I have endured bouts of insomnia for most of my adult life. In 2002, while channel surfing in the middle of the night, I miraculously discovered a cure for my inability to fall asleep. Sadly, this remedy was only available for a few weeks. A stroke of luck occurred in 2006 when I was able to relocate that same relief but only for the same limited time. My fellow sufferers of sleep disorders can understand my joy when I found out that once again, this aid was about to reappear to alleviate my restlessness. Of course, this antidote of which I am speaking is broadcasts of World Cup soccer matches.
This event and soccer in general hold a particular attraction to those embarrassed by their status as Americans. First of all, self-described progressives automatically consider anything European as more desirable than any domestic equivalent. This neo-Eurocentrism extends to the infatuation with socialized health care. Also included in this mania are punitive tax rates for economically productive citizens, governmental subsidization of sloth by generous financial support of those refusing to work for a living, nationalization of businesses leading to governmental monopolies in transportation, retail and other sectors of the economy. Additionally, these hand-wringing types feel compelled to kowtow to any and all demands by Islamists who have infiltrated their countries. Their affinity for soccer results from the desire to morph into a twin of the bloated and tottering amalgamation known as the European Union.
The leftist insistence on prizing self-esteem above success leads to their adoration of soccer for its propensity to end in tied games. For those of whom their self-confidence has built on years of grade inflation and minimal levels of expectations in academic settings, a draw at the end of a match is ideal. In that case, no one’s feelings are hurt by losing. This extends to the trend of organizers of youth sports leagues refusing to keep score at games in athletic contests. Militant egalitarians rejoice in ninety minutes of futility resulting in a zero to zero final score. Unfortunately for a generation of children indoctrinated in such concepts, life inevitably finds ways to result in successes and failures, which no amount of self-delusion can erase from reality.
In conclusion, I would like to commend everyone responsible for this somnolent spectacle. To the players, I applaud your frequent, slow-paced jogging interspersed with episodes of jumping on the ground to clutch your legs in states of exceptionally feigned and embellished agony after an opponent’s shadow overlaps your own. To the fans, I am calmed by your incessant blowing on plastic horns for an hour and a half to generate enough white noise for my easily startled ears. To the television announcers, your repeated references to the status of the clock on the screen as “unofficial” reminds me to ignore my own clock and its ungodly ante meridiem hour. To the sponsors, I am grateful for your non-interruption of the matches with something entertaining such as any your inane commercials for the billionth time that might attract my attention and disrupt my slumber. Finally, I thank the International Federation of Associate Football, better known as FIFA, for a few weeks of intermittent yet recuperative estivation once every four years.
COPYRIGHT BY CHARLES KASTRIOT JUNE 2010
Showing posts with label sports in general. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sports in general. Show all posts
01 June 2010
09 August 2009
End Exhibitionism
Once again, the most wonderful time of the year is on the verge of arriving for fans of the National Football League. The NFL's exhibition games, euphemistically named "pre-season", have commenced with the annual kickoff at the Hall of Fame Game in Canton, Ohio. Fans know that their teams' weekly contests and all the days pre-game speculation and post-game dissection are just around the corner. The sensation for football aficionados resembles that of children when the Christmas merchandise appears in stores. Unfortunately, the anticipation has been needlessly extended just like the retail outlets do by decorating immediately after Labor Day instead of after Thanksgiving Day.
Honestly, does anyone still cling to the antiquated notion that professional football players need four meaningless games in order to prepare themselves for the regular season slate of sixteen? Teams engage in mini-camps throughout the off-season. Plus, players voluntarily participate in drills with teammates during the spring and summer before the official opening of training camps. The days when most, if not all, players showed up to training camp in mid-summer noticeably overweight, stiff or, in any other way, indifferent of any football related matter since their teams' final game of the previous season have gone the way of the phonograph and black/white televisions.
Granted, most fans enjoy watching the first and possibly the second exhibition games. Those two provide an opportunity to view rookies selected in the draft and new additions to the team acquired via free agency or off-season trades. Few fans have access to the scrimmages conducted during training camp so the first exhibition game remains the initial viewing of the newcomers in their new uniforms. However, the novelty soon dissipates in the knowledge that any outstanding performances must be weighed against the half-hearted level of effort of veterans in the games and the irrelevancy of the final scores. The only drama for those fans who watch the final two exhibition games lies in the holding of their collective breath in hope that none of the starting players of his/her teams sustain any injuries preventing them from playing the the games that actually count in the standings.
Therefore, this writer proposes the elimination of the last two exhibition games. Undoubtedly, the owners and others who benefit financially from the staging of these meaningless contests will object. After all, NFL teams charge hefty prices for tickets to these glorified scrimmages which season-ticket holders cannot avoid since these exhibition games are included in their season ticket packages. Those who make their living based on attendance at the games such as vendors, employees at parking lots and others would hate to see two of their ten opportunities for sales to vanish. Obviously, some recompense must be offered to assuage the pain of withdrawal.
The solution will prevent the loss of revenue by those with a stake in upholding the number of games played at an NFL venue yet give the fans more of what they deserve: games that count in the standings. The final two exhibition games should be replaced with two more regular season non-conference games. Just as college football teams typically play two or more non-conference opponents at the start of a season, the NFL would benefit by such a structure of scheduling. The number of games a team would host would not change so there would be no loss of revenue. Fans would not feel cheated by paying to see as many inconsequential games as they do currently.
To further bolster the appeal of these two additional non-conference games, each team would have a list of annual opponents that would spark much interest among the fans to see the teams play every season despite not being in the same conference. Several match-ups of teams in the same state or otherwise within close proximity to each other stand out as obviously interesting contests. The high level of anticipation would exist regardless of the records of the teams entering the contests. Opponents in the same media markets such the Jets and the Giants in addition to the Raiders and the Forty-Niners would provide an outlet for the antipathy between both sets of fans on the field during a relevant game of the regular season. Intrastate matches such the Cowboys versus the Texans, the Buccaneers versus the Dolphins, the Redskins versus the Ravens, the Eagles versus the Steelers and the Rams versus the Chiefs certainly hold more allure in a regular season game even though these teams often play their in-state counterpart in exhibition contests. Even annual meetings between teams of states bordering each other like the Colts versus the Bears, the Lions versus the Browns, the Chargers versus the Cardinals and the Falcons versus the Jaguars could develop into heated rivalries with a traditional early season date against each other.
An extra financial benefit of scheduling these games with teams within a close distance of each other should appeal to owners as well as fans. The shorter distance between the city of visiting team and the home team's stadium will reduce travel costs. For some of these proposed annual contests, the visiting team could easily take buses to their opponent's stadium. A person does not need a Ph.D. in economics or management to realize the tremendous savings in the substitution of one or two short bus trips for several dozen adults instead of flying across timezones for a handful of trivial exhibition games. Also, visiting fans will be more likely to attend games if they can drive to the opponents' stadium and return home the day of the game.
So when will Commissioner Roger Goodell and the owners of NFL franchises adjust to the current situation and abolish some of its needless games in favor of some that will draw much more attention from the fans? Hopefully, the change will occur sooner than the decades that passed before the NFL acknowledged the utility of the two-point conversion and implemented it.
COPYRIGHT BY CHARLES KASTRIOT AUGUST 2009
Honestly, does anyone still cling to the antiquated notion that professional football players need four meaningless games in order to prepare themselves for the regular season slate of sixteen? Teams engage in mini-camps throughout the off-season. Plus, players voluntarily participate in drills with teammates during the spring and summer before the official opening of training camps. The days when most, if not all, players showed up to training camp in mid-summer noticeably overweight, stiff or, in any other way, indifferent of any football related matter since their teams' final game of the previous season have gone the way of the phonograph and black/white televisions.
Granted, most fans enjoy watching the first and possibly the second exhibition games. Those two provide an opportunity to view rookies selected in the draft and new additions to the team acquired via free agency or off-season trades. Few fans have access to the scrimmages conducted during training camp so the first exhibition game remains the initial viewing of the newcomers in their new uniforms. However, the novelty soon dissipates in the knowledge that any outstanding performances must be weighed against the half-hearted level of effort of veterans in the games and the irrelevancy of the final scores. The only drama for those fans who watch the final two exhibition games lies in the holding of their collective breath in hope that none of the starting players of his/her teams sustain any injuries preventing them from playing the the games that actually count in the standings.
Therefore, this writer proposes the elimination of the last two exhibition games. Undoubtedly, the owners and others who benefit financially from the staging of these meaningless contests will object. After all, NFL teams charge hefty prices for tickets to these glorified scrimmages which season-ticket holders cannot avoid since these exhibition games are included in their season ticket packages. Those who make their living based on attendance at the games such as vendors, employees at parking lots and others would hate to see two of their ten opportunities for sales to vanish. Obviously, some recompense must be offered to assuage the pain of withdrawal.
The solution will prevent the loss of revenue by those with a stake in upholding the number of games played at an NFL venue yet give the fans more of what they deserve: games that count in the standings. The final two exhibition games should be replaced with two more regular season non-conference games. Just as college football teams typically play two or more non-conference opponents at the start of a season, the NFL would benefit by such a structure of scheduling. The number of games a team would host would not change so there would be no loss of revenue. Fans would not feel cheated by paying to see as many inconsequential games as they do currently.
To further bolster the appeal of these two additional non-conference games, each team would have a list of annual opponents that would spark much interest among the fans to see the teams play every season despite not being in the same conference. Several match-ups of teams in the same state or otherwise within close proximity to each other stand out as obviously interesting contests. The high level of anticipation would exist regardless of the records of the teams entering the contests. Opponents in the same media markets such the Jets and the Giants in addition to the Raiders and the Forty-Niners would provide an outlet for the antipathy between both sets of fans on the field during a relevant game of the regular season. Intrastate matches such the Cowboys versus the Texans, the Buccaneers versus the Dolphins, the Redskins versus the Ravens, the Eagles versus the Steelers and the Rams versus the Chiefs certainly hold more allure in a regular season game even though these teams often play their in-state counterpart in exhibition contests. Even annual meetings between teams of states bordering each other like the Colts versus the Bears, the Lions versus the Browns, the Chargers versus the Cardinals and the Falcons versus the Jaguars could develop into heated rivalries with a traditional early season date against each other.
An extra financial benefit of scheduling these games with teams within a close distance of each other should appeal to owners as well as fans. The shorter distance between the city of visiting team and the home team's stadium will reduce travel costs. For some of these proposed annual contests, the visiting team could easily take buses to their opponent's stadium. A person does not need a Ph.D. in economics or management to realize the tremendous savings in the substitution of one or two short bus trips for several dozen adults instead of flying across timezones for a handful of trivial exhibition games. Also, visiting fans will be more likely to attend games if they can drive to the opponents' stadium and return home the day of the game.
So when will Commissioner Roger Goodell and the owners of NFL franchises adjust to the current situation and abolish some of its needless games in favor of some that will draw much more attention from the fans? Hopefully, the change will occur sooner than the decades that passed before the NFL acknowledged the utility of the two-point conversion and implemented it.
COPYRIGHT BY CHARLES KASTRIOT AUGUST 2009
23 March 2009
Method behind the Madness
The National Collegiate Athletic Association Division One Men's Basketball Tournament has emerged over the past twenty years as the most prominent multi-day sporting event in the United States. Granted, it lacks the all-consuming focus of a single day as does the preeminent athletic competition, the Super Bowl. Nevertheless, in some aspects, it draws in spectators in ways that the Super Bowl and other highly popular events lack.
First of all, the appeal of the underdog comes to the forefront. How is it that thousands of fans attending the games and millions watching them on television become enamored with lowly seeded teams from relatively unknown programs? Invariably, perhaps instinctively, those not affiliated with the higher seeded squad openly cheer for the underdog, the level of support inversely commensurate with how far down in the seedings the underdog is located. Does this appeal find its roots in the era when Americans were a fledgling yet disrespected country facing dominant and disdaining super-powers? Can this phenomenon be traced to a Judeo-Christian influence of the tale of the protagonist, a perceived hopelessly overmatched David versus the antagonist, an overwhelming favorite Goliath? Is this a manifestation of class warfare leading to antipathy toward the perceived pomposity of perennial powers? Attendees at these venues and public locations where the games can be viewed will commonly hear statements along the lines of this: "I can't stand Blueblood University with its fifteen thousand seat arena and millions of dollars in apparel sales. I hope Podunk State beats those arrogant (expletive)s!"
Secondly, March Madness has morphed into an excuse to dabble in gambling. Bracket pools among co-workers have developed into a tradition on par with the nondescript "holiday" party in December or monthly birthday cakes for employees. People who would only ever enter a casino to partake in the buffets eagerly fill out bracket sheets, even if they rarely, if ever, watch college basketball games during the regular season. Uninterested for most of the season, some Americans suddenly develop an affinity for teams based on curious qualities as "cute mascot", "pretty color scheme" or "location in a loved or detested state".
Additionally, Americans love drama filled immediacy and pressure. The "win or leave" format of the tournament heightens the tension among the players, coaches and fans. The NCAA Tournament can be contrasted with the National Basketball Association's seven games playoff series in which a prohibitively favored team can sleepwalk through three games yet still manage to win the series to advance to the next round. The collegiate squads possess no such luxury. A highly acclaimed team might be unable to focus on a match played at the hour when the players typically have breakfast or are asleep. A dominant, towering center could spend a significant portion of the game on the bench after an early accumulation of fouls. A leading scorer with consistent accuracy might fall into an inexplicable slump. A team of outstanding free throw shooters can fire nothing but bricks and air-balls. With such occurrences, teams with less experience, depth, height and accuracy can and do pull off upsets. These allow the underdogs to advance while the higher seeds ponder what went awry.
Foreigners have frequently stated words to the effect that what Americans do best is overdo everything. The arrangement of the NCAA Tournament lends itself to that stereotype. For the initial days of the tournament, on Thursday and Friday, four sites host four games each. The gluttony of games commences at midday, local time of the venue, and concludes at or near midnight. Even the second round, with half the number of games, extends from noon to well into prime time viewing hours in most of the country. After a respite of three days, concurrent double-headers take place in the evenings of the following Thursday and Friday. Nation-wide twin billings on the next two days determine the Final Four. Of course, a five day lag until the next round happens to allow time for another time-honored American tradition: media overexposure of the participants.
The Madness concludes with one team hoisting a trophy after proving itself as the undisputed national champions. Considering the widespread interest in this playoff among the American people, one might contemplate another mystery: Why is there no similar resolution to the Division 1-A college football season?
First of all, the appeal of the underdog comes to the forefront. How is it that thousands of fans attending the games and millions watching them on television become enamored with lowly seeded teams from relatively unknown programs? Invariably, perhaps instinctively, those not affiliated with the higher seeded squad openly cheer for the underdog, the level of support inversely commensurate with how far down in the seedings the underdog is located. Does this appeal find its roots in the era when Americans were a fledgling yet disrespected country facing dominant and disdaining super-powers? Can this phenomenon be traced to a Judeo-Christian influence of the tale of the protagonist, a perceived hopelessly overmatched David versus the antagonist, an overwhelming favorite Goliath? Is this a manifestation of class warfare leading to antipathy toward the perceived pomposity of perennial powers? Attendees at these venues and public locations where the games can be viewed will commonly hear statements along the lines of this: "I can't stand Blueblood University with its fifteen thousand seat arena and millions of dollars in apparel sales. I hope Podunk State beats those arrogant (expletive)s!"
Secondly, March Madness has morphed into an excuse to dabble in gambling. Bracket pools among co-workers have developed into a tradition on par with the nondescript "holiday" party in December or monthly birthday cakes for employees. People who would only ever enter a casino to partake in the buffets eagerly fill out bracket sheets, even if they rarely, if ever, watch college basketball games during the regular season. Uninterested for most of the season, some Americans suddenly develop an affinity for teams based on curious qualities as "cute mascot", "pretty color scheme" or "location in a loved or detested state".
Additionally, Americans love drama filled immediacy and pressure. The "win or leave" format of the tournament heightens the tension among the players, coaches and fans. The NCAA Tournament can be contrasted with the National Basketball Association's seven games playoff series in which a prohibitively favored team can sleepwalk through three games yet still manage to win the series to advance to the next round. The collegiate squads possess no such luxury. A highly acclaimed team might be unable to focus on a match played at the hour when the players typically have breakfast or are asleep. A dominant, towering center could spend a significant portion of the game on the bench after an early accumulation of fouls. A leading scorer with consistent accuracy might fall into an inexplicable slump. A team of outstanding free throw shooters can fire nothing but bricks and air-balls. With such occurrences, teams with less experience, depth, height and accuracy can and do pull off upsets. These allow the underdogs to advance while the higher seeds ponder what went awry.
Foreigners have frequently stated words to the effect that what Americans do best is overdo everything. The arrangement of the NCAA Tournament lends itself to that stereotype. For the initial days of the tournament, on Thursday and Friday, four sites host four games each. The gluttony of games commences at midday, local time of the venue, and concludes at or near midnight. Even the second round, with half the number of games, extends from noon to well into prime time viewing hours in most of the country. After a respite of three days, concurrent double-headers take place in the evenings of the following Thursday and Friday. Nation-wide twin billings on the next two days determine the Final Four. Of course, a five day lag until the next round happens to allow time for another time-honored American tradition: media overexposure of the participants.
The Madness concludes with one team hoisting a trophy after proving itself as the undisputed national champions. Considering the widespread interest in this playoff among the American people, one might contemplate another mystery: Why is there no similar resolution to the Division 1-A college football season?
11 February 2009
Bailing out More Millionaires?
Mirroring the disturbing trend of businesses which are struggling financially, the professional football and basketball teams in New Orleans expect to receive subsidies from the government of Louisiana. (http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/9205212/Louisiana-faces-Saints,-Hornets-cash-payments?MSNHPHMA) Even during an economic boom, one could expect antipathy to governmental contributions of cash to private entities, particularly to such unessential enterprises as professional sports franchises. Given the declining economy, such assistance offends many taxpayers to the utmost.
Although the deal with NFL's Saints and NBA's Hornets were signed during the governorship of Murphy "Mike" Foster, it now falls to Louisiana's Governor Bobby Jindal to handle to dilemma. Jindal is considered one of the rising stars among Republican office holders. He is facing a situation that will test his commitment to fiscal conservatism. His unequivocal statements about the dire fiscal situation of the state would not square with multi-million dollar remunerations to a franchise worth 937 million dollars in the case of the Saints (http://www.forbes.com/2008/09/10/nfl-team-valuations-biz-sports-nfl08_cz_kb_mo_0910nfl_land.html) or to the Hornets worth 285 million dollars (http://www.forbes.com/lists/2008/32/nba08_New-Orleans-Hornets_328959.html). He must weigh the loss of potential sales and income tax revenues from the presence of the two teams against the withdrawal of cash from the state coffers. Additionally, he must decide whom would he would rather alienate and risk losing their votes for his re-election: fiscal conservatives as opposed to die-hard fans of the Saints or the Hornets.
This situation demonstrates the folly of subsidizing any private business with taxpayers' money. The state's residents would rightfully howl in protest of this funding of entities whose most prominent employees receive a minimum 310,000 dollars annually as NFL rookies or 457,588 dollars for NBA rookies. The owner of the Saints, Tom Benson, has been subtly threatening for several years to relocate the team before Hurricane Katrina. The owners of the Hornets have already shown willingness to uproot their franchise as evidenced by their move to New Orleans from Charlotte. These and far too many professional franchises prefer to demand outside funding instead of generating more of their own profits then threaten to bolt elsewhere until a ransom is received.
As for a solution, Jindal and the legislature should pursue alternatives to a simple transfer of state funds to the sports franchises. Reductions of taxes that adversely impact the two teams' finances should receive consideration. These cuts could be on sales taxes on items sold at the teams' venues. The absurdly high prices on food and other items could be lowered enough by eliminating the sales taxes to entice more fans to purchase these items, thus driving up profits. Finally, Jindal must not cave into threats of relocation. These franchises are unlikely to find any other city willing to accept them and their hefty demands for public funding, especially now.
Although the deal with NFL's Saints and NBA's Hornets were signed during the governorship of Murphy "Mike" Foster, it now falls to Louisiana's Governor Bobby Jindal to handle to dilemma. Jindal is considered one of the rising stars among Republican office holders. He is facing a situation that will test his commitment to fiscal conservatism. His unequivocal statements about the dire fiscal situation of the state would not square with multi-million dollar remunerations to a franchise worth 937 million dollars in the case of the Saints (http://www.forbes.com/2008/09/10/nfl-team-valuations-biz-sports-nfl08_cz_kb_mo_0910nfl_land.html) or to the Hornets worth 285 million dollars (http://www.forbes.com/lists/2008/32/nba08_New-Orleans-Hornets_328959.html). He must weigh the loss of potential sales and income tax revenues from the presence of the two teams against the withdrawal of cash from the state coffers. Additionally, he must decide whom would he would rather alienate and risk losing their votes for his re-election: fiscal conservatives as opposed to die-hard fans of the Saints or the Hornets.
This situation demonstrates the folly of subsidizing any private business with taxpayers' money. The state's residents would rightfully howl in protest of this funding of entities whose most prominent employees receive a minimum 310,000 dollars annually as NFL rookies or 457,588 dollars for NBA rookies. The owner of the Saints, Tom Benson, has been subtly threatening for several years to relocate the team before Hurricane Katrina. The owners of the Hornets have already shown willingness to uproot their franchise as evidenced by their move to New Orleans from Charlotte. These and far too many professional franchises prefer to demand outside funding instead of generating more of their own profits then threaten to bolt elsewhere until a ransom is received.
As for a solution, Jindal and the legislature should pursue alternatives to a simple transfer of state funds to the sports franchises. Reductions of taxes that adversely impact the two teams' finances should receive consideration. These cuts could be on sales taxes on items sold at the teams' venues. The absurdly high prices on food and other items could be lowered enough by eliminating the sales taxes to entice more fans to purchase these items, thus driving up profits. Finally, Jindal must not cave into threats of relocation. These franchises are unlikely to find any other city willing to accept them and their hefty demands for public funding, especially now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
