The music in this commercial for Repatha, a drug used to treat high cholestrol, is a cover of the 1988 power ballad "Listen to Your Heart" by the Swedish rock duo Roxette. The song reached #1 on the U.S. pop chart in 1989.
December 10, 2024
September 7, 2024
Michigan Just Got Reminded How Hard it is to Win Football Games WIthout Cheating
I guess it's not so easy when you don't have spies on the other team's sideline. @CoachJim4UM @UMichFootball
Related Posts:
R.I.P. College Football: How Corporate Interests, Greed and Defiance Killed the Game We Loved -- Part II
August 12, 2024
Steph Curry and the Ugliness of a Long Distance Shooter
...Turning to news from the Olympic games, in heroic fashion, Stephen Curry hit five 3-pointers in the final eight minutes of play to secure a win in the gold medal basketball game against France.
Curry, as he often does during his NBA play, then proceeded to skip down the court, pop his jersey and scream at the crowd, all while posing, taunting, and otherwise embodying the stereotype of the "ugly American."
If that wasn’t enough, Steph also treated everyone to his signature (and rather corny) two-hands-on-the-side-of-his-face "Nite-Nite" gesture which was backed up post-game when he donned a t-shirt reading "Nuit Nuit" ("Nite-Nite" in French) and celebrated with cigars and champagne.
All of this underscores the sad truth about Steph Curry: the fact that since he entered the NBA in 2009, he's gone from being the elite-shooting skinny underdog that everyone was rooting for, to an obnoxious, unsportsmanlike, cocky little showboat who enjoys embarrassing his opponents...
#whatajerk
June 28, 2024
Why St. Elmo's Fire Still Matters
In discussing Andrew McCarthy's new documentary about the Brat Pack with a good friend, he began rather aggressively maligning the movie Saint Elmo’s Fire. Over a span of ten minutes, he ranted about how boring the plot was, how Mare Winningham was miscast, (rather randomly) why McCarthy's character in the film is such a "turd", and just how bad a movie St. Elmo's was to begin with when it was first released thirty-nine years ago.
Okay, I admit it; St. Elmo's Fire is not a great film. It wasn’t back in 1985 and it’s not today. But that’s not really the point. Few claim that Saint Elmo's is a masterpiece of filmmaking. In truth, it's not even above average or, by many measures, even particularly entertaining, But it’s by no means a "bad" film either. On the surface, St. Elmo's is a very average drama with no real highs or lows, featuring competent but not exceptional acting and a thin story that falls well short of captivating.
However, what St. Elmo's Fire is beneath the surface is an exploration of some very common themes -- friendship, coming of age, secret crushes, finding your place in this world, etc. Certainly all of these themes had been explored on film previously, so St. Elmo's broke no new ground in that way. But what the film undeniably does is offer perspectives on these themes through the unique lens of the 1980's -- ultimately presenting keen new examinations of 80's youth by reflecting their psychology, pressures, problems, and world view.
Because Saint Elmo’s Fire applies a unique, extraordinarily contemporary 80's filter, it stands out as one of the most emblematic movies of that decade. Think about it -- when you consider the most representative movies of the 1980's, you don’t think of Oscar winners like Platoon, Terms of Endearment, Amadeus or Rain Man. You think of ones that captured the zeitgeist of the time, whether that means films with Cold War overtones (Rocky IV, Top Gun, No Way Out, Rambo), 80's excess (Less Than Zero, Wall Street), a frivolous, fun-loving vibe (Ferris Bueller's Day Off, Footloose, Police Academy), a distinct but somewhat undefinable 80's aesthetic (Flashdance, Lost Boys, Fatal Attraction, American Gigolo, Risky Business) or a focus on youth culture (Fast Times at Ridgemont High, Valley Girl, The Breakfast Club -- and its sister movie released the same year, Saint Elmo's Fire.)
Indeed, if you examine the characters and plot of St. Elmo's Fire, you clearly see the social conventions, attitudes, mores and struggles common among 80's youth:
- Billy Hixx (Rob Lowe) is a portrait of hedonism and apathy as he's dragged unwillingly into adulthood.
- Coke sniffing, party girl Jules (Demi Moore) -- with her hot pink, neon apartment decor featuring a floor to ceiling mural of Billy Idol -- is a study in 80's glam and overindulgence.
- Alec Newberry (Judd Nelson) shamelessly pursues promotion in the political world and perfectly captures the Gordon Gekko-esque materialism and aspirations toward upward mobility of 80's yuppies.
- Kevin (Andrew McCarthy) is Alec's antithesis -- cynical, introspective and dismissive of conventional thinking.
- Kirbo (Emilio Estevez) is fancifully pursuing things he only thinks he wants (a law degree and Dale Biberman.)
- And finally, Leslie and Wendy (Ally Sheedy and Mare Winningham) both wonder how they became stuck in lives they never chose -- Leslie as a trophy girlfriend caught in boyfriend Alec's wake and fearing she'll never carve out her own identity, and conflicted Wendy yearning to choose her own path and break away from the life her parents want for her.
And that’s why it’s important -- not because it’s a great movie, but because it’s a snapshot of 80's young adulthood. So for me and so many other Gen X-ers, St. Elmo's Fire is an important film that still speaks to us today... because it spoke for us back then.
Related Posts:
June 16, 2024
Streaming Wars: Episode 6
In this latest episode of my ongoing audio blog on the Streaming Wars I examine:
- Dealing with churn
- A shift toward programmed content on streaming channels
- Streamers' plans to push into sports, gaming and betting
- The upfronts: WBD shines, NBCUniversal underwhelms
- Netflix's rationale for no longer reporting subscriber numbers
Listen to this episode on YouTube.
Related Posts:
May 4, 2024
1984's Breakin' Brought Urban & Inner City Art Forms to the Big Screen
I have a tremendous memory when it comes to things pop culture related (hence the name of this blog.) So even though it was 40 years ago (to the day in fact) I still remember what was playing at Loews Wayne Sixplex (the flagship theater located near the Willowbrook Mall in the suburbs of Wayne, NJ) on the first Friday in May of 1984. Firestarter and the Mel Gibson/Anthony Hopkins version of The Bounty alternated showings in one of the big houses; Weekend Pass and My Tutor (the latter on a re-release); Footloose; Moscow on the Hudson; and opening in the other big house was a curious new movie with an unknown cast of black and Latino rappers and street dancers called Breakin’. At the time, breakdancing, b-boys and hip-hop culture was a part of black, inner city culture exclusively. Walls, however, were about to come down and Breakin’ would be the battering ram.
In New York City throughout the 1970’s, DJ Kool Herc, one of the architects of hip-hop, developed deejay techniques that would serve as the paradigm for many of the most important records of the first generation of that musical genre. One of Herc’s techniques involved isolating the most percussive and/or infectious part of the record, also known as the "break". Armed with two turntables and two copies of the record, Herc would let the break beat play on one turntable then “crossfade” to the second turntable where he had the same break beat already cued up. He then repeated this technique over and over, effectively extending these funky drum solos and bass grooves for as long as he wanted. Hearing the prolonged breaks inspired dancers to show off their moves and this ritual was soon dubbed “break dancing.” Herc’s innovation would go on to inspire the early recording technique of “sampling”, which began when artists and producers -- in efforts to simulate Herc’s innovation -- would copy and loop portions of a record to serve as the foundational bed of a new recording.
A pop culture phenomenon
Just about ten years after Herc pretty much invented breakdancing, it and other forms of urban artistic expression finally began entering the American pop culture zeitgeist more broadly. To this point, breakdancing was largely underground and undocumented, gaining perhaps its greatest national attention via the cult film Wild Style and the Los Angeles based dance group The Lockers, who had showcased their talents on shows like Soul Train and Saturday Night Live. Three of the group’s founding members were Fred Berry who, as “Rerun” on the ABC show What’s Happening, would sometimes show off his “pop-locks” and other street dancing moves; choreographer/singer Toni Basil, later known for her hit single “Mickey”, and future star of Breakin’ Shabba-Doo Quinones. But Wild Style and The Lockers were not widely known. What breakdancing needed was a main stream showcase.
It would take pretty
much the first third of the 1980’s but interest in breakdancing and
other urban artistry would continue growing. Jean Michel-Basquiat was by this
time well known in Manhattan art circles for his raw, graffiti-style
paintings; breakdancing was featured in the hit 1983 hit Flashdance
and in music videos by Chaka Khan, Billy Joel and others. Run-DMC’s
first album, released in March of 1984 would become the first
gold-selling rap album and the group would join forces with Whodini, the Fat Boys and others in what would be rap's first successful live concert tour. The
small cultural circles in which these novel types of creative expression were found would soon widen.
Breakin’s legacy
Breakin’ earned almost $40 million on a budget of just $1.2 million. The film’s profitability caused studios and film producers to view the breakdancing “fad” (as it was judged in many of their eyes) as a something worth investing in. A sequel was rushed into production and, in almost unprecedented fashion, that follow-up would arrive less than six months later. More significantly, Breakin' helped expose white America to new art forms – ones that, like jazz and blues, had their origins and for a long time were only appreciated in minority communities. Breakdancing, pop-locking, graffiti art, MC-ing, deejaying and rap music would finally open bourgeois eyes – along with movie producers’ wallets.
Breakin’ earned almost $40 million on a budget of just $1.2 million. The film’s profitability caused studios and film producers to view the breakdancing “fad” (as it was judged in many of their eyes) as a something worth investing in. A sequel was rushed into production and, in almost unprecedented fashion, that follow-up would arrive less than six months later. More significantly, Breakin' helped expose white America to new art forms – ones that, like jazz and blues, had their origins and for a long time were only appreciated in minority communities. Breakdancing, pop-locking, graffiti art, MC-ing, deejaying and rap music would finally open bourgeois eyes – along with movie producers’ wallets.
All of the
aforementioned films are better scripted, produced and acted than
Breakin’ and all are of higher quality overall. But many
of these movies would not have been so easily green
lit had the appetites of studio execs not been whetted by the box office receipts of Breakin’, which demonstrated once and
for all that the urban experience, creative sensibility and culture had a place in contemporary film.
Related Posts:
Breakin’ New Ground
Breakin’ New Ground
A Quick Word on the Ridiculousness of May the 4th Being Star Wars Day
Star Wars was released in 1977 on May 25th -- that's the day everyone should recognize and celebrate. Switching from the film's true anniversary date to May the 4th just because it rhymes with "May the force..." may create a cute pun but its painfully contrived, completely misleading, and just plain dumb.
Related Posts:
April 30, 2024
R.I.P. College Football: How Corporate Interests, Greed and Defiance Killed the Game We Loved -- Part II
Below is Part II of an examination of the decades-long series of events, decisions, compromises and money-grabs that led to the end of college football as we know it. I strongly recommend reading Part I before continuing.
Obsession to Crown a Champion
Certainly, the aim of practically every college athletic squad is a championship but for college football that quest required the glorious winning of your bowl game. With the new system, bowl games seemed like they would be getting in the way of the new aim -- chasing an undisputed title and gaining the biggest payday along the way.
By 1990 there were nineteen bowl games and both schools and coaches considered it an honor to play in them. For players, your collegiate career simply wasn't complete unless you played in and won a bowl game. But as the nineties moved forward, with realignment taking place and big corporate dollars entering the game, the NCAA and college football's power brokers began to wonder if the bowl system had run its course. Football had long been the only college sport where the champion was not determined by some form of tournament or playoff. In addition, since 1968 (when the Associated Press began crowning a national champion) the two top-ranked teams had faced one other in a bowl game only six times. For a time, United Press International also crowned a champion -- sometimes a different one than the AP. In 1978, for example, USC and Alabama each won their bowl game and both finished with one loss. The result was a split national championship -- UPI selected USC and AP chose Alabama (despite the head-scratching fact that Alabama's lone loss was to USC.) Further complicating matters was that many conferences had contractual agreements with bowl committees that bound the conference champion to play in a specific bowl, regardless of any other circumstance. Thus, it was common for the two top-ranked teams at the end of the regular season to never have the opportunity to meet and decide a unanimous national champion. This obviously created lively debate in years where there was no consensus single best team in the land. The situation went on for decades until the early nineties when, after two straight years of controversy (1990 and 1991) the call for a #1 vs. #2 national championship game could, in the eyes of some, no longer be ignored.
College football began experimenting, first with a "Bowl Coalition" and then the "Bowl Alliance", whose rules and structure mandated a meeting between #1 and #2 to be contested in one of the major bowls. The Bowl Championship Series combined polls with computer rankings to determine the two best teams so they could be pitted against one another; the NCAA secured big dollars from sponsors and broadcasters for these games; and all of the top football schools in the country had dollar signs in their eyes more than ever. Unfortunately, there were two major problems with BCS. First, the computer rankings were both convoluted and often called into question. Second, because the goal now was to have a definitive determination after the end of the season rankings, it meant that bowl games would have to defer and forgo years of tradition so that teams that previously had been playing for berths in specific major bowls would now be free to play in others. For example, if the PAC 12 champion was one of the top two teams, it wouldn't necessarily be playing the Big 10 champion in the Rose Bowl, as had always been the case. Similarly, the SEC winner was no longer bound to the Sugar Bowl. Other traditional tie-ins were also affected and the free for all that resulted became yet another indicator of how unmanageable college football was becoming. Certainly, the aim of practically every athletic squad is a championship but for college football that quest required the glorious winning of your bowl game. With the new system, bowl games seemed like they would be getting in the way of the new aim -- chasing an undisputed title and gaining the biggest payday along the way.
A series of selection controversies ensued and itsoon became apparent that the BCS was fundamentally flawed.
- In 2001, Oregon, ranked second in the AP poll, was bypassed for the championship game in favor of Nebraska -- despite Nebraska's 62-36 blowout loss to Colorado in its final regular season game.
- In 2003, three BCS Automatic Qualifying (AQ) conference teams (LSU, Oklahoma and USC) finished the regular season with one loss. Three (Non-AQ) conference teams also finished with one loss (TCU, Boise State and Miami of Ohio) sparking the argument that the BCS was unfair to Non-AQ conference teams. LSU beat Oklahoma in the BCS Championship game and USC beat Michigan in the Rose Bowl and ended up No. 1 in the final AP poll, resulting in yet another split national championship.
- In 2008, Utah was excluded from the BCS championship (despite being the only undefeated Division 1 team) and finished second in the final AP poll behind Florida.
- In 2009, five schools finished the regular season undefeated: Alabama, Texas, Cincinnati, TCU, and Boise State. The BCS formula selected traditional powers Alabama and Texas as the top two teams, which again fueled cries of bias toward the traditional powers.
- In 2010, three teams -- Oregon, Auburn, and TCU -- all finished the year with undefeated records. While TCU statistically led the other two teams in all three major phases of the game (1st in defense, 14th in offense and 13th in special teams) Oregon and Auburn were selected for the national title game.
Clearly the BCS was just as controversial and no better than the polls previously used to determine a champion. The call for some sort of playoff format grew increasingly louder. But a playoff wouldn't be easy to execute. Football wouldn't be able to mimic the NCAA basketball tournament where teams play every other day. Football players needed recovery time, so unless teams were willing to play into late January and February, anything other than a four team playoff would be unfeasible. So that's where things landed. Today we essentially have a four team football championship tournament with (presumably) the four highest ranked teams in the final regular season poll as the participants.
I say "presumably" because the selection committee, as it did this past season, is free to choose whomever they deem to be the four best teams, regardless of their record, if they won their conference championship, or any other factors. So this entire system solves nothing. The four teams selected continue to be second guessed the same way they were when the national champion was subjectively named subsequent to the bowl games. We witnessed this just this past season when Florida State was left out of the top four despite being undefeated and winning its conference. This type of controversy led the NCAA to expand the playoff to 12 teams beginning with the 2024 season. But of course this won't solve anything either, as the teams that finish 13th, 14th, 15th, etc., will almost always have a case for why they should have been chosen over another program. The expansion also serves to further diminish the prestige and tradition of the bowl games, essentially making them simply the venues or "containers" for the series of playoff games.
Moreover, with the bowl games so devalued, players have begun sitting out. Many of them no doubt question why they should play in something like the Duke's Mayo Bowl when it means risking injury and jeopardizing a fat pro contract. Not long ago, passing on your bowl game would have been unheard of but in the 2003, University of Miami running back Willis McGahee took a brutal hit in the Fiesta Bowl that destroyed his left knee. McGahee was a Heisman finalist and top pro prospect expected to go in the top five of the NFL draft -- but after the injury his stock fell and he wasn't selected until the 23rd pick.
Jaylon Smith's story is similar. The former Notre Dame linebacker was projected as a top pick in the 2016 draft before tearing ligaments in his knee and sustaining nerve damage during the Fiesta Bowl. This led to a steep fall in Smith's draft stock -- one that cost him an estimated $10-$20 million.
Smith's and McGahee's stories became cautionary tales for players. With bowl games now having no real significance unless they are part of the college football playoff, top players today often opt out of their bowl games and begin preparing for the draft. (Christian McCaffrey, Bradley Chubb, Anthony Richardson, Kenny Pickett, Breece Hall and this year's number one pick Caleb Williams are good examples,)
Defiance and Concessions
The tide of public sentiment, pushback, criticism from every direction, and now lawsuits have become too much for the NCAA to navigate and still operate as an effective governing body.
Over the last few decades, America has become increasingly (dare I say excessively) litigious. Didn't get into the college of your choice?.. File a lawsuit claiming discrimination... Don't like the state telling you to close your business during the pandemic?... Take it to court... Madonna concert started two hours late?... Sue her.
It's emblematic of what our nation has become -- unwilling to do the hard things and unaccepting of circumstances and judgments that don't go in our favor. It's famously said the the U.S. is a nation of laws... but that only works when its citizenry recognizes and submits to some type of authority. This doesn't mean we should all swallow whatever the powers that be hand out. Certainly there are injustices we suffer and manifestations of idiocracy that are foisted upon us. It's right to challenge things like this. But the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction and we've lost our sense of being members of a society. Every single thing that goes against us is now falsely labeled as being an infringement on our civil rights.
The NCAA serves as a organization that regulates student athletics for over a thousand member schools and close to half a million student athletes. But the NCAA can only accomplish this when its constituents operate under -- and yes, submit -- to the NCAA's rulings. Somewhere along the way, it became the norm to not only criticize the NCAA but also question its authority to prescribe the guidelines and regulations to which its member schools must adhere.
As a result, we've seen an abundance of federal (and even Supreme Court) cases targeting the NCAA -- challenges to rulings on player eligibility, appeals for reversal of sanctions levied for recruiting violations, and more. This past season was a great example. The University of Michigan, after preliminary investigation by the Big Ten conference, was deemed to have violated an NCAA rule that prohibits off-campus, in-person scouting of future opponents. Allegedly, this was part of an elaborate scheme to steal opponents' signs. As a penalty, Michigan head coach Jim Harbaugh (who had run afoul of the NCAA more than once prior) was suspended for three games. What was Michigan's response? After penning a letter that first contested Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti's jurisdiction in punishing the program, the school issued a lengthy statement that condemned the conference (and the NCAA) for rushing to judgment before a full investigation could be completed. Significantly, no where along the line did Harbaugh or anyone else connected with the school expressly deny that cheating had taken place -- the video evidence of Wolverines off-field analyst Connor Stallions clearly visible on the sideline at a Central Michigan game was too damning for that. Yet that didn't stop Michigan heading further down the legal path and securing a temporary restraining order against Harbaugh's suspension.
Again, governing bodies -- in any sector of society but particularly sports leagues --- can only operate effectively when those governed willingly abide. This is how societies and other entities are able to function. We all agree to pull our cars to the side of the road to let an ambulance go by. We all stand in line and wait our turn at the post office. We all accept the determinations of our teachers as they dole out grades on our math tests. In each of these instances, there's agreement to stipulate to the judgement a higher authority. But the grievance and litigiousness that now permeates American society in general has made its way into college football:
Coach got suspended for stealing signs?... Find a judge to issue a stay... NCAA penalized your school for recruiting violations?... File a lawsuit... Star wide out got ruled ineligible?... Rip the NCAA in the media and conduct a public relations war until they cave.
What makes this even worse is the indignance that often accompanies it. ESPN commentator (and Michigan alumnus) Desmond Howard came to Harbaugh's defense. Eleven members of the Michigan House of Representatives penned a letter to the Big Ten expressing outrage. Still, what we didn't hear from either of those parties was a flat out denial or even a plausible explanation for the preponderance of video and other evidence against Stallions and the Michigan program. At no point was anyone at Michigan willing to own up to what most deemed obvious. Instead, the conference and the NCAA got slammed for supposedly denying due process. It was a very Trumpian response, in that the perpetrator of wrongdoings turns to legal challenges, injunctions, claims of unfair treatment and delay tactics. In Michigan's case, it seems to have worked. The NCAA agreed to drop its investigation of Harbaugh; he served his three game wrist slap suspension and the team went on to make the college playoff and win the national title. Now, with Harbaugh having left the university for the greener pastures of the NFL, the entire matter will likely be forgotten, even though its entirely likely that what transpired is grounds for Michigan's championship to be vacated.
It's all because the tide of public sentiment, pushback, criticism from every direction, and now lawsuits have become too much for the NCAA to navigate and still serve as an effective body. The association has lost significant portions of its respect and its power in recent year and has acquiesced to this pressure by changing many of its most longstanding and necessary rules... even those critical to maintaining fairness, parity, and competitive balance in the sport. Which brings me to the final factor that has led to the degradation of college football.
The transfer portal
Prior to the NCAA's rule change, very few transfers would have been permissible without the player having to sit out a year. Today these kinds of ridiculous musical chairs scenarios are happening en masse across the NCAA each and every season.
Facing a tidal wave of negative press, rebellion in the ranks and what seemed like an endless string of lawsuits, the NCAA's capitulation continued. Cries of hypocrisy were launched, this time against the rules surrounding the eligibility of transfer athletes.
The transfer portal launched in the fall of 2018, so it's not as new as many believe. It was implemented to bring more order and process to the mechanics of student athletes seeking to change schools. Windows were established where players could formally enter the portal, schools and coaches could view statuses, and player compliance to all requirements needed to transfer could be tracked. But in 2021, due to the disintegrating power of the NCAA, it once again made concessions to longstanding policies and ratified a new rule that allowed athletes in all sports to transfer without sitting out a year. (Previously, with regard to the five traditional “revenue sports”, upon transferring, players were required to sit out for a season before they were eligible -- except in instances where the athlete was moving from FBS to FCS, or unless they were granted a special waiver.) This concession pleased players and most of the NCAA's critics who were failing to understand (or didn't care) that the "sit out a year" rule was one of the last tools the NCAA had to prevent under the table payments that could entice players to leave one program in favor of another. It also was one of the only ways to dissuade them from leaving a school just to chase bigger and better NIL money.
The rule change effectively turned the transfer portal into, in the words of one NCAA official from the SEC, "chaos." Players today are transferring schools at an alarming rate simply because they believe they're not getting enough playing time... or because their position coach left... or because the team underperformed or isn't on TV enough. Take the case below.
In 2018, JT Daniels was the starting quarterback for USC. He played a year and then in the opening game of the 2019 season, tore his ACL Kedon Slovis became the new starter and played so well that rather than staying and trying to win his job back, Daniels decided to transfer Georgia. He was granted immediate eligibility to play and in 2020 he started four games and shared the position with Stetson Bennett that season. Then, in 2021 spotty play and injuries saw Daniels lose his job to Bennett so Daniels took advantage of the new NCAA transfer rule and switched schools again, this time moving to West Virginia for the 2022 season. Halfway through the year, he was benched and on Dec 5 of that year (you guessed it) Daniels entered the transfer portal a third time and wound up at Rice.
Meanwhile, back at USC, Jaxson Dart replaced Slovis who wasn't playing well. Slovis, having lost his starting job, transferred to Pitt. But the next off season USC hired Lincoln Riley as head coach and it was rumored that QB Caleb Williams, who played for Riley at Oklahoma, would follow Riley to LA so Dart entered the portal and transferred to Ole Miss. Williams departure from Oklahoma left the starting job there vacant and it could have been filled by Spencer Rattler, who was the starter prior to Williams... except as soon as Williams took Rattler's job the previous season, Rattler transferred to South Carolina... Chaos indeed.
Prior to the NCAA's rule change, very few transfers would have been permissible without the player having to sit out a year. Today these kinds of ridiculous musical chairs scenarios are happening en masse across the NCAA each and every season. A year ago, 456 scholarship players appeared in the portal on Day 1 and 780 total players from FBS, FCS and Division II went in. This non-stop program hopping severely injures the competitive balance of the sport, as high caliber players at every position now transfer at the mere hint of losing their starter status, to follow a coach, or for potentially larger NIL payments. The latter two almost certainly had a lot to do with the University of Colorado's 2023 season. New coach Deion Sanders brought in an astonishing 53 transfers -- that's close to half of the team's total roster. Sanders' celebrity, relatability to the modern athlete and the type of culture he fosters had a lot to do with this -- but so did NIL. Sanders had numerous endorsement deals in place long before he made it to in Colorado and upon his arrival his celebrity and star personality shined a spotlight on the program among sponsors and advertisers looking to attach their brand to a team that was increasingly gaining national attention. And as we know, more advertisers equal more NIL opportunity for players.
 |
| Illustration of the very first college football game -- Princeton vs Rutgers, 1869 |
Thus we can all say goodbye to the game we once loved. America's second oldest team sport in fact, played since 1869. College football is more of a "showcase" now than a sport. It used to be the name on the front of the jersey that mattered -- now it's the name on the back. Players used to play for the honor of winning the PAC 12 championship, or Bedlam, or making the All-America team and being introduced on a Bob Hope Special. Now all of those things are extinct and players aspire to star in the next Dr. Pepper "Fansville" commercial. The NCAA, once a steadfast authority that oversaw all aspects of the game, is accused of being out of touch with the modern athlete and is now ridiculed by coaches and university presidents at every turn. No longer is there any allegiance to conference or to school. Those things are mere niceties best left to us simple, naive and wistfully nostalgic fans.
So long college football. We'll miss you.
Related Posts:
March 21, 2024
Darth Vader's Lamest Excuses for Being Late for His Meeting with the Emperor
Needed extra time to iron my cape. Can't intimidate the rebel scum with wrinkles you know!
Doctor's appointment. (Not sure if you can tell but I kind of have a breathing problem.)
TIE fighter got stuck in traffic. Who would have thought there'd be rush hour in hyperspace?
Buried in paperwork -- mostly workers comp claims from Death Star explosion.
Got delayed on Tatooine. Turns out, they actually weren't the droids we're looking for.
Lightsaber wasn't working. Went to Target to snag fresh batteries.
Disturbance in the Force upset my stomach. Had to stop at Rite Aid for some Pepto Bismol.
Lost track of time trying to learn all the Stormtroopers first names. (Why do all these guys have to look so much alike anyway?)
Force-choked another imperial officer and got called in to HR.
Family emergency. Had to reveal my identity to my son and then chop off his hand.
March 20, 2024
Great Album Covers: A Momentary Lapse of Reason, Superman & Dookie
Pink Floyd's A Momentary Lapse of Reason -- unlike many of the band's greater efforts (The Final Cut, Dark Side of the Moon, The Wall) -- is not a concept album. The cover photo, on the other hand, is highly conceptual, conveying ideas of isolation, loneliness and irrationality. When contemplating prospective cover art, lyrics from the album track "Yet Another Movie" brought images of an empty bed to Pink Floyd guitarist David Gilmour. Gilmour explained his idea to Storm Thorgerson whose design firm was responsible for several notable rock album covers including the aforementioned Dark Side of the Moon, Led Zeppelin's Houses of the Holy and Pieces of Eight by Styx. Thorgerson's final design was a type of installation art that provided a nod to the album's track list and incorporated a soaring hang glider ("Learning to Fly") and several dogs ("Dogs of War") occupying an English beach with not one, but 700 carefully arranged wrought iron Victorian beds. Though shot on a typical gray day, the sky we see has a lovely purplish hue, which gives the photo and this cover a wonderfully serene feel.
Barbra Streisand's nineteenth album would be one of her best-selling. Released in 1977 when she was coming off the success of the chart topping "Evergreen" single and three straight box office hits (The Way We Were, Funny Lady and A Star is Born) Streisand was arguably at the peak of her career and rightly being considered the biggest female talent in entertainment. But on the Superman cover she belies prevailing opinions with a simple, demure pose against a plain blue backdrop. Wearing a white t-shirt emblazoned with the Superman logo, knee socks and white shorts, Streisand is shy but coquettish as she sheepishly cocks her head and tugs down on her shirt. Adorable!
Like Never Mind the Bullocks Here's the Sex Pistols, Green Day's Dookie is more than just a major label debut, it's a pronouncement. Just as the Sex Pistols' album had seventeen years prior, Dookie makes the statement: "We're here; we're kicking the effing doors in and we're changing the face of punk." Unfortunately, despite the fact that their lone album is considered one of the seminal works of its genre, the Sex Pistols didn't last. Green Day, however, is closing in on five decades of punk rock relevancy.
Dookie's cover is everything you'd expect from a punk album -- frenetic, irreverent, iconoclastic. In a jam-packed R. Crumb-like illustration by artist Richie Bucher, we see bombs dropped from a plane, a giant mushroom cloud, the "Bad Year" blimp, funny renderings of Patti Smith, fat Elvis and AC-DC's Angus Young; a satyr, a prospector, a giant talking fly, the woman from the first Black Sabbath album, and tons of dogs hurling their feces.
Apart from all the (often scatological) chaos you'll find, the Dookie cover is also a tribute to Green Day's old stomping ground of East Bay, San Francisco. The setting of the entire illustration is downtown Berkeley and Bucher includes representations of several locals from the East Bay punk scene along and the UC Berkeley Marching band. There's also a shout out to Huey Newton, the former Black Panther leader whose base of operations was just a few miles to the south in Oakland,
This is nowhere close to a full list of all the characters, Easter eggs and inside jokes included on this cover. I bought it when it first came out in 1994 and honestly, I'm still discovering things I hadn't previously.
March 14, 2024
This World Changing Event Took Place Under Cover of the New Millennium...
While exploring the Pop Culture Fiend Archives, I came across the New York Times from Jan 1, 2000 -- which I obviously saved because it was the first 21st century edition of one of the largest newspapers in the country. Upon examination, I noticed that overlooked among the banner headline and all the talk about the new millennium was a story about the surprise resignation of Russian President Boris Yeltsin and the installation of one Vladimir Putin.
Yeltsin resigned due to several factors, including instability in his Cabinet, health issues, a bribery scandal, and cratering popularity among the Russian people due to overall ineffectiveness. Under Putin, Russia has reverted toward its former identity on the world stage as an aggressor, enemy of the U.S., and a major threat to world democracy. Indeed, "President" Putin has become a de facto dictator who, in just a few days, will almost certainly be "elected" to his fifth term thanks to his continuous suppression and outright elimination of any true opposition.
For close to a quarter century now, Putin has created havoc across the globe -- allying with State Sponsor of Terrorism-designated Syria, cozying up with communist China, invading and advancing a war against Ukraine, poisoning and otherwise assassinating multiple political enemies, interfering in the 2016 U.S presidential election, and rigging elections in his own country.
Clearly we all had no idea how thuggish and sinister Putin would be back on 1/1/00 but this issue of the New York Times unknowingly announced the start of it all.
February 29, 2024
FX's Capote vs. The Swans & How Iconic 80's Actresses Diane Lane, Molly Ringwald & Demi Moore Make it Great
One of the most enjoyable things about Murphy's series: seeing the three most iconic actresses of the 1980's sharing the screen for the very first time... we have Diane Lane, Molly Ringwald and Demi Moore who, forty-plus years after their initial fame, crush their roles and once again show us why they became stars.
We are barely halfway through Ryan Murphy's latest offering, Feud: Capote vs. the Swans but we've already been treated to a once in a decade type performance by Tom Hollander who positively disappears into his (title) character role. Hollander perfectly captures Capote's dual nature -- amusing and endearing but also pompous and infuriating --- and also replicates his speech and mannerisms so precisely it's practically spooky. (To be honest, they should just skip the ceremony and give him the Emmy right now.)
That said, the "Swans" referred to in this series are a group of elite socialites (most of them New York-based) who befriended and patronized Capote after he reached fame with his sensationalistic novel In Cold Blood. After years of trusting some of their most guarded secrets to the author, he reveals them in a Esquire article that included excerpts from a new book titled Answered Prayers. The group then proceeded to ostracize Capote, forever banishing him from the high society circle he relished so much. Capote supposedly coined the term "Swans" to describe these women that were, by all appearances, perfectly composed but in reality were carrying tremendous weight and beneath the surface were always paddling furiously to keep themselves afloat.
Often, elements of this story and the reaction of the Swans to Capote's betrayal are difficult to understand. Why would these women -- wealthy, refined and entrenched in the upper crust of society, care so much about Truman? Why are they so devasted when he exposes them this way? And why do they second guess themselves for even a minute about cutting them out of their lives?
It's because Capote's assessment of them was correct. Beneath their veneers of perfection, these women are struggling mightily. They've lost their identities after marrying bankers, European royalty, and other rich and powerful men and now deep down perhaps they're realizing that most of what they've accomplished was only made possible through their family and social connections. Maybe they're awakening to the thought that although they're the envy of many, their lives are largely empty, short of pruning the perfect garden, earning "best dressed" honors, or planning Truman's famous Black and White Ball. Or maybe the betrayal thrust these women into turmoil due to simple embarrassment. For the Swans, appearances (we quickly learn) are paramount. Confronting Truman and making a scene in a swank restaurant they frequent is deemed just as much a sin as the betrayal itself. Likewise, husbands' infidelities are tolerable but the thought of others knowing is not.
It speaks to why Capote was able to fall in with the Swans in the first place. He ingratiates himself with flattery, preying on their superficiality and appearance consciousness, even going so far as to toy with them (and send them into a competitive tizzy) by suggesting he'll be choosing one of them as guest of honor at his ball. In spite of his not so subtle pandering and social climbing, the Swans adopted Truman, introduced him to power brokers, brought him along on lavish vacations, all while sharing their personal doubts and fears. So yes they are clearly victims but not entirely sympathetic due to their own snobbery and pretentiousness. All of this makes them rich, multi-layered characters that any actress (particularly those of a certain age) would love to play.
Which brings me to one of the most enjoyable things about Murphy's series: seeing the three most iconic actresses of the 1980's sharing the screen for the very first time. In addition to Naomi Watts as Babe Paley, wife of CBS head William Paley; Calista Flockhart, as Lee Radziwill, younger sister of Jackie Kennedy, and Chloe Sevigny as fashion icon and author C.Z. Guest, we have Diane Lane, Molly Ringwald and Demi Moore who -- forty-plus years after their initial fame -- crush their roles and once again show us why they became stars.
Diane Lane first grabbed headlines at age fourteen when she starred opposite Sir Laurence Olivier in the 1979 feature A Little Romance. Olivier called her "the next Grace Kelly" and Time magazine put Lane on the cover, proclaiming her one of Hollywood's "whiz kids." This was at a time when print was still a dominant form of media, so for a respected world news magazine like Time to dedicate a cover story to a Hollywood actress (especially one still in her early teens) was practically unprecedented.
Lane next made waves in the cult classic Ladies and Gentlemen, the Fabulous Stains and the more mainstream family pic Six Pack. At the famous casting sessions for Francis Ford Coppola's adaptation of The Outsiders, she beat out a who's who of other young ingenues for the role of the beautiful and conflicted Cherry Valance. The performance earned Lane a Young Artist Award nomination. Coppola was so taken with Lane that he cast her in his next film, Rumble Fish (also based on an S.E. Hinton novel.)
In 1984, Lane took on the role of Ellen Aim, a kidnapped rock star in Walter Hill's vastly underrated Streets of Fire and later that year she scored her first "adult" role as singer/gun moll Vera Cicero in Coppola's brilliant The Cotton Club. Lane was just eighteen during shooting (her co-star Richard Gere was thirty-four) but brought a sultriness to her performance that helped establish her as one of Hollywood's leading screen sirens. (She would go on to star in two other films opposite Gere, the acclaimed Unfaithful -- for which she earned a Best Actress Academy Award nomination -- and Nights of Rodante, adapted from the Nicholas Sparks novel.)
Diane Lane's other 1980's film roles included stripper/femme fatale Lorry in The Cincinnati Kid-esque The Big Town, and lead in the erotic thriller Lady Beware. She closed out the decade with an Emmy nominated performance in 1989's Lonesome Dove miniseries.
Lane has one of the meatiest roles in Feud, portraying Nancy "Slim" Keith, who wed filmmaker Howard Hawks and Broadway producer Leland Hayward before marrying into British royalty. According to some accounts, Slim helped Capote land high powered agent Swifty Lazar and a million dollar book deal. Lane's Slim is resolute in her disdain and quest for revenge after Capote's backstab and Lane's strong performance portrays her as the icy ringleader of Capote's ostracization. As she did with her character in The Cotton Club, Lane plays Slim as calculating, direct and in charge. When it comes to the Swans, she is "the center of the center" -- as Slim describes herself in episode 3. Lane is also fantastic at replicating the high-born accent and affectations of New York's upper crust.
Though she's three years Lane's junior, Molly Ringwald's career path was eerily similar -- from starting out as a child actress, to having a cover story crowning her the new face of young Hollywood, to having her career propelled forward by a genius director. She first gained attention for her lead role in the west coast production of the stage play Annie. In 1979, at just eleven years old, she played Molly in the The Facts of Life but the show was retooled after its first season and the cast drastically reduced. It was a lucky break for Ringwald; she quickly found success in feature films, beginning with 1982's Tempest, for which she earned a Golden Globe nomination. But it would be 1984's Sixteen Candles that would rocket the young actress to fame. Writer-director John Hughes cast Ringwald as the film's protagonist Samantha Baker, a high school sophomore whose sixteenth birthday is forgotten in the chaos surrounding her older sister's wedding. Ringwald was praised for her tender and authentic portrayal and the film helped propel the teen movie genre into its High Renaissance.
Like Coppola did with Diane Lane, Hughes was inspired by Ringwald and cast her in his next project -- the film that would come to define Gen X, The Breakfast Club. Ringwald would become something of a muse for Hughes and she next took on the lead role in the director's follow up, Pretty in Pink. A few weeks after the film's release, Ringwald was on the cover of Life magazine in a special issue that christened her as "Hollywood's Teen Queen". Two months later, her own Time magazine cover story cemented this status.
At this point, Molly was eighteen and ready to take on more mature roles. She turned down Hughes' Some Kind of Wonderful and starred as Cordelia in Jean Luc Godard's avant garde exploration of King Lear; played opposite Robert Downey Jr. in the Warren Beatty-produced The Pick-Up Artist; and finished her 80's run with the comedy For Keeps and the drama Fresh Horses, adapted from the stage play.
In Feud, Ringwald plays Joanna Carson, ex-wife of Johnny, who (like the New York Swans) is taken with Capote's charm, wit and intellect. Carson adopts the discarded Capote and brings him into her circle of elite (this time Hollywood) friends. Ringwald's signature red tresses are colored brunette for this role and at fifty-five years old she naturally no longer possesses her waif-like figure, so it's easy to forget who you're watching. As Carson, Ringwald brings the same effusiveness she did with her Pretty in Pink character Andie and her compassion for Truman is on display in several pathos-rich scenes that portray the man at his lowest.
Demi Moore's road to 1980's stardom was far different than Lane's and Moore's. She wasn't an accomplished child actor and in 1983 -- at the exact same time Lane was shooting scenes with the Academy Award-winning Coppola and Ringwald was about to become the face of the American teenager -- Moore was earning her bones as a recurring character on General Hospital. But in 1984, she starred opposite Michael Caine in the charming but overlooked romantic comedy Blame it On Rio. Though newcomer Michelle Johnson was the breakout star, it was Moore's first major film and she soon began a slow climb to success that would culminate with a run of critical and commercial successes through the 1990's. Ghost, A Few Good Men, Indecemt Proposal, Disclosure and Striptease (the film that made Moore the highest paid actress in Hollywood) were all in her future, along with her own iconic magazine cover, but her rise to fame largely began with the sweet and quirky 1984 teen comedy No Small Affair. The role of Jules in the seminal Gen X coming-of-age drama St. Elmo's Fire followed, as did a relationship with co-star Emilio Estevez and membership in the famous "Brat Pack". Moore then played John Cusack's love interest in One Crazy Summer and re-teamed with her St. Elmo's co-star Rob Lowe in the beloved About Last Night, both released in the summer of 1986.
Her next film, The Seventh Sign (despite being highly anticipated) was a box office flop. Moore then closed her 80's career with the role of Molly -- a prostitute who befriends two escape convicts (Robert DeNiro and Sean Penn) masquerading as priests -- in the much-hyped Christmastime release We're No Angels.
Interestingly, though her box office hit rate was spotty, Moore's career never stalled during the eighties. She married Bruce Willis, who at the time was starring in the ABC hit Moonlighting but with the release of 1988's Die Hard would soon become a full on movie star. He and Moore became Hollywood's "it" couple which helped Demi move solidly onto Hollywood's A-list -- where she basically remained until the 2000's.
In Feud, Moore plays Ann Woodward, a former radio star and showgirl who was married to wealthy banker William Woodward Jr. In what would become one of the biggest stories of its day, Ann killed William after mistaking him for a burglar. Speculation that it was murder ignited after Capote's book preview, which included a character based on Ann who was painted as a gold digger and murderess. In real life, Capote seemed to have personal disdain for Ann and publicly accused her of killing her husband.
Moore gives us a picture of Ann battling depression and straining to maintain her dignity amid the public stares. She displays venomous anger in certain scenes and intense vulnerability in others. At the ball, we see Moore at her best, portraying calm and elegance -- but when Truman calls security to have her ejected we see her shaken, pleading, humiliated. It's a scene where Moore demonstrates swan-like comportment as she calls Truman out for his misdeeds and it's reminiscent of another emotional scene in which Moore displayed similar range -- the break up scene in About Last Night.
For Lane, Ringwald and Moore, streaming shows and other high end television like Murphy's Feud offer strong, female lead roles that come few and far between in feature films. Past the age where they can star in rom-coms, take on "lethal lady" action roles (e..g., Black Widow, Atomic Blonde) or other parts written for younger actresses, fifty-something actresses are these days too often relegated to lesser fare -- guest shots on network shows or if they're lucky perhaps a starring role in their own series (think Tea Leoni in Madame Secretary or Julia Louis-Dreyfus in Veep.) Thankfully, Capote and the Swans shines a spotlight on three of the most talented and beloved mature actresses who by chance came up at almost the exact same time. You literally could not have chosen three women more representative of young Hollywood during the 1980's than these three. In fact, you almost wish Murphy would have made it an all-80's party and given the Watts, Sevigny and Flockhart roles to Elisabeth Shue, Lea Thompson and Winona Ryder instead.
Maybe next time : )
Related Posts:
Shout Out to... The Sorels
Shout Out to... The Sorels
February 9, 2024
Streaming Wars: Episode 5
In this latest episode of the Streaming Wars audio blog I discuss:
- Price increases and regression to ad-supported tiers.
- Max successfully rebrands, cuts costs and wins big at the Emmys.
- Formation of the Streaming Innovative Alliance.
- Is Apple acquiring Disney?
Related Posts:
January 9, 2024
R.I.P. College Football: How Corporate Interests, Greed and Defiance Killed the Game We Loved -- Part I
The Michigan Wolverines just defeated the Washington Huskies to win the college football national championship. The victory put a cap on the 2023 college football season but in many ways it also marks the end of 155 years of the country's second oldest organized sport. The events of the last several years, the choices of university officials, rulings by judges, and other factors have finally brought college football to a tipping point where it seems the sport's most defining rules, guidelines and provisions have been compromised (or altogether eliminated) to the point where college football no longer resembles the sport it once was. NCAA football has become the wild west -- complete with rustlers, guns for hire, and more opportunists and villains than it can handle it seems. Here are all the things that slowly killed the college game.
The demise of college football began with the creeping hand of corporate influence and the money grabbing that ensued. Beginning in the early 1990's, the sports world was seduced by the lure of the big dollars of Fortune 500 and other large companies. The 80's had seen Nike, Adidas, Gatorade and other brands strike deals with college and pro-level teams to provide shoes, apparel and more. These, plus endorsement deals with the decade's individual superstars, including Michael Jordan, Wayne Gretzky and Bo Jackson, had proved tremendously lucrative. As the US economy began roaring under the Clinton administration, and the birth of the internet led to the rise of wealthy tech companies like AOL, Yahoo and Cisco, these companies began looking for ways to elevate their brands and increase public awareness. The tens of millions of viewers watching sporting events each week provided the huge audiences they were looking to reach.
From the earliest days of baseball -- America's oldest professional sport -- billboards for beer and cigarette brands were a regular site at ballparks and stadiums. Soon after, play-by-play announcers for baseball, football, basketball and boxing began interrupting their calls to offer a word from the sponsor, whether it was a breakfast cereal, shaving cream, or clothing brand. Later, with the advent of television, games were brought to you by local and national companies in industries including hardware, automobiles, hair care and insurance. But this advertising was always in the background -- fairly innocuous and far from anything one would consider obnoxious. But as time changed, businesses of the new economy wanted a bigger bang for the their buck than billboards or live reads could offer. No longer would companies be satisfied with signage inside the stadium. Instead they sought a much higher profile by acquiring naming rights for the stadiums and arenas where teams played. So it was that by the mid-90's corporate sponsorship in sports reached new heights as American sports stadiums and ballparks quickly sold out (no pun intended.) In 1995, Candlestick Park became 3 Com Park, after the manufacturer of networking equipment. In 1996, the newly opening Pac Bell Park would debut. The following year, Jack Murphy Stadium, home of the NFL's San Diego Chargers became Qualcomm Stadium. We also got Coors Field, Invesco Stadium and several others. From coast to coast, our most famous sports venues were unceremoniously rebranded as big corps shelled out millions to have their names attached to sports franchises.
The Death of the Bowl Games
Around the same time this was taking place, there was also a major disruption in the college bowl system. Bowl games had been played since since 1902 and more were gradually added each decade beginning in the 1930's. By the eighties, the corporate giants (with their footprint now clearly established in the NFL) turned to the college game. Thanks to its new, deep pocketed sponsor, the Sugar Bowl became known officially as the "USF&G Sugar Bowl" in 1988. The next year, the Orange Bowl became the "Fedex Orange Bowl." All of the other bowls followed suit and this soon led to an unwieldy increase in the number of bowl games. To this point, bowl games were events rich in tradition and history. (The Sugar Bowl, for example, has been played since 1935 and came about because Louisiana was once the nation's leading producer of sugar. The game's solid silver trophy was made in London in 1830 during the reign of King George IV and was gifted to the bowl's organizers for the inaugural game.) After corporate sponsorship creeped in, history and tradition were swept aside and bowl names were shamelessly bastardized to afford the sponsor top billing in all press materials and during the TV broadcast.
The final step in this grand sell out was to create all new bowl games -- because after all, more bowls meant more money for everyone. It didn't take long for things to get completely out of hand in this regard evidenced by the fact that several of the newer bowl games have no other name other than that of the sponsor itself. Thus we've seen the likes of the Meineke Car Care Bowl, Little Caesar's Pizza Bowl, GoDaddy.com Bowl, and (God help us) the Pop Tarts Bowl, just to name a few.
Compensation and NIL Concerns
While big businesses were scrambling to stake claim of sports venues, and Nike was profiting and building its brand through partnerships with the professional athletes, new opinions began to form regarding compensation for college athletes. For instance, while practically every other nation on the globe sent players from their professional leagues to compete in the Olympics in sports like basketball, and volleyball, the U.S. had long maintained that only amateur athletes should be eligible for the Olympic Games. This was in spite of the fact that track, cycling and other American sports clubs had long been subsidizing its athletes training costs and even paying them stipends -- something that for all intents and purposes amounted to professionalism. But during the late 80's, the International and United States Olympic Committees began relaxing its rules and by 1992 professionals (including the famous "Dream Team") were ruled eligible in practically every Olympic sport. The line between professionals and amateurs became further blurred.
For decades, the goal for top high school football players was to gain a scholarship to a top university, excel there, graduate, get drafted and then make all your money in the NFL. Sure, there were unscrupulous backroom deals being made. Various NCAA investigations would reveal that money, cars and other enticements were offered to recruits to sign with a certain school and boosters or "friends of the program" provided cash payments and bonuses for outstanding play. Still, the fundamental tenet remained intact -- paying college players was illegal. Yet there was a growing sentiment that athletes were somehow being exploited. Many reasoned that the hundreds of millions the NCAA's member schools were making from TV rights were gained off of the backs of poor student-athletes. Others pointed to the fat multi-year contracts top coaches were signing. And while it was true that most top players were being paid in the form of full scholarships (a single year's tuition, room and board at major universities like Stanford, Michigan or Duke costs around $60,000 for example) such arguments held little sway. Figures like these seemed a mere pittance compared to the millions the schools were making, Thus, the opinion that college athletes should be paid continued into the 2000's.
Then in 2009, former basketball star Ed O'Bannon, who had led the UCLA Bruins to a national title in 1995, filed a class action against the NCAA to challenge its rules regarding the use of players' likenesses. Among other things, the O'Bannon case argued that the restrictions on compensation for the use of athletes' names, images and likenesses (NIL) for video games, live game telecasts, and other purposes violated antitrust laws. O'Bannon brought the suit after learning that his (and scores of other former players') likenesses were being used in EA Sports NCAA Basketball video games without the players' consent. EA Sports had established a licensing agreement with the NCAA but the individuals players were all left out, making the hypocrisy clear -- others could profit off of the performance and fame of college athletes but not the the athletes themselves.
O'Bannon eventually won the case and EA soon abandoned both its NCAA football and basketball games. Similar lawsuits followed and the courts continued to side against the NCAA. Now, not only was public sentiment seemingly in favor of rewriting compensation rules for college players but so was the legal system. The NCAA was clearly losing its grip as judges (who previously considered college athletics completely subject to NCAA regulations) now felt compelled to step in and overrule longstanding policies.
So the NCAA read the writing on the wall and finally began to seriously consider ways in which players might be compensated. Unfortunately, paying players is a lot easier said than done. Initially, ideas revolved around only paying athletes in the "revenue generating sports" ((baseball, men’s and women’s basketball, football and men’s ice hockey.) It's easy to see how this idea might have quickly been dismissed. First there was the matter of equity. Should the third string safety be paid the same as a Heisman candidate running back?... You can also imagine it wouldn't have been long before someone brought a lawsuit claiming only paying the revenue generating sports teams was discriminatory. And then of course there was Title 9. If you're paying the men's teams and not the women's it was a super safe bet there'd be all kinds of additional lawsuits quickly filed.
It's possible though that the NCAA never even seriously considered all this because the decision was more or less taken out of the their hands. In 2019, California passed the “Fair Pay to Play Act” -- which was the first state NIL law enacted. The legislation basically set the bar for how college athletes could be compensated moving forward. Players could now to be paid based on their value as an individual. More simply, any player could accept any endorsement deal, appearance fee or other payment available to them in the free market (provided it didn't create a conflict of interest with a deal already signed by the player's school.) The NCAA called the legislation harmful and "an existential threat to college sports" and even toyed with the idea of declaring all NCAA players in states who allowed payments ineligible. But threats don't get much emptier than that. It didn't take long for the association to capitulate to the new paradigm.
Conference realignment
Further disruption came to the NCAA's status quo with regard to its member conferences. Since their inception, conference affiliations had been both voluntary and fluid. Technically, institutions were free to switch conferences whenever they wished, so long as they gave notice and paid any agreed upon exit or entrance fees. Despite this, more often than not, a sense of logic prevailed and teams by and large remained in conferences that corresponded with their location on the map. That all changed in the nineties when football powerhouses Penn State and Florida State joined the Big 10 and ACC respectively. Meanwhile, the Big East looked to replicate its success as a basketball conference by adding five football schools. Notre Dame, which had always been staunchly independent, began flirting with the idea of joining the Big 10 and the Southwest Conference disintegrated altogether, its member teams joining the WAC, Conference USA and the Big 8 (which subsequently became the Big 12.) Tradition was once again pushed aside and nonsensical realignments (like Miami joining the Big East) proved that what mattered most now were the financials and what a conference could offer its member schools in terms of TV revenue.
To be continued...
Related Posts:
R.I.P. College Football: How Corporate Interests, Greed and Defiance Killed the Game We Loved -- Part II
Related Posts:
R.I.P. College Football: How Corporate Interests, Greed and Defiance Killed the Game We Loved -- Part II
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)