|
|
| |
|
 |
| |
Friday, May 16, 2003
No Accountability Necessary
The Cleveland Plain Dealer Editorial Board strikes again with another distorted account of reality. This time with the HUD Auditors who say Cleveland mismanged the empowerment zone funds, and now wants $11.6 million back of the nearly $22 million given (previously noted here and here). To the PD Editorial Board it seems to be a case of saying, " just because Cleveland was given control of the funds doesn't mean they are responsible for them."
The city of Cleveland and the U.S. Depart ment of Housing and Urban Develop ment are set to battle over $11.6 million. Auditors from HUD's Office of Inspector General claim the city has misused that amount of federal empowerment zone money. Washington demands repayment.
City Hall has until late August to respond. But current and past city officials already have begun returning fire, and it's clear that Mayor Jane Campbell's administration will not meekly cut a check to HUD. Based on what has happened in other cities, the haggling over what federal dollars should or should not have paid for could last well into next year.
Yes, just the same as in other cities. Naturally other cities of similar sizes as Cleveland had the same results when audited. Why Chicago was told to repay the devastating amount of $1.1 million, Atlanta $1.8 million and Cincinnati $327,000. Clearly the problems in Cleveland's dispensation of the money is on such a similar scale.
Cleveland is being grilled for 8 times the money Chicago is, despite Chicago having a population fo 8.3 million versus Cleveland's 2.25 million. To most people that would suggest that Cleveland might have more of a problem with how it managed the money than most other cities. Not the PD, though.
At first glance, Cleveland seems to have a strong defense. HUD's audit team focused on three big-ticket projects that ate through 75 percent of the money in dispute. Cleveland used the cash for projects in the Fairfax and Midtown neighborhoods that removed blighted properties and replaced them, in two of the cases, with buildings that could anchor future development. Renovation is set to begin on the third site. HUD is now questioning whether any of the initiatives met federal guidelines.
For example, Quincy Place in Fairfax appears to have run afoul of HUD because the auditors contend it siphoned jobs from downtown; empowerment zone projects were supposed to generate new jobs. But the jobs at issue are those of some 50 Cuyahoga County employees redeployed to Fairfax as part of the county's welfare-reform program. The county's decentralization dovetailed nicely with one of the major pieces in Cleveland's empowerment zone strategy: getting support services to unstable families. HUD officials praised that human-capital approach in 1994 when they welcomed Cleveland into the highly competitive empowerment-zone program.
Yes, Cleveland placed a majority of the money it received in just 3 projects. The end result is to just transfer 50 MUNICIPAL jobs from downtown to an empowerment zone. I don't think it outrageous for federal auditors to ask -- Where the hell are the private business jobs and opportunities this is supposed to generate? To the PD, of course, if it isn't a big ticket project, there's no point to trying.
Back then, the initiative was a classic Bill Clinton hybrid: a dose of bricks and mortar and social services to please liberal Democrats, plus lots of tax credits to pacify moderates and Republicans. By all appearances, Cleveland's program was an administration favorite. Vice President Al Gore campaigned in the empowerment zone in 1996, and HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo was a regular visitor. On one trip, Cuomo touted the city's job-creation success; his staff approved all of the Cleveland projects.
Now there's a new team in Washington - one that shows little zest for bold urban strategies and whose inspectors rip Cleveland for generating too few jobs. So part of what's going on here may be simple politics. But HUD also charges that Cleveland failed to monitor sufficiently the use of federal dollars; almost every empowerment zone city faces similar claims. That may prove a harder case to defend, and City Hall has hired consultants both to review the inspector general's report and to improve management of the empowerment zone, which is scheduled to get federal money at least through the end of 2005.
Yes, it's all just a change from a Democrat to a Repubican sitting as President. Of course. Pure politics. It makes perfect political sense for a Republican administration to target a city with a Republican Mayor for almost $12 million while in Chicago where there is a Democrat and former Clinton official in the Mayor's office is being smacked for $1.8 million. Obvious to me. It's clearly just an oversight.
Let's ignore that the 3 projects in question generated a total of 44 jobs (11 to local residents) for a cost of $13 million.
There is little doubt that parts of the empowerment zone, which also included sections of Glenville and Hough, look better than they did in 1994. Some of that is due to housing, retail and other developments that were already under way when the federal money arrived. Yet the additional cash undoubtedly helped maintain momentum.
"Better than they did in 1994."? Funny, I would then attribute that to a stronger economy. The documented momentum hardly seems to match the price tag.
At the same time, the empowerment zone has seen little of the dramatic transformation that boosters, here and in Washington, predicted. Decades of physical blight, unemployment, family disintegration and drug trade are a hard mix to overcome. More immediate economic trends also are hard to control: An employer the city had counted on to anchor one of the projects now being questioned went bankrupt. Though the empowerment-zone program has yet to run its course, it is clear that at least some promises are unlikely to be kept. And the lost credibility from that is probably more than any auditor can measure.
What? You mean there may have been some irrational exuberance in the actual amount of jobs predicted? You mean sinking a majority of the funds into big ticket items didn't pay off. You mean it was like the lottery?
Cleveland followed it's traditional approach of only looking for the big projects and employers, not looking to actually develop an area where smaller businesses could grow and thrive.
Thursday, May 15, 2003
Tim Russert Gets It
Tim Russert seems to recognize the difference when covering terrorists.
The rules of journalism have to change when it comes to covering terrorists who "want to destroy men, women and children," Tim Russert, host of NBC's "Meet the Press," told Cleveland business and community leaders yesterday.
Reporters, he said, "have to make very sure that we in no way convey that there is any sense of moral equivalency between the United States of America and terrorists.
It just simply doesn't exist," Russert said, speaking to 250 people at a luncheon sponsored by the Jones Day law firm. "The Fedayeen, the Taliban, Hamas, Hezbollah do not believe in the First Amendment."
Russert, a graduate of John Carroll University and Cleveland-Marshall College of Law, said Sept. 11 changed the way he thinks about his job because he realized that reporters were "first and foremost, American citizens."
Russert said that journalists must still remain objective but reject certain viewpoints.
"Understand when you are talking to someone from the Taliban, which I have done on television, that they are telling us something that comes from a rigid, ideological, and sometimes a theological viewpoint," he said. "And it is untrue. And it is not spin. It is simply not true, and it has to be exposed."
Expect CAIR to issue an alert and protest that Russert was being anti-Islamic for singling out the Islamofascists.
Big East Death Watch/Miami Bolt Watch -- We Are So Screwed
Well, maybe not yet, but the Big East isn't in great shape at the moment. In Providence, RI, where the Big East offices are located, they know the Big East will fight back, but it may be too late and they can't do much about it.
What happens to the Big East now is out of the hands of conference commissioner Mike Tranghese, who was Gavitt's right-hand man -- first at PC, then at the Big East, where he was Gavitt's hand-picked successor.
But it seems all but certain that the mighty Big East is about to get significantly smaller, its prestige and national clout greatly diminished.
...
Although the Big East was founded as a basketball league, it is football that is the dominant sport in intercollegiate athletics, the cash cow that generates the most revenue.
Hence the reason why another b-ball conference is going after Miami.
There are still two possible ways that Miami doesn't bolt for the ACC, but the end outcome is still the end of the Big East in its present format, as I've said many many times now.
One possibility is if the ACC can't agree on the other two teams to raid from the Big East. Miami wants BC and Syracuse. UVA voted for the expansion but wants VATech as one of the other two (not to mention FSU's Athletic Director popping off before the ACC wants to talk)
"Unless people can agree who the teams are, I don't know if they [the presidents] are any closer or not," North Carolina State athletics director Lee Fowler said.
ACC commissioner John Swofford was on the phone late last night trying to build consensus among the nine league schools. That job was made more difficult when Florida State board of trustees chairman John Thrasher revealed that the ACC presidents voted 7-2 in favor of expansion with Duke and North Carolina in opposition. Virginia voted in support, but wants Virginia Tech to be included in the final deal.
Whether it's instead of BC or 'Cuse is unclear, though. Some say it is instead of BC
But when Virginia proposed Virginia Tech, not Boston College, as a potential third new member, there was a prolonged discussion among the ACC athletics directors.
The Atlantic Coast Conference released a statement in which Swofford said nothing had been finalized, but Florida State board of trustees chairman John Thrasher broke the news.
"There are still a couple of issues, but the ACC will be expanding," Thrasher told The Charlotte Observer. "Miami really wants Syracuse as part of its package. We definitely want Miami, Syracuse and Boston College, but a couple of ACC schools have a different view of that."
Those schools are Virginia --- which may be posturing politically, since members of the state legislature have been pressuring the university to support Virginia Tech as a new ACC member --- and Georgia Tech. Dave Braine, Tech's athletics director, was Virginia Tech's athletics director before coming to the Atlanta. Braine was unavailable for comment Tuesday.
Others are saying that Syracuse would be the odd team out.
There was a debate over whether Virginia Tech or Syracuse should be the third team.
What stopped the ACC from issuing a formal invitation to the Hurricanes and two of their brethren from the Big East was a dispute over whom the partners would be. The Virginia state legislature reportedly wants University of Virginia officials to back Virginia Tech to protect the Hokies program, which would be cast adrift if the Big East football league fell apart.
According to sources in the Big East, Miami was adamant about wanting its travel partners to be Syracuse and BC because of their strong alumni base in the Northeast.
Of course, BC isn't exactly being coy about what it will do if invited.
"I have been involved in this from the beginning and I'm very, very confident that if Miami goes, Boston College and Syracuse will be the other institutions that follow," BC director of athletics Gene DeFilippo said last night.
"As I've said all along, we're very happy in the Big East . . . but we're going to do what we have to do to protect our institution and that's to go if they go."
BC is not an official slam dunk to join Miami and Syracuse. Virginia governor Mark R. Warner is leading a drive to get Virginia Tech into the league. One report had Virginia seeking to accept Tech and omit BC, but apparently it is Syracuse that would be left out in that scenario.
Miami, which hasn't received an official invitation, has said it would only enter the league if BC and Syracuse came with the Hurricanes, thus maintaining the school's presence in the Northeast. Virginia Tech would also be a weaker basketball link.
No one is sure, though if Miami is just posturing for the best possible deal for itself or if it is an actual dealbreaker. Of course the issue of UVA insisting on getting VATech in the ACC may just be other posturing.
Yes, there is some support for Virginia Tech. Sister school Virginia will feel obligated to stand up for the Hokies. So will Georgia Tech. Dave Braine, the Jackets' athletics director, had the same job in Blacksburg, Va., for 10 years and, if cut deeply, still bleeds a dash of burgundy.
But the new ACC eventually will boil down to money and markets -- in other words, BC and Syracuse. In the final financial analysis, Virginia Tech will come up long on immediate income but short on long-range projections. The ACC already has most of the Virginia and District of Columbia TV markets covered with UVa and Maryland but has no anchor in lucrative New England and New York.
...
And really, 100 years from now, no one will know or care how it came about. All that will matter in the future will be account deposits and the interest rate.
When in doubt, I tend to favor the cynical, follow the money approach. So, I don't see this derailing the ACC attempts.
The other possibility is from the Big East fighting back with a counter offer.
Call up eBay, type in "Division I-A schools," and, as of Tuesday afternoon, the University of Miami should pop up. The Hurricanes are officially on the block, and as far as we know, there's no "Buy It Now!" price. The Atlantic Coast Conference will bid for Miami to come and bring two friends. The Big East Conference will bid for its perennial football champion to stay. Let the auction begin.
We all thought that when the ACC presidents voted, it would be the beginning of the end of this waiting game. Instead, it's the end of the beginning. So we wait. What will it take to lure Miami?
...
The Big East offers a shorter trip to a national championship in football (fewer tough opponents, no conference championship). The Big East conceivably can offer more money, more favorable terms, perhaps an all-sports conference that leaves behind the conference schools that don't play Division I-A football. The Big East will offer Miami whatever it has to offer, right down to the very last stone crab mallet.
It is obvious that the Big East intends to make an offer to Miami, but I am not encouraged as to how serious it is.
Big East commissioner Mike Tranghese vowed Wednesday "to do whatever it takes" to preserve the conference. According to a Big East source, the conference is expected to make a financial proposal to Miami during its annual meeting this weekend in Ponte Vedra, Fla.
"Our football schools will be willing to do some things financially to make it work, some preferential treatment on revenue sharing," the source said.
However, the expectation was that Miami, if it has any interest in remaining in the Big East, would want to talk about restricting the conference to the eight Big East schools that will be playing Division I-A football in 2005.
The Big East was expected to be willing to put that kind of proposal on the table. Hoping to keep its place in big-time college football, the conference would cast out some of its founding members, including Villanova.
However, under that scenario, Villanova wouldn't be left on its own. No matter how things play out, the Main Line school is expected to remain aligned with the other Big East schools that don't play Division I-A football: Georgetown, St. John's, Seton Hall and Providence.
Sorry, for Miami to stay in any form of the Big East it will have to be a seperate conference of football schools (likely expanded to 12). Otherwise there is no financial benefit, and it only delays the next raiding attempt. I mean if Miami and BC don't appear swayed by the Big East tradition, it's not like Miami will.
It would be easier to feel good about the University of Miami's apparent imminent sports switch from the Big East to the Atlantic Coast Conference if not for the sad, lingering note of regret over the pending loss of that great, traditional football rivalry vs. Rutgers.
Of course other reports about what the Big East will offer are much more encouraging.
The details of the Big East counterproposal won't be known until this weekend, but some of the talking points have begun to leak out. Among them are:
Dispute the ACC's financial numbers.
Change the Big East revenue distribution plan.
Boot non-football-playing schools out of the Big East.
Add football-playing schools so it can have a 12-team football league, too.
The article has more details. I can only hope this is exactly what they are planning to do.
In a column that is the first one I've come across to attempt to blame the Clinton Administration for Miami's willingness to leave for the ACC (Miami's president, Donna Shalala, was a Clinton cabinet member), it makes what appears to be a growing trend of incredibly stupid columns that the way to keep Miami in the Big East football conference is to get Penn State to bolt the Big 11.
Once again, for those not listening. This will not happen.
For more fun, check out ESPN.com's list of possible scenarios in the major conferences. This list of scenarios helped explain why the Big 11 might pluck Pitt over West Virginia U. and VA Tech (screw the geographic contiguity requirement). Pitt, like all the members of the Big 11, is a member of the Association of American Universities.
Other Notes
The national media is finally noticing poor VA Tech and the effect of Miami leaving for the ACC, but VA Tech being left behind, as their athletic future is literally dangling.
Finally, an "outraged" column about how the ACC is just doing this for the money. I was beginning to think everyone was just resigned to this happening.
This couldn't be a worse decision. The ACC portrays its expansion from nine to 12 members as visionary and essential. Arrogant and selfish are more like it.
Nothing against Miami, Syracuse and Boston College, mind you. Fine institutions all. We love the restaurants in Little Havana, the beer joints in Syracuse and the architecture at BC.
But pillaging the Big East to bring them to the ACC? It makes as much sense as adding Mick Jagger, Paul McCartney and Smokey Robinson to the Backstreet Boys.
...
The ACC's quest for potential revenue leaves long-term, if not permanent, scars on several institutions.
ACC expansion zealots such as Georgia Tech athletic director Dave Braine (more on his cruel irony later) counter that 12-team "mega-conferences" are the future of major college sports (read: major college football). Any league without 12, they argue, won't be a player when football's next postseason structure is created in 2006.
So if the Pacific 10 and Big Ten don't expand, they won't be included? A Big East with Miami and Virginia Tech wouldn't be included? An ACC with Florida State wouldn't be included?
What a crock. This isn't vision. This is panic.
Yes, the ACC's football television contracts expire after the 2005 season. And yes, if Florida State continues to slide, the league will have little leverage in negotiations.
But last year the ACC distributed $9.7 million to each of its members, more than any conference. Isn't that enough?
Stupid question.
Most articles come down to this argument.
As a fan of sports, I’m against it.
But as a fan of money, I certainly understand ACC imperialism.
As a side note of some amusement, apparently some in the ACC were getting tired of reading the same quote in every article about the ACC expansion from Big East Commish Mike Tranghese referring to the ACC as hypocrites.
The idea of Miami, Syracuse and Boston College moving to the Atlantic Coast Conference apparently was first broached five years ago -- by Big East Conference commissioner Mike Tranghese. Les Robinson, currently the athletics director at The Citadel, said Tuesday that he attended a secret meeting in Atlanta in 1998 in which Tranghese and ACC commissioner John Swofford led a discussion about three Big East schools possibly leaving and making the ACC a 12-school league.
"Tranghese was the initiator of the meeting, which was hush-hush," said Robinson, then athletics director at N.C. State. "A lot of rumors were floating around, and the Big East was afraid it might lose some schools to the Big Ten. Tranghese, maybe looking to stay one step ahead of the posse, was talking about the Big East becoming an all-basketball conference.
This kind of strikes me, though, as a "blame the victim" approach.
Fred Barnes writes some more about the positives of an ACC-12 in terms of getting closer to a college football playoff. Fred misses the point, that the BCS is designed to enrich the big conferences, the established programs, prevent much in the way of new powers, and preserve the status quo for the bowl system. If you are not in the Big 10, SEC, Pac 10, ACC or Big East there was no guaranteed bid. The odds are stacked against you.
Matt Hayes of the Sporting News projects the new ACC-12. I only mention this because I compared his division breakdown to mine. He even makes similar arguments that I have made.
Hayes projected divisions:
South Division: Florida State, Duke, North Carolina, NC State, Wake Forest, Georgia Tech.
North Division: Miami, Maryland, Clemson, Virginia, Syracuse, Boston College.
My projected divisions:
ACC Div 1 -- FSU, Maryland, UNC, NC St., Duke, Wake
ACC Div 2 -- Miami, Syracuse, BC, Clemson, Ga. Tech, UVA
I think I've driven myself crazy enough for one night.
Wednesday, May 14, 2003
Compounding Errors
It was just one of those days. How to explain. You know how when you get in a rut or nothing seems to be changing or you need some change. Well, I've been out of work since November and just haven't had anything even remotely looking like some freelance work. Well, I decided to make a superficial change. Just to do something. I shaved my goatee this morning. I'd had the goatee for over 3 years, with maybe a month or two without. This was not a well thought out idea, on the wrong day.
My almost 11 month old daughter, Angie, has never seen me without facial hair. I never thought to consider the reaction she might have to seeing me this way. And of course, she had a horrible night of sleep. She had kept my wife up half the night. Apparently teething again. I had not been aware of this information when I was shaving this morning.
The wife was showering, and I was preparing my coffee fix when I heard Angie moving about. I dashed in to pick her up and reassure her that someone was there. We sat down to watch a little SportsCenter. She nestled against me, as she often does when she wakes up a little early, often to fall back to sleep. Everything was familiar to her.
Out came the wife as she was getting ready to head to work.
"You shaved?"
"No."
"How is Angie?"
"She seems fine, just started moving about. Hopefully, she'll go back down."
"She didn't notice your face?"
"I don't think so."
At that moment Angie started moving about, to look at her mommy. As she did, she looked up at me. In that moment, I could see the horror and shock at my appearance. Her eyes went saucer wide and her lower lip trembled in the confusion. Then the crying and screaming started.
The wife rescued her, as Angie stared at me crying. Still, the wife had to leave for work, so I was home with a very upset, tired and confused child.
The kid has lung capacity.
She did sleep a lot today, but would only stay asleep while being held. When she was awake, she cried and demanded to be held (never looking up at me). Finally around 3:30, she actually returned to her normal behavior.
Of course, I had promised the wife the computer time tonight while I watched the Yankees lose tonight on ESPN2.
Just a long explanation as to why I haven't blogged at all today.
Useless Post
Blogger won't let me re-post a post I pulled back for an edit, unless I post something else.
Tuesday, May 13, 2003
Big East Death Watch/Miami Bolt Watch -- Zero Hour
S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. S**t. It's going down.
ACC presidents voted Tuesday to expand to 12 teams, and while no formal invitiations have been extended yet, the new members were expected to be Miami, Syracuse and either Boston College or Virginia Tech.
John Thrasher, chairman of the Florida State University board of trustees, said the vote was 7-2, with Duke and North Carolina in opposition and Virginia in support, but requesting Virginia Tech instead of Boston College.
"There are still a couple of issues, but the ACC will be expanding," Thrasher said. "Miami really wants Syracuse as part of its package. We definitely want Miami, Syracuse and Boston College, but a couple of ACC schools have a different view of that."
The ACC hasn't expanded since adding Florida State in 1991. The expansion to 12 teams will allow the league to split into two divisions and play a championship game in football.
Thrasher said Florida State and Miami would share a division.
"We have to play Miami every year," Thrasher said. "Clearly we don't want to be in different divisions, because the only time we'd play is in the championship game."
Apparently NC St. voted yes. The only hope for this not to happen is if they can't agree on VA Tech or BC, and Miami can't wait any longer. UVA is under a lot of political pressure in the state to get VA Tech in rather than BC. Miami has a huge alumni/fan base in the Northeast and is insisting on BC and 'Cuse. (Plus, it seems Miami really hated the expense of travelling to Blacksburg.)
The other hope is that the Big East football schools are ready to make a counter-presentation to Miami -- and I mean right away. Apparently Miami is at least willing to listen.
No ACC invitation has been extended to the school, according to the person with knowledge of Tuesday's vote. Miami officials are standing firm that they won't move from the Big East Conference without Syracuse and Boston College, and the stumbling block in the ACC is sentiment in some quarters to take Virginia Tech instead.
...
Miami, meanwhile, has assured its Big East brethren that it wouldn't leave the conference for the ACC without listening to a Big East counter-proposal. That almost certainly would have to include provisions for a new or redrawn league in which all schools played big-time football.
The issue will dominate the Big East's annual spring meetings, opening Saturday at Ponte Vedra, Fla. The ACC is wrapping up four days of meetings at Amelia, Island, Fla., today.
The article goes on, decently about how the whole landscape and conferences for college football could change. I think it is a bit off when it envisions a Big East football conference with only 9 members (keeping the present and just adding Louisville). As I've said, for the Big East football to continue with diminished risks of being raided, it would need to expand to 12. At 9, it is still a sitting duck. Otherwise, it is an interesting layout reaching all the way to the Mountain West. It does forget the Pac-10, which would probably expand to 12 if the Big 11 added its 12th, which would probably grab BYU and Utah from the Mountain West.
Ugh.
Additional Comment: Josh Crockett is even more down than I am at the moment.
Big East Death Watch/Miami Bolt Watch (Day 9)
It could be, it might be, who knows if there will be a vote by the ACC school presidents. Basically, everyone is just waiting for it, thinking it could/will happen today, tomorrow, sometime soon. Now everyone seems convinced they will vote for it, because Duke head basketball coach Mike Krzyzewski didn't give his usual strong, vocal objections. The question is still will NC State support it or not?
I don't think I mentioned it, but one of the reasons that the ACC wants the expansion now, is that its football contract is up for renewal in 2005. When ESPN carries ACC football games, they are the lowest rated games. Having Miami would obviously boost their value.
Florida State athletic director Dave Hart announced Sunday during the opening of the Atlantic Coast Conference meetings that the ACC had the lowest ratings of any football league with ESPN and ESPN2 contracts.
Those leagues include the ACC, Big East, Southeastern, Big Ten, Mountain West and Conference USA.
Hart told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution that the Southeastern Conference and Big East had the best ratings last season on ESPN. On ESPN2, Hart said it was the SEC, Big Ten, Big East and Conference USA.
...
The ACC is scheduled to soon begin negotiations for new contracts with ABC and ESPN, and that is at the root of the ACC's expansion drive. The league's contract runs out after the 2005 season. A weakened economy along with a product that is failing to produce television ratings could drive down the market value of a new contract.
...
The Big East had the No. 1-rated game on ESPN last season and three of the top seven games. Miami's 28-21 victory over Pittsburgh on Nov. 21 drew a rating of 4.19 (about 3.6 million homes), was ESPN's highest rated game and the most watched ESPN Thursday game in seven years.
The Boston College-Miami game was No. 5 overall on ESPN, and the Marshall-Virginia Tech game was No. 7.
On ESPN2, the Big East had three of the top nine games. They were West Virginia-Virginia Tech (No. 3), Pittsburgh-Virginia Tech (No. 6) and Syracuse-Auburn (No. 9). The No. 1 rated game last season on ESPN2 was Kentucky-Louisville, which was played on a Sunday night.
The ACC did not have a conference game in the top 10 on either network, but did have Florida State-Louisville, which ranked in the top five on ESPN.
Shocking that there is no interest in a Duke-Wake Forest football game (to be fair, there isn't much interest in a Temple-Rutgers game either, but there are larger alumni bases).
Money, Lawsuits, TV, Conferences and College Football. How did it get this way? Why did the football independents join conferences in the 80s? This is a fantastic article summarizing the key moments in how the landscape of college football was changed. A lot of stuff I didn't know.
Still, others keep making the tired argument of the tradition of the ACC or the money of a 12 team football conference. Sorry, I don't buy the "tradition" argument. The closest that comes is between the 4 North Carolina schools (and how many of their alum get that juiced up when the football teams meet?). There is no tradition with Florida State in the ACC. They were a girls college at one point, and nearly dropped football in the 70s before Bowden was snatched from West Virginia U.
Tradition and rivals arise over time and competitiveness, not being in the same conference. USC-Notre Dame; Florida-Florida St.; Miami-Florida St. are the great examples of games that don't need to be in the same conferences. And do you really think Texas-Oklahoma; Ohio St.-Michigan; USC-UCLA; and Pitt-WVU are based on being in the same conference? The Big 11 has learned with Penn St. that you can't manufacture a rivalry game. Not every game can be that way. The Big 11 cracks me up, because it seems every conference game has some stupid trophy they play for (4 schools, 2 trophies using Paul Bunyan?). The "Land Grant" Trophy doesn't make Michigan St.-Penn St. a rivalry game. Who cares what Indiana and Purdue play for? (Sorry, I seem to be getting off on a rant on the Big 11.)
Sometimes it may be a one-way street. Ask a North Carolina alum, which team he/she wants to beat in basketball more, Duke, Virginia, NC St. or Maryland, and you know the answer is Duke. Ask a Dukie, and you know the answer is UNC. Ask someone from Maryland, and it is less clear. It will depend on which team is higher ranked or leading the conference. Maryland-Duke may be the big game in the ACC right now, but that is only because of Maryland's present strength.
If geography and economy say ACC, why should Miami not go to the ACC? A Florida writer, looks to the wisdom of Bobby Bowden,
If this happens, it will go down as the most disastrous departure since Suzanne Somers left Three's Company.
As a football fan, I love the idea of Miami joining the ACC. College football wins. The ACC wins.
Enlisting Miami and playing an annual conference championship game significantly elevates the football level, passion and the number of NCAA violations in the basketball-bonkers ACC. But for Miami -- and Florida State -- this is a horrible move.
Miami is first and foremost a football school -- and anything that hurts the football program shouldn't be considered. UM is a major player in college athletics today only because it wins national football championships.
Miami doesn't have great facilities or rabid fan support. Its success was built on national titles -- period. Why jeopardize the foundation on which the most dynastic program of the past 20 years was assembled?
Miami dominates the Big East and virtually has a free pass annually into a national-championship game and/or BCS bowl. Florida State has a similarly primrose path. The Seminoles finished with a pedestrian 8-4 record last year but still managed to win the ACC's automatic BCS bid.
If Miami joins the ACC, it might mean more money for the school's athletic coffers but it will come at the expense of the football program. In a 12-team ACC, the road to the national title becomes much more difficult and there's a strong possibility the 'Noles or 'Canes would be left out of the BCS almost every year.
Don't believe this myth that the FSU-Miami loser would all but be assured of a BCS at-large spot. There are only two at-large bids and teams from six conferences (and Notre Dame) vying for them. Miami fans don't travel well even when their team is playing for the national championship. To think a BCS bowl would want the Hurricanes -- when it could have Texas or Tennessee or some other at-large team from a football-fanatical school -- is ludicrous. Bowls are in the business of selling tickets and filling hotel rooms. Miami does neither.
There's a reason UM Coach Larry Coker responded so tepidly when asked about joining the ACC. His official quote: "In football, I don't know how much the ACC helps us."
Unofficial translation: "I'd rather have a colonoscopy."
One of the major reasons FSU joined the ACC in the early '90s is because it provided the cushiest path to the national title. Remember Bobby Bowden's quote when the Seminoles were trying to decide between the ACC and SEC?
"I'm like George Foreman," Bowden said then, referring to the old heavyweight who was in the midst of making a comeback by fighting a bunch of glass-jaw Joes. "I like to pick those unranked guys out and fight 'em. Ol' George is out there knocking out these no-names, but he'll be fighting for the heavyweight championship directly.
"Everybody just assumes ol' Bobby was raised in the heart of the SEC, so naturally he's going to want to jump right in. Maybe I know too much about the SEC to want to join up."
Even though FSU was a much better fit for the SEC -- athletically, academically and geographically -- joining the ACC might have been the best move the Seminoles ever made.
So it's speculation time again. How about Miami not going to the ACC, helping to form a Big East football conference, and FSU bolting for it? Or maybe FSU going to the SEC? Not my theory, but an ACC guy's wild fantasy. I doubt it, but it is an interesting construct.
Over at the Sporting News, Matt Hayes constructs a fantasy where Notre Dame would actually join the Big East in football. Sorry, I don't buy this one either. The ND alumni live in their own world in football, and as Hayes himself points out, "Because it's [the BCS] already bending backward for the Domers."
How Far Up Will The Stain Spread?
Senator John Edwards presidential campaign could be derailed by its fundraising activities (via Patrick Ruffini):
Sen. John Edwards’ presidential campaign finance documents show a pattern of giving by low-level employees at law firms, a number of whom appear to have limited financial resources and no prior record of political donations.
Records submitted to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) show these individuals have often given $2,000 to the North Carolina Democrat, the maximum permitted by law.
In many instances, all the checks from a given firm arrived on the same day — from partners, attorneys, and other support staff.
Some of these support staff have not voted in the past, and those who have voted include registered Republicans, according to public records on file with various county registrars of voting.
Edwards’ campaign records also reveal that many of these individuals’ spouses and relatives contributed the maximum on the same day. The Hill found many of them to be first-time givers. Some have no previous demonstrable interest in politics, while others appear to be active Republicans.
Stacy and Robert Kern of Los Angeles, for example, are among those who contributed to Edwards’ candidacy. Stacy Kern is listed as an administrator at the law firm of Howarth & Smith. The firm participated in the class-action suits against the tobacco industry.
On March 6, Stacy Kern contributed $2,000 to the Edwards campaign. Two associate attorneys and five of the firm’s six partners also contributed the maximum amount. Los Angeles County records show that Stacy Kern is not a registered voter and has not previously voted or contributed to a federal campaign.
Her husband Robert, a self-employed travel agent, also gave $2,000 on the same day. Robert Kern was at one point registered to vote in Los Angeles, but after numerous unanswered letters since 1996 from the county registrar of voters, he was dropped from the voter rolls last year. As with his wife, Robert Kern has no record of having voted and made no previous federal campaign donations.
In 1998, Stacy Kern declared Chapter 7 bankruptcy in California, with assets of $7,925 and liabilities of $126,769. In 1994, California assessed her husband with a $33,254 state tax lien, active until 2004. The Kerns are not listed as property holders.
Under the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) individuals are limited to giving no more than $2000 to an individual candidate for federal office. Giving the limit in the name of another or reimbursing someone for the donation is prohibited by law. The FECA also prohibits a candidate or his/her campaign from knowingly accepting such funds.
The Edwards people are claiming full compliance with FEC laws and regulations and that they are aware of no problems.
It doesn't seem likely that it will get back to Edwards, but there will be fallout and questions. Several law firms are going to be looking at some ethics charges from the state bars.
A Brief Thought on Jayson Blair
For more detailed and more of the insider/journalist take, go read Andrew Sullivan, Mickey Kaus, and others who have been on this deal.
The whole thing has become a complete fiasco for the NYTimes. It comes off almost like an affirmative action opponent's wet dream. Diversity is important, but not by shortcuts. This sort of shortcut to diversity, unfairly puts every minority who advances by his/her own skill, talent, and hard work under a skeptical eye by others around them.
Here's a brief interview with William McGowan, author of Coloring the News on the matter.
But can't these things have just as easily happened if it was a white reporter who was pathologically committed to…
It wouldn't have lasted as long. In the Times's post-mortem, which was excruciatingly and embarrassingly detailed yet still reflects denial over diversity, there are a couple of quotes—there's one from Jonathan Landman, who is the metro editor and was Blair's boss for a couple of years. And when Blair got promoted to full-time reporter from probationary reporter, Landman didn't express his misgivings, and he said he didn't express them principally because the publisher and the executive editor had shown their commitment to diversity and that Blair's promotion was tied to that. And there were other instances, too, where you had editors who clearly wanted him to succeed and therefore didn't speak out or share information among themselves. And I'll make the statement: I don't think a white reporter who worked at the Times, a 27-year-old white reporter, male or female, who worked at the Times for four years who had that long a record of inaccuracy, shady, dodgy behavior, and arrogant confrontations with administrators, that reporter would not have been able to keep a job at the Times, much less get promoted. And be covering sensitive stories like the sniper case.
Resigning to Irrelevance
So Claire Short finally resigned from Tony Blair's cabinet in a bitter speech accusing him of betrayal of Labour. Of course it was a question of jumping before being pushed. Blair announced her replacement within an hour after after she notified Blair in a phone call. She's still pissed about the Iraq war, and her loss of credibility after threatening to quit before, changing her mind and now finding herself marginalized.
I don't know how it will play put in the UK, but in the US the script is rather standard.
She'd go on some high profile interviews with a sympathetic host where she can make all sorts of pious statements claiming to have held principles and standards. Do a couple op-ed pieces, all the while her agent will be banging doors at publishing houses for a fat book contract with promises of a great memoir that will shake the foundations of government. She'd get less than hoped, but then so will the publisher. While having the book ghost-written, she'd do the college circuit and see what kind of political clout she has left in the left. Her book will be unsurprisingly dated, drab and designed solely to make her look like a saint amongst sinners. Eventually, she would become a staple on pundit talks and as an "expert" on certain international affairs. All the while fading.
One Less Reason to Stay Up and Watch
At least in the early part of the season and in warm weather locales for Monday Night Football
Melissa Stark will not return to ABC's ``Monday Night Football'' for a fourth season as a sideline reporter.
Monday, May 12, 2003
Great Place to Start Over
Former Iowa State head coach, now a punchline, Larry Eustachy, may have a new job in an old haunt.
Where will former Iowa State coach Larry Eustachy land? If the New Orleans Hornets hire Tim Floyd as coach, expect Eustachy to wind up on his staff.
Eustachy had been a college coach in New Orleans. Of course New Orleans is the perfect place for Eustachy. No worries about the temptation of drink or young college girls flashing their breasts for beads or anything. Seems like the perfect place for a guy now claiming to be battling alcoholism.
Big East Death Watch/Miami Bolt Watch (Day 8)
It's full speculation mode. No one knows what will happen or when. The ACC is meeting this week, and the Big East meets at the end of the week.
The ACC meetings are taking place, but the issue of expansion isn't on the official agenda.
The speculation as to which way teams in the ACC will vote on expansion continue. Some seem to think that the longer the ACC deliberates the harder it will be to get the full approval. In this rumor filled piece Wake Forest, UVA and Maryland are all reconsidering their position of support (of course in past stories, each was considered to be on the fence or opposed).
In a surprising report from Charlotte, by Greg Doyel (who also covers the ACC and Big East for ESPN.com), the hold-out school is North Carolina State. If it was anyone but Doyel reporting this, I would be skeptical. NC St. has worked hard to elevate its football program (and in some ways is now more successful than its b-ball), and could only improve further with expansion for football. It has a great coach in Amato, and has upgraded the football facilities. The football program and the economics makes NC State's seeming reluctance confusing at the very least.
Schools looking to get into a revamped Big East Football conference, either with or without Miami. Naturally they are Conference USA teams that know this is the big chance. University of South Florida is almost giddy at the prospect since they only started playing D-I football a few years ago. Meanwhile, Memphis is getting nervous about the whole thing, because they know they stand to lose big time.
Memphis has a right to be nervous. If Miami, BC and 'Cuse don't go to the ACC; the Big East football teams will form their own, and definitely raid their 2 biggest C-USA rivals, Louisville and Cinci. I don't think Memphis would be invited as the third member because they don't bring anything on the football side, and are not much more than middle to middle-high on the basketball side over the long-term. They stand a better shot if the Miami, BC and Syracuse bolt. Then the Big East would need a bunch of teams, including Memphis. Likewise for USF. I actually like USF as a possibility, but I don't see how they would get an invite if Miami stays.
Big East Death Watch/Miami Bolt Watch
I'll have more later, but here are some other articles about individual schools and what they are thinking, that I wanted to post over the weekend.
In South Bend, there are actually ruminations with a tinge of concern that maybe ND should look at the ACC or even reconsider the Big 11 -- though conceding that it is unlikely.
An idiot columnist in West Virginia thinks that maybe it's best to let Miami go.
In Syracuse, there is a sense of resignation that their fate is not their own. Admitting that where Miami goes, they will follow.
VATech football coach Frank Beamer wants in on the ACC if Miami bolts. He seems alternatively annoyed and dismayed.
Then there is the optimistic East Carolina University. They, like Louisville should jump on the chance to go to a Big East football conference.
Lesbian Murder Trial Over
The story is over. Marie Seilhammer was found guilty and given a life sentence for her role in the "in a tangled lesbian affair that led to homicide." Shari Lee Jackson was beaten with a baseball bat and had her throat cut open with a box cutter. Her body was then set on fire by Seilhammer and Kristin Edmundson (who pled guilty, and is serving a life sentence).
Where "Uncle Roy" Retired
You can still catch the really old Saturday Night Live shows on the E! channel. Whenever Buck Henry hosts, they have the "Uncle Roy" sketches, that are not so funny as they are creepy now that I have a daughter.
Well, the story of Frank Swiderski, is getting creepier.
Until now, hardly anyone questioned Swiderski's many relationships with boys. Why would they? Swiderski - who in the 1970s was voted Eastlake's citizen of the year - appeared to have a selfless dedication many admired.
German teacher, exchange-student host, travel guide, Boy Scout volunteer and doting uncle. Swiderski insists he has devoted much of his life to helping boys.
City Debts Keep Growing
At the end of April I noted an article on Cleveland being told they need to repay federal money to the tune of $11.6 million. The City of Cleveland officials claimed that they were merely "quibbles" and "very technical regulatory questions." They also claimed that audits in other cities turned up similar problems, so it wasn't that big a deal.
Whoops.
Cleveland, however, appears to be in a league of its own when it comes to the federal empowerment zone program.
...
Auditors examined the largest amount of money in Cleveland, reviewing how the city spent $21.5 million in empowerment zone money. They found that the city should repay more than half because of management and accounting errors - a higher proportion than any other city audited.
...
"Part of the reason the amount seems large for our empowerment zone is that we were trying to do projects of [a large] scale," said Steve Sims, the city's economic development director. "These were expensive, visible projects."
So what you're saying then, is rather than use the money for overall development on several smaller projects, the city tried its old standard approach of betting on the big projects to produce a complete change. All eggs in one basket. Kind of like the approach the city and county takes with downtown. Keep building one giant structure after another claiming it will be the centerpiece of a whole rebirth.
The audit findings in other cities, however, were on a smaller scale than in Cleveland.
Atlanta, for example, was asked to refund $1.1 million and Chicago $1.8 million. Cincinnati was asked to refund nearly $327,000 and Minneapolis only $9,705. Federal officials asked for no money back from St. Louis.
In Cleveland, auditors looked at how the city spent $21.5 million on 10 projects between January 1999 and April 2002, covering the administrations of both Michael R. White and Jane Campbell.
The $11.6 million that Cleveland has been asked to refund is broken into two categories: nearly $6.9 million spent on projects that auditors say were not allowed under empowerment zone guidelines and $4.7 million spent where Cleveland officials could not provide enough documentation to justify the payments.
Yeah, problems just like in other cities. So what if it's 8 times what Atlanta's audit wants back, Cleveland just was more daring.
Brilliant. The city just poured the money in and never looked.
CWRU Shooter
I was going to do some more blogging on the shooter and the events on Friday at Case Western Reserve U, but it appears that the Volokhs have it well covered. Too many posts, just start scrolling down.
Can't Blame Blogger for This
Most of the posting had to stop over the weekend due to ongoing power surges and outages, including an hour plus one last night. We've been getting gusts up to 50 mph, and apparently Eastlake, OH has trouble with that sort of weather. There has already been one brief outage this morning, so posting may be sporadic.
|
|
 |
|
 | |
