Patriots. After Bill Belichick retires in a few years. And Belichick and Bob Kraft hand-pick me as his successor. With Tebow replacing Brady.")
Sorry, Notre Dame fans. (Keep telling yourselves that Charlie Weis has things looking up!)
-- D.S.
Monday 07/13 Quickie: Pujols,
Home Run Derby, Summer League, More
Aaand we're back.
I will present this statement (which leads today's SN column) with zero cynicism:
Albert Pujols has saved baseball this season.
It was hijacked in early spring by A-Rod, then again by Manny just after the season started. Now, let's set aside that -- as we know -- fans don't really care about PEDs or cheating.
But the media sure makes an issue out of it. And Pujols has been the antidote (again, hold your cynicism, please).
He is crushing the ball, affirming his place as (a) the best player in baseball, (b) the best player of the decade, (c) one of the greatest players of all-time, based on his first 9 seasons.
The Cardinals are a (mild) surprise to be leading the NL Central at the break (I believe I picked the Cards to win the division back in the spring.)
And St. Louis will host this year's All-Star Game -- and a more earnest bunch of fans you will not find anywhere else in baseball. They will politely cheer everyone.
And they will roar when Pujols steps up for the Home Run Derby tonight. He's a must-see -- in addition to the favorite. (I'm also intrigued to see Joe Mauer, the AL's version of Pujols.)
It has been the Summer of the Cardinals -- Pujols, First Place, All-Star Game -- and for that they can thank the best player in baseball.
More you'll find in today's column:
*I go through every NBA Vegas Summer League box score so you don't have to! (Short version: Anthony Randolph is killing it. Stephen Curry shoots a lot. DaJuan Summers is a pleasant surprise. DeJuan Blair's double-double is NO surprise. Rodrique Beaubois is the real deal.
*MLB Talking Points
*Favre update (ugh)
*UFC 100 as WWE
*More Wade mockery (and my vision that he ends up playing for...the Knicks!)
Complete column here. More later.
-- D.S.
I will present this statement (which leads today's SN column) with zero cynicism:
Albert Pujols has saved baseball this season.
It was hijacked in early spring by A-Rod, then again by Manny just after the season started. Now, let's set aside that -- as we know -- fans don't really care about PEDs or cheating.
But the media sure makes an issue out of it. And Pujols has been the antidote (again, hold your cynicism, please).
He is crushing the ball, affirming his place as (a) the best player in baseball, (b) the best player of the decade, (c) one of the greatest players of all-time, based on his first 9 seasons.
The Cardinals are a (mild) surprise to be leading the NL Central at the break (I believe I picked the Cards to win the division back in the spring.)
And St. Louis will host this year's All-Star Game -- and a more earnest bunch of fans you will not find anywhere else in baseball. They will politely cheer everyone.
And they will roar when Pujols steps up for the Home Run Derby tonight. He's a must-see -- in addition to the favorite. (I'm also intrigued to see Joe Mauer, the AL's version of Pujols.)
It has been the Summer of the Cardinals -- Pujols, First Place, All-Star Game -- and for that they can thank the best player in baseball.
More you'll find in today's column:
*I go through every NBA Vegas Summer League box score so you don't have to! (Short version: Anthony Randolph is killing it. Stephen Curry shoots a lot. DaJuan Summers is a pleasant surprise. DeJuan Blair's double-double is NO surprise. Rodrique Beaubois is the real deal.
*MLB Talking Points
*Favre update (ugh)
*UFC 100 as WWE
*More Wade mockery (and my vision that he ends up playing for...the Knicks!)
Complete column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Friday, July 10, 2009
MLB Midseason Awards: Mauer, Pujols Lead
Don't forget to put your own in the Comments.
AL MVP: Joe Mauer
AL Cy: Zack Greinke
AL Rookie: Andrew Bailey
AL Manager: Joe Maddon
AL Fantasy Surprise: Ben Zobrist*
NL MVP: Albert Pujols
NL Cy: Tim Lincecum
NL Rookie: Colby Rasmus
NL Manager: Tony LaRussa
NL Fantasy Surprise: Pablo Sandoval*
* - No surprise, both Zobrist and Sandoval are on MY fantasy roster, which is in playoff contention for the first time in my decade-long fantasy baseball GM career. Beyond their unexpected success, how can you not love the triple-position-eligibility? That has huge value.
AL MVP: Joe Mauer
AL Cy: Zack Greinke
AL Rookie: Andrew Bailey
AL Manager: Joe Maddon
AL Fantasy Surprise: Ben Zobrist*
NL MVP: Albert Pujols
NL Cy: Tim Lincecum
NL Rookie: Colby Rasmus
NL Manager: Tony LaRussa
NL Fantasy Surprise: Pablo Sandoval*
* - No surprise, both Zobrist and Sandoval are on MY fantasy roster, which is in playoff contention for the first time in my decade-long fantasy baseball GM career. Beyond their unexpected success, how can you not love the triple-position-eligibility? That has huge value.
Varsity Dad: 3-Year-Old Takes Soccer Class? Fine. But What About Mixed Martial Arts?
New post up at Varsity Dad: I introduce my kid to soccer class, find myself toeing the waters of "THAT soccer parent" and ask if MMA classes will ever trickle down to the 4T set.
Friday 07/10 Quickie: UFC 100
MLB Awards, Boozer, Lincecum, More
I am not an MMA fan. Not because I dislike it, but simply because I haven't really gotten into it.
However, I do respect MMA, highly. I respect it for its growth curve, for the way it has attracted full-time sports-media attention and for its business plan.
Though I know nothing about MMA (similar to the way I know very little -- but respect very much -- NASCAR and even the NHL), I led today's SN column with an homage to UFC 100.
"UFC 100": The name alone delivers some sort of gravitas, doesn't it? Hell, the Super Bowl is only up to the 40s. Air Jordans only made it to 23 before ending the numbering convention.
I see "UFC 100" as shorthand for everything that MMA has done right in its brief, meteoric history (at least version 2.0 since Dana White took over):
*UFC is the dominant organization.
*They have reached 100 mega-events.
*Don't look for it on broadcast TV or even cable. It's PPV, all the way.
What a strategy -- it's not unique (that's how boxing did it and still does it, to the extent that boxing matters anymore), but it is so effective.
I thought MMA on CBS primetime would be a hit; the mistake was going with some lower-tier MMA outfit, rather than UFC. It would be like signing up the UFL and expecting NFL numbers.
I don't mean to write around the event itself, but -- for me, a non-fan but an admirer from afar -- the IDEA of "UFC 100" is impressive enough.
Complete column here, including:
*MLB Midseason Awards
*Boozer to the Bulls? Would be a great move.
*Spurs win the NBA offseason.
*Orlando Summer League MVP: Tyler Hansbrough!
*Latest source for Favre info: Drew Magary
*Brazil prez talks soccer smack to Obama
And a lot more. Complete column here. A few more posts later, then I'm on the road all weekend. I'll try to post tomorrow and Sunday but will likely be filing via Twitter (on the right).
-- D.S.
However, I do respect MMA, highly. I respect it for its growth curve, for the way it has attracted full-time sports-media attention and for its business plan.
Though I know nothing about MMA (similar to the way I know very little -- but respect very much -- NASCAR and even the NHL), I led today's SN column with an homage to UFC 100.
"UFC 100": The name alone delivers some sort of gravitas, doesn't it? Hell, the Super Bowl is only up to the 40s. Air Jordans only made it to 23 before ending the numbering convention.
I see "UFC 100" as shorthand for everything that MMA has done right in its brief, meteoric history (at least version 2.0 since Dana White took over):
*UFC is the dominant organization.
*They have reached 100 mega-events.
*Don't look for it on broadcast TV or even cable. It's PPV, all the way.
What a strategy -- it's not unique (that's how boxing did it and still does it, to the extent that boxing matters anymore), but it is so effective.
I thought MMA on CBS primetime would be a hit; the mistake was going with some lower-tier MMA outfit, rather than UFC. It would be like signing up the UFL and expecting NFL numbers.
I don't mean to write around the event itself, but -- for me, a non-fan but an admirer from afar -- the IDEA of "UFC 100" is impressive enough.
Complete column here, including:
*MLB Midseason Awards
*Boozer to the Bulls? Would be a great move.
*Spurs win the NBA offseason.
*Orlando Summer League MVP: Tyler Hansbrough!
*Latest source for Favre info: Drew Magary
*Brazil prez talks soccer smack to Obama
And a lot more. Complete column here. A few more posts later, then I'm on the road all weekend. I'll try to post tomorrow and Sunday but will likely be filing via Twitter (on the right).
-- D.S.
Thursday, July 09, 2009
Varsity Dad: Best MLB Ballparks for Kids?
New post this week on Varsity Dad: What is your take on the best MLB ballparks to take your kid?
Which has the best transportation/parking? The best mid-game entertainment? The most convenient restrooms? The best prices? (Or are you better off forgetting MLB and sticking with minor-league games?)
Weigh in with a review of your favorite team's ballpark kid-friendliness.
-- D.S.
PS: There are a lot of new Varsity Dad posts to check out.
Which has the best transportation/parking? The best mid-game entertainment? The most convenient restrooms? The best prices? (Or are you better off forgetting MLB and sticking with minor-league games?)
Weigh in with a review of your favorite team's ballpark kid-friendliness.
-- D.S.
PS: There are a lot of new Varsity Dad posts to check out.
Mountain West: No Playoff, Just Payoff
And that color is green.
My favorite part of the latest BCS Mess news is the delicious irony that the same week the MWC goes crying to Congress about the unfairness of the BCS, they take the check from ESPN to remain in their subordinate state. Way to stand up for what you think is right!
If the Mountain West wanted to make a real stand -- and I mean get some serious traction -- they would secede from the BCS and say "If you won't have us, then we'll make our own championship."
It might sound ludicrous now, but it would get them more coverage -- and more positive press -- than they could ever get by trying to force change from within the system. (Like a BCS bowl would ignore an undefeated MWC champ.*)
But, of course, the MWC is as greedy as your average BCS conference.
(That's why their proposed "playoff" plan was hubbed around one cynical component: Letting the Mountain West into the BCS cabal. They don't hate the BCS; they resent the money they're losing by being left out of it.)
As yesterday's announcement showed, the Mountain West doesn't care about a playoff as much as it does a payoff.
-- D.S.
(* - From at least one standpoint, the Mountain West IS in the BCS: If a MWC team goes unbeaten, it would surely be selected for a BCS bowl -- in fact, that is stipulated in the BCS bowl-selection deal. And with Utah's success, it is what fans want to see. And if a MWC team can't go undefeated? Well, they probably didn't deserve to be in a BCS bowl anyway. And there are plenty of other conferences -- say,BYU Boise St out of the WAC -- whose unbeaten champ would deserve a BCS spot ahead of a beaten MWC champ. And yet the MWC would like an automatic BCS bid.)
My favorite part of the latest BCS Mess news is the delicious irony that the same week the MWC goes crying to Congress about the unfairness of the BCS, they take the check from ESPN to remain in their subordinate state. Way to stand up for what you think is right!
If the Mountain West wanted to make a real stand -- and I mean get some serious traction -- they would secede from the BCS and say "If you won't have us, then we'll make our own championship."
It might sound ludicrous now, but it would get them more coverage -- and more positive press -- than they could ever get by trying to force change from within the system. (Like a BCS bowl would ignore an undefeated MWC champ.*)
But, of course, the MWC is as greedy as your average BCS conference.
(That's why their proposed "playoff" plan was hubbed around one cynical component: Letting the Mountain West into the BCS cabal. They don't hate the BCS; they resent the money they're losing by being left out of it.)
As yesterday's announcement showed, the Mountain West doesn't care about a playoff as much as it does a payoff.
-- D.S.
(* - From at least one standpoint, the Mountain West IS in the BCS: If a MWC team goes unbeaten, it would surely be selected for a BCS bowl -- in fact, that is stipulated in the BCS bowl-selection deal. And with Utah's success, it is what fans want to see. And if a MWC team can't go undefeated? Well, they probably didn't deserve to be in a BCS bowl anyway. And there are plenty of other conferences -- say,
My First (And Possibly Last) Cover Story
Is there a topic I might be remotely qualified to write as the cover story for a MAJOR NATIONAL BOOK RELEASE?
Why, yes. Yes, there is: Tim Tebow's place among all-time great college QBs.
I will not ruin the surprise ending, but I will note that this book -- like the editions for fans of Texas, Ohio State, Notre Dame and others -- is geared for a partisan audience.
That said: Spencer Hall (aka Orson Swindle of Every Day Should Be Saturday) has done a phenomenal job lining up contributors far more value-adding than me.
But only one got to make the case that, under the right conditions, Tim Tebow ends his career as the greatest QB in college football history.
Florida fans: Purchasing details here. The rest of you may now go rinse out your mouths, because that acid reflux taste must feel kind of gross right now.
-- D.S.
Why, yes. Yes, there is: Tim Tebow's place among all-time great college QBs.
I will not ruin the surprise ending, but I will note that this book -- like the editions for fans of Texas, Ohio State, Notre Dame and others -- is geared for a partisan audience.
That said: Spencer Hall (aka Orson Swindle of Every Day Should Be Saturday) has done a phenomenal job lining up contributors far more value-adding than me.
But only one got to make the case that, under the right conditions, Tim Tebow ends his career as the greatest QB in college football history.
Florida fans: Purchasing details here. The rest of you may now go rinse out your mouths, because that acid reflux taste must feel kind of gross right now.
-- D.S.
Thursday 07/09 Quickie: MLB Midseason,
LeBron, Marion, Zobrist, BCS, More
More new posts coming at 11 am, 1 pm and 3. Check back.
The annual baseball "midseason" stuff is always a bit of a moving target: Do you do it when most teams generally get to 81 games played? Do you do it the Friday before the All-Star Break? DURING the All-Star Break? You don't want to be premature; you don't want to be too late.
So I split the difference -- taking advantage of a relatively slow news morning -- and posted my Top 3 Storylines of MLB's 2nd Half as the lead of today's SN column. Here's the shorthand:
(1) AL East menage a WTF.
(2) Pujols vs. Maris (vs. Bonds/Sosa)
(3) Almost everyone's a contender in the NL
You can get the full work-up in the column, although I'd love to get your own 2nd Half Storylines to Watch in the Comments.
Meanwhile:
*McNair Murder: I guess that's closure, and Occam's Razor is in effect -- the most obvious answer to the mystery was the right answer. Doesn't make it any less sad.
*LeBron/"No Witness": For someone as media savvy as LeBron (and Nike), they really blew this one. They could have let the video go viral -- it would have humanized LeBron. Instead, the story is their control-freakishness and lack of transparency.
My first thought was that Nike would come to its senses and use the tape -- now in their possession -- to create their own ad, releasing the images from it but spinning it to LeBron's ultimate advantage. Now it seems like they're simply saying, contrary to original reports, "No one was supposed to be taping!" Everyone knows that is b.s. Where are Nike's marketing ninjas?
*Mavs get Matrix: If you read my "Two NBAs" post -- my unifying theory of the state of the NBA -- you know that I will think very highly of the Mavericks (part of the NBA that is playing to win a title NOW) making the moves to keep up with the top contenders. I wasn't all that high on the Kidd re-signing, but combined with bringing in Shawn Marion and the Mavs have as good of a quintet (Dirk, Kidd, Marion, Howard, Terry) as there is in the NBA.
*MLB Last Night: Zobrist! That is all.
Complete column here. More later.
-- D.S.
The annual baseball "midseason" stuff is always a bit of a moving target: Do you do it when most teams generally get to 81 games played? Do you do it the Friday before the All-Star Break? DURING the All-Star Break? You don't want to be premature; you don't want to be too late.
So I split the difference -- taking advantage of a relatively slow news morning -- and posted my Top 3 Storylines of MLB's 2nd Half as the lead of today's SN column. Here's the shorthand:
(1) AL East menage a WTF.
(2) Pujols vs. Maris (vs. Bonds/Sosa)
(3) Almost everyone's a contender in the NL
You can get the full work-up in the column, although I'd love to get your own 2nd Half Storylines to Watch in the Comments.
Meanwhile:
*McNair Murder: I guess that's closure, and Occam's Razor is in effect -- the most obvious answer to the mystery was the right answer. Doesn't make it any less sad.
*LeBron/"No Witness": For someone as media savvy as LeBron (and Nike), they really blew this one. They could have let the video go viral -- it would have humanized LeBron. Instead, the story is their control-freakishness and lack of transparency.
My first thought was that Nike would come to its senses and use the tape -- now in their possession -- to create their own ad, releasing the images from it but spinning it to LeBron's ultimate advantage. Now it seems like they're simply saying, contrary to original reports, "No one was supposed to be taping!" Everyone knows that is b.s. Where are Nike's marketing ninjas?
*Mavs get Matrix: If you read my "Two NBAs" post -- my unifying theory of the state of the NBA -- you know that I will think very highly of the Mavericks (part of the NBA that is playing to win a title NOW) making the moves to keep up with the top contenders. I wasn't all that high on the Kidd re-signing, but combined with bringing in Shawn Marion and the Mavs have as good of a quintet (Dirk, Kidd, Marion, Howard, Terry) as there is in the NBA.
*MLB Last Night: Zobrist! That is all.
Complete column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Wednesday, July 08, 2009
UFL Update: Leagues New Rules Lacking
So the UFL is trying to spice up its league by relaxing many of the starchy rules the NFL has in place.
OK, this is where I will say it YET AGAIN:
There is only one NFL "rule" that the UFL has to change that will guarantee (a) tons of attention, (b) tons of NFL-level talent and (c) defensible market position as a true "minor" league:
Allow in any player with at least one year of college football experience.
That means the UFL could draft players after their freshman year or sophomore year -- because the NFL won't let them in. Even if those players are clearly NFL-ready or NFL-worthy.
It's so simple. It's so freaking simple.
At the very least, I wish someone in the league would at least explain to me why they WON'T do it. At least show me that they have evaluated the idea -- but (inanely) rejected it.
-- D.S.
OK, this is where I will say it YET AGAIN:
There is only one NFL "rule" that the UFL has to change that will guarantee (a) tons of attention, (b) tons of NFL-level talent and (c) defensible market position as a true "minor" league:
Allow in any player with at least one year of college football experience.
That means the UFL could draft players after their freshman year or sophomore year -- because the NFL won't let them in. Even if those players are clearly NFL-ready or NFL-worthy.
It's so simple. It's so freaking simple.
At the very least, I wish someone in the league would at least explain to me why they WON'T do it. At least show me that they have evaluated the idea -- but (inanely) rejected it.
-- D.S.
Wednesday 07/08 Quickie:
More Wade, Coach K, Manny, Halladay
How is Dwyane Wade like Sarah Palin? Lots to cover in today's SN column, including a follow-up to yesterday's argument about how LeBron and Wade are screwing over their fans, either by not signing or declaring their intention to leave.
Here is a snippet of today's lead argument:
*Mets fans hate Mets more than Manny.
*Coach K likes Team USA more than Duke.
*Orrin Hatch likes the BCS more than America.
*Jays like saving more than Roy Halladay.
Lot more where that came from. Complete column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Here is a snippet of today's lead argument:
I'm sure fans in Miami are thrilled that Dywane Wade signed his lucrative long-term contract extension with the Heat in the very first moments after midnight last night, the earliest he possibly could.More you'll find in today's column:
What a terrific signal to send to his fans and his franchise that he is committed to bringing a title back to Miami -- that it might not happen in 2010, but with him in place as the cornerstone, they can make a run at several of them.
And what a relief that he dropped the Palinesque "only quitters stick around" talking point that he wouldn't sign unless the team built a title contender around him right now, even though he previously hadn't committed to the team to staying around beyond next year.
Heat fans now avoid the rest of us snickering at them as they attempt to justify their cheering all next season for a player who so obviously would have disrespected and dismissed them by not declaring his reciprocal allegiance as soon as he could.
How awkward would it have been had Wade NOT signed last night, and spent the next season as some kind of lame-duck -- with fans cheering for him half-heartedly, knowing that NOT signing with the Heat sends the strongest signal he almost surely will be bolting for another city next summer.
Wow, it sure is great that Wade cleared that up.
*Mets fans hate Mets more than Manny.
*Coach K likes Team USA more than Duke.
*Orrin Hatch likes the BCS more than America.
*Jays like saving more than Roy Halladay.
Lot more where that came from. Complete column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Tuesday, July 07, 2009
Losing Is The New Winning
Adapted from the "Last Word" section of my SN column this morning:
Losing is the new winning, if you believe the buzz about Andy Roddick's almost-win against Roger Federer (note: not the same as winning), which many are hailing as the best match Roddick has ever played -- and turning his rep around from bratty underachiever to lovable underdog.
This same past weekend, we have the approval of Anthony Kim for nearly beating Tiger Woods at Tiger's tournament in DC this weekend.
And that follows up the general approval of the Magic's "Hey-At-Least-They-Made-It-This-Far" run to the NBA Finals and the Cardinals' "Hey-Look!-It's-The-CARDS!-In-The-SUPER-BOWL!" near-miss in the Super Bowl.
And that was preceded by the Rays' Cinderella run to the World Series -- They didn't win? Who cares? They ALMOST won!
I'm not saying this is a bad thing. If the only people who enjoyed a season was the league champs, sports would dissolve in fan frustration.
It's all about expectations. If you exceed expectations -- see Roddick or the Magic or the Cards or the Rays or the never-thought-we'd-make-it Final Four team -- the season is a huge success. Maybe expectations are adjusted for the next season, but still: It is expectations-based.
There is one sport left where "Hey, good try!" just doesn't cut it at the championship level: College football.
Oklahoma's great season was RUINED by their loss to Florida, just as Ohio State's season was ruined in the two seasons before that, just as the Buckeyes ruined Miami's season in 2002.
If you have championship aspirations in college football, anything less than a title is a failed season.
Or, alternatively, you could be Andy Roddick -- happy to claim the youth-league "Everyone's-a-winner!" trophy for almost beating Federer. Against the GOAT, 2nd place ain't bad at all.
-- D.S.
Losing is the new winning, if you believe the buzz about Andy Roddick's almost-win against Roger Federer (note: not the same as winning), which many are hailing as the best match Roddick has ever played -- and turning his rep around from bratty underachiever to lovable underdog.
This same past weekend, we have the approval of Anthony Kim for nearly beating Tiger Woods at Tiger's tournament in DC this weekend.
And that follows up the general approval of the Magic's "Hey-At-Least-They-Made-It-This-Far" run to the NBA Finals and the Cardinals' "Hey-Look!-It's-The-CARDS!-In-The-SUPER-BOWL!" near-miss in the Super Bowl.
And that was preceded by the Rays' Cinderella run to the World Series -- They didn't win? Who cares? They ALMOST won!
I'm not saying this is a bad thing. If the only people who enjoyed a season was the league champs, sports would dissolve in fan frustration.
It's all about expectations. If you exceed expectations -- see Roddick or the Magic or the Cards or the Rays or the never-thought-we'd-make-it Final Four team -- the season is a huge success. Maybe expectations are adjusted for the next season, but still: It is expectations-based.
There is one sport left where "Hey, good try!" just doesn't cut it at the championship level: College football.
Oklahoma's great season was RUINED by their loss to Florida, just as Ohio State's season was ruined in the two seasons before that, just as the Buckeyes ruined Miami's season in 2002.
If you have championship aspirations in college football, anything less than a title is a failed season.
Or, alternatively, you could be Andy Roddick -- happy to claim the youth-league "Everyone's-a-winner!" trophy for almost beating Federer. Against the GOAT, 2nd place ain't bad at all.
-- D.S.
Mediaite Launches: The Sports Rankings
Peter King: The 7th most influential columnist in print or online -- sports or otherwise? Bill Simmons: No. 21? Jason Whitlock ranked behind Will Leitch? Jason won't like that at all...
The new media-industry news-and-analysis site Mediaite launched yesterday, and by far its most buzz-worthy (and brilliant) feature is the "Power Grid," which ranks hundreds of people in media, based on category.
The rankings are algorithmically derived, based on things like audience size, Google Buzz, Twitter followers and more. For navel-gazey media types, this is basically like crack.
Of course, the first thing I looked for in the Power Grid was the sports-media folks on the list. (No, that's not true. The very first thing I did, of course, was look for my own name. Not there. D'oh!)
In the Top 100 of the grid for "Print/Online Columnists," here are your top-ranked names:
7. Peter King
"Coffeenerdness" was part of algorithm?
21. Bill Simmons
"Dunleavy Treatment" for 20 ahead of him?
35. Jon Heyman
43. Will Leitch
56. Rick Reilly
That's $60,000 per slot.
63. Joel Sherman
67. Selena Roberts
Bright side of 3 months of negative publicity!
74. Michael Wilbon
79. Jason Whitlock
Still hates Will Leitch. But ahead of Lupica!
87. Bob Ryan
92. Gary Smith
Columnist? Not quite.
93. Mike Lupica
Curses Whitlock. Curses them all!
98. Frank Deford
If "Print/Online" means "Radio/Pay Cable"
105. John Feinstein
110. Bill Plaschke
Renounces this list because it is based on an algorithm.
122. JA Adande
132. Sally Jenkins
142. Woody Paige
Oh, come on: List him under "TV Pundit!"
153. Mike Vaccaro
155. Mike Downey
156. Bill Madden
159. John Buccigross
Who says hockey doesn't sell?
162. "Mike" Wilbon
So big he's listed TWICE.
168. Ray Ratto
177. Patrick Hruby
Rare appearance for online-only writer.
180. Jackie MacMullen
185. William Rhoden
There were a handful of sports-media folks categorized under "Print/Online Reporter," although some of these folks are clearly columnists:
45. Dashiell Bennett
60. Dan Shaughnessy
Really?
107. Drew Magary
118. Tommy Craggs
One more data point he's killing it at Deadspin.
131. Ron Borges
133. Roger Angell
Can hear Drew now: "Suck it, Angell!"
161. Tony Massarotti
166. Bill Dwyre
186. Joe Drape
As you can see, the list is VERY heavy on print/"traditional media" folks, although the print folks' online presences are undoubtedly helping in the algorithm.
No, I'm not going to recheck the list every week for sports types -- well, maybe to see if I (finally) crack the list someday.
Otherwise, the rest of you may continue clicking through this page-view-driving engine to see who ranks where.
-- D.S.
The new media-industry news-and-analysis site Mediaite launched yesterday, and by far its most buzz-worthy (and brilliant) feature is the "Power Grid," which ranks hundreds of people in media, based on category.
The rankings are algorithmically derived, based on things like audience size, Google Buzz, Twitter followers and more. For navel-gazey media types, this is basically like crack.
Of course, the first thing I looked for in the Power Grid was the sports-media folks on the list. (No, that's not true. The very first thing I did, of course, was look for my own name. Not there. D'oh!)
In the Top 100 of the grid for "Print/Online Columnists," here are your top-ranked names:
7. Peter King
"Coffeenerdness" was part of algorithm?
21. Bill Simmons
"Dunleavy Treatment" for 20 ahead of him?
35. Jon Heyman
43. Will Leitch
56. Rick Reilly
That's $60,000 per slot.
63. Joel Sherman
67. Selena Roberts
Bright side of 3 months of negative publicity!
74. Michael Wilbon
79. Jason Whitlock
Still hates Will Leitch. But ahead of Lupica!
87. Bob Ryan
92. Gary Smith
Columnist? Not quite.
93. Mike Lupica
Curses Whitlock. Curses them all!
98. Frank Deford
If "Print/Online" means "Radio/Pay Cable"
105. John Feinstein
110. Bill Plaschke
Renounces this list because it is based on an algorithm.
122. JA Adande
132. Sally Jenkins
142. Woody Paige
Oh, come on: List him under "TV Pundit!"
153. Mike Vaccaro
155. Mike Downey
156. Bill Madden
159. John Buccigross
Who says hockey doesn't sell?
162. "Mike" Wilbon
So big he's listed TWICE.
168. Ray Ratto
177. Patrick Hruby
Rare appearance for online-only writer.
180. Jackie MacMullen
185. William Rhoden
There were a handful of sports-media folks categorized under "Print/Online Reporter," although some of these folks are clearly columnists:
45. Dashiell Bennett
60. Dan Shaughnessy
Really?
107. Drew Magary
118. Tommy Craggs
One more data point he's killing it at Deadspin.
131. Ron Borges
133. Roger Angell
Can hear Drew now: "Suck it, Angell!"
161. Tony Massarotti
166. Bill Dwyre
186. Joe Drape
As you can see, the list is VERY heavy on print/"traditional media" folks, although the print folks' online presences are undoubtedly helping in the algorithm.
No, I'm not going to recheck the list every week for sports types -- well, maybe to see if I (finally) crack the list someday.
Otherwise, the rest of you may continue clicking through this page-view-driving engine to see who ranks where.
-- D.S.
Tuesday 07/07 Quickie:
LeBron, Wade and the 2010 Myth
LeBron was B.S.'ing Trevor Ariza. Ariza detected it, which is why he sidestepped the lure/myth of "playing with LeBron" for a REAL long-term plan in Houston.
My issue with fans in Cleveland and Miami is that your biggest stars -- LeBron and Dwyane Wade -- obviously don't want to play for you. Yet you continue to support them.
Maybe there's the "as long as they're on my team, I'll root for them." Which is fine, to a point. But nothing suggests these players have any loyalty to your team. So why support them?
If they really wanted to stay, they could simply re-sign -- tomorrow -- and lock in their careers with their current teams. Let their current teams build title contenders around them.
Instead, they are playing coy -- Wade went so far as to preemptively frame his leaving as the Heat's fault for not building a contender around him (they WON a title building around him...you'd think he would give them a little credit for that).
There is nothing enjoyable about basketball's two biggest stars playing out lame-duck years in cities they appear to have every intention of bailing on, come next summer.
I recognize that if fans turn on them now, the players are definitely gone. But that would be buying into the player-generated myth that they are considering sticking around to begin with.
I guess the only thing left for Cavs and Heat fans is to enjoy this one final year of watching brilliant players up close. There is some consolation in that -- better one last year than nothing.
Complete SN column here. More later.
-- D.S.
My issue with fans in Cleveland and Miami is that your biggest stars -- LeBron and Dwyane Wade -- obviously don't want to play for you. Yet you continue to support them.
Maybe there's the "as long as they're on my team, I'll root for them." Which is fine, to a point. But nothing suggests these players have any loyalty to your team. So why support them?
If they really wanted to stay, they could simply re-sign -- tomorrow -- and lock in their careers with their current teams. Let their current teams build title contenders around them.
Instead, they are playing coy -- Wade went so far as to preemptively frame his leaving as the Heat's fault for not building a contender around him (they WON a title building around him...you'd think he would give them a little credit for that).
There is nothing enjoyable about basketball's two biggest stars playing out lame-duck years in cities they appear to have every intention of bailing on, come next summer.
I recognize that if fans turn on them now, the players are definitely gone. But that would be buying into the player-generated myth that they are considering sticking around to begin with.
I guess the only thing left for Cavs and Heat fans is to enjoy this one final year of watching brilliant players up close. There is some consolation in that -- better one last year than nothing.
Complete SN column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Monday, July 06, 2009
Sarah Palin's Full-Court Press
Via Deadspin's Craggs. So good I had to publish the image here, with full credit/awe, of course.
Agenda For Yahoo Sports Bloggers Summit
Apparently, the Yahoo Sports Bloggers are all convening on California this week -- not being a Y!SB mafia member, I only hear about these things offhand through Twitter.
I'm sure they will have much to discuss and celebrate: After all, as a group they put out one of the most well-produced, well-written and well-read products in sports media, online or off.
YSB's template -- as engineered by Jamie Mottram (who adapted the model he built at Fanhouse, which sort of makes him the Bill Parcells of the sports-blog universe) -- is a range of vertically oriented, single-sport blogs, managed and largely written by absolutely outstanding, best-in-their-sport editors. (Disclosure: Count many of these folks as my friends.)
This strategy allows for complete coverage of virtually every topic that fans may want to read about, regardless of team allegiance. (Intentionally, they leave deep team-by-team analysis to individual independent bloggers and partners like SB Nation.) This dovetails nicely with Yahoo's competitive advantage of driving tens of millions of readers through Yahoo's front door at Yahoo.com -- then directing it to the best of their own content. A compelling blog post that runs on Yahoo's front page can earn millions of page views in an hour.
This is not to discount the millions and millions coming through sports.yahoo.com (by many publically available metrics, the largest audience in online sports): Many from the Yahoo front page; many from folks coming for their fantasy leagues but staying for the quality sports content; many to Y! Sports directly, because Yahoo Sports' interface is clean, simple and effective; and many because they have learned that the blogs are so damn good.
(Yahoo Sports blogs have been so successful that I think they have eclipsed two other very strong areas of Yahoo's sports coverage: (1) Original reporting that regularly creates "national-discussion" storylines, and (2) traditional -- but no less high-quality -- "newspaper"-style columnists like Wetzel, Wojnaroski and Silver. Once you layer in the bloggers, then pound-for-pound, the relatively small group punches big at the highest weight class.)
Triumphalism aside, as the Y! Sports bloggers gather to talk, what should they REALLY be talking about? What should the agenda include?
(1) Social media. I love Y!S's simple yet wildly effective 4-legged stool of fantasy, blog network, original reporting and traditional columns. How can this group -- particularly the bloggers -- incorporate social media beyond tweeting links to their latest posts? How does "passed" media fit into the strategy, with the bloggers both as benefactors of and, yes, benefiting from the link economy?
(2) The Yahoo firehose. Obviously, a link on the front page of Yahoo is gold -- but every content department at Yahoo understands that. What can the bloggers learn about how that front-page process works to earn more links there for their work? (Equally, can bloggers work both from an absolute traffic count and an "effective" traffic count that discounts one-time placement surges to best think about growing their traffic? And, yes, they should be thinking about that.)
(3) Increasing blogger profiles. Again, the Y! Sports bloggers are among -- if not the best -- bloggers in their sport. They may be the best commentators in their sport, period -- in new or traditional media. Through p.r. outreach, grassroots bootstrapping or larger distribution deals, how can the group become bigger "names," both as individuals and to increase the profile of Y! Sports? Should this include investing time and resources in more "traditional" media like audio (creating their own podcasts, which some do) and/or online video?
(4) Revenue. I am not suggesting the bloggers participate in ad sales (although I would say that, generally, editorial folks have amazingly creative ideas about how editorial and advertising can work together to maintain editorial integrity and best serve the consumer, while creating value for the marketer -- there's no shame in a brainstorming meeting). I am suggesting that it behooves everyone to have even a basic understanding of the economics of both the Y! Sports business and Yahoo's business as a whole. Ignorance isn't integrity, and great writers won't lose their effectiveness if they understand how the business that pays their bills happens to work. (I guess what would really make sense is having a basic understanding of the business realities, and the metrics that drive them -- which the bloggers have substantial control over. Then, specifically, a tactical-level understanding of analytics: Where it comes from, why and how.)
(5) Bargain collectively. Whatever they're paying you -- and it is impossible to discount the correlation between great product and security of a full-time income stream -- it ain't enough. (Kidding. Sort of.)
Commenters: I'm sure most of you consume Y! Sports in some way -- fantasy, blogs, news headlines, front page of Yahoo, etc. If you do read Y! Sports blogs, what's your evaluation and where do you think they need to focus their efforts?
-- D.S.
I'm sure they will have much to discuss and celebrate: After all, as a group they put out one of the most well-produced, well-written and well-read products in sports media, online or off.
YSB's template -- as engineered by Jamie Mottram (who adapted the model he built at Fanhouse, which sort of makes him the Bill Parcells of the sports-blog universe) -- is a range of vertically oriented, single-sport blogs, managed and largely written by absolutely outstanding, best-in-their-sport editors. (Disclosure: Count many of these folks as my friends.)
This strategy allows for complete coverage of virtually every topic that fans may want to read about, regardless of team allegiance. (Intentionally, they leave deep team-by-team analysis to individual independent bloggers and partners like SB Nation.) This dovetails nicely with Yahoo's competitive advantage of driving tens of millions of readers through Yahoo's front door at Yahoo.com -- then directing it to the best of their own content. A compelling blog post that runs on Yahoo's front page can earn millions of page views in an hour.
This is not to discount the millions and millions coming through sports.yahoo.com (by many publically available metrics, the largest audience in online sports): Many from the Yahoo front page; many from folks coming for their fantasy leagues but staying for the quality sports content; many to Y! Sports directly, because Yahoo Sports' interface is clean, simple and effective; and many because they have learned that the blogs are so damn good.
(Yahoo Sports blogs have been so successful that I think they have eclipsed two other very strong areas of Yahoo's sports coverage: (1) Original reporting that regularly creates "national-discussion" storylines, and (2) traditional -- but no less high-quality -- "newspaper"-style columnists like Wetzel, Wojnaroski and Silver. Once you layer in the bloggers, then pound-for-pound, the relatively small group punches big at the highest weight class.)
Triumphalism aside, as the Y! Sports bloggers gather to talk, what should they REALLY be talking about? What should the agenda include?
(1) Social media. I love Y!S's simple yet wildly effective 4-legged stool of fantasy, blog network, original reporting and traditional columns. How can this group -- particularly the bloggers -- incorporate social media beyond tweeting links to their latest posts? How does "passed" media fit into the strategy, with the bloggers both as benefactors of and, yes, benefiting from the link economy?
(2) The Yahoo firehose. Obviously, a link on the front page of Yahoo is gold -- but every content department at Yahoo understands that. What can the bloggers learn about how that front-page process works to earn more links there for their work? (Equally, can bloggers work both from an absolute traffic count and an "effective" traffic count that discounts one-time placement surges to best think about growing their traffic? And, yes, they should be thinking about that.)
(3) Increasing blogger profiles. Again, the Y! Sports bloggers are among -- if not the best -- bloggers in their sport. They may be the best commentators in their sport, period -- in new or traditional media. Through p.r. outreach, grassroots bootstrapping or larger distribution deals, how can the group become bigger "names," both as individuals and to increase the profile of Y! Sports? Should this include investing time and resources in more "traditional" media like audio (creating their own podcasts, which some do) and/or online video?
(4) Revenue. I am not suggesting the bloggers participate in ad sales (although I would say that, generally, editorial folks have amazingly creative ideas about how editorial and advertising can work together to maintain editorial integrity and best serve the consumer, while creating value for the marketer -- there's no shame in a brainstorming meeting). I am suggesting that it behooves everyone to have even a basic understanding of the economics of both the Y! Sports business and Yahoo's business as a whole. Ignorance isn't integrity, and great writers won't lose their effectiveness if they understand how the business that pays their bills happens to work. (I guess what would really make sense is having a basic understanding of the business realities, and the metrics that drive them -- which the bloggers have substantial control over. Then, specifically, a tactical-level understanding of analytics: Where it comes from, why and how.)
(5) Bargain collectively. Whatever they're paying you -- and it is impossible to discount the correlation between great product and security of a full-time income stream -- it ain't enough. (Kidding. Sort of.)
Commenters: I'm sure most of you consume Y! Sports in some way -- fantasy, blogs, news headlines, front page of Yahoo, etc. If you do read Y! Sports blogs, what's your evaluation and where do you think they need to focus their efforts?
-- D.S.
On Steve McNair
Steve McNair and I were born two days apart. We were in college at the same time. His career, family -- even retirement -- was something I tracked, if only because it was so easy to relate.
Like everyone else, I admired McNair for his toughness and his leadership in the NFL. It is hard not to imagine what his career had been like had he not played for just-win Jeff Fisher. (I don't want to also nick him for playing in a small market like Nashville, because great NFL careers usually transcend their market size.)
Maybe McNair would not have had the team success he had -- an NFL career really crystallized by that one-yard-short play in the Super Bowl -- without Fisher. But what if he played for a more wide-open offense? McNair was arguably the most physically gifted QB in NFL history.
I define that in a couple different ways: He had as good of an arm as anyone ever. He could run, when necessary -- again, he could have redefined the position if he had a coach with more imagination. And he was the toughest QB to ever play the position -- yes, including Favre. Especially Favre. McNair was the anti-Favre: He didn't need to advertise his toughness.
(Vince Young is a comparably skilled player, at least as it relates to physical talents -- McNair worked with Fisher a lot better than VY has, obviously. Here's the thing: McNair was a father-figure to Young; I cannot imagine how hard Young is taking this -- where Young goes from this moment will be the defining pivot of HIS career.)
But let's go back to Alcorn State, because when I was in college, I was as blown away by McNair as everyone else. That he was able to leap from 1-AA to the top of the NFL Draft says as much about his talent as anything. His senior season was ridiculous: 6,000 yards rushing and passing, with 53 TDs.
The greatest insult was that McNair finished third in Heisman voting, behind Rashan Salaam and Ki-Jana Carter -- no, really -- when he was clearly the most talented player in college football that year. We should hold this against sportswriters who vote for the Heisman for the rest of their careers. Those voters should still feel shamed by that vote.
(I suppose that it is as much of a testament to his skill as anything that in the pre-Internet era, he was able to earn 3rd with a bunch of sportswriters who undoubtedly held his 1-AA status against him -- as much as they were blinded by Salaam's 2,000-yard season or Carter's status as a Penn State player.)
I will now cop to my own astounding mistake: For an upcoming book, I recently worked on a long analysis of Tim Tebow's place among all-time college QBs. I have no problem placing him near the top of the list now -- and at the very top, depending on what happens next season.
But I left Steve McNair out of my all-time Top 5, which was a huge mistake. I feel as bad about that as those Heisman voters should feel about their vote in '94. McNair was as good of a QB as ever played college football -- I wish we had gotten to see him play against top 1-A comp. Regardless, when the book comes out in a few weeks -- I only wrote the one essay, btw -- and I promote it, I will have to add an asterisk to everything, caveating my snub of McNair.
(I actually think that McNair isn't a bad comp for Tebow. Obviously, McNair had a much better -- and more accurate -- arm, but their size and toughness and leadership and results on the field and in the stats column are comparable, at least at the college level.)
We did get to see McNair play against the best in the world, in the NFL. And he was a winner there, too -- again, despite a system that converted his brilliance into convention, but translated into wins, which is all anyone should care about when it comes to McNair's record in the NFL. That, and the fact that he played through pain and injury as well as anyone ever.
As he was retired, his loss won't be felt as acutely as if he was still playing. But as he was recently retired, with a slew of thirtysomething and fortysomething fans controlling sports media and blogs, we all remember his college and pro career so vividly, it is stunning that he is gone.
-- D.S.
Like everyone else, I admired McNair for his toughness and his leadership in the NFL. It is hard not to imagine what his career had been like had he not played for just-win Jeff Fisher. (I don't want to also nick him for playing in a small market like Nashville, because great NFL careers usually transcend their market size.)
Maybe McNair would not have had the team success he had -- an NFL career really crystallized by that one-yard-short play in the Super Bowl -- without Fisher. But what if he played for a more wide-open offense? McNair was arguably the most physically gifted QB in NFL history.
I define that in a couple different ways: He had as good of an arm as anyone ever. He could run, when necessary -- again, he could have redefined the position if he had a coach with more imagination. And he was the toughest QB to ever play the position -- yes, including Favre. Especially Favre. McNair was the anti-Favre: He didn't need to advertise his toughness.
(Vince Young is a comparably skilled player, at least as it relates to physical talents -- McNair worked with Fisher a lot better than VY has, obviously. Here's the thing: McNair was a father-figure to Young; I cannot imagine how hard Young is taking this -- where Young goes from this moment will be the defining pivot of HIS career.)
But let's go back to Alcorn State, because when I was in college, I was as blown away by McNair as everyone else. That he was able to leap from 1-AA to the top of the NFL Draft says as much about his talent as anything. His senior season was ridiculous: 6,000 yards rushing and passing, with 53 TDs.
The greatest insult was that McNair finished third in Heisman voting, behind Rashan Salaam and Ki-Jana Carter -- no, really -- when he was clearly the most talented player in college football that year. We should hold this against sportswriters who vote for the Heisman for the rest of their careers. Those voters should still feel shamed by that vote.
(I suppose that it is as much of a testament to his skill as anything that in the pre-Internet era, he was able to earn 3rd with a bunch of sportswriters who undoubtedly held his 1-AA status against him -- as much as they were blinded by Salaam's 2,000-yard season or Carter's status as a Penn State player.)
I will now cop to my own astounding mistake: For an upcoming book, I recently worked on a long analysis of Tim Tebow's place among all-time college QBs. I have no problem placing him near the top of the list now -- and at the very top, depending on what happens next season.
But I left Steve McNair out of my all-time Top 5, which was a huge mistake. I feel as bad about that as those Heisman voters should feel about their vote in '94. McNair was as good of a QB as ever played college football -- I wish we had gotten to see him play against top 1-A comp. Regardless, when the book comes out in a few weeks -- I only wrote the one essay, btw -- and I promote it, I will have to add an asterisk to everything, caveating my snub of McNair.
(I actually think that McNair isn't a bad comp for Tebow. Obviously, McNair had a much better -- and more accurate -- arm, but their size and toughness and leadership and results on the field and in the stats column are comparable, at least at the college level.)
We did get to see McNair play against the best in the world, in the NFL. And he was a winner there, too -- again, despite a system that converted his brilliance into convention, but translated into wins, which is all anyone should care about when it comes to McNair's record in the NFL. That, and the fact that he played through pain and injury as well as anyone ever.
As he was retired, his loss won't be felt as acutely as if he was still playing. But as he was recently retired, with a slew of thirtysomething and fortysomething fans controlling sports media and blogs, we all remember his college and pro career so vividly, it is stunning that he is gone.
-- D.S.
Monday 07/06 A.M. Quickie:
MLB All-Stars, McNair, Federer, Sheed
There's a lot to like about the MLB All-Star teams, as I lead in today's SN column:
*Love Pujols as the leading vote-getter.
*Love Tim Wakefield making his first ASG at 42.
*Love King Felix making his first ASG at 23.
*Love Ben Zobrist making the AL roster.
There's a lot to be annoyed about:
*Josh Hamilton. I know a lot of voting is popularity, but fans have a great track record of voting in the deserving. Hamilton did not deserve to start the game this year.
*I know Aaron Hill is having a great season, but Ian Kinsler could have been the starting 2B. Now he's relegated to "Final Vote"; respect the people's wishes and vote him in.
*I know Mark Reynolds strikes out a lot. And I know Pablo Sandoval isn't a big name (but he is in fantasy circles!) But I had both on my NL starting ballot -- both are Final Vote guys.
Still: We're talking MLB, and MLB All-Star selections remain the most interesting of any sports league's all-star results. And, as I have said for years, Final Vote is genius.
Meanwhile:
*Roger Federer. What I love is all the folks who said that last year's Federer-Nadal Wimbledon final was the best tennis match ever. Umm...what happens when the very next year, the Wimbledon final is just as good? (BTW: Federer GOAT, in case you still had doubts.)
*I'm not sold on Rasheed Wallace being the missing ingredient for the Celtics. I don't see him containing Dwight Howard, unless he can take him out to the 3-point line. I do like his veteran/championship experience, but it's not like the Celtics were short on that before.
*Love that Hedo Turkoglu pulled a Boozer by saying yes to the Blazers, then turned around and signed with the Raptors -- mainly because his wife likes Toronto more than Portland. Toronto is NBA exile (sorry, Skeets and Melas) and Hedo just went from in-mind to outta sight.
*Steve McNair. I remain incredibly troubled by his murder. More on this later, in its own post.
Complete SN column here. More later.
-- D.S.
*Love Pujols as the leading vote-getter.
*Love Tim Wakefield making his first ASG at 42.
*Love King Felix making his first ASG at 23.
*Love Ben Zobrist making the AL roster.
There's a lot to be annoyed about:
*Josh Hamilton. I know a lot of voting is popularity, but fans have a great track record of voting in the deserving. Hamilton did not deserve to start the game this year.
*I know Aaron Hill is having a great season, but Ian Kinsler could have been the starting 2B. Now he's relegated to "Final Vote"; respect the people's wishes and vote him in.
*I know Mark Reynolds strikes out a lot. And I know Pablo Sandoval isn't a big name (but he is in fantasy circles!) But I had both on my NL starting ballot -- both are Final Vote guys.
Still: We're talking MLB, and MLB All-Star selections remain the most interesting of any sports league's all-star results. And, as I have said for years, Final Vote is genius.
Meanwhile:
*Roger Federer. What I love is all the folks who said that last year's Federer-Nadal Wimbledon final was the best tennis match ever. Umm...what happens when the very next year, the Wimbledon final is just as good? (BTW: Federer GOAT, in case you still had doubts.)
*I'm not sold on Rasheed Wallace being the missing ingredient for the Celtics. I don't see him containing Dwight Howard, unless he can take him out to the 3-point line. I do like his veteran/championship experience, but it's not like the Celtics were short on that before.
*Love that Hedo Turkoglu pulled a Boozer by saying yes to the Blazers, then turned around and signed with the Raptors -- mainly because his wife likes Toronto more than Portland. Toronto is NBA exile (sorry, Skeets and Melas) and Hedo just went from in-mind to outta sight.
*Steve McNair. I remain incredibly troubled by his murder. More on this later, in its own post.
Complete SN column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Saturday, July 04, 2009
Saturday 07/04 (July 4) Quickie
Happy Fourth of July. To celebrate, yesterday I benched Shin-Soo Choo (4/5, 4 R, 2 HR, 7 RBI, 1 SB) for Manny (0/3, 0 R, 0 HR, 0 RBI, 0 SB) in a week where I'm in a back-and-forth fantasy matchup with AJ Daulerio. Choo's line alone would have given me a decisive advantage. Ugggghhhh. This is how my day began. I will now slowly and carefully close my computer and not open it back up until tomorrow. Have a safe and enjoyable holiday today.
-- D.S.
-- D.S.
Friday, July 03, 2009
Obama: Jordan > Kobe
And, of course, the President is right. It's kind of a ludicrous question, actually.
But consider, just in time for Independence Day, what kind of roll President Obama has been on this year, sports-wise, since he took office:
*Picked the Lakers over the Magic.
*Picked UNC to win the NCAA Tournament.
*Made his NCAA bracket-picking a national event.
*Hosted the Florida Gators at the White House.
*Beat UConn women in White House P-I-G.
*Made the White Sox trendy again.
*Made pick-up hoops the national pastime.
*Supported his biggest backer in Western Pennsylvania all the way to the Super Bowl.
(And I'm sure I'm forgetting something.)
Heading into this 4th of July, I am thankful for a country that elected, among other things, such a die-hard, just-like-you-and-me sports fan.
-- D.S.
But consider, just in time for Independence Day, what kind of roll President Obama has been on this year, sports-wise, since he took office:
*Picked the Lakers over the Magic.
*Picked UNC to win the NCAA Tournament.
*Made his NCAA bracket-picking a national event.
*Hosted the Florida Gators at the White House.
*Beat UConn women in White House P-I-G.
*Made the White Sox trendy again.
*Made pick-up hoops the national pastime.
*Supported his biggest backer in Western Pennsylvania all the way to the Super Bowl.
(And I'm sure I'm forgetting something.)
Heading into this 4th of July, I am thankful for a country that elected, among other things, such a die-hard, just-like-you-and-me sports fan.
-- D.S.
Friday 07/03 (Artest) Quickie
Who said the 2009 NBA Free Agency season was going to be lame?
The Lakers snagging Ron Artest is, of course, brilliant. The first thing I thought of was the Bulls signing Dennis Rodman -- but Artest isn't nearly the nut Rodman was, and he is a vastly superior player.
Bring it on, contenders: Artest can guard LeBron, Rashard Lewis, Paul Pierce, Hedo Turkoglu, Richard Jefferson, Carmelo Anthony.
Is Ron-Ron a fit in the Triangle offense? Who cares? Will he freak out in the glare of L.A.? All the better! Artest is the best kind of acquisition: Talented AND interesting.
Jordan kept Rodman in check and the '96 Bulls were one of the best teams ever. It is not an inappropriate analogue to think the same thing about Kobe and Ron-Ron, who are friends.
Imagine that: Artest with a ring -- and the last laugh.
(As for the Lakers letting Trevor Ariza go? We may look back and realize that his youth and length were a critical X-factor for the Lakers' title run. But more likely Artest is an upgrade and Odom can play the "long" defender role that Ariza did. Still: Does Artest or Odom trigger bad inbounds passes from the Nuggets that seal conference-finals wins for the Lakers?)
It makes it all the more intriguing that Arizamight WILL end up with Houston, which seems to match his versatility with the Rockets' innovative approach to personnel. I don't think he is as good as Artest, but Ariza is at least young, with lots of room for growth. But no matter how big my man-crush on Daryl Morey, perhaps it's time to put the Rockets into my "rebuilding" NBA, rather than my "contending" NBA. (No! Never!)
(The Rockets appear to have lost out on Marcin Gortat, who looks like he is going to the Mavericks.)
Rumors: AI to the Bulls? Rubio staying in Spain for 2 years? (Or at least until the T'wolves trade him to a team he would rather play for.)
Quick MLB Hits:
*CC Sabathia: Streak-stopper, and not in a good way.
*Joey Votto is so back.
*Mark Reynolds (22nd HR) affirms my ASG selection.
*Orioles just the tonic for the Angels
*Phils swept by Braves heading into weekender with rival Mets
*Fantasy Stud: Derrick Lee (2 HR, 7 RBI)
*Did the Rangers borrow money from MLB? -- TOTALLY UNDERRATED STORY
*Can I get Aroldis Chapman off my fantasy waiver wire yet?
*Aaack! Bees!
I'm not much of a tennis fan, but I will probably tune in for a little of Andy vs. Andy.
And, yes, Manny is back. 50 games goes by so quickly, doesn't it?
-- D.S.
The Lakers snagging Ron Artest is, of course, brilliant. The first thing I thought of was the Bulls signing Dennis Rodman -- but Artest isn't nearly the nut Rodman was, and he is a vastly superior player.
Bring it on, contenders: Artest can guard LeBron, Rashard Lewis, Paul Pierce, Hedo Turkoglu, Richard Jefferson, Carmelo Anthony.
Is Ron-Ron a fit in the Triangle offense? Who cares? Will he freak out in the glare of L.A.? All the better! Artest is the best kind of acquisition: Talented AND interesting.
Jordan kept Rodman in check and the '96 Bulls were one of the best teams ever. It is not an inappropriate analogue to think the same thing about Kobe and Ron-Ron, who are friends.
Imagine that: Artest with a ring -- and the last laugh.
(As for the Lakers letting Trevor Ariza go? We may look back and realize that his youth and length were a critical X-factor for the Lakers' title run. But more likely Artest is an upgrade and Odom can play the "long" defender role that Ariza did. Still: Does Artest or Odom trigger bad inbounds passes from the Nuggets that seal conference-finals wins for the Lakers?)
It makes it all the more intriguing that Ariza
(The Rockets appear to have lost out on Marcin Gortat, who looks like he is going to the Mavericks.)
Rumors: AI to the Bulls? Rubio staying in Spain for 2 years? (Or at least until the T'wolves trade him to a team he would rather play for.)
Quick MLB Hits:
*CC Sabathia: Streak-stopper, and not in a good way.
*Joey Votto is so back.
*Mark Reynolds (22nd HR) affirms my ASG selection.
*Orioles just the tonic for the Angels
*Phils swept by Braves heading into weekender with rival Mets
*Fantasy Stud: Derrick Lee (2 HR, 7 RBI)
*Did the Rangers borrow money from MLB? -- TOTALLY UNDERRATED STORY
*Can I get Aroldis Chapman off my fantasy waiver wire yet?
*Aaack! Bees!
I'm not much of a tennis fan, but I will probably tune in for a little of Andy vs. Andy.
And, yes, Manny is back. 50 games goes by so quickly, doesn't it?
-- D.S.
Thursday, July 02, 2009
Varsity Letters: Tonight! Baseball Mania
UPDATE (AFTER THE FACT): I didn't see this until today, but as the founder of the Varsity Letters Reading Series, this endorsement from Joe Posnanski makes me very very happy.
You know you're not going anywhere this weekend -- it's a Fourth of July staycation. So if you live in NYC, here's a good plan for tonight: Why not jump on the F (or the A/C) and head to DUMBO for this month's Varsity Letters extravaganza -- including the Daily News reporters on Clemens, Selena Roberts on A-Rod and SL Price on Mike Coolbaugh. Plus: It's FREE. Complete details here.
-- D.S.
You know you're not going anywhere this weekend -- it's a Fourth of July staycation. So if you live in NYC, here's a good plan for tonight: Why not jump on the F (or the A/C) and head to DUMBO for this month's Varsity Letters extravaganza -- including the Daily News reporters on Clemens, Selena Roberts on A-Rod and SL Price on Mike Coolbaugh. Plus: It's FREE. Complete details here.
-- D.S.
Thursday 07/02 Quickie:
MLB All-Star Voting, Pistons Spend, July 4
Ben Zobrist.
I wouldn't exactly call him a "protest vote" on my MLB All-Star Ballot -- final day to vote is today and he (and my ASG ballot) leads today's SN column.
He is leading the AL in OPS (and Slugging). He is the surprise star of the rejuvenated Rays -- and it's no coincidence that the rejuvenation started when Zobrist finally started playing every day.
And, yes, I am voting him as a starter in the AL outfield because he has led my perennially woeful fantasy baseball team into playoff contention for the first time ever.
Zobrist was a pickup after the season started -- I'm not sure anyone actually drafted him. After all, he wasn't slated to get full-time at-bats. Even after his hot start, I followed him on the free-agent wire -- unclaimed -- because who wants a guy who won't play?
But the combination of his per-AB results and his amazing eligibility -- OF, SS, 2B -- was enough for me. I snagged him and he has been clocking the ball ever since, leading my team to its best fantasy year ever -- this despite having to sit Manny for the last 50 games, having Kazmir suck and having Joey Votto develop DL-landing depression after a terrific hot start.
And so I voted Zobrist -- I know full well that he won't make the starting lineup. But I am eagerly anticipating his spot on the reserves, the most unlikely All-Star of the season, for sure.
Don't forget to vote, and I'll be cranking up my annual "Extra Man" campaign next week once we find out who the contenders are. I think in the age of Twitter, it will be particularly interesting, because teams have become very savvy about marketing campaigns for "Extra Man."
Meanwhile:
*Pistons sign Gordon and Villanueva. The Pistons are the new Knicks -- unwilling to admit that they can't compete with the East elite but unwilling to actually start rebuilding.
So instead they commit nearly $100 million to younger versions of players they just lost -- AI and Sheed. Problem: Gordon needs shots -- what about Rip and the development of Stuckey? Villanueva is a little more solid -- seems like every team wants their "new 4" -- the 6-10 forwards like Rashard Lewis who can step out and shoot 3s. Who knew Matt Bullard would become an NBA archetype?
Lots more NBA Free Agency stuff that might pop this weekend: Will Artest sign with the Cavs? Will Hedo sign with the Blazers? Will Ariza bolt -- and what does that mean for the Lakers?
Complete column here. More to come later today and all weekend long.
-- D.S.
I wouldn't exactly call him a "protest vote" on my MLB All-Star Ballot -- final day to vote is today and he (and my ASG ballot) leads today's SN column.
He is leading the AL in OPS (and Slugging). He is the surprise star of the rejuvenated Rays -- and it's no coincidence that the rejuvenation started when Zobrist finally started playing every day.
And, yes, I am voting him as a starter in the AL outfield because he has led my perennially woeful fantasy baseball team into playoff contention for the first time ever.
Zobrist was a pickup after the season started -- I'm not sure anyone actually drafted him. After all, he wasn't slated to get full-time at-bats. Even after his hot start, I followed him on the free-agent wire -- unclaimed -- because who wants a guy who won't play?
But the combination of his per-AB results and his amazing eligibility -- OF, SS, 2B -- was enough for me. I snagged him and he has been clocking the ball ever since, leading my team to its best fantasy year ever -- this despite having to sit Manny for the last 50 games, having Kazmir suck and having Joey Votto develop DL-landing depression after a terrific hot start.
And so I voted Zobrist -- I know full well that he won't make the starting lineup. But I am eagerly anticipating his spot on the reserves, the most unlikely All-Star of the season, for sure.
Don't forget to vote, and I'll be cranking up my annual "Extra Man" campaign next week once we find out who the contenders are. I think in the age of Twitter, it will be particularly interesting, because teams have become very savvy about marketing campaigns for "Extra Man."
Meanwhile:
*Pistons sign Gordon and Villanueva. The Pistons are the new Knicks -- unwilling to admit that they can't compete with the East elite but unwilling to actually start rebuilding.
So instead they commit nearly $100 million to younger versions of players they just lost -- AI and Sheed. Problem: Gordon needs shots -- what about Rip and the development of Stuckey? Villanueva is a little more solid -- seems like every team wants their "new 4" -- the 6-10 forwards like Rashard Lewis who can step out and shoot 3s. Who knew Matt Bullard would become an NBA archetype?
Lots more NBA Free Agency stuff that might pop this weekend: Will Artest sign with the Cavs? Will Hedo sign with the Blazers? Will Ariza bolt -- and what does that mean for the Lakers?
Complete column here. More to come later today and all weekend long.
-- D.S.
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
About the Orioles' Comeback Over Boston
I grew up going to Orioles games, and so I am sympathetic to Baltimore fans. Obviously, you know how I feel about the Red Sox. (Although you know I love Theo! And Jed Hoyer! And Youk!)
You could sense the national feeling of schadenfreude over the Orioles' epic comeback over the Red Sox last night.
Look: We all know that Boston is going to the playoffs. By all rights, they should be the favorite to win the World Series. So can't we have just one moment to give a Nelson Muntz-style: "HA-ha!"
Red Sox fans will rightly snoot that this was just a single game, a single loss. (FJM's Ken T. had a great tweet, about how this merely represents a -1 hit to Boston's season-total run differential.)
But I suspect that this was Orioles fans' version of a championship. The team is in last. There are some nice young parts, but they're not competing this season -- or probably a few after that.
(And the AL East is sizing up as so obliteratingly nasty -- not just this season, but for the foreseeable future -- that you wonder if the O's can ever compete, no matter how good they get.)
Every fan of a last-place team deserves SOMETHING -- some kind of consolation prize -- that even minimally offsets what is otherwise a terrible season.
(Even Lions fans got the consolation prize of the ignominy of "all-time" history. 0-16 was a better ending than 1-15. 0-16 is epic. 1-15 just sucks.)
This was Orioles fans' moment. (The tragic part is that given Boston's lead, I'll bet most O's fans turned off the game before the comeback began, only to wake up to the results.)
Red Sox fans have no reason to be defensive -- just take the mockery; you get the last laugh when you win the division, the AL pennant, the World Series. This will be a blip, if not forgotten.
But for Orioles fans, it is a season-maker.
-- D.S.
You could sense the national feeling of schadenfreude over the Orioles' epic comeback over the Red Sox last night.
Look: We all know that Boston is going to the playoffs. By all rights, they should be the favorite to win the World Series. So can't we have just one moment to give a Nelson Muntz-style: "HA-ha!"
Red Sox fans will rightly snoot that this was just a single game, a single loss. (FJM's Ken T. had a great tweet, about how this merely represents a -1 hit to Boston's season-total run differential.)
But I suspect that this was Orioles fans' version of a championship. The team is in last. There are some nice young parts, but they're not competing this season -- or probably a few after that.
(And the AL East is sizing up as so obliteratingly nasty -- not just this season, but for the foreseeable future -- that you wonder if the O's can ever compete, no matter how good they get.)
Every fan of a last-place team deserves SOMETHING -- some kind of consolation prize -- that even minimally offsets what is otherwise a terrible season.
(Even Lions fans got the consolation prize of the ignominy of "all-time" history. 0-16 was a better ending than 1-15. 0-16 is epic. 1-15 just sucks.)
This was Orioles fans' moment. (The tragic part is that given Boston's lead, I'll bet most O's fans turned off the game before the comeback began, only to wake up to the results.)
Red Sox fans have no reason to be defensive -- just take the mockery; you get the last laugh when you win the division, the AL pennant, the World Series. This will be a blip, if not forgotten.
But for Orioles fans, it is a season-maker.
-- D.S.
Wednesday 07/01 Quickie:
NBA Free Agency, Orioles, Stephenson
I led today's SN column with NBA Free Agency, because at 12:01 a.m. this morning, that's what I was thinking about.
But not 2009 NBA Free Agency, but the countdown that officially began to 12:01 a.m. on July 1... 2010, what I argue will be the biggest single day in NBA history.
(No, really: Make an argument for any other single day as being bigger. Not even the day of Jordan's first unretirement, which I would argue is the reigning champ, right up until 7/01/10.)
Carlos Boozer is staying put. Hedo Turkoglu could be headed West to the Blazers. Jason Kidd might be going to the Knicks. I have no idea where David Lee will end up, but as one of my Top 5 favorite players in the league right now, I sort of care. And he'll make a big impact. (The real question there is whether the Thunder sign Lee, sign Millsap or sign neither.)
But the meta storyline of NBA Free Agency is this: It's a terrible year to be a free agent, not just because everyone is hording cash for 2010, but because no one wants to spend cash, period, and the combination of the current economy and the FA forecast in 2010 gives them an excuse not to spend it.
Meanwhile, this is a point I make in the column, and I expect to hammer it for the next 364 days: There can only be 2 or 3 "winners" (ie, signing LeBron, Wade, Bosh) next summer; everyone else will have a ton of cap room and a mess of good-not-transcendent free agents to pick from, along with a decision:
Do they spend to try to compete now, or do they maintain the "rebuilding" thing. Problem: Everyone has kept saying "Just wait for 2010!" At that point, fans will want action; no more excuses for not spending -- or competing for a title, at least among the middling teams who aren't quite legit contenders and aren't quite bottom-feeders.
Complete column here. More later -- I mean, did you drop by yesterday at all? Apparently, "more" means "a lot more."
-- D.S.
But not 2009 NBA Free Agency, but the countdown that officially began to 12:01 a.m. on July 1... 2010, what I argue will be the biggest single day in NBA history.
(No, really: Make an argument for any other single day as being bigger. Not even the day of Jordan's first unretirement, which I would argue is the reigning champ, right up until 7/01/10.)
Carlos Boozer is staying put. Hedo Turkoglu could be headed West to the Blazers. Jason Kidd might be going to the Knicks. I have no idea where David Lee will end up, but as one of my Top 5 favorite players in the league right now, I sort of care. And he'll make a big impact. (The real question there is whether the Thunder sign Lee, sign Millsap or sign neither.)
But the meta storyline of NBA Free Agency is this: It's a terrible year to be a free agent, not just because everyone is hording cash for 2010, but because no one wants to spend cash, period, and the combination of the current economy and the FA forecast in 2010 gives them an excuse not to spend it.
Meanwhile, this is a point I make in the column, and I expect to hammer it for the next 364 days: There can only be 2 or 3 "winners" (ie, signing LeBron, Wade, Bosh) next summer; everyone else will have a ton of cap room and a mess of good-not-transcendent free agents to pick from, along with a decision:
Do they spend to try to compete now, or do they maintain the "rebuilding" thing. Problem: Everyone has kept saying "Just wait for 2010!" At that point, fans will want action; no more excuses for not spending -- or competing for a title, at least among the middling teams who aren't quite legit contenders and aren't quite bottom-feeders.
Complete column here. More later -- I mean, did you drop by yesterday at all? Apparently, "more" means "a lot more."
-- D.S.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Tweet of the Day: Best Front Office in Sports
from ESPN SportsNation producer Kevin Wildes, who asked what the top front-office in sports is.
His proposed Top 5 included: Cavs, Red Sox, Patriots, Steelers, Red Wings.
I immediately responded "no way" for the Cavs, who not only lucked into LeBron via ping-pong balls, but failed to figure out they needed someone to stop Rashard Lewis.
My nominee was current man-crush Daryl Morey and the Rockets, but I quickly changed my mind seeing Jonah Keri's nomination of the Spurs. Of course: The Spurs front office rules.
If I had to pick a Top 3, it would be in this order: (1) Patriots (because the NFL is so much more competitive than the other big sports, but I'd like to see how they'll do without Scott Pioli); (2) Red Sox; (3) Spurs. I'd like to give a shout-out to Andrew Friedman and the Rays, too.
I would also like to point out that if you consider college football and college basketball programs to be damn-near-professional, then a contender for "best front office" is Florida football, no question. They run that team modeled after the Patriots, and it shows.
-- D.S.
His proposed Top 5 included: Cavs, Red Sox, Patriots, Steelers, Red Wings.
I immediately responded "no way" for the Cavs, who not only lucked into LeBron via ping-pong balls, but failed to figure out they needed someone to stop Rashard Lewis.
My nominee was current man-crush Daryl Morey and the Rockets, but I quickly changed my mind seeing Jonah Keri's nomination of the Spurs. Of course: The Spurs front office rules.
If I had to pick a Top 3, it would be in this order: (1) Patriots (because the NFL is so much more competitive than the other big sports, but I'd like to see how they'll do without Scott Pioli); (2) Red Sox; (3) Spurs. I'd like to give a shout-out to Andrew Friedman and the Rays, too.
I would also like to point out that if you consider college football and college basketball programs to be damn-near-professional, then a contender for "best front office" is Florida football, no question. They run that team modeled after the Patriots, and it shows.
-- D.S.
Xavier Henry: Why Not Try D-League?
Great post by Dash at Deadspin about the Henry Brothers at Kansas. Xavier, the can't-miss star, seems uninterested in college for anything than the minimum before he can turn pro.
He doesn't want to go to Europe because he thinks its too far off the radar (yeah, because Jennings' Top 10 draft status and shoe deal really suffered) but he doesn't want to go to class.
Here is what his solution should be, and it's so simple: Go to the D-League.
(1) Be the trendsetter, the first top prep to go to the NBA's minor league. Being the prep to go to Europe is totally played out now that Jennings has done it after h.s. (and Jeremy Tyler did it before h.s. was even over). Chance to stake out new marketing ground.
(2) Sign the shoe endorsement deal today, along with any other marketing deals he can get. He doesn't even really need the money; the shoe deal would be about the marketing support.
(3) The D-League would be incented to put Henry in a position to succeed: Make him the team's star, develop his game for the NBA and help, not hurt, his draft stock.
(4) As for visibility, I could imagine that the novelty of Henry's year in the D-League would make it an appealing play for ESPN or TNT to produce a game or two.
The big thing is this: Why should he (or Bill Self or fans) "suffer" through his cynical single year at Kansas when he really just wants to be a pro? If he wants to be a pro, go pro: The D-League is right there, available to him.
-- D.S.
He doesn't want to go to Europe because he thinks its too far off the radar (yeah, because Jennings' Top 10 draft status and shoe deal really suffered) but he doesn't want to go to class.
Here is what his solution should be, and it's so simple: Go to the D-League.
(1) Be the trendsetter, the first top prep to go to the NBA's minor league. Being the prep to go to Europe is totally played out now that Jennings has done it after h.s. (and Jeremy Tyler did it before h.s. was even over). Chance to stake out new marketing ground.
(2) Sign the shoe endorsement deal today, along with any other marketing deals he can get. He doesn't even really need the money; the shoe deal would be about the marketing support.
(3) The D-League would be incented to put Henry in a position to succeed: Make him the team's star, develop his game for the NBA and help, not hurt, his draft stock.
(4) As for visibility, I could imagine that the novelty of Henry's year in the D-League would make it an appealing play for ESPN or TNT to produce a game or two.
The big thing is this: Why should he (or Bill Self or fans) "suffer" through his cynical single year at Kansas when he really just wants to be a pro? If he wants to be a pro, go pro: The D-League is right there, available to him.
-- D.S.
Freemium Case Study, Cont'd: Rivals
Great tweet response from a reader about a terrific case study for successful deployment of a "freemium" strategy (in online sports media, no less) being Rivals.com. Let's examine...
How did Rivals pull it off? I'd argue three main reasons:
(1) Partly, it was the same reason that the Wall Street Journal pulled it off -- they launched with a strategy to make subscribing part of the service, right from the start.
(2) Partly, it was because they trafficked in, what was then, very exclusive information. It's the same reason finance and political newsletters still find a paying audience.
(3) Partly, it was because of the incredible message board communities -- incredible, in part, because the subscription fee was a hurdle to keep out the trolls and leave it to serious fans.
Hard to replicate now:
(1) Sites that might charge aren't launching; they are established (as free destinations);
(2) Info/intel -- even recruiting -- is simply too commoditized; you could not start Rivals or Scout in 2009 and expect folks to pay a subscriber fee;
(3) Great message boards are VERY hard to develop. They take years and dedication, which was all more available pre-Web 2.0.
When Yahoo bought Rivals, I was curious to see if they would eliminate the subscription fee and make all that juicy recruiting content widely (and freely) available, to try to increase their market share of overall unique users. They didn't, to their credit (I think -- hard to calculate the opportunity cost). Obviously, Yahoo Sports is doing just fine, audience-wise, without Rivals being free.
-- D.S.
How did Rivals pull it off? I'd argue three main reasons:
(1) Partly, it was the same reason that the Wall Street Journal pulled it off -- they launched with a strategy to make subscribing part of the service, right from the start.
(2) Partly, it was because they trafficked in, what was then, very exclusive information. It's the same reason finance and political newsletters still find a paying audience.
(3) Partly, it was because of the incredible message board communities -- incredible, in part, because the subscription fee was a hurdle to keep out the trolls and leave it to serious fans.
Hard to replicate now:
(1) Sites that might charge aren't launching; they are established (as free destinations);
(2) Info/intel -- even recruiting -- is simply too commoditized; you could not start Rivals or Scout in 2009 and expect folks to pay a subscriber fee;
(3) Great message boards are VERY hard to develop. They take years and dedication, which was all more available pre-Web 2.0.
When Yahoo bought Rivals, I was curious to see if they would eliminate the subscription fee and make all that juicy recruiting content widely (and freely) available, to try to increase their market share of overall unique users. They didn't, to their credit (I think -- hard to calculate the opportunity cost). Obviously, Yahoo Sports is doing just fine, audience-wise, without Rivals being free.
-- D.S.
Free vs. Premium: ESPN.com Case Study
Lot of discussion recently about free content online versus charging for it -- ad-supported models versus subscription fees. Obviously, the answer is some combination of the two.
Here is a thought experiment, using one of the more powerful brands/products in online media:
What if ESPN.com put everything original they did under an Insider subscription?
Free: Commodity products like AP stories, game recaps, scoreboards (and scoreboard info like box scores) and fantasy games, plus anything video. They could also make free any hard news the site reporters break or report, which will be out there anyway as fast as they hit "Publish."
Subscriber-only: Anything original, which means -- basically -- analysis and columns, but I would even include blogs like TrueHoop or Rob Neyer or the NFL divisional blog group. And, yes, even Bill. Especially Bill. But we'll get to that in a minute.
They already put magazine content behind the Insider wall, along with a small selection of other content. Most notably and recently, they showcased Chad Ford's NBA Draft content -- not just his mocks, but his original reporting, too.
Here is the quandary of the current context, of course:
News reporting has been commoditized; as fast as someone can "break" something, I can post it here (with my take) or anyone can post it anywhere. (Happy to credit you for "breaking" it, by the way -- not sure consumers have ever cared about that. You would be much better off not worrying about the credit and making sure you got me to LINK to it. A link is worth more than "as first reported by" text credit. Much much more.)
But even as news reporting has been commoditized, commentary has been commoditized even further. You could read a newspaper columnist's take on the Dodgers in the LA Times or the Red Sox in the Boston Globe. Or you could read your favorite team blogger -- one of many that cover your team. Or you could read the message boards of your favorite team's best online community. Or, hell, just the tweets of smart fans. The terrific thing about this commoditization of commentary is that it has become far more of a meritocracy; the best stuff tends to win.
Sure, promotion on a highly trafficked site helps artificially inflate page views, but that remains in the short-term; the long-term trends point towards highly fragmented audiences going to the sources that serve them best (presumably with the best-quality analysis, however you define "quality" to you -- a cute turn-of-phrase, a smart idea, well-researched data). Long-term trends also point toward the power of passed links: What people you trust recommend you look at.
Back to my thought experiment:
Let's assume that the majority of ESPN.com's page views are coming from this commoditized "free" content -- headline news that folks come back to check 5 times per day, scores and scoreboard information, fantasy. You could continue to sell ad sponsorships on this content with little if any erosion of the audience size necessary to generate large sponsorship deals. (Take it from me: The Quickie was sponsored from time to time -- you missed out, Starbucks! -- but it was a rare piece of original content that WAS revenue-positive; compare that to the mega sponsorship of, say, Tournament Challenge.)
Now, after you have still sold out your sponsorship inventory on the free content, take everything original you have created and offer THAT for a subscription fee: Forget the piecemeal offerings currently available; this is EVERYTHING. It has incredible value -- the best columnists across every sport, real-time commentary and morning-after commentary and enterprise super-stories that are worth the investment. Everything original.
What percent of ESPN.com's 20 million unique visitors per month would be willing to pay for that kind of content value? 5 percent (1 million)? 10 percent (2 million)? More? (I don't have the existing Insider subscriber numbers to use as a baseline.) And what if you charged a nominal fee for all that content: They currently charge around $40 a year. $3 per month seems more than fair for all that high-quality content. That nets ESPN.com anywhere from $40-100 million a year, on top of the ad sales.
Now, the downside: Going behind the pay wall provides an opening to competitors to emphasize that they have FREE commentary! But if quality is going to be the differentiating factor between sources of commentary, it forces everyone to step up their game: If you're going to charge for your commentary, you better have the best stuff; if you're going to try to convince people that your free commentary is just as good (or better), you better have great stuff, too. I am somewhat convinced that most sports fans would simply consume both, even at nominal cost to them -- especially if it was only nominal cost.
(Actually, I would make everything related to Fantasy sports free, including commentary and analysis, because the fantasy landscape is SO competitive that you have to offer as many high-quality free services as possible. If you satisfy the fantasy consumer, you will make back any lost subscription revenue in selling sponsorships to reach participants; besides, it's not like ESPN.com would lack for original content if you removed fantasy -- still a ton every day.)
The larger issue is that pay walls remove the content from the wider conversation online. Set aside the issues with search discoverability -- I don't mean to minimize that, because it's huge, but our example property, ESPN.com, has never really been focused on optimizing its original commentary for search (note that I specify its "commentary"; ESPN.com's commodity content like headlines, scoreboards and team pages is VERY search-friendly, to their credit). No, it really makes it harder for people who traffic in passed links -- bloggers, message-board participants, people on Twitter -- to link to your stuff, because there's always that pesky "Subscription required" caveat you have to apply.
But here's the upside: See enough of those links -- and those caveats -- and soon consumers might start to wonder what they are missing by not having a subscription themselves. That, in turn, will create more subscribers; once a critical mass of folks are "inside" (no pun intended), the passed links generate even more value.
(Funny: You hear a lot of newspaper company executives talking very hostile about Google and Huffington Post; you haven't heard that kind of talk from online-sports-media execs... I suspect that's because they recognize the traffic that comes from Google and from folks who excerpt-but-link-back, like sports bloggers. Might not drive a TON of traffic, but it drives credibility.)
Again, this is just a thought experiment. My inclination is to say "Information wants to be free!" My inclination is to go to sites that offer me free content, rather than pay for it, because I think that every time someone puts up a pay wall, someone else creates (or can create) free content of equal value on the same subject (without ripping the other outlet off, obviously). But that's because there are very few places that have shown me that they are worth my subscription payment -- put something as valuable as, say, every original piece of opinion and analysis on ESPN.com behind a subscriber wall and I'd pay for that in a second. It would simply be too much content that is too good to be missing.
Maybe I'm cherry-picking my argument, because it feels like it would work for ESPN.com in a way that it wouldn't for other competitors in the online sports media world -- or certainly the news or entertainment world. Besides, none of ESPN.com's competitors have an existing subscription product to build off of, as ESPN does.
And, make no mistake: I see the potential downside -- what if consumers don't adopt? (It certainly would indicate something about the value of the original content -- "I like it, but not so much that I'm willing to pay for it.") What if consumers stop coming to ESPN.com, not just for original commentary, but for the commodity stuff, too? Honestly, maybe it would happen like that. But -- and, again, maybe this is because ESPN is a special case -- the brand loyalty remains very very high. I think that if anyone could do it, ESPN could do it.
And, yes, purely from an academic perspective, I would be very curious to know how many folks would pay, say, $3 a month to read Simmons. He does, what, a million or two uniques per column? Let's be absurdly conservative and call it a million uniques, in aggregate, over an entire year. If even 10 percent of those fans felt strongly enough about him to pay $3 a month, that's $4 million a year, which -- as the business manager -- I would gladly split 50/50 with my star, roughly doubling what I figure is his current annual deal. Yup, those are 10 percent of his readers.
I have mentioned this idea to folks around ESPN.com a handful of times over the years -- I bring it up every couple of industry shifts. Usually, it is dismissed as a crackpot theory -- for a lot of good reasons listed above. I'm not even going to commit to supporting it myself -- I just think it makes for an interesting theoretical discussion. You might not be willing to pay for a small fraction -- however high-end -- of ESPN.com's original content, but would you be willing to pay for EVERYTHING they do?
I guess you could file it under "Freemium" -- some stuff free, some stuff paid. Antenna TV: Free. Basic cable: Paid. "Sopranos" and "Curb Your Enthusiasm" and "Joe Buck Live": Pay even more.
Again, this is just a thought exercise, inspired by the current discussion over free versus subscription and the "value" of original content produced by high-end content publishers.
I can say this with certainty: Who in their right mind would try to make LINKING illegal? (Oh, a Federal judge? AWESOME.)
-- D.S.
UPDATE: Great tweet response from a reader about a terrific case study for successful deployment of a "freemium" strategy being Rivals.com.
How did Rivals pull it off? Three main reasons:
(1) Partly, it was the same reason that the Wall Street Journal pulled it off -- they launched with a strategy to make subscribing part of the service, right from the start.
(2) Partly, it was because they trafficked in, what was then, very exclusive information. It's the same reason finance and political newsletters still find a paying audience.
(3) Partly, it was because of the incredible message board communities -- incredible, in part, because the subscription fee was a hurdle to keep out the trolls and leave it to serious fans.
Hard to replicate now:
(1) Sites that might charge aren't launching; they are established (as free destinations);
(2) Info/intel -- even recruiting -- is simply too commoditized; you could not start Rivals or Scout in 2009 and expect folks to pay a subscriber fee;
(3) Great message boards are VERY hard to develop. They take years and dedication, which was all more available pre-Web 2.0.
Here is a thought experiment, using one of the more powerful brands/products in online media:
What if ESPN.com put everything original they did under an Insider subscription?
Free: Commodity products like AP stories, game recaps, scoreboards (and scoreboard info like box scores) and fantasy games, plus anything video. They could also make free any hard news the site reporters break or report, which will be out there anyway as fast as they hit "Publish."
Subscriber-only: Anything original, which means -- basically -- analysis and columns, but I would even include blogs like TrueHoop or Rob Neyer or the NFL divisional blog group. And, yes, even Bill. Especially Bill. But we'll get to that in a minute.
They already put magazine content behind the Insider wall, along with a small selection of other content. Most notably and recently, they showcased Chad Ford's NBA Draft content -- not just his mocks, but his original reporting, too.
Here is the quandary of the current context, of course:
News reporting has been commoditized; as fast as someone can "break" something, I can post it here (with my take) or anyone can post it anywhere. (Happy to credit you for "breaking" it, by the way -- not sure consumers have ever cared about that. You would be much better off not worrying about the credit and making sure you got me to LINK to it. A link is worth more than "as first reported by" text credit. Much much more.)
But even as news reporting has been commoditized, commentary has been commoditized even further. You could read a newspaper columnist's take on the Dodgers in the LA Times or the Red Sox in the Boston Globe. Or you could read your favorite team blogger -- one of many that cover your team. Or you could read the message boards of your favorite team's best online community. Or, hell, just the tweets of smart fans. The terrific thing about this commoditization of commentary is that it has become far more of a meritocracy; the best stuff tends to win.
Sure, promotion on a highly trafficked site helps artificially inflate page views, but that remains in the short-term; the long-term trends point towards highly fragmented audiences going to the sources that serve them best (presumably with the best-quality analysis, however you define "quality" to you -- a cute turn-of-phrase, a smart idea, well-researched data). Long-term trends also point toward the power of passed links: What people you trust recommend you look at.
Back to my thought experiment:
Let's assume that the majority of ESPN.com's page views are coming from this commoditized "free" content -- headline news that folks come back to check 5 times per day, scores and scoreboard information, fantasy. You could continue to sell ad sponsorships on this content with little if any erosion of the audience size necessary to generate large sponsorship deals. (Take it from me: The Quickie was sponsored from time to time -- you missed out, Starbucks! -- but it was a rare piece of original content that WAS revenue-positive; compare that to the mega sponsorship of, say, Tournament Challenge.)
Now, after you have still sold out your sponsorship inventory on the free content, take everything original you have created and offer THAT for a subscription fee: Forget the piecemeal offerings currently available; this is EVERYTHING. It has incredible value -- the best columnists across every sport, real-time commentary and morning-after commentary and enterprise super-stories that are worth the investment. Everything original.
What percent of ESPN.com's 20 million unique visitors per month would be willing to pay for that kind of content value? 5 percent (1 million)? 10 percent (2 million)? More? (I don't have the existing Insider subscriber numbers to use as a baseline.) And what if you charged a nominal fee for all that content: They currently charge around $40 a year. $3 per month seems more than fair for all that high-quality content. That nets ESPN.com anywhere from $40-100 million a year, on top of the ad sales.
Now, the downside: Going behind the pay wall provides an opening to competitors to emphasize that they have FREE commentary! But if quality is going to be the differentiating factor between sources of commentary, it forces everyone to step up their game: If you're going to charge for your commentary, you better have the best stuff; if you're going to try to convince people that your free commentary is just as good (or better), you better have great stuff, too. I am somewhat convinced that most sports fans would simply consume both, even at nominal cost to them -- especially if it was only nominal cost.
(Actually, I would make everything related to Fantasy sports free, including commentary and analysis, because the fantasy landscape is SO competitive that you have to offer as many high-quality free services as possible. If you satisfy the fantasy consumer, you will make back any lost subscription revenue in selling sponsorships to reach participants; besides, it's not like ESPN.com would lack for original content if you removed fantasy -- still a ton every day.)
The larger issue is that pay walls remove the content from the wider conversation online. Set aside the issues with search discoverability -- I don't mean to minimize that, because it's huge, but our example property, ESPN.com, has never really been focused on optimizing its original commentary for search (note that I specify its "commentary"; ESPN.com's commodity content like headlines, scoreboards and team pages is VERY search-friendly, to their credit). No, it really makes it harder for people who traffic in passed links -- bloggers, message-board participants, people on Twitter -- to link to your stuff, because there's always that pesky "Subscription required" caveat you have to apply.
But here's the upside: See enough of those links -- and those caveats -- and soon consumers might start to wonder what they are missing by not having a subscription themselves. That, in turn, will create more subscribers; once a critical mass of folks are "inside" (no pun intended), the passed links generate even more value.
(Funny: You hear a lot of newspaper company executives talking very hostile about Google and Huffington Post; you haven't heard that kind of talk from online-sports-media execs... I suspect that's because they recognize the traffic that comes from Google and from folks who excerpt-but-link-back, like sports bloggers. Might not drive a TON of traffic, but it drives credibility.)
Again, this is just a thought experiment. My inclination is to say "Information wants to be free!" My inclination is to go to sites that offer me free content, rather than pay for it, because I think that every time someone puts up a pay wall, someone else creates (or can create) free content of equal value on the same subject (without ripping the other outlet off, obviously). But that's because there are very few places that have shown me that they are worth my subscription payment -- put something as valuable as, say, every original piece of opinion and analysis on ESPN.com behind a subscriber wall and I'd pay for that in a second. It would simply be too much content that is too good to be missing.
Maybe I'm cherry-picking my argument, because it feels like it would work for ESPN.com in a way that it wouldn't for other competitors in the online sports media world -- or certainly the news or entertainment world. Besides, none of ESPN.com's competitors have an existing subscription product to build off of, as ESPN does.
And, make no mistake: I see the potential downside -- what if consumers don't adopt? (It certainly would indicate something about the value of the original content -- "I like it, but not so much that I'm willing to pay for it.") What if consumers stop coming to ESPN.com, not just for original commentary, but for the commodity stuff, too? Honestly, maybe it would happen like that. But -- and, again, maybe this is because ESPN is a special case -- the brand loyalty remains very very high. I think that if anyone could do it, ESPN could do it.
And, yes, purely from an academic perspective, I would be very curious to know how many folks would pay, say, $3 a month to read Simmons. He does, what, a million or two uniques per column? Let's be absurdly conservative and call it a million uniques, in aggregate, over an entire year. If even 10 percent of those fans felt strongly enough about him to pay $3 a month, that's $4 million a year, which -- as the business manager -- I would gladly split 50/50 with my star, roughly doubling what I figure is his current annual deal. Yup, those are 10 percent of his readers.
I have mentioned this idea to folks around ESPN.com a handful of times over the years -- I bring it up every couple of industry shifts. Usually, it is dismissed as a crackpot theory -- for a lot of good reasons listed above. I'm not even going to commit to supporting it myself -- I just think it makes for an interesting theoretical discussion. You might not be willing to pay for a small fraction -- however high-end -- of ESPN.com's original content, but would you be willing to pay for EVERYTHING they do?
I guess you could file it under "Freemium" -- some stuff free, some stuff paid. Antenna TV: Free. Basic cable: Paid. "Sopranos" and "Curb Your Enthusiasm" and "Joe Buck Live": Pay even more.
Again, this is just a thought exercise, inspired by the current discussion over free versus subscription and the "value" of original content produced by high-end content publishers.
I can say this with certainty: Who in their right mind would try to make LINKING illegal? (Oh, a Federal judge? AWESOME.)
-- D.S.
UPDATE: Great tweet response from a reader about a terrific case study for successful deployment of a "freemium" strategy being Rivals.com.
How did Rivals pull it off? Three main reasons:
(1) Partly, it was the same reason that the Wall Street Journal pulled it off -- they launched with a strategy to make subscribing part of the service, right from the start.
(2) Partly, it was because they trafficked in, what was then, very exclusive information. It's the same reason finance and political newsletters still find a paying audience.
(3) Partly, it was because of the incredible message board communities -- incredible, in part, because the subscription fee was a hurdle to keep out the trolls and leave it to serious fans.
Hard to replicate now:
(1) Sites that might charge aren't launching; they are established (as free destinations);
(2) Info/intel -- even recruiting -- is simply too commoditized; you could not start Rivals or Scout in 2009 and expect folks to pay a subscriber fee;
(3) Great message boards are VERY hard to develop. They take years and dedication, which was all more available pre-Web 2.0.
New William & Mary Nickname: One Option
I don't really have a particular name in mind for a new nickname for William & Mary's athletic teams. From one of my favorite trivia questions, I will offer a few criteria:
*Not an animal.
*Not a color.
*Doesn't end in "S."
Know how many teams qualify under those criteria? In 1-A football, three: Navy (Midshipmen); Notre Dame (Fighting Irish); Illinois (Fighting Illini).
Expanding that to Division 1 basketball, William & Mary "Tribe" was one of the few others that qualified.
W&M has always had a place with me because they were part of that answer.
And so I think that the uniqueness of their nickname is the rarity of the animal/color/"s" trifecta -- THAT is the legacy they should maintain.
-- D.S.
Update: Yes, UMass MINUTEMEN makes the list. Wasn't a dis. I just didn't list all of the DI hoops schools that qualified. And, no, Alabama CRIMSON TIDE does NOT qualify -- the whole "crimson" thing, obviously.
*Not an animal.
*Not a color.
*Doesn't end in "S."
Know how many teams qualify under those criteria? In 1-A football, three: Navy (Midshipmen); Notre Dame (Fighting Irish); Illinois (Fighting Illini).
Expanding that to Division 1 basketball, William & Mary "Tribe" was one of the few others that qualified.
W&M has always had a place with me because they were part of that answer.
And so I think that the uniqueness of their nickname is the rarity of the animal/color/"s" trifecta -- THAT is the legacy they should maintain.
-- D.S.
Update: Yes, UMass MINUTEMEN makes the list. Wasn't a dis. I just didn't list all of the DI hoops schools that qualified. And, no, Alabama CRIMSON TIDE does NOT qualify -- the whole "crimson" thing, obviously.
Tuesday 6/30 Quickie: Who Needs Yao?
Who needs Yao?
That was my first reaction to the news that the Rockets might lose Yao for all of next season -- with the ominous suffix "maybe longer" attached to every blog post about it.
But without Yao (or T-Mac, for that matter), the Rockets nearly knocked off the Lakers -- and gave the champs their toughest series of the playoffs.
It was a testament to Houston's thinking-man's approach to the NBA, and it leads today's SN column, if you want to check it out.
So: Do the Rockets need Yao to be playoff competitive? Obviously not.
Do they need Yao to actually BEAT the Lakers (or whoever) and win a championship? I would argue that the playoffs proved otherwise, but -- yes, sure -- Yao would certainly help.
Then again, the team was better without McGrady. And far better with the addition of Ron Artest, whose re-signing should be a priority for the Rockets.
Do the Rockets need a quote-unquote "superstar?" I don't think so, just based on their style and what happened last month in the playoffs.
That said, the Rockets are trying to win a championship -- one of a handful of teams actually more concerned with winning now than rebuilding for later.
It might be the case that Houston is the NBA equivalent of the early-00's "Moneyball" A's: For now, the Rockets are able to arbitrage inefficiencies in NBA team analytical proficiencies.
That would be enough to get them into the playoffs -- with the right matchups, even winning a few series. The odds are long that a team of journeymen can hold it together against superstar-powered juggernauts for 3 months. That said: Look what they did against LA.
Richard Justice had an interesting take on my "Who needs Yao?" theory in today's Houston Chronicle: He says that the Rockets should target Chris Bosh in the summer of 2010.
It is actually a pretty smart idea: I wouldn't consider Bosh a true put-team-on-his-back superstar like Kobe, LeBron or Wade. But I would consider him a terrific top-tier talent to mesh within a system as sophisticated as Houston's.
The point of "Who needs Yao?" is that Houston has built a system that works without superstars. Bosh is not a superstar -- just a terrifically talented 6-11 player.
It is hard to imagine that Yao's NBA career is over -- arguably, before it even really began. But the reality is that Houston doesn't really need him.
Complete column here. More later.
-- D.S.
That was my first reaction to the news that the Rockets might lose Yao for all of next season -- with the ominous suffix "maybe longer" attached to every blog post about it.
But without Yao (or T-Mac, for that matter), the Rockets nearly knocked off the Lakers -- and gave the champs their toughest series of the playoffs.
It was a testament to Houston's thinking-man's approach to the NBA, and it leads today's SN column, if you want to check it out.
So: Do the Rockets need Yao to be playoff competitive? Obviously not.
Do they need Yao to actually BEAT the Lakers (or whoever) and win a championship? I would argue that the playoffs proved otherwise, but -- yes, sure -- Yao would certainly help.
Then again, the team was better without McGrady. And far better with the addition of Ron Artest, whose re-signing should be a priority for the Rockets.
Do the Rockets need a quote-unquote "superstar?" I don't think so, just based on their style and what happened last month in the playoffs.
That said, the Rockets are trying to win a championship -- one of a handful of teams actually more concerned with winning now than rebuilding for later.
It might be the case that Houston is the NBA equivalent of the early-00's "Moneyball" A's: For now, the Rockets are able to arbitrage inefficiencies in NBA team analytical proficiencies.
That would be enough to get them into the playoffs -- with the right matchups, even winning a few series. The odds are long that a team of journeymen can hold it together against superstar-powered juggernauts for 3 months. That said: Look what they did against LA.
Richard Justice had an interesting take on my "Who needs Yao?" theory in today's Houston Chronicle: He says that the Rockets should target Chris Bosh in the summer of 2010.
It is actually a pretty smart idea: I wouldn't consider Bosh a true put-team-on-his-back superstar like Kobe, LeBron or Wade. But I would consider him a terrific top-tier talent to mesh within a system as sophisticated as Houston's.
The point of "Who needs Yao?" is that Houston has built a system that works without superstars. Bosh is not a superstar -- just a terrifically talented 6-11 player.
It is hard to imagine that Yao's NBA career is over -- arguably, before it even really began. But the reality is that Houston doesn't really need him.
Complete column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Daryl Morey Loves The D-League
I'm an unabashed fan of Rockets GM Daryl Morey. Here's one more reason he's smarter than the rest of the NBA: The Rockets will run their own D-League team. That means they can develop their own players (and coaches) the way they want to, test out stastistics-based theories and play sets -- and test new ways to collect and analyze information. It is a (mostly) true minor-league affiliation, ideal both for the parent club and the D-League. As for players who want to make the NBA, why wouldn't you want your career trajectory to rely on a league (and a team front office) incented to get you to the NBA? (h/t: True Hoop)
-- D.S.
PS: It's worth repeating, because it is a phenomenal stat -- 1 in 5 NBA players have played in the D League.
-- D.S.
PS: It's worth repeating, because it is a phenomenal stat -- 1 in 5 NBA players have played in the D League.
Monday 06/29 A.M. Quickie:
US Soccer, Mo Rivera, Rubio, Kazmir, More
The No. 1 best outcome for US Soccer in their can't-possibly-win Confed Cup final with Brazil was achieved:
People were talking about (or watching) US Soccer. (And it wasn't even the World Cup.) It leads today's SN column.
A win over Brazil would have been nice, but it was not a necessary condition for this to work out as well as possible for the U.S.
3-0/3-0 was a fluke. Beating Spain was huge -- a radar-hitting achievement, but still setting up "Well, we're going to get KILLED by Brazil."
To spend that glorious half not just keeping up with Brazil -- but beating them at their own game -- was a remarkable moment.
If nothing else, it likely increased US fan interest for the team's fortunes in the World Cup next year. And that's the most important thing.
But it also has a downside: Before 3-0/3-0, I would say that fans had zero expectations the US would get out of the group round of the World Cup.
After Spain, I think fans should have had expectations that we will advance to the World Cup knockout round.
After Brazil, there will be no excuse if we don't make it at least to the quarters -- that's an awful lot of pressure, where "anything-but-quarters" will be viewed as a failure.
But you know what? That's progress. Huge progress. New, higher expectations are a step in the right direction.
More you'll find in today's column:
*Why the Knicks don't need (and shouldn't want) Rubio.
*Mo Rivera: Best closer ever?
*Shaq to Blazers nixed? What about Odom?
*Whose return is more important to their team: Kazmir or Manny?
Complete column here. More later.
-- D.S.
People were talking about (or watching) US Soccer. (And it wasn't even the World Cup.) It leads today's SN column.
A win over Brazil would have been nice, but it was not a necessary condition for this to work out as well as possible for the U.S.
3-0/3-0 was a fluke. Beating Spain was huge -- a radar-hitting achievement, but still setting up "Well, we're going to get KILLED by Brazil."
To spend that glorious half not just keeping up with Brazil -- but beating them at their own game -- was a remarkable moment.
If nothing else, it likely increased US fan interest for the team's fortunes in the World Cup next year. And that's the most important thing.
But it also has a downside: Before 3-0/3-0, I would say that fans had zero expectations the US would get out of the group round of the World Cup.
After Spain, I think fans should have had expectations that we will advance to the World Cup knockout round.
After Brazil, there will be no excuse if we don't make it at least to the quarters -- that's an awful lot of pressure, where "anything-but-quarters" will be viewed as a failure.
But you know what? That's progress. Huge progress. New, higher expectations are a step in the right direction.
More you'll find in today's column:
*Why the Knicks don't need (and shouldn't want) Rubio.
*Mo Rivera: Best closer ever?
*Shaq to Blazers nixed? What about Odom?
*Whose return is more important to their team: Kazmir or Manny?
Complete column here. More later.
-- D.S.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
