The U.S. celebrates its 233rd birthday today.
I'm enjoying it grilling and watching baseball (the White Sox-Royals game of course) -- two of the most American things a person can do.
Thanks to all those in the military who are ensuring we can enjoy another Fourth of July. God's speed for a quick return.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Will Mother Nature allow a lesser U.S. Open champion?
It takes a measure of luck to win the U.S. Open, but this weekend the luck appears only sprinkled among a few players.
The weather has dominated the tournament and today is no different. The field will play round three today and likely start round four, which is expected to be completed Monday.
I don't mind playing golf in the rain. But I do mind when it seems to rain on the same players over and over, while sparing others. Ricky Barnes, a former U.S. Amateur champion who is more or less unknown as a pro golfer, is leading the tournament at 8-under par. He has not played one shot in the rain in three days. On Saturday he torched the softened course for a 5-under 65. The telecast of his early-morning round made it appear like a serene sunny day. Meanwhile, Tiger Woods and the so-called second wave of players played their second round in what generously could be called wet conditions. It didn't rain throughout Tiger's round, but it was a misty drizzle for several holes that eventually strengthened into rain.
I know the U.S.G.A. cannot predict the weather and decides the early round pairings well before the first stroke is played. But I just wonder whether a red flag should go up when the same group of players are benefiting from a soft course, while others continue to fight the conditions. It seems as though half the field has been eliminated without taking a shot.
Barnes even benefited again yesterday after his record-setting round. He was one of the few players that did not have to start his third round Saturday afternoon, when the course had been beat up by the players and the rain. He will start this afternoon, when conditions likely will have improved.
It's hard to find fault with how the tournament has been managed. Like I said, no one can predict a nasty bout of rain. But it seems this year's U.S. Open is a lesser test than it should be given the leaderboard.
This has nothing to do with Woods and other favorites being out of contention. I like the U.S. Open because the players have to make a good swing every time to score. Par is supposed to be a good score, maybe the winning score. Players shouldn't be able to attack every pin placement.
Seeing guys stick six irons, and in some cases fairway woods, 2-inches from every hole is not my idea of a major championship. That is reserved for the weekly PGA Tour events.
The weather has dominated the tournament and today is no different. The field will play round three today and likely start round four, which is expected to be completed Monday.
I don't mind playing golf in the rain. But I do mind when it seems to rain on the same players over and over, while sparing others. Ricky Barnes, a former U.S. Amateur champion who is more or less unknown as a pro golfer, is leading the tournament at 8-under par. He has not played one shot in the rain in three days. On Saturday he torched the softened course for a 5-under 65. The telecast of his early-morning round made it appear like a serene sunny day. Meanwhile, Tiger Woods and the so-called second wave of players played their second round in what generously could be called wet conditions. It didn't rain throughout Tiger's round, but it was a misty drizzle for several holes that eventually strengthened into rain.
I know the U.S.G.A. cannot predict the weather and decides the early round pairings well before the first stroke is played. But I just wonder whether a red flag should go up when the same group of players are benefiting from a soft course, while others continue to fight the conditions. It seems as though half the field has been eliminated without taking a shot.
Barnes even benefited again yesterday after his record-setting round. He was one of the few players that did not have to start his third round Saturday afternoon, when the course had been beat up by the players and the rain. He will start this afternoon, when conditions likely will have improved.
It's hard to find fault with how the tournament has been managed. Like I said, no one can predict a nasty bout of rain. But it seems this year's U.S. Open is a lesser test than it should be given the leaderboard.
This has nothing to do with Woods and other favorites being out of contention. I like the U.S. Open because the players have to make a good swing every time to score. Par is supposed to be a good score, maybe the winning score. Players shouldn't be able to attack every pin placement.
Seeing guys stick six irons, and in some cases fairway woods, 2-inches from every hole is not my idea of a major championship. That is reserved for the weekly PGA Tour events.
Saturday, June 13, 2009
The Big Ten-Pac 10 Challenge
I'm about to start preparing for the IU football season, when I come across this article on ESPN.com.
It was making the argument for conference challenges in college football, similar to the events staged in college basketball every year between the Big Ten and ACC. They are very successful and generate some buzz in what used to be a mostly boring pre-conference season.
ESPN writer Mark Schlabach proposed a Big Ten-Pac 10 football challenge, where 10 games would be staged. He designated Purdue as the Big Ten's odd team out, but scheduled the rest of the teams to play a fictitious Rose Bowl game of sorts.
Indiana was given USC in the inaugural series. This game is as unlikely as it is stupid. If the challenge were agreed to, USC would be the marquee team and demand a prime-time television audience. Also, coach Pete Carroll would want the game to improve his BCS standing, not hurt it. A likely blow-out of Indiana would not provide TV star power or BCS points.
If the series were established, I think it would have a make-up similar to its basketball counterpart. Teams with large followings would play each other, i.e. Indiana v. Duke and North Carolina v. Michigan State. The lesser teams in each conference still participate, but play teams on their level. Example: Northwestern v. Miami.
In a football challenge, USC most likely would play a Big Ten power, like Penn State or Ohio State, in the first year or two to interest the fans in the series. I would love to see the Hoosiers take on a team like Stanford. The game would generate some interest if played in Bloomington. Cardinal coach Jim Harbaugh led the Indianapolis Colts to the AFC Championship game back in the mid-90s.
The rest of my Big Ten-Pac 10 challenge:
It was making the argument for conference challenges in college football, similar to the events staged in college basketball every year between the Big Ten and ACC. They are very successful and generate some buzz in what used to be a mostly boring pre-conference season.
ESPN writer Mark Schlabach proposed a Big Ten-Pac 10 football challenge, where 10 games would be staged. He designated Purdue as the Big Ten's odd team out, but scheduled the rest of the teams to play a fictitious Rose Bowl game of sorts.
Indiana was given USC in the inaugural series. This game is as unlikely as it is stupid. If the challenge were agreed to, USC would be the marquee team and demand a prime-time television audience. Also, coach Pete Carroll would want the game to improve his BCS standing, not hurt it. A likely blow-out of Indiana would not provide TV star power or BCS points.
If the series were established, I think it would have a make-up similar to its basketball counterpart. Teams with large followings would play each other, i.e. Indiana v. Duke and North Carolina v. Michigan State. The lesser teams in each conference still participate, but play teams on their level. Example: Northwestern v. Miami.
In a football challenge, USC most likely would play a Big Ten power, like Penn State or Ohio State, in the first year or two to interest the fans in the series. I would love to see the Hoosiers take on a team like Stanford. The game would generate some interest if played in Bloomington. Cardinal coach Jim Harbaugh led the Indianapolis Colts to the AFC Championship game back in the mid-90s.
The rest of my Big Ten-Pac 10 challenge:
- Oregon State-Northwestern -- There is a little history between these two. Northwestern beat Oregon State in 1964, but the Beavers still went to the Rose Bowl. This would be a good game against two conference contenders.
- Michigan-Arizona -- Two teams on the rise and RichRod gets a good early benchmark for his team's development. It also could score some big points for the winner in the BCS polls, since both should be conference title contenders.
- Wisconsin-Washington -- I don't know why this match-up is appealing. Wisconsin likes playing out west (they have scheduled Hawaii this season). This would save them a few thousand miles on a plane.
- Penn State-USC-- This is the game everyone will want to see. Two big-time programs with big-time coaches. Can you imagine the white-out at Beaver Stadium?
- Michigan State-California -- This game is perfect for these two teams. Both have a history of not living up to expectations. At least this time someone has to come through in a big game.
- Ohio State-Oregon -- The Buckeyes get more practice defending against the spread offense, which will come in handy if they get another BCS berth. This game also could be an early top 10 match-up. Autzen Stadium will be rocking.
- Minnesota-Washington State -- Like I indicated above, some of the games will be boring, and this one should be among them. Minnesota has shown improvement in recent years, but the Cougars have been just awful lately. The Big Ten can use the game to get some needed points for the series title.
- Iowa-UCLA -- This is a coaches match-up, Rick Neuheisel versus Kirt Ferentz. Both teams will be ready to play, even if they don't have national championship talent. It would be a great game whether played in L.A. or Iowa City.
- Illinois-Washington -- The Huskies haven't made much noise in the last few seasons, but if the game were played in Illinois, you know the Illini fans would be eager.
Overall, I like this idea. If gets some lesser-known teams, like Indiana, on national TV, which would help in recruiting. And it creates some quality non-conference games each year for the BCS contenders.
Just think of the scene in Bloomington if Indiana drew a ranked team. All the sudden, those pre-conference games designed to generate easy wins and cement a bowl bid don't seem to matter. I think IU fans would buy tickets to see a west coast team that was not part of the usual schedule.
And what if the Hoosiers pulled the upset? Well let's not get ahead of ourselves.
Sunday, June 7, 2009
Turn off the hype machine please
Two months into the baseball season, some people already are developing unrealistic expectations.
While running errands Saturday, I heard an ESPN radio announcer talking about how wonderful it would be if the New York Yankees and L.A. Dodgers played in the World Series this year. The two teams (as of Saturday morning) had the best records in each league (The Yankees later that day slipped a half-game behind the Red Sox in the AL East).
Part of the justification for such a match-up is Major League Baseball's two largest markets, as well two of its most popular teams, would meet in the league's premier event. The two teams have played each other 10 times in the fall classic, most recently in 1981.
The game only suffers with the hyping of these so-called "dream match-ups." Because while it draws lots of fans to the two teams as the regular and post seasons play out, it sends most of them away if, and most likely when, that match-up doesn't materialize. A lot can happen with 97 games remaining. No team has reached the meat of the pennant race yet.
How quickly we fail to learn from mistakes. Just look at the NBA Finals to see what happens when the hype machine runs in overdrive. As the Cleveland Cavaliers cruised through the early rounds of the NBA Eastern Conference playoffs and the L.A. Lakers advanced in the Western Conference, we began hearing with increasing frequency how exciting the NBA Finals will be when the Lakers' Kobe Bryant takes on the Cavs' LeBron James.
Unfortunately, the Orlando Magic had different plans. They spanked the Cavs in the Eastern Conference Finals, setting up a more forgettable NBA championship series. The Lakers hammered the Magic by 25 points in Game 1 and few signs that wouldn't continue in Game 2 today.
I don't think MLB benefits by pushing a Yankees-Dodgers World Series two months into the season. The sports media always is looking for season-defining themes, but in this case, they should be looking at the races (14 teams are within 3 1/2 games of first place and two more are within 4 1/2 games), not hoping for an end result.
What baseball really needs is a competitive World Series. While some favorite teams have returned to the World Series or won after long droughts, three of the last five have been sweeps and the other two were 4-games-to-1 victories. The last series to reach a seventh game was the Anaheim Angels' 2002 win over the San Fransisco Giants.
I suppose it is a natural baseball cycle that sometimes the World Series is the season after-thought instead of its climax. It has happened in other sports -- Remember the NFC dominance over the AFC in the Super Bowl from the mid-80s through the mid- to late 90s? -- and there likely is no cure, except to let the cycle play out.
Pushing faces or teams to artificially inflate interest is not a good bet. The odds are too high for a devastating loss.
While running errands Saturday, I heard an ESPN radio announcer talking about how wonderful it would be if the New York Yankees and L.A. Dodgers played in the World Series this year. The two teams (as of Saturday morning) had the best records in each league (The Yankees later that day slipped a half-game behind the Red Sox in the AL East).
Part of the justification for such a match-up is Major League Baseball's two largest markets, as well two of its most popular teams, would meet in the league's premier event. The two teams have played each other 10 times in the fall classic, most recently in 1981.
The game only suffers with the hyping of these so-called "dream match-ups." Because while it draws lots of fans to the two teams as the regular and post seasons play out, it sends most of them away if, and most likely when, that match-up doesn't materialize. A lot can happen with 97 games remaining. No team has reached the meat of the pennant race yet.
How quickly we fail to learn from mistakes. Just look at the NBA Finals to see what happens when the hype machine runs in overdrive. As the Cleveland Cavaliers cruised through the early rounds of the NBA Eastern Conference playoffs and the L.A. Lakers advanced in the Western Conference, we began hearing with increasing frequency how exciting the NBA Finals will be when the Lakers' Kobe Bryant takes on the Cavs' LeBron James.
Unfortunately, the Orlando Magic had different plans. They spanked the Cavs in the Eastern Conference Finals, setting up a more forgettable NBA championship series. The Lakers hammered the Magic by 25 points in Game 1 and few signs that wouldn't continue in Game 2 today.
I don't think MLB benefits by pushing a Yankees-Dodgers World Series two months into the season. The sports media always is looking for season-defining themes, but in this case, they should be looking at the races (14 teams are within 3 1/2 games of first place and two more are within 4 1/2 games), not hoping for an end result.
What baseball really needs is a competitive World Series. While some favorite teams have returned to the World Series or won after long droughts, three of the last five have been sweeps and the other two were 4-games-to-1 victories. The last series to reach a seventh game was the Anaheim Angels' 2002 win over the San Fransisco Giants.
I suppose it is a natural baseball cycle that sometimes the World Series is the season after-thought instead of its climax. It has happened in other sports -- Remember the NFC dominance over the AFC in the Super Bowl from the mid-80s through the mid- to late 90s? -- and there likely is no cure, except to let the cycle play out.
Pushing faces or teams to artificially inflate interest is not a good bet. The odds are too high for a devastating loss.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
A world competition similar to the WBC
My comments promoting the World Baseball Classic are well-known on this blog. That is why I was intrigued by this story in the New York Times about the upcoming Twenty20 World Cup, the world championship of a version of cricket.
Full disclosure: I know almost nothing about cricket, except that it is a cousin of baseball. But I have been mildly curious about it since my wife returned from India last year. Among her presents for me was a Mumbai Indians polo shirt. The Indians are one of the teams in the Indian Premier League, a professional cricket league that plays the Twenty20 version of the game.
It is controversial, because it does not last days and days like traditional cricket. Games last about three hours and fit better on television. Traditionalists, of course, don't like it.
Which brings me to the Twenty20 World Cup. The NYT story had a tone that reminded me a lot of attitude surrounding the WBC. Baseball purists complained about the mandatory pitch-counts, the mercy rule and other modifications made so the tournament could be staged in March. Yet Major League Baseball and others looking to grow the national pastime pushed for the world tournament to gain more exposure, even though it wasn't "pure" baseball.
I wonder if the same "I'm not sure this is a good idea" attitude surrounds these matches. The story indicated while Twenty20 cricket is growing in popularity, test nations, those that play the highest level of cricket, are not playing lots of these new streamlined matches. The story suggested that could affect the play in the World Cup.
It sounds somewhat like concerns around the U.S. team heading into the WBC. Not only did we not have the best players available to us, but we also were just beginning spring training. Our guys were not in game-playing shape and our quality of play was in serious question. Japan and Cuba on the other hand had more prepared players physically.
Ultimately, the WBC was a success, even though the U.S. did not win it. Just advancing to the final four was an achievement. And even though Japan has won both WBC events, I think the game grows when someone other than the U.S. is the best at our favorite sports. Americans like being the best and some competition for the crown makes us better.
The Twenty20 World Cup has the potential to do the same for cricket. Three of the participants are not test nations, which sounds to me like they could be potential expansion markets.
Would a Netherlands upset of India be as big a cricket upset as the Netherlands upsetting the Dominican Republic was a baseball upset? I don't know. But it certainly would draw some attention outside traditional cricket markets.
Full disclosure: I know almost nothing about cricket, except that it is a cousin of baseball. But I have been mildly curious about it since my wife returned from India last year. Among her presents for me was a Mumbai Indians polo shirt. The Indians are one of the teams in the Indian Premier League, a professional cricket league that plays the Twenty20 version of the game.
It is controversial, because it does not last days and days like traditional cricket. Games last about three hours and fit better on television. Traditionalists, of course, don't like it.
Which brings me to the Twenty20 World Cup. The NYT story had a tone that reminded me a lot of attitude surrounding the WBC. Baseball purists complained about the mandatory pitch-counts, the mercy rule and other modifications made so the tournament could be staged in March. Yet Major League Baseball and others looking to grow the national pastime pushed for the world tournament to gain more exposure, even though it wasn't "pure" baseball.
I wonder if the same "I'm not sure this is a good idea" attitude surrounds these matches. The story indicated while Twenty20 cricket is growing in popularity, test nations, those that play the highest level of cricket, are not playing lots of these new streamlined matches. The story suggested that could affect the play in the World Cup.
It sounds somewhat like concerns around the U.S. team heading into the WBC. Not only did we not have the best players available to us, but we also were just beginning spring training. Our guys were not in game-playing shape and our quality of play was in serious question. Japan and Cuba on the other hand had more prepared players physically.
Ultimately, the WBC was a success, even though the U.S. did not win it. Just advancing to the final four was an achievement. And even though Japan has won both WBC events, I think the game grows when someone other than the U.S. is the best at our favorite sports. Americans like being the best and some competition for the crown makes us better.
The Twenty20 World Cup has the potential to do the same for cricket. Three of the participants are not test nations, which sounds to me like they could be potential expansion markets.
Would a Netherlands upset of India be as big a cricket upset as the Netherlands upsetting the Dominican Republic was a baseball upset? I don't know. But it certainly would draw some attention outside traditional cricket markets.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Hoosiers in the NCAA baseball tournament
IU will find out tomorrow where they will play in the NCAA baseball tournament.
The selection show is scheduled for 12:30 p.m. Monday on ESPN. The Hoosiers earned their first berth in the tourney since 1996 with a 13-2 win over Minnesota on Saturday that gave them the Big Ten tournament title.
The 16 regional sites will be announced Monday along with the field. The ultimate goal is to advance through the regional and super regional to the College World Series in Omaha, Neb.
The selection show is scheduled for 12:30 p.m. Monday on ESPN. The Hoosiers earned their first berth in the tourney since 1996 with a 13-2 win over Minnesota on Saturday that gave them the Big Ten tournament title.
The 16 regional sites will be announced Monday along with the field. The ultimate goal is to advance through the regional and super regional to the College World Series in Omaha, Neb.
Saturday, May 23, 2009
Big Ten Champs!
If you didn't know about the IU baseball team before this weekend, you should be well aware of them now.
The Hoosiers thumped Minnesota 13-2 Saturday to win the Big Ten championship and an automatic bid to the NCAA tournament. As the No. 3 seed, the Hoosiers had to win four games in four days, beating No. 1 seed Ohio State and No. 2 seed Minnesota twice after knocking off No. 6 seed Purdue.
IU outscored opponents 47-9 over the four games. It was a phenomenal offensive explosion. They scored at least 9, 12, 13, and 13 runs over the four-game stretch, respectively. Pitching also was impressive, allowing 1, 3, 3, and 3 runs respectively.
The NCAA tournament begins May 29. If the offensive explosion continues, you have to think IU could scare a lot of teams. And with two outstanding pitchers in Eric Arnett and Matt Bashore it is not unrealistic to expect a good showing.
The win is the second ever Big Ten title for IU, the other coming in 1996. As an IU fan, I have to say this win is satisfying, given all our suffering during the football and basketball seasons. It may not be the most popular sport on campus, but hopefully, IU baseball is gaining some fans tonight.
The Hoosiers thumped Minnesota 13-2 Saturday to win the Big Ten championship and an automatic bid to the NCAA tournament. As the No. 3 seed, the Hoosiers had to win four games in four days, beating No. 1 seed Ohio State and No. 2 seed Minnesota twice after knocking off No. 6 seed Purdue.
IU outscored opponents 47-9 over the four games. It was a phenomenal offensive explosion. They scored at least 9, 12, 13, and 13 runs over the four-game stretch, respectively. Pitching also was impressive, allowing 1, 3, 3, and 3 runs respectively.
The NCAA tournament begins May 29. If the offensive explosion continues, you have to think IU could scare a lot of teams. And with two outstanding pitchers in Eric Arnett and Matt Bashore it is not unrealistic to expect a good showing.
The win is the second ever Big Ten title for IU, the other coming in 1996. As an IU fan, I have to say this win is satisfying, given all our suffering during the football and basketball seasons. It may not be the most popular sport on campus, but hopefully, IU baseball is gaining some fans tonight.
Sunday, May 17, 2009
The best-kept secret on the Bloomington campus
A sport other than football or basketball is yearning for attention from IU fans.
The IU baseball team is the third seed in the Big Ten tournament beginning Wednesday in Columbus, Ohio. While the overall record was not stellar, 28-25, the conference record was an impressive 16-7. The Hoosiers had won six in a row before losing the final game of the year yesterday to Michigan State.
The team batted .322 as a team this year, while opponents batted .289. Junior Pitcher Eric Arnett has been impressive, compiling an 11-1 record and 2.89 ERA in 12 appearances. He has 93 strike-outs in 94 innings pitched.
In Big Ten play, the entire IU pitching staff has been impressive. Arnett has a 7-0 record and 2.89 ERA. Pitcher Matt Bashore is 5-1 with a 2.36 ERA in conference play, despite an overall record of 6-4 and a 3.87 ERA. Four IU pitchers have ERAs under 4 in Big Ten games.
The Hoosiers will open the Big Ten tournament against Purdue, the sixth seed in the double-elimination event. A win means a game against No. 2-seed Minnesota. All the games should be on Big Ten Network.
Last year, the team made a Cinderella run to the Big Ten semi-finals before losing to Purdue.
This program is on the rise and deserves a little more attention from the fans. IU baseball suffers from a season that begins in the winter, overlaps with basketball and ends after the students depart for summer vacation. The team plays in relative obscurity in a facility across the street from McNutt Quad.
A Big Ten title and NCAA tournament berth would be impressive for a team that has to leave town the first two months of the season to play games. Two of the Hoosiers' first 18 games were in Bloomington.
Here is a blog with game-by-game coverage of IU baseball.
The IU baseball team is the third seed in the Big Ten tournament beginning Wednesday in Columbus, Ohio. While the overall record was not stellar, 28-25, the conference record was an impressive 16-7. The Hoosiers had won six in a row before losing the final game of the year yesterday to Michigan State.
The team batted .322 as a team this year, while opponents batted .289. Junior Pitcher Eric Arnett has been impressive, compiling an 11-1 record and 2.89 ERA in 12 appearances. He has 93 strike-outs in 94 innings pitched.
In Big Ten play, the entire IU pitching staff has been impressive. Arnett has a 7-0 record and 2.89 ERA. Pitcher Matt Bashore is 5-1 with a 2.36 ERA in conference play, despite an overall record of 6-4 and a 3.87 ERA. Four IU pitchers have ERAs under 4 in Big Ten games.
The Hoosiers will open the Big Ten tournament against Purdue, the sixth seed in the double-elimination event. A win means a game against No. 2-seed Minnesota. All the games should be on Big Ten Network.
Last year, the team made a Cinderella run to the Big Ten semi-finals before losing to Purdue.
This program is on the rise and deserves a little more attention from the fans. IU baseball suffers from a season that begins in the winter, overlaps with basketball and ends after the students depart for summer vacation. The team plays in relative obscurity in a facility across the street from McNutt Quad.
A Big Ten title and NCAA tournament berth would be impressive for a team that has to leave town the first two months of the season to play games. Two of the Hoosiers' first 18 games were in Bloomington.
Here is a blog with game-by-game coverage of IU baseball.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Elite football AND basketball?
The reaction to Kellen Lewis' dismissal from the Hoosier football team was not surprising. Most of my friends said they weren't expecting a good season with Lewis on the team. And to be honest I wasn't at all optimistic either.
But it led me to ask something:
Why can't Indiana University field top-tier football AND basketball teams?
It has happened. Florida held the Division I football and men's basketball titles in 2007. Ohio State of the Big Ten has built a contender in men's basketball to go along with the resurrected football program.
The IU football program doesn't have a stellar reputation. But it can be improved with a staff that is enthusiastic and good at recruiting. It also will require a little luck, like a win over a Top 10 team, as well as consistent improvement. I'm not talking about a Rose Bowl berth every year, but I am talking about hovering around .500 record or better every year.
A team that can win seven games every year at some point is going to get that big win (Ole Miss over Florida last year, or Illinois over Ohio State in 2007) and vaults them to national prominence.
Indiana University is capable of fielding that kind of team. It has the resources to do it, and I'm not talking about a new stadium. Michigan produced a quality football team for decades playing in the same bowl. I'm talking about know-how in the athletic department.
IU doesn't even have to give up its academic standards to produce a winner. Northwestern and USC proved that. That road has already been paved. The real question is why hasn't IU taken it over the last 10 years?
Do I expect IU to consistently produce a BCS and Final Four contender? No. But we can have winning teams. We can sell out Memorial Stadium. We can play in more than one bowl game a decade.
Am I making an unreasonable request?
But it led me to ask something:
Why can't Indiana University field top-tier football AND basketball teams?
It has happened. Florida held the Division I football and men's basketball titles in 2007. Ohio State of the Big Ten has built a contender in men's basketball to go along with the resurrected football program.
The IU football program doesn't have a stellar reputation. But it can be improved with a staff that is enthusiastic and good at recruiting. It also will require a little luck, like a win over a Top 10 team, as well as consistent improvement. I'm not talking about a Rose Bowl berth every year, but I am talking about hovering around .500 record or better every year.
A team that can win seven games every year at some point is going to get that big win (Ole Miss over Florida last year, or Illinois over Ohio State in 2007) and vaults them to national prominence.
Indiana University is capable of fielding that kind of team. It has the resources to do it, and I'm not talking about a new stadium. Michigan produced a quality football team for decades playing in the same bowl. I'm talking about know-how in the athletic department.
IU doesn't even have to give up its academic standards to produce a winner. Northwestern and USC proved that. That road has already been paved. The real question is why hasn't IU taken it over the last 10 years?
Do I expect IU to consistently produce a BCS and Final Four contender? No. But we can have winning teams. We can sell out Memorial Stadium. We can play in more than one bowl game a decade.
Am I making an unreasonable request?
No Kellen Lewis TD catches this year
IU announced yesterday that former QB Kellen Lewis has been kicked off the football team.
Lewis had switched to wide receiver for the upcoming season, allowing Ben Chappell to take over at QB.
This obviously diminishes the Hoosiers' talent level, but another dismal season appeared imminent anyway.
Lewis had switched to wide receiver for the upcoming season, allowing Ben Chappell to take over at QB.
This obviously diminishes the Hoosiers' talent level, but another dismal season appeared imminent anyway.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Hoosiers did not fair well on draft day
After a year where two Hoosiers were drafted in the second round of the NFL draft, IU had no players drafted this year.
Five players were on the board, including wide receiver Andrew Means, running back Marcus Thigpen and kicker Austin Starr.
This doesn't mean none of them will end up in the NFL, but it certainly is a lot tougher to make a team as an undrafted free agent.
By comparison, Ohio State had seven players drafted, Penn State had five. Northwestern and Minnesota also were shut out, but West Texas A&M had one player drafted: quarterback Keith Null, who was taken by the Rams in the sixth round. Null threw for nearly 5,100 yards and 48 touchdowns last season, averaging 392 yards per game.
What does this mean for the IU program? Probably not much. As was noted, some much better Big Ten programs had no players drafted. I have to think it doesn't help much for recruiting. Seeing that IU logo appear during the pre-draft process and during the ESPN draft telecast was exciting. I remember how excited I was because IU had a Pro Day in last year.
College football teams can win a lot of games without NFL-calibre talent. But I don't think it's a coincidence that the year IU goes 7-5 -- its first winning season in recent memory -- is the year a defensive back and wide receiver are taken high in the draft.
Are we going to continue seeing no cream and crimson draft picks?
Five players were on the board, including wide receiver Andrew Means, running back Marcus Thigpen and kicker Austin Starr.
This doesn't mean none of them will end up in the NFL, but it certainly is a lot tougher to make a team as an undrafted free agent.
By comparison, Ohio State had seven players drafted, Penn State had five. Northwestern and Minnesota also were shut out, but West Texas A&M had one player drafted: quarterback Keith Null, who was taken by the Rams in the sixth round. Null threw for nearly 5,100 yards and 48 touchdowns last season, averaging 392 yards per game.
What does this mean for the IU program? Probably not much. As was noted, some much better Big Ten programs had no players drafted. I have to think it doesn't help much for recruiting. Seeing that IU logo appear during the pre-draft process and during the ESPN draft telecast was exciting. I remember how excited I was because IU had a Pro Day in last year.
College football teams can win a lot of games without NFL-calibre talent. But I don't think it's a coincidence that the year IU goes 7-5 -- its first winning season in recent memory -- is the year a defensive back and wide receiver are taken high in the draft.
Are we going to continue seeing no cream and crimson draft picks?
Sunday, April 12, 2009
I hope Bill Lynch knows what he's doing
The IU football team completed its second spring scrimmage yesterday. Once again Ben Chappell was at quarterback and Kellen Lewis played wide receiver.
The coaches say Chappell has just as good a grasp of the spread offense as Lewis. Chappell threw for 111 yards and an interception yesterday, completing eight of 10 passes. But Lewis is the former second-team all Big Ten QB, who now is learning a new position.
In 2001, Antwaan Randle El switched from QB to receiver to open the season, the best chance for a bowl appearance in several years. Randle El also was a Heisman Trophy contender. The Hoosiers opened with a 35-14 thrashing by North Carolina State. Randle El had to move back to QB and the Hoosiers struggled through another losing season.
Neither Lewis nor Chappell played well last year, combining for 10 TDs and 11 interceptions passing in an injury-filled season. I suspect Lynch's strategy is to gain some more consistency at QB. My guess is Chappell will stand in the pocket a little longer and make more throws than Lewis, who tended to scramble when the rush closed in. That usually led to a good result -- Lewis was second on the team in rushing yards last year.
The question I ask is: If Lewis is your best all-around player, do you want to take the ball out of his hands? The '01 Hoosiers were much better with Randle El touching the ball on every play, which is why after that game against N.C. State he did not play receiver consistently again until after his college career was over.
Is Lewis that type of player? We will find out in August.
The coaches say Chappell has just as good a grasp of the spread offense as Lewis. Chappell threw for 111 yards and an interception yesterday, completing eight of 10 passes. But Lewis is the former second-team all Big Ten QB, who now is learning a new position.
In 2001, Antwaan Randle El switched from QB to receiver to open the season, the best chance for a bowl appearance in several years. Randle El also was a Heisman Trophy contender. The Hoosiers opened with a 35-14 thrashing by North Carolina State. Randle El had to move back to QB and the Hoosiers struggled through another losing season.
Neither Lewis nor Chappell played well last year, combining for 10 TDs and 11 interceptions passing in an injury-filled season. I suspect Lynch's strategy is to gain some more consistency at QB. My guess is Chappell will stand in the pocket a little longer and make more throws than Lewis, who tended to scramble when the rush closed in. That usually led to a good result -- Lewis was second on the team in rushing yards last year.
The question I ask is: If Lewis is your best all-around player, do you want to take the ball out of his hands? The '01 Hoosiers were much better with Randle El touching the ball on every play, which is why after that game against N.C. State he did not play receiver consistently again until after his college career was over.
Is Lewis that type of player? We will find out in August.
Friday, April 3, 2009
Bears got a long-term solution, not a quick fix
I want the Bears to play better. I want them to score more points. But simply adding Quarterback Jay Cutler will not achieve those goals. He needs help. He needs better wide receivers. He needs better offensive linemen. He may even need an offensive system that suits him.
All things being equal, Cutler will not make the Bears significantly better than they were with Kyle Orton. Last season, running back Matt Forte led the Bears in catches with 63. Behind him was Tight End Greg Olsen with 54. The Broncos' leading pass catchers were wide receivers Brandon Marshall and Eddie Royal with 104 and 91, respectively.
The stat indicates a difference in philosophy. The Bears are willing to grind a team down with a strong running game and controlled passing and depend on their defense to win games. The Broncos played to outscore an opponent, which requires throwing the ball a lot and down field.
The Bears are not going to line Forte up as a wide receiver all that often. And Olsen isn't fast enough to beat a corner down field. Both indicate an expectation for short passes and long drives. That's not playing to Cutler's strength, his talent or his strong arm.
I think Orton understood his role and how to flourish in it. He knew he couldn't throw the ball 70 yards to hit Devin Hester on a fly pattern. But he was smart enough to know he could make the 15- and 20-yard over the middle. We don't know if Cutler will succeed in that role.
The Bears don't have the personnel to change their offense to suit Cutler's strengths. Now maybe in the future (but not until at least 2011) the Bears will have a high draft pick to get a receiver that allows for a vertical passing game.
The Cutler trade has made rebuilding a long-term project, not a quick fix. The problem is so many Bears fans are expecting results next season. I don't think they're coming this fall.
All things being equal, Cutler will not make the Bears significantly better than they were with Kyle Orton. Last season, running back Matt Forte led the Bears in catches with 63. Behind him was Tight End Greg Olsen with 54. The Broncos' leading pass catchers were wide receivers Brandon Marshall and Eddie Royal with 104 and 91, respectively.
The stat indicates a difference in philosophy. The Bears are willing to grind a team down with a strong running game and controlled passing and depend on their defense to win games. The Broncos played to outscore an opponent, which requires throwing the ball a lot and down field.
The Bears are not going to line Forte up as a wide receiver all that often. And Olsen isn't fast enough to beat a corner down field. Both indicate an expectation for short passes and long drives. That's not playing to Cutler's strength, his talent or his strong arm.
I think Orton understood his role and how to flourish in it. He knew he couldn't throw the ball 70 yards to hit Devin Hester on a fly pattern. But he was smart enough to know he could make the 15- and 20-yard over the middle. We don't know if Cutler will succeed in that role.
The Bears don't have the personnel to change their offense to suit Cutler's strengths. Now maybe in the future (but not until at least 2011) the Bears will have a high draft pick to get a receiver that allows for a vertical passing game.
The Cutler trade has made rebuilding a long-term project, not a quick fix. The problem is so many Bears fans are expecting results next season. I don't think they're coming this fall.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Cutler to Bears not the answer
Bears fans are jumping for joy across the world. Next year, quarterback Jay Cutler will be running the offense. Clearly the Bears are expecting him to be the answer to an offense that has been downright awful at times over the past few years.
Unfortunately, my enthusiasm is tempered. I don't like that the Bears gave away two No. 1 picks (this year's and 2010), as well as this year's third round pick. Oh, and they also gave the Denver Broncos Kyle Orton.
The Bears may have a good quarterback, but they have few people for him to catch passes. Devin Hester was their leading receiver with 51 catches and three touchdowns. Is that an indictment of Orton? Maybe. But it also shows the Bears philosophy for its quarterback. It is to manage the game, not win it. Cutler played in an offense where the quarterback must win the game.
I think Cutler is going to be surprised at how many upgrades the Bears offense needs. Most important is offensive line. The Bears gave up 29 sacks last year, the Broncos 12. Hopefully Orlando Pace will help, if he is healthy.
The NFC North is not a free-wheeling pass-happy division like the AFC West. In November and December in the Midwest, a team has to run the ball when the snow is falling and wind is blowing.
Cutler had big stats, but it was because the Broncos didn't run the ball. He threw for 1,600 more yards than Orton last year, but he also had 150 more pass attempts. The Bears ran the ball about 50 more times than the Broncos last season.
The two players' passer ratings were not that different. Cutler threw for six more interceptions than Orton, including more picks than TDs in his last four games, when the Broncos were in the playoff hunt. Orton won three of his last four games, when the Bears were chasing a playoff spot.
My problem isn't Cutler, it's that the Bears will not have much a draft to build the rest of the team. This year's first round pick could have been used for an offensive lineman, a wide receiver or defensive back. And next year's first round pick could have been used to draft Tim Tebow, Colt McCoy, or Sam Bradford, the likely three best QBs coming out of college next year.
This was a good trade for the Bears. I just don't think it's immediately going to turn the Bears into a playoff contender. There are just too many other problems I would have liked to see the team address. Orton was not the answer either, but he also was not the only question.
Unfortunately, my enthusiasm is tempered. I don't like that the Bears gave away two No. 1 picks (this year's and 2010), as well as this year's third round pick. Oh, and they also gave the Denver Broncos Kyle Orton.
The Bears may have a good quarterback, but they have few people for him to catch passes. Devin Hester was their leading receiver with 51 catches and three touchdowns. Is that an indictment of Orton? Maybe. But it also shows the Bears philosophy for its quarterback. It is to manage the game, not win it. Cutler played in an offense where the quarterback must win the game.
I think Cutler is going to be surprised at how many upgrades the Bears offense needs. Most important is offensive line. The Bears gave up 29 sacks last year, the Broncos 12. Hopefully Orlando Pace will help, if he is healthy.
The NFC North is not a free-wheeling pass-happy division like the AFC West. In November and December in the Midwest, a team has to run the ball when the snow is falling and wind is blowing.
Cutler had big stats, but it was because the Broncos didn't run the ball. He threw for 1,600 more yards than Orton last year, but he also had 150 more pass attempts. The Bears ran the ball about 50 more times than the Broncos last season.
The two players' passer ratings were not that different. Cutler threw for six more interceptions than Orton, including more picks than TDs in his last four games, when the Broncos were in the playoff hunt. Orton won three of his last four games, when the Bears were chasing a playoff spot.
My problem isn't Cutler, it's that the Bears will not have much a draft to build the rest of the team. This year's first round pick could have been used for an offensive lineman, a wide receiver or defensive back. And next year's first round pick could have been used to draft Tim Tebow, Colt McCoy, or Sam Bradford, the likely three best QBs coming out of college next year.
This was a good trade for the Bears. I just don't think it's immediately going to turn the Bears into a playoff contender. There are just too many other problems I would have liked to see the team address. Orton was not the answer either, but he also was not the only question.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Reality Check
It's easy to forget how lucky we are to live in the United States.
I was reminded once again today after I read this story in the New York Times.
Cricket officials in India are moving the Indian Premier League games out of the country because of security problems. With national elections upcoming, the government said it cannot spare military forces to secure cricket matches. And after the terrorist attacks in Mumbai in November, the country is on high-alert.
Cricket in India is akin to football in the U.S. It is the national obsession. My wife saw it first hand when she visited India about a year ago. The season was about to start and the media hoard was in full swing. It was a national controversy when the teams brought cheerleaders to the pitch that did not adequately cover themselves. (They were dressed similar to American cheerleaders.)
Americans worry about security at sporting events. I have endured the pat-down to enter football games at Solider Field and Michigan Stadium. But can you imagine if President Bush last fall said all NFL games would be moved to Canada the first week of November because we needed to ensure voters were secure during the presidential election?
We all remember how important baseball and football became after the Sept. 11 attacks on New York. City residents under so much pressure from the mayhem and clean-up were able to cheer for the Mets, Yankees, Jets or Giants and forget about the chaos for a few hours.
Moving the cricket matches off shore is not fair to the millions of cricket fans in India. The actions, or potential actions, of a few, cause the many to suffer.
It gave me a moment of pause. Times may not be ideal now, but we're still pretty lucky here.
I was reminded once again today after I read this story in the New York Times.
Cricket officials in India are moving the Indian Premier League games out of the country because of security problems. With national elections upcoming, the government said it cannot spare military forces to secure cricket matches. And after the terrorist attacks in Mumbai in November, the country is on high-alert.
Cricket in India is akin to football in the U.S. It is the national obsession. My wife saw it first hand when she visited India about a year ago. The season was about to start and the media hoard was in full swing. It was a national controversy when the teams brought cheerleaders to the pitch that did not adequately cover themselves. (They were dressed similar to American cheerleaders.)
Americans worry about security at sporting events. I have endured the pat-down to enter football games at Solider Field and Michigan Stadium. But can you imagine if President Bush last fall said all NFL games would be moved to Canada the first week of November because we needed to ensure voters were secure during the presidential election?
We all remember how important baseball and football became after the Sept. 11 attacks on New York. City residents under so much pressure from the mayhem and clean-up were able to cheer for the Mets, Yankees, Jets or Giants and forget about the chaos for a few hours.
Moving the cricket matches off shore is not fair to the millions of cricket fans in India. The actions, or potential actions, of a few, cause the many to suffer.
It gave me a moment of pause. Times may not be ideal now, but we're still pretty lucky here.
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Handicapping the WBC Final 4
Tonight and Sunday are the World Baseball Classic semi-finals. Korea and Venezuela mix it up first, followed by the U.S. and Japan Sunday night. Both games are at Dodger Stadium.
ESPN's experts made their picks today. Four of six selected Japan.
Roy Oswalt will pitch for the U.S. against Daisuke Matsuzaka. Oswalt is 1-0 with a 3.52 ERA during the classic. Dice-K has been almost unhittable so far. He is 2-0 with a 1.80 ERA, including a win over Cuba.
It will be a tall order for the U.S. to knock Dice-K around. And there is no real pitch count in the semis. Up to 100 pitches are allowed now. I think Japan wins, but it's a close game. Oswalt will pitch well. Maybe a 3-2 or 4-2 final.
The WBC finals on Monday will be all Asia. Korea should get past Venezuela. As the U.S. proved, the Venezuelan bullpen is suspect.
In the finals, Japan v. Korea should be a great game. The teams split their four previous meetings in the WBC, but I think this time Korea wins it. Both teams play small ball, but Korea also has some power. A timely home run will be the difference.
ESPN's experts made their picks today. Four of six selected Japan.
Roy Oswalt will pitch for the U.S. against Daisuke Matsuzaka. Oswalt is 1-0 with a 3.52 ERA during the classic. Dice-K has been almost unhittable so far. He is 2-0 with a 1.80 ERA, including a win over Cuba.
It will be a tall order for the U.S. to knock Dice-K around. And there is no real pitch count in the semis. Up to 100 pitches are allowed now. I think Japan wins, but it's a close game. Oswalt will pitch well. Maybe a 3-2 or 4-2 final.
The WBC finals on Monday will be all Asia. Korea should get past Venezuela. As the U.S. proved, the Venezuelan bullpen is suspect.
In the finals, Japan v. Korea should be a great game. The teams split their four previous meetings in the WBC, but I think this time Korea wins it. Both teams play small ball, but Korea also has some power. A timely home run will be the difference.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
