On to the Preakness

For 47 weeks, few care about Horse Racing. Now, everybody is an expert

by John Furgele (The Galloping 228)

With Kentucky Derby 150 in the books, all horse racing eyes will shift to Pimlico Race Course for Preakness Stakes 149. The venerable old track, awaiting a massive refurbishment, has always been a peculiar race in the Triple Crown series.

In today’s world, horses don’t run back in just two weeks, and Kenny McPeek, the trainer of Derby winner Mystik Dan, said yesterday that his horse might not race in Baltimore on May 18.

If Mystik Dan does indeed skip the Preakness, there will be some outrage. How can the only horse with a chance to win the Triple Crown skip the second leg of said series?

The answer we all know is how horses are handled and trained today. Because most are bred for speed, they’re seen as more fragile than and not as sturdy as the horses of yesteryear. And while that’s likely true, today’s trainers are flat out more conservative. They prefer extended time between starts versus rushing them back too soon.

Gone for sure are the days of what Conquistador Cielo did in 1982. The colt was coming back from injury and missed the Kentucky Derby, so trainer Woody Stephens had to map out a different plan for the son of Mr. Prospector.

He won an allowance race on May 8 at Pimlico and another at Belmont Park on May 19. Twelve days later, Stevens entered him against older horses in the Met Mile at Belmont Park and he won by nine lengths.

After his Met Mile victory, Stephens hinted that he might run him back five days later in the Belmont Stakes. Nobody believed him, but on that Saturday, there he was in the starting gate and two and half minutes later, the colt pulled off that improbable double with a 14 length win in the 1.5 mile race.

In 28 days, the colt raced four times, something that will likely never happen again with top horses. For a horse like Mystik Dan, McPeek knows that if he races him in the Preakness and he comes up flat, it might be tough to “get him back” for the remainder of the 2024 season.

If he (McPeek) really wants to do what’s best for the horse, it would be to skip the Preakness and wait for the Belmont, a five week break between races. This year’s Belmont is at Saratoga, and more importantly, will be contested at 1 ¼ miles rather than the grueling 1.5. This could and should result in a full field for the oldest race in the series.

Why wouldn’t Sierra Leone and Forever Young contest a race that has the same distance as the Derby? People may scoff and say it’s just another ¼ mile, but in horse racing that’s at least 25 more seconds to run and we all saw how badly Mystik Dan needed the wire in the Derby. If that race was a quarter mile longer, Mystik Dan likely fades to at least sixth place.

If Mystik Dan does skip the Preakness there will be lament and that’s a big problem with American society. We tend to worry more about who’s not here than those who are. Rather than focus on the ten to 12 horses that run, we’ll complain about the ones that don’t. That’s the American Way I suppose, but that doesn’t mean it’s a good thing.

Last year’s Preakness was dreadful. Derby winner Mage was the only (Derby) runner who came to Baltimore and that was considered obligatory of course. The field of seven was far from strong, with most experts calling it a glorified allowance race. That said, Mage was beaten and never really heard from again.

The Preakness has to work hard to get quality horses in its race. As mentioned, most trainers prefer to skip it because of the quick turnaround, so officials at Pimlico offer incentives to attract talent.

For example, Seize The Grey, who won the Pat Day Mile on the Derby undercard gets an expenses paid trip and trainer D. Wayne Lukas said that if the horse comes out sound in the days after, he’ll send him to Pimlico.

The biggest curiosity and story will be Muth, trained by eight time Preakness winning Bob Baffert. As we know, Baffert remains barred from running his horses at any Churchill Downs owned tracks, but that’s not the case at Pimlico and Muth will be fresh and ready on May 18.

We’d all like to see Mystik Dan in the Preakness, but let’s be understanding if that doesn’t happen. And for those that say that the Triple Crown races should be spread out more, please, that’s a very tired argument.

Let’s keep things the way they are and let’s celebrate the horses that show up to race, not those that don’t. 

End of the Radio Era?

There aren’t many baseball radio icons left

by John Furgele (The Static Free 228)

Last week, after 36 years behind the mic, the Voice of the New York Yankees, John Sterling, retired. Sterling took over the radio duties in 1989, long before the internet, streaming, and the luxury of having every game on TV. That begs the question: if all the games are on TV, is the radio broadcaster still the “Voice of the Team?”

Back in the day, radio was the way to listen to games. Often, you had no choice. As a kid in the 1970s, if a Buffalo Bills home game–and few did–didn’t sell out 72 hours before kickoff, it was blacked out on local TV. My father and I would listen to the games on the radio at our kitchen table. Dad was usually paying bills with me reading something or keeping stats of some sort.

Baseball and radio were made for each other. The pace of the game allows the broadcaster to use humor, tell anecdotes, give important stats, and talk history. In the 1970s, most games were broadcast on AM stations.

In Buffalo, at night, that meant you could get games from faraway places; the Tigers, clear as a bell on WJR (760); the Cardinals on KMOX (1120) ; the Phillies on WCAU (1210). On some nights, you could hear the Twins on WCCO, 830 AM. When I found the Braves on WSB (750), I told my Dad, and we would write down the station and the team and tape the information to the fridge. Over time, the list–lengthy.

When Toronto entered the American League in 1977, games could be heard clearly on CJRN (710), a Niagara Falls, Ontario affiliate station. That was good because sometimes, as a home run was flying out of a park, static/interference would occur and you’d miss it. But with a station just miles away, Tom Cheek and Early Wynn could be heard clearly and without interference.

Sterling’s tenure with the Yankees began in the cable TV era and though he was at the mic for the 1996-2000 dynasty, by then, all Yankee fans were watching the games on TV. In the 1950s and 60s, when the Yanks were winning title after title, most were listening to their games on the radio.

Of course, come playoff time, the YES Network gives way to Fox, TBS, and ESPN, and most prefer to watch the games and put up with the national announcers that listen to them on the radio. While some teams would implore you to turn down the TV sound and listen to the radio announcers, how many actually did that?

Even though TV is dominant, games are still on the radio; most teams have separate radio teams and broadcast all the games. If you don’t have Apple TV or Amazon, you can still listen to those games on the radio, but that’s not as easy as it used to be because today’s fans have grown up watching the games. Many don’t know how to access a radio broadcast. For some–especially those in their 20s–it’s a foreign concept.

When the NFL gave the streamer, Peacock, exclusive rights to the Dolphins-Chiefs Wild Card Playoff Game, there was outrage. I wrote that the game was available–for free–on Westwood One Radio and online, but the outrage persisted. Cries of “why should I have to pay for a playoff game,” were rampant. You only had to pay to watch, not to listen.

When people think of the Yankees of yesteryear, they think of Red Barber, Mel Allen, Phil Rizzuto, the radio guys. When they think about the Detroit Tigers, Ernie Harwell and Paul Carey roll off the tongue, just like it does with Harry Caray and the Cardinals; Bob Prince and the Pirates; Harry Kalas and the Phillies; Jack Buck and the Cardinals.

Those days are likely gone and for some reason, the TV broadcasters don’t resonate like those radio guys did. Even though more people watch Kay than listen to Sterling, I’ll argue that Sterling is more well-known. Bob Uecker is still calling Brewers games on the radio, but once he retires, that will be it. There won’t be 30 and 40-year guys doing radio because they’ll all be looking to land a TV gig, where they can likely earn more money.

In the age of cell phone videos, selfies and Spotify, one does wonder what the future of sports on the radio will be. Perhaps I am being too dramatic here, after all, radio is still the most personal of all mediums. Most of us listen to the radio while driving and because we’re often alone, we feel more connected to the host; it feels like they’re talking to us. There are still tons of commercials on radio stations, so talk of its demise may be premature.

Could you imagine a father and a son going out to their back porch to listen to a baseball game today? But, there was a time when that indeed happened. That’s why many are still nostalgic about the National Pastime and in some ways, more critical of it than the other sports.

My parents had a pantry in our basement. I used to go down there with the big radio and my binder. I would put the Yankee game on and listen to Frank Messer, Bill White, Fran Healy, and Phil Rizzuto call the action. I would take notes, record some stats, and listen to the whole game.

Back then, some of the games were on TV, so when they were, I watched. Those old enough remember WPIX 11 (Yankees); WOR (Mets); WSBK (Red Sox); and of course the superstations, WGN (Chicago Cubs and White Sox), and WTBS (Braves).

It was a terrific mix; you might get two to three TV games a week, leaving three to four for radio only. The true fan didn’t just watch the TV games and because of that, the radio announcer held the most prominent role because he did all the games.

Met fans know Howie Rose is the radio guy, but he’ll never be revered like Bob Murphy was. The reason: Gary, Keith, and Ron on SNY. That’s the go-to for Met fans. Sure, you’ll get a “put it in the books,’ sound byte from Rose, but most are not listening to the entire radio broadcast.

Even though TV has seized command from radio, that doesn’t mean that guys like Sterling, Denny Matthews (KC Royals), and Eric Nadel (Texas Rangers) aren’t revered. Their calls are still played, but our tastes, and moreover, demands, have changed. Seeing I suppose beats listening. That said, there is nothing better than driving to and from the lake with a baseball game on the radio.

Sterling had a great career. In his 36 years, he called five championships and hundreds of playoff games. At age 85, and after 64 years of calling games, he has turned off his mic. It signifies the end of an era in many ways.

Monday Musings

With winter over, the fun is just starting

by John Furgele (The All Over the Place 228)

Joy to the World—the long, cold, dark winter is over. We know this because the NHL and NBA playoffs have begun and while the playoffs will seemingly last forever, it’s good to see that the most meaningful games are back.

In less than two weeks, we will have the Kentucky Derby, an even surer sign that winter is officially over. 

Like many, I wish the NBA and NHL regular seasons were shorter. We know this will never happen, but doesn’t a 72-game season make more sense than one that has 82? It’s only ten games, but it just seems like the right amount of games to play. Revenues and network demand for inventory will prevent this from ever happening, but starting the playoffs in March is something that few would complain about. 

For some reason, though, I like the 162-game MLB schedule. Perhaps it’s because they play games every day, but if they cut down to 144, 152, or 154, I wouldn’t complain.

Speaking of sports, it’s impossible to avoid gambling commercials, they’re everywhere. And sadly, TV broadcasters often discuss money lines and prop bets during games. Just 10 years ago, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said that gambling would ruin the integrity of professional sports; today he sleeps with the devil and seems to enjoy it. After all, this is a guy (and a league) that will step over their best friend to pick up two quarters off the street.

Last week, Jontay Porter was banned by the NBA for life for betting/making a prop bet on a basketball game that he was playing in. It didn’t get much play in the press which goes to show you how much in bed they are with the gambling outfits. If this happened eight years ago, Congress would conduct a hearing; today, it just gets brushed off. But there will come a day when a true scandal hits professional or professional college sports. It’s an earthquake, just waiting to happen.

My son and I attended Game 2 of the ECHL’s North Division Semifinals. The game pitted the Maine Mariners and the homestanding Adirondack Thunder, in Glens Falls, NY. There were 4,701 fans in the 4,860-seat Cool Insuring Arena. On Friday, there were 5,017 in that same arena–standing room only.

It’s nice to see a small community embrace a minor league team like this. In some ways, it restores my faith in humanity. While most of us are consumed with watching multi-millionaires play professional sports, there is something to be said for getting out and watching the local team perform.

Fans in major league towns have forgotten this. In Buffalo, there is much lament over the cost of the PSLs for the new Bills’ stadium, while others complain that the NHL Sabres have now missed the playoffs for a 13th consecutive season.

Fans in Buffalo have other options besides taking out a home equity loan to secure their season tickets. They could attend a Triple A baseball game, a University at Buffalo football or basketball game, or games at Daemen, Buffalo State, Niagara, or Canisius. But, if they do that, they can’t keep up with Bills and Sabres doings–the classic case of FOMO.

My son asked me a good question during the game–“Why are there so many minor league teams in hockey and baseball and very few in football and basketball.”

That’s an excellent question. We know why there isn’t minor league football; the colleges provide more than enough labor for the NFL. Basketball has always surprised me. We have the G League, but I’m not sure how communities feel about it. Hockey is still the least played by youth of the big five sports (soccer counts), yet, they have a robust minor league system with the AHL, the ECHL, the SPHL, and the Federal Prospects Hockey League. Like baseball’s minor leagues, it is well organized and games and teams are embraced in cities like Glens Falls, NY and Estero, FL. 

If you’re going to have a minor league team, hockey and baseball make the most sense. In addition to Triple A, Double A, Single A and Rookie Ball, baseball has several independent leagues and teams in places like Sioux Falls, SD which for those who follow, makes summer better.

The survival rate of minor league hockey and baseball surpass those of basketball and the other sports. I look at cities like Rochester, NY–they’ve had the Triple A Red Wings since 1899 and the AHL Americans since 1956. Other minor league entities have come and gone, but those two remain.

Soccer is trying to replicate what (minor league) baseball and hockey have. The United Soccer League continues to grow with 24 teams (and three more coming) and a feeder system below it. And the teams are in cities like Pittsburgh, Detroit, Phoenix, and San Antonio. On Sunday, the Tampa Bay Rowdies drew, 1-1, with El Paso Locomotive FC before 4,945 in Tampa, a solid crowd for a minor league sport.

We know that the cost of attending major league sports isn’t getting any cheaper; in fact, those that attend are often our highest earners. Sure, you can wait for Seat Geek bargains, but if you’re a planner and need to secure tickets in advance, it will cost you. Minor league sports exist for many reasons with affordability being one of them.

Women’s sports continue their ascent. On Saturday, the PWHL moved its Toronto-Montreal contest to the Bell Centre, the home of the Montreal Canadiens. The place was packed with 21,000 fans who saw Toronto prevail in overtime.

I’m not sure when we woke up and started paying attention to women playing sports, but who cares. It looks like women’s sports are finally here to stay. Over the weekend, there were several NWSL games on TV and I have to believe that one of the networks will pick up PWHL games, hopefully in time for the 2024-25 season.

While Caitlin Clark deserves credit, she can’t get all of it can she? Did 21,000 plus go to the Bell Centre for a hockey game because of her? Were NWSL stadiums filled for that very same reason?

Maybe there is some fatigue with men’s sports. In basketball, they shove Curry and James down our collective throats. In football, the NFL has become a 24/7/365 machine. Baseball, despite its rules to speed up the game, still has economic disparity between its teams, and a younger generation that simply doesn’t pay enough attention to the National Pastime.

Women’s sports are new and refreshing. We don’t know who the stars are, so we’re investing our time to find out for ourselves. If that’s the case, I hope it continues, because they are worth watching.

What’s Tiger Woods Really Thinking?

Does he really want to keep playing? Is he tarnishing his legacy?

by John Furgele (The Par for the Course 228)

On Aug. 13, 1977, future Hall of Famer Brooks Robinson retired. The Oriole great was batting .149 with 1 home run and 4 RBI when he walked away.

On May 28, 1989, future Hall of Famer Michael Jack Schmidt retired. The Phillie great was batting .203 with 6 home runs and 28 RBI.

On Aug. 3, 1989, future Hall of Famer Jim Rice retired. The Red Sox great was batting .234 with 6 home runs and 28 RBI.

The toughest thing to do in sports is to know when it is time to walk away from the game. Very few go out on top, at their pinnacle, and that’s understandable. What makes athletes great is their drive, their resolve. They always think they can do it and sometimes they can. Heck, George Foreman won a heavyweight boxing title at age 45.

Father Time is not kind to all of us, especially athletes. While John Sterling can still call Yankee games at age 85, most athletes are lucky to play past age 35. The hardest part is coming to grips that it’s over.

I grew up a Phillies fan. For some reason, I started following them in the summer of 1976. When they lost to the Cincinnati Reds in the ’76 NLCS, I was sad, but I knew I was hooked.

They went on to lose two more NLCS—Phils fans remember Black Friday in ’77—before winning it all in 1980. That ’80 team remains my second favorite sports team of all-time (Team USA, 1980, Miracle on Ice, will always be number one).

Schmidt, despite being overshadowed by more colorful personalities and being dogged by a tough media, was my favorite Phillie. Despite collecting 2,234 hits, 548 HR and 1,595 RBI, he remains underappreciated by the baseball world.

I remember the day he retired. He cried. But he knew that it was time and despite the .203 batting average, his legacy is untarnished.

Brooks Robinson knew that day was coming. In 1975, he batted just .201 with 6 HR and 53 RBI. Like most, he thought he could turn it around in 1976. He didn’t, batting .211 with 3 HR and 11 RBI in 71 games. But he came back in ‘77 for one more try and in August knew it was time to hang ‘em up.

Rice had a similar decline. In 1986, he batted .324 with 20 HR and 112 RBI. That was his last great season as injuries and age took over. He probably should have retired after the 1988 season; a season where he batted .264 with 15 HR and 72 RBI, but he wanted to go out on a high so he came back—until Aug. 3.

I write this because of what we saw over the weekend at Augusta National at The Masters. While Scottie Scheffler was winning his second “Green Jacket,” as always, CBS had to show us every shot taken by Tiger Woods.

I felt sorry for Woods, which is something I thought I would never say. As great as Woods is (second best ever?), his demise is largely because of him. The extramarital affairs, the car crash, the DUI—those happened because of choices he made.

But we remain enamored, hoping that he can defy and bring us another moment of glory. In that hope, we get to see him hit into bunkers, into water, into trees, card triple bogeys, and shoot 159 on Saturday and Sunday.

When he approached 18, the adoring crowd cheered, just like they did when Arnold Palmer played his last competitive round at the US Open in 1994. The crowds also cheered in 1977, when the well-past-his-prime Brooks Robinson came to the plate.

I give Woods credit for trying, but he is an immortal. Phil Mickelson is not an immortal, so if he plays The Masters at age 70, that’s fine. That goes for Fred Couples, Vijay Singh, Mike Weir, and all the other former champions.

Who am I to tell somebody they should retire. But, Woods is a different cat. This guy changed the game of golf. Because of him, fitness became an important part of the game. Power became an important part of the game. When Jack Nicklaus won his sixth Masters in 1986 at age 46, he had a Dad Bod, his belly hanging over his plaid pants.

Woods forced golfers to become fit athletes and he also made them all millions of dollars, so for me to tell him to hang it up is truly out of bounds.

That said where is the pride? It’s okay for Vijay Singh to be 14 over par—he’s just another golfer that’s won a few majors—but Tiger Woods?

Woods says he will play on and plans to compete in the PGA Championship, the US Open, and the British Open. Again, that’s his choice, but when he flew back to Florida Sunday evening, I wonder if he had a conversation with himself that began with “Is this really worth it anymore?”

Professional golf is a mess right now. We have two tours—PGA and LIV—which has led to chaos. LIV players can play majors, but they can’t get World rankings points. Last year, Jon Rahm bashed LIV; this year he swallowed his pride and took a nine figure guarantee to join what truthfully is, a Triple A circuit.

The game needs Tiger Woods. I’d like to see him as PGA commissioner. He has the clout to unite the two sides. There supposedly is a merger agreement in place, but today, we still have two tours.

Woods could direct his energies to finding a solution. He has the game for that. Players would listen, sponsors would listen, and he could write and right/rite his next chapter of immortality.

That won’t happen today as he is determined to carry on and keep playing and he could prove me wrong by finding his game and winning another major. I don’t think that will happen, but I certainly don’t know it.

Watching Woods shoot 159 was sad on many, many levels. He’s too great; he’s an immortal, and we want to remember immortals at their very best. We didn’t see that in Augusta.

And, that’s disheartening.

UConn’s Basketball Title Just Creates More Tension

At some point, they have to figure out what to do with football. It’s a delicate balancing act

by John Furgele (The Tension Filled 228)

The Connecticut Huskies are a blueblood, whatever that means in today’s age of professional college sports. Beginning in 1999, the Huskies have won six NCAA basketball championships. They have made the Final Four six times and have never lost, a 12-0 record. Bottom line–when they get there, they win, and usually do so in convincing fashion.

But unlike the other “bluebloods,” there will always been tension in Storrs, CT. Right now, it’s just simmering, but Connecticut is different than Duke, North Carolina. Kansas, and Kentucky, and that is the cause for concern.

That cause: Football

Basketball-wise, Connecticut has it made. They win, they have an alpha-dog head coach, and they play in a conference that loves basketball. They have regional rivalries with St. John’s, Providence, Seton Hall, and Villanova; new ones with Creighton, Butler, Xavier; and ones renewed with DePaul, Marquette, and Georgetown.

What could possibly go wrong? 

Unfortunately for Connecticut, football has all the power in college athletics. They get the big ratings, they get talked about daily during the regular season, and most importantly, the networks are paying big bucks to broadcast football games.

Connecticut has a problem that no other Big East school faces because they have a FBS football team that is struggling to survive. Villanova has a football team but it’s not a threat because it plays at the lower FCS level. Butler also has a FCS football–in the non-scholarship Pioneer League—that will never threaten basketball.

Connecticut has to figure out what to do. Soon, the Big East basketball package will expire and go out to bid. Currently, the conference has a 12-year $500 million deal with Fox that runs out after the 2024-25 season. Each school receives about $5 million per year.

To compare, the Big 12’s new TV deal will pay each football member $31.7 million per year starting in 2025-26. Marquette and St. John’s aren’t starting football programs to get in on the action, so for them, basketball will always be number one. As long as the Big East keeps getting TV deals, the other 10 schools are going nowhere in this seemingly endless conference realignment game. 

As great as Connecticut basketball is, they have to save football, or admit defeat and either dissolve it or drop to FCS. They’re trying to survive as an independent, but they’re not Notre Dame. They don’t have NBC throwing $50 million at them to show their home games (plus the $17 million they’ll get from the ACC). 

Massachusetts were in a similar boat. The Minutemen were in the Atlantic 10, a basketball centric league that only has FCS football members in it. Of course, the Minutemen are not half the basketball program that Connecticut is, but they had the same football dilemma. 

Officials in Amherst no doubt wanted to stay in the A 10, but they had to save the football program, or put up the white flag and drop to FCS or dissolve it.

The decision was easier because they’re not a blueblood, so they opted to leave the A 10 for the MAC. That certainly is a step down in basketball, but it saved the football program. Fans may not like it, but those in charge in Amherst made it clear:  football is here to stay.

There is no chance that Connecticut would leave the Big East for the MAC, we all know that, but because they have to save, downgrade, or kill football, they will always be open to conversations from the existing power conferences.

They flirted with the Big 12 last summer, but the members didn’t want Connecticut football, but if they, the Big Ten, the SEC, or even the beleaguered ACC called, they’d have to listen. And, if offered a spot, they might have to go.

That would hurt and anger many of their basketball fans. When the university put football first (in 2013) by joining the American Athletic Conference, basketball suffered. Sure, they won the NCAA title in 2014, but that was their (in the American) first year; they still had that Big East pedigree and of course Big East quality players. Fans begged for them to go back to the Big East and surprisingly, the conference took them back, but that left football out in the cold as an independent.

As long as Connecticut has FBS football, this tension will continue to exist. I’m sure there isn’t friction between the programs per se, but you know each day, athletic director is David Benedict is trying to figure out what the future is for football and his entire athletic program.

If we looked at this purely from a success rate, why would Connecticut ever leave the Big East? They’ve won two straight titles, they get to play at Madison Square Garden, and they get to play–and beat up—their old rivals. Oh, they also get to play and beat up the rest of the country, too.

That’s pragmatic, which sadly, doesn’t exist anymore in professional college sports. That went out the window when USC and UCLA left the Pac 12 to play in the Big Ten and all those Eastern Time Zone games. It eroded further when Stanford thought traveling to Syracuse for an ACC soccer game on Wednesday night was a good idea.

Would Connecticut thrive playing at Kansas and hosting Arizona in basketball? Yes, but what they have going on right now is working perfectly so why move away from it?

The reason, of course, is money. You’re trading the packed Madison Square Garden game versus St. John’s for playing Kansas in Hartford. But, you’re also getting to play power conference football with a robust TV deal.

This tension will not go away until Connecticut figures out how to handle football in this new era of professional college sports.

And that, is cause for concern. 

Why Look for a Coach When You Can Steal One?

Schools like Kentucky are too lazy to find a coach so they just poach them

by John Furgele (The Diligent 228)

John Calipari decided it was better to leave before getting fired. Rather than face a 2024-25 year of hell and constant scrutiny, he took a demotion by leaving Kentucky for Arkansas.

Good for him. If you don’t feel wanted at your workplace, why stay? Why subject yourself to the daily grind, criticism and the stress that comes with it? For Calipari, anything short of the Final Four in 2025, would likely mean dismissal.

Now the comical part has arrived. Anytime a coach from a “blueblood” program leaves or is jettisoned, the speculation begins. Or, as the pundits do, they create a shortlist of potential hires. Some schools hire search firms and they also come up with a similar shortlist which makes me ask, “Why bother to hire a search firm?”

Naturally, the list of candidates are all from winning programs and for Kentucky, they’d have to steal them to get them to Lexington. That’s the sad part of this because it doesn’t have to be that way.

We know why Kentucky would target Danny Hurley, Scott Drew, and Nate Oats. Hurley is the current king; his Huskies have dominated the last two NCAA Tournaments while Drew won it all in 2020-21. Oats was highly successful at Buffalo and has done very well at Alabama as evidenced by a Final Four run this season.

Many think if Kentucky offered Hurley $10 million per season, he’d likely take the job. Hurley, of course, hinted that he wants to stay in Storrs and win more titles at Connecticut, but his words left a crack in the door, meaning he would listen to a UK sales pitch.

Shame on him. And, if he takes the UK job, he’s nothing but a fraud.

I just don’t get why schools have to steal coaches from other power schools. I certainly understand why a Kentucky would hire a guy from Kent State; that’s what we call natural progression. But why try to steal a Hurley, a Drew or an Oats?

Do schools like Kentucky do any research? Are they really scouring to find somebody who has successfully built a basketball program that could come to Lexington and succeed?

There has to be a guy that took a moribund program and turned it around. You know a school that had 24 wins in three years and then, under his direction, won 54 games in his first three years. Rather than do due diligence, it’s easier to create the shortlist, talk to some agents and see if you can steal a coach.

There are four levels of college basketball; Division 1, 2, 3 and the NAIA, and if you want to be accurate, we have JUCO and its three divisions. Obviously, hiring someone from a JUCO school is too big a reach, but isn’t there a guy at one of the other levels that has built a program and could come to your school and become a star.

Most will laugh this off and say that you can’t take a Division II coach and hire him at Kentucky to which I say, why not? Why can’t you be different and spin the wheel? As much as we like to call coaches geniuses, the fact remains that this is basketball. It’s not that hard of a sport to coach because all coaches do the same thing: recruit, coach, and manage their players.

But for some reason, schools are afraid; they’re scared to take a chance, so why not do the easy thing and throw $10 million per at Scott Drew or Danny Hurley. I guess it’s easier to go to a store and steal rather than save up and buy.

Look at Kalen DeBoer. The Alabama football coach was the head coach at Sioux Falls, a NAIA school, where he won three NAIA championships. After several assistant coaching jobs, he became the head coach at Fresno State and then Washington and now, Alabama.

A better example is Jim Tressel. Like many, Tressel started as an assistant with stops at Akron, Miami (OH), Syracuse and Ohio State. He then became the head coach at Youngstown State, a 1-AA (now FCS) program and in 15 seasons (1986-2000) won four 1-AA championships with two runner-up finishes.

You would think a 1-A school would have noticed this success and pried him away from Northeast Ohio, but it took 15 years for that to happen. Finally, in 2000, he was hired by Ohio State.

That was a bold move. The Buckeyes didn’t steal a big name guy from a big name school. They hired a program builder from a lower level, believing that he could do the same in Columbus. All he did at Ohio State in his ten seasons was win a BCS championship and play in two others. He also constantly beat Michigan (9-1).

Why can’t Kentucky find a Tressel to lead its basketball program? The answer is simple—they’re too lazy. Why work diligently, when you can dangle an eight-figure annum and steal from another school?

Kentucky could be bold here and look for the up-and-comers, and bring them in for interviews. Drew Stutts just won the NAIA title at a place called Freed-Hardeman University in Tennessee. You probably wouldn’t hire him but why not interview him?

The first question: “You just went 35-3 and won a national championship. Tell me how you did it?”

Nah, that requires too much work. Why make the cake when you can buy one.

Women’s Sports are on Fire

Utica on the World Stage

by John Furgele (The Icy 228)

UTICA, NY–Lost in the shuffle of the Caitlin Clark Craze is that all women’s sports seem to be flourishing right now. Perhaps they always were, but it appears that America has finally taken notice. While Clark was leading her Iowa Hawkeyes to another runner-up finish at the NCAA Championships, another event was taking place in a Central New York city best known for greens and chicken riggies–Utica. 

The event–the IIHF Women’s World Ice Hockey Championships. Ten teams trying to capture the gold, silver and bronze medals in an Olympic style tournament. I took in two games last Saturday; Japan-Germany was the matinee affair which was followed up by USA-Finland. I will sum it up simply and succinctly.

They can play.

As we’re noticing, women’s sports have come a long way in what seems like a short time period. There has always been the perception that women are too slow and not athletic enough for the masses to watch. Because of this, they had to be cerebral and fundamentally sound. Because women can’t–for the most part–dunk–they played at a slower and steadier pace. Because they can’t run 4.4 in the 40-yard dash, they were labeled as plodders.

As we’ve seen (because we’re watching more), that’s not the case. Women are faster and more athletic than ever and their games/sports are progressing faster than the men. Part of that is that they have more room–more upside–to progress, but also because, they’re athletes, they train and play year round.

In the old days, when high schools began sponsoring sports for girls, it was the wild west, a crap shoot. Let’s see who shows up for tryouts and we’ll go from there. I know I’m simplifying things here, but you get the point. Teams would form and the coaches would then adapt and figure things out.

That’s changed. Today, girls are starting to play sports much earlier, and like the boys, they have travel soccer, AAU basketball, club lacrosse, hockey, and everything else. By the time girls reach high school, their skills are already developed and the coaches know which ones are the stars and which ones will be the role players. 

Another great thing about this evolution is that its changed our thinking. Some refuse to watch women’s sports because they don’t play as fast as the men. Why would they watch a women’s hockey game knowing that a boys’ high school team could beat the best women’s college team?

Thankfully, acceptance and separation have taken place. There will always be those who will never watch, but for those that do, they recognize that it’s a different game, but in many ways, just as, or even more exciting. Watching Cailtin Clark hit shots from the logo garnered attention and people wanted to see her with their own eyes.

Once they took a peak, they liked it, and kept watching as evidenced by the 12.3 million who tuned into ESPN on April 1 to watch Iowa beat LSU in a regional final and then, in Sunday’s championship game, 18.7 million more–an astounding number.

We’ve always been able to separate College Football from the NFL and it appears that we have finally separated women’s sports from men’s sports. Now, when you watch, you’re really watching, not comparing.

Back in Utica, Germany beat Japan 4-1, but the game was closer than that score. For much of the contest, this was a one-goal game with Japan having ample chances to get the tying goal. Both teams were skating fast and the action was up and down, end to end. I kept waiting for Japan to tie things up which would have made things interesting. But once Germany went up 2-0, the outcome was no longer in doubt.

One thing I’ve noticed while watching PWHL games this year is that the goalies are ahead of the scorers. The German goalie kept her team in the game and the Japan goalie prevented Germany from taking a commanding lead. The forwards, fast and quick, seemed to lack the shooting skills that results in more goals being scored.

Because of that, neither goalie had to stand on her head; meaning they were not called upon to make miraculous saves. I believe that, in time, the scorers will catch up, and once that happens, life will be difficult for goalies and fans will get what they want—more scoring.

While 1,831 watched the afternoon contest, 3,900 crammed into the Adirondack Bank Center to see the USA battle Finland that evening. The “ABC” is a wonderful “little” arena. Known locally as The Aud, the arena underwent a significant refurbishment and looks shiny, clean, and beautiful. At roughly 4,000 seats, it’s the perfect setting for this championship. Hopefully, there will come a time where the IIHF Women’s World Championship will outgrow the Utica venue, but for now, enjoy it while you have it.

Utica likes its hockey. The AHL Utica Comets draw well and the Division III Utica University Pioneers often sell out the place–impressive for a Division III hockey program. There has been talk of Utica moving to Division I for hockey, but as they say, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.

If you look at the stats of USA’s 5-3 win over Finland, you’d think the Americans dominated. They outshot the Finns 45-12, but the Finns were in the game the entire way. In fact, they scored first and then tied things at 2-2. And like the first game, the Finnish goalie was good, but didn’t have to be great. Yes, the Yanks got lots of rubber on the net, but most of the saves made were routine in nature. 

There have been 22 world championships since the first in 1990 and USA or Canada have won the gold at all of them (12 for Canada, 10 for USA). Finland checks in with 13 bronze medals. That’s the one thing that is needed to give this ascending sport more credibility—more countries winning. 

Make no mistake, the other countries are catching up and while I’m not an expert on international women’s hockey, I did leave the arena with the thinking that Team USA could be beaten. The team I saw was good, but were they great? I guess that remains to be seen.

On Sunday, I watched China battle Denmark on ESPN Plus. That game was played at a much slower pace than the two games I saw on Saturday. The skills were there, but the speed was slower than the quartet that played the day before.

Denmark won the game, 2-1 in a shootout for their first win; their goal is to make it to the quarterfinals and avoid being relegated to Division I in 2025. Neither team will be collecting a medal this week.

That’s how the IIHF works. Eight of the 10 teams will advance to the quarterfinals. The teams that don’t make it get relegated while the two who make the Division 1 final get promoted for next year’s event in Chechia.

There is one glaring absence and that is Russia. Once they pull out of Ukraine, I’ll assume they’ll come back, but until the leaders of the 3-time bronze medalists do so, they’ll be banished from these events.

The Gold and Bronze medal games are slated for Sun. Apr. 14 and while most sports fans will be glued to The Masters, Utica, NY will crown a world champion.

Women’s sports are hot right now—even on the ice.

Rec Soccer and the Rise of Women’s Sports?

Americans are finally giving women’s sports a shot and the women are delivering

by John Furgele (The You Go Girl 228)

What we’re seeing is refreshing, enjoyable, and in some ways, quite surprising. And, unlike earlier times, it looks like it’s here to stay.

Women’s sports have never been hotter than they are right now.

We have seen this in basketball, with Caitlin Clark’s successful quest to become the all-time leader scorer in history coupled with trying to win a championship in her final college season.

Last Monday, defending champion LSU played the team they beat (Iowa) in the 2023 title game. The Tigers were led by their star, Angel Reese, and their colorful coach, Kim Mulkey, who like her or not, brings wanted attention to the sport.

Iowa won the game, but more importantly, 13,888 came to see it in Albany, NY while a record 12.3 million watched on TV. Those numbers beat the overall average of both last year’s World Series and NBA Finals. It looks like we have finally come around on women’s sports.

I’ll admit, I used to be one of those who “couldn’t get into women’s sports,” because they couldn’t play as ‘fast’ as the men did. I wasn’t alone. We read that a Dallas Academy boys soccer team beat the USWNT 5-2 in a scrimmage. Others point out that a men’s high school basketball team would “wipe” the floor with the women’s NCAA champ.

Some men will never accept or will never watch women’s sports. Some of that can be attributed to what I referenced above, but much of it reflects on their own sense of well-being. Simply, they struggle when women gain or have power. They love it when a women’s sports league fails and when one starts, they scoff and root for its demise.

I’ll give credit to recreational soccer for helping women’s sports. Soccer, for decades, was one of those scoffed at sports, but in the 1980s, soccer offered families and their kids something that most other sports did not; a legitimate co-ed sport for youngsters to harness their skills.

If you have kids and signed them up for rec soccer, you understand. Your kid turns four (earlier starting age than the other sports) and off they go. Boys and girls play together, they practice once a week for an hour and on Saturday, they play their game.

You’ve seen these games. Little four and five year olds running around, following the ball. The kids don’t play positions, they all just congregate around the smaller soccer ball. The coach yells for spacing, yells that fall on deaf ears. At halftime, orange slices are passed out; at game’s end, popsicles.

The key here is that boys and girls play together. Parents can see who is really good. More importantly, it puts girls on equal footing with boys. Most rec soccer leagues play co-ed through third or fourth grade and by that time, you can see who the athletes are.

When my son was in third grade, the best player on his team and the league was a girl. She could do it all and dominated everybody. Once they separated by sex, she continued that dominance. Eventually, she played Division 1 soccer.

Most kids don’t stay with soccer, but the skills learned there do carry over to basketball, hockey, volleyball, and the other sports. Young girls became empowered. Rec soccer gave them a taste of competitive sport and led some to try other sports.

What we’re seeing now is extraordinary and most importantly, investors have taken notice. They see the star power of Caitlin Clark, Angel Reese, Juju Watkins, and Paige Bueckers and they want in. Can you name four players on the men’s side in this year’s Final Four?

Companies want to market their products to new people and sports like MLB and the NBA are not growing their TV audiences. Last year’s World Series averaged 9.1 million viewers, so they’re looking for sports that are gaining viewers not losing them.

The NBA’s TV contracts expire after the 2024-25 season. They think they can triple what they’re getting now ($24 billion each from Turner and ESPN).

Can they?

With women’s sports rising, is ESPN and Turner willing to fork over $72 billion for a declining TV product?

Could interest in women’s sports be a passing fad? Once Clark departs Iowa for the WNBA, how many will hang in there and keep watching? The NCAA tournament is special because of its one and done nature. It’s three weeks, not six to seven months.

Pro sports are tough to follow because of what seems like an endless regular season. The WNBA has a tolerable 40-game regular season, but plays during the summer months when many are trying to take advantage of the weather by being outside.

That said the investment shows that women’s sports are to be taken seriously. The PWHL debuted in January and attendance has been great. How much longer until they secure a national TV contract?

And, while the women get ready for their Final Four in Cleveland; Utica, New York is hosting the IIHF Women’s World Ice Hockey Championships, a 10-team event that runs from April 3 to April 14.

The NWSL gets games on CBS and last fall, we saw great TV numbers for the NCAA Women’s Volleyball championships and each spring, the Women’s Softball College World Series does very well on ESPN.

Why has it taken this long for women’s sports to get this type of attention? It has to be generational. When I grew up in the 1970s and 80s, some parents just didn’t think girls and sports was a good combo. If they played, it was just for fun. There was also that stigma—Jenny is tomboy not a lady, and of course, the stereotype that only lesbians played sports.

That changed with my generation and even more with the one after. Instead of being disappointed (sports and college scholarship wise) with three daughters, parents were looking for places for their daughters to play, play well, and perhaps get some college scholarship money to do so.

I’m not saying this is all because of rec soccer, but seeing young girls compete at a young age with boys opened many an eye to the realization that daughters could get it done on the athletic field.

And, finally, Americans have taken notice.

The NCAA Basketball Tournament Should Expand: To 128 Teams

by John Furgele (The 128 228)

Greg Sankey likely didn’t enjoy his Saturday morning coffee. The SEC commissioner, determined to make college athletics a big school spectacle, has seen his vaunted SEC teams get thrashed in the opening two days of America’s favorite three-week event.

Sankey wants the NCAA tournament to expand so schools like Ole Miss, the conference’s tenth best team are in the field. If the field expands, does that mean Indiana State would get in? And if they did,  would they have to play in the dreaded play-in round; a round that needs to be retired.

At some point, the tournament will and probably should expand. There are 362 Division I basketball schools and only 68 of them make the tournament. That’s 18.8 percent, far below other sports. To compare, there are 64 hockey playing schools; 16 of them (25 percent) make their tournament.

If the NCAA does expand, it can’t go halfway. The talk is that 80 would be a good number. Others have thrown out 96, while others say let’s go to 72 or 76. All these numbers do is create more play-in games, which to me, are not part of the real thing that begins on the third Thursday in March.

Too often, sports tinker instead of blowing things up. This is the chance for the NCAA to make a major change and create something newer, bolder and brighter; If expansion is imminent, let’s go to 128 teams and rebrand this great event.

Before everybody goes nuts, let’s see what a 128-team field will look like. The best thing about 128 is that there would be no play-in games. No longer would Grambling State have to play Montana State, with the winner going into the real 64-team tournament.

With 128, you’d have eight regions with 16 schools in each. You could have one city host all 16, or you could have sub-regionals like you do now, but to win a region, you’d have to win four games, the same as it is today.

With eight schools left, the Final Four changes. That city now gets to host the Final Eight, just like they do at the Division II level. That means there would be four Elite 8 games on Thursday in the host city. The Final Four would then take place on Saturday with the championship game on Monday, just like it currently is.

Those against change will hate this, but think about what it could do for the NCAA and the host city. Now, fans would come in earlier, spend more money on dinners, hotels, sights, and of course tickets. The host city now gets seven games as opposed to three and the NCAA could avoid sending two eastern teams to Seattle to play each other in the regionals.

The math works, too. With 128, 35.8 percent of teams would qualify and as more schools jump to Division I, that percentage will drop. Professional sports keep adding postseason teams—the NBA invites 67 percent (if you count the play-in); the NHL, 50 percent; MLB, 40 percent; and the NFL, 43.8.

Adding half a round only confuses things. What do you call the play-in round. Where do you play the games? In short, a half-round is half-assed.

With 128, any school that wins its regular season conference title is in. Sankey won’t like this because the America East, the Mid-American, and the Southern might get two bids if the regular season titlist comes up short in their conference tournaments, but if you’re not going to value the regular season, why play 29 to 31 games?

For schools like Indiana State and Eastern Washington, the fall is too steep. ISU went 28-6 this year, 17-3 in conference play, but when they lost to Drake in the MVC Championship Game, they had to settle for an NIT bid.

Eastern Washington suffered a crueler fate, The Eagles went 15-3 in the Big Sky, three games clear of everybody else. They had one really bad night, losing their opening round tournament contest to Sacramento State and didn’t even receive an NIT bid.

Putting EWU and ISU in the field does no harm and it rewards a total body of work. Like the current format, these teams might win a game or two, but they’re not going to be cutting down the nets when this thing ends.

It’s never been that way. Indeed, teams like George Mason, VCU, Florida Atlantic, and San Diego State have gotten to the Final Four, but getting there and winning it all are vastly different.

The last team from a non-Power conference to win the NCAA title:  UNLV in 1990 (Some could say Connecticut’s 2014 title as an American member, but they had just left the Big East after the 2012-13 season). The first two days are for Cinderella, but by the time the regional finals come, the power schools are usually the ones moving on.

Making a big change requires training. Fans won’t like it, but the great thing about the NCAA basketball tournament is that you eliminate teams quickly. In two days, the field is cut in half; in three weeks, the whole thing is over.

The only big player tournament field that moves faster is Grand Slam tennis, which goes from 128 players to one champion in two weeks.

Having eight teams advancing to the Final Four site doubles the fun. Think about the bars and restaurants on the Wednesday before the quarterfinals—eight sets of fan bases, eating, drinking, chanting, teasing each other and having what hopefully is good natured fun.

If you’re going to expand, do it the right way. It’s one more round and in time, fans will embrace it just like they did when the field went from 12 teams to 16, 24, 32, 48, 52, 64 and eventually 68.

In today’s sports market, it’s all about the playoffs; that’s what fans care about. So if the NCAA is smart, they’ll give us more of that, because that’s what captivates.

It’s Time for NCAA Tournament to Expand

The NIT debacle is just another black eye for the beleaguered NCAA

by John Furgele (The Why Not 228)

It just never gets better for the NCAA. Each year, on Selection Sunday, we all know that there will be crying. The tears will come from teams that got left out and more will come from critics that believe some teams that got in, didn’t deserve to. That’s how it goes. Thankfully, when the first round tips on that third Thursday, the tears dry up.

Many think the NCAA tournament should expand and while critics argue that expansion will water things down, there are 362 teams playing Division 1 basketball. When the tournament expanded to 64 in 1985, there were 274.

The NCAA runs another tournament, the NIT. The NIT was the first postseason tournament and at one time (long ago), more prestigious. On Sunday, several teams that missed the NCAA party were invited to the NIT and sadly, many of them—Pittsburgh, St. John’s, Memphis to name a few—declined.

The NCAA took over the NIT a decade ago hoping that by running it, it would once again, be considered a prestigious tournament. Prior to this year, any team that won its regular season conference championship would get an automatic bid. That was good news for one-bid leagues like the America East. If Vermont was tripped up by Maine, they knew that they could get into the NIT and play on.

The Power Conference schools complained so the NCAA made changes; no more auto bids for mid-majors, instead, we will guarantee 12 sports for the Power 6 conferences. Even with this new wrinkle, several Power 6 schools said thanks but no thanks to the NIT.

Whether you’re for expansion of the NCAA or not, the question is simple: if nobody really wants to play in the NIT, why not eliminate it and expand the NCAAs?  Furthermore, if the NCAA runs the NIT, shouldn’t NCAA members be required to play in it, if invited?

New York City and its famed Madison Square Garden gave up on the NIT. As the NIT declined in prestige, the one carrot they had was that its Final Four would be contested in the mecca of college basketball; the Garden. No disrespect to the Hinkle Fieldhouse, but it’s not The Garden.

The NIT is no longer the “springboard,” to the NCAAs either. Last year’s NIT champion, North Texas, is back to defend its title. The runner up, UAB, did make the NCAAs this year, but previous success guarantees nothing, especially with coaching changes and transfers portals.

Fans would accept an expanded NCAA field as long as they get to 64 by the third Thursday in March, so 80 teams, or even 96 would not kill the Golden Goose like many suggest.

What it would do is save the NCAA from this NIT embarrassment. It doesn’t look good when you ask 12 teams to play and they say no. And think about that school that gets a call at 8:45 PM with the NCAA on the line begging them to play because 12 others turned them down?

If there were 80 or 96 teams in the field, there would still be crying, but there wouldn’t be any declining. Pittsburgh might not like playing a “Round of 80,” game in Kansas City, Omaha, or Des Moines, but guess what? They’ll play.

I’ve always believed in playing and I would rather focus on the teams that are playing instead of those who aren’t. I also believe that if the NIT invites you to its tournament, you SHOULD accept, but I’m an old guy who misses the old days, so I must check myself.

This year’s NIT champ will come with an asterisk, a yeah but, because the better teams chose not to participate. That’s not good for anybody—the schools, the winner, the NCAA, nobody.

The NIT, like the landline phone, may have lived out its usefulness. That’s part of life. Evolution occurs and it’s probably the right time for the NCAA to expand and for the NIT to fade away.