Will they care about Iowa hoops in Brooklyn? Pressure on BTN president to sign deals with area cable operators

Posted on by

Let the record show I wrote the first Rutgers to the Big Ten story. It only took 23 years for it to come to fruition.

Back in Dec., 1989, when Skip Myslenski and I broke the news in the Chicago Tribune that the Big Ten was adding Penn State, I reported on a conference memo about identifying a possible 12th school. Rutgers and Pittsburgh were tops on the list.

However, there wasn’t much enthusiasm for Rutgers. “They`re too far East,“ said one conference source back then.

Not anymore.

The Big Ten finally made its move to the Atlantic by officially adding Maryland to the conference today, with Rutgers’ party imminent. And like the Penn State deal in 1989, Commissioner Jim Delany executed the moves under the radar, which I’m sure pleases him to no end.

As was the case back then, it’s mostly about television. However, the stakes are much higher now.

Back then, the Big Ten didn’t have its own television network. It does now, and the addition of Maryland and Rutgers allows the BTN to greatly expand its footprint. Currently, the network is in 53 million homes and available to 90 million.

Now consider the possible BTN boost from an estimated 15 million homes in the DC (Maryland) and New York/New Jersey (Rutgers) areas. With BTN subscriber fees at an estimated 85 cents per month, the potential windfall is huge. Do the math. Probably in excess of $100 million per year.

Of course, that’s if the BTN can land deals with the various cable operators in the area. A big challenge for network president Mark Silverman to say the least.

Rutgers doesn’t register much beyond its campus in New Jersey. Also, the New York cable operators played hardball about adding the Yankees YES network. So Silverman might not find them to be overly excited about hitting up their subscribers with another fee for a new channel. He will know he is in trouble if he has to explain to them where Rutgers is.

I can hear an NY cable operator now: “Nobody in Brooklyn cares about Iowa basketball.”

Maryland has a much more avid following in DC, but cable operators in that area also might have reservations about the expenses of adding the BTN.

Silverman is traveling today and unavailable for comment. You could be sure he already is in full talk mode with various cable operators.

As a child of the Big Ten, I’m not overly thrilled with the addition of Maryland and Rutgers. With 14 schools, it now means fewer games between the traditional opponents. Illinois-Rutgers doesn’t do as much for this Illini grad as Illinois-Indiana in basketball.

But it is what it is, and the potential money is too much to ignore. If Silverman can cut deals with the various cable operators, the BTN will be that much richer.

 

 

 

Will he wear red sweater? What to expect from Knight on call of first Indiana game

Posted on by

This won’t be an ordinary broadcast of an Indiana-Georgia game tonight in Brooklyn on ESPN (5:30 ET). Oh no, not with Bob Knight working the game with Dan Shulman.

It will be Knight’s first time breaking down the Hoosiers during a game as an ESPN analyst. He was part of the studio crew for a previous Indiana game at Madison Square Garden, but didn’t call the actual game.

If you’re Indiana, this is a big deal. Knight had to sign off on this, perhaps signaling he is ready to reconcile with the school. It’ll be interesting to see how Shulman draws him out about Indiana.

Veteran Knight watcher, Rick Bozich, wrote at WDRB.com in Louisville:

Knight-ologists will be breaking down the telecast like the Zapruder film, trying to determine if Knight’s decision to work the game signals a legitimate thaw in the icy relations that have existed between the coach and IU in the dozen years after he was fired.

My guess?

I don’t expect to see Knight in Assembly Hall this season, but this is a small step in closing the massive divide. If Knight’s only thoughts about IU were ugly and adversarial, he wouldn’t be working this game. He’d find a way to avoid IU again.

And one wise person who knows Knight well told me this several years ago: Bob Knight will make peace with Indiana when IU is back on top and he isn’t.

Terry Hutchens of Indystar.com writes:

Now, for all of you out there that are reading into this that because Knight is doing an IU game that it means he’s ready to ride on his white horse (with a red sweater probably) back to Bloomington and become part of the Indiana family again, I would say this: Relax, take a deep breath, calm yourself and don’t get carried away here. It’s one game, and it’s one game predicated by the fact that Indiana is the No. 1 team in the nation.  It was the preseason No. 1 team in the land for the first time since the 1979-80 team that Knight coached for the Hoosiers.

Could it be a first step to repairing relations? Maybe. But if I was someone at IU and hoping that would be the ultimate outcome here, I would have my doubts. It’s one game. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Hutchens then wrote of his last encounter with Knight:

Selfishly, I’m looking forward to see if he shakes my hand. I covered coach Knight his final two seasons at Indiana and he would actually had a pretty good professional relationship. But the last time I went to one of his speaking engagements where he met a receiving line afterwards and shook hands with former players and all of the old cronies, I decided to get in line and see if he acknowledge my presence. As he walked down the line, he shook hand after hand. He paused at the gentleman to my left and gave him a warm embrace. Then he looked at me. We made brief contact and … he kept right on walking and shook the hand of the person to my right. So I’m looking forward to seeing if I have any better luck Monday.

New IU National Sports Journalism director: young writers have advantage over veterans in market

Posted on by

Teaching sports journalism at the big U these days would seem to be as valuable as starting classes on how to make a typewriter.

Journalism is a dying industry, we’re told. Read about it in the papers. What’s left of them, that is.

Malcolm Moran is here to say don’t believe everything you read and hear. And listen to this: He contends in many respects the market never has been better for young journalists. So are the opportunities to make an immediate impact.

Moran has seen it up close as the Knight Chair in Sports Journalism and Society at the John Curley Center for Sports Journalism since 2006. And it isn’t just about young equaling cheaper.

“For the first time in the history of the industry, a 20-something journalist could have an advantage over a 40-something candidate,” Moran said.

In January, Moran will be molding those young writers as the new director of the National Sports Journalism Center at Indiana. He takes over a program launched in 2009 by my old Tribune boss Tim Franklin. Moran said there are 100 students affiliated with the NJSC. Those students recently participated in compiling the hiring report card for the Black Coaches and Administrators Association, yet another example of the opportunity to make an early impact.

Moran obviously has the credentials with distinguished stops at the New York Times, Chicago Tribune and USA Today. He has covered more college bowl games and Final Fours than he cares to count.

Now Moran is making his presence felt on the academic side during a time of great transition for the profession. Here’s my Q/A.

What makes you say 20-somethings have an advantage over 40-somethings?

For the first time in the history of the industry, a 20-something journalist could have an advantage over a 40-something candidate. Graduates as recent as the class of 2007 have told me they feel as though they missed out on having the new technology included in their course work. If a younger candidate can meet all the timeless expectations of the industry, and demonstrate that he or she can tell stories across platforms, the assumption is that the candidate will handle the technology more easily than the more experienced veteran. Media outlets are willing to sacrifice institutional memory – and the higher salaries that comes with that – for more cost-effective, techno-savvy candidates. I’m not saying it’s right. I’m just saying it’s happening.

But what about the job cuts in the market. Aren’t there diminished opportunities?

Yes, there is a distribution problem on the print side, but think about how many outlets that didn’t exist 10 years ago. There are staffers from our program at Penn State who are working at the Big Ten Network. When I started, the Big Ten Network was on the drawing board. ESPN.com was a small core of writers and a lot of wire copy 10-15 years ago. Now look at it.

In the spring of 2009, it seemed like there was no movement. The students who were graduating had a hard time finding jobs. But now we’re seeing more opportunities.

At Penn State, we had a student, Mark Viera, who wound up covering a lot of the Sandusky story for the New York Times. If you opened up the paper, you would assume he was a staff writer. He and Pete Thamel won the APSE award for breaking news. Those kinds of places would rarely use a free lancer 10-15 years ago. Now they do. The opportunity to make a name for yourself now is much greater.

Why would somebody want a sports journalism program as opposed to a regular journalism program?

Part of it is the nature of the industry and the changes we’ve seen. It’s so much more fragmented. Can a journalism major succeed in sports? Of course. However, last year, the students at Penn State covered the men’s Final Four, the BCS game, and the Olympics. If you’re 22 and have that on your resume, you’re in good shape.

We had nine students at the Olympics in London. They produced the digital newsletter daily for the USOC. There were only 15 U.S. media outlets that had more people in London than we did.

You can’t replicate what we did in London in a classroom. When we first got there, they were, ‘OK, what do we do now?’ By the end, they were veterans. It was fun to watch them discover that they can do this.

How is teaching sports journalism different now than 10 years ago?

It’s different than even three or four years ago. I guarantee you the word ‘tweet’ was nowhere to be found in my syllabus. Now I do a class on tweeting and how to use it in an intelligent way. We stress the same standards apply to a 140-character tweet as they do to a 2,000 word story.

Tweeting wasn’t on our radar three years ago, but if you don’t do it now, you’re not doing yourself justice.

What is the key for a young writer to get a job today?

You have to be able to cross every platform. You have to be able to tell your story in more ways than you used to. You can’t show up with a notebook in your pocket and expect to be relevant. You have to market yourself by demonstrating you can work across all the platforms. If you can do that and retain your core values, then you’re marketable.

What are your hopes for NSJC?

I’d like to grow the program and identify people who can make a difference. I have relationships with people they have relationships with. They’ve done a lot in a short period of time. I hope to be able to build upon it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sunday books: Epic Duke-Kentucky game covered from all angles; author Q/A

Posted on by

I was watching the Duke-Kentucky game this week when I heard Dick Vitale bring up “The Game.” Sure enough, there was Christian Laettner sitting in the stands being interviewed about his legendary game-winning shot to beat Kentucky in 1992.

Earlier this year, my old friend Gene Wojciechowski came out with a terrific new book: The Last Great Game: Duke vs. Kentucky and the 2.1 seconds that changed college basketball.

Watching this week’s game reminded me that Gene’s book is a must-read if you love college basketball. At the very least, it definitely should be on someone’s holiday gift list.

Gene covers that game in 1992 from every conceivable angle, getting a myriad of perspectives. He also examines all the central characters in that game, from Mike Krzyzewski and Rick Pitino to Christian Laettner and a Kentucky team that had been decimated by recruiting violations just a few years earlier.

I did a Q/A with Gene, asking why that game, which wasn’t even a Final Four game, still resonates with fans 20 years later.

People say this is the best college basketball game ever, and yet it didn’t occur in a Final Four. What lofts this game to that status?

Because it was Kentucky vs. Duke, Pitino vs. Krzyzewski, the soon-to-be-called Unforgettables vs. the virtually unbeatables of Duke. Because the game was played at an incredibly high level from start to finish. Because it went to overtime. Because you need a calculator to add all the great shots down the stretch and during OT. Because a Final Four was at stake. Because Kentucky was back from the near-dead and Duke was going for dynasty status. There were characters and there was character. I just saw Mike Krzyzewski a few weeks ago at Duke and the first thing he wanted to talk about was that game. Twenty years later—that game.

Obviously, this book is much more than about that game. What did you find intriguing about how those programs were built?

Kentucky was at the brink of the death penalty, of irrelevance–which is hard to believe for hoops fans who were too young to remember just how bad it got for that program. Pitino, who would have never come to Kentucky had he known something about the job he was leaving as NY Knicks coach (it’s explained in the book), restored UK basketball to greatness by using the “Hoosiers” movie formula: break the players down, build them up and then find a great player. Jamal Mashburn was the great player. But Pitino was merciless. He almost had no choice. He didn’t have enough talent, so he drove them to the edge with conditioning drills and his particular brand of offense.

Meanwhile, Krzyzewski, who grew up in Chicago and went to Weber High, was hired after a nine-win season at Army. That would never happen today. A nine-win coach getting a major college job? Laughable. But Duke AD Tom Butters did it and then stuck by Krzyzewski three years later when boosters wanted him fired. He had a breakthrough recruiting class shortly thereafter and slowly but surely built his program into elite status. But as late as 1991, there were questions if he could win a national title. He won it in ’91 and then another won in ’92. But he had to get through Kentucky to have a chance for the repeat.

Also, you realize just how much luck goes into building a program. Pitino lucked out getting Mashburn to leave New York City for Kentucky, a school Mash couldn’t locate on a map. Krzyzewski lucked out getting Laettner, Bobby Hurley and Grant Hill. At one point, all three college superstars thought they were going to play at North Carolina for Dean Smith.

The early portions of the book discuss Coach K’s connections to Chicago and then to Bob Knight. How did those aspects influence his career?

Krzyzewski’s is the son of immigrants who came to Chicago looking for a better life. Corny, but true. He went to Catholic schools and at one point wanted to be a priest. Later, he wanted to play basketball in the Big Ten. But no Big Ten school was interested. Nobody was interested–except Knight, the youngest coach in major college basketball at the time. Krzyzewski had no interest in West Point until his parents basically shamed him into accepting the appointment. That would begin a life-long relationship that included coach, mentor, opposing coach, friend and then, for nine years, non-friend, and then friend again. It is a complicated relationship. And at times, it was an unhealthy relationship. But there’s no doubt that Knight profoundly impacted Krzyzewski’s life and career–and, I think, the other way around, too. Through osmosis, Krzyzewski has many of Knight’s best qualities–and very few of his worst. But that relationship–and its twists and turns–is a central theme of the book.

Besides Coach K and Pitino, the most interesting character in the book is Mr. Laettner. What made him the perfect guy to be the hero?

Laettner is a hero and a villain at the same time. He is clearly one of the greatest college hoops players of all time. But he was despised by opponents and often, by his own teammates. He imposed his will on those Duke teams and he didn’t care if he was beloved. He loved his teammates, his school, his coach, etc. But he could be ruthless and calculating, if he thought it necessary. He isn’t a hero in the classic sense. He’s almost an anti-hero. But he was definitely the star of the game and of this book. He had movie-star looks, attended a prestigious Buffalo prep school, but actually came from a very humble backround and had to work his way through high school. I covered him at Duke when I was with the LA Times and enjoyed talking to him then, and now. UK fans still don’t find him enjoyable. Even 20 years later, the mere mention of his name to Wildcat fans sends their blood pressure to astronomical levels.

Northwestern and Duke have much in common: Academics, size, etc. Can it ever happen at Northwestern in basketball, as it did for Duke?

Doubtful. You need an administration willing to be patient. You need to get lucky with recruiting. You need something of a hoops legacy. Northwestern is a great institution, but the era, the patience level, the recruiting are much different today than they were when Krzyzewski was building Duke basketball. I’d love to see it happen at Northwestern, but you have to remember that Krzyzewski has been at Duke since 1981. In many ways, he IS Duke basketball now. There’s nobody at Northwestern with that sort of identity. Plus, Duke actually had basketball pedigree before Krzyzewski arrived. Not so at Northwestern.

Forget about the Dallas Cowboys. Is Duke truly as close to an America’s Team in sports?

Duke and Kentucky are sort of America’s team. If you made a Mt. Rushmore of college basketball, it would feature Duke, North Carolina, Kansas and Kentucky. UCLA used to be on there, but no more. Those programs are regional and yet national too. But if you’re asking which one of those four is America’s Team, then, sure, Duke would be it, based on Krzyzewski’s longevity, all those national championship banners under his watch, that wonderful Cameron Indoor Stadium, the Crazies. . . everything.

One last point from Gene.

The book, of course, is centered around how Kentucky and Duke came to meet that amazing night at the Spectrum in Philadelphia. But after Duke beat Kentucky, it had to beat two Big Ten teams to claim that second consecutive national title: Bob Knight’s Indiana team, and then Michigan and the Fab Five. The win against IU marked the beginning of the cold war between Knight and Krzyzewski, and the win against The Fab Five put an exclamation point on a very heated and, at times, racially charged rivalry.

ESPN The Magazine: Dedicates latest issue to Alabama-LSU game

Posted on by

The Alabama-LSU game is two weeks old, a lifetime in the new media age. So why did ESPN The Magazine decide to dedicate its latest issue to the game?

It’s all part of a magazine strategy to have theme issues focused on one subject. This is the third time it has centered its resources on one game.

It’s all about total immersion, said Rob King, ESPN senior vice-president.

“It’s storytelling in and around the game,” King said. “Every corner of the stadium experience. Every corner of the parking lot. Locker room. Coaches and administration. We try to find stories that are unique to the venue.”

King joked that having Wright Thompson on the loose in Baton Rouge “is a scary proposition.” Thompson, though, wrote a terrific profile on Les Miles.

King said ESPN requested fans submit photos via Twitter. The picture gallery on ESPN.com produced 657,000 page views during that game weekend.

“I really like this franchise,” King said. “(Editor) Chad Millman and his team are really ambitious about doing this beautiful work. It’s a good example of the magazine’s placement in the ESPN ecosytem. ”

 

 

Keith Olbermann to guest host next week on MLB Network

Posted on by

Should be fun.

Keith Olbermann will be a guest-host on MLB Network’s “Hot Stove” next Tuesday and Wednesday, from 9-11 AM ET.  He was in-studio yesterday as part of a panel discussion on the American League MVP.

Olbermann knows baseball and has some time on his hands these days. While I doubt he would do this as a regular gig, it would terrific to see him pop in as a contributor. He has plenty to offer.

He writes Baseball Nerd for the MLB Blog network.

 

Posted in MLB

More fire: Payton author questions whether Walter’s brother knows meaning of “biography”

Posted on by

Walter Payton’s brother, Eddie, is out with a new book, Walter & Me. From the preview:

More than a  decade  after the untimely death of Walter Payton, his older brother  recalls  the moments they shared and the continuing sting of the loss of  a  legend. This glimpse into Payton’s life doesn’t sugarcoat the issues  or  glorify the late superstar, but rather it addresses the subjects of   suicide, drug abuse, and infidelity head-on with intimate knowledge of   the facts. In this candid take, Walter’s older brotherdiscloses the   true life of man simply known as “Sweetness.”

Jeff Pearlman addressed many of those same issues in his biography on Payton, Sweetness. Many folks in Payton’s camp have taken offense to the portrayal, including Eddie.

While promoting his book, Eddie accused Pearlman of misrepresenting himself when the author approached him.

“[Jeff Pearlman] didn’t misrepresent himself. He flat-out lied to me. I never met him. I talked to him on the phone. He introduced himself as a writer for Sports Illustrated; he wanted to come on down; he was thinking about doing an article for Sports Illustrated about Walter; he wanted to meet some of his old teammates, his coaches and yadda yadda yadda. And I was gung ho about that. I introduced him to 10-15 people. And in doing that … about, two … three days later one of the guys comes in and says, “This book ought to sell a bunch of copies.’ I said, ‘What book? He’s writing an article.’ He said, ‘No, he’s writing a book.’ And when I confronted him with it he kind of heed and haaed and heed and haad and said, ‘Well, it may be a book.’ And then we asked him about Walter’s scholarship. And I said, ‘If you’re going to write about the man, you need to help continue what the man was doing.’ And he heed and haaed, and wouldn’t make a commitment, and we pulled. Everybody we knew, we pulled. Because at that point we realized we’d been had. And we’re not gonna go along and be a part of this charade from this a-hole. Who said he’d do one thing and did another. And the book is such a work of garbage and fiction.”

Pearlman should be used to the attacks by now. However, being called a liar is a whole other matter.

On his site, Pearlman addressed the latest remarks. He doesn’t hold back, calling Eddie “a dolt,” and questioning whether he knew the meaning of the word, biography. Pearlman wrote:

To be 100-percent clear: I did not lie to Eddie Payton and I did not misrepresent myself to Eddie Payton. Never. As I always do when working on a book, I introduce myself thusly: “My name is Jeff Pearlman. I was a longtime Sports Illustrated writer, and I’m the author of X books. I’m working on a biography of Walter, and would love the chance …” This is how I’ve done it for years, this is how I’ll continue to do it. Why? Because SI supplies a backdrop to my career, and the books show I’ve done this before. It establishes my cred, so to speak, which is important.

In hindsight, I suspect that Eddie may well not know what the word “biography” means. I’m not joking or being snide. He has a unique way of mangling and misusing words; Walt Frazier without the smarts. Maybe, just maybe, he didn’t understand. I’m willing to offer that benefit of the doubt, I suppose.