caulfield12

QUOTE (joeynach @ Mar 30, 2013 -> 04:19 PM) This is a slippery slope. Usually in Joint Ventures businesses such as CSN Chicago the owners don't really extract profit from the business and pocket it. Usually they own the TV station so they can maintain a level control over the content, people, and operation of their main TV medium. Similar to Andrew Carnegie in our history books buying out the supply chain; railroads and trucking companies to maintain control and price control over his end product, steel production. Not to necessarily profit from owning the railroad company. Any growth or money CSN Chicago makes most likely is not taken out by JR and folks, pocketed, and used in team payroll or stadium construction, its most likely just re-invested in CSN Chicago's operations; technology, products, personnel, etc. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/d...l-tv-landscape/ Very thorough and detailed breakdown of every team's regional broadcasting rights deal. Here's another article. Of course, they don't tell you how much the actual ownership of the station is worth or how any profits are distributed, if at all. The Baltimore Orioles regional television network, the Mid-Atlantic Sports Network, is a cash cow for the team, but many have wondered just how much it rakes in annually. Some conspiracy theorists have speculated that owner Peter Angelos has been sitting on huge profits while operating his team like they earn mid-market revenue. This very vocal minority never has any substantial evidence to support their claim and, to no one’s surprise, went quiet when the O’s made the postseason in 2012. Over at FanGraphs.com, Wendy Thurm broke down all 30 team’s TV deals and pointed out that MASN brings in $29 million annually for both the Orioles and the Washington Nationals. There was a time when the Yankees and Red Sox stood above the other 28 teams in local TV revenue with their team-owned regional sports networks. When it comes to yearly rights fees, that’s not the case anymore. But the owners of the Yankees and Red Sox — and now Mets, Orioles, and Nationals — continue to rake in millions of dollars in profits from the operation of their RSNs. And again, as noted, these profits are not subject to revenue-sharing. It seems like a good deal of cash, but the Orioles find themselves behind a number of markets when it comes to TV revenue. The Dodgers, Angels, Rangers, Astros, Padres, Yankees, Mets, Red Sox, Phillies, Diamondbacks, Mariners, Reds, Tigers, Blue Jays and Indians all earn over $29 million from their TV deals. That’s half of Major League Baseball, for those of you counting at home. That number is about to go down. The Nationals, who own 13 percent of MASN, are currently in a mediation dispute over the annual rights fee. Perhaps the Orioles haven’t been secretly pocketing money all along. baltimoresportsreport.com

http://www.forbes.com/sites/bobcook/2012/1...rship-overkill/ Yay, Brooks Boyer is actually doing something!

Umm....they already own 40% of ComCast.

Alford’s deal with New Mexico was worth more than $20 million over 10 years. Guerrero said Alford is responsible for a buyout of his contract in Albuquerque, but that UCLA would work out the details. Guerrero said UCLA reached out to Alford first, not knowing whether he would be interested in the Bruins. Once he confirmed he was, the details were finalized early Saturday, Guerrero said. “He’s not the kind of guy that will shy away from what UCLA basketball is all about,” the athletic director said. Alford, who is 48, succeeds Ben Howland, who was fired last weekend after 10 years and a 233-107 record that included three consecutive Final Four appearances and four Pac-12 titles. The Bruins were 25-10 this season, which ended with a 20-point loss to Minnesota in the second round of the NCAA tournament. Alford led New Mexico to a 29-6 record this season that included the Mountain West regular-season and tournament titles. But the Lobos were upset by Harvard in the second round of the NCAAs shortly after Alford’snew contract had been announced. His son, Bryce, was set to play for his father with the Lobos, continuing a tradition that Alford first established when he played under his own father, Sam, at New Castle Chrysler High in Indiana. Alford had a 155-52 record in six years at New Mexico, with the Lobos making three trips to the NCAA tournament. He was selected Mountain West coach of the year three times. Guerrero had said he wanted a coach who would help boost season ticket sales. The Bruins had just a few sellouts at newly renovated Pauley Pavilion this season. “I think the UCLA family will embrace him. I think he’ll be able to hit on all cylinders,” Guerrero said. “He’ll be able to energize the fan base in so many ways. Look at New Mexico, they get 15,000 a game, it’s madness there.” www.hawkcentral.com

No, this is why. I feel sorry for you guys, Alford is the kiss of death. My dedication to preventing revision of Iowa's real historical experience with the Alford experiment apparently knows no limits. While I agree with all who say Alford's smug, entitled and egotistic behaivor is hard to distinguish from his failures as a coach, I will reinterate the basketball facts; in a little context. Lick has HCed as many Sweet 16 teams as Alford. Dr. Davis, Alford's predecessor at Iowa, won 4 NCAA games in his worst 8 seasons at Iowa, Alford has won a total of 5 in 16 years as HC with his own recruits and 1 more with a mixed Davis/Alford starting line up over his total HC career. Six NCAA wins in 18 seasons as HC. The one mixed line up win was the only NCAA win in Alford's 8 seasons at Iowa, by far Iowa's longest strectch with only one such win since the NCAA has allowed two teams from one conference to participate---30 years or so. Alford inherited a team coming off a Sweet 16 and left the first Iowa team with a winning record (17-14) to miss the NCAA and the NIT since my senior year of HS, 76-77. In eight seasons at Iowa Alford had only 7 recruits play a normal full 8 consecutive semester career at Iowa and also had 7 signed recruits never play a minute at Iowa. That doesn't even begin to tell the story of all the transfers and kids who just quit playing rather than play for Alford. Now, for a little further perspective, let's compare the Alford years to the previous 30 years, a literal generation, of basketball. Again, I think there would be general agreement that the two most reasonable metrics of success at Iowa-not some other program but the specific program under discussion-are Big Ten finishes and post season success. Believe me, other metrics are very unfavorable to the remaining Alford apologists. Thirty years would seem to be a reasonably broad sample by which to measure the basketball expectations of the fans that had experienced all or most of that generation. Below by year and coach are BiG finishes beginning 30 years before Alford arrived in IC. This excludes all but one of Ralph Miller's great teams and includes all of Dick Schultz's futile career. 69-70 1st Miller 79-80 4th Olson 89-90 8th Davis 99-00 8th Alford 70-71 7th Schultz 80-81 2nd Olson 90-91 5th Davis 00-01 6th Alford 71-72 8th Schultz 81-82 2nd Olson 91-92 5th Davis 01-02 8th Alford 72-73 6th Schultz 82-83 2nd Olson 92-93 3rd Davis 02-03 8th Alford 73-74 7th Schultz 83-84 7th GR 93-94 10 Davis 03-04 4th Alford 74-75 7th Olson 84-85 5th GR 94-95 7th Davis 04-05 7th Alford 75-76 5th Olson 85-86 6th GR 95-96 4th Davis 05-06 2nd Alford 76-77 4th Olson 86-87 3rd Davis 96-97 2ndDavis 06-07 4th Alford 77-78 8th Olson 87-88 3rd Davis 97-98 5th Davis 78-79 1st Olson 88-89 4th Davis 98-99 3rd Davis It took Alford 5 seasons to crack the upper division. His two fourth places finishes were years that the conference was so weak only three Big Ten teams danced, and neither Iowa team deserved a bid, especially the 07 squad. Sorry about the chart-just won't align right. Then, you can look at post season success as the other metric of Iowa's programatic quality. I think most of us would agree that the best time to start such an inquiry would be the year the NCAA expanded to allow multiple teams from a conference to participate. 78-79 Olson NCAA 0-1 1st round 79-80 Olson NCAA 4-2 Final Four 80-81 Olson NCAA 0-1 1st round 81-82 Olson NCAA 1-1 2nd round 82-83 Olson NCAA 2-1 Sweet 16 83-84 Raveling 84-85 Raveling NCAA 0-1 1st round 85-86 Raveling NCAA 0-1 1st round 86-87 Davis NCAA 3-1 Regional Final 87-88 Davis NCAA 2-1 Sweet 16 88-89 Davis NCAA 1-1 2nd round 89-90 Davis 90-91 Davis NCAA 1-1 2nd round 91-92 Davis NCAA 1-1 2nd round 92-93 Davis NCAA 1-1 2nd round 93-94 Davis 94-95 Davis NIT 2-1 3rd round 95-96 Davis NCAA 1-1 2nd round 96-97 Davis NCAA 1-1 2nd round 97-98 Davis NIT 0-1 1st round 98-99 Davis NCAA 2-1 Sweet 16 99-00 Alford 00-01 Alford NCAA 1-1 2nd round 01-02 Alford NIT 0-1 1st round 02-03 Alford NIT 0-1 1st round 03-04 Alford NIT 2-1 3rd round 04-05 Alford NCAA 0-1 1st round 05-06 Alford NCAA 0-1 1st round 06-07 Alford Under the three coaches before Alford, in the 21 seasons since the NCAA expanded the field Iowa had 16 NCAA seasons, advancing to the second round or beyond 12 times and the Sweet 16 or beyond 5 times. It also should be noted that Iowa's snub in 95 is simply inexplicable, as we were a very high RPI squad with some very impressive wins (Duke, Indiana, Michigan State) and razor thin losses to a few high majors as well. Two NIT trips had also resulted in a trip to the third round of the tournament. If you count the NIT Iowa fans had experienced a post season participation 86% of the time, NCAA participation 76% of the time; a post season win 62% of the seasons and an NCAA win 57% of the time. Those are objective numbers. So when Alford was hired "to take the program to another level" why should a reasonable fan have judged him by any lesser standard. In 8 seasons at Iowa Alford's teams went to six post season tournaments, a 75% participation rate. Three NCAA trips is a 50% participation rate. A single NCAA win is a NCAA win rate of 12.5%; throw in Alford's NIT wins and his post season win rate is 37.5%. That single NCAA win came in a season where our qualification for the NCAAs required an unprecedented and I believe unmatched miracle of winning four in a row at the BTT. Six of 8 Alford seasons ended without a single post season win, including the collapse in 06 to a 14 seed (sound familiar Lobos?). Finally, Alford inherited Dean Oliver and Duez Henderson, and Jake Jaacks for that matter, and left the GorLoob. Could anything be a better metaphor by which to pithily state the devastation Alford brought to the Hawkeye World. I think people will stop the active hatred of Alford when the program returns to where he found it, and did, indeed, take us to another level. TFS 3/22 5:24 PM | IP: Logged

QUOTE (flavum @ Mar 30, 2013 -> 02:46 PM) Beckham double to RF gap Wise RBI single Short double Brandon Short has helped himself this week. The problem is he's got to hit .330 or above to start DREAMING about an everyday major league job. He's doesn't have one extraordinary tool. Maybe, just maybe, he can make it as a 4th/5th outfielder somewhere, but he's got four guys in the Sox minor league system with a lot more potential breathing down his neck. Brandon's made a nice recovery from his injury problems, but he's still viewed mostly as organizational filler, like Gartrell. Maybe a step up from that, but not really a legit prospect, either.

more than the paper it was printed on at UNM. Discuss.

Dunn homer, rocket to RF, 4th of the spring. 2-1 Brewers. fastball over the middle of the plate, belt high. just 1 hr in 36 appearances for this Henderson guy last year.

QUOTE (The Ultimate Champion @ Mar 30, 2013 -> 08:17 AM) I sense that overall the Sox thinking is to acquire as much talent as possible in the most cost-efficient manner possible, and to put the best possible team on the field each and every season while still building for the future. That's so wrong. It is always foolish to concern yourself with your own matters, especially when others around you are doing more interesting things. f*** the hamburger in front of me, I'd rather go hungry watching that guy eat his steak. Why? Because he's better than me. IMO the proper approach for Sox brass should be to hold an emergency meeting every time a division rival acquires, promotes or extends a good MLB player or prospect and at that point decide whether it's best to play any games at all or instead to shift the focus to monster truck rallies. And right now, after the Verlander deal, all I can hear in my head is Gene Honda shouting "Sunday! Sunday! Sunday!" because we're totally f***ed and the sky is black and holy s*** we're doomed and Jerry needs to sell among other things. I don't remember saying anything about selling the team.

If we tried to trade Dylan Axelrod today, he would fetch the same in return as Lucas Harrell or Phil Humber. We have three or four distinct advantages with our organization right now, maybe 4. 1) Cuban connection...but we didn't go after Puig or Soler 2) Minor/major league outfield depth....DeAza/Viciedo/Mitchell/Walker/Thompson/Hawkins 3) Starting pitching goes 6-7 deep, especially if Danks is 100%, plus 3-4 minor leaguers behind them (Castro, Molina, Rienzo, Johnson) 4) Bullpen/bullpen depth (Septimo, Veal, Santiago, Omogrosso, etc.) 5) I'll add one more....the chance to have a fresh start and get rid of Williams, JR., Silverio, etc. But still, Buddy Bell is the constant. Somehow, one of those four areas has to be leveraged to our benefit soon in order to become more competitive.

It's pretty simple. Verlander and Miguel Cabrera are the two most important players in the AL Central, maybe the entire AL, right now. Knowing that Verlander's going to be around not just 2013 and 2014 but well into the future...could change the organizational thinking of the White Sox. The odds are diminished of both the White Sox beating the Tigers head-to-head or taking a Wild Card spot (look at the AL East, Angels/A's/Rangers/Mariners, the continued improvement of the AL Central with the Royals and Twins now turning the corner on a youth movement)...that would be one conclusion. The White Sox are in a very tough spot. They're probably not good enough right now to win the division unless everything goes perfectly right, and that's adding some pieces at midseason (like we did with Liriano, Youk and Myers). It doesn't mean that it's ALL doom and gloom...but I just can't imagine Axelrod being part of our long-term future...we really need to push the envelope with guys such as Santiago and Trayce Thompson/Hawkins that have the highest upside, instead of taking that unsatisfying middle road of being competitive but not quite good enough. Yet we can't begin to think about tearing down the team in any significant way until halfway through the season. I think looking at the schedule, a lot of Sox fans are thinking about a 2007/09/10/11 start to the season and how realistic being a comeback team in the 2nd half would be, based on team history and the ages of veteran players like Konerko, Dunn, Rios, Peavy, Keppinger, Ramirez, etc.

It's pretty simple. Verlander and Miguel Cabrera are the two most important players in the AL Central, maybe the entire AL, right now. Knowing that Verlander's going to be around not just 2013 and 2014 but well into the future...could change the organizational thinking of the White Sox. The odds are diminished of both the White Sox beating the Tigers head-to-head or taking a Wild Card spot (look at the AL East, Angels/A's/Rangers/Mariners, the continued improvement of the AL Central with the Royals and Twins now turning the corner on a youth movement)...that would be one conclusion. The White Sox are in a very tough spot. They're probably not good enough right now to win the division unless everything goes perfectly right, and that's adding some pieces at midseason (like we did with Liriano, Youk and Myers). It doesn't mean that it's ALL doom and gloom...but I just can't imagine Axelrod being part of our long-term future...we really need to push the envelope with guys such as Santiago and Trayce Thompson/Hawkins that have the highest upside, instead of taking that unsatisfying middle road of being competitive but not quite good enough. Yet we can't begin to think about tearing down the team in any significant way until halfway through the season. I think looking at the schedule, a lot of Sox fans are thinking about a 2007/09/10/11 start to the season and how realistic being a comeback team in the 2nd half would be, based on team history and the ages of players like Konerko, Dunn, Rios, Peavy, Keppinger, Ramirez, etc.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/justin-verlan...-203513113.html Jeff Passan in favor of the move.

And when he (Verlander) showed up at Comerica Park and saw those statues out there in left-center field, you'd better believe he was thinking that he wanted to prove he deserved one of them himself. He'll get one now. He's committed to the Tigers now through his age-36 season, which gives him seven more years to add to a legacy that already includes 124 wins (you bet he'd like to take a shot at 300), six straight 200-inning seasons (probably would have been seven if the Tigers had allowed him to do it as a rookie), three strikeout crowns in the last four years and first- and second-place finishes in the Cy Young voting the last two years. On the way to all that, he has thrown a ton of pitches, 1,000 more than any other pitcher in the game over the last six years (and that doesn't even include the postseason). Some would say that all those pitches will take a toll, that all those pitches are one more reason why he won't make it to the end of this contract as an elite pitcher, a reason that the Tigers shouldn't have signed him for this long or that other teams should actually be happy that they won't be able to bid for Verlander on the free-agent market. The problem with that theory is that Verlander has already proven he can do things other guys can't. Who's to say that can't continue? Besides, there's no doubting that, right now, having Verlander atop the Tigers' rotation makes them one of the elite teams in baseball, perhaps even the best. There's every reason to believe that will still be true two years from now. The Tigers had a choice. They could pay up by Verlander's opening day deadline, or they could take a major risk that, after 2014, Verlander would be pitching (and winning) for somebody else. They couldn't sign Verlander to a shorter contract. Believe me, if they could have, they would have. Verlander had a choice, too. He could play it out and see if he could get even more, or he could sign now and commit to the Tigers. He could hope for more money, or he could go for a statue. The statue won out. Danny Knobler, cbssports.com

Florida storms back with a 16-2 run to close out the first half. FGCU will either wilt under the pressure or put together another run of their own. Interesting to see which way it goes. We'll find out how good Enfield is as a coach. UF is mauling them on the boards.

Carlos Lee was REALLY bad. Maybe not as bad as Sax, but worse than Raines.

Launched October 1, 2004 Network Comcast SportsNet Owned by NBCUniversal (20%) J. Joseph Ricketts Family (20%) Jerry Reinsdorf (40%) Rocky Wirtz (20%) Who can put a dollar figure on exactly how much that is worth? Plus advertising revenues...we know the White Sox experienced higher ratings last year for t.v. (making up for some of the falling attendance as well) as more and more fans have been staying home in the era of higher ticket prices and big screen/HDTV.

Pods his second time around was pretty good, too. As long as he wasn't playing CF. Raines wasn't very good...decent, but nothing to write home about.

QUOTE (CaliSoxFanViaSWside @ Mar 29, 2013 -> 12:24 PM) I'm surprised Viciedo didn't move up more after hitting 25 HR's in his 1st full season. Maybe I should be surprised he was ranked 380 the previous year when he only had a few September call ups in prior to last year which would rank him better than nearly half the major league players without doing much of anything. And his defense was surprisingly decent. This year is the really big year in determining what kind of player he eventually becomes. Just a good/average one (due to impatience, swinging at bad pitches, struggles with inside fastballs and breaking balls out of the zone, lower OBP) or a very good/great hitter. A lot of that was also based on the hype from 2010 when he tore up the minors and was a pretty key piece down the stretch, when Ozzie used him against mostly LHP.

QUOTE (farmteam @ Mar 29, 2013 -> 10:52 AM) Watched Rock of Ages last night. Not great, but a fun movie. Julianne Hough was bad, bad, bad in that. I guess we'll see this weekend with Kim Kardashian in the Tyler Perry movie, who's worse....her, Taylor Swift or Kim.The timing of the comic moments is off, and the film drags and drags before reaching a conclusion anybody can see from a mile off. Adding the no-talent Kim Kardashian to his sass and semonette formula was a mistake.The quartet of leads is blander-than-bland. The “Temptation” of the title is a come-on and a false promise. How “tempting” can a movie about cheating be with a PG-13 rating? Casting Norwood, a vapid clothes horse Kim Kardashian as a shallow, judgmental colleague in the dating service and Vanessa Williams as the boss of that service suggests that Perry is drawn to women who have been media (and man) victims, from time to time. But the filmmaker has points to make, about wealth and the allure of the new. “There’s nothing wrong with being rich and having nice things — so long as the nice things don’t own YOU.” “We become a lot of different people before we settle into who we are.” With homilies like that, I expected Perry to get into the talk show/advice game, but Steve Harvey leaped at that. But cranking out two formulaic movies like this a year show the Atlanta mogul’s true ambition — replacing all those soap operas TV is canceling, two hours at a time.Roger Moore-Movie Nation.com BTW, Wonder what happened to that Hispanic lead singer/co-star from Rock of Ages? Haven't seen him since. Tom Cruise and Malin Ackerman were cute together. Really liked his over the top performance, reminded me of Frank TJ Mackey in Magnolia. Olympus Has Fallen...predictable, formulaic, but good summer popcorn movie in spring, at least better than most of Gerard Butler's recent romantic comedy attempts, getting back to his bread and butter

QUOTE (Cali @ Mar 29, 2013 -> 11:36 AM) The Tank is gonna have to be hitting bombs cause the guys on in front of him aren't gonna be flying around the bases if he hits one to the gap haha Seems we always have at least 2 slows guys in the middle. It was worse with Thome, Dye and Crede, not to mention AJ...around. AJ was a smart baserunner, but not exactly fleet of foot. And Rios and Alexei, for all their athleticism, hit into more than their fair share of DP's.

37 Chris Sale, up from 244 entering 2012 98 Paulie, down from 75 115 Jakemeister, up 126 places 158 Alex Rios, up 307 182 Danks, down a charitable 47 183 Dunn, up 190 188 Addison Reed, up 263 226 Matt Thornton, down 19 (charitable) 260 Gavin Floyd, down 68 266 DeAza, NR 273 Sexy Alexei, down 120 316 Viciedo, up 64 331 Keppinger, up 148 359 Crain, up 25 407 Beckham, down 34 424 Quintana, NR 425 Santiago, NR 436 N. Jones, NR 449 Lindstrom, NR 492, Flowers, NR You have seven players improving at least 100 places, plus the last five guys that came out of nowhere in Quintana/Santiago/N. Jones/Lindstrom/Flowers. Sale, Rios, Dunn, Reed and DeAza made the biggest jumps. Can Peavy and Keppinger continue their upswings at their respective ages? The players to look for improvement from are obviously Danks, Thornton, Floyd, Ramirez, Viciedo (most would argue that way) and Beckham. A lot are cautiously optimistic/hopeful Paulie can be the same hitter he was in the 1st half, but skeptical due to the age concerns. SOURCE: espn.com/mlb

QUOTE (Jake @ Mar 28, 2013 -> 08:06 PM) Sounds like they're doing a good job. I think we have just enough to spend that we could really bring in a big name if the time and player was right -- the nice thing about the way we do things is we don't like to bring on huge salary commitments just because. No Michael Bourns or Kyle Lohses here. We could make a big dollar acquisition via trade this year to put us over the top or we could really do some adding in the next offseason if we want with a lot of money coming off the books. Manny Ramirez was a waste of money, but, otherwise, most of our mid to late season additions have been pretty good.

The Cavaliers, who finished the season 23-12, brought a 19-game home-court winning streak into the game. Snap, crackle, pop. Virginia went 9-0 at home against Atlantic Coast Conference teams this season. Coach Tony Bennett’s team was fourth nationally in scoring defense at 57.2 points per game. Duke scored 68 in a loss to the Cavaliers. No other ACC team scored more than 55. Iowa torched those numbers, shooting 49.1 percent from the field and making all 15 of its free-throw attempts. The last 14 came in the final 3 minutes and 9 seconds, which showed maturity from a team that had struggled in the final minutes of several Big Ten road games. “Guys made free throws, guys made passes,” said McCaffery, whose team was 2-8 on the road before Wednesday. “We never panicked.” Iowa’s 24th victory puts this team, two seasons removed from an 11-20 record, tied for third with the 1987-88 team for most single-season victories in school history. Only the 2005-06 team, with 25, and the 1986-87 team, with 30, have more. hawkcentral.com

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball...ressure-on-fgcu Yet another "fun" FGCU story. Is Cinderella ready to leave the ball, yet?