The MLB championship series are set to begin tonight with the New York Yankees facing the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim, and the Los Angeles Dodgers hosting defending champion Philadelphia Phillies. I expect both series to be exciting and closely-fought matches. But as we all know, there can only be one winner.
ALCS - While the Yankees are the sexy choice here with their all-star lineup that can hit almost at will, I like the Angels. I think they are a better-rounded team with a lot of pitching depth. The Yankees’ back of the rotation is suspect, which could be problematic in a long, seven-game series. Also, the Angels have an intangible. The death early in the season of pitcher Nick Adenhart has unified this team. I think that experience, plus overcoming a slow start with injuries to three of their starting pitchers, has made them an emotionally strong team. If any team can get past the Yankees, the Angels can.
NLCS - The NLCS is a tougher call. Like the Yankees, the Dodgers are the sexy choice with their young starters. But they struggled down the stretch and nearly lost their division title. The Phillies also struggled and Brad Lidge is a big question mark as their closer. Still, he performed well in the NLDS. I also like the way the Phillies came back against the Rockies in Game 4 to clinch the series, and I like their lineup. They know how to win the big games. I’m not convinced the Dodgers are able to do that.
So, I guess I’m going against all expert prognosticators with my pick: Angels and Phillies.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Bears, Hawks Launch Ad Campaign
I’m eager to see the new series of ads that will promote the Chicago Bears and Chicago Blackhawks. The ads, which will begin airing in a few weeks, will feature members of both teams in various scenarios. For example, Bears’ quarterback Jay Cutler and Hawks’ captain Jonathan Toews exchange tips on passing.
The ad campaign is unique in that the teams are aligning their brands to reach their fan base, something they apparently share. According to a Chicago Tribune story, 92 percent of hockey fans are also football fans.
The Hawks wanted to reach out to this fan base and approached the Bears to see if they were interested. They even offered to foot the bill for production and air time. The Bears have nothing to lose since they are already well-known worldwide. The Hawks, on the other hand, are trying to capitalize on the buzz they created last year when they surpassed everyone’s expectations in reaching the NHL’s Western Conference finals before losing to the Detroit Red Wings.
If these ads do well, I’m willing to bet the other teams in town -- the Cubs, White Sox, Bulls and Fire – will look to join forces to cross-promote their brands.
The ad campaign is unique in that the teams are aligning their brands to reach their fan base, something they apparently share. According to a Chicago Tribune story, 92 percent of hockey fans are also football fans.
The Hawks wanted to reach out to this fan base and approached the Bears to see if they were interested. They even offered to foot the bill for production and air time. The Bears have nothing to lose since they are already well-known worldwide. The Hawks, on the other hand, are trying to capitalize on the buzz they created last year when they surpassed everyone’s expectations in reaching the NHL’s Western Conference finals before losing to the Detroit Red Wings.
If these ads do well, I’m willing to bet the other teams in town -- the Cubs, White Sox, Bulls and Fire – will look to join forces to cross-promote their brands.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Orton's Success Should Come as No Surprise
Bears fans who watched the Denver Broncos’ overtime victory over New England yesterday are probably wondering, “Why couldn’t Kyle Orton have played this way when he was with the Bears?”
While I’m as surprised as everyone else that the Broncos are unbeaten at 5-0, I’m not as surprised to see Orton perform as well as he has. In my blog last April after the Orton-Cutler trade, I wondered if Orton would have enjoyed better success in Chicago if he had better receivers to throw to, a younger, quicker offensive line to protect him, and a game plan that featured his strengths as a quarterback.
During his three years in Chicago, Orton was much maligned and underrated. Yet, for all his flaws, he posted a 21-12 career record with the Bears and had a .667 regular season winning percentage, the fourth highest among Bears quarterbacks since 1961. Being traded to Denver in the offseason provided the perfect opportunity to jumpstart his career. Now he has a chance to play every week with many of the players and offensive schemes that helped Cutler be so successful last season.
While it’s still early in the 2009 football campaign, it appears that this trade has worked out well so far for all parties. Cutler’s talents and leadership on the field is forcing the rest of the Bears team, especially the receivers, to raise their game to his level. Meanwhile, Orton, who went to a team with many offensive weapons already in place, has raised his game to match theirs.
If Orton’s performance so far this season proves anything, it’s this: Football is still a team sport. Winning depends on having a balanced attack: offense, defense, special teams and coaching. When all these elements are in place, you don’t need to be the most talented quarterback on the block to win in the National Football League. You just have to be a smart one.
While I’m as surprised as everyone else that the Broncos are unbeaten at 5-0, I’m not as surprised to see Orton perform as well as he has. In my blog last April after the Orton-Cutler trade, I wondered if Orton would have enjoyed better success in Chicago if he had better receivers to throw to, a younger, quicker offensive line to protect him, and a game plan that featured his strengths as a quarterback.
During his three years in Chicago, Orton was much maligned and underrated. Yet, for all his flaws, he posted a 21-12 career record with the Bears and had a .667 regular season winning percentage, the fourth highest among Bears quarterbacks since 1961. Being traded to Denver in the offseason provided the perfect opportunity to jumpstart his career. Now he has a chance to play every week with many of the players and offensive schemes that helped Cutler be so successful last season.
While it’s still early in the 2009 football campaign, it appears that this trade has worked out well so far for all parties. Cutler’s talents and leadership on the field is forcing the rest of the Bears team, especially the receivers, to raise their game to his level. Meanwhile, Orton, who went to a team with many offensive weapons already in place, has raised his game to match theirs.
If Orton’s performance so far this season proves anything, it’s this: Football is still a team sport. Winning depends on having a balanced attack: offense, defense, special teams and coaching. When all these elements are in place, you don’t need to be the most talented quarterback on the block to win in the National Football League. You just have to be a smart one.
Thursday, October 08, 2009
Michael Vick Lands TV Gig
After spending 18 months in jail for running a dog-fighting ring, Michael Vick returned to the NFL as a backup QB with the Philadelphia Eagles. Now he’s landed a new gig – a reality TV show for the BET network, according to Foxsports.com. The eight-part series called “The Michael Vick Project” will follow Vick’s comeback in the NFL and document his past, including the 2007 arrest for running a dog-fighting ring.
According to the story, Vick says he is doing this to “change the perception of me” so people can know him as an individual.
Many of Vick’s supporters say the show can help Vick set the record straight and put the past behind him. But if Vick is serious about doing that, why do a reality TV show that may only shed more light on the dog-fighting controversy? Instead, why not appear in a series of public service announcements that show the dangers of dog fighting or how to fight animal abuse?
For someone who committed a crime, Vick has gotten a pretty good deal. Not only has the NFL welcomed him back into the fold, he also gets his own TV show, which will do more for Vick’s career but very little to help the animal abuse cause. If Vick really wants to prove that he is a decent human being, then he needs to focus more on helping the cause and less on helping himself.
According to the story, Vick says he is doing this to “change the perception of me” so people can know him as an individual.
Many of Vick’s supporters say the show can help Vick set the record straight and put the past behind him. But if Vick is serious about doing that, why do a reality TV show that may only shed more light on the dog-fighting controversy? Instead, why not appear in a series of public service announcements that show the dangers of dog fighting or how to fight animal abuse?
For someone who committed a crime, Vick has gotten a pretty good deal. Not only has the NFL welcomed him back into the fold, he also gets his own TV show, which will do more for Vick’s career but very little to help the animal abuse cause. If Vick really wants to prove that he is a decent human being, then he needs to focus more on helping the cause and less on helping himself.
Monday, October 05, 2009
Pitching Is Key to Sox' Success in 2010
Sox GM Kenny Williams won’t admit it, but this was really a rebuilding year for the White Sox. After losing Orlando Cabrera and Joe Crede to free agency in the offseason and trading Nick Swisher to the Yankees and Javier Vasquez to Atlanta, the Sox committed themselves to building a younger, faster team. But in the process, they went through some growing pains with their young infielders, and went through what seemed like a season long hitting slump. In the end, the Sox finished third in the AL Central with a 79-83 record. Not what the Sox expected at the start of the 2009 campaign, but not bad considering what they were dealing with this year and better than the last-place finish Baseball Prospectus predicted.
While the Sox did not perform as well as many fans hoped, there are enough good things in this team to make a decent run for a division title in 2010. It starts with pitching. If the past few starts by Jake Peavy and Freddie Garcia are any indication, then the Sox will have one of the best starting rotations in the American League. And I include Garcia in the mix because he has consistently given the Sox quality starts and could win as many as 12 to 15 games if he gets enough run support. Peavy was outstanding in his last outing against the Tigers Friday night, going eight innings and giving up only two hits. That’s the stuff World Series dreams are made of. Add a stronger bullpen, timely hitting and strong defense, and the White Sox should rebound from their lackluster 2009 effort.
While the Sox did not perform as well as many fans hoped, there are enough good things in this team to make a decent run for a division title in 2010. It starts with pitching. If the past few starts by Jake Peavy and Freddie Garcia are any indication, then the Sox will have one of the best starting rotations in the American League. And I include Garcia in the mix because he has consistently given the Sox quality starts and could win as many as 12 to 15 games if he gets enough run support. Peavy was outstanding in his last outing against the Tigers Friday night, going eight innings and giving up only two hits. That’s the stuff World Series dreams are made of. Add a stronger bullpen, timely hitting and strong defense, and the White Sox should rebound from their lackluster 2009 effort.
Chicago’s Olympic Bid Doomed from the Start
I suggested in my post last Friday that the rather contentious relationship between the IOC and the U.S. Olympic Committee could be a contributing factor in Chicago’s failed bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics, and it appears I was right. Phil Hersh of the Chicago Tribune does a nice job of explaining what happened here and here.
Based on what I’ve read, it seems Chicago’s bid was doomed from the start and that many of the IOC members had made up their minds long before the final presentations were made. There was nothing that the bid committee or President Obama could say or do to change the course of things.
It is clear the USOC is in a shambles. Until it can get its act together and resolve its differences with the IOC, I see no point in putting forth any future bids by American cities to host the Olympic Games.
Based on what I’ve read, it seems Chicago’s bid was doomed from the start and that many of the IOC members had made up their minds long before the final presentations were made. There was nothing that the bid committee or President Obama could say or do to change the course of things.
It is clear the USOC is in a shambles. Until it can get its act together and resolve its differences with the IOC, I see no point in putting forth any future bids by American cities to host the Olympic Games.
Friday, October 02, 2009
Why Chicago’s Olympic Bid Failed
For the first time ever, a South American city will host the Olympics. Today, Rio de Janeiro was named the host city of the 2016 Summer Olympic Games. The path to the top was paved for Rio when Chicago, considered to be Rio’s closest competition, was eliminated in the first round of voting.
Technically, Chicago’s bid was very strong by all accounts, perhaps the strongest ever by any American city. So why did Chicago lose the bid? Why was the city eliminated in the first round while earning only 18 votes by IOC members? I have several theories, and they have nothing to do with President Obama’s inability to sway voters or with Michael Jordan not appearing in Copenhagen.
Lack of focus. Chicago’s bid had no central theme or purpose to rally around. The final presentation did not provide IOC members with a strong, compelling reason why Chicago should host the Olympics. And it failed to show what kind of legacy the Games would leave behind to help local communities.
On the other hand, Rio’s bid team repeatedly reminded IOC members that the Olympic Games had never been held in South America, and Rio was ready to host them. That message apparently resonated with IOC voters.
Lack of public support. A Tribune poll in August showed only 47 percent of Chicagoans wanted the city to host the Olympic Games, down from more than 60 percent in February. IOC members generally do not award the Games to cities where public support is low. That may have been the case with Chicago’s bid.
USOC issues. The U.S. Olympic Committee has several lingering conflicts with the IOC, including the U.S. share of revenue from the Games and the USOC’s recent announcement that they would launch an Olympic network. Both parties have agreed to table these issues until after the 2016 bid city was announced. In addition, the USOC appears to be somewhat unstable after several changes in USOC leadership and cutbacks in operations earlier this year, which might have hampered Chicago’s bid.
Lack of visibility. While the city’s bid effort introduced Chicago to many IOC members who were unfamiliar with the city, Chicago’s remains relatively unknown compared to the other bid cities. IOC members are not allowed to visit the bidding cities on their own, so they must rely on the presentations and bid books to become familiar with the bid city. IOC members may have preferred to give the Games to a city they are more familiar with.
Lack of experience with Olympic bidding process. This is Chicago’s first bid attempt, and their lack of experience showed at times. Chicago made a few mistakes along the way, such as creating their initial logo without consulting IOC rules governing symbol usage. The committee had to scrap the logo and create a new one. The other bid cities have gone through the bid process before and know what to expect, know what buttons to push. Both Rio and Madrid submitted bids for the 2012 Games and lost out to eventual winner London. Tokyo has hosted the Games before.
U.S. reputation. It is no secret that the United States has an image problem with the rest of the world. Despite the election of President Obama, the U.S. is still not well liked or trusted in many parts of the world. I wonder how much of that distrust carried over into the IOC’s decision.
Ultimately, the reason Chicago did not win its bid to host the 2016 Olympic Games is because Rio de Janeiro presented a better, more compelling case why they should host the Games.
Go ahead. Blame it on Rio.
Technically, Chicago’s bid was very strong by all accounts, perhaps the strongest ever by any American city. So why did Chicago lose the bid? Why was the city eliminated in the first round while earning only 18 votes by IOC members? I have several theories, and they have nothing to do with President Obama’s inability to sway voters or with Michael Jordan not appearing in Copenhagen.
Lack of focus. Chicago’s bid had no central theme or purpose to rally around. The final presentation did not provide IOC members with a strong, compelling reason why Chicago should host the Olympics. And it failed to show what kind of legacy the Games would leave behind to help local communities.
On the other hand, Rio’s bid team repeatedly reminded IOC members that the Olympic Games had never been held in South America, and Rio was ready to host them. That message apparently resonated with IOC voters.
Lack of public support. A Tribune poll in August showed only 47 percent of Chicagoans wanted the city to host the Olympic Games, down from more than 60 percent in February. IOC members generally do not award the Games to cities where public support is low. That may have been the case with Chicago’s bid.
USOC issues. The U.S. Olympic Committee has several lingering conflicts with the IOC, including the U.S. share of revenue from the Games and the USOC’s recent announcement that they would launch an Olympic network. Both parties have agreed to table these issues until after the 2016 bid city was announced. In addition, the USOC appears to be somewhat unstable after several changes in USOC leadership and cutbacks in operations earlier this year, which might have hampered Chicago’s bid.
Lack of visibility. While the city’s bid effort introduced Chicago to many IOC members who were unfamiliar with the city, Chicago’s remains relatively unknown compared to the other bid cities. IOC members are not allowed to visit the bidding cities on their own, so they must rely on the presentations and bid books to become familiar with the bid city. IOC members may have preferred to give the Games to a city they are more familiar with.
Lack of experience with Olympic bidding process. This is Chicago’s first bid attempt, and their lack of experience showed at times. Chicago made a few mistakes along the way, such as creating their initial logo without consulting IOC rules governing symbol usage. The committee had to scrap the logo and create a new one. The other bid cities have gone through the bid process before and know what to expect, know what buttons to push. Both Rio and Madrid submitted bids for the 2012 Games and lost out to eventual winner London. Tokyo has hosted the Games before.
U.S. reputation. It is no secret that the United States has an image problem with the rest of the world. Despite the election of President Obama, the U.S. is still not well liked or trusted in many parts of the world. I wonder how much of that distrust carried over into the IOC’s decision.
Ultimately, the reason Chicago did not win its bid to host the 2016 Olympic Games is because Rio de Janeiro presented a better, more compelling case why they should host the Games.
Go ahead. Blame it on Rio.
Thursday, October 01, 2009
Final Countdown Begins for Olympic Bid Cities
The clock is ticking.
In less than 24 hours, members of the International Olympic Committee will decide which of four bid cities will host the 2016 Summer Olympic Games: Tokyo, Madrid, Rio de Janeiro and Chicago. While each bid city has presented strong cases for hosting the Olympic Games, the general consensus is that this race is oh-so-close, with Rio and Chicago being the leading contenders.
After reading the Chicago Tribune’s succinct summary of why each bid city could win or lose the Olympic bid, I think Chicago’s chances are quite good. Rio is a strong contender and presents an emotional case, but I don’t think they are quite ready logistically to handle the Games. Their budget of $14.4 billion is much higher because the infrastructure is not yet in place. They have more venues to build, and the Games will be more spread out, which means they need to build the roads and transportation. With so much work to do, Rio may be a risky choice.
Even more troubling is the level of crime, as Tribune column Phil Hersh described recently in his Globetrotting blog. Granted, Chicago has crime issues too, but they don't compare with what is happening in Rio. These crime and infrastructure issues could be big enough concerns that they could hurt Rio’s chances to win the Games.
We'll know for sure in less than 24 hours.
In less than 24 hours, members of the International Olympic Committee will decide which of four bid cities will host the 2016 Summer Olympic Games: Tokyo, Madrid, Rio de Janeiro and Chicago. While each bid city has presented strong cases for hosting the Olympic Games, the general consensus is that this race is oh-so-close, with Rio and Chicago being the leading contenders.
After reading the Chicago Tribune’s succinct summary of why each bid city could win or lose the Olympic bid, I think Chicago’s chances are quite good. Rio is a strong contender and presents an emotional case, but I don’t think they are quite ready logistically to handle the Games. Their budget of $14.4 billion is much higher because the infrastructure is not yet in place. They have more venues to build, and the Games will be more spread out, which means they need to build the roads and transportation. With so much work to do, Rio may be a risky choice.
Even more troubling is the level of crime, as Tribune column Phil Hersh described recently in his Globetrotting blog. Granted, Chicago has crime issues too, but they don't compare with what is happening in Rio. These crime and infrastructure issues could be big enough concerns that they could hurt Rio’s chances to win the Games.
We'll know for sure in less than 24 hours.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)