CBS SPORTS EXCLUSIVITY TO SUPER BOWL XLVII
02.03.2013
This Sunday, Super Bowl XLVII will air on CBS. Which network televises the Super Bowl is all part of a negotiated agreement that the league and its broadcasters revisit every 4-8 years. Currently, rights are being rotated between 3 major US networks: CBS, NBC and FOX. This will be the 18th year that CBS has carried the big game. It pays about $620 million a year for these rights and will cough-up nearly $1.08 billion/year once the new deal begins in 2014. As the holder of these rights, CBS has exclusivity extending to all aspects of Super Bowl XLVII, of which, the NFL is the author and copyright owner. Telecast is expected to begin at 2:00 P.M. E.T. on February 3, 2013 and go until approximately 10:30 P.M. E.T. Once the trophy presentation concludes, the “Event” will be deemed over, and all other networks may then use NFL footage and other portions of the event without subjecting to risk of liability for copyright infringement.
As one would expect, a lot goes into televising the year’s biggest event. For starters, the Super Bowl is rehearsed. This past Friday high school teams gathered inside Mercedes-Benz Superdome to run a full-on dress rehearsal. This allowed CBS Sports anchor James Brown and the rest of the CBS crew to workout any kinks prior to the real thing. That makes enough sense. After all, the Super Bowl consistently brings in more than 100 million viewers. Production for the game is estimated to cost the network around $3 million, which to put into perspective is nearly twice what it spends on a regular-season matchup.
The Super Bowl has come a long way. The first game in 1967 was arranged just 60 days prior to kickoff. By the way, that game blacked out in the LA market where the game was actually being played. Imagine the chaos. Additionally, the first four Super Bowls cost only a total of $9.5 million, but this of course was the Stone Age of television. For the 47th Super Bowl, CBS will be flaunting six “HEYEper Zoom” high-frame-rate, 4K replay and zoom camera systems, which the network ensures will enhance the viewer’s experience.
But the actual game is only half of the story. Advertisements are as popular if not more so than the event itself with some going for as much as $4 million. Half time is its own production, which the league actually produces after taking responsibility for the whole Janet Jackson wardrobe malfunction in 2004. This year’s show will feature chart-topping superstar Beyoncé Knowles, coming off of her much talked about lip-synced performance at the Presidential Inauguration. Furthermore, because the Super Bowl is truly one of America’s most communal experiences, CBS, recognizing that this is, for some, the only game they’ve tuned into all season long, will put equal effort into setting the stage for the game. This year this will include the tale of John and Jim Harbaugh, sibling rival coaches facing-off in the Super Bowl. Much attention will also be given to Ray Lewis, a Hall of Famer who will be playing his last NFL game.
For the most part, things are predicted to run smoothly Sunday, undoubtedly, a result of much effort by many. And as soon as the game concludes, it will be FOX’s turn to start gearing up for the 48th Super Bowl in New York. A never ending arms race between 3 networks to make each year more spectacular than the one prior.
GO Niners!
Kelly Comer
This Sunday, Super Bowl XLVII will air on CBS. Which network televises the Super Bowl is all part of a negotiated agreement that the league and its broadcasters revisit every 4-8 years. Currently, rights are being rotated between 3 major US networks: CBS, NBC and FOX. This will be the 18th year that CBS has carried the big game. It pays about $620 million a year for these rights and will cough-up nearly $1.08 billion/year once the new deal begins in 2014. As the holder of these rights, CBS has exclusivity extending to all aspects of Super Bowl XLVII, of which, the NFL is the author and copyright owner. Telecast is expected to begin at 2:00 P.M. E.T. on February 3, 2013 and go until approximately 10:30 P.M. E.T. Once the trophy presentation concludes, the “Event” will be deemed over, and all other networks may then use NFL footage and other portions of the event without subjecting to risk of liability for copyright infringement.
As one would expect, a lot goes into televising the year’s biggest event. For starters, the Super Bowl is rehearsed. This past Friday high school teams gathered inside Mercedes-Benz Superdome to run a full-on dress rehearsal. This allowed CBS Sports anchor James Brown and the rest of the CBS crew to workout any kinks prior to the real thing. That makes enough sense. After all, the Super Bowl consistently brings in more than 100 million viewers. Production for the game is estimated to cost the network around $3 million, which to put into perspective is nearly twice what it spends on a regular-season matchup.
The Super Bowl has come a long way. The first game in 1967 was arranged just 60 days prior to kickoff. By the way, that game blacked out in the LA market where the game was actually being played. Imagine the chaos. Additionally, the first four Super Bowls cost only a total of $9.5 million, but this of course was the Stone Age of television. For the 47th Super Bowl, CBS will be flaunting six “HEYEper Zoom” high-frame-rate, 4K replay and zoom camera systems, which the network ensures will enhance the viewer’s experience.
But the actual game is only half of the story. Advertisements are as popular if not more so than the event itself with some going for as much as $4 million. Half time is its own production, which the league actually produces after taking responsibility for the whole Janet Jackson wardrobe malfunction in 2004. This year’s show will feature chart-topping superstar Beyoncé Knowles, coming off of her much talked about lip-synced performance at the Presidential Inauguration. Furthermore, because the Super Bowl is truly one of America’s most communal experiences, CBS, recognizing that this is, for some, the only game they’ve tuned into all season long, will put equal effort into setting the stage for the game. This year this will include the tale of John and Jim Harbaugh, sibling rival coaches facing-off in the Super Bowl. Much attention will also be given to Ray Lewis, a Hall of Famer who will be playing his last NFL game.
For the most part, things are predicted to run smoothly Sunday, undoubtedly, a result of much effort by many. And as soon as the game concludes, it will be FOX’s turn to start gearing up for the 48th Super Bowl in New York. A never ending arms race between 3 networks to make each year more spectacular than the one prior.
GO Niners!
Kelly Comer
Tulane’s 6th Annual National Baseball Arbitration Competition
01.05.2013
Sometime at the start of last October, I was in Constitutional Law, perusing the world wide web, when I stumbled upon this competition. I spent the next hour of class time pouring over the details and immediately decided that this was something I had to be a part of. Right away, I snagged up TImothy Alexander, a fellow negotiation competitor and sports enthusiast, as my partner. Then, over the course of the next few days, my partner and I put together a "Pitch" that would ultimately convince faculty and staff that Tim and I were worth sponsoring in this competition. Once we got the go-head, we got to work!
So exactly what is this competition? The National Baseball Arbitration Competition, run by the Tulane Sports Law Society, is a simulated salary arbitration competition modeled closely on the procedures used by Major League Baseball. The structure of the competition is as follows: a Committee will create 3 different salary arbitration cases, which were made available on Nov. 16. Each case included a hypothetical player's final offer and a club's final offer. The Committee assigned each team participating a client--either a player or a club--for each of the three cases. Each team then must prepare oral presentations and briefs to support their clients' positions in each of the three cases.
The players used in the competition are actual MLB players eligible for salary arbitration in the upcoming round. The problem is as follows:
1. Ike Davis vs. Mets
2. Dexter Fowler vs. Rockies
3. Braves vs. Tommy Hanson
My partner and I have finished preparing our briefs for each of the three cases, which I will submit Monday. The briefs were comprised of player statistics obtained from a reliable source of information such as MLB's official website, ESPN, Baseball Prospectus, Fangraphs, etc. On January 13th, electronic copies of all the briefs will be made available so that teams might begin preparing their oral arguments. Oral arguments take place January 23rd and 24th in Nawlins! Each round of arbitration is 45 minutes. The format allows each side 15 minutes for opening remarks and then 7.5 minutes for a rebuttal. These oral arguments will only reference information made available on or before November 16th (Tommy Hanson's trade did not impact any prep work).
If we successfully can convince the arbitration panel that our player is worth more or less than the salary midpoint of both the Player and Club offers, then we will continue moving forward in the competition. I am so excited that I have been given this opportunity and am so grateful for Professor Angela Doss, Professor Tim Moberly and Jason Browning for their support. I will share my briefs here once the competition is over. Regardless of the turnout, this has been such a wonderful experience! Stay tuned...
Kelly Comer
Sometime at the start of last October, I was in Constitutional Law, perusing the world wide web, when I stumbled upon this competition. I spent the next hour of class time pouring over the details and immediately decided that this was something I had to be a part of. Right away, I snagged up TImothy Alexander, a fellow negotiation competitor and sports enthusiast, as my partner. Then, over the course of the next few days, my partner and I put together a "Pitch" that would ultimately convince faculty and staff that Tim and I were worth sponsoring in this competition. Once we got the go-head, we got to work!
So exactly what is this competition? The National Baseball Arbitration Competition, run by the Tulane Sports Law Society, is a simulated salary arbitration competition modeled closely on the procedures used by Major League Baseball. The structure of the competition is as follows: a Committee will create 3 different salary arbitration cases, which were made available on Nov. 16. Each case included a hypothetical player's final offer and a club's final offer. The Committee assigned each team participating a client--either a player or a club--for each of the three cases. Each team then must prepare oral presentations and briefs to support their clients' positions in each of the three cases.
The players used in the competition are actual MLB players eligible for salary arbitration in the upcoming round. The problem is as follows:
1. Ike Davis vs. Mets
- Player's Offer: $3 million
- Club's Offer: $2.4 million
2. Dexter Fowler vs. Rockies
- Player's Offer: $4.6 million
- Club's Offer: $4 million
3. Braves vs. Tommy Hanson
- Player's Offer: $4.3 million
- Club's Offer: $3.5 million
My partner and I have finished preparing our briefs for each of the three cases, which I will submit Monday. The briefs were comprised of player statistics obtained from a reliable source of information such as MLB's official website, ESPN, Baseball Prospectus, Fangraphs, etc. On January 13th, electronic copies of all the briefs will be made available so that teams might begin preparing their oral arguments. Oral arguments take place January 23rd and 24th in Nawlins! Each round of arbitration is 45 minutes. The format allows each side 15 minutes for opening remarks and then 7.5 minutes for a rebuttal. These oral arguments will only reference information made available on or before November 16th (Tommy Hanson's trade did not impact any prep work).
If we successfully can convince the arbitration panel that our player is worth more or less than the salary midpoint of both the Player and Club offers, then we will continue moving forward in the competition. I am so excited that I have been given this opportunity and am so grateful for Professor Angela Doss, Professor Tim Moberly and Jason Browning for their support. I will share my briefs here once the competition is over. Regardless of the turnout, this has been such a wonderful experience! Stay tuned...
Kelly Comer
Catching-up With Ed O’Bannon vs. NCAA
10. 04. 2012
Ed O’Bannon’s billion-dollar case against the NCAA was originally brought on behalf of former college athletes seeking to share in the licensing and royalty profits from the use of their images after their college playing days are over. The case, currently in the stage of pre-trial discovery, is dragging on with a back-and-forth of motions, counter motions, call for dismissals, discovery, and depositions. In fact, the case is not scheduled to go to trial until 2014. The outcome of which is looking to be a game-changer in the world of intercollegiate athletics.
Back in August, the case took a significant turn when the NCAA was ordered by a California judge to open their books and reveal revenue that its member institutions receive from licensing and broadcast deals. We are still awaiting the outcome of the judge’s ruling on that issue. Interestingly though, following that order, ESPN and Birmingham News managed to unearth questionable emails that appear damaging to the NCAA’s case. Among these emails was one from a CLC executive that seems to contradict the NCAA’s firm stance that the characters in basketball and football video games are not based on players or their likenesses.
“Just a heads up, in case schools ask you this – all of EA’s latest 2008 March Madness basketball submissions have current players names on the jerseys in the game,” wrote Wendy Harmon, a CLC marketing coordinator. “I have called Gina Ferranti at EA about this (she submits all of these basketball ones) and she assured me that they will not be using those in the final version. She said they have to put the players names in so it will calculate the correct stats but then they take them off. Just don’t want the schools to freak out – she said a few have already commented on it in their approval.”
Hmm…
And it doesn’t stop there. A second shake-up in this case came this past Monday when a District Judge ordered ESPN to hand over its television and licensing contracts for Division I men's basketball and football since 2005. O’Bannon argues that such discovery is crucial to his claim against the NCAA, which essentially is that Collegiate Licensing Company (CLC), the NCAA’s licensing partner, and NCAA members have conspired to deny former student-athletes compensation for the commercial use of their names, likenesses and images. O’Bannon hopes that these contracts shed light on how the NCAA ‘monetized’ college athletics. Furthermore, these figures could ultimately be used to determine monetary damages should O’Bannon prevail.
ESPN of course opposed the motion, unsuccessfully. Thus, they are being forced to comply with the order to share closely guarded and private information that could implement ESPN, a non-party to the lawsuit. What impact might this have on other companies who have contracted with the NCAA? Financially? Legally? One company having already felt the impact of a similar ruling in the litigation is Electronic Arts, a maker of college sports video games. Companies such as EA and ESPN fear that by relinquishing their confidential knowledge about their profits from the labor of college players illuminates these companies' own susceptibility to being sued by O'Bannon. If the NCAA is guilty here, then arguably so must the companies holding contracts with the NCAA.
Kelly Comer
Ed O’Bannon’s billion-dollar case against the NCAA was originally brought on behalf of former college athletes seeking to share in the licensing and royalty profits from the use of their images after their college playing days are over. The case, currently in the stage of pre-trial discovery, is dragging on with a back-and-forth of motions, counter motions, call for dismissals, discovery, and depositions. In fact, the case is not scheduled to go to trial until 2014. The outcome of which is looking to be a game-changer in the world of intercollegiate athletics.
Back in August, the case took a significant turn when the NCAA was ordered by a California judge to open their books and reveal revenue that its member institutions receive from licensing and broadcast deals. We are still awaiting the outcome of the judge’s ruling on that issue. Interestingly though, following that order, ESPN and Birmingham News managed to unearth questionable emails that appear damaging to the NCAA’s case. Among these emails was one from a CLC executive that seems to contradict the NCAA’s firm stance that the characters in basketball and football video games are not based on players or their likenesses.
“Just a heads up, in case schools ask you this – all of EA’s latest 2008 March Madness basketball submissions have current players names on the jerseys in the game,” wrote Wendy Harmon, a CLC marketing coordinator. “I have called Gina Ferranti at EA about this (she submits all of these basketball ones) and she assured me that they will not be using those in the final version. She said they have to put the players names in so it will calculate the correct stats but then they take them off. Just don’t want the schools to freak out – she said a few have already commented on it in their approval.”
Hmm…
And it doesn’t stop there. A second shake-up in this case came this past Monday when a District Judge ordered ESPN to hand over its television and licensing contracts for Division I men's basketball and football since 2005. O’Bannon argues that such discovery is crucial to his claim against the NCAA, which essentially is that Collegiate Licensing Company (CLC), the NCAA’s licensing partner, and NCAA members have conspired to deny former student-athletes compensation for the commercial use of their names, likenesses and images. O’Bannon hopes that these contracts shed light on how the NCAA ‘monetized’ college athletics. Furthermore, these figures could ultimately be used to determine monetary damages should O’Bannon prevail.
ESPN of course opposed the motion, unsuccessfully. Thus, they are being forced to comply with the order to share closely guarded and private information that could implement ESPN, a non-party to the lawsuit. What impact might this have on other companies who have contracted with the NCAA? Financially? Legally? One company having already felt the impact of a similar ruling in the litigation is Electronic Arts, a maker of college sports video games. Companies such as EA and ESPN fear that by relinquishing their confidential knowledge about their profits from the labor of college players illuminates these companies' own susceptibility to being sued by O'Bannon. If the NCAA is guilty here, then arguably so must the companies holding contracts with the NCAA.
Kelly Comer
NCAA Clears UNC… Wait, What?
9. 05. 2012
Unquestionably, college sports is more complicated now than ever, and just as the dust is some-what (not really) settling from the NCAA’s announcement regarding Penn State’s punishment, the NCAA releases an announcement that has left some in disbelief. The NCAA concluded late last week, that UNC did not break any rules in the scandal surrounding the school's Afro and African-American Studies Department.
Last August, UNC self-reported to the NCAA that there were potential violations involving student-athletes in the Afro and African-American Studies program. For the most part, the specifics have been kept rather hush-hush, but it appears that UNC was offering student-athletes bogus classes in order for these individuals to maintain eligibility. Public scrutiny intensified when transcripts of student-athletes emerged reflecting questionable grade configuration and suggesting poorly supervised independent studies dating back to the 90s. Additionally, evidence suggests that pre-assigned academic counselors steered student-athletes into these taking these specific courses.
If it was UNC’s intent to offer student-athletes no-show classes and independent studies to ensure eligibility, the UNC ought to face major sanctions, likely of which would include stripping the school of their 2005 and 2009 men’s basketball championship titles as well as deeming UNC ineligible to participate in championships for a number of years in one or more sports. That probable outcome has many speculating as to why the NCAA took this position with UNC. The majority opinion seemingly being that the NCAA is turning a blind-eye in this circumstance because of UNC’s prominent men’s basketball program and the revenue generator the NCAA’s tournament is for the non-profit. Additionally, critics of the decision are voicing their frustration with the NCAA’s inconsistency and holding this situation out to be a setback for the organization in regards to public opinion surrounding the NCAA’s integrity. Finally, many are calling into question how the NCAA can justify punishing Penn State and not UNC. Ultimately, it might be a stretch to compare the situation at UNC to the incident at Penn State. Academic fraud, no matter how severe, is not a scam to cover-up child molestation. So maybe it is unfair to draw comparisons.
To clarify, it would be nice for the NCAA to release more information on how this decision was reached. Unfortunately, unlike Penn State, this matter is less transparent. There is no case outside of the NCAA’s own. Maybe UNC did not actually violate any rules pertaining to academics and eligibility. However, per NCAA, unethical conduct by an institution includes, “knowing involvement in arranging for fraudulent academic credit or false transcripts for a prospective or an enrolled student-athlete.” That rule alone seems to implicate UNC. Back to the handling of Penn State, initially it was questioned whether or not the NCAA had the authority to respond to the situation. Admittedly, the NCAA found that no NCAA rules giving Penn State a “competitive advantage” were broken. Yet, the NCAA defended imposition of severe sanctions on Penn State with both the NCAA Constitution and Bylaws. It seems then, assuming the NCAA acted appropriately in their handling of this UNC matter, that based on the NCAA’s determination, the problem mustn’t lie in the NCAA’s rules and policies or their application thereof but rather in the evidence and investigation itself. UNC’s behavior simply must not have been punishable by NCAA standards. If it were, the NCAA has carefully crafted their Constitution and Bylaws, allowing them broad scope in their decision-making power and certainly action would have been taken. Right?
Kelly Comer
Unquestionably, college sports is more complicated now than ever, and just as the dust is some-what (not really) settling from the NCAA’s announcement regarding Penn State’s punishment, the NCAA releases an announcement that has left some in disbelief. The NCAA concluded late last week, that UNC did not break any rules in the scandal surrounding the school's Afro and African-American Studies Department.
Last August, UNC self-reported to the NCAA that there were potential violations involving student-athletes in the Afro and African-American Studies program. For the most part, the specifics have been kept rather hush-hush, but it appears that UNC was offering student-athletes bogus classes in order for these individuals to maintain eligibility. Public scrutiny intensified when transcripts of student-athletes emerged reflecting questionable grade configuration and suggesting poorly supervised independent studies dating back to the 90s. Additionally, evidence suggests that pre-assigned academic counselors steered student-athletes into these taking these specific courses.
If it was UNC’s intent to offer student-athletes no-show classes and independent studies to ensure eligibility, the UNC ought to face major sanctions, likely of which would include stripping the school of their 2005 and 2009 men’s basketball championship titles as well as deeming UNC ineligible to participate in championships for a number of years in one or more sports. That probable outcome has many speculating as to why the NCAA took this position with UNC. The majority opinion seemingly being that the NCAA is turning a blind-eye in this circumstance because of UNC’s prominent men’s basketball program and the revenue generator the NCAA’s tournament is for the non-profit. Additionally, critics of the decision are voicing their frustration with the NCAA’s inconsistency and holding this situation out to be a setback for the organization in regards to public opinion surrounding the NCAA’s integrity. Finally, many are calling into question how the NCAA can justify punishing Penn State and not UNC. Ultimately, it might be a stretch to compare the situation at UNC to the incident at Penn State. Academic fraud, no matter how severe, is not a scam to cover-up child molestation. So maybe it is unfair to draw comparisons.
To clarify, it would be nice for the NCAA to release more information on how this decision was reached. Unfortunately, unlike Penn State, this matter is less transparent. There is no case outside of the NCAA’s own. Maybe UNC did not actually violate any rules pertaining to academics and eligibility. However, per NCAA, unethical conduct by an institution includes, “knowing involvement in arranging for fraudulent academic credit or false transcripts for a prospective or an enrolled student-athlete.” That rule alone seems to implicate UNC. Back to the handling of Penn State, initially it was questioned whether or not the NCAA had the authority to respond to the situation. Admittedly, the NCAA found that no NCAA rules giving Penn State a “competitive advantage” were broken. Yet, the NCAA defended imposition of severe sanctions on Penn State with both the NCAA Constitution and Bylaws. It seems then, assuming the NCAA acted appropriately in their handling of this UNC matter, that based on the NCAA’s determination, the problem mustn’t lie in the NCAA’s rules and policies or their application thereof but rather in the evidence and investigation itself. UNC’s behavior simply must not have been punishable by NCAA standards. If it were, the NCAA has carefully crafted their Constitution and Bylaws, allowing them broad scope in their decision-making power and certainly action would have been taken. Right?
Kelly Comer
As Report Surfaces the Public Awaits the NCAA's Reaction
7. 13. 2012
Last week, after hearing nine days of testimony, a jury confirmed obvious guilt and found Jerry Sandusky, former assistant football coach of Penn State University, guilty on 45 of 48 child sex-abuse counts. Yesterday, following an extensive investigation into the scandal, ex-FBI director Louis Freeh’s report revealed the disturbing fact that Joe Paterno and other top officials at Penn State ignored and even concealed child sexual abuse allegations against Sandusky for nearly 14 years to avoid bad publicity, prompting the discussion about the much anticipated reaction of the NCAA. Seeing as the Buckeyes lost the right to compete in a bowl game this season after former coach Jim Trussel lied to NCAA officials about players receiving free tattoos, public expectations are high in the wake of this revelation that the NCAA will penalize Penn State football for this horrific cover-up. As Freeh’s 267-page report put it, the university lacks “institutional control”, and while most would see this as major violation, such a violation may be more ethical than one covered by NCAA Bylaws.
Yesterday, NCAA spokesman Bob Williams said in a release that the NCAA is awaiting Penn State’s response to ”four key questions, concerning compliance with institutional control and ethics policies” and that Penn State's response to the letter will inform the NCAA of their next steps. Like the rest of us, Williams says that this is the first time the NCAA has had the opportunity to review what is in the report. This appears to be an NCAA issue because of the idea of compliance and the institutional role the department plays in managing and overseeing an athletic department. Yet, NCAA compliance deals specifically with preexisting rules, and to that point, the information revealed in this report may not directly be in violation of the NCAA rules and regulations of intercollegiate sports. Therefore, it is unlikely that the NCAA will be able to take the criminal activities in this matter and relay them to the rules in the NCAA manual. The only thing that appears to be certain is what the NCAA cannot do: make up the rules as they go along.
Kelly Comer
Update: NCAA Imposes Severe Sanctions on Penn State
7. 24. 2012
Yesterday, the following sanctions were imposed on Penn State:
- $60 million fine
- Four-year post season ban
- Four-year reduction of grant-in-aid
- Five-year probation
- Vacation of wins since 1998
- Waiver of transfer rules and grant-in-aid retention
- Individual penalties to be determined
Additionally, the NCAA took corrective measures such as the implementation of Athletics Integrity Agreement, appointment of an independent Athletics Integrity Monitor for a five-year period, and adoption of all recommendations presented in Ch. 10 of the Freeh report.
I encourage everyone to visit ncaa.org for more on the NCAA’s authority to act, decision to forego imposing the death penalty, and transfer options for Penn State football student-athletes.
Last week, after hearing nine days of testimony, a jury confirmed obvious guilt and found Jerry Sandusky, former assistant football coach of Penn State University, guilty on 45 of 48 child sex-abuse counts. Yesterday, following an extensive investigation into the scandal, ex-FBI director Louis Freeh’s report revealed the disturbing fact that Joe Paterno and other top officials at Penn State ignored and even concealed child sexual abuse allegations against Sandusky for nearly 14 years to avoid bad publicity, prompting the discussion about the much anticipated reaction of the NCAA. Seeing as the Buckeyes lost the right to compete in a bowl game this season after former coach Jim Trussel lied to NCAA officials about players receiving free tattoos, public expectations are high in the wake of this revelation that the NCAA will penalize Penn State football for this horrific cover-up. As Freeh’s 267-page report put it, the university lacks “institutional control”, and while most would see this as major violation, such a violation may be more ethical than one covered by NCAA Bylaws.
Yesterday, NCAA spokesman Bob Williams said in a release that the NCAA is awaiting Penn State’s response to ”four key questions, concerning compliance with institutional control and ethics policies” and that Penn State's response to the letter will inform the NCAA of their next steps. Like the rest of us, Williams says that this is the first time the NCAA has had the opportunity to review what is in the report. This appears to be an NCAA issue because of the idea of compliance and the institutional role the department plays in managing and overseeing an athletic department. Yet, NCAA compliance deals specifically with preexisting rules, and to that point, the information revealed in this report may not directly be in violation of the NCAA rules and regulations of intercollegiate sports. Therefore, it is unlikely that the NCAA will be able to take the criminal activities in this matter and relay them to the rules in the NCAA manual. The only thing that appears to be certain is what the NCAA cannot do: make up the rules as they go along.
Kelly Comer
Update: NCAA Imposes Severe Sanctions on Penn State
7. 24. 2012
Yesterday, the following sanctions were imposed on Penn State:
- $60 million fine
- Four-year post season ban
- Four-year reduction of grant-in-aid
- Five-year probation
- Vacation of wins since 1998
- Waiver of transfer rules and grant-in-aid retention
- Individual penalties to be determined
Additionally, the NCAA took corrective measures such as the implementation of Athletics Integrity Agreement, appointment of an independent Athletics Integrity Monitor for a five-year period, and adoption of all recommendations presented in Ch. 10 of the Freeh report.
I encourage everyone to visit ncaa.org for more on the NCAA’s authority to act, decision to forego imposing the death penalty, and transfer options for Penn State football student-athletes.
What a Beau Hossler Victory Could Mean
6. 17. 2012
What a weekend for sports! The NBA Finals, the Euro Cup, the College World Series and the U.S. Open, all happening this weekend, and the U.S. Open this year has not disappointed. It seems that some of the greatest are playing some terrible golf. Luke Donald, number one in standing-- cut. Bubba Watson, this year’s Master’s champion--cut. Rory McIlroy, last year’s U.S. Open champion--cut! Phil Mickelson makes the cut but is going into the final day at eight over! Admittedly, the Olympic is set out to be a very challenging course. Even those contending are simply trying to get by on par. So who is going to win this thing? Of course, I’d love to see Tiger Woods claim his fourth U.S. Open victory this Sunday. Woods appears to have his confidence back and is in the hunt. However, after an unfortunate show yesterday, he is going to have to play some extraordinary golf today in order to do that.
That being said, I want to address another possibility and that is a Beau Hossler victory. Beau Hossler is a high school junior this year. At seventeen years old, he is committed to Texas, and found himself, for a brief moment, playing in the U.S. Open and playing well. While he has fallen out of the lead, one wonders: if Beau Hossler wins today, should he take the millions given to the Open champion and more in endorsements? If he were to take the winnings, Hossler would lose student-athlete eligibility, meaning he would not be able to play for Texas in 2013. The advantages are obvious. As for the disadvantages, well does Ty Tryon ring a bell? Ty Tyron turned pro at sixteen and signed an endorsement deal with Callaway at age seventeen after qualifying for the PGA Tour. Yet, since qualifying, Tyron has struggled to hold his PGA Tour status, and by age twenty Tyron’s career had crashed and burned. Another thing to consider is the PGA Tour's own rules on amateurism, and it is likely that Hossler waived his right to earnings prior to the tournament to maintain amateur status. However this plays out, Hossler’s contention in this PGA TOUR event, yet alone his almost guaranteed status as low amateur is beyond admirable for a young man about to start his senior year of high school.
***Happy Father’s Day to the man who introduced me to the game of golf! Love you, Dad!***
Kelly Comer
What a weekend for sports! The NBA Finals, the Euro Cup, the College World Series and the U.S. Open, all happening this weekend, and the U.S. Open this year has not disappointed. It seems that some of the greatest are playing some terrible golf. Luke Donald, number one in standing-- cut. Bubba Watson, this year’s Master’s champion--cut. Rory McIlroy, last year’s U.S. Open champion--cut! Phil Mickelson makes the cut but is going into the final day at eight over! Admittedly, the Olympic is set out to be a very challenging course. Even those contending are simply trying to get by on par. So who is going to win this thing? Of course, I’d love to see Tiger Woods claim his fourth U.S. Open victory this Sunday. Woods appears to have his confidence back and is in the hunt. However, after an unfortunate show yesterday, he is going to have to play some extraordinary golf today in order to do that.
That being said, I want to address another possibility and that is a Beau Hossler victory. Beau Hossler is a high school junior this year. At seventeen years old, he is committed to Texas, and found himself, for a brief moment, playing in the U.S. Open and playing well. While he has fallen out of the lead, one wonders: if Beau Hossler wins today, should he take the millions given to the Open champion and more in endorsements? If he were to take the winnings, Hossler would lose student-athlete eligibility, meaning he would not be able to play for Texas in 2013. The advantages are obvious. As for the disadvantages, well does Ty Tryon ring a bell? Ty Tyron turned pro at sixteen and signed an endorsement deal with Callaway at age seventeen after qualifying for the PGA Tour. Yet, since qualifying, Tyron has struggled to hold his PGA Tour status, and by age twenty Tyron’s career had crashed and burned. Another thing to consider is the PGA Tour's own rules on amateurism, and it is likely that Hossler waived his right to earnings prior to the tournament to maintain amateur status. However this plays out, Hossler’s contention in this PGA TOUR event, yet alone his almost guaranteed status as low amateur is beyond admirable for a young man about to start his senior year of high school.
***Happy Father’s Day to the man who introduced me to the game of golf! Love you, Dad!***
Kelly Comer
Saints' Sanctions and the NCAA
4. 14. 2012
A few weeks ago, the NFL handed down sanctions to the New Orleans Saints for what is being referred to as a “crush-for-cash” bounty system. In short, the players and coaching staff were involved in a scheme, which rewarded players for hitting and injuring the opposition. According to the league, a snapshot of this system entails defensive players for the Saints being given specific targets such as Rodgers, Farve, and Newton, with "knockouts" being worth $1,500 and "cart-offs" $1,000. So what was the punishment for this “totally unacceptable” crime as NFL commissioner Roger Goodell put it? Head coach Sean Payton was suspended for the next season without pay, and defensive coordinator Gregg Williams was indefinitely suspended. The commissioner also banned the team’s general manager Mickey Loomis for eight regular-season games next year and assistant coach Joe Vitt for six. Lastly, the team as a whole was fined $500,000, and their second-round draft pick was taken away for both this year’s draft and next.
It goes with out saying that this unprecedented punishment is receiving a lot of attention. While Saints’ quarterback Drew Brees took to Twitter, sharing with followers, “I am speechless. Sean Payton is a great man, coach, and mentor. The best there is. I need to hear an explanation for this,” the reaction of most seems to be satisfaction that the league is taking such a strong stance against a bounty system in the NFL. The NFL sent a message with this punishment, and undoubtedly, the audience heard that message loud and clear; the NFL is non-tolerant of any behavior that jeopardizes the players’ safety and well-being.
So what would the outcome have been under similar circumstances in college football? How would the NCAA have responded? While it is difficult to speculate as to exactly how the NCAA might handle such a scheme, unlike the NFL, the NCAA has no methodology for distributing sanctions. In fact, the NCAA is often criticized for its ineffective dealing of infractions. Unquestionably, the NCAA should prioritize player safety, even more so than the NFL. Fortunately, the NCAA, having yet to be faced with such extreme violations by any team, has not had to make such decisions. However, it is only a matter of time before some new violation breaks, and the NCAA’s handling of the situation will be crucial. One thing is for certain; the NCAA should take note of the NFL’s response to the Saints’ situation and ensure that when the time comes, measures will be taken to corroborate the message the NCAA wants to send to college football.
Kelly Comer
A few weeks ago, the NFL handed down sanctions to the New Orleans Saints for what is being referred to as a “crush-for-cash” bounty system. In short, the players and coaching staff were involved in a scheme, which rewarded players for hitting and injuring the opposition. According to the league, a snapshot of this system entails defensive players for the Saints being given specific targets such as Rodgers, Farve, and Newton, with "knockouts" being worth $1,500 and "cart-offs" $1,000. So what was the punishment for this “totally unacceptable” crime as NFL commissioner Roger Goodell put it? Head coach Sean Payton was suspended for the next season without pay, and defensive coordinator Gregg Williams was indefinitely suspended. The commissioner also banned the team’s general manager Mickey Loomis for eight regular-season games next year and assistant coach Joe Vitt for six. Lastly, the team as a whole was fined $500,000, and their second-round draft pick was taken away for both this year’s draft and next.
It goes with out saying that this unprecedented punishment is receiving a lot of attention. While Saints’ quarterback Drew Brees took to Twitter, sharing with followers, “I am speechless. Sean Payton is a great man, coach, and mentor. The best there is. I need to hear an explanation for this,” the reaction of most seems to be satisfaction that the league is taking such a strong stance against a bounty system in the NFL. The NFL sent a message with this punishment, and undoubtedly, the audience heard that message loud and clear; the NFL is non-tolerant of any behavior that jeopardizes the players’ safety and well-being.
So what would the outcome have been under similar circumstances in college football? How would the NCAA have responded? While it is difficult to speculate as to exactly how the NCAA might handle such a scheme, unlike the NFL, the NCAA has no methodology for distributing sanctions. In fact, the NCAA is often criticized for its ineffective dealing of infractions. Unquestionably, the NCAA should prioritize player safety, even more so than the NFL. Fortunately, the NCAA, having yet to be faced with such extreme violations by any team, has not had to make such decisions. However, it is only a matter of time before some new violation breaks, and the NCAA’s handling of the situation will be crucial. One thing is for certain; the NCAA should take note of the NFL’s response to the Saints’ situation and ensure that when the time comes, measures will be taken to corroborate the message the NCAA wants to send to college football.
Kelly Comer
McIlroy Poised to Land Major Endorsements
4. 06. 2012
In 2011, Rory McIlroy established himself as a major contender in the world of golf, winning his first major, the U.S. Open. Without a doubt, McIlroy has come a long way from the Masters in 2011 where he fell short of a victory when he had a detrimental round the last Sunday, climbing to the number one spot in the world rankings after a victory back in March at the Hondo Classic. The Northern Irish golfer, at the age of twenty-two, is in the position to become one of the world’s elite golfers and certainly has proven that he has what it takes to compete with other golf professionals. Specifically, golf media, notorious for overanalyzing players performance, has honed in on likening the young player to none other than Tiger Woods, an unavoidable comparison since McIlroy became the second youngest player to achieve the number one slot, with Woods being the youngest. The media is looking now for McIlroy to contend in literally every tournament, and in regards to Woods, each round the guy plays is blown out of proportion, awaiting a streak that is worthy of officiating “Tiger is back!”
So what’s next for this young up and comer? Experts are predicting that McIlroy is going to draw in a sponsorship portfolio comparable to the $1 billion career earnings of Woods. While Jeremiah, a Dubai-based hotel chain, is basking in McIlroy’s lime light as one of the player’s most prominent sponsors, it won’t be long before some recognizable brands such as Nike, Audi, or Samsung get in on some of this attention. Kevin Alder, a sports marketing expert, predicts "the golf and sports marketing communities are hungering for that next golf superstar and want to anoint someone right away.” That someone looks to be McIlroy. Now that the dust has settled from the Woods scandal, the media needs a fresh face, a leader in influencing the game today. McIlroy is the image that these sponsors want to represent their brands. It is only a matter of time before McIlroy’s $10 million dollar portfolio skyrockets, with earnings that this sport has possibly never seen before.
Kelly Comer
In 2011, Rory McIlroy established himself as a major contender in the world of golf, winning his first major, the U.S. Open. Without a doubt, McIlroy has come a long way from the Masters in 2011 where he fell short of a victory when he had a detrimental round the last Sunday, climbing to the number one spot in the world rankings after a victory back in March at the Hondo Classic. The Northern Irish golfer, at the age of twenty-two, is in the position to become one of the world’s elite golfers and certainly has proven that he has what it takes to compete with other golf professionals. Specifically, golf media, notorious for overanalyzing players performance, has honed in on likening the young player to none other than Tiger Woods, an unavoidable comparison since McIlroy became the second youngest player to achieve the number one slot, with Woods being the youngest. The media is looking now for McIlroy to contend in literally every tournament, and in regards to Woods, each round the guy plays is blown out of proportion, awaiting a streak that is worthy of officiating “Tiger is back!”
So what’s next for this young up and comer? Experts are predicting that McIlroy is going to draw in a sponsorship portfolio comparable to the $1 billion career earnings of Woods. While Jeremiah, a Dubai-based hotel chain, is basking in McIlroy’s lime light as one of the player’s most prominent sponsors, it won’t be long before some recognizable brands such as Nike, Audi, or Samsung get in on some of this attention. Kevin Alder, a sports marketing expert, predicts "the golf and sports marketing communities are hungering for that next golf superstar and want to anoint someone right away.” That someone looks to be McIlroy. Now that the dust has settled from the Woods scandal, the media needs a fresh face, a leader in influencing the game today. McIlroy is the image that these sponsors want to represent their brands. It is only a matter of time before McIlroy’s $10 million dollar portfolio skyrockets, with earnings that this sport has possibly never seen before.
Kelly Comer
LIN MANIA- Jeremy Lin Seeks Ownership of "Linsanity"
3. 01. 2012
“LINSANITY!” If that term doesn’t strike a chord with you, then allow me to enlighten you on the phenomenon that is currently taking the sports world by storm. Jeremy Lin, point guard of the New York Knicks, has risen to stardom in a whirlwind over the course of a few weeks after Lin put up twenty-five points against the New Jersey Nets on February 4th. Since, Lin has arguably led the Knicks on a string of recent victories. There are doubters and there are believers, but rhetoric aside, no one can deny that there is a new buzz in the world of sports that stems from Jeremy Lin.
Jeremy Lin’s last name has been converted into a variety of new words in an attempt to describe the sensation. “Linsanity,” being the most recognizable among them. Webpages are popping up devoted solely to generating words using the famous athlete’s last name. On February 13, 2011, Jeremy Lin filed to own the “Linsanity” trademark with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. However, Lin may have some competition. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office webpage lists three others that filed prior to Lin. Two of whom have no ties to the Knicks player while the other is a former coach of the player with rights to preexisting rights to registered domain names in relation to Jeremy Lin. So who will come out with the patented term? My bet is on Lin, but you can’t blame the others for an effort.
Kelly Comer
“LINSANITY!” If that term doesn’t strike a chord with you, then allow me to enlighten you on the phenomenon that is currently taking the sports world by storm. Jeremy Lin, point guard of the New York Knicks, has risen to stardom in a whirlwind over the course of a few weeks after Lin put up twenty-five points against the New Jersey Nets on February 4th. Since, Lin has arguably led the Knicks on a string of recent victories. There are doubters and there are believers, but rhetoric aside, no one can deny that there is a new buzz in the world of sports that stems from Jeremy Lin.
Jeremy Lin’s last name has been converted into a variety of new words in an attempt to describe the sensation. “Linsanity,” being the most recognizable among them. Webpages are popping up devoted solely to generating words using the famous athlete’s last name. On February 13, 2011, Jeremy Lin filed to own the “Linsanity” trademark with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. However, Lin may have some competition. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office webpage lists three others that filed prior to Lin. Two of whom have no ties to the Knicks player while the other is a former coach of the player with rights to preexisting rights to registered domain names in relation to Jeremy Lin. So who will come out with the patented term? My bet is on Lin, but you can’t blame the others for an effort.
Kelly Comer
NFL DRAFT "CLEAT" SHEET
3. 01. 2012
It’s that time of the year! With the NFL Combine coming to a wrap, teams are gearing up to fill positions on next year’s roster with some of America’s most elite college players at the NFL Draft. Due to the recent publicized decisions of Arkansas’ players Tyler Wilson and Knile Davis to forgo the 2013 Draft, most are aware that the deadline for college players to declare for the Draft fell in January. Once a player declares, they will then proceed with signing an agent, training for the NFL Scouting Combine, and depending on their prestige in the football world, managing the hype in the wake of this declaration.
The draft takes place over a weekend in April each year, which falls halfway between the Super Bowl and the commencing of spring training in July. For the teams, the draft is one of three opportunities they have to fill positions on their team for the upcoming year; other ways include team-to-team trades or free-agent signings. During the draft, thirty-two teams will take turns over seven rounds selecting their players. A round is complete when each team has had the chance to make a selection. However, there is slight variation in the number of picks since picks can either be traded between teams or awarded to a team in the rare occurrence that the NFL issues a compensatory pick to a team. Each teams’ position in the drafting order is determined based on their win-loss record from the previous season, with the first team being the team with the poorest performance and the Super Bowl Champion receiving the last pick. There are various factors that are considered in determining a team’ s record and even more factors to consider in the event that two teams share a record. The intention being that ideally the worst teams come out receiving the better players.
The day of the draft, players anticipating a first round pick will more than likely be on-hand in the green room at The Theater in Madison Square Garden, while others will be scattered across the nation awaiting the call with their friends and family. A commissioner will come onto the stage and set the clock allotting each team in the first round, in turn, fifteen minutes to make a selection before moving onto the next team. In the second round this goes down to ten minutes and five minutes in those rounds remaining. For the most part, teams will then have their pick of almost anyone they want. It will come as no surprise that the majority of draft picks are of course eligible college football players, but what might shock some is that in 1984 the Cowboys th drafted player Carl Lewis in the 12 round, whom had no football experience at all but rather was an Olympic Gold medalist.
Once the team personnel reach a decision on whom they will select, they will relay their selection to a representative in attendance, whom will tell the commissioner, then notifying the player. The player is under no obligation to accept; however such circumstances are unlikely. A drafting position is crucial to the hopeful players. The difference in a first round pick and a twelfth round pick could mean millions in signing and bonus. While this year the odds are in favor of Andrew Luck, a quarterback for Stanford, being selected by the Colts as the first pick, and RG3, a fellow quarterback, following closely behind him, what I’m curious about is who will be deemed “Mr. Irrelevant.” Yes, you read correctly, “Mr. Irrelevant.” An honor in itself, bestowed on the last draft pick. The recipient is recognized in a celebration lasting a week, known of course as “Mr. Irrelevant Week” where he receives the “Lowsmein. ” For those curious, Arkansas quarterback Kevin Scanlon was the last Mr. Irrelevant from the state in 1980. Where is he today? In Little Rock, Arkansas where he resides with his wife and children.
Kelly Comer
It’s that time of the year! With the NFL Combine coming to a wrap, teams are gearing up to fill positions on next year’s roster with some of America’s most elite college players at the NFL Draft. Due to the recent publicized decisions of Arkansas’ players Tyler Wilson and Knile Davis to forgo the 2013 Draft, most are aware that the deadline for college players to declare for the Draft fell in January. Once a player declares, they will then proceed with signing an agent, training for the NFL Scouting Combine, and depending on their prestige in the football world, managing the hype in the wake of this declaration.
The draft takes place over a weekend in April each year, which falls halfway between the Super Bowl and the commencing of spring training in July. For the teams, the draft is one of three opportunities they have to fill positions on their team for the upcoming year; other ways include team-to-team trades or free-agent signings. During the draft, thirty-two teams will take turns over seven rounds selecting their players. A round is complete when each team has had the chance to make a selection. However, there is slight variation in the number of picks since picks can either be traded between teams or awarded to a team in the rare occurrence that the NFL issues a compensatory pick to a team. Each teams’ position in the drafting order is determined based on their win-loss record from the previous season, with the first team being the team with the poorest performance and the Super Bowl Champion receiving the last pick. There are various factors that are considered in determining a team’ s record and even more factors to consider in the event that two teams share a record. The intention being that ideally the worst teams come out receiving the better players.
The day of the draft, players anticipating a first round pick will more than likely be on-hand in the green room at The Theater in Madison Square Garden, while others will be scattered across the nation awaiting the call with their friends and family. A commissioner will come onto the stage and set the clock allotting each team in the first round, in turn, fifteen minutes to make a selection before moving onto the next team. In the second round this goes down to ten minutes and five minutes in those rounds remaining. For the most part, teams will then have their pick of almost anyone they want. It will come as no surprise that the majority of draft picks are of course eligible college football players, but what might shock some is that in 1984 the Cowboys th drafted player Carl Lewis in the 12 round, whom had no football experience at all but rather was an Olympic Gold medalist.
Once the team personnel reach a decision on whom they will select, they will relay their selection to a representative in attendance, whom will tell the commissioner, then notifying the player. The player is under no obligation to accept; however such circumstances are unlikely. A drafting position is crucial to the hopeful players. The difference in a first round pick and a twelfth round pick could mean millions in signing and bonus. While this year the odds are in favor of Andrew Luck, a quarterback for Stanford, being selected by the Colts as the first pick, and RG3, a fellow quarterback, following closely behind him, what I’m curious about is who will be deemed “Mr. Irrelevant.” Yes, you read correctly, “Mr. Irrelevant.” An honor in itself, bestowed on the last draft pick. The recipient is recognized in a celebration lasting a week, known of course as “Mr. Irrelevant Week” where he receives the “Lowsmein. ” For those curious, Arkansas quarterback Kevin Scanlon was the last Mr. Irrelevant from the state in 1980. Where is he today? In Little Rock, Arkansas where he resides with his wife and children.
Kelly Comer