Miscellaneous Minutiae, 7/18/2012

Jeremy Lin, money, and more money. This is only tangentially relevant, but MSG's--the Knicks ownership group--decision not to match the Houston Rockets' offer sheet for Jeremy Lin and the preemptive justification of this decision by MSG made me laugh and then reminded me of Brian's post from yesterday about the Rose Bowl: yes, in the end, it's all about the money. Sometimes certain stories pop up and for a little while make you believe that at least some infinitesimal portion of the experience is reserved for things other than money (pride, tradition, passion, etc.) Unfortunately, it becomes increasingly obvious that it is always about the money, 100% of the time, every time.

According to Chris Marangi, a portfolio manager at MSG's third-largest shareholder, Gamco Investors, Inc.:

“We like it when companies shop for bargains, and Ray Felton looks like a bargain compared to Jeremy Lin,” Marangi said. “We’re value investors.”

Like the people in change of running college football, it seems that the people in charge of decisions made my professional sport franchises are equally as out of touch and myopic. You could make an argument for the riskiness behind keeping a guy like Lin at that cost, but there were many more reasons in favor of keeping him.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that people who only care about money, besides not understanding how sports team work and operate, often only care about short-term returns. Without venturing into a rant about this being symptomatic of Knicks ownership's complete ineptitude since the beginning of the new millennium*, it's frustrating to see monied interests continue to be short-sighted, especially when it would seem against their own interests.

To be honest, I'm actually kind of shocked that this whole playoff thing even happened in the first place given the aversion to change among most people in sports with money and a position of power. This calls to mind the constant reference to how "the bowls have been good to us" by various Big Ten folks throughout these playoff negotiations.

Then again, it remains to be seen how different the new playoff structure will actually be; from were I stand, it seems as if it will be not that different.

*And I'm not even a Knicks fans (I'm a Bulls fans). So, really, this is actually a good thing, but my point still stands. James Dolan and whoever else was in charge of this decision are being extremely short-sighted at best and potentially petty and vindictive at worst (if rumors of jealousy within the organization coughCarmelocough are to be believed).

Tony Barnhart on Alabama's biggest losses. Tony Barnhart briefly addresses Alabama's significant defensive turnover and which players will end up being the biggest losses for Saban's Gradgrindian, buzzsaw of a defense. Alabama lost two starting corners from last season's team, first round pick Dre Kirkpatrick and DeQuan Menzie. As such, Saban dipped into the nebulous pool of JUCO talent and emerged with two corners, Deion Belue and Travell Dixon:

Based on my last conversation with Saban, both Belue and Dixon will be ready to play against Michigan on Sept. 1.
"Our system is not as complicated as some people make it out to be," Saban said. "Both guys picked it up well, and I expect them to contribute."
The rule of thumb in the SEC is that you don't bring in juco players to sit on the bench.

 If there is a light at the end of the tunnel--as I mentioned in the Alabama preview posts--it's that Saban felt the need to grab not one but two JUCO corners. The Crimson Tide do return Dee Milliner, a former 5-star who has logged a significant number of starts in his own right, but it doesn't seem like Alabama has much in the way of experienced depth after Milliner. Either way, Belue and Dixon will definitely be on the field on September 1st, which should be a good thing.

Personally, I think that Mark Barron will prove to be Alabama's biggest defensive loss. The Tide lost a lot on the front 7, but they do return a lot of talent and athleticism. I do like Vinnie Sunseri and Ha'Sean Clinton-Dix as players, but asking them to replicate Barron's play at strong safety in week 1 is asking a little much, IMO. Both are excellent talents receiving some of the best (if not the best) defensive coaching in the country, but if Al Borges and Michigan are looking for some potential weakness to target and play off of, the strong safety spot might be it.

Spencer Hall on Day 1 of SEC Media Days. You would think that I, a Michigan fan and alum, would feel above the notion of watching even one solitary second of SE Media Day coverage. You would think that, and you'd be absolutely wrong.

As much as I hate to say it, the B1G's collection of coaches are fairly bland compared to the SEC's, which can be good or bad, a dichotomy that directly correlates to how many people you've forced off of your lawn in the past year or so. If the answer is "a lot of people," then you probably find this to be a good thing.

Whatever your opinion on the matter, it's undeniably true that media days are infinitely more entertaining when coaches actually say things. After day 1, Steve Spurrier openly made fun of Ole Miss, Kevin Sumlin and Gary Pinkel spent much of their time at the podium being all "hey guys we've played competitive football before you know", and James Franklin literally made me want to put on helmet and tackle random people while quoting Shakespeare. It was an eventful day.

Instead of blabbering on any more, just read Spencer's account of the proceedings. It is very good.

True freshmen contributors: hopefully there are less of 'em. Kyle Meinke and Nick Baumgardner run down the list of potential true freshmen contributors, debating an arbitrary O/U of 6. As Meinke notes, Michigan returned 14 starters and played 7 true freshmen in 2006 (Michigan returns 15 starters this year). I find it hard to believe that Michigan plays less than that number this year.

Pipkins, Darboh, and Chesson are the candidates that come to mind first. After that, Kalis and Bolden seem like pretty good bets (although I think that everyone would hope for a redshirt for the former). Dennis Norfleet should get on the field in some capacity. Safety depth is not exactly tremendous; Jarrod Wilson will probably see the field. An injury to either Kovacs or Thomas Gordon--KNOCK ON WOOD--and Wilson is becomes understudy #1 after Marvin Robinson slides into the starting lineup.

That's 7 already, and I'm sure there will be others. Devin Funchess and AJ Williams probably aren't ready to play yet, but Michigan's TE two-deep is pretty grim. Other than that, who knows. This isn't NCAA, so there will always be guys losing redshirts that you, the all-knowing fan, might not agree with. In any case, I think it's safe to say that the less true freshmen that end up playing, the better.

More? If you didn't know anything about this whole situation, you'd think that Mizzou's and TAMU's tackles were preparing to block literal forces of nature this fall...stinks to be them, PAWL. Darius Morris picture in the excellently named Laker blog Silver Screen and Roll captioned "No more turnovers!" FWIW. Ramon Sessions's departure means nothing with Nash coming in, and Darius still has to beat out Steve Blake for the backup spot.

Bill Carmody has been recruiting surprisingly well of late for the Wildcats...I'm starting to get behind this Northwestern team as one that can grab a tourney berth even in spite of John Shurna's departure. I agree with Lake the Posts; this team, somehow, seems deeper and better equipped to avoid those late season failures than in years past.

Although I almost stopped reading after the Ayn Rand reference in the beginning, this just about sums up the folly of the Knicks' decision to not retain Lin's services.

Miscellaneous Minutiae, 5/24/2012

Just in case you needed a painful reminder. The pair of MNC game losses aside, Ohio State was obscenely dominant throughout the Tressel era: news at 11. From this week's Big Ten mailblog, these two points stand out:

• Ohio State hasn't lost to the same opponent twice in a row since 2003/04 (Wisconsin--the first being, yes, that game where Robert Reynolds did that thing). 
• The Buckeyes lost five conference games between 2005 and 2010. My goodness. 

These aren't things you reflexively think about because the previous decade or so is mostly a monolithic bloc of frustrating rivalry immolation. With that said, when you actually look at things like the above--in addition to other similarly shocking-but-not-really-shocking stats and/or anecdotes that make you go CRABLE WHY  or LLOYD WHY PUNT THERE WHY WE'RE NOT WINNING BY THAT MUCH--what the Buckeyes did to the conference was pretty amazing. Say what you will about the strength of the Big Ten during that span, but that is impressive any way you slice it. The odds of a run like that happening anytime soon are not that great. 

With that said, the 2012 schedule for the Buckeyes does feature more than a few opportunities to see the aforementioned streak end. Michigan State, Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Michigan are all distinct possibilities, and who knows what Penn State will look like this year. Three of those five are on the road, so, I think it's safe to say that the streak will come to an end. It's also safe to say that a couple other streaks and records that only fans care about will come to an end, given how high Tressel set the bar. I doubt that the Buckeyes experience the same sort of catastrophic tabula rasa-ing that Michigan got in its transition from Lloyd to RR, but there will be some bumps in the road. How many bumps there'll end up being will be the difference between say, another 6-win season and an 8 or 9 win year in Year 1 under Meyer.

Just here to negate all that retrospective doom and gloom, you guys

Show me the money. In light of the Great Band Fiasco of 2012, you're probably wondering a bit about Michigan's finances and, by extension, how much cash money we netted from the Sugar Bowl. Well, here you go: 

After expenses were taken out and the Big Ten absorbed the cost of the university's unsold tickets, Michigan brought in $78,916 in profit from its trip to New Orleans, according to records received by WolverineNation as part of a Freedom of Information request.

The headline doesn't include all pertinent information (not that it can be expected to), but, either way, your visceral reaction of "pfft, that's it" might not be completely wrong. I still don't think it's unreasonable to wonder why the "guys in blazers" that everybody euphemistically refers to get paid so much to do so little. Bowl directors and general hangers on remind me of Turtle from Entourage in that they are completely useless vis-a-vis their role in the entire operation. This is bad because anything that reminds me of Entourage or a character from it is probably a pretty terrible thing. 

Naturally, everybody in the Big Ten who is anybody thinks that semi-final home games would be a bad idea. They would make money, which I thought was what this was all about, but I guess they would also preclude generally anonymous B1G administrators from having ritzy times in warm weather bowl locales for a few days. Emphasis mine: 

Michigan spent $423,574 to transport the 379 people comprising the team and staff to New Orleans for the game, $297,183 for the 319 members of the band and cheerleading squads and $16,470 to transport 31 members of the school's "official party," which Ablauf wrote comprised "non-athletic department personnel: Regents, president and university officials."

Jim Delany is Vincent Chase if the latter had an entourage that enjoyed exquisite cheese spreads and maintained an average age of no less than 60. Okay, obviously I'm joking a little bit here (it's not like $16,000 and change is all that much in the grand scheme of things anyway), but there's probably a little truth to the point that these guys have a personal stake in this.

On a somewhat unrelated note, the other main takeaway from all of this for you, the fan: things are a lot more expensive than you think. Those transportation, food, and lodging costs are kind of staggering. It's not right for Brandon to Machiavelli his way into getting people to pay for the band, but, can you blame him?

DB: slowly making me back away from the "let's laugh at the hate-everything-DB-does-people" table. I have moved on from the fact that we will likely never get the chance to see a team from below the Mason-Dixon line come up to the frigid North to play the game of football. Football, you see, is a delicate game that can always be played under the most pleasant of conditions. The willingness to "roll over," ostensibly for the sake of compromise, is irritating; however, much of the ire against Delany et al is admittedly better directed at the other participants in this playoff debate, simply because they have strength in numbers with respect to this particular issue.

Still, Dave...come on, man. I mean, sometimes I wonder if the Big Ten brass are representing, you know, the Big Ten's interests, what with the comments regarding the "unfairness" of getting teams from warm parts of the country (see: everywhere that isn't the B1G, apparently) to play up north in December/January, and now this.

Not only did DB not support a playoff at all (it's not like he has a choice now), he didn't even feign support for campus site semi-finals and now he's saying that he's against even having neutral site games in the Midwest: 

"The one thing that kind of gets left out of this discussion that maybe ought to get some weight are the kids," he said Friday during WTKA's Mott Takeover. "Now, I know a lot of people don't really care about that part, but I do, and if you polled our players and said, 'If you played a really tough, successful, long regular season, the award you're going to get is to travel to Ford Field or Lucas Oil Stadium,' they would look at you and say, 'Huh?'

I just don't know what to say anymore. I've been far less critical of DB than most people, but this is starting to get absurd. If Brandon has done some even somewhat scientific polling of Michigan players on this issue of "travel convenience/de facto home field advantage vs. going somewhere warm and awesome like Orlando WOO" then I'd love to see it. I doubt that happens, because bringing up "the kids" is a good way of making any critics tantamount to "oh, so you hate the kids huh?"I am not at all saying that DB (and others) don't care about the players, it's just that saying these decisions are being made because of what the players want is maybe a little disingenuous. Maybe I'm being overly cynical.

General superconference thoughts. Stuart Mandel talks about, among other things, why a conference champions only playoff model would negatively impact the importance of the regular season. I don't necessarily disagree with his arguments, but I'm of a mind that superconferences are going to happen. As nonsensical and unnatural as the concept may seem when you look at a map, it's actually a much tidier plan, especially when juxtaposed with what is being discussed within the context of the current conference by conference landscape. As long as the Big East and ACC exist, they will have to be considered in a non-superconference playoff.

A few stray thoughts related to my post from the other day on the issue. It's easy to become enamored with the symmetry of the superconference model: 4 conferences, 16 teams each, 4 playoff spots that require teams to do one simple thing, i.e. win their conference. Very clean and very simple. What's that Alabama, you didn't win your division or your conference? NO SOUP FOR YOU.

In a sense, this setup would mimic the NCAAB tournament model in a roundabout way. I know this sounds like a bad thing, because, after all, everyone complains about how vastly unimportant the college basketball is compared to the Big Dance. The Final Four is not comprised of the "best" teams each and every year, but rather the teams that made it through their respective regions. In this sense, the college football regular season would essentially become the first four rounds of the Big Dance, with the 4 team playoff of course mirroring the Final Four.

Yes, lawsuits will rain down from the sky if this happens. Also, someone mentioned this on MGoBlog the other day (I can't remember who or where it was, but if I find it I'll update), but there really isn't a centralized entity or any pervasive force that's pushing realignment to happen, let alone pushing each of the four conferences to exactly 16 teams. The more that I think about this point, the more that I wonder whether or not even teams even exist to fill out the rest of the Big Ten (Notre Dame, Rutgers...and? Maybe Virginia Tech if they don't land elsewhere?), and even the Pac 12.

The SEC, however, is already at 14. The Big 12, if the completely reliable rumblings are to be believed, might be getting ready to go on an expansion spree that is positively Supermarket Sweep-esque. What would force the B1G and Pac 12 to expand if both the SEC and Big 12 got to 16? Does the Big 12 event want 16, or is it just looking to add teams so that its figurative EKG machine stops flat-lining every so often, something that was a daily torment for the conference not too long ago? You know, kind of like stocking up on water jugs and batteries, just in case*. I don't really have answers to these questions, but when you throw out the inevitability that is "lawyers from have-not schools running around all nimbly bimbly," the whole non-conference games becoming obsolete thing, and the ongoing cognitive dissonance of "this is about the kids" while forcing said kids to travel outrageous distances for conference games...well.

Maybe superconferences aren't such a great idea after all. Symmetry is nice, though.

*Yes, the Big 12 is Dale Gribble. Yes, I am a fan of 1990s television.

More? I don't have much to say about this, but I will say this: whenever the apocalypse comes to pass, I'm pretty certain that Gene Smith will still somehow be the AD at OSU when all is said and done. It's like Smith has spent the entire time since Tressel's departure saying questionable things and then going "hey everybody look over there!"...and then everybody does, and here we are over a year later and he's still the AD and nobody has seemed to notice.

Jim Delany doesn't want to talk about it, because discussing one's finances is tacky and unbecoming of a Big Ten Man. Some good recruiting buzz from UMHoops on Michigan's point guard of the future (and others). Via Michigan Today, a look at Jim Abbott's recently released memoir, Imperfect: An Improbable Life

Mo' Money Mo' Problems

I had an entire post ready to go this morning re: The Great Band Crisis of 2012, but, naturally, it seems that the Internet decided to eat it. This is somewhat irritating but also might have been the universe's way of saying "shut up, guy, the world does not need a 47,194th take on this issue." Duly noted, universe. In any case, I have reproduced the most important part of the lost post below. The rest would've been just noise, anyway.

I don't know what the want from me/

It's like the more money we come across/

The more problems we see