Unwrapping the Christmas Games: the NBA, Phil Jackson and Playing on Christmas Day
How often is it that you see a coach from one team and a player from another agree with each other about an upcoming game between the two?
Miami Heat forward Lebron James and Los Angeles Lakers head coach Phil Jackson both question the NBA’s desire to have games on Christmas Day. But to both, it should be clear as to why they must perform for the masses on the second holiest day in Christianity.
Look at the trend in the NBA with regards to Christmas games. The NBA notes that Christmas games go back to the 1940s and really became more of staple in the 1980s when the games were televised on CBS and ESPN. But these Christmas “gifts” generally consisted of one game or, at most, two.
Then in the 2000s things changed. In the 2002-03 season and the 2003-04 season the NBA went to three games before reverting back to two games. In 2006 there was only one game — Heat v. Lakers. This single game was due to the “rivalry” between Kobe Bryant and then-Heat Shaquille O’Neil, the latter not playing in the game.
In the 2007-08 season, the NBA went to three games again. Then the NBA got greedy and went to five games for the 2008-09 season! That trend was repeated in 2009 and appears again in 2010. This season we have Bulls-Knicks, Celtics-Magic, Heat-Lakers, Nuggets-Thunder, and Trailblazers-Warriors spread out across ABC and ESPN.
Why not just have 15 games going and have them all play? The NBA is already a third of the way there.
Jackson complaints focus on family, which is fair, and Christianity. Huh?
It’s like Christian holidays don’t mean to them anything anymore. Just go out and play and entertain the TV.
- Mmmm! Those white jerseys taste better than Sunday dinner!
Well, that is disingenuous. As noted above, the NBA has scheduled Christmas Day games basically since its inception. It is not as though the NBA suddenly decided to schedules such games.
Additionally, where are the outcries for games played on Sundays? The Lakers will wear their pretty white uniforms for Sunday home games. The only team that avoids Sunday home games are the Utah Jazz, based primarily on late owner Larry Miller and his Mormon faith [this season the Jazz have four scheduled Sunday games -- all on the road].
And what of Easter? Easter is considered by some Christians to be holier than Christmas. Yet, the NBA schedules playoff games on Easter Sunday. Where is the outcry there?
This Sporting News article also notes that Jackson points out that the NHL and “other major sports” usually take Christmas off. That is not entirely accurate. Yes, the NHL takes both Christmas Eve and Christmas Day off (the NBA also avoids scheduling games on Christmas Eve).
But the NFL, perhaps the major sport in the U.S., does not take off for Christmas Day if that day falls within the normal NFL schedule. The NFL is not going to randomly schedule a game on a Tuesday Christmas, but this season it has one game scheduled for Christmas, which is on Saturday. Last season, the NFL scheduled one game for a Friday Christmas. And in 2004, while the NFL scheduled most of its Week 16 games for a Saturday Christmas Eve, there were still two games on Sunday Christmas Day.
Additionally, in years past there have been college bowl games on Christmas Day. The Blue-Gray Classic — a college football all-star game — used to also be played on Christmas Day.
Easter is not sacred to other sports either. The NHL allows for hockey games on Easter Sunday while Major League Baseball had a full slate of games on Easter Sunday 2009 [Easter fell on 4 April 2010, which was the end of spring training. However, the first game of the 2010 season was played on Easter Sunday].
About the only sport that truly holds holidays sacred is NASCAR. NASCAR avoids running races on Easter weekend and until 2005 did not schedule races for Mother’s Day weekend. Since 2005, NASCAR has held races on Mother’s Day weekend, but does so on Saturday rather than Sunday.
But NASCAR still does not hold Sunday sacred — most races are held on Sundays.
And maybe family would be a better argument than attempt to float Christianity out as a reason for avoiding Christmas games. The commercialization of the holiday as strip it of much of its original Christian meaning. So the holiday is about being with loved ones.
But then again, this is coming from an industry — sports — where being on the road and away from family is the norm. It cannot mean that much more than it means to others who work on the road.
Now, it may seem cold-hearted to write that; as if athletes do not deserve time to be with their family on holidays. They do. But so do truck drivers and Waffle House waitresses. Many of them work on holidays, including Christmas. Is Kobe Bryant really that much better than Edna the Waffle House waitress?
- She’s just like Kobe Bryant!
Actually, they are more alike than you realize. Both work in the service industry. Elite sport is a form of service. Restaurants provide a service. Both are products of the capitalist economy. And as such, the goal of both is not necessarily to provide that service but to make money, both for the worker — NBA players and the WH waitress — but also for the owners. However, they must earn that money and to do so must provide their particular service — serving up food or serving up dunks.
Waffle House exists because the market exists. People want food quickly; WH provides that “want” and in turn makes money. Supply and demand.
The NBA exists because the market exists. People want professional basketball; the NBA provides that “want” and in turn makes money. Supply and demand.
Christmas Day games are all about making money, as if that needed to be stated. I think it is well understood that the NBA knows there is a captivated audience of people at home and maybe someone — the gambling uncle, for example — will turn on the game just because you can only take so much of A Christmas Story.
Okay, maybe there is a difference between the Waffle House waitress and NBA players. A multi-million dollar difference. While waitresses struggle to get by off of petty tips, NBA players get millions for each tip-in they make. Their million-dollar position also gives them a platform to complain about working on Christmas while the Waffle House waitress (and the cooks) must smile and pretend to enjoy pouring your coffee.
On the other hand, that million-dollar difference is also the reason why NBA’ers play on Christmas. The NBA is not stupid; and neither is Jackson. The NBA, like Christmas, has become commodified and commercialized. It has become big money and the NBA and its respective sponsors know this. Hence why the NBA trots out marquee games in the middle of December. We are not talking about the Milwaukee Bucks versus Los Angeles Clippers. As Jackson’s Saturday counterpart Erik Spoelstra stated, “If you play with a team that doesn’t matter, you never play on a holiday.”
Take that Memphis!
Perhaps James has the most rational quote in all of this.
The fans, we always say it’s good for the fans. But the fans get an opportunity to see us all year. We’ve got TV games all year. We’ve got a TV game on Thursday [in Phoenix]. I don’t care for it too much.
Good point. Again, it is not about the fans or being anti-Christian or anti-family. It is about money. The NBA knows that Heat v. Lakers will be a big draw. Forget the fans who have “nothing to do on Christmas Day other than watch an NBA game” [Magic coach Stan Van Gundy's words; not mine]. It is about money.
And honestly, despite James’s rational quote, he and Jackson and Van Gundy and all of the NBA players have no room to complain. Maybe Jackson and James are simply tired of playing on Christmas every year, the latter seemingly coaching on the 25th every season. But the system that creates a situation where the NBA schedules Christmas games also created James and Jackson and the rest of the NBA’ers. The commericialization of the sport made them who they are today and the Christmas games are simply a consequence of this creation.
So go forth and entertain the TV! Provide the service that basketball fans demand! You created this game; revel in it! Millions are going to be watching.
Not me though. I will be at Waffle House ordering up some hash browns…scattered, smothered and chunked, of course.
Boise State gets their National Championship
Boise State gets their national championship after all, winning a sloppy MAACO Bowl against the Utah Utes. That is the third national championship for head coach Chris Petersen, who also moved to an incredible 61-5 record. That is also the fifth national champion crowned in the “bowl season.”
So raise your glasses and give big ups to the Boise State Broncos, the 2010 MAACO Bowl National Champions!!!
A big run by Doug Martin tallied the first Broncos points and put them up for good. (big ups to Getty Images, via Daylife)
Whoa, now! (big ups to Getty Images, via Daylife)
What an ugly-ass trophy! Is it ironic that there is a goal post behind them? (big ups to Getty Images, via Daylife)
Another National Champion Crowned
Despite a fumble that apparently was not a fumble (at least the refs could not clearly determine who came up with it), the Louisville Cardinals defeated their former Conference USA rival Southern Miss to take the Beef O’Brady’s Bowl in St. Petersburg, Florida. Hey, what’s a national championship without a little controversy. But at least this championship game was close; the previous three played on Saturday were snoozers. Chris Philpot kicked a 36-yard field goal with just over six minutes remaining to win it for first year head coach Charlie Strong and the Cardinals. For Southern Miss head coach Larry Fedora, that’s two straight national championship losses since winning the New Orleans Bowl National Championship in 2008.
So big ups to the Louisville Cardinals! Your 2010 Beef O’Brady’s Bowl National Champions!!!!!
Game winning kick. (Big ups to the AP, via Daylife)
Charlie Strong celebrates his national championship! (big ups to the AP, via Daylife)
Bilal Powell celebrates the Cards' championship! (big ups to the AP, via Daylife)
First Three National Champions of the 2010 Bowl Season
Just wanted to give a big Uncle Popov salute to the first three national champions of the bowl season! These teams played hard all year, earned their bowl bid, and went out and won it on the field. They deserve to be recognized.
- New Mexico Bowl National Champion: BYU Cougars
- uDrove Humanitarian Bowl National Champion: Northern Illinois Huskies
- R+L Carriers New Orleans Bowl National Champion: Troy Trojans
All three teams raised their respective trophies high and no other team in the country can claim such a championship this season. So, raise your glasses and give a big ups to the Cougars, Huskies, and Trojans.
BYU - 2010 New Mexico Bowl National Champions
Northern Illinois - 2010 Humanitarian Bowl National Champions
Troy coach Larry Blakeney slides on a New Orleans Bowl national champions T-shirt
Troy - New Orleans Bowl National Champions
2010 Uncle Popov Top 23 – Final Week
Since the season is now over, this will be the final Uncle Popov Top 23 poll for the 2010 season. I might consider doing a bowl edition of the poll, but since the bowls are not administered by the NCAA (only sanctioned by that governing body), I refuse to include the results of these arbitrary exhibition games in my poll.
I think I have finally perfected my formula. So next season, it should be straight forward and need no tweeking. I still will not release my formula since those computers that are factored in to creating an exhibition champion are not released. But I will provide the number that each team in the top 23 received.
One element I did add just for the final poll is a measure for conference champion. This gives conference champs a boost over non-conference winners. Split champs have been factored in, as have divisional winners in the ACC, Big 12, C-USA, MAC, and SEC.
- TCU (28.453)
- Auburn (28.438)
- Oregon (28.250)
- Boise State (22.657)
- Ohio State (21.377)
- Wisconsin (21.159)
- Nevada (20.817)
- Stanford (20.396)
- Michigan State (18.991)
- Virginia Tech (18.963)
- Oklahoma State (18.627)
- Oklahoma (18.446)
- Arkansas (17.900)
- Utah (15.869)
- Hawai’i (14.882)
- Missouri (14.783)
- Central Florida (14.679)
- LSU (14.568)
- Nebraska (13.861)
- Texas A&M (13.725)
- Alabama (13.658)
- Northern Illinois (13.537)
- West Virginia (12.974)
Frog Stomped: TCU Should be Considered for the BCS Title Game
After their dominant performance against South Carolina, Auburn (number 3 in the UP Top 23) emphatically laid claim to a spot in the BCS Exhibition Title Game. But the Tigers’ opponent is a mystery.
Well, it should be a mystery. But every sports website out there penciled in the Oregon Ducks (number 2 in the UP Top 23) to face Auburn in Glendale. ESPN; Yahoo! Sports; CBS Sports. It is a foregone conclusion and really renders ESPN’s stroke-job this evening about as intriguing as “THE DECISION!!!”
But while everyone else is penciling in the Ducks, I have to question that choice. Not that Oregon is not a good team, but why isn’t TCU receiving any consideration whatsoever?
I laid it out before questioning why Oregon was given preferential treatment while Boise State was ignored despite a similar resume. Well, with Boise State out of the way, maybe it is time to examine TCU head to head with Oregon.
There are two common opponents between the two teams — New Mexico and Oregon State. Oregon and TCU both beat those two teams in similar fashion — the Lobos were blown out while the Beavers fought valiantly but just did not have enough to take down their opponent. Now, here is where someone will point out that Oregon State is Oregon’s chief rival and the game was in Corvallis. But the counter to this is that the Beavers were a shell of their former self going into the Civil War and the Horned Frogs beat a fully-healthy Oregon State squad.
This latter fact is a reason I am not too keen on using common opponents as a measuring stick. There are different circumstances surrounding each game and comparing one game to another is an utter fallacy. So, what other factors could be examined in the comparison between Oregon and TCU? How about rankings?
Well, the final BCS poll will not be released until later this evening, but it is safe to say that both TCU and Oregon will only have one opponent in the Top 25 of the BCS (Arizona should drop out of the Top 25). Obviously both teams beat their Top 25 opponent so they are 1-0 versus BCS Top 25 opponents. Oregon does have an advantage because they beat Stanford, who is ranked #4 in the BCS while TCU defeated Utah (20th in the current poll). However, three side notes with this comparison.
First, Oregon faces Stanford early in the season, which allowed the Cardinal a chance to crawl back into the Top 10. But also, Stanford went from unranked to #13 in the USA Today Coaches’ Poll going into their 2 October game against the Ducks. Who exactly did the Cardinal beat to jump up so much? Sacramento State, UCLA (0-1), Wake Forest (2-0) and Notre Dame (1-2)! Really? Meanwhile, Utah, which was also unranked, at least beat Pittsburgh to open the season and justified their early jump in the polls. Utah went into the TCU game undefeated and was destroyed…at home! But because that game occurred a little more than month after the Oregon-Stanford game, Utah — and vicariously TCU — was punished more because late season losses have a greater impact than early season losses.
Second, Utah followed up the TCU loss with a dismal performance at Notre Dame. Back-to-back losses are lethal and tend to cause greater total drop than non-consecutive losses. For example, Utah dropped a total of 18 slots in the coaches’ poll (sixth to 15th after the TCU loss; 15th to 24th after the Notre Dame loss). Oklahoma fell a total of 15 slots after losses to Missouri (third to 11th) and Texas A&M (ninth to 16th), with a Texas Tech win sandwiched in between the two losses. While only a difference of three, the point is that consecutive losses are more damaging than those of the non-consecutive variety.
The third thing to consider is the conference perception theory that has been laid out here before. Without regurgitating the entire theory, essentially because Utah is in the Mountain West conference, their loss to TCU carries a heavier impact than Stanford’s loss to Oregon. This is because it is believed that Utah’s ranking was a fraud due to their conference and that the Utes cannot be “legitimate.” Or to put it another way, Stanford’s loss was “respectable” because it occurred in a “tougher” (read “BCS”) conference. Hence why Stanford only fell five slots while Utah fell nine slots.
Nevertheless, the fact does remain that Stanford is fourth in the BCS poll going into tonight’s unveiling while Utah is 20th and even if the polls are flawed this perception will carry the day. So the Ducks likely will win this comparison 99 percent of the time.
Another potential comparison is to examine the average ranking of the opponents. This can be achieved by looking at the CBSSports.com 120. By taking the rankings of each FBS team, we find that Oregon’s average is 65.36 while TCU’s average is 73.45. While the same caution above with regards to losses and poll position apply here (and has been addressed before), the fact that there really is not a great difference between Oregon’s opponents and TCU’s opponents should bring pause. If one wants to argue that TCU does not belong in the BCS title game discussion because of their opponents, then what has Oregon really done to prove that they belong? That Oregon’s opponent’s average ranking is only eight spots higher than that of TCU’s opponents does not make the Ducks a clear cut choice.
Which leads us to strength of schedule. While this is not completely objective due to the fact that intangibles unrelated to records are not taken into account (not to mention that the formula used is up to the evaluator), it at the very least avoids emotion and perception.
The NCAA implements a formula to determine the “toughest schedule,” which is simply the winning percentage of all of the opponents of a given team. According to their formula, Texas A&M has the toughest schedule in the FBS (0.65289) while Middle Tennessee State has the weakest schedule (0.305). Based on the same formula, TCU is ranked 75th (0.47058) while Oregon is one slot below the Horned Frogs at 76th (0.46956). If you include FCS schools, both drop considerably, but Oregon falls all the way into a tie at 150 while TCU drops to a tie at 135. So, using the NCAA’s standard, TCU has faced a tougher schedule.
Well, can we get more sophisticated than just total winning percentage of opponents? Sure. What about a simple strength of schedule formula and well as the Rating Percentage Index that is often used for basketball?
- SOS = ((2*Opponent Record)+(Opponents’ Opponent’s Record))/3
- RPI = (Record*0.25)+(Opponents’ Record*0.5)+(Opponents’ Opponents’ Record*0.25)
If we do this, the difference between the Ducks and the Horned Frogs is minuscule.
- Oregon: SOS – 0.485; RPI – 0.614
- TCU: SOS – 0.483; RPI – 0.612
In both cases, Oregon’s “lead” is only 0.002 points. It is such minuscule difference that it would be safer to call both teams even. Although I did not go through and rank every team based on these two measures, it is safe to say that the difference between Oregon and TCU would likely be one or two spots.
It is difficult to state that TCU deserves to be in the BCS title game over Oregon. But what makes it so easy to claim that Oregon deserves it over TCU? Based on every comparable measure examined here, both teams are even and should receive equal consideration. There should be mystery going into tonight’s “BCS DECISION!!!” but it seems that the decision has already been made.
Actually, the decision to have Oregon and Auburn play for the BCS title was made over a decade ago when this current system was designed. The system was created by the power conferences and designed to give their members direct access to the title game. Oregon and Auburn are both in BCS schools and as such it only seems “natural” that those teams “belong” in the BCS Title Game. It is their party and so of course they are going to be invited.
Meanwhile TCU, who appears to be able to party just as hard as Oregon, is left standing on the front porch.
At least in two years they can snatch the Big East’s ticket to a BCS game. Maybe then TCU will be “accepted.”
Quick Snap: LeBron James Plays Just Another Game in Cleveland
Tonight, the Miami Heat square off against the Cleveland Cavaliers in a battle of mediocrity.
Sorry…wrong word. Of media-crazy!
Obviously this game will NOT be about just the Cavs and the Heat. This will about LEBRON JAMES and his return to cleveland.
I have a feeling of what the reaction will be like, and it will sound something like a Chick-Fil-A commercial. But what is the appropriate response.
At first, I thought it would be awesome if no one showed up for the game. Have the fans not show up and abandon James. But that would actually punish the Cavs. The better response would be fans showing up for all 41 Cleveland home games in full force regardless of the team’s record. It would show that the city of Cleveland is behind its team and not an individual. Sell out the Quicken Loans Arena every home game and stand behind the team, unlike what James did.
So far, Cleveland fans have done that as through nine games the Cavs had the highest average home attendance (20,562), which is at 100 percent capacity (tied for sixth). So bravo to the city of Cleveland.
But I am not sure that is the best way to stick it to LeBron James, who honestly will never truly “care” about what Cleveland fans do.
I think the best thing for those fans to do is, when James is announced, to stand and applaud him. Remember the positive things that James did for the team. He took helped lead Cleveland to the NBA Finals. He brought attention to a down-trodden team.
So stand and applaud him before the game. Such a move would be classy. And given that many around the country hold James’s move to Miami as a classless move (at least the way he did it; not the move itself), the response would be a stark contract to The King’s classless move.
And then, cheer like mad for the Cavaliers to win the game. Don’t boo James every time he touches the ball. But cheer for the Cavs. Let Cleveland be the focus of fan energy; not a player who is no longer on the team.
To me, that would be the ultimate jab at LeBron. Show that he is appreciated, but that the city has moved on and will stand behind the Cavaliers as they move on without James’s services. After all, Cleveland is only three games back of Miami. Cleveland may not be doing as well as they did when James was a part of the team, but he is not doing so hot without Cleveland either.
Certainly, we have to expect that Miami will improve. But for one night, Cleveland can show that they are better than James and his Evil Empire in South Florida.
So applaud LeBron James for what he has done. And hopefully by the time the game ends, Cleveland can be cheering for Mo Williams leading the Cavs to victory (behind a triple-double).
Quick Snap: Cameron Newton Decision
The NCAA determined that Auburn quarterback Cameron Newton is eligible to play. That is good news for the Auburn “family” and really good news for college football as Newton is the best player in the FBS and deserves to play.
Or is it a good thing? The NCAA report notes that…
Based on the information available to the reinstatement staff at this time, we do not have sufficient evidence that Cam Newton or anyone from Auburn was aware of this activity, which led to his reinstatement. From a student-athlete reinstatement perspective, Auburn University met its obligation under NCAA bylaw 14.11.1. Under this threshold, the student-athlete has not participated while ineligible.
Um, okay. That Newton can play is fine. I have no problem with that. But the wording used here is puzzling. “At this time” is always a puzzling phrase. Does this mean that the NCAA suspects that more information will surface? That there is not “sufficient evidence” is certainly legalspeak, but also leaves open the possibility that Newton did know that he was being shopped and there evidence was simply weak.
But it is clear that NCAA violations occurred. How? The NCAA stated as much.
The NCAA concluded on Monday that a violation of amateurism rules occurred, therefore Auburn University declared the student-athlete ineligible yesterday [Tuesday] for violations of NCAA amateurism rules.
So violations did occur, but the only “punishment” that Newton received was essentially a one day penalty of being deemed “ineligible”?! Really?
Look, I understand that once a violation by an athlete has been proven that the individual is immediately deemed ineligible. There is then a reinstatement process that takes place. But for that process to be completed so quickly is bizarre. And why would Newton, who was suddenly deemed ineligible, not deemed ineligible for any games that he played? It is a curious situation for which I only seek clarification; not damnation.
Additionally, will Auburn be punished? Not likely as apparently the NCAA’s investigation did not find that Auburn paid anyone for Newton’s services. That is fine, too. But I am curious how Auburn “satisfied” NCAA Bylaw 14.01.1 (emphasis added):
Institutional Responsibility. An institution shall not permit a student-athlete to represent it in intercollegiate athletics competition unless the student-athlete meets all applicable eligibility requirements, and the institution has certified the student-athlete’s eligibility. A violation of this bylaw in which the institution fails to certify the student-athlete’s eligibility prior to allowing him or her to represent the institution in intercollegiate competition shall be considered an institutional violation per Constitution 2.8.1; however, such a violation shall not affect the student-athlete’s eligibility, provided all the necessary information to certify the student-athlete’s eligibility was available to the institution and the student-athlete otherwise would have been eligible for competition.
Well, technically he did not meet all applicable eligibility requirements — whether he knew it or not — and was allowed to represent Auburn. Furthermore, did Auburn really certify his eligibility? The findings of the NCAA seem to indicate that he was not eligible even if the violations were unknown to him. Violating amateur status resulted in automatic ineligibility; thus if Auburn could not confirm 100 percent his amateur status, then how did they clear this particular bylaw? Again…only asking…not condemning.
Cameron Newton is going to play — and he will likely play well — in the SEC title game. At this point, that is something that cannot be question. Maybe he did really know what was going on, but it is innoncent until proven guilty; not the other way around. And in this case, his innocence was upheld. He can play. Get over it.
But the thing that worries me is not Newton or Auburn. It is the door that these findings open. What is to stop future shopping of high school athletes by their father or proxies and if caught the athlete claiming that he (or she) had no idea what was going on? Remember Albert Means? He was shopped around and the results was punishment for Alabama, not Means. Means was still allowed to play…he just did so at Memphis rather than Alabama.
What does the case of Newton and Means show us? Simply that the individual can get away with it while the school is the one that receives the punishment. Neither Newton nor Means were unable to play. They were not (directly) punished. There are few consequences for the athlete and with this decision, will we see more cases where athletes simply “did not know” what was happening?
It is like the tragedy of the commons, where the individual benefits while the group bears the burden. Only, it is the tragedy of the NCAA, where athletes (or their representatives) benefit at the expense of the individual team.
The NCAA will never make sense — an institution that will punish schools subjectively, where in some cases current athletes pay the price for the wrongdoings of past players and in other cases claim that they do not want to punish the current players. This is an institution that allows some athletes to play professional baseball and then return to college to play football, but would not allow former Colorado wide receiver Jeremy Bloom to maintain his eligibility because he was a professional skier (and competing for the United States!).
Oh well. War Cameron Eagle, i guess.
