Texas A&M Commerce is a commuter school in the Dallas-Ft. Worth Metroplex.
Their head coach, Guy Morriss, had a career record with Baylor and Kentucky of 27-54. He was 5-5 last season, which is a big deal for him, I guess.
Anyway, a couple of his players were busted last month on drug charges. Since this was actually campus news, the student newspaper wrote a story about the situation.
Morriss's players, unhappy that the media would have the audacity to report any news about their team that didn't involve their sterling 5-5 record, apparently took it upon themselves to steal every copy of the newspaper from campus.
Now, student newspapers tend to be free. But if you read the fine print in the staff box, there is usually a disclaimer that the first copy is free and each additional copy is worth, say, 25 or 50 cents.
So, these players stole every copy of the paper so that no one would know about the crime.
Well, it turns out that because of the ignorance of the players, now more people know about it.
Upon finding out what his players did, Morriss said, "I’m proud of my players for doing that. This was the best team building exercise we have ever done."
Wow.
What does that say about you, Guy Morriss, that committing a crime is the best team builder you can think of?
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Pac-10 Expansion Sidebar: The realistic choices
After we highlighted Teddy Greenstein's Chicago Tribune piece about Big Ten expansion possibilities the other day, I came across this piece by the San Jose Mercury News' Jon Wilner looking at Pac-10 expansion.
Some interesting notes from Wilner's blog (which is a must read):
* Voting on expansion will have to be unanimous. All of the schools are going to have to agree to this or it's not going to work.
* Like most things in sports, this all comes down to money. The Pac-10 wants to increase their revenues, since they are outpaced significantly by the Big Ten and the SEC. They don't need to match those two conferences, but they need to get closer.
* An interesting point that Wilner highlights is that one of the ways to get more money is to, for lack of a better term, expose the conference more. That would mean playing games on off days and nights. More football games on Thursdays, for example, or basketball games on Monday.
* A television network could be formed, perhaps by partnering with the Big 12 or the ACC.
Of course, if the conference were to expand by potentially poaching Colorado (considered the best fit among western schools), I don't know how excited the Big 12 would be about partnering with the Pac-10.
However, we all know that expansion is the way to get new markets and new exposure. I'll let Wilner explain the field:
Well, Missouri would be available, but not for the Pac-10. Mizzou would rather join the Big Ten if they're going to jump ship.
And while BYU/Utah makes sense if you look at the rest of the Pac-10 and the natural pairings that occur because of geography, if your goal is to make more money, you need two distinct television markets to maximize eyeballs.
And in this scenario, with the finalists being BYU, Utah and Colorado, I would take Colorado and Utah as being the newest members of the Pac-10 (Pac-12? Pacific Coast Conference?).
Why not BYU? Well, that's another post.
Some interesting notes from Wilner's blog (which is a must read):
* Voting on expansion will have to be unanimous. All of the schools are going to have to agree to this or it's not going to work.
* Like most things in sports, this all comes down to money. The Pac-10 wants to increase their revenues, since they are outpaced significantly by the Big Ten and the SEC. They don't need to match those two conferences, but they need to get closer.
* An interesting point that Wilner highlights is that one of the ways to get more money is to, for lack of a better term, expose the conference more. That would mean playing games on off days and nights. More football games on Thursdays, for example, or basketball games on Monday.
* A television network could be formed, perhaps by partnering with the Big 12 or the ACC.
Of course, if the conference were to expand by potentially poaching Colorado (considered the best fit among western schools), I don't know how excited the Big 12 would be about partnering with the Pac-10.
However, we all know that expansion is the way to get new markets and new exposure. I'll let Wilner explain the field:
San Diego State, Fresno State, UNLV, Nevada and Boise State are not part of the equation, multiple sources told me. No way, no how. They don’t work academically and they don’t work in the TV homes/revenue equation.
Unless Missouri or Texas (presumably with Texas A&M) are available — and at this point there’s no substantive reason to believe they are — then only three options exist for the conference: Utah, BYU and Colorado.
And for all practical purposes, there are only two options: Colorado and BYU, or Colorado and Utah.
Utah and BYU together simply will not work.
As I speculated a few weeks ago (and have since gotten confirmation on), you cannot add two mouths and only one trough, especially when that trough is the Salt Lake City market, which is not exactly Dallas-Ft. Worth.
Well, Missouri would be available, but not for the Pac-10. Mizzou would rather join the Big Ten if they're going to jump ship.
And while BYU/Utah makes sense if you look at the rest of the Pac-10 and the natural pairings that occur because of geography, if your goal is to make more money, you need two distinct television markets to maximize eyeballs.
And in this scenario, with the finalists being BYU, Utah and Colorado, I would take Colorado and Utah as being the newest members of the Pac-10 (Pac-12? Pacific Coast Conference?).
Why not BYU? Well, that's another post.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Myron Rolle's a Grown Ass Man. He can make his own decisions
I do have to say that I was completely flabbergasted when I read this Clark Judge piece from over the weekend.
In it, Judge argues that Myron Rolle, the former Florida State safety and Rhodes Scholar, should give up on football and go on to medical school because he has a better chance of making an impact in the medical profession than he ever will on the football field:
Excuse me, say what?
So let's see. Myron Rolle may not have been a ball hawking, big playmaking safety at Florida State, so he has no chance of ever being an NFL starter and therefore, he should just give up this silly charade and get on with the rest of his life.
And that quote, from Mike Lombardi, is the crux of the problem.
I've heard that tired line floated out there before, and as an educator, it makes me want to vomit.
Education isn't valued, and apparently being an academically high performing athlete is a net negative.
I wonder how much his decision to take advantage of a once in a lifetime opportunity to study at Oxford is being seriously held against him because of either ignorance or jealousy on the part of NFL men.
Seems to me Lombardi says as much—that the kid is just too damn smart and, for most teams, would be the smartest person in the organization as soon as he was drafted.
Hell, considering the highly inappropriate and rude question he was asked by the Tampa Bay coaching staff at the Senior Bowl (How did you feel deserting your team last year?), I am astounded that he even got invited to the combine at all.
All of us who write about, follow, work in or care about sports lament the lack of the true scholar athlete in the 21st century.
And then that once in a generation guy comes along, and he gets crap for caring about his education.
I know Myron Rolle is smart enough to know if he can cut it at the next level or not. If he didn't think he had a chance to make the NFL and contribute, I highly doubt that he would be putting himself through all of this.
If he wasn't committed to playing football, he wouldn't have flown to Maryland for a game after participating in the Rhodes Scholar interviews on the same day.
Besides, this young man (so far) appears to be someone that could be held up as an ideal member of any team or community he became a part of. Hell, football would be a vehicle that he could use to get the word out that it's possible to balance high level academics and high level football play. That it is possible to chase your dreams, set high goals and achieve them.
And considering the spate of arrests for DUI and weapons issues and drugs, doesn't the NFL need more Myron Rolles?
In it, Judge argues that Myron Rolle, the former Florida State safety and Rhodes Scholar, should give up on football and go on to medical school because he has a better chance of making an impact in the medical profession than he ever will on the football field:
Myron Rolle is an extraordinary student. He is not an extraordinary safety. So use that head, Myron, and connect the dots.
[S]tep up. Go to medical school, do your residency and get on with your life. The mind shouldn't be wasted and I hate to think what repeated blows to the head of a strong safety can do.
In Rolle's case, I don't want to know. I'd rather see him use that head to save someone's life rather than saving a spot on a 53-man roster. The guy took a year off from football because he not only valued his education but because he wanted to further it.
So now he's putting it on hold by trying to make professional football a career? Sorry, but I must have missed something.
Excuse me, say what?
So let's see. Myron Rolle may not have been a ball hawking, big playmaking safety at Florida State, so he has no chance of ever being an NFL starter and therefore, he should just give up this silly charade and get on with the rest of his life.
I just think it would be better if Myron Rolle went where he was appreciated and valued most.
And that's not the NFL.
"Any guy who can do what he did shows his dedication and determination," said NFL Network analyst Michael Lombardi. "But safeties that don't play a lot of man-to-man in our league right now are going to struggle. Like I said on the air the other day, when the guys asking the question aren't as smart as the guy answering them you've got a problem."
And that quote, from Mike Lombardi, is the crux of the problem.
I've heard that tired line floated out there before, and as an educator, it makes me want to vomit.
Education isn't valued, and apparently being an academically high performing athlete is a net negative.
I wonder how much his decision to take advantage of a once in a lifetime opportunity to study at Oxford is being seriously held against him because of either ignorance or jealousy on the part of NFL men.
Seems to me Lombardi says as much—that the kid is just too damn smart and, for most teams, would be the smartest person in the organization as soon as he was drafted.
Hell, considering the highly inappropriate and rude question he was asked by the Tampa Bay coaching staff at the Senior Bowl (How did you feel deserting your team last year?), I am astounded that he even got invited to the combine at all.
All of us who write about, follow, work in or care about sports lament the lack of the true scholar athlete in the 21st century.
And then that once in a generation guy comes along, and he gets crap for caring about his education.
I know Myron Rolle is smart enough to know if he can cut it at the next level or not. If he didn't think he had a chance to make the NFL and contribute, I highly doubt that he would be putting himself through all of this.
If he wasn't committed to playing football, he wouldn't have flown to Maryland for a game after participating in the Rhodes Scholar interviews on the same day.
Besides, this young man (so far) appears to be someone that could be held up as an ideal member of any team or community he became a part of. Hell, football would be a vehicle that he could use to get the word out that it's possible to balance high level academics and high level football play. That it is possible to chase your dreams, set high goals and achieve them.
And considering the spate of arrests for DUI and weapons issues and drugs, doesn't the NFL need more Myron Rolles?
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
March Madness: The Jerome Picks
The what?
The Jerome.
Okay, so I am not in anofficial Jerome Pool. As of about 2:40 PST, I was entered into the official Jerome Pool.
As a matter of fact, to be frank, I didn't even know what the Jerome was until about half an hour ago.
Read these stories by Dan Wetzel and Pete Thamel to see what the Jerome is.
To simplify, think of it as an extension of March Madness down to the conference Tourneys (which start tonight).
Choose the winner of the 30 conference tournaments. For those of you who don't know, the Ivy League does not play a conference tournament.
America East: Vermont
Atlantic Sun: Jacksonville
Big Sky: Weber State
Big South: Winthrop
Colonial: William and Mary
Horizon League: Butler
Metro Atlantic: Siena
Missouri Valley: Illinois State (total homer pick)
Northeast: Robert Morris
Ohio Valley: Murray State
Patriot League: Lafayette
Southern: Davidson
Summit: Oral Roberts (homer pick because anything that might help Mizzou is a +)
Sun Belt: Middle Tennessee
West Coast: Gonzaga
Atlantic 10: Xavier
Atlantic Coast: Maryland
Big East: Syracuse
Big Ten: Wisconsin
Big West: Pacific
Big 12: Kansas State
Conference-USA: UAB
MAC: Kent State
MEAC: Morgan State
Mountain West: UNLV
Pac-10: California
SEC: Kentucky
Southland: Stephen F. Austin
SWAC: Jackson State
WAC: Utah State
The Jerome.
Okay, so I am not in an
As a matter of fact, to be frank, I didn't even know what the Jerome was until about half an hour ago.
Read these stories by Dan Wetzel and Pete Thamel to see what the Jerome is.
To simplify, think of it as an extension of March Madness down to the conference Tourneys (which start tonight).
Choose the winner of the 30 conference tournaments. For those of you who don't know, the Ivy League does not play a conference tournament.
America East: Vermont
Atlantic Sun: Jacksonville
Big Sky: Weber State
Big South: Winthrop
Colonial: William and Mary
Horizon League: Butler
Metro Atlantic: Siena
Missouri Valley: Illinois State (total homer pick)
Northeast: Robert Morris
Ohio Valley: Murray State
Patriot League: Lafayette
Southern: Davidson
Summit: Oral Roberts (homer pick because anything that might help Mizzou is a +)
Sun Belt: Middle Tennessee
West Coast: Gonzaga
Atlantic 10: Xavier
Atlantic Coast: Maryland
Big East: Syracuse
Big Ten: Wisconsin
Big West: Pacific
Big 12: Kansas State
Conference-USA: UAB
MAC: Kent State
MEAC: Morgan State
Mountain West: UNLV
Pac-10: California
SEC: Kentucky
Southland: Stephen F. Austin
SWAC: Jackson State
WAC: Utah State
As The Tebow Spins, Day 341: What is a college coaches job?
Okay, it hasn't really been that long.
But it certainly feels like it.
I will come right out and admit I am somewhere between neutral and negative on Tim Tebow, and that's a visceral reaction more than anything else.
I have only been able to observe him through magazine articles and television interviews but my gut reaction is somewhere between indifference and mild dislike. Something about him rubs me the wrong way, much like Jimmy Clausen.
I can't put my finger on it.
But I'm not going to impugn him as a person. Instead I want to use him as a jumping off point.
On Sunday, I was watching in split screen the NFL combine QB/RB/WR day and the gold medal game.
As soon as I turned on the tv, there was Marshall Faulk, Mike Mayock and Charles Davis arguing over the merits of Tim Tebow and how Urban Meyer may (or may not) have failed him. Faulk thinks that Meyer needed to do more to prepare Tebow for the next level; Mayock and Davis think that Tebow has potential to be a next level talent.
Oh, and the name Alex Smith was invoked as a quarterback that Meyer had gotten to the NFL.
Yeah, and Danny Wuerffel, Shane Matthews, Jesse Palmer and Doug Johnson all got run with NFL teams. No one would ever say that Spurrier developed NFL talent at QB, right?
Tebow claims that Meyer has his charges NFL ready as far as preparation goes and being ready to work week in and week out.
But it's hard to look away from the throwing motion (aka "The Frittata", as the hilarious blog Every Day Should Be Saturday calls it).
Tebow unveils Tim Tebow throwing motion 3.0 at the Florida Pro Day on St. Patrick's Day.
It is a dilemma, though: What is a collegiate coaching staff's responsibility when it comes to their players?
Is it to develop and nurture the natural talent of these players and get them ready for potential pro careers?
Or is it to win games first and, if it fits within the program, develop players to get better?
My inclination is to say that college coaches need to focus on winning. That is what they are paid to do and that is what should come first.
Now, this doesn't mean that a coach can't get a player ready for moving on to the NFL.
I just don't think it should be the primary goal for a couple of reasons:
1) If the player needs to be radically rebuilt from a skills perspective, then it will be difficult to have that player not appear robotic as the new skills become second nature.
2) It could—could!—serve as a distraction because the focus can get taken off of the team goals for that current season.
Now, this doesn't preclude the player trying to get better on their own and seeking the input from their coaches.
But I think, given the practice limits (ahem) by the NCAA, it's difficult to smoothly work in concepts for next level improvements while installing the current week's game plan.
Urban Meyer's job is to win games for Florida.
Nick Saban's job is to win games for Alabama.
If they can improve on a player's skills, great.
But that should not be their sole focus.
But it certainly feels like it.
I will come right out and admit I am somewhere between neutral and negative on Tim Tebow, and that's a visceral reaction more than anything else.
I have only been able to observe him through magazine articles and television interviews but my gut reaction is somewhere between indifference and mild dislike. Something about him rubs me the wrong way, much like Jimmy Clausen.
I can't put my finger on it.
But I'm not going to impugn him as a person. Instead I want to use him as a jumping off point.
On Sunday, I was watching in split screen the NFL combine QB/RB/WR day and the gold medal game.
As soon as I turned on the tv, there was Marshall Faulk, Mike Mayock and Charles Davis arguing over the merits of Tim Tebow and how Urban Meyer may (or may not) have failed him. Faulk thinks that Meyer needed to do more to prepare Tebow for the next level; Mayock and Davis think that Tebow has potential to be a next level talent.
Oh, and the name Alex Smith was invoked as a quarterback that Meyer had gotten to the NFL.
Yeah, and Danny Wuerffel, Shane Matthews, Jesse Palmer and Doug Johnson all got run with NFL teams. No one would ever say that Spurrier developed NFL talent at QB, right?
Tebow claims that Meyer has his charges NFL ready as far as preparation goes and being ready to work week in and week out.
But it's hard to look away from the throwing motion (aka "The Frittata", as the hilarious blog Every Day Should Be Saturday calls it).
Tebow unveils Tim Tebow throwing motion 3.0 at the Florida Pro Day on St. Patrick's Day.
It is a dilemma, though: What is a collegiate coaching staff's responsibility when it comes to their players?
Is it to develop and nurture the natural talent of these players and get them ready for potential pro careers?
Or is it to win games first and, if it fits within the program, develop players to get better?
My inclination is to say that college coaches need to focus on winning. That is what they are paid to do and that is what should come first.
Now, this doesn't mean that a coach can't get a player ready for moving on to the NFL.
I just don't think it should be the primary goal for a couple of reasons:
1) If the player needs to be radically rebuilt from a skills perspective, then it will be difficult to have that player not appear robotic as the new skills become second nature.
2) It could—could!—serve as a distraction because the focus can get taken off of the team goals for that current season.
Now, this doesn't preclude the player trying to get better on their own and seeking the input from their coaches.
But I think, given the practice limits (ahem) by the NCAA, it's difficult to smoothly work in concepts for next level improvements while installing the current week's game plan.
Urban Meyer's job is to win games for Florida.
Nick Saban's job is to win games for Alabama.
If they can improve on a player's skills, great.
But that should not be their sole focus.
Big Ten Expansion Sidebar: A preliminary list?
The company that the Big Ten hired to help them determine whether or not to expand and who to look at has come back and said, "Yep. Expand."
Interesting piece by Teddy Greenstein in the Chicago Tribune today with his thoughts about who would be the best fit for the conference.
Teddy cites the following factors as being important in his view:
1) Revenue. Football stadium size, basketball arena and (most importantly) TV market
2) Geography to keep travel costs down
3) Academics
4) Recruiting (fertile recruiting area)
The winner, according to sources?
Yes, there are other schools that need to be considered that aren't being mentioned. Rutgers, Missouri, Pittsburgh, Notre Dame and Syracuse are simply the obvious suspects.
But quite frankly I don't see too many other teams that fit the profile and would make the impact that these five would.
Frankly, I'm not 100 percent sold on the Rutgers angle just yet.
Yes, New Jersey has been a good solid recruiting area for football talent and some basketball as well.
But I still find that "New York market" argument to be weak.
Sure, the Big Ten would love to expand their footprint and get the Big Ten Network into those homes.
But I don't know if Rutgers has the pull make that happen.
College football is still a novelty in the NYC area for most folks who are NY natives.
And for college basketball, NYC is Big East country.
Yes, you might be able to capture the alums from Northwestern, Michigan and Penn State and have them reconnect with their teams.
But frankly I don't see Rutgers as drawing eyeballs to the screen on Saturday afternoons simply because they are on.
They have to win games to make that happen, and the step up in weight class would make that a daunting effort, I would say.
Interesting piece by Teddy Greenstein in the Chicago Tribune today with his thoughts about who would be the best fit for the conference.
Teddy cites the following factors as being important in his view:
1) Revenue. Football stadium size, basketball arena and (most importantly) TV market
2) Geography to keep travel costs down
3) Academics
4) Recruiting (fertile recruiting area)
The winner, according to sources?
The consensus among Big Ten sources, officials from other conferences and TV executives is that Rutgers offers the best package. Missouri is second and Pittsburgh third.
Why Rutgers? It doesn't hurt that the New Brunswick, N.J., campus is less than 40 miles from midtown Manhattan. Or that the state of New Jersey alone would be the nation's fourth-largest television market -- after New York, Los Angeles and Chicago.
The New York market has 7.5 million TV homes, and the Big Ten Network would love to get them on expanded basic cable rather than forcing subscribers to pay extra via a sports tier.
Rutgers just completed a $102 million renovation of its football stadium that added more than 12,000 seats, 1,000 club-level seats, a $5 million recruiting lounge -- and earned the ire of opposition groups. Capacity is up to 52,454 with an option for building a third deck.
Rutgers will play the first ever major-college football game (vs. Army) at the new Meadowlands Stadium, a $1.4 billion facility that will open for the Jets and Giants this fall. Think there's be any trouble selling out the 82,500-seat stadium for a Penn State-Rutgers game? Or when Ohio State or Michigan visits?
The Newark Star-Ledger reported in January that the school also plans to overhaul its outdated Rutgers Athletic Center, a 32-year-old facility that holds 8,000 for men's and women's basketball.
The New York/New Jersey area feeds the nation's top-rated basketball conference, the Big East, much of its talent.
Four other factors can't hurt Rutgers' cause:
• Newark Liberty International Airport is 23 miles from New Brunswick, making Rutgers more accessible than many Big Ten campuses.
• Rutgers calls itself "The Birthplace of College Football." It beat Princeton in what must have been a thrilling contest in 1869. Final score: 6-4.
• Delany hails from the Garden State -- South Orange, N.J.
• By leaving the Big East, Rutgers could quadruple its annual TV share to more than $20 million. Meaning that unlike with Texas and Notre Dame, an R.S.V.P would be a mere formality.
Yes, there are other schools that need to be considered that aren't being mentioned. Rutgers, Missouri, Pittsburgh, Notre Dame and Syracuse are simply the obvious suspects.
But quite frankly I don't see too many other teams that fit the profile and would make the impact that these five would.
Frankly, I'm not 100 percent sold on the Rutgers angle just yet.
Yes, New Jersey has been a good solid recruiting area for football talent and some basketball as well.
But I still find that "New York market" argument to be weak.
Sure, the Big Ten would love to expand their footprint and get the Big Ten Network into those homes.
But I don't know if Rutgers has the pull make that happen.
College football is still a novelty in the NYC area for most folks who are NY natives.
And for college basketball, NYC is Big East country.
Yes, you might be able to capture the alums from Northwestern, Michigan and Penn State and have them reconnect with their teams.
But frankly I don't see Rutgers as drawing eyeballs to the screen on Saturday afternoons simply because they are on.
They have to win games to make that happen, and the step up in weight class would make that a daunting effort, I would say.
Guess What? Maybe Your Team Isn't That Good
So March Madness is upon us with the flipping of the calendar page yesterday, and with the change of the month comes the annual rites of Spring:
1) Conference Tournaments
2) The CBS Selection Show
3) The Filling Out Of The Brackets and Entering Of The Pools
4) The Bitchfest Of Snubbing
Actually, the bitching usually starts well before the tournament, as bracketologists find their email boxes, their Facebook walls and their Twitter feeds bombarded by folks wondering how come "my team" isn't in the NCAA tournament.
(Although I would also hazard a guess that some of these folks that feel marginalized also are against tourney expansion, but I digress.)
Only slightly less annoying than these folks are the ones who complain each week about whether or not their basketball team is ranked.
I maintain that you shouldn't care about where your basketball team is ranked.
Unlike in college football, where the rankings play a huge role in which postseason game you may or may not play in (because of the BCS formula), in college basketball the weekly polls really don't matter.
Don't worry about being ranked in the Top 25 in February.
Just make sure your team is considered one of the 65 best come mid-March.
But I want to expand out to a larger point, and this point is about what people perceive to be media bias against your team:
Maybe, just maybe, your team is not as good as you think it is.
From a national perspective, on TV or Radio, not everyone is going to get equal time.
Sorry, that's just a fact of life.
It doesn't mean that your team hasn't done good things.
But the need to have the sports cognoscenti brand you as worthy is something that I find hard to swallow.
Look, ESPN, NBC Sports, Fox Sports and CBS Sports are looking to drive the biggest amount of eyes and ears to the different platforms and products that they produce. That's a fact.
And like in most businesses, if you're a newcomer, it takes some time to make your way in the market and break down those barriers.
It seems that the time line in sports is about a decade (see: Boise State in CFB and Gonzaga in CBB; see the MWC in CFB AND CBB).
I think in CBB, though, it's even harder to get representation.
While we profess to love Cinderella, she's not worth talking about most of the rest of the season.
We are a society that prefers blue bloods, so those teams are naturally going to dominate the airwaves more.
But in this era, it's not like you can't find coverage of your team.
So if you think you're not getting a fair shake from the big boys, guess what?
Hit Google and find some favorable coverage.
It's not rocket science.
And as your team improves, and maintains that improvement, the accolades will fall your team's way.
As usual, patience is a virtue that gets rewarded in the end.
1) Conference Tournaments
2) The CBS Selection Show
3) The Filling Out Of The Brackets and Entering Of The Pools
4) The Bitchfest Of Snubbing
Actually, the bitching usually starts well before the tournament, as bracketologists find their email boxes, their Facebook walls and their Twitter feeds bombarded by folks wondering how come "my team" isn't in the NCAA tournament.
(Although I would also hazard a guess that some of these folks that feel marginalized also are against tourney expansion, but I digress.)
Only slightly less annoying than these folks are the ones who complain each week about whether or not their basketball team is ranked.
I maintain that you shouldn't care about where your basketball team is ranked.
Unlike in college football, where the rankings play a huge role in which postseason game you may or may not play in (because of the BCS formula), in college basketball the weekly polls really don't matter.
Don't worry about being ranked in the Top 25 in February.
Just make sure your team is considered one of the 65 best come mid-March.
But I want to expand out to a larger point, and this point is about what people perceive to be media bias against your team:
Maybe, just maybe, your team is not as good as you think it is.
From a national perspective, on TV or Radio, not everyone is going to get equal time.
Sorry, that's just a fact of life.
It doesn't mean that your team hasn't done good things.
But the need to have the sports cognoscenti brand you as worthy is something that I find hard to swallow.
Look, ESPN, NBC Sports, Fox Sports and CBS Sports are looking to drive the biggest amount of eyes and ears to the different platforms and products that they produce. That's a fact.
And like in most businesses, if you're a newcomer, it takes some time to make your way in the market and break down those barriers.
It seems that the time line in sports is about a decade (see: Boise State in CFB and Gonzaga in CBB; see the MWC in CFB AND CBB).
I think in CBB, though, it's even harder to get representation.
While we profess to love Cinderella, she's not worth talking about most of the rest of the season.
We are a society that prefers blue bloods, so those teams are naturally going to dominate the airwaves more.
But in this era, it's not like you can't find coverage of your team.
So if you think you're not getting a fair shake from the big boys, guess what?
Hit Google and find some favorable coverage.
It's not rocket science.
And as your team improves, and maintains that improvement, the accolades will fall your team's way.
As usual, patience is a virtue that gets rewarded in the end.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)