Major League Baseball starts a new season today, and I predict it is going to be a long one. We already know that the World Series could stretch into November again, but what I'm talking about is the pace of play in a game already considered way too slow by many casual fans which is now going to get even slower.
This is the first season that MLB will be be using expanded instant replay. Instead of determining just fair or foul calls and whether a ball cleared the fence or home run line, now plays on the bases and catches in the field can be reviewed as well. For the first six innings, managers will have one challenge each. If their first challenge is upheld, they get a second. That means four challenges are possible each game. Starting in the seventh inning, the umpires can request a replay review of their own.
Given the nature of baseball, with a small ball being used on a large field--and the number of bang-bang plays occurring on the bases--the possibilities for challenges and umpire-reviews are nearly endless. And as we've seen in the NCAA Tournament--where every finger to the eye, last-minute shot and ball deflected out of bounds has led to momentum-killing video reviews courtside--watching umpires on the phone with the video command center in New York is not going to be must see television.
Pace of play was a big topic on the internet this weekend, with suggestions ranging from pitch clocks to home run derby to decide tie games after the 10th inning. But here is a novel idea to speed up pace of play--and encourage more offense as well: CALL MORE STRIKES.
The strike zone in today's pro game is a joke. A ball four inches above the belt is now "high". And yet, you see the same pitch thrown to the same batter in his next at-bat and he drills it 450-feet out of the ballpark. The tight strike zone has also played into the hands of the Sabermetrics crowd--who believe you want lineups filled with batters who take a lot of pitches and can foul off borderline pitches until they get a juicy hanging curve out over the plate to drive somewhere. The Red Sox, Yankees and Cardinals are masters of that technique--and they all play some of the longest games in the Majors--drawn out, four hour affairs with numerous pinch hitters, pitching changes to face one batter and 15-pitch at bats that end up with a walk.
If you went back to the bottom of the armpits to the bottom of the knees--and call strikes all the way out to the edges of the plate, hitters would go up there ready to swing, because they know they are going to see strikes and they need to be aggressive to avoid falling behind in the count. You might also see more complete games and fewer three-pitchers-used-in-one-inning situations--as starters won't reach the 100-pitch mark in the 6th inning so often.
So enjoy the 2014 baseball season, fans. You are going to be there awhile.
Monday, March 31, 2014
Friday, March 28, 2014
The Ivory Tower Quandry
As the recent National Labor Relations Board ruling that Northwestern University football players can unionize moves us toward the end of college athletics as we know it, it should be fun to watch those involved in academia twist themselves into philosophical knots trying to figure out who to support in the upcoming battle.
Many of those who patrol our halls of learning tend to lean left--VERY left. They support efforts to unionize all forms of "labor"--right down to the high school dropout who is putting my Filet-O-Fish on a bun along the McDonald's production line. They believe--and teach--that collective bargaining is the only form of "power" that employees have over their employers--and that all concessions by workers to maintain profitability should be met with a quid-pro-quo from the company as well. So they should be jumping behind the idea of classifying college athletes as "employees" of the school--with "rights" to bargain for such things as salaries, health insurance and a share of all marketing based upon their likeness or name.
But many of those same Doctors and Professors also HATE athletics--especially the influence sports has on the campus culture. They resent the big bucks pulled in by Athletic Directors and Head Coaches. They detest the special treatment afforded athletes in the classroom. They fume over reports showing some sports programs producing a graduation rate out of Animal House: ZERO-POINT-ZERO-ZERO. And they envy the adulation placed upon those who do the menial tasks of putting a basketball in a hoop or catching a football--while they toil in anonymity in the lab doing work that "betters the human race". How do you think Professor Peabody is going to feel parking his Prius with all of the Obama '08 and '12 bumper stickers on it in the lot outside the College of Letters and Sciences next to the Mustang Convertible with the 14-inch chrome rims that Johnny Football purchased with the money the school gave him for the uniforms with his number that sold in the University Bookstore last month? And how will Doctor Knowitall treat the one-and-done, 19-year old freshman basketball star taking her first semester remedial English class just to stay eligible long enough to play into the NCAA Tournament--who is also getting paid as much as her?
Plus, the debates over how paying athletes advances the "Academic Mission" of the schools should be great theater as well. A whole new class of "employee" will be added to college payrolls that will do no teaching or research--nor will it support the efforts to do either of those tasks. All at a time when most schools are trimming the number of instructors on campus and asking those in the classroom to teach more kids.
For some reason, I think the Ivory Tower is going to win out over the Blue Fist in this ideological battle.
Many of those who patrol our halls of learning tend to lean left--VERY left. They support efforts to unionize all forms of "labor"--right down to the high school dropout who is putting my Filet-O-Fish on a bun along the McDonald's production line. They believe--and teach--that collective bargaining is the only form of "power" that employees have over their employers--and that all concessions by workers to maintain profitability should be met with a quid-pro-quo from the company as well. So they should be jumping behind the idea of classifying college athletes as "employees" of the school--with "rights" to bargain for such things as salaries, health insurance and a share of all marketing based upon their likeness or name.
But many of those same Doctors and Professors also HATE athletics--especially the influence sports has on the campus culture. They resent the big bucks pulled in by Athletic Directors and Head Coaches. They detest the special treatment afforded athletes in the classroom. They fume over reports showing some sports programs producing a graduation rate out of Animal House: ZERO-POINT-ZERO-ZERO. And they envy the adulation placed upon those who do the menial tasks of putting a basketball in a hoop or catching a football--while they toil in anonymity in the lab doing work that "betters the human race". How do you think Professor Peabody is going to feel parking his Prius with all of the Obama '08 and '12 bumper stickers on it in the lot outside the College of Letters and Sciences next to the Mustang Convertible with the 14-inch chrome rims that Johnny Football purchased with the money the school gave him for the uniforms with his number that sold in the University Bookstore last month? And how will Doctor Knowitall treat the one-and-done, 19-year old freshman basketball star taking her first semester remedial English class just to stay eligible long enough to play into the NCAA Tournament--who is also getting paid as much as her?
Plus, the debates over how paying athletes advances the "Academic Mission" of the schools should be great theater as well. A whole new class of "employee" will be added to college payrolls that will do no teaching or research--nor will it support the efforts to do either of those tasks. All at a time when most schools are trimming the number of instructors on campus and asking those in the classroom to teach more kids.
For some reason, I think the Ivory Tower is going to win out over the Blue Fist in this ideological battle.
Thursday, March 27, 2014
Why Good People Don't Get Into Politics Anymore
Ever wonder why there seems to be a lack of good people in politics nowadays? All you have to do is look at the behavior of Brown County Board candidate Jason Wisneski. Angry because the Green Bay Press-Gazette did a story about his conviction for misdemeanor animal mistreatment six years ago, Wisneski fired back on his Facebook page this incredibly petty, ignorant and mean-spirited post:
For those who are not familiar with the situation, Senator Hansen was backing out of his garage in 2007 when his two year old granddaughter ran behind the car. Hansen was not able to see her and ran her over. It was a tragic accident that resulted in NO criminal charges against the State Senator--and, based on Hansen's emotional response in an Action 2 News report yesterday, caused a permanent emotional scar on him and his family.
Wisneski's Facebook comments show an incredible lack of perspective in comparing the circumstances of him throwing his cat off his bed and it suffering a broken leg--and a grandfather accidentally running over his granddaughter. It also shows a complete lack of understanding of the definition of "murder"--an intentional effort to take another person's life.
It also shows the lack of respect for others underlying the current political discourse in this country. Jason Wisneski is running for a non-partisan, part-time County Board seat. He's not even running against Dave Hansen. Yet, the scorched earth policy established by Karl Rove has made its way into a race that will likely see all of a thousand people bother to cast a vote next Tuesday.
Now does that mean I think all political campaigns should feature smiley faces and singing together around the campfire? Certainly not. If Dave Hansen's next opponent wants to steal the line Senator Mike Ellis used about him here on WOSH years ago ("Dave Hansen can't got to the bathroom without direction from the unions") that's fine. If they want to show pictures of him huddling with his fellow Democrats in Illinois instead of doing his job in Madison, that's fair as well. But to continue to beat the man reminders that he bears responsibility for the tragic death of his granddaughter is WAY out of bounds.
And it's why finding a good man or woman in politics will continue to get harder in the future.
For those who are not familiar with the situation, Senator Hansen was backing out of his garage in 2007 when his two year old granddaughter ran behind the car. Hansen was not able to see her and ran her over. It was a tragic accident that resulted in NO criminal charges against the State Senator--and, based on Hansen's emotional response in an Action 2 News report yesterday, caused a permanent emotional scar on him and his family.
Wisneski's Facebook comments show an incredible lack of perspective in comparing the circumstances of him throwing his cat off his bed and it suffering a broken leg--and a grandfather accidentally running over his granddaughter. It also shows a complete lack of understanding of the definition of "murder"--an intentional effort to take another person's life.
It also shows the lack of respect for others underlying the current political discourse in this country. Jason Wisneski is running for a non-partisan, part-time County Board seat. He's not even running against Dave Hansen. Yet, the scorched earth policy established by Karl Rove has made its way into a race that will likely see all of a thousand people bother to cast a vote next Tuesday.
Now does that mean I think all political campaigns should feature smiley faces and singing together around the campfire? Certainly not. If Dave Hansen's next opponent wants to steal the line Senator Mike Ellis used about him here on WOSH years ago ("Dave Hansen can't got to the bathroom without direction from the unions") that's fine. If they want to show pictures of him huddling with his fellow Democrats in Illinois instead of doing his job in Madison, that's fair as well. But to continue to beat the man reminders that he bears responsibility for the tragic death of his granddaughter is WAY out of bounds.
And it's why finding a good man or woman in politics will continue to get harder in the future.
Wednesday, March 26, 2014
The Accountability Gap
If President Obama parents like he governs, we can expect Sasha and Malia to be living in the basement of the Presidential Library when they are in their 40's. I say that because their Dad has (without Congressional approval) pushed back the deadline for meeting the requirements of the individual mandate in the Affordable Care Act AGAIN. Now, you don't have to have paid for your health insurance policy by March 31st--or to have even applied for a health insurance policy by March 31st. All you have to do by the end of the month is enter your name on page 2 of the federal exchange website and save the "application"--and you have a now open-ended timeline to actually enroll.
While the White House likes to pretend this is the "absolute last" extension that will be granted to those who have failed to enroll, we are more likely just at the beginning of what will be an endless (if Democrats retain the Presidency) series of delays in provisions contained in what President Obama likes to remind supporters of repeal is "THE LAW OF THE LAND" (unless we don't want it to be for our own political purposes). Up next will be a Presidential directive delaying the IRS enforcement of failing to meet the individual mandate with the tax penalties that are clearly spelled out in the ACA. That will be followed by the President ordering insurance companies to continue policies for people who fail to pay their share of the federally-subsidized monthly premiums. And then health care providers will be barred from suing those who fail to pay the deductibles or co-pays clearly spelled out in the policies in which they are enrolling in the federal exchange. Then we will have extended open enrollment periods again--another delay in the employer mandate because Democrats running for re-election are still fearful of millions of small businesses just cutting the benefit and sending all of their employees into the exchanges--and another delay in the IRS penalties as well.
But what will not be delayed, is enforcement of the provisions of the ACA that affect insurers themselves. Blue Cross won't be able to claim it "forgot" that it has to provide coverage to someone with stage 4 lung cancer. In fact, there will be a press conference by Attorney General Eric Holder to announce the federal lawsuit that will be filed in that "historic first case". Kaiser won't be able to say that it "still can't afford" to provide free birth control pills to all of its female customers (including those over the age of 50). And UnitedHealthCare isn't getting an extension to start covering those who did go through the entire enrollment process and paid their first month's premium.
Democrats like to address "gaps". The "Income Gap", the "Wealth Gap", the "Education Gap", the "Technology Gap" and even "Transportation Access Gap". But one "gap" they never seem to want to address is the "Accountability Gap". Of course, expecting people to be responsible for themselves and their actions goes against everything they believe in politically.
While the White House likes to pretend this is the "absolute last" extension that will be granted to those who have failed to enroll, we are more likely just at the beginning of what will be an endless (if Democrats retain the Presidency) series of delays in provisions contained in what President Obama likes to remind supporters of repeal is "THE LAW OF THE LAND" (unless we don't want it to be for our own political purposes). Up next will be a Presidential directive delaying the IRS enforcement of failing to meet the individual mandate with the tax penalties that are clearly spelled out in the ACA. That will be followed by the President ordering insurance companies to continue policies for people who fail to pay their share of the federally-subsidized monthly premiums. And then health care providers will be barred from suing those who fail to pay the deductibles or co-pays clearly spelled out in the policies in which they are enrolling in the federal exchange. Then we will have extended open enrollment periods again--another delay in the employer mandate because Democrats running for re-election are still fearful of millions of small businesses just cutting the benefit and sending all of their employees into the exchanges--and another delay in the IRS penalties as well.
But what will not be delayed, is enforcement of the provisions of the ACA that affect insurers themselves. Blue Cross won't be able to claim it "forgot" that it has to provide coverage to someone with stage 4 lung cancer. In fact, there will be a press conference by Attorney General Eric Holder to announce the federal lawsuit that will be filed in that "historic first case". Kaiser won't be able to say that it "still can't afford" to provide free birth control pills to all of its female customers (including those over the age of 50). And UnitedHealthCare isn't getting an extension to start covering those who did go through the entire enrollment process and paid their first month's premium.
Democrats like to address "gaps". The "Income Gap", the "Wealth Gap", the "Education Gap", the "Technology Gap" and even "Transportation Access Gap". But one "gap" they never seem to want to address is the "Accountability Gap". Of course, expecting people to be responsible for themselves and their actions goes against everything they believe in politically.
Tuesday, March 25, 2014
So What Is the Plan?
Back in my pre-Dave Ramsey Total Money Makeover days--when I was incredibly foolish with my money--any raise, credit limit increase or "pre-approved" credit card application was treated like an opportunity to go out and spend and borrow more money. Getting those few extra bucks allowed me to delay having to make some tough--but not debilitating--choices about how I was spending my money. Eventually, the raises don't come as regularly (or never) and banks stop adding water to the pool of debt in which you are drowning--and the less-painful cuts that could have been made years ago suddenly become big life-altering options that you have no choice but to make. What you find out is that just because you make more doesn't mean you still shouldn't look to lower your expenses.
Unfortunately, I see the Oshkosh School District heading in this same direction as formerly-money-foolish Me. One thing I have not heard in any of the presentations, School Board workshops or media appearances by Superintendent Stan Mack is the plan for not needing to come back with an even bigger referendum request when the seven-year issue on the ballot next week expires. I think the plan is to (like I did) just keep spending because now there is no longer a reason to cutback--and just hope that voters in 2021 will approve 38 or 48 or even 58-million dollars in additional spending.
We had Dale Knapp from the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance on the WOSH Morning News Focus yesterday. They just completed a study on school referenda--that found voters are far more amenable to temporary property tax increases--rather than permanently exceeding the state-mandated revenue cap. And while that is good for the short-term (3-7 years) it sets those districts on an endless cycle of having to bring larger and larger referenda before the voters, until one day, those who used to say "yes" finally vote "no"--and the short list of cuts that were on that first ballot issue suddenly become HUGE cuts that likely could have been avoided with proper long-range planning.
Superintendent Mack will be in for his monthly WOSH Morning News Focus appearance on Friday at 8:30. We'll be sure to ask him about the new Seven Year Plan that should accompany any request for a "yes" vote on April 1st.
Unfortunately, I see the Oshkosh School District heading in this same direction as formerly-money-foolish Me. One thing I have not heard in any of the presentations, School Board workshops or media appearances by Superintendent Stan Mack is the plan for not needing to come back with an even bigger referendum request when the seven-year issue on the ballot next week expires. I think the plan is to (like I did) just keep spending because now there is no longer a reason to cutback--and just hope that voters in 2021 will approve 38 or 48 or even 58-million dollars in additional spending.
We had Dale Knapp from the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance on the WOSH Morning News Focus yesterday. They just completed a study on school referenda--that found voters are far more amenable to temporary property tax increases--rather than permanently exceeding the state-mandated revenue cap. And while that is good for the short-term (3-7 years) it sets those districts on an endless cycle of having to bring larger and larger referenda before the voters, until one day, those who used to say "yes" finally vote "no"--and the short list of cuts that were on that first ballot issue suddenly become HUGE cuts that likely could have been avoided with proper long-range planning.
Superintendent Mack will be in for his monthly WOSH Morning News Focus appearance on Friday at 8:30. We'll be sure to ask him about the new Seven Year Plan that should accompany any request for a "yes" vote on April 1st.
Monday, March 24, 2014
If It's Not Free--It's Not For Me
Back in January, we here at WOSH News attempted to do a story on the future of free and community health clinics in the Fox Valley following the full implementation of the Affordable Care Act. With the requirement that all Americans purchase health insurance, it seemed that the need for such facilities would go away--as everyone would be able to access the "regular" clinics and doctors provided by Aurora, Agnesian, ThedaCare and Affinity. We contacted five clinics in all--and only Agnesian out of Fond du Lac returned any of our calls. Their spokeswoman would not go on the record and would only say that they planned to continue their "charity care" programs. She would not answer any questions about why--if every patient coming in should now have health insurance.
You could probably assume that these clinics and programs need to tone down the promotion of their services, since those coming in without health insurance are technically breaking the law (although the Obama Administration has made no announcement on how they plan to actually track down those "offenders"--other than to say the IRS will handle it.) And who knows, the President could just unilaterally decide to push back the individual mandate (again) past the November mid-term elections to help Democrats dealing with "ObamaCare" blowback.
Well this weekend, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinal uncovered why the free clinics will remain open. In their cleverly titled "Affordable Care Act's copays may become no-pays", the paper finds that even though many of the newly-enrolled will be getting federal subsidies and could pay as little as $8 a month for their coverage--they have no requirement to pay the deductibles and co-pays included in the plans. John Bartkowski--who runs the 16th Street Health Center--flat out admits in the story "We will never collect that money".
But Mr Bartkowski is not quite correct, you see that money will be collected eventually--from everyone else who buys health insurance and pays taxes. And that is the same source of funding that existed before the Trillion-dollar ACA bureaucracy was put into place. Note that many of the newly-insured are getting sizable federal subsidies to purchase their policies--and additional subsidies are in place to help with deductibles and co-pays as well. I'll grant you that the money for that is just being printed and not really collected from taxpayers at this time--but eventually, there will be a need to back up all that spending with actual revenue--and those getting the subsidies and walking away from the deductibles and co-pays will not be the ones picking up the tab.
Those who represent the 6-million "newly enrolled" and the millions more that are now provided government health coverage through expanded Medicaid programs paid little to nothing for health care before and they will continue to pay little to nothing for it now. So for whom did the Affordable Care Act make things "more affordable"?
You could probably assume that these clinics and programs need to tone down the promotion of their services, since those coming in without health insurance are technically breaking the law (although the Obama Administration has made no announcement on how they plan to actually track down those "offenders"--other than to say the IRS will handle it.) And who knows, the President could just unilaterally decide to push back the individual mandate (again) past the November mid-term elections to help Democrats dealing with "ObamaCare" blowback.
Well this weekend, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinal uncovered why the free clinics will remain open. In their cleverly titled "Affordable Care Act's copays may become no-pays", the paper finds that even though many of the newly-enrolled will be getting federal subsidies and could pay as little as $8 a month for their coverage--they have no requirement to pay the deductibles and co-pays included in the plans. John Bartkowski--who runs the 16th Street Health Center--flat out admits in the story "We will never collect that money".
But Mr Bartkowski is not quite correct, you see that money will be collected eventually--from everyone else who buys health insurance and pays taxes. And that is the same source of funding that existed before the Trillion-dollar ACA bureaucracy was put into place. Note that many of the newly-insured are getting sizable federal subsidies to purchase their policies--and additional subsidies are in place to help with deductibles and co-pays as well. I'll grant you that the money for that is just being printed and not really collected from taxpayers at this time--but eventually, there will be a need to back up all that spending with actual revenue--and those getting the subsidies and walking away from the deductibles and co-pays will not be the ones picking up the tab.
Those who represent the 6-million "newly enrolled" and the millions more that are now provided government health coverage through expanded Medicaid programs paid little to nothing for health care before and they will continue to pay little to nothing for it now. So for whom did the Affordable Care Act make things "more affordable"?
Friday, March 21, 2014
Life in a Nutshell--At the Line
After watching North Carolina State blow a late 16-point lead by missing more than half of their free throws in a loss to St Louis in the NCAA Tournament last night, I've come to realize that futility at the line mirrors our societal decline off the court. How else to explain the inability of so many high-level athletes to make an unchallenged 15-foot shot?
Free throws are neither exciting nor sexy--making them virtually useless to modern young adults. Have you ever seen a Lebron James free throw in the Sportscenter Top 10? Does Gus Johnson scream at the top of his lungs about a made free throw in the middle of the first quarter? Do millions of people post and re-tweet .gifs of anybody making both ends of a one-and-one? If it doesn't have the chance to "go viral" why bother doing it nowadays?
Being a good free throw shooter also requires time. I'm not even talking about spending hours in the gym practicing the shots--but rather using more of the ten seconds you are given after being administered the ball to shoot. Take the Badgers' Sam Dekker for instance--he should be one of those 90% free throw shooters--but instead he hovers around 70%--because he doesn't take his time. He dribbles once, looks up for a split second at the rim, and fires away. The great free throw shooters of the past took seven to nine seconds to go through their routines--usually spending most of that time actually focusing on the target. In today's "Ugh, this slow internet is driving me nuts, it took four seconds for my Google search to load" society, seven to ten seconds to do something right is just waaayyy too long.
Free throw shooting is also one of the most individualistic acts in sports. No one has to pass you the ball or set a screen to get you wide open. It's just you, the ball and the basket. Of course, individual success is frowned upon in America today--and proving that you are better than someone else in a one-on-one basis is considered to create "achievement gaps"--so perhaps today's players are just trying to make their opponents feel better about themselves by choosing to fail.
And finally, there is a reduced value to a free throw. It's worth just one point--as opposed to the two you get for a spectacular dunk or the three awarded for launching one from downtown. And the word "free" is right there in it. Ask officials in any city that has tried to provide "free bikes" for use around town--but has seen every one of them stolen or seriously damaged--how people value stuff that is free. Or get Affordable Care Act supporters to explain the general lack of enthusiasm from people who were so "desperate" to get health insurance when it came to actually enrolling in the government-subsidized plans. The less you have to work for something--the less you appreciate getting it.
Of course, in the direction we are heading a commentator 20-years from now will be wondering why the 3D hologram player controlled by the NC State student sitting on the couch in his dorm room is shooting free throws so poorly.
Free throws are neither exciting nor sexy--making them virtually useless to modern young adults. Have you ever seen a Lebron James free throw in the Sportscenter Top 10? Does Gus Johnson scream at the top of his lungs about a made free throw in the middle of the first quarter? Do millions of people post and re-tweet .gifs of anybody making both ends of a one-and-one? If it doesn't have the chance to "go viral" why bother doing it nowadays?
Being a good free throw shooter also requires time. I'm not even talking about spending hours in the gym practicing the shots--but rather using more of the ten seconds you are given after being administered the ball to shoot. Take the Badgers' Sam Dekker for instance--he should be one of those 90% free throw shooters--but instead he hovers around 70%--because he doesn't take his time. He dribbles once, looks up for a split second at the rim, and fires away. The great free throw shooters of the past took seven to nine seconds to go through their routines--usually spending most of that time actually focusing on the target. In today's "Ugh, this slow internet is driving me nuts, it took four seconds for my Google search to load" society, seven to ten seconds to do something right is just waaayyy too long.
Free throw shooting is also one of the most individualistic acts in sports. No one has to pass you the ball or set a screen to get you wide open. It's just you, the ball and the basket. Of course, individual success is frowned upon in America today--and proving that you are better than someone else in a one-on-one basis is considered to create "achievement gaps"--so perhaps today's players are just trying to make their opponents feel better about themselves by choosing to fail.
And finally, there is a reduced value to a free throw. It's worth just one point--as opposed to the two you get for a spectacular dunk or the three awarded for launching one from downtown. And the word "free" is right there in it. Ask officials in any city that has tried to provide "free bikes" for use around town--but has seen every one of them stolen or seriously damaged--how people value stuff that is free. Or get Affordable Care Act supporters to explain the general lack of enthusiasm from people who were so "desperate" to get health insurance when it came to actually enrolling in the government-subsidized plans. The less you have to work for something--the less you appreciate getting it.
Of course, in the direction we are heading a commentator 20-years from now will be wondering why the 3D hologram player controlled by the NC State student sitting on the couch in his dorm room is shooting free throws so poorly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)