Last night in the NCAA Women's basketball championship Tennessee beat Stanford to win it all. I didn't watch the game, but I know many did on ESPN and the arena was sold out.
In fact, for the women's game, NCAA is the pinnacle. But once they get drafted by the WNBA, where they play for money, the arenas are no longer filled; in fact the arenas a very much empty. I know many college sports are AS popular as their professional counterparts, but I can't think of another sport where the popularity of the amateur/college sport dwarfs the professional counterpart.
What is it that WNBA stands for? A friend of mine suggested: "We Need Better Athletes"
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Bracket Improvement
A suggestion to improve the near flawless NCAA mens basketball tournament:
About eight years ago the bracket was expanded to incorporate 65 teams. Since one more conference was awarded an automatic bid, the committee decided they didn't want that small conference team to take the place of a big name school. So they make the 2 smallest schools play a game before the tournament starts. The loser of this game does not even get to play in the actual tournament even though they received an automatic bid.
So, what they could do is declare who the last 2 bubble teams were to get into the tournament without an automatic bid. Since they didn't even win their conference these 2 teams should play the "play-in" game before the tournament.
Sure, these big school bubble teams (like this year's Arizona squad) are better than the small time "play-in" school (like this year's Coppin St). So instead of having Coppin State play Mount St. Mary's in a "play-in" and having the winner take the #16 seed to play #1 North Carolina, have Arizona play Kentucky (2 bubble teams this year) and have the winner take the #12 seed and play the #5 seed.
Reward a conference champion and make a bubble team play the pre-tournament game.
About eight years ago the bracket was expanded to incorporate 65 teams. Since one more conference was awarded an automatic bid, the committee decided they didn't want that small conference team to take the place of a big name school. So they make the 2 smallest schools play a game before the tournament starts. The loser of this game does not even get to play in the actual tournament even though they received an automatic bid.
So, what they could do is declare who the last 2 bubble teams were to get into the tournament without an automatic bid. Since they didn't even win their conference these 2 teams should play the "play-in" game before the tournament.
Sure, these big school bubble teams (like this year's Arizona squad) are better than the small time "play-in" school (like this year's Coppin St). So instead of having Coppin State play Mount St. Mary's in a "play-in" and having the winner take the #16 seed to play #1 North Carolina, have Arizona play Kentucky (2 bubble teams this year) and have the winner take the #12 seed and play the #5 seed.
Reward a conference champion and make a bubble team play the pre-tournament game.
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
Payroll Minimum
You know its bad when the Tampa Bay Devil Rays - yes, the Devil Rays who are known for fielding an uncompetitive team year after year while management refuses to fork over money for talent... You know its bad when these hapless Devil Rays have a payroll TWICE as much as you.
Unbelievably, the Florida Marlins payroll this year is only 21 million dollars. Tampa Bay's payroll is almost 44 million. The Yankees payroll is 209 million dollars, nearly ten times that of the Marlins. Alex Rodriguez will make 28 million this year, 7 million more than the entire Florida roster.
Instead of complaining about the deep pockets of the Yankees, is it time to start complaining about the bottom end? Do we need to have some sort of minimum spending limit?
Here's what can happen if we don't: Let's say Florida has a spending budget of 80 million (which is about what Milwaukee and Cleveland spend, who are both in the middle of the chart.) Florida chooses to spend 20 million every year putting double A talent on the field while saving 60 million every year. Then six years later they reach into their 360 million savings account and buy all the best players and win a championship. The next year, they have a fire sale and let go of the payroll and start over.
Funny thing, that's exactly what Florida did after they won the World Series in 1997 and again six years later in 2003. Its a strategy that may work, but is that what we want? Is that good for the game?
Here is an idea for a rule. The ticket price amount should be in direct proportion to payroll. So if Florida management decides to spend only 21 million, then their ticket prices should be near zero. That way since you put a no-name product on the field (which most people will not spend money to see), you will at least try to fill up the stadium with people who otherwise would never go to a game except now that it is free. They can make money on concessions.
Unbelievably, the Florida Marlins payroll this year is only 21 million dollars. Tampa Bay's payroll is almost 44 million. The Yankees payroll is 209 million dollars, nearly ten times that of the Marlins. Alex Rodriguez will make 28 million this year, 7 million more than the entire Florida roster.
Instead of complaining about the deep pockets of the Yankees, is it time to start complaining about the bottom end? Do we need to have some sort of minimum spending limit?
Here's what can happen if we don't: Let's say Florida has a spending budget of 80 million (which is about what Milwaukee and Cleveland spend, who are both in the middle of the chart.) Florida chooses to spend 20 million every year putting double A talent on the field while saving 60 million every year. Then six years later they reach into their 360 million savings account and buy all the best players and win a championship. The next year, they have a fire sale and let go of the payroll and start over.
Funny thing, that's exactly what Florida did after they won the World Series in 1997 and again six years later in 2003. Its a strategy that may work, but is that what we want? Is that good for the game?
Here is an idea for a rule. The ticket price amount should be in direct proportion to payroll. So if Florida management decides to spend only 21 million, then their ticket prices should be near zero. That way since you put a no-name product on the field (which most people will not spend money to see), you will at least try to fill up the stadium with people who otherwise would never go to a game except now that it is free. They can make money on concessions.
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
Appealing a Called 3rd Strike (revisited)
On a check swing when the plate umpire calls a ball, the catcher can appeal for the umpire down the line for help. (Its funny that the catcher can only get that appeal if the home plate ump grants it. Its possible that the line ump gets a better view but will not get a chance to correct the call because the plate ump will not grant it!) Let's assume the plate umpire grants an appeal. The plate umpire thinks he has it right - they only appeal if the catcher asks. The assumption is the plate umpire is humble and generous and admits he might have missed it - lets ask the gentleman down the line if he got a better view.
My question is, why does the catcher have to appeal? Why can't the umpire down the line just make the call if the plate umpire missed it? Don't they want the right call anyways? You could actually have a situation where the line ump sees a strike after the plate ump called a ball and if the catcher never asks for an appeal, the game goes on with a missed call. This is ridiculous. Eliminate appeals. Just let the line ump correct a call without the catcher asking.
In this line of thinking, the opposite should also be true. Sometimes the batter has a close check swing. The plate ump points at the batter and calls a strike. Shouldn't the batter be able to ask the line ump for an appeal like the catcher can? The situation is no different. In both cases the plate ump thinks he's right. Why is it that he can only get help to correct a ball?
My question is, why does the catcher have to appeal? Why can't the umpire down the line just make the call if the plate umpire missed it? Don't they want the right call anyways? You could actually have a situation where the line ump sees a strike after the plate ump called a ball and if the catcher never asks for an appeal, the game goes on with a missed call. This is ridiculous. Eliminate appeals. Just let the line ump correct a call without the catcher asking.
In this line of thinking, the opposite should also be true. Sometimes the batter has a close check swing. The plate ump points at the batter and calls a strike. Shouldn't the batter be able to ask the line ump for an appeal like the catcher can? The situation is no different. In both cases the plate ump thinks he's right. Why is it that he can only get help to correct a ball?
MLB Opening Day(s)?
Boston and Oakland travel to Japan for opening day which was actually in the morning in the US. Washington and Atlanta play Sunday night which is called opening night. Then on Monday we have the traditional opening day.
This doesn't do it for me. There are too many problems. First, Boston comes back to Los Angeles after playing regular season games in Japan and is then expected to play the Dodgers in a meaningless exhibition game. The Boston travels to Oakland to resume their regular season series with the A's. Hmm.
Another problem I see is with opening day being a one-game series. Wouldn't you think Washington, after opening their new stadium Sunday night against Atlanta, would play on Monday against Atlanta? Nope, Washington traveled to Philadelphia on Monday while Atlanta traveled home to play Pittsburgh.
Then it gets stranger. On Tuesday, Washington and Philadelphia both get the day off and then resume their series on Wednesday.
Can we just start everybody off on Monday and call it a national holiday and stay home and watch all the team play at the same time? Just like we do at the start of March Madness. Strange things are afoot in the MLB offices.
This doesn't do it for me. There are too many problems. First, Boston comes back to Los Angeles after playing regular season games in Japan and is then expected to play the Dodgers in a meaningless exhibition game. The Boston travels to Oakland to resume their regular season series with the A's. Hmm.
Another problem I see is with opening day being a one-game series. Wouldn't you think Washington, after opening their new stadium Sunday night against Atlanta, would play on Monday against Atlanta? Nope, Washington traveled to Philadelphia on Monday while Atlanta traveled home to play Pittsburgh.
Then it gets stranger. On Tuesday, Washington and Philadelphia both get the day off and then resume their series on Wednesday.
Can we just start everybody off on Monday and call it a national holiday and stay home and watch all the team play at the same time? Just like we do at the start of March Madness. Strange things are afoot in the MLB offices.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
