Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Going In on Cavs Fans
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
2011 Baseball Picks
Monday, March 28, 2011
College Athletes Should be Paid [Mondays with Gus]
If a scholarship student is allowed to be paid a stipend for work in their fields, why then aren't college athletes given the same benefit? I have been lucky enough to have been granted a full scholarship plus stipend to study cultural anthropology and teach at Kent State University. I can't thank them enough. But this also begs the question, why am I worth more to the university than a college athlete would be?
Many people get angry at arguing for paying college athletes, because those kids are getting something that most people can't afford. I'm not arguing that these kids should make six figures (I'm looking at you, Chris Webber), but I am saying we should analyze their value and pay them accordingly. In order to understand their value, we have to look at what benefits they do get. First, tuition. Let's assume they get the benefit of about $12,000 worth of tuition expenses. They also get room, board, and food (if you can call what they make in the cafeterias food). Room and board at Ohio State, where I got my undergraduate degree from was worth about $8,000 a year. Food? I would say about $3,000 a year. That gives these kids $23,000 in benefits for each year. What kind of job would you normally get for that price? According to Salary.com, telemarketers in Columbus, OH make $32,000 a year.
Now, let's analyse what they're worth to the university. For starters, they sell the tickets to their events. Most sports don't finance themselves, but sports as a whole certainly should. Second, the school gets to sell memorabilia, recruit a wider variety of students, and even start their own television networks to increase revenue. That's an awful lot of benefits for the school. In 2005-2006, Ohio State pulled in $2.9 million in profit from all sports combined. Divide that by all 36 teams at the time, and you get an extra $80,500 per team. The Big Ten Network added an estimated $6.5 million per school in 2010. Divide that by the 36 teams and you get another $180,500. That's a profit of $240,000 per sports team.
Coaches pay is just as significant. Why is it that major college coaches are worth $3-4 million in some cases? The argument is that they generate more revenue than they're paid. I find it more than slightly hypocritical that the coaches are worth millions and the players are worth thousands. Yes, the coaches are important, and my argument here isn't that the players are necessarily worth more than the coaches. But we should be making the same arguments for players and coaches. They're both worth millions of dollars to the universities. The difference is that the coaches can leave to go to the professional level immediately while players are often under restrictions that force them to stay in college rather than becoming a pro. While I could (and will one day) argue that it's smarter to stay in school, I still find it ridiculous that the schools take advantage of this.
I understand they have a great chance to make it to the professional levels and make a fortune, and that's very true. But that mindset punishes those kids that are making their schools a fortune but can't make it to the pros. I think it's time to start rewarding these kids based on how the school benefits from their talents.
-Gus Rafeedie
Friday, March 25, 2011
Tipping
Thursday, March 24, 2011
NCAA Frozen Four Picks and Updated Madness Picks
Sweet 16
Championship
Monday, March 21, 2011
Why Great Players Can't Become Great Coaches [Mondays with Gus]
There's a reason why Jim Brown and Michael Jordan never coached in the NFL and NBA, respectively. It just so happens to be the same reason why people like Bill Parcells and Bill Belichick can succeed without ever playing a down in the NFL. For starters, it's impossible to teach another person something that you have an unworldly natural ability to do.
Michael Jordan's greatest attribute (in my humble opinion) was his unbelievable ability to hold grudges and work tirelessly to prove people wrong. The man complained about how the NBA hated him (5 MVPs, ten-time 1st team All NBA) even after being inducted into the NBA Hall of Fame as one of the greatest, if not the greatest, player of all time. In his hall of fame speech, he insulted his high school basketball coach, a man that had cut MJ from the team because he hadn't grown tall enough to play. How on earth could you coach that? You would never be able to convince someone to hold a grudge for 30 years. It was a natural hatred of doubters (also called passion) that made MJ impossibly good, and impossible to listen to.
Jim Brown? That dude was a freak with a vicious streak a mile wide. He hated the world, and for good reason. The racism he dealt with at Syracuse can never (and should never) be recreated. In fact, all of college football legitimately hated Jim Brown, purely because he was a strong black man. Dick Schaap once said that Jim Brown coming in 5th in the Heisman race in 1956 is the reason he never voted for another Heisman Trophy winner again. The hatred for Jim Brown went to the NFL, too. Deacon Jones, a hall of fame DL once said he tried to injure Jim Brown after every play in a game. Jones said the most frustrating thing he ever dealt with in his career was that Brown responded “Nice hit, Deac.” Again, how on earth could you teach that?
What I'm getting at is that the greatest of the great have a natural hatred of opponents, doubters, and all criticism whatsoever. They can't handle it. So, they take it out on their respective sports, and do it with a natural athleticism that few are born with. They can't ever go up to someone and explain how to do this. It's programmed into their DNA.
Bill Parcells? He can explain it, because he would have to pay attention to every detail imaginable to be a great player. He's a guy that doesn't have a natural ability to fall back on. If someone pisses him off, he's going to have to outwork them and outsmart them. While he has a similar desire to win as MJ or Jimmy B, he can at least sympathize with what a regular player is going through. He knows that you can't just go out there and dominate a game. You have to prepare for it, because you don't have the natural ability to fall back on. Jordan scored I believe 4,800 points one day while dragging an IV with him down court in that ridiculous flu game. How could you possibly teach that? Parcells never had to. He had to win through preparation, not reaction.
And that's the mark of a successful coach; preparation. The Parcells and Belichicks of the world will continue to be the great coaches due to the fact that they have to prepare like madmen just to compete. They have little in common with their players. They can't motivate them because they don't know what those guys are going through. They have to have the game won before they step on the field. Jordan and Jim Brown? They could have won the game whenever the hell they felt like it. That's the mark of a great player, but coaches can't play that game and hope to win.
-Gus Rafeedie
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Brickety Brackets [UPDATE]
Now onto the real First Round. I'll go down the line in each quadrant:
WEST
WEST
WEST
WEST