Eric Mangini (New York Jets): Wow, all of the former Patriots coordinators are being fired up today...however, unlike the Crennel move, I firmly believe the Jets made the wrong move here. It all starts with why he was hired in the first place: To be another Belichick. Ownership failed to realize in the aftermath of firing the once named 'Man-genius', two factors that I will touch upon:
Monday, December 29, 2008
The NFL Coach's Firing Line...Deservedly or Not?
Eric Mangini (New York Jets): Wow, all of the former Patriots coordinators are being fired up today...however, unlike the Crennel move, I firmly believe the Jets made the wrong move here. It all starts with why he was hired in the first place: To be another Belichick. Ownership failed to realize in the aftermath of firing the once named 'Man-genius', two factors that I will touch upon:
Friday, December 26, 2008
The NBA's Parody Era Set to Begin...stay tuned
I am just waking up at 2:19am the day after Christmas...man I have learned the age old lesson of not mixing creativity with some really good food. Remember that television I was trying to hook up? Well, I fell asleep...literally knocked out while working on it. However, while in my seafood induced coma, I had come up with some thoughts about the Celtics-Lakers rivalry and asked myself whether these two teams will be in line for a return engagement in the 2009 NBA Finals. I ask this question within the backdrop of a vastly underrated paradigm shift of competitiveness in the National Basketball Association. David Stern should be proud in light of the fact that after years and years of Western Conference dominance and Eastern Conference incompetence, there is certifiable competitive balance prevalent in the league that has not been seen for a long time. Currently, there are more NBA Title contenders than I can count on one hand which is an anomaly.
Throughout my younger years, an NBA fan can look forward to 1 to 3, maybe 4 at most really good teams that can be called true contenders; now we have at least 10 squads that have the depth, coaching and star power to get hot and make a serious sprint towards holding that Larry O'Brien Memorial Trophy in June. In the successive eras of Magic, Bird, Thomas, Jordan, Olajuwon and Shaq and Duncan NBA fans witnessed the pinnacle of the superstar player surrounded by a wealth of talent whether it was upstart superstars or established veterans who basically ran roughshod over the entire league with little to no resistance. If we look at the number of NBA champions going back to 1980, we will see over the years, there are only 8 teams that have won NBA titles...let me clarify that in better terms...in the last 28 years, there have only been 8 organizations who have had the privilege of celebrating a title in June. In no major American professional sport do we see this type of statistic. However, when looking at the statistic, it tells me that winning in the NBA is formulaic and very few organizations have positioned themselves to construct the formula and fined tuned it to be able to withstand the regular season grind and post-season marathon.
The institution of a salary cap, beginning in the 1984-85 season (yep, it goes back that far) was made in order to engender competitive balance and parity within the league. Looking at the title winners before then, one will see the landscape dominated by the Celtics and Lakers, so the league felt showcasing more teams with winning spread among the entire league will lead to increased revenues and expand the brand among a wider demographic. However, the fact that there are so few amounts of different NBA Champions tells me that winning teams are doing things differently whether it be cost effective spending, trading volume for a player who will get them 'over the top' so to speak, drafting better and willing to let good players develop into great ones. I firmly believe if Michael Jordan was born later and drafted into the NBA in the 1990's he would have been traded around more than Chris Gatling. People seldom remember Jordan's first few years in the league were marred with injury, losing and the ability to carry bad teams. How many players suffered through that in the 1990's and were traded?
The losing end of the NBA culture is littered with bust first round picks, fired coaches, unstable ownership and reliance on one player to turn around the fortunes of the team. The current era has seen a wider number of organizations making a commitment to winning on par with NBA Title winners of the past; this is the reason why there are so many good teams right now. Organizations are not only drafting better, they are recognizing their centerpiece player(s) and rather than centralizing everything around them (despite the opposite shown in NBA related merchandising), they surrounding them with a mix of capable veterans and young players that fulfill specific roles on offense and defense. I know it sounds obvious, but that is what those 8 eight winning organizations since 1980 (Celtics, Lakers, Spurs, Heat, Pistons, 76ers, Rockets and Bulls) have done, except now it is being done on wider basis. So when I see players like Dwight Howard, Lebron James, Chris Paul and Deron Williams I know that the league is in good hands. These players are supported by organizations who do not expect them to win by themselves and also are willing to spend to place a group of players around them that will extract the best from it's superstar investment. Ultimately, I believe the influx of such multi-faceted and talented players will lead to more teams winning titles in the NBA over the next 10-15 seasons. This of course could change if the teams they currently are on mismanage finances and field poor supporting casts; of course this will lead to some the young superstars jumping ship to a traditional contender, ala Shaq leaving Orlando for L.A.
With the recent resurgence of the Boston Celtics to the forefront of the NBA landscape, it is easy to look at the acquisitions of Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen adding these future Hall of Fame players to a roster featuring another potential HOF'er Paul Pierce and overlook the development of future star, Rajon Rondo. The Celtics have done a great job of drafting over the past few seasons and with a young roster, notably excepting the aforementioned players, they are quietly building group of battle tested players that could potentially bridge them into a successful future of the organization. In the 1980's, 90's and going into the current century, teams were content to spend their way to a title (never worked, ask Timberwolves, Hornets, Knicks and Suns); or just purposely thrown really crappy teams on the floor with hopes of drafting the future superstar that could change their fortunes. Sometimes it works (Cavaliers in 2003 is the most modern sabotage example) and sometimes it doesn't (Clippers in 1998, Celtics in 1997 and 2007).
The rise in the salary cap underscores how critical teams must manage their finances and since the contracts are guaranteed, if a player is signed to a mega-deal and does not pan out, the team is stuck with the contract. The teams are then forced to trade the contract (not the player as much) to get it off their salary cap and be able to spend freely again. To the left you will see a diagram of the growth of the NBA salary cap over the years. It has grown with the economy as we can see. *Shout out to wikimedia for the image.
The salary cap is not a hindrance to keeping teams together, but it can be if the organization commits itself to spending freely without the right mix of personalities, poor coaching or a lack of an organizational commitment to a firm plan of where the team will be in the short and long term. It is easy to draft a player with superstar potential, but if he is placed in a situation where he or the coaching staff is not able to maximize his talents, the team will not succeed (Carmelo Anthony, Denver Nuggets). It costs far more to rebuild past mistakes than it is recognize trends and adjust on the fly. As we can see, with the recent spate of coaches being fired, the teams are obviously concerned with winning and putting people in the seats. However, if a team drafted a player, signed free agents and made trades with the coach's system in mind, what happens when he is fired? For one, the coach is paid the balance of his contract and then the team has to pay an interim coach. Who knows if his new system or method will maximize the ability of the roster? If not, the players get disgruntled, tune him out and before ownership knows it, they have to sell off the assets to begin anew. In other words, a team that does this (listening Clippers and 76ers?) will continue to be in the NBA Draft Lottery and stay in 'rebuilding mode' while the teams that are committed to a players and have a plan of competing with them in mind will add to the list of NBA titlist teams in the future.
To wrap this up, I am excited for the NBA for the first time in quite a while; I cannot predict who will be the champion this year as there are so many upstart teams that can get hot and go on a run towards the NBA Finals. Here is my first annual 'Look to the Future but It Can Be Now' list (4):
Cleveland Cavaliers
Atlanta Hawks
Portland Trailblazers
Orlando Magic
*All of them have this in common: 6 years ago, they all were very bad teams. Unstable ownership, behavioral issues among the players and rosters constantly being turnover. These teams drafted well (not to hard to do when you are always in the top 3), recognized their franchise player, hired coaches with winning pedigrees (African American head coaches, NCAA athletic directors out there who may be reading this) and planned future drafts, trades and free agent additions with an eye towards making the franchise player(s) better. We will see what happens with these teams over the next few years but it is encouraging to see parody (well, relative to what we are used to seeing) in the NBA.
*By the way, the television still doesn't work.
Thursday, December 25, 2008
Commercial Christmas In L.A.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Mark Teixeira & New York Yankees---The Soothsayer Liveth
Monday, December 22, 2008
New England Patriots: Brady's Cassel to Lose?
Sunday, December 21, 2008
WWE: Wrestling with Labor Issues
I was looking at old Youtube.com videos of wrestling from the old days, reflecting on my youth and decided to look into the business of pro wrestling; when I was younger back when Hulk Hogan and Ric Flair were ruling the roost as the top drawers in the industry, I actually thought it was a real sport, complete with legitimate beefs, titles, agendas and in-match injuries. As I got older, I wanted to know what the life a pro wrestler was OUTSIDE of the ring. Do they really ride in limos and fly in private jets? Do they lay up with super models and have tailor made suits made of silk? Do they say their prayers and take their vitamins, thus enuring another hard fought victory? Well, now that I have the time to look into that aspect, I can explore and write about it.
One thing that I did not know up until at least 72 hours ago is that pro wrestlers are entitled to little to no protection against injury as they are not employees of the various (and dwindling) wrestling promotions. They are considered 'independent contractors' who are not provided with W-2's for tax filing or given medical, dental or life insurance. They are paid weekly and if they are legitimately injured, it is up to them to foot the bill for getting better. Granted they are paid moderately well, are in the public spotlight and pretty much can use pro wrestling as a springboard into other endeavors, I thought this to be rather odd. In the WWE (World Wrestling Entertainment) for instance, the wrestlers are required to license themselves in the areas where they are to perform and if they need help, the WWE will charge them for assistance in doing so. In looking at the industry from my old perspective, I thought it was more like a team traveling from town to town where the company had a roster of paid employees who were taken care of, but now I look at the industry sort of like a circus where if the Elephant is injured and cannot stand on it's hind legs (compete) within 6 weeks of the injury, the boss reserves the right to put them to sleep (or in WWE's case, to terminate the contract). Some of the performers are provided perks such as first class plane tickets, hotel accommodations, and a certain percentage of the merchandise sales bearing their images. However, if I am a lay wrestler that has not yet made a name for myself in the business or generated a buzz with a fancy tag line or gimmick (which if developed while in WWE, belongs to them), not only do I pay for my transportation, I pay for living expenses, insurance, licenses, a place to live and other miscellaneous expenses...not exactly the most glamorous life huh?
As far as injuries are concerned, these athletes live a life that ensures that there are numerous high risks for injury; in order to entertain the fans, the performers take what are called 'bumps' whether it be falling from high altitudes, getting hit with tables, ladders or chairs. In order to recover from injuries that are the result of these risks, wrestlers eventually turn to performance enhancing substances in order to recover from the injuries so they can keep working. This is something that is a culture in the industry of pro-wrestling as a performer can be one missed event away from not being to feed their family or take care of themselves. Of course we know the downside of using steroids, cocaine and painkillers as they played roles in the deaths of numerous wrestlers. Once again, this is not something done by the WWE, but an inherent culture in the industry itself.
I apologize for digressing, as I wanted to really put emphasis on the injury side of the business and how razor thin the margin of error is for some performers; I can now see why if someone has slipped a disc in their back after falling 15 feet onto a thinly padded mat would take Vicodin or Percocet rather than go to a doctor and take time off to rehab the injury. I also can see that when is living on the road over 300 days per year, one can develop some some dangerous 'off the job' habits such as illicit drug use and alcoholism.
Scott Levy, better known as 'Johnny Polo' or 'Raven' in the 'sports entertainment' industry along with two other wrestlers are bringing suit against the WWE in regards to their status as 'independent contractors'. In their 'booking contracts' there are numerous clauses in them that have to do with elements an employer would ask an employee to do such as: a training regimen, how physically fit they are to be, and behavioral clauses. All of this, plus asking one to be one the road a majority of the year, not entitled to workman's compensation, health insurance, life insurance or accidental death insurance. This is something that is demanded of them even when not working for the WWE (for instance a house for a small regional brand). Wow. It has not been revealed what Levy or the other plaintiffs are seeking in damages, but it makes for a good case to examine. To be totally honest, now that I am looking at wrestling differently, I can see why performers can be looked upon as disposable. The promoter has no ties to them at all except paying for the performance or taking credit for 'developing' their character. In the late 1990's, a slew of older wrestlers left what was then called the WWF (World Wrestling Federation) and went to WCW(World Championship Wrestling) not because they wanted to stick it to Vince McMahon, but because they were offered guaranteed contracts and a lighter workload...that's it. Now that McMahon has virtually monopolized the industry since the acquisition of WCW in 2001, performers are relegated to the independent circuit where their situation can be tenuous at best or go to another company called TNA (Total Non-Stop Action) where all of the older performers are residing now. Once again the same conditions will more than likely apply for many wrestlers; the contract can be terminated at will by the promoter.
The bottom line is this: I never in my wildest dreams would have thought the life of a pro wrestler would be so difficult. The promoters do a great job of dressing up a hard, ugly industry and making it palatable for public consumption. It makes me think deeper about the business when I watch the older matches from my youth...'was he injured when he fell like that?' or 'what is his/her life like when the cheers stop, the lights go out and there is no more money?' 'How does this lifestyle affect wives and children?' On the other end, to be fair, what is a promoter to do in a case where he has assets that can be seriously debilitated at any moment? The wrestlers have no union so everyone is pretty much in it for their own well being for the most part. In the NFL, there is a similarity in that an individual can lose the ability to play in a matter of seconds and the team still has the right to terminate a contract if it is felt a player is not playing well enough; the risk doesn't warrant a total commitment. If there was a total commitment by owners in these high risk sports, the league would be subject to financial difficulty by paying for all of the injuries, especially after a career is finished; and this is why I cannot wait for the new Collective Bargaining Agreement in the NFL between owners and players. The players are guaranteed signing bonuses even though the rest of the their contract isn't; so the players are not walking away from the negotiation table with nothing in hand. I am not YET well versed in labor law, so I cannot really get into the nuts and bolts of this but I can say at least the NFL has a a union and pension fund complete with a drug prescription plan, albeit a grossly underfunded one. Do the wrestlers deserve a similar structure based on the demands placed upon them to entertain us?
I will try to keep an ongoing update in regards to the goings on of Levy's case as the WWE is preparing a motion for summary judgement. I will post any new information as I receive it.
Friday, December 19, 2008
How to Blow $200 Million and Live to Fight Another Day
I am not sure if anyone remembers a movie by the name of 'Brewster's Millions'. Richard Pryor starred alongside John Candy as a washed up lower level pitcher for some minor league team. His great uncle or other rich relative type died and left him $30 million with the condition that he spend it all in 1 month and have no assets at that time; if successful, he would get $300 million. If want more details, go see the film...in the movie, the character STRUGGLED to blow $30 million in a month...a fictional person in Hollywood script...how in the world is Evander Holyfield's home in foreclosure? Why has he coined same tag-line most broke athletes used when not paying attention to their money while living in a 'American Dream' haze? 'I trusted people around me and I was robbed'...The simple fact of the matter is that it SHOULD be impossible to blow $30 million, much less $200 million; but let us look at the factors abound that would lead a 46 year old man to continue fighting. Is it the 11 children he has? I don't think so; I know that child support can be a major constraint on one's cash flow, but $200 million? I doubt it. Let's see, he is still under investigation for receiving HGH (human growth hormone) by mail; but even Jose Canseco or Hulk Hogan cannot run through $200 million worth of chemical performance enhancers.
Most of the money (that's just purse money, not the Burger King money or Sega's 'Real Deal Boxing' money) was probably tied up in shady 'get richer quick' schemes and excessive living. I can see why one would want to live in a huge house, but let's be for real...if one is in foreclosure, that means one has a loan against the property and if one has a loan, they don't own. Is it possible that he surrounded himself with items and property that he did not own or intend to own? We all know that the with loans, rates change and as rates change and fights (in his case) become more sparse, and endorsers no longer showing interest, there is nothing but drain going on...likewise in excess. He probably had a lawyer on retainer 24 hrs a day and wanted live off the sweat of his toil that broke his face, battered his body and took a piece of his ear (thanks, Mike). One thing I believe athletes do not prepare for is this type of dilemma...you leave the game or the game passes you by and they are sitting virtually in the same mental condition (or worse) that the got into it with. They did not become savvy and invest in themselves, who is the real cash cow in life. Now image if he got his BA/BS or Graduate Degree, imagine if he paid for media training and became a student of the game so much so that he would be a part of the broadcast team covering some washed up fighter looking for a quick buck rather than being the washed up fighter.
The official bottoming out for an athlete of this kind is when they sell the very items that brought them so much fame, money and glory. The stubbornness to not move out of the compound and into a relatively modest, yet very high end condo was not an option. Getting rid of the 7 sports cars and jewelry was out of the question. This type of logic only leads to all of the 'Golden Gloves' trophies and other memorabilia that was meant for him to look back on with pride and accomplishment being on eBay, some nut with real money can brag and boast about how 'Evander and me were so tight he gave me his Golden Gloves trophy from 1985'. We need not go any further in that discussion when we look at the downfall of OJ Simpson, who needed money, which led to the failed attempt to re-acquire and sell his old football memorabilia which has landed him in prison. I wish 'Real Deal' the best, but George Foreman has already written this story with a happy ending (cooking salmon on my grille as we speak); sadly many other athletes travel this slippery slope in a quest to maintain an impossible lifestyle. When you are finished reading this, please provide a list of athletes and entertainers who have lived so fast and rich but have bottomed out due to a depressing life of excess; gives more significance to the term 'disposable money'. On a side-note, look up the fighter Holyfield is facing...what a monster...literally. I hope he gets a GEICO endorsement deal if he wins...no make up needed.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Franchise Tag Discussion---What is Haynes Worth?
As for the interesting world of sports, I was looking around on the Internet and one thing struck me...how Albert Haynesworth is the luckiest man this side of Lee Majors. I mean this guy had at least 1,000 lbs fall on his knee and all he has is a sprained medial collateral ligament (MCL). When I first saw the injury, I know his agent was screaming DAMN!!!!! For those who do not know, Haynesworth is one of the more dominant defensive tackles in the NFL and was a mid- season candidate for NFL MVP. He has seemingly come a long way from the Andre Garoude http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5nlEA8BUTQ stomp-out a couple of seasons back and put himself in line for a huge contract once he hit unrestricted free agency. His current team, the Tennessee Titans decided to hang onto him last season, placing the 'franchise tag' on him, which is a one year deal, salary all guaranteed and amounting to the average salary of the top 5 players at his position in the league or 120% of his previous year's salary, whichever one is higher. However, the major risk in a deal of this sort is that there is no long term commitment from the team and if the player's value slips during the subsequent season, he will make considerably less on the open market or be forced to sign back to his original team at a significant discount.
Now say if Haynesworth suffered a Tom Brady-like injury where the not only the MCL is blown out, the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is destroyed as well, imagine the free fall in his value for the next season. He would not have the protection of a long term commitment from his existing team AND no other team would be willing to make such a risky investment over the long term. This is the dilemma players in the NFL face when they sign are tagged and sign the 'franchise' agreement. In Albert's case, I know his career flashed in front of his eyes as he made the changes in his on field behavior, rebounding from a heinous act in stomping out a fellow player (cleats to his face) and was able to rehabilitate his image to the point where his team was willing to make a large investment in him.
In signing the franchise agreement, Albert was investing in himself; a good season gets you good money, a bad season gets you decent money and a superb season lets the player set the market standard. The tag's essential purpose is to get the player to the negotiating table without the interference of other teams; if a team wants the player they must give up not one, but two future first round picks. In many cases, the player and the team come to an agreement as Lance Briggs and the Chicago Bears did last season where the team agrees to not place the tag on the player again if he agrees to play under the tag. I have two examples of this; one past and the other in the present. In 2007, New England Patriots cornerback Asante Samuel (who garnered a Briggs-like agreement) played under the 'franchise' tag and proceeded to have one of the best seasons of his career on a record setting team. The Patriots attempted to make an offer, but after a great season and not being able to hammer out a long term contractual commitment, Samuel decided to let the market dictate what he was worth rather than the Patriots. He was worth $57 million over 6 years to the Philadelphia Eagles. Presently Oakland Raiders cornerback Nnamdi Asomghua is playing under the 'franchise' tag and seems set to rake in a big haul in free agency.
However, the Raiders do reserve the right to tag Asomoghua again this off-season; this is something not unprecedented as Seattle Seahawks left tackle Walter Jones played under the tag for three consecutive seasons (2002-2004) was lucky enough to stay healthy and cash in when the team believed they could make a long term commitment without suffering negative salary cap ramifications. However, Asomghua has several things working for him: 1) he is an elite player that has not slipped during this season in performance, so he will match or exceed the market at his position, 2) the Raiders are notorious for overvaluing players on OTHER teams and undervaluing the players they do have, 3) he can always hold out until he is traded, which the Raiders would do (hopefully not for a 4th round pick in the draft ala Randy Moss) and finally, 4) the team may be better off letting him go as the organization needs a top to bottom philosophical shift in approaching football operations.
I for one am glad Albert Haynesworth will be okay and he will be able to reap the benefits of another 'franchise' tag (which I know he will probably not do), strike a deal with the Titans at market value or blow out the market when he hits unrestricted free agency. The franchise tag in my estimation works well for both sides (player and team) as the team is forced to put up a lions share of guaranteed money that counts against the salary cap (which can inhibit them from signing players they need to be competitive) and the player assumes the risk of injury and poor performance...classic benefit detriment as I have learned in law school. Imagine if it is all positive and it works out with the team being successful, the player can get his money and the team can attract prime free agents from other teams. This a classic situation in which the Titans and Haynesworth are in now; get well big man and get paid.
Monday, December 15, 2008
The Price of Winning
I have been stuck in books, studied through a hurricane and worked insane nights waiting for the opportunity to give my take on the sports world that I have not been a part of for at least 4 months. One of things that has been stuck on my mind doesn't have to do with batting averages, yards per carry, penalty minutes or assist to turnover ratio. It has to do with the recently declared recession in the United States and how it is and will affect not only the economics of the professional and ameatur sports we enjoy, but also the jobs of the people who are directly involved in the industry whether it be the sausage vendor, ticket scalper, equipment manager, coach or Vice President of an organization. I have seen owners of teams so vastly affected by the ever-shrinking bottom line, that the general managers, coaches and players they employ have shorter leashes than in the past and there is no longer patience for team to get better over a series of seasons whether they be up or down. If an owner (or school, as we shall see) is hemorraging money, the only way to conceivably break even, is to put immense pressure on the people they employ to win NOW. The days of hiring a coach and giving him 3 years to turn around a program are becoming a thing of the past. Barry Melrose of the Tampa Bay Lightning lasted mere weeks before given his walking papers. Owners who are facing serious financial peril need a product that the fans, sponsors, local and national media can embrace as it will equal more merchandising opportunities and then in turn, increased gate attendance at games (especially if one put up tons of cash to finance the building of a state of the art arena or stadium). The NBA has already featured 5 coaching changes within the the opening stages of the 2008-09 season; Washington's Eddie Jordan, Oklahoma City's P.J. Carlisimo, Sacramento's Reggie Theus, Minnesota's Randy Wittman and Philadelphia's Maurice Cheeks have been handed the ol' pink slip by their employers within the past three weeks and we have not even reached the halfway point of the regular season. In the NFL, numerous teams will undergo major organizational reconstruction projects on the personnel side, coaching and the executive positions. If anyone were to ask if this is necessary, I would bittersweetly say yes.
If I were an owner of a pro sports franchise in the current economic environment, I have to be cognizant of several things: 1) If the team is not winning, how do we make a profit? 2) If the on the field/court/ice product does improve, will it positively affect the bottom line? and 3) If I can positively affect the bottom line, can I afford to do it over a 3-5 year period? The answer is no. Look at the recent examples of not only the NBA coaches but the short life span that Romeo Crennel and Phil Savage will have for the NFL's Cleveland Browns or the recent resignation of former Kansas City Chiefs President and General Manager, Carl Peterson. In the NBA, the Minnesota Timberwolves owner Glen Taylor decided to relieve General Manager Kevin McHale of his duties and put him on the bench to coach the team McHale himself assembled, which is an obvious move to push McHale out of the organization; John Wooden, Phil Jackson and Red Auerbach combined could not get this young team to win NOW. The pressure is on coaches and players to perform and the economic contraints are clearly showing ; the NFL contracts are now featuring behavioral clauses for a large number of players, which will enable the organization to distance themselves from dibilitating financial ramifications of a deal signed with players. Even leagues themelves are affected; the WNBA's Houston Comets, once the flagship of the popular league is now defunct and the Arena Football League (AFL) has cancelled it's 2oo9 season. It has been said that pro sports is recession-proof, but as we can see with the layoffs all of the major professional sports leagues have initiated recently, this obviously is not true.
If we look at the new stadiums that popped up from 1995 t0 2007, we see a sterling example of publicly funded venues that raked in profits for the owners, tax money for the municalities and increased prices (and taxes) on the consumer. Taxpayers across the country have financed large number of the these projects and the states themselves have given prime land and investment to them; however, citizens are the ones's often footing the bill on maintenance and infrastructure. Teams have forced fans to buy personal seat licenses and overpriced food at the games with the combined costs of travel and parking, the typical night out with the family is too much to bear. Now the fans are in an even more precarious position; the recession has rendered the average fan no choice but to not go to the games not willing to frivilously spend money that can be saved on on paying that adjustable rate mortage. This fan especially is not going to pay large money to see a young team 'getting their lumps' but improving slowly before they make some noise down the line at some indeterminable time. In the 1990's that plan was acceptable as money was flowing all over the place to the point where we saw our first $100 million player in Los Angeles Dodgers pitcher Kevin Brown.
For a profit/spotlight seeking owner, this was a great environment to operate; however now, this does not exist. The owner now faces the prospects of either a championship run or empty stands...there no longer is that happy medium. In Sunday's Phoenix Cardinals-Minnesota Vikings game, the stadium was not sold out. This is not a regular stadium either mind you; it is the prestigious University of Phoenix Stadium (look up at my header, yeah that's the stadium). The Cards are division champions for the first time since 1975 AND the game could be a playoff preview between two good teams. Under normal circumstances, that place would be banged out and the fans would have been going crazy...not anymore. This dilemma is exactly what prompted Ralph Wilson, the owner of the Buffalo Bills, to examine potential profits in other markets, hence, the team's recent agreement to play several games over the next few years in Toronto, Ontario.
Owners now have to find a way to justify all of the political strong-arming, the financing of expensive venues and exorbitant salaries of employees that no longer relate to the people who watch them. The luxury boxes built into new stadiums were contructed with corporate interests in mind; now that the corporations are themselves suffering, what is an owner to do? If they have priced out the 'everyman' who was and still loyal. The upper classes are scaling back their expenses and less wealthy fans are considering cutting this entertainment out entirely. How can an owner make a buck here? WINNING. The owners are willing to spend now to gain a foothold in future generations via that magical championship season(s) and it is the coach who will bear the brunt of pressure because of this. The Philadelphia 76ers gave Maurice Cheeks a contract extension 2 and a half months before firing him. Sylvester Croom, the head coach of Missisippi State University's football team was forced to resign one season removed from being named SEC Coach of the Year and likewise rewarded with a contract extension(yes, the bottom line has trickled down to the college ranks as well). The message here is mere improvements only buy you stay; there is no room for a 'bad' season; just ask Tommy Tuberville, the deposed football coach at Auburn University.
If we thought sports on any level was bottom line before, there is no doubt it really going to be at that point from now on. There are positives that may come out of this such as better management, more control over the market value of the players (i.e. protecting the owners from themselves), better player development and owners making hires on a common ground with the individual they are bringing in, which would save us from Lane Kiffin-Al Davis like feuds. However, it seems as if some organizations still don't get it as the New York Yankees handed out over $200 million in combined guaranteed money to two free agents while employing one with a $180 million deal and another with a $250 million contract. Winning is at an all-time premium right now and everyone (fans, owners and players) has a smaller margin for error due to the economic crisis in the United States.