Money Players

For the love of money

By Marc Isenberg

Chicago Bull rookie Tyrus Thomas was fined $10,000 by management for making insensitive remarks about

A) Jews
B) Homosexuals
C) People in Louisiana who talk funny
D) The NBA Sprite Slam Dunk Contest

Answer is of course D.

Here's what Thomas said:

"I'm just going to go out there, get my check and call it a day." He added, "I'm just into the free money. That's it. I'll just do whatever when I get out there."

Does that qualify as inappropriate?

Bulls GM John Paxson (My absolute favorite Bulls GM in the last 20 years) thinks so.

"This fine is an appropriate response to the remarks Tyrus made concerning his participation in the slam dunk contest. It is a poor reflection on Tyrus individually and a poor reflection on the Bulls organization, and I am certainly disappointed. The league office has chosen Tyrus to participate in one of its All-Star events and that is an honor that should be accepted with humility. I spoke to Tyrus this morning and am confident he understands that he made a mistake with his words and that he also understands the importance of representing the Bulls and the NBA in a positive way."

Using this standard, imagine how much Michael Jordan would have been fined when he originally refused to wear the Reebok sweats at the 1992 Olympics -- and the tongue lashing Jerry Krause would have given. (Actually, imagine silence.)

It is important for players and management to publicly support All Star Weekend, including the dunkfest. That often means speaking in cliches that come directly from The Approved Script for Professional Athletes. In Ty Thomas's case, I don't see anything wrong with declaring that he is motivated to participate by money. Thomas shouldn't have made these comments to the media, but the offense hardly seems worthy of a public scolding and $10,000 fine. Thomas should probably pay it and move on.

NBA Slam Dunk "Contest" or entertainment
This is not a contest, especially since it's judged by celebrities. No one should get that worked up over this, including management, basketball purists, and media. The Slam Dunk Contest is for fans, mostly kids, who want to be entertained. Not that a Slam Dunk Contest is all that entertaining. Dunks we see today are all derivative of something already done by Michael, 'Nique, or Doctor J. Doesn't  matter. We still watch, just like we celebrate Christmas (technically I don't) even after we learn that Santa really doesn't come down the chimney.

© 2007 Marc Isenberg. All rights reserved.

Defending Reggie Bush

By Marc Isenberg

A lot has been written about Reggie Bush's alleged violations of NCAA rules. I have no idea what exactly happened, so I am not going to speculate too much. I will say I am not fan of Mike Ornstein, Reggie Bush's marketing agent. I think Ornstein has unnecessarily fueled the fire, both in the media and between the Bush and Michaels/Lake camps. Also, when it comes to "he said, he said" Ornstein has little credibility. Lake and Michaels don't have much credibility either.

Yahoo! has been looking into the Reggie Bush matter for almost a year. Read all about it. The latest allegations involve Reggie Bush on tape supposedly talking about starting a sports agency and implicating himself regarding NCAA violations. Yahooooooo!

Most information uncovered in the latest Yahoo! investigation comes from attorneys representing Lloyd Lake, who recently was released from prison, and Michael Michaels. The Bush tapes were likely made by Michaels or Lake, which would bolster Bush’s attorney David Cornwell's claim that these guys are trying to extort money.

It is illegal in many states, including California, to record a conversation without consent. This bit of information was not mentioned in the Yahoo! article. Many media outlets picked up an AP story, but none mentioned the potentially illegality of the taping.

Thankfully my research department is more expert in these matters. My wife Debbie Spander is a business affairs lawyer at Comedy Cental. When I brought up the latest development in the Bush case, she responded in quotable fashion, stating, "These recordings might be problematic. In the state of California it is not legal to make audio recordings unless all parties have consented."

She cited Crank Yankers, a show that aired on Comedy Central, which ultimately had to move its (crank) call center from California to Arizona, where it is apparently legal to tape unsuspecting targets without their knowledge.

If a tape of Reggie Bush exists as reported it would still likely be inadmissible in court, other than to support an extortion claim or to bring a criminal claim against Michaels or Lake.

But what about the NCAA? The NCAA is reportedly investigating the matter. If it is determined that Reggie Bush violated his amateur status, USC could face possible NCAA sanctions (e.g. forfeit games, repay money). If it is proven that no USC athletic staff member knew what was going on, they should avoid any major NCAA sanctions (e.g. loss of scholarships, postseason eligibility).

Michaels and Lake are likely to talk to the NCAA, but how credible is their testimony? Bush would be probably well advised to not cooperate. If the alleged tape falls into the hands of NCAA investigators, it will be interesting to see how it treats this information.

The NCAA is not a court of law and not subject to due process requirements of the Constitution. Last year the NCAA hired a high-priced lawyer to declare that "NCAA enforcement, hearing, appeals, and waiver and reinstatement proceedings compare favorably with federal, administrative and state court process." The Bush case will be a good test.

© 2007 Marc Isenberg. All rights reserved.

Pay for play

Brian Leonard played in today's Under Armour Senior Bowl. He has lost 20 pounds preparing for the NFL draft with the hope that NFL scouts will see him more as an I-Back rather than as a fullback. Dick Vermeil, who was broadcasting the game for the NFL Network, thought that's a mistake. Vermeil's broadcast partner mentioned that Leonard is a "good, but not great blocker." Responded Vermeil: "You become a better blocker the more you get paid."

I previously wrote about Leonard's decision to return to Rutgers for his senior year.

The odds of two African American coaches meeting in the Super Bowl and college championship

By Marc Isenberg

As an MBA grad and co-author of "The Truth about  Gambling," I enjoy examining the odds of pretty much everything...sports, gambling, investing, decision making, and life. Now that the Super Bowl matches two teams coached by African Americans, I started thinking about the odds of this event taking place.

Is this a statistical anomaly or predictable occurrence? Given 6 African American NFL head coaches out of 32 teams (at the start of the 2006 season), the odds of two African American coaches meeting in the Super Bowl were actually better than your favorite team making it. The event of two African American NFL head football coaches meeting again in the Super Bowl is likely to occur for the second time in the next 25 years. So how many years is it probable that two African American college coaches will meet in the national championship game for the first time? Based on today's numbers, this event should occur by 2475 A.D., hopefully a little sooner.

The Probability of Two African American Coaches Meeting in Super Bowl

Number of NFL African American head coaches at start of the 2006 season: 7

NFC
Lovie Smith
Dennis Green (fired)

AFC
Tony Dungy
Herman Edwards
Romeo Crennell
Marvin Lewis
Art Shell (fired)

At present, there are five African American AFC coaches (now that the Steelers hired Mike Timlin) versus only one in the NFC. Wonder if this has anything to do with fact that AFC is comprised mostly of old AFL teams, which was the "upstart" league? Also would be interesting to look at length of ownership and diversity of city to see if there's any correlation.

Chance of one African American head coach in Super Bowl: 21.88%
Chance of two African American head coaches in Super Bowl: 3.9% (Note 1)
Number of years it would take (assuming everything is held constant, including number of teams and number of African American head coaches) to have two black head coaches again: 25.6 years (Note 2)

Given that there are fewer African American coaches at the collegiate level, I thought it would be interesting to make the same calculations.

Number of African American D1-A head coaches: 6
Number of D1-A teams: 119
Chance of one black head coach in D1-A "championship game": 5.04%
Chance of two black head coaches in "championship game": .2136% (Note 3)
Number of years it would take (assuming everything is held constant, including number of D1-A teams and number of African American head coaches) to have two African American head coaches meet in the championship game: 468.2 years! I was taught to use exclamation points sparingly, but in this case it's appropriate!! (Note 4)

As the number of African American college football coaches increases so does the likelihood that two will meet in the championship game in the 21st century.

Calculations
Note 1: Since only one team represents each conference, the calculation is (2/16) * (5/16) or 3.9%.
Note 2: 100/3.9 = 25.6
Note 3: (6/119) * (5/118) = .002136
Note 4: 100/.2136 = 468.2

Payton's so-so career as a Chicago Bear

No, not the great Walter Payton. Sean Payton, the current New Orleans Saints coach.

Just prior to the Bear-Saints NFC Championship game, Fox did a feature on Sean Payton's short stint as a replacement player during the the 1987 NFL strike season.

ESPN.com's Gene Wojciechowski also wrote about Sean Payton's short Chicago Bear career.

While time heals many wounds, replacement players have always been a touchy subject in professional sports labor issues. After the 1995 MLB strike, a few replacement players went on to become full-time players. Unions have not treated the replacements kindly. Replacement players are  prohibited from joining the Major League Baseball Players' Association, although they can still receive pension benefits.

In 1987 replacement players were used by NFL management to weaken the players and their union. While the product was diminished by not having regular players on the field, as long as teams suited up 45 players, teams received television revenue.

The 1987 NFL players strike was over a critical  issue -- free agency.

Prior to 1976, the NFL had free agency, but it was essentially meaningless because of the "Rozelle Rule," which awarded compensation to the team who lost a player to free agency.

Paul Staudohar analyzed the 1987 strike in the August 1988 issue of Monthly Labor Review and discussed the NFL's slow progress toward establishing a free market for players:

"In December 1975, however, the players' association won the Mackey case...the Federal Courts ruled that the Rozelle Rule was an unreasonable restraint of trade under the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, because it acted as a deterrent to player movement in the NFL.

"With the decision in Mackey, NFL players could become free agents by playing out their option with the barrier of a compensation penalty to their team no longer in the way. However, in 1977, the union bargained away the rights won in the courtroom and agreed to method of determining compensation payments for signing free agents.

"The rationale for negotiating away free agency won in court is that fee agency may not be as meaningful in football as it is in other sports. The players gained increased pension and other benefits for giving up free agency, and felt it was a wise trade off."

Sean Payton was not the only current NFL head coach to make news during the 1987 strike. Then Kansas City Chief linebacker Jack Del Rio (now Jacksonville Jaguars head coach) got into a nasty fight with former Chief star Otis Taylor, who worked for the Chiefs as a scout. Taylor was escorting replacement players to practice.

LaDanian Tomlinson: The greatest of all time?

Good article by Art on the never-ending, never-to-be-settled debate about the greatest athletes of all time. I agree that LT is probably not the greatest running back of all time. At least not yet. Plus he doesn't play in Chicago. Now MJ is the great basketball player of all-time. Right?

Randolph Morris and the benefits of being an NBA reject

Randolph Morris, a junior center at Kentucky finds himself in a fascinating situation. The story starts out with his unfortunate decision (at the time) to test his market value by declaring for the 2005 draft after his freshman season.

Once Morris's projected draft position began to fall it probably would have prudent to withdraw his name and return to school. Instead he kept name in the draft, but was not selected. Had he been a late 2nd round pick, his college career would have been over. He would have either signed an NBA rookie minimum contract or ended up in the NBDL or in Europe. Morris thought he could return to play for his school, as permitted by NCAA rules. But Morris was ruled ineligible for the entire season (later reduced to 14 games) because he, in the eyes of the NCAA, had an agent working on his behalf and because he did not pay all his own expenses associated with working out for NBA teams.

Nothing worse than declaring for the draft, then not getting picked. Actually for Randolph Morris going undrafted will likely turn into his good fortune. Literally.

Here's how it works: While the NCAA allows a player to return to school (as long as he announces his intention to return prior to the draft or is not drafted and maintains his amateur status), under the NBA collective bargaining agreement he is only eligible to be drafted one time.

Fast forward to the present: Randolph Morris is a now a junior and considered a top prospect. He is averaging 16.9 points and 8.0 rebounds. Last week Morris made 10 of 11 shots against North Carolina and its star Tyler Hansbrough.

Since Morris cannot be drafted again he will enter the NBA as a free agent. A coveted free agent. No artificially capped rookie contract. Instead he (and his agent) can negotiate with any NBA franchise and sign with the highest bidder.

Like an infomercial voice over, BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE! Apparently many NBA GMs were not aware of the rules covering a player in Morris's situation. An NBA team doesn't even have to wait until the normal free agent signing period which starts July 1. They can sign him, get this, now.

Not since Jim Chones left Marquette in the middle of the 1971-72 season to sign with an ABA team, has a college basketball player been in this type of situation. The ABA held its draft in the middle of the college season in order to gain an advantage over NBA. What the ABA owners lacked in money, they made up for in ingenuity.

I am sure college coaches will be up in arms about the potential can of worms Morris might open if he leaves Kentucky. Dick Vitale will probably freak out and write another open letter to the misguided Randolph Morris. He will talk about loyalty, about commitment, about finishing what he started. All good points. He probably won't mention those money-grubbing college football coaches who left their teams last week...in the middle of the season...when their own market values were peaking.

Interestingly, when Jim Chones was in this situation his college coach, Al Maguire, one of my all-time favorites, encouraged him to sign the pro contract. Keep in mind, Marquette was 21-0 at the time and the number 2 ranked college team in the country.

According to Chones:

"Al says to me, 'Jimmy, you gotta leave, it’s a lot of money and it’s a great opportunity.' I told him that I didn’t think I was ready and you know what Al tells me? 'Jimmy, I don’t care and it doesn’t make a difference. You gotta go.' You see, Al had no fear. He wasn’t afraid to voice his opinion or stand up against anything or any institution. There will never be another Al McGuire or a revolutionary like he was...He saw the world not as people wanted to see it, but as it really was."

I hope that Randolph Morris stays until the end of the season, but I will not begrudge him if he leaves.

Lexington Leader's Jerry Tipton explains why it is unlikely that a pro team would sign Morris during the season. As college basketball commentator Clark Kellogg said the NBA does not want to "create the appearance that it is raiding players off teams."

Going Pro or Stay: The Truth

SI's college basketball writer Grant Wahl analyzes the economics of basketball players staying in college.

He looks at whether there is a "any correlation between how long a player stays in college and the contribution he actually makes in the NBA."

Check out Wahl's research. Wahl's conclusion: If you're a sure-fire first round pick, history suggests there is "little to no advantage to sticking around college for another year (if all you're concerned about is your NBA livelihood and performance and not the value of, say, enjoying college, earning a degree, winning a national championship, etc.)"

Florida basketball coach Billy Donovan has other ideas. Said Donovan, "To me the most important statistic in the NBA if you're a player is minutes played. If you're not playing, you can't produce...The big question is, What kind of second contract are you signing?"

I would like to believe college athletics is the best training ground for elite players to develop their abilities for an career in professional sports. But the decision should be based on critical analysis, not emotional rhetoric.

There are many great reasons to stay in school, particularly if a college athlete is engaged in the pursuit of a quality education, enjoys college life, and wants to win a championship, etc. But many in the business of college athletics (particularly Dick Vitale) often zealously make the case against leaving school early. They point out the failures, including Korleone Young, Leon Smith, Taj McDavid (often used as Exhibit A when citing the mistake of players turning pro early, but in reality he wasn't a legitimate pro prospect or even a D1 prospect). They fail to point out the many more athletes whose career were derailed during their college careers (either by poor off the court decisions or simply by poor play).

Certainly professional sports is not an ideal world for young athletes, but neither is college athletics, where there are just as many (perhaps more) corrupting influences.

Unfortunately many athletes are so focused on getting into professional sports that they never think beyond that. The goal isn’t to get to the pros, it’s to stay in the pros. Do you want to be a first-round pick, sign a rookie contract, and then be out of the League after a couple of seasons? Or is your goal to have a 10-year career?  The key is not the first contract (based on artificial "rookie minimums"), but the second contract (which is capped at $12 to $16.8 million  per year based on experience). As Grant Wahl's analysis shows there appears to be a diminishing return the longer college players stay in school beyond the NBA required age minimums when viewed in terms of the value of the second contract.

Law professor Michael McCann wrote a scholarly article on this subject titled, "Illegal Defense: The Irrational Economics of Banning High School Players from the NBA Draft."

The article "finds that players drafted straight out of high school are not only likely to do well in the NBA, but are likely to become better players than any other age group entering the league. In fact, on average, these players perform better in every major statistical category than does the average NBA player or the average NBA player of any age cohort."

I still think that college athletics can play a vital role in preparing future professional athletes, but we shouldn't fall for the rah rah "stay in school" arguments.

The big steroid testing bully gets a Stern lecture

With prodding from Congress and the media, owners and league commissioners have pushed for stricter steroid regulations and testing. So the game is on to root out the evil doers. Yes, I do think players bear responsibility for what they put into (or on) their bodies. But that doesn't mean players (even owners and commissioners) should roll over when the drug testing attack dogs bark.

Many people think players associations have moved slowly on the issue, which I think is an unfair criticism. Players associations are, in fact, working to eliminate steroid use and, at the same time, preserve athletes’ privacy and prevent owners from using drug testing as a weapon against players.

The media and Congress have built strong cases against athletes often without all the facts. Notable examples: the positive A sample of Marion Jones and the leaked grand jury testimony in the BALCO case.

Dick Pound, as head of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), has used his power to severely criticize professional and amateur governing bodies for being lax when it comes to drug testing. The solution, of course, is simple: hire WADA to administer the drug testing programs.

I am against athletes using steroids, both from a competitive standpoint and for health reasons. But the question is, how do we approach the problem in a sensible, fair way?

For starters, listen to NBA commissioner David Stern. Said Stern,"[WADA] is actually getting harder to take seriously. Whenever an organization which purports to be even-handed and fair announces that a 'B' sample isn't necessary, then they lose an enormous amount of respect."

Stern continued, "We have these very intense procedures we deal with our players on, and we throw them out if they fail the tests. But we also have a number of processes in place to protect them."

Washington Post columnist Sally Jenkins said it best in 2004:

"That phony careerist and human necktie Dick Pound should promptly remove himself from public life and quit trying to enlarge his reputation by wrecking the reputations of others."

Two years later that's still wishful thinking.

Shawne Merriman's positive drug test

San Diego Charger Shawne Merriman has been suspended by the NFL for testing positive for a banned substance. He is appealing this suspension.

I am definitely against players using steroids. While many are ready to attack Merriman, he does deserve some benefit of the doubt. At least until we have all the facts.

There are rules and procedures which must be followed in order to protect the integrity of the drug testing program. Unfortunately, someone from the team and league leaked information to the ESPN's Chris Mortensen.

On ESPN.com, Mortensen reported team and league sources told him that Merriman's suspension was "definitely for steroids … not one of those supplement deals."

Merriman's attorney David Cornwell correctly pointed out, "Someone breached the confidentiality provision of the NFL's drug policy, which is subject to a $500,000 fine."

Cornwell claims that any steroids that may have been present in Merriman's body was the result of tainted supplements.

Said Cornwell, “(Merriman) has been playing, unwittingly, Russian Roulette with his career, because he has been taking the same supplements and has been subjected to testing and hasn't yielded a positive test. So he thought the supplements he was taking were safe.”

Unfortunately, this is more of a commentary than a defense. Tainted supplements is certainly plausible, but this claim likely won't help Merriman.

The bottom line is the NFLPA agreed that players are responsible for whatever goes into or onto their bodies, knowingly or unknowingly. Even if they're getting a massage, they need to know what is being rubbed onto their skin. Ignorance is not an excuse.