MLB Playoff Log5

Sorry I couldn't get this up before the first two games. I was up at 4:45 working on it but had to hit the gym before work. Fun stuff.

NFL Survivor Week 2

This year rather than updating the same sheet on my spreadsheet, I am creating different worksheets for each week's strategy. After the first week, it's already very interesting to see how the lines for the remaining games change based on only one week. The Arizona-Cincinati Week 16 game I mentioned in a previous post has moved five points in Arizona's favor. That game isn't the only major mover: The Eagles were pick'em with the Dolphins in Week 14 and now are favored by seven in that game. There is potential to have substantial middles if you place your bets right.

Here is my new plan.

Already Used: Houston



I don't think this maximizes the points in my favor but it uses up the best teams early. Hopefully by the time weeks 16 and 17 roll around Tennessee and Denver will either look like better picks or another team will emerge as a surprise.

The pick this week is Green Bay -10 at Carolina.

Will this cause all NCAA hell to break loose? I hope so.

I saw this article in the NYT this morning and thought it was pretty good.

On Campus, It's One Big Commerical

Despite being the paper of record, the New York Times is usually late on what's actually going on in culture and style. When I started college four years ago, these types of practices existed various. None of them were as integrated as the Target/UNC relationship, but this is not a new "issue" as the NYT and UNC frame it.

I say "issue" because this article makes it sound like a potential problem. In a shocking twist, the establishment is worried about the college student becoming too tied to "the man". This was my favorite portion of the article:

But Mr. Crisp says he was unaware of the American Eagle effort on his campus. He worried aloud that students and parents might mistake such promotions as having the university’s imprimatur.

“They are not supposed to be using the opportunity to help people move in as a way of forwarding commercial ventures,” he said, standing near the cash registers at Target that evening, as upperclassmen handed out free VitaminWater, Combos and packages of macaroni and cheese.  

This is classic. The university is fine with companies being involved as long as the university is getting a cut. Crisp has another follow up quote:

 “I don’t think we have a good grip on it,” Mr. Crisp says. “We are going to need to get a good grip on it.”  The challenge, he says, is to balance potential student employment opportunities against practices that could manipulate undergraduates or dilute the U.N.C. experience.

Earlier in the article, the Target event was described as:

Over the course of the evening, about 2,200 Carolina students make their way through the aisles. Mr. Crisp describes the party as the school’s “signature event” for the start of the school year.

I don't know anyone who went to UNC ten years ago, but I'd guess they'd be appalled to know that the signature Freshmen event is basically a giant party at Target, sponsored by Target. New traditions need to start and I don't have a problem with companies playing in role in new traditions. It's laughable that the University feels like it needs to be the one to decide what brands are permitted to help form the new traditions (and pay the university), but that students, the ones paying an arm and leg for tuition (and in most cases the tradition/name brand of the school) and actually attending the school, shouldn't be allowed to. Back to Crisp:

“How we police that and how we deal with our students, who after all are our students, is probably something we need to spend some more time thinking about.”

The more interesting aspect of this story is how these types of relationships would be treated by the NCAA. The article says that companies are seeking students, "involved in athletics, music, fraternities or sororities" and that these students, "can earn several hundred to several thousand dollars a semester in salary, perks, products and services, depending on the company." Uh oh. 


If non-athletes are allowed to engage in these relationships with no bound to compensation, why wouldn't athletes? What would stop Nike, Adidas, or a non-athletic brand from approaching Heisman Candidate X with an offer to provide him with products or payment in return for his advancing the brand? I'm guessing the NCAA would argue that the athlete is using his or her status as an athlete to better himself or herself. As we know, only the NCAA and the school are allowed to make money off the athletes. If an non-athlete student is President of a major fraternity or is that person who friended everyone in the class freshman year, who will stop them from parlaying that status into compensation? No one. I would love to see this scenario play out. 

NFL Survivor Week 1 Update

Just a quick update to my survivor strategy going into Week 1. Obviously the big news in the NFL is that Peyton Manning is out indefinitely. This has repercussions on the whole strategy as I had planned on using the Colts in Week 12. The Week 1 line for the Texans-Colts game has also changed drastically: With Manning the line would be Colts -3/4, without him it's Texans -10. Here are the changes.

Week 1: Texans
Week 12: San Diego (Former Week 1 team)
Week 15: New York Giants (Replacing Texans)