Month: July 2023

The MLB regular season has figuratively entered its second half with the All-Star break behind us.  The All-Star Game was disappointing to execs in MLB and at the networks; the game drew only 7 million viewers and a 3 rating.  By comparison, All-Star Games in the past have drawn as many as 30 million viewers and pulled down ratings near 20.  It was probably 15 years ago that I advocated for all sports leagues to abandon their All-Star Games because they were nothing but garish spectacles where the players obviously did not care nearly as much about winning as was necessary for an entertaining product.  The MLB All-Star Game is far and away the best All-Star spectacle of the four major US sports – – and yet, it is pretty threadbare.

One of the interesting things from the first half of the 2023 MLB season is the lack of correlation between “Opening Day Payroll” and “Current Standings”.  A lot of big money teams have disappointed, and a lot of low-priced teams have surprised.  In business these days, the term “sustainability” has become a cliché; however, this year’s baseball season raises questions of sustainability for some of those surprising teams.  Some data from Statista.com:

• NY Mets:  Highest Opening Day Payroll in MLB history at $353.6M.  The Mets are 4^th in the NL East and are 18.5 games behind the Braves this morning; their record is 43-50.  CBSSports.com projects the Mets with only a 15.1% chance to make the playoffs.
• NY Yankees:  Opening Day Payroll was second highest for this year at $277.0M.  The Yankees and Red Sox are tied for last place in the AL East 9 games behind the Rays.  The Yankees’ record is 50-44.  At least the Yankees are projected to have a 52.9% chance to make the playoffs.
• San Diego Padres:  Opening Day Payroll was third highest for this year at $249.0M.  The Padres are in 4^th place in the NL West and are 10 games behind the Dodgers.  The Padres’ record is 44-50.  Playoff probability is projected to be only 10.4%

So far in 2023, the lack of a salary cap in MLB has not provided the “big spenders” with dominance.  In fact, the best stories for 2023 to date are how the “little guys” have held on for the first half of the season.  More data from Statista.com:

• Baltimore Orioles:  Opening Day Payroll was only $60.7M.  The O’s are in second place in the AL East only 1 game behind the Rays with a record of 57-35.  The O’s’ have won 8 games in a row and their road record is 28-17 which is the best road record in the AL.
• Tampa Bay Rays:  Opening Day Payroll was $73.3M.  This is not all that shocking; the Rays always get more bang for the buck than one would expect.  This year they lead the AL East with a record of 60-36.
• Cincinnati Reds:  Opening Day Payroll was $83.3M.  The Reds are second in the NL Central this morning only 2 games out of first place.  Their record is 50-44.
• Miami Marlins:  Opening Day Payroll was $91.7M.  This morning, the Marlins’ record is 53-42 and they would be a wild-card team if the playoffs began tomorrow.
• Arizona Diamondbacks:  Opening Day Payroll was $116.5M.  The D-Backs are in third place in the NL West only 2 games behind the Dodgers in that division.  Their record to date is 52-42.

Back in March as Spring Training camps closed down, anyone who had this status obtaining in mid-July would have been considered a tad “off-center”.  And yet, here we are.  “Sustainability” is sometimes a nonsense word/concept when it is tossed about in the business world; “sustainability” is at the heart of whatever drama exists in the second half of this year’s MLB regular season.  Those 5 “low-payroll teams” are all playoff eligible as of today …

There is one direct correlation between payroll and performance to date in 2023 that needs to be made.  I refer to the Oakland A’s whose Opening Day Payroll was the lowest in MLB at $56.9M.  The A’s have performed pretty much as one would expect the lowest paid team in MLB to perform.  Consider:

• The A’s had been on pace to shatter the Mets’ standing record of 120 losses in a season until a spasm of competence produced a 7-game win streak.
• Now, the A’’s are projected to lose “only” 117.5 games over the entire regular season.
• The A’s record is 25-70 but that does not tell the entire story.  In those 95 games, the A’s have a run differential of minus-259 runs.  Over 162 games, that projects to a final run-differential of minus-442 runs or a staggering 2.73 runs per game.

[Aside:  I went looking for the worst run-differential posted by a team in MLB history but was not able to find it.  If anyone digs that up, please leave it as a comment here.  I would not be surprised to learn that minus-442 runs for a season would be an all-time record.]

Moving on …  Gregg Drinnan had this in his blog, Keeping Score last week.  It is sort of a CFL story of futility that meshes with the Oakland A’s status just above:

“ICYMI, the Edmonton Elks lost their 20th straight home game on Thursday, dropping an ugly 37-29 decision to the Hamilton Tiger-Cats in front of a whole lot of empty seats. The Elks now share the professional sporting record for most consecutive home losses with the 1953 St. Louis Browns, who moved to Baltimore once that season was over. The Elks will have two weeks to stew over this one. Will Chris Jones still be running things in Edmonton when the B.C. Lions come calling on July 29? He has so many titles there that he likely would have to fire himself and that isn’t going to happen.”

Finally, since I mentioned the Baltimore Orioles as a surprising team for 2023, let me close here with an observation from “The Bard of Baltimore”, H. L. Mencken:

“It is a sin to believe evil of others, but it is seldom a mistake.”

But don’t get me wrong, I love sports………

This has been a dark week for sports journalism in the US.  Let me start with the largest city in the US – – NYC – – where we got an announcement from the NY Times that it will drop its sports section in the print edition and turn over sports coverage to The Athletic in its online editions.  For the moment at least, there have not been firings/layoffs from the sports section; reporters who covered various aspects of sports – – say business of sports – – were “reassigned” to other sections of the paper – – the business section in the example here.  Sorry to be so cynical here, but I wonder how long it will be until those other sections appear “bloated” to the bean counters and buyouts/layoffs begin.

• Over/Under here is December 1, 2023 …

The motto of the NY Times has been:

“All the news that’s fit to print.”

So, I wonder if that tag line must change now that the Times will no longer print anything related to sports.  Somehow, that news is “unfit to print”?  Here is how management chose to spin this announcement:

“We plan to focus even more directly on distinctive, high-impact news and enterprise journalism about how sports intersect with money, power, culture, politics and society at large.”

Translation:

• We will publish periodic erudite fluff pieces tangentially related to sports.  Sports fans will read the first three paragraphs before tuning out – – but the online clicks will still count.

Having said all the above, this is not such a great loss to sports fans in NYC because the Times sports section has been outpaced by the NY Post for at least the last 20 years if not longer than that.

Moving along to the second most populated city in the US – – Los Angeles – – we got an announcement from the sports editor of the LA Times that they were “reimagining the sports section”.  Because the LA Times sold off its printing presses – – let that sink in for a moment – – and because they recently laid off more than 50 copy editors and consolidated that function within the newsroom, the LA Times would require reporters to have their stories for tomorrow’s paper done by 6:00 PM PDT.  Think about that for just a moment and realize that games involving the Dodgers, Angels, Lakers, Clippers and Kings almost always begin after that deadline.  So, a report or column centered on a game on Monday night cannot find its way into the paper until at least Wednesday.  By that point, sports fans will likely have moved on to another game/story/issue.

It seems to me that some of the top decision makers at the LA Times have chosen a path that leads to the demise of the print edition of the paper and its continued existence to be carried on by the Internet.  The previously taken decision – – and the acting on that previous decision – – to sell the printing presses must make a rational person shake his/her head in confusion.  Radio stations don’t sell their antennas; farmers don’t sell their fields; Microsoft doesn’t sell its computers – – unless there is some longer-term plan in place to get out of the current business model.  But a newspaper can sell its printing presses without anyone even raising an eyebrow?

Down the road from LA in San Diego there is news that the owner of the San Diego Union-Tribune is selling the paper to Alden Global Capital.  If history is any guide, the folks at Alden will sell off assets, lay off employees and leave the paper as a shell of what it used to be.  According to one report, the Union-Tribune now has 108 editorial/reporter staff employees – – down from almost 400 about 15 years ago – – and just about every report on this transaction expects layoffs to come quickly under Alden’s ownership.  San Diego is not a city that is considered to be a “sports hotbed” in the US, so I suspect the sports department there will devolve to a handful of folks doing live coverages and a lot of AP reporting.

And finally, in the third largest city in the US – – Chicago – – the remnants of the two papers that used to dominate the news scape in the city – – the Sun-Times and the Tribune – – both got scooped and put out to dry by the college paper at Northwestern University – – The Daily Northwestern.  The story involved hazing in the Northwestern football program which was corroborated by an independent investigation; that led to the president of the university announcing a two-week suspension for Head Coach Pat Fitzgerald to be served prior to the opening of this year’s training camp.  Reporters for the “big-boy papers” took that at face value even though such a suspension is not even a slap on the wrist.  The school kids dug in deeper.

Based on their reporting about details of the hazing and the extent of the hazing, the university had to do a major course correction and in about 2 days it announced that Pat Fitzgerald was terminated as the Head Coach even though the football season will start in about 7 weeks.  It took the Sun-Times and the Tribune a couple of days just to catch up on reporting about the findings in the Daily Northwestern that set all this in motion.

This is not all that surprising because both Chicago papers have gone through their own downsizing/reimagination in prior years.  Today, these are not the newspapers that had writers like Mike Royko or Jay Mariotti or Steve Rosenbloom or Dan Pompeii.  My guess is that the LA Times and the San Diego Union-Tribune are on a path to look like the Chicago papers in about 3-5 years.  The NY Times will continue to exist and be respected because it is the NY Times, and it never needed a sports section to bring any attention to itself.

It was a dark week indeed for sports journalism in the US…

But don’t get me wrong, I love sports………

Adam Silver and others in NBA management have been musing about the idea of an “in-season tournament” for several years now.  The idea is taken from European soccer where such things happen annually and there is significant interest in both the regular soccer season and in the tournament(s).  For example, the FA Cup tournament in England is a huge success.

Until now, there was a sticking point.  The existing CBA did not allow the Commish to pronounce the existence of such a tournament, but that CBA expired on 30 June 2023 and the new CBA allows for this in-season tournament.  Before I get to what I know about the specifics here, let me take a moment to tell you why I believe Adam Silver & Co. are so anxious to make this happen.

Numbers don’t lie; notwithstanding the common narrative that the NBA is exploding in popularity, the TV audiences for NBA games have been shrinking significantly.  Consider these data:

• In 1998 (25 years ago) the NBA Finals matched the Bulls and the Jazz.  The average TV audience for that 6-game series was just over 29 million viewers.
• In 1998, the sixth-and-final game of that series – – won by the Bulls with Michael Jordan – – drew a TV audience of more than 35 million viewers.
• In the 2023 NBA finals just concluded between the Heat and the Nuggets the average TV audience for the 5 games was less than 12 million viewers.

I am not cherry-picking data.  The NBA’s TV audiences have been in decline for a while, and I will not even try to point to the numbers from the COVID-affected seasons of 2020 and 2021.  From 2015 through 2017, the NBA Finals had average TV audiences between 20 and 21 million viewers.  The trend is down, and the trend is persistent.  In fact, let me give you two more data points that I would not have predicted.  Remember, the average TV audience for the Nuggets/Heat series just concluded was 11.7 million viewers.

1. For the Final Game of this year’s March Madness, the audience was 14.4 million viewers.  UConn/San Diego St. outdrew the NBA Finals by more than 20%.
2. For the Final Game of this year’s Women’s College Basketball Tournament, the audience was 9.9 million viewers.  The NBA Finals outdrew the Women’s collegiate final game by less than 2 million viewers or only 15%.

Moreover, the NBA’s current media rights deals are about to come up for renegotiation in two years.  Adam Silver needs something to happen to make TV audience numbers look more promising than beating out a women’s college game by less than 15%.  He thinks the in-season tournament will spark enough interest; I doubt it, but I am willing to review the numbers when they come in.

There will be an in-season tournament during this regular season.  All the specifics have not yet been announced but here is what I know so far:

• The results of tournament games in the Group Stage will count as part of the teams’ regular season record.  That is not the case with the English FA Cup for example; the NBA’s tournament will simply label some regular season games as “dual-interest games” because they count in two different sets of “standings”.
• All 30 NBA teams will participate in a “Group Stage” much the way many soccer tournaments are structured.  There will be six Groups; it is not clear to me if there will be Conference crossovers in the selected groups; that that a “TBD” for the moment.
• Also unclear at the moment is a statement on how the teams will be assigned to various groups.  The statement from the league I read said it would be done “by a random draw based on a team’s winning percentage last season.”  Maybe I am just dense, but that is not crystal clear to me.
• Each team will play 4 games in the Group Stage within its group.  The team in each group with the best record in Group play will advance to the “Knockout Round” – – again much the way soccer tournaments proceed.
• There will also be two “wild card teams” added to the Knockout Round to create a bracket of 8 teams.  The Knockout Round will be single elimination and we know that the Final Four of this tournament will be played in Las Vegas this year.

Somehow, and in some way, this in-season tournament is somehow going to spike the size of the TV audience for the NBA Finals next June. Hey, it could happen – – just as it could happen that next year’s Kentucky Derby winner will be a latter-day Mr. Ed and give his own interviews after the race.

Finally, let me close today with some observations by Adam Silver’s predecessor as NBA Commissioner – – David Stern:

“Everyone knows that if you can keep on making money, everyone’s happy.”

And …

“I actually don’t hope for a legacy.  I think it impedes your ability to make the hard decisions if you sit around saying, ‘How will this affect my legacy?’”

And …

“My own basketball background was ripping up my ACL in a lawyer’s league.”

But don’t get me wrong, I love sports………

Since I spent yesterday pondering the NFL’s gambling rules as they relate to NFL players, I thought I would check around and see what the NCAA might be doing along similar lines.  College football does not draw as much betting interest as the NFL, but I can tell you from direct observation that plenty of people have a significant interest in “having something riding” on the outcome of college football games.  It turns out that the NCAA recently modified its punishments for various levels of offense.

In the past, the NCAA had a blanket rule for all of its student-athletes:

• Players may not bet on any sport offered by the NCAA and the punishment was a loss of one-year of eligibility.

The NCAA has had some bizarre rules in the past; so, let me assume that this rule only applies to collegiate games in various sports.  It is difficult for me to imagine how “the integrity of college football” might be endangered by an offensive tackle somewhere betting on the outcome of the World Series – – even though the NCAA offers baseball.  Recently, the NCAA has refined that one-size-fits-all rule as follows:

• Players who do something to affect the outcomes of games they are involved in or who provide any information to people who wagered on games they are involved in can face a penalty up to and including complete loss of collegiate eligibility.  This prohibition extends beyond games in which the player participates and extends to any game in any sport at their school.  [Aside:  I like this rule; it has teeth; I wonder if it would ever be applied.]
• Players who bet on their own sport but involving teams from different schools can face up to a half season suspension and loss of a half year of eligibility.  [Aside:  This seems a bit harsh, but this is a distinction that should be made.]
• When players violate other betting restrictions – – not spelled out in the reports I read – – the NCAA will consider the amount(s) of the wagers.  Presumably, that means a wager causing the loser to buy lunch for the winner would be treated on a sliding scale when compared to a wager involving several thousand dollars.  The punishments here would similarly involve various amounts of eligibility loss.  [Aside:  I guess the rectitude of this provision really depends on what “other betting restrictions” turn out to be.]

Here is part of a statement by the NCAA regarding the impetus for the rule modifications/clarifications:

“These new guidelines modernize penalties for college athletes at a time when sports wagering has been legalized in dozens of states and is easily accessible nationwide with online betting platforms.  While sports wagering by college athletes is still a concern — particularly as we remain committed to preserving the integrity of competition in college sports — consideration of mitigating factors is appropriate as staff prescribe penalties for young people who have made mistakes in this space.”

Speaking of sports betting – – now legalized in 38 states don’t you know – – one popular form of betting is known as “Futures”.  As we speak, one can bet on the “future” outcomes for all the NFL Division races among other future happenings in the NFL such as Super Bowl participants and number of games won by any team.  I read a report last week that the NFC North Division is the one getting the most action in Futures betting this year and that the Detroit Lions are the betting favorite in that division.  According to BetMGM:

• The greatest number of Futures bets so far this year involve the winner of the NFC North Division.
• The Lions have more money bet on them to win their division than any other team in the league.
• In this heavily bet division, the Lions command 71% of the money wagered on the division as a whole.

Remember, the Vikings are in the NFC North and the Vikings won 13 games last year.  Obviously, the betting public does not think that is going to happen again.  For the record, here are the odds on the betting favorites to win their respective divisions in the upcoming regular season:

• Bengals at +120
• Bills at +130
• Chiefs at minus-165
• Eagles at minus-110
• Jags at minus-165
• Lions at +105
• Niners at minus-165
• Saints at +125

Finally, apropos of nothing, let me close today with this note from artist Georgia O’Keeffe:

“I hate flowers – I paint them because they’re cheaper than models and they don’t move.”

But don’t get me wrong, I love sports………

Last week, the NFL suspended 4 more players for violations of NFL rules related to sports gambling.  The NFL has a fine line to walk here; gambling and the NFL have a long history together.  In fact, I believe that an argument can be made that the reason that the NFL is the biggest sport in the US is related to the many ways that have been concocted for fans to bet on NFL activities.  In modern times, that underpinning of fans’ interest in betting on games and stats is augmented by lots of money that flows to the NFL through “partnerships” with companies that take bets on games and exploit the Internet to do so.  It is not in the interest of the NFL to endanger that foundation of fan interest or that revenue stream.

The history of NFL players gambling on things they should not have been gambling on goes all the way back to the 1960s with the Paul Hornung and Alex Karras situations.  There was even a time when the NFL pressured Joe Namath to divest himself of an interest in a nightclub in NYC that was frequented by folks involved in organized crime.  Today the problem is expanded because every “smartphone” can be connected to an app that permits wagering on just about anything with the stroke of a thumb.

Some players have said they were confused by some of the rules that they need to abide by notwithstanding attempts to “educate” the players.  The NFL’s gambling rules as they relate to players are codified in the existing CBA.  As I understand it, there are 6 gambling prohibitions:

1. Do not bet on anything related to the NFL.  That seems like a no-brainer to me.
2. Do not gamble at the team facility or while the team is on a road trip.  That seems a tad excessive to me.  Is there really any harm if a player is engaged in an online poker game between weightlifting sets?
3. Do not share “inside information”.  Another no-brainer – – except “inside information” might be subject to interpretation that could be foggy.
4. Do not have someone place bets for you.  Translation:  Do not break these rules AND at the same time try to hide your activity.
5. Do not visit sportsbooks during the NFL season.  Does this mean players should not visit them physically or electronically or both?  It seems to me that visiting a sportsbook is not the problem; what the player might do while in the sportsbook could be a problem.
6. Do not play fantasy football.  This is another no-brainer since fantasy football is related to the NFL and it is possible that a player’s decisions regarding his fantasy teams could reveal “inside information”.

Even though I think some of these restrictions are excessive and/or “foggy”, I do not think that if I were an NFL player that I would have great difficulty in living within the boundaries of those 6 restrictions.  So, in the event that a suspended player tries to explain away what got him suspended, I am not predisposed to accept the assertion that he did not know what he was doing was a no-no.

I read a report about a month ago that estimated that more than 46 million people in the US had placed at least one wager on an NFL game last year.  My gut tells me that number is too low given the simple fact that more than 100 million people tuned in to watch the Chiefs/Eagles game in the Super Bowl.  In any case, the magnitude of the “active bettors” for NFL activities is indeed large; and in any population of that size, there will always be individuals looking to “get an edge” on others involved in the same or similar activities.  For that reason, I understand why the NFL would seek to make its gambling rules as restrictive as possible; players can provide “an edge” to those seeking such either knowingly or unknowingly.  And the NFL is not shy about saying so; here is part of a statement made by the NFL’s VP for Communications:

“Everybody should know that when somebody has been found to have been engaged in sports betting that there are real ramifications with real discipline, real discipline …  The integrity of the game has to be held at such a high standard that there is no tolerance for those sorts of behaviors.”

He is correct; he and other league officials are protecting an enterprise that generates around $20B in revenue annually.  They should indeed drop the hammer on anyone – – player, coach, owner, commissioner – – who jeopardizes that enterprise.

And that leads me to wonder about something that has not happened in the last several years.  All of the suspensions – – minor ones at 6 games and major ones where the suspension is indefinite and cannot be appealed for at least one season – – have come down on “not highly recognized names”.  [Aside:  Yes, I know Calvin Ridley was a high draft pick, but at the time he was suspended he was hardly acclaimed as one of the top 3 WRs in the league.]  So, riddle me this:

• Has the NFL been super-fortunate that none of the real stars of the league – – none of the players considered to be the “face-of-the-franchise” – – have run afoul of the gambling rules knowingly or unknowingly?
• Would the NFL suspend such a star player for a year or more if he were caught doing something improper here?  Pete Rozelle did that to Alex Karras and to Paul Hornung in 1963; would Roger Goodell do the same today?

Finally, I am reminded here of a response to the pop psychology book, All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten.  It seems to apply to NFL players these days:

“Only someone who dies very young learns all they really need to know in kindergarten.”

But don’t get me wrong, I love sports………

Happy July 4^th, everyone; today the United States is 247 years old.

I have said here more than once that I think Sally Jenkins is the best sports columnist practicing that art today.  Here is a link to her most recent work.  It is not just a column; it is an essay, and the Washington Post ran it in the front section – – not the sports section.  It is long compared to a sports column but do yourself a favor and take a few moments to read it.  I think it is brilliant.

Over last weekend, there were a couple of other “anniversaries” that I did not mention yesterday; so, let me point them out today.  Most known among sports fans is that last Saturday was July 1^st and that date is informally known as Bobby Bonilla Day.  The NY Mets signed Bonilla to a contract with deferred payments so every July 1^st between the years of 2011 and 2035, Bonilla gets a check from the Mets for $1.19M.  He last suited up for the Mets in 1999 and he retired from MLB after the 2001 season.  But that deferred compensation is the gift that keeps on giving.

The NY Mets are peripherally involved in another similar “anniversary” from last Saturday.  Max Scherzer is currently on the Mets’ pitching staff; but on July 1^st, Scherzer got a check for $15M from the Washington Nationals.  That “deferred compensation” comes from the deal he signed with the Nats prior to being traded to the Dodgers and then signing as a free agent with the Mets.  Scherzer is going to get 5 more such payments of $15M through 2028 and since his salary from the Mets this year is about $43M, his tax return for 2023 should be a fun read for the IRS auditor or whose desk it lands.

Sunday was July 2^nd and that was the 60^th anniversary of a MLB game that will not come close to happening anytime soon.  On the surface, the game might seem ordinary.  The SF Giants beat the Milwaukee Braves when Willie Mays hit a walk-off home run; the final score was 1-0.  Actually, this may have been the greatest pitchers’ duel of all time because:

• The game lasted 16 innings.
• Juan Marichal started for the Giants and pitched all 16 innings.
• Warren Spahn started for the Braves and pitched all 16 innings.
• Marichal threw 227 pitches that day.
• Spahn – – at age 42 no less – – threw 201 pitches that day.

[A pitching coach somewhere just felt a twinge in his elbow simply because I typed those last two sentences.]

Neither Marichal nor Spahn needed any miraculous recovery interventions after that outing.  In fact, the 42-year-old Spahn managed to win 10 more games for the Braves in that 1963 season and he led the National League in complete games that year with 22.  Spahn pitched through the 1965 season ending his 21-year career with the SF Giants.

The argument offered most as to why modern pitchers cannot throw as many pitches in a game as in “the olden days” is that modern pitchers throw harder and that puts more stress and strain on their body parts.  That makes sense but it does make me wonder if it is a bit too simplistic.  By the end of the 1963 season, Warren Spahn had been in the major leagues for 19 seasons and over that part of his career he threw a total of 4872.1 innings of major league baseball and at the end of the 1963 season he had also thrown 370 complete games.

Modern pitchers have access to more sophisticated training methods and regimens, and it is difficult to imagine that someone like Warren Spahn who came of age in the early 1940s grew up with better nutritional guidance than a baseball player in the 2020s.  So, I wonder if there might be more to the usual explanation offered up for why today’s starting pitchers are “less durable” than their counterparts in the past.

Let me stay with baseball for one more item that relates to the ongoing saga of the Oakland A’s quest to move to Las Vegas.  Last week, A’s fans in Oakland staged a “reverse boycott”; they organized a night when people would flock to the stadium to see the A’s play as a way to demonstrate that they – – the fans – – are not the problem in Oakland; it is the team ownership that is the problem.  A little more than 28,000 fans showed up which is significantly more than the 10,089 fans who show up for an average game in Oakland this year.  [Aside: That average is inflated somewhat by the 28,000 who showed up on “reverse boycott night”, but let’s not quibble.]

The A’s attendance has been bad for more than a couple of seasons; the A’s have been up and down in the standings, but they have been in the playoffs 3 times since 2017.  The stadium is a hot mess to be sure, but one can make the argument that team management has intentionally gutted the roster to make the product on the field in that hot mess of a stadium very unpalatable.  Consider this:

• When a team selects a pitcher to be the “Opening Day starter”, that usually means he is considered to be the staff stud.
• The A’s starter on Opening Day in 2023 was Kyle Muller who was acquired from the Braves in a multi-team trade.  Muller is 25 years old.
• Prior to 2023, Muller’s MLB stats are meager.  He had started 11 games for the Braves over 2 partial seasons; his record was 3-5 and his ERA was 5.14.

I am not saying that Kyle Muller is a turkey; he may turn out to be an All-Star during his career.  However, if in April of 2023, those are the credentials of the “staff stud” on a team’s roster, it is reasonable to think that the team is particularly thin on the mound.  And maybe – – just maybe – – that thinness on the mound might not be an accident…

Finally, let me close today with an observation by the baseball philosopher, Yogi Berra, that might have a bearing on the attendance stats for the A’s in Oakland:

“If the people don’t want to come out to the park, nobody’s gonna stop ‘em.”

But don’t get me wrong, I love sports ………

The Walt Disney Company – – frequently referred to as Disney Corp – – reported a gross profit of $28B last year.  For the first quarter of 2023, the reported gross profit was $7.1B.  I am no financial wizard nor am I any sort of “stock market guru”, but I feel as if I am on solid ground suggesting that Disney Corp is not on the brink of bankruptcy.  My conclusion there makes me sad about two decisions Disney Corp made last week:

1. In case you did not know this, Disney Corp owns National Geographic magazine.  Last week, National Geographic laid off “all of its remaining staff writers”.  There were only 19 left on the payroll; previous layoffs took care of previous employees; in the future, assignments will be handed out piecemeal to freelancers.
2. I am sure you know that Disney Corp. owns the ESPN family of networks.  Last week, ESPN laid off more than a dozen of its “high-profile on-air talent”.

Disney Corp is looking to cut more than 7,000 jobs as part of a $5B cost cutting endeavor.  I am sure the inhabitants of “Mahogany Row” at Disney HQs have good corporate/financial reasons for doing what they are doing.  One consequence of what they are doing is that two quality products that Disney offered to the public will be diminished.

Obviously, I am going to focus on the effect(s) on ESPN here; but let me say for the record that National Geographic has been a top-quality publication for more than my lifetime.  That said, let me deal with ESPN today.

The network has rightfully called itself “The Worldwide Leader in Sports” for about 30 years.  They probably still hold the rights to that moniker this morning, but if the cost cutting trend continues to remove the quality contributors for the network, it may be difficult in the future for leaders at ESPN and/or Disney to say those words with a straight face.

One of the “high-profile cuts” last week was NBA basketball color analyst, Jeff Van Gundy.  He has been with ESPN since 2007 and he was part of an NBA announcing troika that included Mike Breen and Mark Jackson.  Jeff Van Gundy has been the best basketball color analyst at any level of competition for about the last 10 years.  His commentaries are insightful, and they are on point; when a player or an official’s call deserves criticism, Van Gundy delivers the criticism candidly and clearly – – and then he moves on.  He adds to the telecast significantly, but he is not a “look-at-me-over-here” kind of critic.

So, what might “The Worldwide Leader” do here?  Well, obviously, that three-man booth can be shrunk to a two-man booth and cost reductions will necessarily follow.  Similarly obviously, the quality will shrink too.  There was one reported rumor that Doris Burke would replace Jeff Van Gundy on that “three-man team”.  That probably also provides cost reductions and quality reductions for ESPN.  Doris Burke is OK as a basketball color analyst – – but to paraphrase Senator Lloyd Bentson:

• Ms. Burke, I have listened to Jeff Van Gundy; I have seen his work: Ms. Burke, you’re no Jeff Van Gundy.

The incumbent Worldwide Leader also axed its morning radio program, firing all three of the hosts there and no replacements have been identified.  This should be a case study in cost/quality tradeoffs.  For years, ESPN Radio dominated morning shows with Mike and Mike in the Morning.  They broke that duo up and tried to maintain the quality pairing Trey Wingo with Mike Golic but that didn’t work so they threw together the current trio of Keyshawn Johnson, Max Kellerman and Jay Williams.  I doubt that anyone would say that quality improved from “Mike and Mike” to whatever is on the ESPN Radio airwaves this morning.

Other people let go from ESPN last week included:

• Suzy Kolber.  She had been with ESPN for 27 years and will probably be replaced on Monday Night Countdown by Mina Kimes.
• Todd McShay.  That leaves Mel Kiper, Jr. as the only NFL Draft maven meaning he will appear even more frequently?  Yikes!
• Jalen Rose.  He appeared randomly but frequently on lots of ESPN programming.
• Steve Young.  Like Jeff Van Gundy, he was an analyst who offered candid and focused criticism when it was warranted; not many others do that.

ESPN seems to be heading in a direction where the network hopes to draw viewers and attention by means of a few “mega-stars” and not a solid roster of broadcasters.  If reports are accurate, ESPN payroll includes:

• Troy Aikman at $15M per year
• Joe Buck at $15M per year
• Pat McAfee at $17M per year – – soon to be added.
• Adam Schefter at $7M per year
• Stephen A. Smith at $10M per year
• Adrian Wojnarowski at $5M per year

I am not reading minds or tea leaves when I make the statement that ESPN seems not to think a solid roster with depth is the direction it needs to take.  Here is the statement issued to employees by ESPN execs:

“Given the current environment, ESPN has determined it necessary to identify some additional cost savings in the area of public-facing commentator salaries, and that process has begun.  This exercise will include a small group of job cuts in the short term and an ongoing focus on managing costs when we negotiate individual contract renewals in the months ahead.  This is an extremely challenging process involving individuals who have had a tremendous impact on our company.  These difficult decisions, based more on overall efficiency than merit, will help us meet our financial targets and ensure future growth.”  [Emphasis added]

Finally, ESPN’s decisions were made by executives in the company and in the parent Disney Corp.  So, let me close today with this definition of “Executive” from The Official Dictionary of Sarcasm:

“Executive:  A distinction given to certain bathrooms, denoting that those allowed to use them are, unlike the rest of us, able to produce defecations that smell like a fragrant field of flowers.”

But don’t get me wrong, I love sports………