From the Chron
Harbaugh said Oregon’s domination of USC reminded of a video he saw recently on the Internet of a baby cape buffalo being attacked by lions.
“They drag it in the water, and it’s fighting for its life, and the lions have got their claws on its head and neck,” he said. What’s more, a crocodile enters the fray and “is biting at this baby water buffalo.”
With a smile, he said, “You think we’ve got it bad - that baby water buffalo is in a little bit more of a predicament.” Amazingly, he said, the infant survives when the buffalo herd comes to his rescue. “We’re drawing some inspiration from that,” he said.
umm…ok?
An excerpt from Tim Donaghy’s book, which the NBA is trying to get banned (more good excerpts on deadspin):
Studying under Dick Bavetta for 13 years was like pursuing a graduate degree in advanced game manipulation. He knew how to marshal the tempo and tone of a game better than any referee in the league, by far. He also knew how to take subtle-and not so subtle-cues from the NBA front office and extend a playoff series or, worse yet, change the complexion of that series.
The 2002 Western Conference Finals between the Los Angeles Lakers and the Sacramento Kings presents a stunning example of game and series manipulation at its ugliest. As the teams prepared for Game 6 at the Staples Center, Sacramento had a 3–2 lead in the series. The referees assigned to work Game 6 were Dick Bavetta, Bob Delaney, and Ted Bernhardt. As soon as the referees for the game were chosen, the rest of us knew immediately that there would be a Game 7. A prolonged series was good for the league, good for the networks, and good for the game. Oh, and one more thing: it was great for the big-market, star-studded Los Angeles Lakers.
In the pregame meeting prior to Game 6, the league office sent down word that certain calls-calls that would have benefitted the Lakers — were being missed by the referees. This was the type of not-so-subtle information that I and other referees were left to interpret. After receiving the dispatch, Bavetta openly talked about the fact that the league wanted a Game 7.
“If we give the benefit of the calls to the team that’s down in the series, nobody’s going to complain. The series will be even at three apiece, and then the better team can win Game 7,” Bavetta stated.
As history shows, Sacramento lost Game 6 in a wild come-from-behind thriller that saw the Lakers repeatedly sent to the foul line by the referees. For other NBA referees watching the game on television, it was a shameful performance by Bavetta’s crew, one of the most poorly officiated games of all time.
interstate:
indian:
interstate:
indian:
Yeah, that 30 million people number is complete bullshit. I think that might be the sum total of people that watch NFL weekly.
From nbcsports.com, in 2007:
Welcome to the ever-growing world of fantasy football. More than 19 million people play fantasy sports in U.S. and Canada, according to numbers released in August by the Fantasy Sports Trade Association. Football comprises the majority, around 14 million. Major Web sites, such as the aforementioned CBSSports.com and giant ESPN.com, cater to players by offering leagues and fantasy columnists, as do hundreds of lesser-known sites. And it’s not just for men. Women comprise about 15 percent of fantasy players.
And these are numbers from the “Fantasy Sports Trade Association”. Want to take bets on how inflated that number is? I wouldn’t be surprised if they’re counting leagues, and the number was closer to 5 million, given that many people are in 2+ leagues. Which at 2% of the country, I would argue, makes it very much a niche.
Look guys (I’m talking to us, the 16-32 ESPN crowd), our vision of the world is very skewed. We think we’re more “mainstream” than we really are.
I’m not excusing the Post - they’re idiots - but I do think it’s passable to review the show from the lens of someone who knows nothing about fantasy football, aka the silent majority. But if they were in tune, they’d know it’s a niche show on a guy-heavy network (as pointed out by bfizzle), and would explain and review it as such.
Srini, you may be right on skewed numbers (though I’m less convinced), and you’re certainly right that we think we’re more mainstream than we really are. But at least use a current source. From Time (not my favorite but it uses the same source for its data): “But even in this harshest of realities, fantasy is doing just fine. There are 30 million fantasy players in the U.S. and Canada, according to the Fantasy Sports Trade Association, a 54% increase from two years ago.” I’ve heard the 28-30 million figure tossed around a few places, most recently Karabell on espn. Even if skewed it’s a significant number.
Sure, the review is passable, but it’s got the journalistic value of having me review an opera or Omar review bacon - largely useless if you don’t have any background whatsoever or even attempt to put it in context.
interstate:
indian:
I’m not disagreeing that the show may not be good. But really? You have issue that the show hasn’t provided compelling reason to play fantasy football? This isn’t 1985. My Lithuanian neighbor plays fantasy football, and I’m not sure he even knows that it’s not about soccer.
Fantasy football is still very much a niche hobby. Yeah, it’s not so niche amongst the 16-32 year old ESPN watching crowd, but that in itself is a lot more niche-y than you would think.
30 million people are playing fantasy football. That’s 50% higher than last week’s highest rated show (NCIS), more than any World Series since the 2001 Game 7, more than the number of people who watched American Idol last year. Is that 30 million skewed towards males age 12-50? Sure, but so are beer, porn, fast food, and the film industry. Give me a break.
Wow, now I understand why these out of touch institutions are going under. From the Washington Post review of this new show, The League:
“In the hubbub to get to the next wee-wee gag, the script forgets to mention a reason why any of these people have the slightest interest in football, much less the obsession required to participate in the numbers-crunching minutiae of a fantasy league. (This is, by the by, a competition in which you pick players in pro football, and their statistics in each game constitute your score, and the person with the highest score at the end of the season is the winner.)
Nobody mentions, say, even such hoary cliches as their dad taking them to a snowy game at Lambeau Field when they were a kid, or of having grown up Down South where the sport is a tribal passion, or having played the game as a kid. Nobody appears to be so much as a season-ticket holder.”
I’m not disagreeing that the show may not be good. But really? You have issue that the show hasn’t provided compelling reason to play fantasy football? This isn’t 1985. My Lithuanian neighbor plays fantasy football, and I’m not sure he even knows that it’s not about soccer.
