The Big Ten Men's Basketball Tournament tips off today. Now before you get excited about Selection Sunday coming up this weekend, know that is not actually the case. For the first time since it was instituted, the Big Ten Tourney will not be held on the final weekend of the regular season.
Instead, conference officials--in yet another money grab--agreed to hold the tournament a week earlier so they could play in that hotbed of Big Ten Basketball: Madison Square Garden in New York. MSG is not available during traditional Championship Week because the Big East plays its conference tourney there. That basically relegates the Big Ten to JV status--playing at the same time as such powerhouses as the Patriot League and the Horizon League. And we're not talking about the "real" Big East when Syracuse, Georgetown and Villanova were national powers. We are talking about the Marquette, Creighton, Butler Big East--which just adds further insult to injury.
Although, the watered down Big East will likely still pack in bigger crowds for their tournament games that the Big Ten will. The average conference campus is more than 650-miles from Madison Square Garden. And hotel rooms in New York City are much more expensive than the usual conference tournament host sites of Indianapolis or Chicago. The one bright spot is that attendance should be better than last year's Big Ten Tournament in Washington, DC which conjured up the phrase "Plenty of good seats still available" every time there would be a shot of the stands on TV.
This downgrading of what should be the premier event of the Big Ten Basketball season is part of the conference's misguided efforts to make New York and Washington "Big Ten cities". While there is certainly fan interest and media coverage of Maryland Basketball in the nation's capital, nobody in NYC gives a rat's behind about Rutgers. I would be willing to bet there are more alumni of Big Ten schools in New York than there are fans of the Scarlet Knights in the entire country. But is that interest worthy of having the conference tournament moved out of its regular timeslot and playing second fiddle to everything else that goes on in NYC when it could be the biggest thing going on in Indy, Milwaukee or Detroit?
And any "inroads" the conference may make this week will be quickly forgotten next week when the Big East Tournament at Madison Square Garden itself gets overshadowed by the Atlantic Coast Conference tourney taking over the Barclays Center in Brooklyn at the same time. The ACC will be coming to town with number one ranked Virginia and the Duke Blue Devils--who are reviled by even the most casual college basketball fan. By Selection Sunday, you'd be hard pressed to even remember who won the Big Ten Championship.
Perhaps most importantly, how will this early tournament affect Big Ten teams that do make the Big Dance? Those knocked out in the quarterfinals will go two weeks without playing a game. The conference championship game participants a week-and-a-half. You ask any coach and he'd tell you it's best to play every third day to stay sharp. When the Big Ten fails to get anyone to the second weekend of the NCAA tournament I hope that conference officials can take time away from counting their money and consider the negative effects of their short-sighted decisions.
Wednesday, February 28, 2018
Tuesday, February 27, 2018
Liberals' Toy Trains
I saw yesterday that the city of Washington, DC is replace their streetcar fleet. Transit officials say they are having a hard time getting parts anymore for the trains--as the company that made them is no longer in business--and the foreign company that can make those parts is always backlogged. The cost to replace those streetcars is estimated at 25-MILLION dollars. Did I mention the streetcars that are going to be replaced are just two years old?
Fortunately, the problems with the DC streetcars isn't going to affect a lot of people. The trains currently run on just one street--H Street--covering a two mile stretch of bureaucratic office buildings and lobbying groups before ending up near RFK stadium where the DC United MLS soccer team plays a handful of home games a year. According to the DC Transit website, buses run along that same route almost as regularly as the streetcars.
The need to buy all new cars won't derail (pun intended) plans to expand the system to one other street by the year 2024--which is three years later than first expected. The cost for that is estimated at 89-million dollars--plus buying another 20-million worth of trains. Installing streetcars is no easy task. The entire street must be torn up so that the rails can be installed down the middle of it. And wires need to be strung along the entire route between buildings--since you can't have pedestrians stepping on an electrified third rail that subways use. Although a future expansion to the Georgetown area would use wireless streetcars that run on batteries--but that also cost 85-MILLION dollars.
The good news for DC streetcar riders is that the cost of the new trains and the expansion of the line will not be passed along to them. Rides on the streetcar will continue to be FREE for the foreseeable future. That's right, DC Transit makes no attempt to generate any revenue from the streetcars--despite their exorbitant costs. That expense is just charged to the taxpayer--some of whom are us--as the Federal Government subsidizes operations of the capital city.
DC streetcar riders should consider themselves lucky, as least they can use their trains. Cincinnati found out the hard way theirs don't run so well in cold and icy conditions. They too started out with free rides, but as soon as a fare was instituted, ridership fell 25-percent short of expectations--and those numbers continue to decline.
Milwaukee is finishing the construction work on their streetcar line this year and service should begin in the fall. If it performs as well as those in most other American cities, I'll have plenty of fodder for My Two Cents for years to come.
Fortunately, the problems with the DC streetcars isn't going to affect a lot of people. The trains currently run on just one street--H Street--covering a two mile stretch of bureaucratic office buildings and lobbying groups before ending up near RFK stadium where the DC United MLS soccer team plays a handful of home games a year. According to the DC Transit website, buses run along that same route almost as regularly as the streetcars.
The need to buy all new cars won't derail (pun intended) plans to expand the system to one other street by the year 2024--which is three years later than first expected. The cost for that is estimated at 89-million dollars--plus buying another 20-million worth of trains. Installing streetcars is no easy task. The entire street must be torn up so that the rails can be installed down the middle of it. And wires need to be strung along the entire route between buildings--since you can't have pedestrians stepping on an electrified third rail that subways use. Although a future expansion to the Georgetown area would use wireless streetcars that run on batteries--but that also cost 85-MILLION dollars.
The good news for DC streetcar riders is that the cost of the new trains and the expansion of the line will not be passed along to them. Rides on the streetcar will continue to be FREE for the foreseeable future. That's right, DC Transit makes no attempt to generate any revenue from the streetcars--despite their exorbitant costs. That expense is just charged to the taxpayer--some of whom are us--as the Federal Government subsidizes operations of the capital city.
DC streetcar riders should consider themselves lucky, as least they can use their trains. Cincinnati found out the hard way theirs don't run so well in cold and icy conditions. They too started out with free rides, but as soon as a fare was instituted, ridership fell 25-percent short of expectations--and those numbers continue to decline.
Milwaukee is finishing the construction work on their streetcar line this year and service should begin in the fall. If it performs as well as those in most other American cities, I'll have plenty of fodder for My Two Cents for years to come.
Monday, February 26, 2018
Paying For Your Vacation
I expect to hear "I bet you are looking forward to your vacation next week" quite often over the next few days. My wife and I are heading out on our annual winter pilgrimage to much warmer weather, where she can sit on a beach or by a pool and I can play golf all day for a week. But I don't get to look forward to that until the night before we fly out.
Like many of you, when I'm not at work, not as much work gets done. And in a business where we can't just turn off the lights, lock the door and come back to pick up where we left off a week ago, that means I have to get two weeks worth of work done in just one week. This week I have to book twice as many interviews for Bob Burnell to talk to while I'm gone. Working on stories that are not time-sensitive for inclusion in newscast all next week. Recording weekend programs two weeks in advance and producing a 67-item checklist so that the people that are here can complete all of the daily tasks that I handle.
It's almost like the system punishes you for taking time away from your job. Maybe we should adopt the attitude that Europeans have. No one goes to Spain in August because everyone in Spain is on vacation in August--and nothing gets done while they are gone. It's a good thing the countries don't border each other, or Germans would likely have to be brought in just to keep things operating efficiently.
One thing that I'm good at is unplugging and forgetting about this place while on vacation. I don't wake up in the morning worrying "Did Anthony Domol send the morning forecast?". And I turn off all the "breaking news alerts" on my phone so that "Trump Tweets Insults at North Korea" doesn't wake me up at 3:30 am.
The pile of work that you need to do before a vacation--and that you face when you come back--is likely the reason that Americans take less time off than all other industrialized nations--and why so many of us leave vacation time on the table every year. So now it's off to tackle my doubled workload, so I can have a few days to relax and recharge for the double-work week on the back-end.
Like many of you, when I'm not at work, not as much work gets done. And in a business where we can't just turn off the lights, lock the door and come back to pick up where we left off a week ago, that means I have to get two weeks worth of work done in just one week. This week I have to book twice as many interviews for Bob Burnell to talk to while I'm gone. Working on stories that are not time-sensitive for inclusion in newscast all next week. Recording weekend programs two weeks in advance and producing a 67-item checklist so that the people that are here can complete all of the daily tasks that I handle.
It's almost like the system punishes you for taking time away from your job. Maybe we should adopt the attitude that Europeans have. No one goes to Spain in August because everyone in Spain is on vacation in August--and nothing gets done while they are gone. It's a good thing the countries don't border each other, or Germans would likely have to be brought in just to keep things operating efficiently.
One thing that I'm good at is unplugging and forgetting about this place while on vacation. I don't wake up in the morning worrying "Did Anthony Domol send the morning forecast?". And I turn off all the "breaking news alerts" on my phone so that "Trump Tweets Insults at North Korea" doesn't wake me up at 3:30 am.
The pile of work that you need to do before a vacation--and that you face when you come back--is likely the reason that Americans take less time off than all other industrialized nations--and why so many of us leave vacation time on the table every year. So now it's off to tackle my doubled workload, so I can have a few days to relax and recharge for the double-work week on the back-end.
Friday, February 23, 2018
Losing the TV Olympics
"It has been a disastrous Olympics for the United States"
I actually heard that from more than one TV commentator this week as the US "languishes" in 4th place in the medal count at the Winter Games. What we have here is a situation where perception is trumping reality.
Yes, we sent the largest team in Winter Olympics history--so being far behind less-populous countries like Norway and Canada looks bad. But let's be honest, what percentage of our population is ever exposed to conditions suited to winter sports. And when events are known as "Nordic Skiing" people from Nordic countries should probably dominate.
Incredible successes have been achieved by Americans in these games. We won our first ever medal in men's single luge. Chris Mazdzer won silver after failing to get into the top ten for many of the events leading up to the Olympics. We won our first-ever gold medal in women's cross-country skiing in the team sprint event. Our women's hockey team finally got over the mental hurdle that has killed them for so many years when they play the Canadians. And later today, we will win our first ever gold or silver in men's curling.
The reason it seems like the US is a "disaster" this year is because we are losing what I like to call the "TV Olympics"--the tiny sliver of action that NBC decides to show during their prime-time broadcast window. NBC hitched its wagon--as it always does--to a few high-profile athletes in its promotion leading up to the games. Snowboarders like Chloe Kim and Shaun White delivered gold in primetime. But they were one-night, one-event athletes. We saw plenty of Mikaela Schiffrin and Lindsey Vonn flashing their blonde hair and blue eyes before the games. But weather delays forced Schiffrin to cut back on the aggressive schedule she planned to ski--and Vonn simply wasn't good enough in her latest comeback from a knee injury.
And then there is figure skating. Adam Rippon became the "breakout star" of the Games (on NBC). He was "flamboyant". He was "sassy". He "put Vice President Mike Pence in his place". He also doesn't do quad-jumps in his routines--and he was never a serious medal contender coming to South Korea. Nathan Chen does a lot of quads in his routine. But he flamed out in the short program and dug himself a hole too deep to get out of in the long program. The Americans choked in ice dancing, weren't good enough in pairs and the women's team was just weak this time around. But because these are the athletes that NBC (and other media outlets) know get ratings in primetime--they were all we heard about.
The real sport we need to be concerned about is speed skating. Medals were few and far between for Team USA in these games--and the future of the sport doesn't look too bright. In fact, most of our top contenders in South Korea are recent converts from in-line skating--who started skating on ice in just the last couple of years. That doesn't bode well for folks at the Pettit Center in West Allis--where greats like Bonnie Blair and Dan Jansen honed their skills.
In terms of a TV show, these Olympics have been a bomb. In terms of what this is supposed to be about--sports--we've done fine this time around.
I actually heard that from more than one TV commentator this week as the US "languishes" in 4th place in the medal count at the Winter Games. What we have here is a situation where perception is trumping reality.
Yes, we sent the largest team in Winter Olympics history--so being far behind less-populous countries like Norway and Canada looks bad. But let's be honest, what percentage of our population is ever exposed to conditions suited to winter sports. And when events are known as "Nordic Skiing" people from Nordic countries should probably dominate.
Incredible successes have been achieved by Americans in these games. We won our first ever medal in men's single luge. Chris Mazdzer won silver after failing to get into the top ten for many of the events leading up to the Olympics. We won our first-ever gold medal in women's cross-country skiing in the team sprint event. Our women's hockey team finally got over the mental hurdle that has killed them for so many years when they play the Canadians. And later today, we will win our first ever gold or silver in men's curling.
The reason it seems like the US is a "disaster" this year is because we are losing what I like to call the "TV Olympics"--the tiny sliver of action that NBC decides to show during their prime-time broadcast window. NBC hitched its wagon--as it always does--to a few high-profile athletes in its promotion leading up to the games. Snowboarders like Chloe Kim and Shaun White delivered gold in primetime. But they were one-night, one-event athletes. We saw plenty of Mikaela Schiffrin and Lindsey Vonn flashing their blonde hair and blue eyes before the games. But weather delays forced Schiffrin to cut back on the aggressive schedule she planned to ski--and Vonn simply wasn't good enough in her latest comeback from a knee injury.
And then there is figure skating. Adam Rippon became the "breakout star" of the Games (on NBC). He was "flamboyant". He was "sassy". He "put Vice President Mike Pence in his place". He also doesn't do quad-jumps in his routines--and he was never a serious medal contender coming to South Korea. Nathan Chen does a lot of quads in his routine. But he flamed out in the short program and dug himself a hole too deep to get out of in the long program. The Americans choked in ice dancing, weren't good enough in pairs and the women's team was just weak this time around. But because these are the athletes that NBC (and other media outlets) know get ratings in primetime--they were all we heard about.
The real sport we need to be concerned about is speed skating. Medals were few and far between for Team USA in these games--and the future of the sport doesn't look too bright. In fact, most of our top contenders in South Korea are recent converts from in-line skating--who started skating on ice in just the last couple of years. That doesn't bode well for folks at the Pettit Center in West Allis--where greats like Bonnie Blair and Dan Jansen honed their skills.
In terms of a TV show, these Olympics have been a bomb. In terms of what this is supposed to be about--sports--we've done fine this time around.
Thursday, February 22, 2018
He May Get It
I'm not going to give an endorsement in the selection process of the new Oshkosh School District Superintendent. But I do have to laud some of the comments I heard from interim Beloit Superintendent Darrell Williams during our conversation last night.
First off, I give Williams credit for not being the usual academic in his interactions with people. He's a two-hand hand-shaker--which invariably makes you a two-hand-shaker and pretty soon you feel like you've just signed the Camp David Accords to bring peace to the Middle East. And not everyone is addressed as "sir" or "madam" during an introduction with Darrell. But I digress.
In answering my question about the role of schools in the community, Williams mentioned the standard "closing the achievement gap", but he also brought up something that I haven't heard from many in education anymore: "closing the attitude gap". And he specifically called out students and parents that make no effort to take advantage of the myriad programs and services school districts already have in place--and then end up blaming "the schools" for the child's lack of education.
Williams got another two-hand-shake from me after that answer, because it shows that he "gets it". To say that today's education system "doesn't do enough" is disingenuous to those working in the system--and insulting to those that fund the system. Consider that we feed kids two meals a day--even during the summer, provide them with modern technology and internet access for free, we artificially reduce class sizes, offer before and after school babysitting services, counseling services, healthcare services, reading specialists, math tutoring, one-on-one specialized instruction, an alternative high school, mentoring programs, work-to-learn programs and student-directed learning.
And yet, what is the only message we hear? "We need to do more for our schools--because there are still kids falling through the cracks". Now we need to pay for older students to ride the bus for free because they don't want to walk in the cold. Or we should pay for free broadband internet at home so there is no "technology gap". The ugly truth--as Mr Williams points out in his "attitude gap" response--is that those kids are looking for the cracks and their parents are helping to find them.
It would be incredibly refreshing to have a Superintendent that demands accountability from all students and parents--and not treat them like "victims of the system". It would be nice to hear that we the taxpayers are going above and beyond in providing equal opportunities for all students--and that "doing more for our schools" will in no way guarantee equal results for all kids. And that's why Darrell Williams probably has no chance to be the next Oshkosh School Superintendent.
First off, I give Williams credit for not being the usual academic in his interactions with people. He's a two-hand hand-shaker--which invariably makes you a two-hand-shaker and pretty soon you feel like you've just signed the Camp David Accords to bring peace to the Middle East. And not everyone is addressed as "sir" or "madam" during an introduction with Darrell. But I digress.
In answering my question about the role of schools in the community, Williams mentioned the standard "closing the achievement gap", but he also brought up something that I haven't heard from many in education anymore: "closing the attitude gap". And he specifically called out students and parents that make no effort to take advantage of the myriad programs and services school districts already have in place--and then end up blaming "the schools" for the child's lack of education.
Williams got another two-hand-shake from me after that answer, because it shows that he "gets it". To say that today's education system "doesn't do enough" is disingenuous to those working in the system--and insulting to those that fund the system. Consider that we feed kids two meals a day--even during the summer, provide them with modern technology and internet access for free, we artificially reduce class sizes, offer before and after school babysitting services, counseling services, healthcare services, reading specialists, math tutoring, one-on-one specialized instruction, an alternative high school, mentoring programs, work-to-learn programs and student-directed learning.
And yet, what is the only message we hear? "We need to do more for our schools--because there are still kids falling through the cracks". Now we need to pay for older students to ride the bus for free because they don't want to walk in the cold. Or we should pay for free broadband internet at home so there is no "technology gap". The ugly truth--as Mr Williams points out in his "attitude gap" response--is that those kids are looking for the cracks and their parents are helping to find them.
It would be incredibly refreshing to have a Superintendent that demands accountability from all students and parents--and not treat them like "victims of the system". It would be nice to hear that we the taxpayers are going above and beyond in providing equal opportunities for all students--and that "doing more for our schools" will in no way guarantee equal results for all kids. And that's why Darrell Williams probably has no chance to be the next Oshkosh School Superintendent.
Wednesday, February 21, 2018
No Way to Win (or Lose)
I will admit that I went to bed after the second period of last night's Team USA-Czech Republic men's Olympic Hockey game because 9:10 pm start times don't go well with 2:45 am wake up calls for work. And it is a good thing I did, because if I had stayed up until the end of the game I would have had no sleep while ranting and raving about how this contest was decided.
If you didn't stay up either, the US lost to the Czechs--and were eliminated from medal contention--in an overtime shootout. As a fan of "real hockey" I DETEST the shootout more than anything else in sports. An elimination playoff game that featured great competition for three full periods and a ten minute overtime gets decided by trick shots.
I will never understand why the powers-that-be think the best way to break ties is to completely abandon the normal gameplay and go to a completely different way of playing just because you don't want it to "go on too long". The NHL uses the shootout during its regular season--after playing an equally-stupid, five-minute, 3-on-3 overtime period. But that's for one of 82-games and really doesn't mean that much in the grand scheme of things. But in the Playoffs--where every game has greatly-magnified meaning--the teams play 5-on-5 "regular" sudden death hockey for as long as it takes to get a game-winning goal.
And that has produced some of the most epic hockey games in the sport's history. Three and four overtime contests with multiple close calls and dramatic game winners that remain part of the sports lore. Unlike the three goals that might be scored in a shootout by one team edging out the two goals scored by the other.
You don't see tie games in Olympic Basketball decided by a free-throw shooting contest. And when they had baseball and softball in the Olympics, those extra innings games weren't decided by Home Run Derby. The integrity of those sports is preserved all the way to the conclusion.
I fear that based on the competitive balance between the two teams that tonight's Women's Hockey gold medal game between Team USA and Canada will also likely end up in a shootout--with neither side feeling like they really "earned" that win. So let them play until there is a winner. And leave the "shootout" for the losers over on the soccer pitch.
If you didn't stay up either, the US lost to the Czechs--and were eliminated from medal contention--in an overtime shootout. As a fan of "real hockey" I DETEST the shootout more than anything else in sports. An elimination playoff game that featured great competition for three full periods and a ten minute overtime gets decided by trick shots.
I will never understand why the powers-that-be think the best way to break ties is to completely abandon the normal gameplay and go to a completely different way of playing just because you don't want it to "go on too long". The NHL uses the shootout during its regular season--after playing an equally-stupid, five-minute, 3-on-3 overtime period. But that's for one of 82-games and really doesn't mean that much in the grand scheme of things. But in the Playoffs--where every game has greatly-magnified meaning--the teams play 5-on-5 "regular" sudden death hockey for as long as it takes to get a game-winning goal.
And that has produced some of the most epic hockey games in the sport's history. Three and four overtime contests with multiple close calls and dramatic game winners that remain part of the sports lore. Unlike the three goals that might be scored in a shootout by one team edging out the two goals scored by the other.
You don't see tie games in Olympic Basketball decided by a free-throw shooting contest. And when they had baseball and softball in the Olympics, those extra innings games weren't decided by Home Run Derby. The integrity of those sports is preserved all the way to the conclusion.
I fear that based on the competitive balance between the two teams that tonight's Women's Hockey gold medal game between Team USA and Canada will also likely end up in a shootout--with neither side feeling like they really "earned" that win. So let them play until there is a winner. And leave the "shootout" for the losers over on the soccer pitch.
Tuesday, February 20, 2018
They Did That On Purpose
One of the great things about the Founding Fathers and the framers of the Constitution is that they made it very, very, very hard for the Government to take away our rights. Having paid a heavy price to secure our independence, they didn't want it just given away by one judge, a slim legislative majority or a power-hungry executive. That's why they made it a long and arduous effort to amend the Constitution--and it's why they built redundancies into the document too.
I was reminded of that as discussions both on-line and on the news channels turned to the potential repeal of the Second Amendment in response to the rash of school shootings over the past decade. Again, such a repeal would take years and the consent of 38-states to ratify a new amendment to repeal the old amendment. There has not been an amendment added to the Constitution since 1992 (not allowing Congress to change its salaries within their current terms)--and it was first proposed 202 years before it was finally ratified. It was just the 17th amendment added since the original Bill of Rights in 1789.
But even if there was somehow a successful repeal of the Second Amendment, that still wouldn't open the door for Government confiscation of guns. You see, the Fifth Amendment requires the Government show cause before seizing any private property from citizens. That means the owners of all 300-million weapons in the US could demand a court hearing before any confiscation could take place. How long do you think it would take to cycle through all of those cases--plus the appeals to which the citizens are entitled under the Sixth Amendment?
And we are only talking about the people that we already know have guns. To root out those still possessing weapons in unknown numbers, that would require search warrants under the Fourth Amendment. Judges not overwhelmed by Fifth Amendment cases would be inundated with requests from police agencies to search homes and storage units of suspected weapons owners before any action could be taken against them--triggering their Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights.
We may look at the Founding Fathers as relatively uneducated men with beliefs that don't conform to modern social mores. But they obviously understood human nature--that there would be knee-jerk reactions to things that happened in our society. Or that total idiots might be elected to positions of power. And they built incredible safeguards into our system of governance. And the most important of those is that the rights of the individual have always, still are, and hopefully always will be more important that the power of the Government.
I was reminded of that as discussions both on-line and on the news channels turned to the potential repeal of the Second Amendment in response to the rash of school shootings over the past decade. Again, such a repeal would take years and the consent of 38-states to ratify a new amendment to repeal the old amendment. There has not been an amendment added to the Constitution since 1992 (not allowing Congress to change its salaries within their current terms)--and it was first proposed 202 years before it was finally ratified. It was just the 17th amendment added since the original Bill of Rights in 1789.
But even if there was somehow a successful repeal of the Second Amendment, that still wouldn't open the door for Government confiscation of guns. You see, the Fifth Amendment requires the Government show cause before seizing any private property from citizens. That means the owners of all 300-million weapons in the US could demand a court hearing before any confiscation could take place. How long do you think it would take to cycle through all of those cases--plus the appeals to which the citizens are entitled under the Sixth Amendment?
And we are only talking about the people that we already know have guns. To root out those still possessing weapons in unknown numbers, that would require search warrants under the Fourth Amendment. Judges not overwhelmed by Fifth Amendment cases would be inundated with requests from police agencies to search homes and storage units of suspected weapons owners before any action could be taken against them--triggering their Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights.
We may look at the Founding Fathers as relatively uneducated men with beliefs that don't conform to modern social mores. But they obviously understood human nature--that there would be knee-jerk reactions to things that happened in our society. Or that total idiots might be elected to positions of power. And they built incredible safeguards into our system of governance. And the most important of those is that the rights of the individual have always, still are, and hopefully always will be more important that the power of the Government.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)