The Boxing Schedule Debate – To Be the Best, You’ve Gotta BEAT the Best… So if You ARE the Best, Does it Matter Who You Fight?

June 23, 2009

Read Loyal Homer and Sports Geek’s opinions.



In boxing’s heavyweight division, Wladimir Klitschko (53-3-0, 47KO) is the best. He’s ranked at the top by Ring Magazine, the IBF and the WBO.

Until recently, Klitschko was scheduled to fight David Haye (22-1-0, 21KO), a very exciting contender out of Great Britain who had no problems in letting the public know his lack of respect for both Wladimir and his brother, Vitali (37-2-0, 36KO) who is also a heavyweight title holder.

This fight could have rejuvenated the sport of boxing. Considered by most fans to be the premier weight class, the heavyweight division has lacked an exciting, fan pleasing champion since the retirement of Lennox Lewis in 2004. Since Lewis’ retirement, the Klitschko’s emerged as the division’s elite fighters, but neither excites crowds the way previous champions like Evander Holyfield, Mike Tyson, or Lewis were able to. Despite possessing devastating knockout power, the Klitschko’s have established their dominance more through technical superiority than brutality. Unfortunately, boxing fans crave the latter. As a result, the popularity of heavyweight boxing – and subsequently the sport in general – has suffered.

Another drawback in the heavyweight division is that the Klitschko brothers have categorically stated they will never fight each other. That decision leaves no chance of seeing the best fighters within the division step into the ring together until a new and legitimate contender can challenge their dominance. Many fight fans hoped Haye would be the man equal to the Klitschkos’ challenge.

Haye brings a level of excitement (and explosive brutality) to the heavyweight division that has re-energized boxing fans. After completely dominating the Cruiserweight division, the undisputed champion (holding the WBO, WBC, WBA AND Ring Magazine Championship Belts) vacated his titles to step up to heavyweight. Last November, he completely dismantled American Monte Barrett in his heavyweight debut, sending Barrett to the canvas a total of five times. The fight mercifully ended in a fifth round TKO for Haye. Following that fight, Haye got his opportunity when Wladimir Klitschko agreed to a fight.

How excited were the fans when this fight was announced? So excited that the 61,000 seat Veltins Arena in Gelsenkirchen, Germany sold out, making it the largest crowd for a fight in Germany since Max Schmeling fought back in 1939. It did not matter if Haye was capable of beating Klitschko, fans expected a very exciting bout.

As fate would have it, the fight was not meant to be. On June 3, just two weeks before the fight, Haye withdrew with a back injury sustained during training. Hoping to still fight Klitschko, Haye requested a three week postponement to allow his back to heal. Much to the chagrin of boxing fans, Klitschko declined to postpone the fight, signing Ruslan Chagaev as Haye’s replacement.

Klitschko’s stated reason for postponing the fight was because he had never fought in front of a crowd so large and he wanted to see that dream realized. Whatever the reason, it was clear to fans that the newly scheduled Klitschko-Chagaev fight was going to be a very boring exhibition, likely playing out as previous Klitschko fights had. With only two weeks to train, there was little hope that Chagaev would pull off the upset. Expectations were so low that HBO Boxing cancelled their broadcast of the fight.

Did Klitschko make the right decision to deny Haye’s request to reschedule the fight, or should he have postponed the fight date in order to keep his scheduled bout with Haye?

Yes, Klitschko got to fight in front of a capacity crowd, but he arguably lost his global draw for the fight. The fight with Chagaev once again disappointed the many fans who had hoped to see an instant classic, but instead watched a one-sided, technical exhibition of fundamental boxing superiority by Klitschko. Chagaev was overmatched from the first bell. Are the long-term risks of Klitschko’s refusal to fight Haye mitigated by his seemingly guaranteed victory over Chagaev, or would the risk of fighting an apparently legitimate contender have paid off for Klitschko’s future prospects?

Loyal Homer will argue that Klitschko made the better choice by keeping his fight date and signing a replacement opponent in Ruslan Chagaev.

Sports Geek will argue that Klitschko should have instead accepted the postponed date, because he had more to gain from the commercial appeal of a fight with David Haye.

Once the debaters have completed their argument, we will go to the judge’s scorecard (me) for the final decision…

–DING!-

3 Comments | The Boxing Schedule Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

The Problem Receiver Debate – Goody’s Can’t Solve All of the Headaches

June 22, 2009



Read Bleacher Fan and Sports Geek’s opinions.

Lately, two of the biggest stories involving NFL wide receivers during off-season are the statuses of Denver Broncos wide receiver Brandon Marshall and free agent Plaxico Burress.

Let’s recap shall we?

Marshall didn’t come into the league with as much fanfare as Burress. Marshall’s ability on the football field is also not as well-known to the casual fan as Burress’ is (fantasy football players aren’t casual fans); but, he has had an outstanding start to his career.

Drafted out of Central Florida in 2006 by the Denver Broncos, Marshall has quickly become one of the league’s best wide receivers. He has 226 catches for 2,899 yards in three years, including 206 catches for 2,580 the past two seasons. He’s been on my fantasy football team the past two years, and, obviously, he has been a big part of it.

That is all one the field. Very impressive! But off the field, he has some baggage, to say the least.

He was indirectly involved in the fatal shooting of Darrent Williams in 2007. He has been arrested numerous times for various alcohol related incidents and also domestic disturbances. He has also recently requested a trade.

Plaxico Burress came into the league with a lot more fanfare after an outstanding career at Michigan State. After being a solid player for five years with the Pittsburgh Steelers, Burress went on to greener pastures with the New York Giants. His time in New York has been highlighted by a game-winning touchdown reception in Super Bowl XLII.

He, too, has some baggage. He held out from training camp due to being unhappy with his contract situation before the 2008 season. This ruffled some feathers with his former organization, the New York Giants. He was suspended for one game for violating team rules in 2008. This was the second time in his career he had been suspending for breaking team rules. He has been fined numerous times. And then, of course, there is the accidental shooting incident at a New York nightclub. This incident caused him to be suspended from the team for conduct detrimental to the team. He has since been released from the Giants and is trying to catch on with another team.

The question posed is which one of these talented players I would take. The answer is NEITHER.

Neither player is worth the major headaches that would be caused. As a loyal fan of my teams, I truly care about winning. But, I want chemistry in my clubhouse, and chemistry is not what you would have if either of these players is on a team. There are just too many distractions. The questions from the media would all be about Burress or Marshall… and that’s not what a TEAM needs.

Are they super talented? Absolutely! No one is questioning that. But I strongly believe Brandon Marshall and Plaxico Burress would bring more harm to my team than good!

Thanks but no thanks! But, feel free to give Al Davis a call!

2 Comments | The Problem Wide Receiver Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Loyal Homer

The Problem Wide Receiver Debate – Brandon Marshall Is Great

June 22, 2009



Read Bleacher Fan and Loyal Homer’s opinions.

Here’s an NFL fun fact – the wide receiver position is full of self-assured prima donnas. (Thanks, Captain Obvious). Certainly not all receivers overinflate their self-worth and value to a football team, but many do. Generally, fans have a hard time getting behind these types of players. Their vocal nature and occasionally controversial attitudes do not seem to fit with the limited role they play on the team – running routes, catches passes, and blocking (though not all receivers have warmed up to that “concept”). While all of these things are true about receivers in general, they aren’t true about Denver Broncos wide receiver Brandon Marshall, a real, emerging talent who doesn’t fit the prima donna mold.

First, he is a talented receiver. At the tender age of 25 he has already cemented his status as a #1 receiver on his team, and a top 10 receiver in the NFL. Marshall has only played two – TWO – full seasons of professional football, but already averages well over 1,100 yards per season in those two years and is a tall yet speedy deep-threat all passing oriented offenses covet. His two years as a starter have produced over 100 catches a season while racking up well over 80-yards per game. It’s even possible to argue that Marshall’s stats would have been even better if not for a terrible running game in Denver during the 2008 season. In other words, Marshall saw a lot of double teams he would not have normally lined up against if the opposing defense had to respect the run. Plus, the great thing about Marshall is his age. He is still three to four years away from reaching his prime, placing his value at an all time high.

Second, he’s not prima donna. Unlike former New York Giants Plaxico Burress (who, besides Terrell Owens, is the most problematic, prototypical prima donna receiver ever) Marshall has never been a problem in the locker room or with the media. His “reasons” for seeking a trade now (and earning his way into this debate) are shaky. In other words, no one in the world believes that Marshall is demanding a pay raise and lacks confidence in the Broncos medical staff. Marshall is simply in an advantageous situation that his agent is trying to make the most of.

Former Denver quarterback Jay Cutler managed to force his way out of town by expressing his extreme displeasure with the new coach and dramatically changed situation. In that state of organizational tumult, Brandon Marshall’s agent, Kennard McGuire, sees an opportunity. McGuire has a roster of clients that includes, among others, Cleveland Browns defensive tackle Shaun Rogers. Rogers is a player who voiced some concerns this off-season about whether the new coaching staff in Cleveland wanted him around, even threatening to seek a trade because he was snubbed at a cocktail party. The obvious conclusion here is that McGuire has a vested interest in creating a situation where he is able to circumvent free agency and team ownership rights. Why would an agent want to do this? To make more money and gain leverage on the league. My point is that it’s not at all fair to judge Marshall as a prima donna when he’s nothing more than a pawn in a highly complex game of chess.

If McGuire is able to pull this trade off and find a situation where a team is able to make the worthwhile sacrifice to bring in Marshall’s talent, they’ll be a contender – immediately and for years to come. Not only will they have a #1 receiving threat with his best years ahead of him (unlike Burress), they will be able to create a more wide-open and balanced offense, and they’ll also have a player who is not the prima donna the media has made him out to be. Win-win-win.

Leave a Comment » | The Problem Wide Receiver Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Sports Geek

The Problem Wide Receiver Debate – If a ‘Shot in the Arm’ is Good, a Shot in the Leg Must be Great!!!

June 22, 2009



Read Sports Geek and Loyal Homer’s opinions.

Currently, there are two rather controversial, but highly productive, wide receivers who are actively seeking an new opportunity in the National Football League – free agent Plaxico Burress and the Denver Broncos’ Brandon Marshall.

Are either of these receivers worth bringing into an organization, or are teams better left looking elsewhere for their talent?

To help answer that question, I (Bleacher Fan) will be arguing that Plaxico Burress is a talent worth signing.

Sports Geek will argue that Brandon Marshall, who publicly asked for a trade from Denver last week, is worth the pursuit and sacrifice necessary to bring him into an organization.

Loyal Homer will argue that neither are worth signing, and teams should avoid these two at all costs.

Make sure to check back throughout the day to read each perspective, then vote for person you feel made the strongest case for their side.

This should be a no-brainer. In fact, as GM for an NFL organization, signing Plaxico Burress ranks on the common sense scale just above ‘never carry a loaded gun in your sweatpants when visiting a New York City nightclub’! FOLLOW COMMON SENSE!!!

The guy did something stupid… okay, REALLY stupid.

Be honest, though… we have ALL done something stupid at least once. I know I have. I can remember playing around with a new set of kitchen knives I got when I dropped one of them, taking a 2-inch gash out of my leg! Or consider my Dad (Happy Father’s Day, Pop!), who has a scar on his chin that he ‘earned’ as a little boy. He and his brother got a bullet from a friends’ house and had the brilliant idea to wedge said bullet into a sidewalk crack and take turns hitting it with a hammer (it’s a wonder I even made it into this world)! Not surprisingly, the bullet exploded and a piece of it hit my dad in the chin, with the other piece hitting my uncle in the chest (don’t worry, both survived the incident). People do STUPID things all the time!

And it’s not like Burress got away with his stupidity… he was shot in the leg, suspended from his team, forced to pay hundreds-of-thousands of dollars in fines, and lost millions from his contract. I HOPE he learned his lesson!

He’s also been involved in contract disputes, though he’s not the first or the last to do that. Unfortunately, that is the nature of today’s professional athlete, and not a character flaw held solely by Plaxico Burress.

So the reasons not to sign Burress are because he did something stupid, and he’s trying to squeeze every last penny he can out of the NFL – but none of those reasons take away the fact that he is an AMAZING wide receiver!

Since being drafted eighth overall in the 2000 NFL draft, Burress has amassed 7,845 receiving yards on 505 receptions, averaging 15.5 yards per catch. He has also caught 55 touchdowns, fumbled only nine times, and has broken the 1,000-yard receiving mark four times. Compare that to Brandon Marshall, who averages only 12.8 yards per catch, and has already fumbled 7 times in 3 short years!

In 2007, Plaxico’s last complete season, he caught 70 passes for 1,025 yards (14.6 yards per catch), and 12 touchdowns. Marshall, in that same season, caught 102 catches for 1,325 yards (only 13.0 per catch), and only seven touchdowns. In this case, quantity does not outweigh quality.

Plaxico Burress makes his team a winner. The New York Giants WITH Plaxico were the best team in the NFL, hands down. In 2007 they won the Super Bowl, and in 2008 they began the season 10-1. Following his suspension, the Giants finished the season with a dismal 2-3 record, capping off their season with an 11-23 playoff loss to division rival Philadelphia.

He’s able to catch virtually anything. At 6-feet 5-inches he can reach places defenders cannot. The Giants knew this. That’s why, when trailing by four points with only 0:39 left on the clock in Super Bowl XLII, they executed a fade pass to Burress in the corner of the end zone. The play worked then as it had all year. He caught the ball, and the Giants won the championship.

The amazing thing about that play, though, was that EVERYONE knew the play was coming, including the New England Patriots. The Patriots, powerless to stop it, watched helplessly as Burress ended their perfect season.

That is what makes Plaxico Burress a dominant Wide Receiver, and that is why he should be signed immediately!

3 Comments | The Problem Wide Receiver Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

The ESPN Channel Change Debate – No One Buys Monday Night Football Hype

June 19, 2009

Read Loyal Homer and Bleacher Fan‘s opinions.



It’s an age-old question in ethics – just because you can, should you? This ethical dilemma should be contemplated within the walls of ESPN. “Just because we CAN hype the crap out of a Monday Night Football, SHOULD we?” The answer is a resounding no!

In the Fall, Sports Geek changes the channel whenever ESPN starts rolling out the hype machine for the next Monday Night Football game. ESPN is relentlessly in the face of their viewers promoting Monday Night Football. First, there are those “Is it Monday yet?” and “Monday can’t come soon enough!” ads that start on Tuesday of the previous week. Then it’s PTI live from a set outside the stadium where MNF is taking place. Then it’s Sportscenter, live from inside the stadium at 6p Eastern (two and half hours before “game time”… even though the game REALLY starts at 8:47p Eastern). Then it’s one of the NFL panels, broadcasting live from the secret basement of the same stadium, and doing several break-ins during Sportscenter. (This year, with Sportscenter live all day, I’m sure ESPN will devote the entire broadcast day to the monday night game.) Then, it’s Monday Night Countdown starting during/after Sportscenter, live from Section 155, Row C, Seat 15 – with real shots of the real players really warming up – discussing more stuff no one cares about.

One of the worst things about the MNF hype from 2008 was the presence of Emmitt Smith on one of the 75 different “expert” panels (you know, the ones ESPN hides in semi-secret locations throughout the stadium). His routine destruction of the English language was well-documented by PFT. But, for some reason, ESPN didn’t take him off the air for two years, perhaps because he had proven himself as a great football player, a nice guy, a heckuva dancer. Here’s a gem from Emmitt when hyping a MNF game featuring the Dallas Cowboys and running backs Marion Barber and Felix Jones: “Marion and Felix, I’ve only got one word of advice: Don’t get hurt.” Classic.

The absolute worst thing about the ESPN hype-overload is that the games are usually terrible.

Let’s examine the last seven weeks of the 2008 season – when the games are supposed to really start meaning something. ESPN featured the following teams, in order, on their MNF schedule: San Francisco 49ers (7-9), Cleveland Browns (4-12), Green Bay Packers (6-10), Jacksonville Jaguars (5-11), Tampa Bay Buccaneers (9-7), Cleveland Browns again (still 4-12), and the Green Bay Packers again (still 6-10). For the final seven weeks of the season – “crunch time” by anyone’s standards – ESPN managed to feature one game, ONE, where both teams had a winning record, and something to play for.

Contrast that with arguably under-hyped NBC’s Football Night In America on Sunday nights. In their final seven weeks they featured only one team with a .500 record – the rest were well-over .500 and headed for the playoffs.

The more ESPN tries to tell us a meaningless game matters, the more they lose credibility as the WorldWide Leader.

I get that flexible scheduling gives NBC a HUGE advantage over ESPN. I also understand that ESPN has a job to do. They must advertise their games in order get good ratings. The problem with that approach is, however, that FANS ARE NOT STUPID!! If a game doesn’t feature good teams, then it just isn’t going to get ratings. Period. So all the airtime and millions of dollars ESPN spends to promote a bad game is just insulting to the fans, not effective.

17 Comments | The ESPN Channel Change Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Sports Geek

The ESPN Channel Change Debate – Mock Drafts are a Mockery

June 19, 2009

Read Loyal Homer and Sports Geek’s opinions.



I really wish that ESPN would quit wasting our time with Mock NFL Drafts.

Sit and analyze the athletes all day long! Project those players who you think have the best chance of competing successfully at the next level. You could even go so far as to speculate whom you think will be drafted #1 overall. After that, though, you are just making stuff up. It’s ALL bogus.

The first mistake made by Mock Draft analysts such as Mel Kiper, Jr., is that they try to make sense out of all the misinformation sent by NFL organizations. Some organizations are very good at keeping their cards close to the chest. These NFL organizations intentionally deceive and misinform in order to leverage any confusion to gain an advantage. Draft strategies are planned and executed in the same way a poker player bluffs, recognizes tells, and engages in guesswork.

Because of this misinformation, each subsequent draft pick becomes exponentially more difficult to predict. It becomes so difficult, in fact, that by the time the top-10 have actually been drafted, each analyst’s Mock Draft sheet is no longer worth the paper on which it’s printed.

Let’s compare the 2009 actual draft results to Mel Kiper, Jr.’s accuracy:

Actual Pick (Kiper’s Pick)

  1. Matthew Stafford (Matthew Stafford – good for you!)
  2. Jason Smith (Jason Smith – 2 for 2… you’re on a roll!)
  3. Tyson Jackson (Aaron Curry – Like Meatloaf said, though, two out of three ain’t bad!)
  4. Aaron Curry (Eugene Monroe – We’re still batting .500… in baseball, that’s legendary!)
  5. Mark Sanchez (B.J. Raji – The wheels are starting to come off…)
  6. Andre Smith (Michael Crabtree – I can’t watch any more…)
  7. Darrius Heyward-Bey (Jeremy Maclin – Kiper’s inner monologue… “I’ve never even HEARD of that guy”)
  8. Eugene Monroe (Mark Sanchez – Knowing you’re wrong before it even happens only makes it worse!)
  9. B.J. Raji (Brian Orapko – OHHH, THE HUMANITY!)
  10. Michael Crabtree (Aaron Maybin – The sound of Taps playing in the distance)

To recap, Mel Kiper, Jr., one of the NFL draft “experts” on ESPN, got only the first two picks correct. He then went OH’fer on the rest of the top 10, scoring a LOUSY 20% accuracy. The shame of this result is that his predictions came AFTER hearing about which players were eligible, and AFTER free-agency. This was his BEST guess, with the BEST information available. Even weather predictions are more accurate than that! I’d almost rather hear what Miss Cleo had to say about the Draft, because she would at least bring incense and trippy music!

These results beg the next question: If the “experts” can be so wrong with the best information available, how on earth can they even assume to have anything worth saying before free-agency, or before the deadline for players to declare their eligibility? Fortunately for sports fans everywhere, ESPN can often be oblivious to the need for accuracy, so they just ignore that fact.

ESPN analyst Todd McShay (whose 2009 top-10 accuracy matched Kiper’s by only predicting the first 2 correct) has actually ALREADY published a Mock Draft for 2010, BEFORE the NFL and NCAA seasons have even BEGUN!

When all is said and done, ESPN invests far too much time and energy in this process – which is a complete waste of time – and somehow feels that they are an authority on the topic. They might as well slap a 1-900 phone number in front of it, because that’s all the REAL value it would ever carry.

I don’t know about you, but at the Casa-Del-Bleacher-Fan, when you hear the TV say “And now, here to talk about his Mock Draft for 2010,” the next thing you hear is… -CLICK-!

6 Comments | The ESPN Channel Change Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

The ESPN Channel Change Debate – Brett Favre Makes Me Turn the Channel

June 19, 2009

Read Sports Geek and Bleacher Fan‘s opinions.



Sports Geek, Bleacher Fan, and I are huge sports fans. As a result, we watch quite a lot of sports on TV, whether it’s an actual sporting event or a sports news show. So we thought we’d take time on Friday to discuss, in King of the Hill style, which sports story turns our collective stomachs – and turns our televisions – away from ESPN.

I can’t speak for the other two, but I watch a lot of ESPN – the self-proclaimed “Worldwide Leader in Sports.” And there’s one athlete that gets so much attention on ESPN that it often makes me turn the channel. He’s a future Hall of Fame quarterback, but in the past couple of years (especially the past two months) I have grown increasingly tired of seeing his gruff face on my 37-inch flat screen television. Who might this person be? I’m sure you’ve guessed by now that it’s Brett Favre!!!!

For years I always admired Brett Favre. He played for one of the more storied franchises in the NFL with the Green Bay Packers. He set record after record with that gun-slinging arm. He had that “good ol boy” image that I enjoyed. He was never clean shaved. If you saw him at a press conference, he usually had on a t-shirt. He was, let’s face it, a roughneck. He doesn’t have the pretty boy look that other NFL players do. I even stuck by him when, in 1996, he admitted that he became addicted to painkillers. I justified it by saying, “He takes a beating every Sunday. I’d take them too!” But, my attitude changed in the middle of this decade.

It became a yearly ‘Will he or won’t he’ ordeal with Favre. Will he retire? Will he come back? In the spring of 2008, he finally decided to retire! Yes! Great job Brett! We salute you! Enjoy your ride off into the sunset!

But wait! What? You decide later that year that you want to come back? What about that tearful retirement press conference that got so much coverage on ESPN? What about you telling the Packers to move on and build around current Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers? Was all of that for naught? Luckily, the Packers held their ground and traded you to the J-E-T-S, JETS, JETS, JETS. After an up and down 2008 season, you decide that retirement is for real this time. Yeah, you stayed at least a year too long, but good riddance to you!

But wait! What’s this? A possible comeback to play for the Minnesota Vikings, who happen to be one of the Packers’ biggest rivals? Is this just to stick it to Green Bay? Why are you going to see Dr. James Andrews about your arm? I thought you were happy at your ranch in Mississippi!?

All of these are valid questions! And guess who is there to talk about these questions, and still come up with NO answers?

ESPN!

ESPN might as well become The Favre Network these last six weeks. Minute after minute, and hour after hour, you can get your Favre fix on ESPN. Turn on any of the channels in the ESPN Family of networks and you’re sure to hear about #4. Heck, just leave it on ESPN News and you’ll hear anything and everything about Favre. Guess what? Favre threw passes with players at a local high school. (This really happened and was documented!) Favre ate lunch at a local diner. Favre went to the bathroom today. Do we really need all this coverage?

Well, I can only speak for myself, but I don’t need this. It’s not ending anytime soon because he hasn’t made up his mind yet! So what do I do? I turn the channel! I hope you do too!

4 Comments | The ESPN Channel Change Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Loyal Homer

The College World Series Debate – The Verdict

June 19, 2009

Read Sports Geek and Loyal Homer’s arguments.



After reading the arguments and many comments on this topic, I came to a realization. There doesn’t seem to be much middle ground when it comes to opinions about the College World Series. You either love it, or you just don’t care.

To Sports Geek’s point, there are fans of the event, like our friend Ryan, who believe that the College World Series actually presents more for a fan to love than March Madness or Bowl Week. He commented that college baseball carries with it an inherent purity that is lacking from some of the more commercially marketed events. In contrast to that, as Loyal Homer argues, there are many out there who feel that the College World Series is lacking something (besides fans).

Unfortunately for Sports Geek, it was that same realization which led me to the conclusion that the winner of this debate is…

LOYAL HOMER!!!!!!

Despite the mass commercialization and often questionable motives wrapped up in college basketball or college football, both carry with them a universal appeal. Even Mrs. Bleacher Fan fills out a March Madness bracket!!! College World Series just does not possess that same allure, as proven by Loyal Homer’s challenge to name the 2 teams who played in the finals of the 2008 CWS. Did you know the answer? I didn’t.

To Sports Geek’s credit, there are definitely moments of excitement and inspiration wrapped up in the CWS. Those moments can lead to some very dramatic games. While I cannot deny the existence of that drama in the CWS, I also have to acknowledge that the same drama exists in any sport or competition. THAT’S what makes competition so great. Whether lacrosse, bowling, or darts… EVERY competitive event presents an opportunity for drama, excitement, and a chance to root for the underdog. The CWS does not solely own that magic.

There are likely many reasons why the CWS is unable to attract a mass fan base. Sports Geek accurately points out that the collegiate basketball and football programs provide a much more transparent avenue into professional athletics. Another comment, posted by our friend 4thquarterpunts, brought up the fact that college baseball fails to appeal to the Midwest and Northeast regions of the United States. With such little participation from conferences such as the Big 10 and schools from NY, Philadelphia, or Boston, a very large and vocal college sports fan base has no vested interest in the event.

Whatever the reason, there is one point which was universally agreed upon – the CWS must answer the question of how it can better appeal to fans. Until then, it will always be third best.

4 Comments | The College World Series Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

The College World Series Debate – CWS… or should it be WCS!?

June 18, 2009

Read the debate intro and Sports Geek’s opinion.



Hello friends of The Sports Debates. Until the intro written by my colleague Bleacher Fan, did you even realize that the College World Series was going on? Any takers? Last call? Yeah that’s what I thought! Complete silence!!! So instead of calling it the CWS, let’s just call it the WCS!!!

The Who Cares Series!!!

I have a quick pop quiz for all of our educated readers. Who won the World Series in 2008? Who won the Super Bowl in 2008? Who won the BCS Championship in 2008? Who won March Madness in 2008?

Chances are good that you knew the answers to all four of those questions. But for those who didn’t know the answers… the Philadelphia Phillies won the World Series, the New York Giants won the Super Bowl, the LSU Tigers won the BCS Championship, and the Kansas Jayhawks won March Madness.

Now, here’s a tough question for you. Who won the College World Series in 2008? As a bonus, tell me the team that finished second in the College World Series. I’m waiting guys (key Jeopardy final question theme music). What is your answer?

What is?????????

I’ll bet you that Sports Geek doesn’t know the answer! Honestly, Sports Geek, did you know? I actually did know the answer because I live in the middle of SEC country. I’ll be honest though. Any other year and I wouldn’t have known. In last year’s CWS, in the battle of the Bulldogs, Fresno State defeated Georgia.

It’s too early to break down ratings for this year’s CWS, but last year, the CWS averaged a whopping 1.4 million viewers on ESPN and less than 1 million viewers on ESPN2. You know what the sad thing is? It was the highest rated College World Series ever!

Excuse me while I laugh!!! And this weekend, I will bet you that the U.S. Open in golf will draw at least 4 times as many viewers, and even more if Tiger Woods is in contention.

I’ll tell you while it is rated so low. Quite simply, there is no name recognition with the players. Can you name one player off of last year’s Fresno State team? I didn’t think so! It’s the same reason no one tunes in for the MLB Draft. The vast majority of college baseball games are not televised. Thus, it is harder for the regular John Doe sports fan to follow any of the teams. Mr. Doe doesn’t develop that “relationship” with the players and the team the way he would with a major league player and team.

Is the College World Series entertaining? To a degree… yes. But if I am flipping through the channels and I come across it, chances are I will keep on flipping!

7 Comments | The College World Series Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Loyal Homer

The College World Series Debate – It’s the Best Sporting Event No One Watches

June 18, 2009

Read the debate intro and Loyal Homer’s opinion.



What makes college sports (think basketball and football) great? Passion. Loyalty. Youth. Energy. Every college sporting event ties these characteristics together, creating a contagious atmosphere that spreads like wildfire. In fact, nothing in the US compares to the passion seen from fans in college sports.
Baseball shares the same characteristics seen in college sports. Look at how other cultures cheer for baseball, for example. Consider the national obsession that is seen in places like Japan and Puerto Rico.

Enthusiasm for baseball and college sports exists within American culture. So why is college baseball, specifically the College World Series, not part of mainstream sports culture?

It’s not a lack of good competition. A fan of baseball in its most pure form must appreciate college baseball more than any other level. Hitters are asked to be fundamentally sound by moving runners from second to third on ground outs to second, bunting players over, etc. Pitchers are asked to pitch more often and with less role definition, creating the formula for truly amazing performances.

Let’s look at a recent example of a CWS game – the Arkansas-Virginia elimination game in Omaha – to see if the CWS has enough intrigue to appeal to fans. Here’s the 12-inning drama that unfolded: Arkansas’ Brett Eibner hit a two-out, two-run homer in the top of the ninth inning to tie the game at three. Just a half-inning before that, Arkansas ace Dallas Keuchel was asked to enter the game in relief (his first appearance in relief on the year) to preserve the score. He then pitched three additional innings to close out the game – including allowing the leadoff runner to make third base in the bottom of the 12 inning – before striking out the final two batters to end the game. Drama, excitement, and a comeback – everything a good sporting event needs to capture the heart and passion of the fan.

The proper ingredients for making the College World Series a major success – on par with its two more popular counterparts that Bleacher Fan outlined in the debate intro – exist. If the right ingredients exist, then it’s fair to say that the College World Series is a great sporting event – even if it struggles in television ratings.

A couple of factors contribute to the ratings struggle. First, college football and basketball are the de facto AAA affiliate of their professional counterparts, with the top college athletes transitioning to the professional ranks in a very visible way. It’s not as smooth in baseball, where the gap in talent level between the college and professional ranks is much wider. Second, national television – mistakenly – pays very little attention to college baseball until the College World Series. The broadcast model for ESPN is similar to NBCs approach to the Olympics. Once the event starts, the model builds the personal stories from the past year into the broadcast to try and hook viewers. A more effective method of hype-building for the College World Series would be to show a College Baseball Game of the Week for every week of the season on one of the many ESPN channels (ESPN Ocho??). Get the ESPN hype machine involved to broadcast the passion, tailgating, and fervor that already exist within college baseball.

The challenge for the marketing people behind the CWS is to tap into the intense passion seen in college sports and baseball. The College World Series is already a great sporting event, complete with all of the elements that sports fans crave – making it the best sporting event with the least national visibility. College baseball isn’t a niche sport; it just lacks the type of marketing hype and multi-platform promotion afforded to college basketball and football. Once the hype and promotion communicate the pageantry and passion of the College World Series, we’ll have to find another event for this debate.

14 Comments | The College World Series Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Sports Geek

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.