I apologize for not posting on here as much as I should be, the semester is trying to make me its victim but I won't let it happen? I have to come back with some heat! Let's see what I come up with.
I have been thinking for the past few days about what I would write for my first post after a long hiatus on here. Then the answer just fell into my lap last night as I was watching highlights on SportsCenter.
Elizabeth Lambert, a defender for the New Mexico Lobos women's soccer team, single-handedly pulled her school to a new low (yes, even with the Mike Locksley situation still simmering there). If you haven't seen the video yet, take a look at the theatrics.
http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2009/11/video-meet-elizabeth-lambert-goon-womens-soccer
I was shocked, as I'm sure most people were when they saw it. I'm sure that Lambert never planned on being this famous (or infamous) overnight, but it happened literally overnight.
In this week of Florida Gators linebacker Brandon Spikes being grounded in a controversy over trying to gouge the eyes of a Georgia Bulldogs player, it's weird to think that incident is really tame compared to what Lambert did. If Spikes was suspended for a half by Urban Meyer and then suspended himself for the whole game, what should happen to this young lady?
Not only is this a bad look for Lambert and the University of New Mexico athletic department, it also looks bad for the Mountain West Conference. One of the big issues for the NCAA this year has been sportsmanship. That's why they tried to have football teams shake hands at midfield before kickoff. That didn't work too well though, because you really shouldn't have whole teams get together that close before a game when adrenaline is running at its highest. It just won't work.
Back to Lambert and the New Mexico athletic department, this is something that will linger for a long time. With the 1-0 loss to BYU, Lambert just ended her junior season. That means she will be back next fall and will have to hear from the public for the next year. If the Mountain West wants to make a statement, they need to suspend her for at least 5-10 games to start next season. What she did has no part in any collegiate athletics. If the university doesn't do it, the conference needs to. If the conference doesn't do it, the NCAA certainly needs to step in right away and take action.
Lost in all of this, credit has to be given to the BYU women's soccer team for not responding to the numerous outbursts from Lambert. They kept on doing what they had to do to win the game, and that is exactly what they did.
There is a reason they are ranked in the top 25, and part of it has to do with the fact that they beat New Mexico and the refs, who couldn't seem to muster the courage to red card Lambert and get her out of the game, which is what was sorely needed.
All in all, this was something that I am sure the university did not need. One black eye to the program is bad enough, two just adds insult to the injury of a struggling program.
Showing posts with label NCAA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NCAA. Show all posts
Friday, November 6, 2009
Saturday, October 3, 2009
DB’s NCAA predictions: week 5
Last week wasn’t a very good week at all for my predictions as I went 1-4 on a weekend that produced a few stunning results. Miami and Cal both showed that they weren’t quite ready for the big time and their top 10 rankings as they each lost convincingly to Virginia Tech and Oregon, respectively. The only pick I got correct was the Stanford upset over Washington. The trend this year seems to be teams that come off of big wins lose the next week to teams they shouldn’t. Will it happen this week? Follow me and you’ll find out.
DB’s Game of the Week
*No. 8 Oklahoma at No. 17 Miami
Miami is in the last stretch of an extremely tough four-game stretch that most recently included a 31-7 loss at Virginia Tech. Sophomore sensation quarterback Jacory Harris looked human for the first time all season, going 9-of-21 for 150 yards and an interception. He will be looking to rebound against a Sooner defense that hasn’t allowed a point in their past two games. The combined score of those games has been 109-0, but the two games have come against Idaho State and Tulsa. Miami figures to be a slightly better opponent than either of them.
The biggest question facing Oklahoma is the status of Sam Bradford’s shoulder. He has been progressing with his rehab, but it remains to be seen whether he will play on Saturday or not. If he doesn’t, Landry Jones will start in his place. Jones has looked impressive in his first two starts, breaking the single-game record for touchdowns in a game with six against Tulsa. Like I said before though, they weren’t exactly playing the toughest teams in the country.
Miami has plenty of incentive coming into this game. They did not look impressive at all last weekend, and I am sure that they want to end this treacherous four-game start on a good note. I believe the Hurricanes will win because regardless of who starts at quarterback for Oklahoma, they will struggle against an angry and swarming Hurricanes defense. Jones will be going up against his first true test as a starter and Bradford will be a target because of his shoulder. Bottom line is this: the U isn’t fully back, but it’s closer than the experts think.
DB’s Game of the Week prediction: Miami 24 Oklahoma 20
*No. 4 LSU at No. 18 Georgia
This battle between SEC foes could go a long way in potentially determining the outcome of the national championship chase. Both teams are coming off of close victories, with Georgia slipping past 20-17 over Arizona State and LSU holding off Mississippi State on a goal-line stand to win 30-26.
LSU is an interesting team so far this season, because they have beaten some solid teams. That being said, the meat of their schedule is coming up with Georgia this week and the top ranked Florida Gators next weekend in Death Valley. If they win both games, it would be hard not to see them as the top ranked team in the country as of right now.
The question that needs to be asked is this: do they get past this tough Georgia team between the hedges at Sanford Stadium? Their offense hasn’t exactly been lighting it up so far this season, only scoring 31 points against the likes of Louisiana-Lafayette. They may need to step their defense against a Bulldogs offense that put up points if need be.
Home-field advantage is very important when it comes to conference play, and I don’t believe this will be any different. I believe that Georgia wins because they will play enough defense to contain the LSU offense. They will also score enough with their weapons to force the Tigers to try and play catch up. It is a close game, but I believe the Dawgs pull it out.
DB’s SEC prediction: Georgia 34 LSU 21
*No. 7 USC at No. 24 California
This Pac 10 game doesn’t have the same luster as it did at the start of the season. USC had their annual conference hiccup, this time against Washington. They rebounded last weekend against Washington State with a 27-6 victory. Cal didn’t have quite as good of a weekend, getting blown out on the road at Oregon by a score of 42-3.
Cal showed that they were not ready for such a high ranking and it will be interesting to see how they rebound this week. They will be facing a strong USC defense that will be keying in on Jahvid Best.
Will the Trojan offense be able to perform this week? They haven’t been up to par in recent weeks, and it just got worse for the offense with the loss of running back Stafon Johnson. They have the talent at that position, but they won’t be able to replace his experience.
I think Cal will win because they definitely have a big chip on their shoulders right now. USC has a lot of things going on off the field that I don’t think they will be able to get rid of, at least not this week.
DB’s Pac 10 prediction: Cal 24 USC 17
DB’s other predictions
*No. 22 Michigan at Michigan State (Michigan State)
*Washington at Notre Dame (Washington)
*Florida State at Boston College (Florida State)
*UCLA at Stanford (Stanford)
DB’s Game of the Week
*No. 8 Oklahoma at No. 17 Miami
Miami is in the last stretch of an extremely tough four-game stretch that most recently included a 31-7 loss at Virginia Tech. Sophomore sensation quarterback Jacory Harris looked human for the first time all season, going 9-of-21 for 150 yards and an interception. He will be looking to rebound against a Sooner defense that hasn’t allowed a point in their past two games. The combined score of those games has been 109-0, but the two games have come against Idaho State and Tulsa. Miami figures to be a slightly better opponent than either of them.
The biggest question facing Oklahoma is the status of Sam Bradford’s shoulder. He has been progressing with his rehab, but it remains to be seen whether he will play on Saturday or not. If he doesn’t, Landry Jones will start in his place. Jones has looked impressive in his first two starts, breaking the single-game record for touchdowns in a game with six against Tulsa. Like I said before though, they weren’t exactly playing the toughest teams in the country.
Miami has plenty of incentive coming into this game. They did not look impressive at all last weekend, and I am sure that they want to end this treacherous four-game start on a good note. I believe the Hurricanes will win because regardless of who starts at quarterback for Oklahoma, they will struggle against an angry and swarming Hurricanes defense. Jones will be going up against his first true test as a starter and Bradford will be a target because of his shoulder. Bottom line is this: the U isn’t fully back, but it’s closer than the experts think.
DB’s Game of the Week prediction: Miami 24 Oklahoma 20
*No. 4 LSU at No. 18 Georgia
This battle between SEC foes could go a long way in potentially determining the outcome of the national championship chase. Both teams are coming off of close victories, with Georgia slipping past 20-17 over Arizona State and LSU holding off Mississippi State on a goal-line stand to win 30-26.
LSU is an interesting team so far this season, because they have beaten some solid teams. That being said, the meat of their schedule is coming up with Georgia this week and the top ranked Florida Gators next weekend in Death Valley. If they win both games, it would be hard not to see them as the top ranked team in the country as of right now.
The question that needs to be asked is this: do they get past this tough Georgia team between the hedges at Sanford Stadium? Their offense hasn’t exactly been lighting it up so far this season, only scoring 31 points against the likes of Louisiana-Lafayette. They may need to step their defense against a Bulldogs offense that put up points if need be.
Home-field advantage is very important when it comes to conference play, and I don’t believe this will be any different. I believe that Georgia wins because they will play enough defense to contain the LSU offense. They will also score enough with their weapons to force the Tigers to try and play catch up. It is a close game, but I believe the Dawgs pull it out.
DB’s SEC prediction: Georgia 34 LSU 21
*No. 7 USC at No. 24 California
This Pac 10 game doesn’t have the same luster as it did at the start of the season. USC had their annual conference hiccup, this time against Washington. They rebounded last weekend against Washington State with a 27-6 victory. Cal didn’t have quite as good of a weekend, getting blown out on the road at Oregon by a score of 42-3.
Cal showed that they were not ready for such a high ranking and it will be interesting to see how they rebound this week. They will be facing a strong USC defense that will be keying in on Jahvid Best.
Will the Trojan offense be able to perform this week? They haven’t been up to par in recent weeks, and it just got worse for the offense with the loss of running back Stafon Johnson. They have the talent at that position, but they won’t be able to replace his experience.
I think Cal will win because they definitely have a big chip on their shoulders right now. USC has a lot of things going on off the field that I don’t think they will be able to get rid of, at least not this week.
DB’s Pac 10 prediction: Cal 24 USC 17
DB’s other predictions
*No. 22 Michigan at Michigan State (Michigan State)
*Washington at Notre Dame (Washington)
*Florida State at Boston College (Florida State)
*UCLA at Stanford (Stanford)
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Why High School Athletes Should Commit to Schools and not Coaches
Just last week, John Calipari received a ridiculously large contract to become Head Coach at the University of Kentucky. I believe it is somewhere in the neighborhood of eight years and $31 million. That's almost $4 million a year to be a head coach. A bit much? Well, not if you ask boosters at pretty much any SEC school, but that's an issue for another post.
The domino effect at Calipari's old school (Memphis) is being felt immediately as well as tremendously. We've already seen DeMarcus Cousins, the #4 recruit on the ESPNU Top 100, change his commitment from Memphis to Kentucky. Another ESPNU Top 100 prospect, guard Nolan Dennis has re-opened his commitment and will look at other schools. The Wildcats are also potentially losing a recruit, as Super 60 recruit Dominique Ferguson re-opened his commitment as well.
My point is that high school athletes really need to evaluate their commitments. They also need to realize that the same coaches who are chasing after them for commitments never signed a commitment. Sure they signed a contract to coach at the school, but that doesn't seem to mean much in modern times. Calipari easily had one of the most talented teams in the country last year and was able to lead Memphis to a #2 seed in the NCAA Tournament. They are in Conference USA, which is slightly below the BCS conferences. It means that they will almost always be in the hunt for a conference title, barring sanctions or something of the like. Calipari gave up a solid job at a cushy school for the rigors and extreme pressures of the SEC and Kentucky. Like he said, they don't have banners for anything BUT national championships.
Now the student-athletes that are at Memphis are in a very precarious position. They could transfer to another school, but they would more than likely have to sit out that next year. Who knows, that coach could end up leaving too! The best-case scenario if they stay is that they like the new coach and everything goes well. Worst-case is that he is the exact opposite of the coach you had and expected. He runs the team completely different, on the court/field and off. What are you supposed to do?
I've often heard that high school athletes should commit to the school and not the coach. I used to think why? The coach is one of the most important piece of the puzzle when choosing a school. He is your father figure when you're home. All of this is true, but just like fathers can leave you in real life, so they can do in the cut-throat business world of NCAA athletics.
What makes this issue so important is the fact that it doesn't just apply to the major college sports. I'm pretty sure a softball or tennis player will feel the impact if they have to deal with a new coach when they committed to a different one.
For any high school athlete that may read this:
Take a hard look at the atmosphere of the campus, obviously you should look at the academics to make sure they are in line with what you want to do. Make sure you have intentions of playing right away or redshirting and getting stronger and faster in that year. You should take a really really hard look at the assistant coaches for a few reasons. First, you will be around them way more than the head coach so if you don't like them the team may not be meant for you. Second, one of those assistant coaches could end up being the top guy if the head coach takes another job.
It happened to me while I was here at JU (except the coach didn't take another job, he was fired), and I believe that is one of the reasons that I don't play football anymore. It is hard to get that to happen, given my true love for the sport. It just goes to show it can happen anywhere, from the SEC to the PFL.
The domino effect at Calipari's old school (Memphis) is being felt immediately as well as tremendously. We've already seen DeMarcus Cousins, the #4 recruit on the ESPNU Top 100, change his commitment from Memphis to Kentucky. Another ESPNU Top 100 prospect, guard Nolan Dennis has re-opened his commitment and will look at other schools. The Wildcats are also potentially losing a recruit, as Super 60 recruit Dominique Ferguson re-opened his commitment as well.
My point is that high school athletes really need to evaluate their commitments. They also need to realize that the same coaches who are chasing after them for commitments never signed a commitment. Sure they signed a contract to coach at the school, but that doesn't seem to mean much in modern times. Calipari easily had one of the most talented teams in the country last year and was able to lead Memphis to a #2 seed in the NCAA Tournament. They are in Conference USA, which is slightly below the BCS conferences. It means that they will almost always be in the hunt for a conference title, barring sanctions or something of the like. Calipari gave up a solid job at a cushy school for the rigors and extreme pressures of the SEC and Kentucky. Like he said, they don't have banners for anything BUT national championships.
Now the student-athletes that are at Memphis are in a very precarious position. They could transfer to another school, but they would more than likely have to sit out that next year. Who knows, that coach could end up leaving too! The best-case scenario if they stay is that they like the new coach and everything goes well. Worst-case is that he is the exact opposite of the coach you had and expected. He runs the team completely different, on the court/field and off. What are you supposed to do?
I've often heard that high school athletes should commit to the school and not the coach. I used to think why? The coach is one of the most important piece of the puzzle when choosing a school. He is your father figure when you're home. All of this is true, but just like fathers can leave you in real life, so they can do in the cut-throat business world of NCAA athletics.
What makes this issue so important is the fact that it doesn't just apply to the major college sports. I'm pretty sure a softball or tennis player will feel the impact if they have to deal with a new coach when they committed to a different one.
For any high school athlete that may read this:
Take a hard look at the atmosphere of the campus, obviously you should look at the academics to make sure they are in line with what you want to do. Make sure you have intentions of playing right away or redshirting and getting stronger and faster in that year. You should take a really really hard look at the assistant coaches for a few reasons. First, you will be around them way more than the head coach so if you don't like them the team may not be meant for you. Second, one of those assistant coaches could end up being the top guy if the head coach takes another job.
It happened to me while I was here at JU (except the coach didn't take another job, he was fired), and I believe that is one of the reasons that I don't play football anymore. It is hard to get that to happen, given my true love for the sport. It just goes to show it can happen anywhere, from the SEC to the PFL.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Why College Athletes Don't Need to be Paid
For as long as I have remembered, the issue of paying college athletes has been prevalent in society. The usual reasoning for it is the fact that most BCS (ACC, Big 10, Big 12, Big East SEC, and Pac 10) conferences and schools make so much revenue because of the athletes on the field that those players deserve a piece of the pie. Stop and think about things for a second.
There are the staunch opponents to that view that say because athletes are getting their education paid for, they should not need to get paid. That is why they are in college says those pundits. I am not on that extreme side of the issue. I believe that college athletes are already getting paid outside of their scholarships. Say you get a full scholarship and still fillout a FAFSA (Free Application for Federal Student Aid). If you are eligible for a pell grant or any other kind of grant, you will be getting an extra $2500 or so per school year. That money is being put towards tuition, room and board or books for a regular student. It is merely money you can put in the bank or spend however you want. This is all on top of certain stipends that the athletes receive because they play for the school. So in fact, they are already getting paid in the truest sense of the word.
Another reason that college athletes should not be paid is because of the boosters at the respective schools, particularly at the BCS schools. There are no specific instances I will bring up, but anyone with a fairly good knowledge of college athletics knows that boosters will help out the athletes that are making their athletic program like a finel-oiled machine. Whether it is under the table or something that is legitimate, they will help them. This is all without athletes getting a true "salary" or "check". Would they really need the extra? These players are allowed to get jobs if they need one as well, and even then they get a better deal out of it than regular folks. Former Oklahoma and Sam Houston State quarterback Rhett Bomar got kicked off the Sooners' team by Head Coach Bob Stoops for a violation of rules by having a job with a pay rate that was way above what is considered normal for the position.
When football players go to bowl games and basketball players go to postseason tournaments, they get gift packages that would make the Grammys blush. I have heard of players getting Xbox 360s, watches, and more. According to NCAA rules, they allow each bowl to award $500 worth of gifts to 125 participants per school. In many cases, schools bring more than that and pay for the rest on their dime. Florida and Oklahoma were essentially given a $300 credit line to spend on Sony Entertainment products that were stocked in a suite. This is the case for all of the bowl games in the country, though not all may be is lavish as the bigger bowls. The athletes are being paid for the successes on the field, but they're still getting PAID!!!! Here is a link that shows what every player on every team got for participating in the different bowl games last season: http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/article/60900
College football and basketball are the revenue-generating sports in the NCAA and they usually have an effect on how much money the smaller sports get. How fair would it be to pay just two or three sports and watch the other sports struggle with equipment, recruiting, and facilities? And how realistic would it be to pay every single sport in your athletic department if only a few of the sports are really making any money? Either way it doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense.
An ethical issue that comes up is that players would only come to school to get paid and to play their respective sport. It is already pretty bad because it seems as though that is already the case. Basketball seems especially privy to this given the one-and-done scenario that most talented players seem to go for. In essence, you are paying a player for a year to pay so you can get to the national championship game (like John Calipari and Memphis did with Derrick Rose last season) and even win the national championship (like Syracuse did in 2003). With the little motivation that these kids have to go to class already, paying them for that lack of drive seems like it would be morally wrong.
I understand that not every school in the country has the budget of a BCS school and even some of those schools are tightening their wallet in the wake of this recession.It wouldn't be fair to every school to pay some and not others and the money just is not there right now to do it.
There are the staunch opponents to that view that say because athletes are getting their education paid for, they should not need to get paid. That is why they are in college says those pundits. I am not on that extreme side of the issue. I believe that college athletes are already getting paid outside of their scholarships. Say you get a full scholarship and still fillout a FAFSA (Free Application for Federal Student Aid). If you are eligible for a pell grant or any other kind of grant, you will be getting an extra $2500 or so per school year. That money is being put towards tuition, room and board or books for a regular student. It is merely money you can put in the bank or spend however you want. This is all on top of certain stipends that the athletes receive because they play for the school. So in fact, they are already getting paid in the truest sense of the word.
Another reason that college athletes should not be paid is because of the boosters at the respective schools, particularly at the BCS schools. There are no specific instances I will bring up, but anyone with a fairly good knowledge of college athletics knows that boosters will help out the athletes that are making their athletic program like a finel-oiled machine. Whether it is under the table or something that is legitimate, they will help them. This is all without athletes getting a true "salary" or "check". Would they really need the extra? These players are allowed to get jobs if they need one as well, and even then they get a better deal out of it than regular folks. Former Oklahoma and Sam Houston State quarterback Rhett Bomar got kicked off the Sooners' team by Head Coach Bob Stoops for a violation of rules by having a job with a pay rate that was way above what is considered normal for the position.
When football players go to bowl games and basketball players go to postseason tournaments, they get gift packages that would make the Grammys blush. I have heard of players getting Xbox 360s, watches, and more. According to NCAA rules, they allow each bowl to award $500 worth of gifts to 125 participants per school. In many cases, schools bring more than that and pay for the rest on their dime. Florida and Oklahoma were essentially given a $300 credit line to spend on Sony Entertainment products that were stocked in a suite. This is the case for all of the bowl games in the country, though not all may be is lavish as the bigger bowls. The athletes are being paid for the successes on the field, but they're still getting PAID!!!! Here is a link that shows what every player on every team got for participating in the different bowl games last season: http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/article/60900
College football and basketball are the revenue-generating sports in the NCAA and they usually have an effect on how much money the smaller sports get. How fair would it be to pay just two or three sports and watch the other sports struggle with equipment, recruiting, and facilities? And how realistic would it be to pay every single sport in your athletic department if only a few of the sports are really making any money? Either way it doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense.
An ethical issue that comes up is that players would only come to school to get paid and to play their respective sport. It is already pretty bad because it seems as though that is already the case. Basketball seems especially privy to this given the one-and-done scenario that most talented players seem to go for. In essence, you are paying a player for a year to pay so you can get to the national championship game (like John Calipari and Memphis did with Derrick Rose last season) and even win the national championship (like Syracuse did in 2003). With the little motivation that these kids have to go to class already, paying them for that lack of drive seems like it would be morally wrong.
I understand that not every school in the country has the budget of a BCS school and even some of those schools are tightening their wallet in the wake of this recession.It wouldn't be fair to every school to pay some and not others and the money just is not there right now to do it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
