Friday, June 29, 2007

Tribute to Big 12 Fanbases, Part II: Iowa State

It won't stop raining here, so I'm forced to not play golf. There isn't much good on TV, either, so I figured I'd plow on with my quest to honor the less-glamorous side of each Big 12 fanbase.

I hate to kick a man when he's down, so I almost decided to leave the Iowa State tribute blank. But I figured if I did that, it might imply they have no fans, which would be an even worse insult. And besides, any university who has had this... its past deserves to catch a little grief. Ol' Lecherous Larry really missed his time. He needed to be born into the coaching era before digital cameras, so he could get away with having a girl in every Big 8 town like Bob Devaney did.

The great Lecher holds an unspecial place in every K-Stater's heart for telling an attractive K-State coed (allegedly in between sips of a more upscale beer, like Milwaukee's Best) that she should be at KU. The following picture doesn't really disprove that notion, but I'll take the excuse to post it anyway...

Of course, maybe Eustachy was just repressed, because he was living in the midst fans such as this guy...

(I have no idea if this guy is an ISU fan or not, but it was posted under ISU football pics on flickr, so I ran with it.)

I don't have anything against people finding the right person for them, but if you find that person with a cardboard sign and a PBR, well, just expect the world to get a laugh out of it. At least he was able to correcty write the words on his sign, unlike the shirt-maker for these next ISU fans...

These guys are definitely big fans of "ETATS AWOI", whatever the hell that is. It would be funnier if they were fans of a team in a state that is generally looked down upon as culturally backward, such as "SASNAKRA", but we'll let Iowa represent.

Finally, I think this guy epitomizes the state of Iowa State athletics right now, but fear not Clone fans! Jamie Pollard will bring you back.

Holy hell, it's stopped raining. I may go slog out a quick 18.

Tribute to Big 12 Fanbases, Part I: Nebraska

As I mentioned previously, I intend to tour the ridiculousness that often comes with being a fan(atic) of any sports team by creating a tribute to each Big 12 fanbases indiscretions and funny photos. And yes, I will include K-State, so don't think I'm a total homer. Just so you know, I also intend to go through my favorite traditions from each Big 12 team as well, so you'll get the good with the bad.

Moving on, the first team to be chronicled is the Nebraska Cornhuskers. Maybe it's just because I'm from there that I'm more familiar with some of the more ridonkulous things they do, but maybe it's because they hold themselves out as somehow different from other fans. For example...

You have to look close, the the text across the middle of the pictures says, "Through these gates pass the greatest fans in college football." That's where it begins with Nebraska. They believe they have the greatest fans in college football. It even says so on their stadium. And undoubtedly, most of my family and friends up there are as nice as anyone you would ever want to meet, and cheer on their team just like anyone else. But Husker fans forget their fanbase is, as a whole, not all that different from any others. For example...

"Sal is dead. Go big red." (Note: The video doesn't show anyone chanting that, or the bumper stickers that said it. It happened in 1990, before digital cameras where we took pics of everything, and I can't find any pictures of it.)

There's no defense for this, Huskers. You can tell me you hate Colorado (even though they're 'not your rival'), how they're a bunch of immoral, elitist bastards, but making light of the death of a 21 year old due to cancer is evidence of a pretty sad existence. Granted, K-State fans have made some equally pathetic remarks about Brook Berringer, but Snyder Stadium doesn't proclaim us the greatest fans in college football.

Ok, you may say, that's one (albeit a bad one) isolated example of bad fans being bad fans. Oh, but there's more, and a more recent incident. For example...

The cartoon is dumb enough, but I'll give it a pass because the kid claimed he was making a point about the antics of the Memorial Stadium crowd and KU fan's "Our coach can eat your coach" shirts. The point is, an injured KU player lay motionless on the field for something like 10 minutes, temporarily paralyzed, and Husker fans DID THE WAVE! Lord knows it can get boring up there, but if you really need something to do, go buy some Valentino's pizza or read your program.

But in Nebraska, it's not always that bad. Sometimes it's just funny. For example...

If I have to explain this, then maybe you shouldn't be reading this. I like hats. I love hats. I have way more hats than I will ever need. But I cannot understand the allure of spending $20 on a giant piece of foam in (roughly) the shape of a corn cob, and then wearing it around, much to annoyance of those in front or and behind you.

I'll end with one of the greatest representatives any university could ever hope to have, a true native Nebraskan (although I suspect the accent is fake) and a big Husker fan...

Now I'll admit, I thought Larry the Cable Guy was funny...initially. But his jokes get old. How many times can you joke about farts, and poop, and your ugly/inbred family, and accidentally dating your sister?

So there you have it. Part I of this 12-part series is complete. Stay tuned in the coming days as I move through the rest of the conference.

P.S. For a more complete list of Husker hilarity, drop in on AJ. He actually made a list.

Wednesday, June 27, 2007

Bramlage Facelift

Thanks to the Topeka Capitol-Journal, I now have an idea of what the premium seating at Bramlage Coliseum is going to look like (above, courtesy After hearing about the idea of putting suites into Bramlage for more than a year, I was trying to decide whether I was for or against it. Obviously, it would bring in more money. But on the other hand, if you know anything about Bramlage, you know traditional glassed-in suites would have kind of a "Boy-in-the-bubble" look.

With the loge seats, Bramlage will finally begin to take on the look and feel of a real basketball arena. When I first encountered it I liked it, but it just had the feeling it wasn't quite there yet. I've heard some in Manhattan say Bramlage actually is an unfinished project, that they ran out of money when it was being built and had to forgo some things that were supposed to be included. I don't know if that's true or not, I can't find a source for it, and we all know how rumors can get started. Regardless, with the addition of the courtside seating, the much improved atmosphere from last year, and the addition of the loge seating (behind the students...which should be interesting), we're going to see significant improvements to Bramlage in the fall.

Another thing I must commend AD Tim Weiser on is the idea of building a K-State sports hall of fame. Weiser told me last year he wanted Bramlage's west side to be an inviting "front-door" to the sports complex. He repeated that in the CJ story today. This is a great idea. Having a Wildcat hall-of-fame will allow for young Wildcat fans to learn about the history and traditions of Wildcat athletics, making for a better future fanbase. When I came to K-State (and granted, I was a transplant), I knew nothing of K-State history, except that they used to suck in football. I had no idea they had once had a good basketball program, with legendary coaches and players.

Learning all of that took a long time. With a hall-of-fame, maybe future transplants will catch the Purple Fever a little quicker than I did.

Tuesday, June 26, 2007

A Little More on Revenue Sharing

This Big 12 revenue sharing horse has been beaten to death the last couple weeks, so I'm really hoping to start moving on to new topics soon. However, Wendell Barnhouse of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram had to drop his $.02 in, so I feel obliged to respond. I contacted Mr. Barnhouse via email, but he has not responded.

Essentially, Barnhouse asserts that revenue sharing is a "nonissue" for the Big 12. At first I wondered what planet he lives on, but then I realized he lives in Texas, just as I do. In Texas, revenue sharing is generally a nonissue, except to the extent that UT and A&M don't want to give up "their" money. For the eight conference schools not named UT, A&M, OU or NU, it is absolutely an issue. The smaller eight schools get a smaller cut of the Big 12 money each year, which leads to a self-perpetuating system where the big guys get more money, buy fancier toys, and maintain what they see as the rightful order of things (to use Nebraska language).

Barnhouse severely misstates the argument when he writes:

Leveling the Big 12's financial playing field is impossible considering the money-making potential of football stadiums at Texas, A&M, Oklahoma and Nebraska. Those four schools can generate crowds that are consistently nearly double that of other conference schools.

The whole point of this is not to allow Iowa State to spend as much money on athletics as Texas. That will never happen. There's no way Iowa State is going to make up that $52 million gap. The point is, conference revenue is not the property of any individual program, and should be shared equally.

A few things about this strike me. For one, the big schools claim it's "their" money, so they're rightfully entitled to keep it. Barnhouse refers to it as sharing the money "equitably, not evenly." I don't buy that as an accurate characterization of the issue. The TV appearances made by these schools are a result of the CONFERENCE'S TV deal. You may notice it's called the Big 12 TV contract, not the Longhorns' TV contract, or the Aggies' TV contract, or the Sooners' TV contract, or the Cornhuskers' TV contract. ABC and FSN contract with the Big 12 to show its games. Now granted, most of those games the last few years have been UT and OU games. A lot of them have also been NU and A&M games, although UT and OU are clearly the kings of the conference as far as TV goes.

The point is, there's no requirement in the Big 12 TV contract that UT or OU or A&M or NU be on TV a certain number of times. It's just so happened that in the last few years, the Longhorns and Sooners, et al, have been the best teams, ergo TV wants more of their games. So the TV money generated by the Big 12 is exactly that, it's the Big 12's money. As such, it should be shared equally among all members.

I know it's an easy argument in a capitalist society to say the money should go to those who earned it, but a college athletic conference is not a purely capitalist endeavor. We have 12 schools that have banded together for the common good. Sharing things equally isn't exactly a foreign concept, we do it with most of the revenue, with the exception of 50 percent of the TV money...and as mentioned before, that TV money is about to get a whole lot bigger, meaning the gap between the haves and have-lots of the Big 12 is about to get bigger as well.

And lest the big four schools forget, the conference hasn't always been aligned as it is. Texas went 4-7 in 1997. Oklahoma didn't have a winning record in the Big 12 until 1999. Texas A&M went 6-6 twice, 4-8 once and 5-6 once. Nebraska went 7-7 in 2002 and 5-6 in 2004. Bad days like that could come back around, and these schools could be looking at the short end of the stick for some time (all it takes is the wrong coach(ing staff).

I guess I just don't get the idea of a conference in which the philosophy is to allow certain members to aggrandize themselves at the expense of the other member institutions. In some ways, it already has come back to bite those teams in the butt. If the Big 12 turns into the Big 4 and the Little 8, the strength of schedule of all member institutions suffers, which makes it harder for the conference teams to compete for national titles.

One final thought on this for the schools who complain that it would be thoroughly unfair for them to share the conference's revenue with the other member institutions. If you get mad about this, mad enough to drop the Big 12, where are you going to go? And is it really worth it to go through the hassle of changing conferences over this? Here's how much money each school would have lost to equal revenue sharing based on the 2005-06 figures:

Texas: $2.13 million
Oklahoma: $1.59 million
Texas A&M: $730,000
Nebraska: $310,000
Colorado: $140,000

There aren't necessarily a lot of great options. The SEC (assuming it wants to expand/change membership) splits all its revenue equally, although they also make more money than the Big 12. The Big 10 (again, assuming it's not still holding out for Notre Dame) shares all its revenue equally. As far as I know, the Pac-10 is the only other major conference that doesn't share all revenue equally.

Finally, an analogy that I hope will put this in perspective. Major League Baseball does not have equal revenue sharing or a salary cap. The National Football League does. It's easy to name the dominant teams in MLB, it's the Boston Red Sox and the New York Yankees. They're practically the only teams on TV, and the primary teams who are talked about that. Contrast that with the NFL. You can't name a single, dominant team in the NFL. You're fine with the MLB situation if you're a Yankees or Red Sox fan, but the vast majority of the nation's baseball fans are not Yankees or Red Sox fans. In the NFL, fans of every team feel like they have a shot, or at least the opportunity to get a shot, at the playoffs/Super Bowl. One makes for a good product with satisfied fans who can root for a contender. The other makes for cynical fans who get turned off by two teams' domination of the sport.

Those 'other schools' in the Big 12 care about this issue. You should too. Just take a step behind the veil of ignorance and don't forget: it could be you.

Monday, June 25, 2007

Ahh, Fanbases

Last week we found out that two hick...err...lucky Oklahoma couples will get married in their local Wal-Marts this July. I know exactly what you're thinking...

"What the hell does this have to do with K-State sports?"

Well, nothing really. My initial reaction was "typical thing for Oklahoma." Being raised in Nebraska and educated at K-State, hating on the state of Oklahoma was a natural thing for me, though scientists haven't located the "loatheOK" gene yet. But everytime such thoughts cross my head, I have to step back and remember something. I'm from Nebraska. I've lived in Kansas. Now I live in Texas.

I have no room to be bagging on anybody for being a redneck.

I realized this could just as easily have happened in Grand Island, Neb., or Valley Falls, Kan., or Tyler, Tex., as Gore, Okla. So obviously I'm a person who gets caught up in the initial stereotype of making fun of other fanbases for their shortcomings, while overlooking those in my own. And it's a fun thing to do, sometimes, especially when dumb fans do something notorious or get exactly what they deserve (just the part about getting kicked out, not the rest of the crap Shatel wrote).

It's one of those things that will never change, and probably shouldn't, as long as the attacks aren't personal. But everytime a fan of any team accuses "the fans" of another team of being (insert random accusation here), they should remember that their fans have probably done many things dumber/worse/classless.

For example, every time I hear a Husker fan accuse some other team's fans of having no class, I'll never be able to forget "Sal is dead, go big red" in 1990. Whenever K-State fans call KU fans elitist, I can't help but think "You're all Kansans" (except for the ones from Johnson County, you don't really count). Whenever KU fans call K-State fans backward flatlanders, I can't help but think "You're all from Kansas." And whenever an OU/OSU fan points to another school and says its fan base is a bunch of toothless rednecks, I can't help but think "Your fans get married at Wal-Mart."

There's really no point to this, because I never will (nor intend to) stop fanbases from making fun of each other. As my uncle says, "What fun would sports be if we couldn't make fun of each other's teams?" But because of this, I intend to periodically post true, comical pictures of states/fanbases associated with all Big 12 schools. And because I will be driving extensively through Missouri, Oklahoma and Texas in the next week, I should have a good opportunity to get some of my own. If you happen to have some of your own, send them my way.

Happy Monday.

Friday, June 22, 2007

Friday News Bits

Blaire Kerkhoff (of the KC Star) has gotten his wish, sort of. The Big 12 has named Dan Beebe its interim commissioner. So Beebe will do whatever it is the Big 12 commish does while Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman searches for a new flunky.

The more I hear about Beebe, the more I like him. He's had solid experience with the Ohio Valley Conference, he's familiar with the inner-workings (and inner strife) of the Big 12, and he's a lawyer. Seems like a natural fit, but I'm sure Perlman will show up and tell us he's hired Tex McLonghorn for the job, and that the conference headquarters will now be split between Austin, College Station, Norman and Lincoln. Stay tuned...


Apparently some Big 12 schools just can't keep their hands out of the cookie jar. In the last two weeks, it's been revealed there are new allegations against Oklahoma, and Colorado has been sanctioned. Ordinarily, I'd start with the program that has been in trouble more often, but in this case it's hard to decide whether that's the Dirt-Burglars or the Hippies. I'll start with OU...

So Sooner officials reported themselves after they discovered they were distributing "two nutritional supplements that contained impermissible substances." They said they didn't realize the substances were illegal initially, which sounds a little like Barry Bonds saying he thought he was using flaxseed oil when he was actually using the cream and the clear. On the other hand, they did self-report themselves, and stopped the practice immediately. Kudos, Schooners. I sure would have hated to see the NCAA smash you with probation (and then suspend it) and loss of scholarships (also suspended) because you gave your players juiced milkshakes.

Colorado's violations were probably a bit more egregious, at least as far as the NCAA is concerned. Also, CU is not one of those elite programs that can get away with giving its players free houses or cars and cash and not have the NCAA land on it. Basically, the Buffs committed the unforgivable sin of allowing prospective student athletes eat training-table meals while paying dining hall prices. That certainly rivals the old $100-handshakes of the SEC and the old SWC. But as minor as that seems to me, the compliance people at CU ought to be fired (or, in the alternative, shot) for not recognizing and stopping this. I know the NCAA rulebook is thicker than most legal treatises, but is it so hard to figure out that getting one thing for the price of something cheaper is probably a violation? Good Gawd, it doesn't take the head clerk at Steak-N-Shake to figure that out.


Have a great weekend everybody. I'm off to Arthur Bryant's for some real barbeque, then off to observe the goings-on at the Great Lenexa Barbeque Battle. Word is you can smell the smoke and meat for miles...

Thursday, June 21, 2007

Countdown to launch...

72 days and counting...

Also came across this video on YouTube the other day. It's really a great reminder of where K-State football was, where it went, and what we hope it will be again.

Go Cats!

Tuesday, June 19, 2007

Sincere Tribute to a Husker Fan

Last week a friend of mine, a good man and a Husker fan, died way before his time. Whatever your method of personally helping others through tough times, I ask you to keep Husker Howie and his family in your thoughts or prayers.

You were a good man, Howie. Enjoy your new view of Memorial Stadium. And laugh at me when I hit a bad golf shot and keep making fun of me for wearing purple. We need more fans like you.


Monday, June 18, 2007

Monday Commentary: Big 12 Commissioner and Sprint Center

A great weekend was had by all in Omaha (well, except Mississippi State fans), but now I'm back and only have a nasty sunburn to show for it. Well, maybe a little more than that. If you haven't been to the CWS, I recommend you go sometime. It's a good time, including when one Husker fan tried to get the "Go Big Red" cheer started and half his section told him to shut up.

But anyway, I'm back now and it's time to get back into some news items around these parts. So without further ado...

No new word yet on who will replace Kevin Weiberg as Big 12 commissioner. It seems like the names of most Big 12 ADs have been mentioned, although DeLoss Dodds is the only one I would consider a serious contender. Blair Kerkhoff of the KC Star thinks senior associate commissioner Dan Beebe should have the job. His credentials are strong, as Kerkhoff mentions in the article. But the big four (UT, aTm, OU, NU) may balk at him because he would be seen as a Weiberg guy. On the other hand, he doesn't have a vote on revenue sharing, so maybe the ADs don't really care what the commish thinks on that issue. They may care more if he manages to get a good TV contract in place where a lot more conference games are on TV, which would dilute the TV money.

There seems to be a lot of conflict right now about Dodds. Some K-State fans point to the fact that he is a Kansas native and K-State alum and think maybe he'd look out for Alma Mater while in Dallas. I'm not sold, although I did meet him in Manhattan and he's a really nice guy. He's a Texas man now, and has publicly stated he opposes revenue sharing. Maybe that's only because it would be a financial hit for UT, but I'm still hesitant.

I'm sure you're all anxiously waiting my pick for the next Big 12 commish, but sorry to say I haven't made up my mind yet. From reading about Beebe, he would be my early favorite, but I want to make sure we have a man who can get the schools on TV a lot more. Of course, maybe that's not a huge consideration, as Husker Mike mentions in a post where he looks to the future of college sports broadcasts.

One other thing to clear up from my earlier post. Apparently some people thought I insinuated that Nebraska Chancellor Harvey Perlman advocated Nebraska leaving for the Big 10. That's not what he nor what I said. Perlman mentioned he would never rule out leaving the Big 12, although it's not currently in Nebraska's plans. My point was that his, along with Tim Weiser's comments about schools leaving, puts that idea out there.


I promised last week to discuss possible tenants for the new Sprint Center in Kansas City. It seemed like a hot topic last week when news hit about the NHL considering expansion. I was all set to post about it when Weiberg resigned and left me to talk about that. So here you go...

It looks like the possibility of getting an NHL team via relocation has passed for Kansas City. The Nashville Predators will be bought by a Canadian (is it OK to say Canuck, just as a joke?) billionaire, who plans to move the team to Hamilton, Ontario (wherever the hell that is). In fact, he's already launched a ticket drive, and there's apparently a buyout clause even if Nashville's citizens pull themselves away from their live music and Christian radio long enough to go to the games. Suffice it to say, we won't be seeing an NHL team named the Kansas City Predators.

But despite that, one of the two news sources that still cares about the NHL let it be known that Jerry Bruckheimer is interested in bringing an NHL team to Las Vegas, and the NHL is interested in that happening via expansion. There are currently 30 NHL teams, meaning an expansion would make more sense if two teams were added, so Kansas City naturally popped up as a possibility, thanks to the Sprint Center.

I have to admit, when I heard this my first thought was, "How the hell is the NHL going to expand?" Their ratings are lower than Bud Adams' approval rating in Houston right now. When you have a friend who played club hockey in college and has to be reminded that an NHL game is on network TV, you know the NHL has been forgotten about.

However, I do see some positives in this. The NHL could be the first major sports league to get into Las Vegas, which is an event market. I could see pro sports, even hockey, succeeding in Vegas, maybe even thriving if they can get some star power in there. And despite what the apprehensions of some in Kansas City, I think the NHL can succeed here, too. The NHL is going through what Major League Baseball went through in 1994 and subsequent years. It's going to take a while to get fans back, but I believe they will come back. Also, the NHL season fits pretty well into most KC sports fans' calendars. The first part of the season may struggle a little because of the Chiefs, but the good news is the Chiefs only play once a week, leaving six nights where Kansas Citians have nothing better to do than go down to the Power and Light District, have a nice dinner, and catch an NHL game in their glittering new arena. The Royals don't start then until April, which means the two teams would only have to share the fans for a month or two at most. This discussion excludes college basketball in Manhattan, Columbia and Lawrence, which is also a huge attraction to many KC alums of each school. But on the whole, I think a KC hockey team could average 15,000 fans per game.

That brings us to the other possibility to fill the Sprint Center...the NBA. It's no secret that the Seattle SuperSonics are owned by an Oklahoma City businessman who will be moving the team if they don't replace aging KeyArena. It isn't likely Seattle citizens are going to pay more tax on their lattes to build a new arena, so the question becomes, "Where will they go?" The ESPN article above mentions Vegas again, although the odds-on favorite is OKC. The Sonics' owner (Clay Bennett) is from OKC, and the city has a decent arena that has been home for the New Orleans Hornets since Hurricane Katrina decimated NO. The city proved they could support a pro sports team, although one may wonder whether that can be sustained over a longer period of time. The Sprint Center offers more revenue streams than the Ford Center, but as this article mentions, KC may be an overextended market.

Oh well, at least the Big 12 tournament will be in KC three times in the next five years.

Thursday, June 14, 2007

Big 12 at a Fork in the Road

Kevin Weiberg stepped down today as commissioner of the Big 12 conference. This came straight out of left-field for me. It seemed things were getting better, with the slight improvement to the TV contract announced recently. However, to hear K-State AD Tim Weiser on KC's 810 sports talk today, this wasn't a surprise at all. Weiser indicated Weiberg had been frustrated for a while with what was going on in the conference. That seems apparent to me because Weiberg is taking a huge step down in terms of prestige (and presumably pay) now to be the vice-president in charge of university operations for the new Big Ten Television Network.

This is going to raise a whole lot of sensitive issues for the schools in the Big 12, and the person chosen to replace Weiberg (not to mention the search process to find him) will tell us a lot about the road down which this conference is going.

The most contentious issue among the Big 12 members right now is revenue sharing. All non-television money is shared equally. Of course, non-television money is a pittance compared to the money generated from the TV contracts. Half the TV money is split equally, half is split proportional to the number of TV appearances each school makes. Here is a quick look at the number of TV appearances each school made last year in football (from

1. Oklahoma: 14 (6 ABC, 1 TBS, 1 Fox, 5 FSN, 1 FSN Southwest PPV)
2. Texas: 12 (6 ABC, 2 ESPN, 3 TBS, 1 FSN)
2. Nebraska: 12 (8 ABC, 1 Fox, 2 FSN, 1 FSN PPV)
4. Texas A&M: 8 (5 ABC, 2 ESPN, 1 FSN)
5. K-State: 7 (4 FSN, 1 ABC, 1 FSN pay-per-view, 1 NFL Network)
5. Missouri: 7 (4 ABC, 1 CBS, 2 FSN)
5. Oklahoma State: 7 (1 ABC, 1 TBS, 1 ESPN, 1 ESPNU, 1 CSTV, 2 FSN)
5. Texas Tech: 7 (1 ABC, 1 TBS, 2 CSTV, 1 NFL Network, 2 FSN)
9. KU: 6 (1 ABC, 1 ESPN, 4 FSN)
9. Colorado: 6 (1 ABC, 1 TBS, 1 ESPN Gameplan, 3 FSN)
11. Baylor: 5 (1 TBS, 4 FSN)
12. Iowa State: 4 (2 ABC, 1 ESPN, 1 FSN)

As you can see, there's a pretty fair disconnect between the top four teams and the next eight. While K-State, Okie State and Texas Tech are only one appearance out of the top four, several of their appearances came on stations that get much less penetration than ABC and ESPN, including ESPNU, CSTV, NFL Network, and PPV games. According to the Omaha World-Herald, it's even more unequal than you think (K-State received the least TV money last year??? How is that so?)

And that's where the problem lies. Changing the Big 12 bylaws requires a super-majority vote of 9 out of 12 schools (athletic directors). Those four teams on top aren't going to be very excited about giving up some money every year to the other eight teams in the conference. Texas AD DeLoss Dodds isn't for it (or wasn't in 2001, and I doubt he's changed his mind). Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman said on KC's 810 sports today he isn't for a revenue change (no word on what Steve Pederson thinks about it...or if he's even still alive). Bill Byrne is a former Nebraska guy and now at another of the top four money schools, so I doubt he's for the change. I have no idea what OU thinks about this, but there's little reason to believe they're for it.

Basically this is shaping up as a real showdown over Big 12 ideologies. Two factions have emerged, those who favor fully equal revenue sharing of all revenues (the schools outside the top four mentioned above) and the bigger schools. The bigger schools argue it's not fair to them to give up that money to the schools who don't earn TV appearances for the conference. It shouldn't surprise you that I don't see that as a real winner of an argument. First, the Big 10 shares all revenue equally, and it's really destroyed Ohio State and Michigan (or not). Actually, the Big 10 has done almost as well overall in football since the Big 12 was formed (three national titles for the Big 12, two for the Big 10, counting one each for Nebraska and Michigan in 1997). In basketball, the Big 10 has won one national title in that time, while the Big 12 has none. Second, there's a reason schools band together as conferences. The idea should be, in at least some ways, to benefit all members of the institutions. The top four schools from above don't want to give an inch on this issue, believing it would cause them irreparable harm.

That's a bunch of crap, really. Stay with me here and I'll demonstrate how little money the big schools would be giving up by sharing all TV revenue equally. First, here are the operating expenses for each Big 12 school, thanks to

1. Texas: $83,600,248
2. Oklahoma: $64,322,580
3. Nebraska: $63,695,480
4. Texas A&M: $61,419,536
5. Texas Tech: $53,337,768
6. KU: $47,554,572
7. Colorado: $45,731,544
8. Missouri: $45,184,836
9. Oklahoma State: $44,061,812
10. Baylor: $36,228,960
11. K-State: $34,834,468
12. Iowa State: $32,541,236

According to the Omaha World-Herald, the overall allocation in 2005-06 totalled about $90 million. If that total is shared equally, each school gets $7.5 million. As it is, Texas gets $9.68 million, while K-State gets $6.47 million.

Whoa. What the hell are we arguing about here? You're telling me Texas can't take a $2.18 million cut in revenue? That's a whopping two percent of its operating expenses. Meanwhile, even the school getting the smallest cut (K-State), only gets an extra $1 million. What exactly are you scared of, Texas? Is an extra $1 million to lowly K-State going to make or break you? Hell, one rich oilman in West Texas can make up that $2 million per year.

The problem is, the stakes get higher soon. The new Big 12 TV deal will be worth $480 million. If UT keeps getting 10 percent of that, they'll be raking in $48 million each year. If K-State keeps getting seven percent, they'll be getting $33 million each year. The rich keep getting richer, building bigger and better facilities, and forcing the smaller schools to break their banks to keep up. Now, if we all share that $480 million equally, everybody gets $40 million each year.

In my opinion, two things need to be done, and done soon. First, we have to get a new TV deal done. The new commissioner needs to know that the minute he takes his seat in Dallas, he needs to have a phone to his ear, connected to Bristol, CT, and he needs to bust ESPN's balls to get more TV for our teams. The Big 10 is going to its own network, we need to get ESPN to start showing more of our games and fewer Big 10 games. But even that isn't going to be easy. The big schools don't really care if we have more TV appearances or not. Almost all their games are already on TV, so more TV slots mean the smaller schools get on TV more and eat up more of the revenue.

Second, the presidents/chancellors and athletic directors of this conference need to authorize equal revenue sharing for ALL conference income. It's not going to be easy. It's going to require a vote from one of the top four to give up some money. Nebraska has the least to lose financially, but in terms of its division, it has the most to lose (four north division schools would gain money from equal sharing, only Colorado was above last year's median). Whomever it is, it has to get done, or we're going to run into more serious trouble than we're already in. If we truly are a conference, looking out for each other's interests and wanting everyone to get better, this has to happen.

On 810 today, both chancellor Perlman and AD Weiser noted, idly, the possibility of schools leaving the conference. Perlman noted that Nebraska wouldn't rule out the possibility of leaving the Big 12 (presumably to go to the Big 10) if forced to share revenue. Weiser indicated he's so fed up with the debate that, at this point, if someone says they "want to take their ball and go home" if forced to equally share revenue, he'd be happy to tell them to take their ball and leave. I'm not going to get into who could leave, and where they'd go, but it just illustrates how selfish some of the schools in this conference are, and how divisive the issue is.

I love the Big 12, just as I loved the Big 8 before it. This has been, and could be again, the best conference in the land. But to be the best, we're going to have to start acting like brothers, rather than enemies. If the big boys lose in this, will they throw a fit and go elsewhere? Or will they realize they're still far better off than the other schools and continue to play? Michigan and Ohio State have survived equal revenue sharing, there's no reason for me to believe Texas and Oklahoma can't do the same.

Monday, June 11, 2007

Big 12 South and Overall Conference Predictions

Before I begin, I'll preface this by admitting I'm not as familiar with the South teams as I am the North. I follow them, but I don't have as much in-depth knowledge of each team as your average football-crazed Texan. I'm sure justin will be along shortly to let me know what's wrong with my predictions, starting with why I didn't pick A&M to win the South.

That said, I'd be derelict in my blogging duties if I didn't tell you what I think of the Big 12 South teams, so here are my predictions.

1. Texas: I think some questions may remain about Colt McCoy's ability to stay healthy, but there's no question about his ability when he is healthy. The kid is flat out good, and we saw in the last two games last year his team wasn't the same without him. Oh, the offense they'll have, with McCoy, Jamaal Charles and Limas Sweed back in the picture. They definitely lost some big hosses up front, though, so we'll see how the new offensive line comes together.

The defense is the real question mark for me with this team. They lost their best players in Michael Griffin and Aaron Ross, not to mention DE Tim Crowder. Now we hear Robert Joseph is transferring after his legal issues, so we'll see if a team that was awful against the pass last year can get better using addition by subtraction. Throw in the fact that defensive coordinator Gene Chizik is now freezing his balls off in Ames, Iowa, and I may be nuts for picking this team to represent the South in San Antonio. That's why these are spring/summer predictions, I guess.

Predicted finish: 6-2
9/29, K-State: Win for UT. See my comments from the North predictions. Suffice it to say, K-State is still a fairly young team, with young coaches, trying to find its way. I'm hardly admitting the win last year in Manhattan was a fluke, but Austin ain't Manhattan.
10/6, vs. OU (in Dallas): Win for UT. The biggest game every year in the South comes early, which may be good for UT, with OU breaking in a new QB. Am I really predicting Mack Brown to make it three in a row against Bawb Stewps? I guess I am.
10/13, at Iowa State: Win for UT. Just because Chizik will know everything UT is doing on defense doesn't mean his players will be able to execute his game plan. Plus, it's early enough in the year that UT's players won't die of exposure on the Iowa plains.
10/20, at Baylor: Win for UT. As long as UT's players don't fall asleep during the pregame prayer, I have a feeling they'll be able to handle Baylor this year.
10/27, Nebraska: Win for UT. The 'Horns managed to pull one off in Lincoln, in the snow, last year, which was pretty impressive. Nebraska will be a little better than last year, but I don't see UT on the downward slide, and having the game in Austin will help with the crowd and the weather.
11/3, at Oklahoma State: Loss for UT. Ok, they're not invincible. At this point, the Horns will probably be the subject of some national title talk, but I see that ending in Stillwater.
11/10, Texas Tech: Win for UT. I'm tempted to pick Tech here, but the game's in Austin and Tech has some questions up front on defense. On the other hand, if UT's passing defense doesn't improve, I could see "veteran" (at Tech, anything more than one year for a QB qualifies as a grizzled vet) QB Graham Harrell torching UT for a victory.
11/23, at Texas A&M: Loss for UT. Dare I say it? Can Fran saws varsity's horns off two years in a row? If McCoy is healthy and UT is out for revenge, the Backyard Brawl could go to UT, but at this point I'm sticking with the Ags.

2. Oklahoma: Everyone's saying OU doesn't have a quarterback. I disagree. I don't think they have a proven quarterback. We'll see if Joey Halzle of Sam Bradford have what it takes to succeed in the Big 12. They get four non-con games and a trip to Boulder (where right now the fans are scarier than the team) to sort things out. It helps to have eight offensive starters back.

I don't have much opinion on OU's defense, other than noting they have seven starters back. Of course, the losses include CJ Ah You, Larry Birdine and Rufus Alexander. With the coaches they have, I don't expect much dropoff.

Predicted finish, 6-2:
9/29, at Colorado: Win for OU. See comments from other post and above. CU will be marginally better, but not to any great extent.
10/6, vs. UT (in Dallas): Loss for OU. See comments above.
10/13, vs. Missouri: Win for OU. Mizzou should be pretty good, even possibly the North champions, but I don't see them beating OU, even in Columbia. I'd like to think I'm wrong though...but I don't.
10/20, at Iowa State: Win for OU. See comments from other post. I think ISU is in for a struggle this year.
11/3, Texas A&M: Win for OU. The Aggies couldn't stop OU's ground attack in College Station last year, even with me helping out as the 12th Man. On top of that, if it comes down to Fran v. Stewps, it's not even a contest. Throw in the fact that it's in Gaylord Stadium (or whatever it's called) and the Sooners top the Aggies.
11/10, Baylor: Win for OU. Poor Bears.
11/17, at Texas Tech: Loss for OU. Tech has a proven starter at QB for the first time since 1897, and they had OU on the ropes in Norman last year before faltering. If nothing else, a Tech fan will throw a tortilla on the field, causing an OU player to slip on his way to a possible touchdown run.
11/24, Oklahoma State: Win for OU. Bedlam returns to Norman this year, and I think the Sooners have just enough for Mike Gundy's Cowboys this year. Better get that defense ready, though, because I doubt OU wants to get into a shootout with the gunslingers from Stillwater.

3. Oklahoma State: I think the Pokes break into the top half of the South this year behind Bobby Reid, Adarius Bowman and Dantrell Savage. This could be one sick offense. I really like watching this team, because it reminds me of the K-State offense under Snyder with the likes of Ell Roberson and Michael Bishop at quarterback and runners like Darren Sproles terrorizing Big 12 defenses.

The key to OSU being more successful this year obviously lies with the defense. The Pokes return seven starters, but only ranked ninth in the league in total defense. If the defensive line replacements (Marque Fountain and Nate Peterson) are as good as advertised, they should be at least as good as last year.

Predicted finish, 5-3:
9/22, vs. Texas Tech: Win for OSU. In a game where the over will probably be a good bet, I'm taking the Pokes at home. Tech's fairly experienced secondary may make life rough on Reid throwing, but that's hardly his only talent.
10/6, at Texas A&M: Loss for OSU. The Cowboys may have a hard time running their complicated offense and dealing with the Kyle Field noise, and A&M's experienced offense should be able to put up just enough points to sneak out a win.
10/13, at Nebraska: Loss for OSU. Last year the Pokes ran the Huskers out of Stillwater with an embarassing loss, and put Bill Callahan in hot water with Husker fans (at least for a week). However, it's another game where OSU will have to deal with a fairly loud crowd, not to mention a team looking for some revenge. Also, if I'm not mistaken, OSU hasn't won in Lincoln since 1960. Ouch.
10/20, vs. K-State: Win for OSU. One of those games where the venue switches, and the result switches. The Wildcat defense should be able to slow the Pokes down...for a while. We'll see if the Wildcat offense can give them any help.
11/3, vs. Texas: Win for OSU. Biggest win of the year for OSU. This could be a real shootout, but this time the Pokes have the firepower to take it, especially if UT's defense doesn't improve against the pass without Griffin and Ross.
11/10, vs. KU: Win for OSU. Umm, Adarius Bowman might have to leave this game from exhaustion if he plays like he did last year in Lawrence. Could he have 400 yards receiving?
11/17, at Baylor: Win for OSU. Okie State only put up 66 points last year on Baylor. They may not manage 60 in Waco, but the Bears will probably have a tough time holding them under 50.
11/24, at Oklahoma: Loss for OSU. Bitter pill to swallow at the end of the season, but at least they'll have a bowl game to look forward to. Also, I wouldn't count the Cowboys out of this one. They've beaten OU recently in Norman, and have the firepower to make life difficult on the Sooners.

4. Texas Tech: It says something about the South's depth that I'm getting to the four and five spots and thinking I must have made a horrible mistake to pick these teams this low. Then I look at the teams above them and can't see any way to move them up.

This should be an interesting year in Lubbock. For the first time in recorded history, Mike Leach has a quarterback with a year's starting experience (I mistakenly indicated they didn't in my North prediction post, sorry). On the other hand, TTU lost Joel Filani, Jarrett Hicks, and almost its entire offensive line. Leach, more than any other coach, has proven his system can win with almost any players plugged into spots. This will be a good test of that idea.

On defense, it's more of the same. The secondary has a lot of experience, but the defensive line lost all its starters and has only seven players on scholarship (cross those fingers in Lubbock against injuries...or maybe I should say cross those teeth).

I used to hate Tech, and in some ways I still do, but I discovered a newfound appreciation for Leach this winter, courtesy NFL Films and the local Lubbock news. Truly a mad scientist. Enjoy.

Predicted finish, 5-3:
9/22, at Oklahoma State. Loss for TTU, see comments above.
10/6, Iowa State. Win for TTU. Unless Chizik can take the field himself (and has some serious talent at every position), the Clones are gonna get buried.
10/13, vs. Texas A&M: Win for TTU. The Raiders went into Kyle Field and snuck out a win last year, we'll see if aTm can return the favor this year. I doubt it, but the Aggies will assuredly come to play.
10/20, at Missouri: Loss for TTU. Could be a real shootout, but I predict a drunken and crazed Mizzou student will charge the field and cause an accidental fumble by Tech, which will be the difference in the game.
10/27, vs. Colorado: Win for TTU. What the hell happened to Tech in Boulder last year? Whatever it was, I'm guessing it won't happen again, in spades.
11/3, at Baylor: Win for TTU. Now if it was a math competition, I might have a different answer, but I'm guessing they won't change the rules of football to incorporate academic skills anytime soon.
11/10, at Texas: Loss for TTU. See comments above.
11/17, vs. OU: Win for TTU. See comments above.

5. Texas A&M: Wow. Sorry Ags. I guess I'm probably predicting the final downfall of Dennis Franchione with a fifth-place division finish, but then again that probably doesn't make all of you sad. This year the Aggies will probably have their moments (as you'll see below), but won't be able to put it together consistently to make a run at the conference title game.

How am I predicting a team with 16 returning starters to finish next-to-last in the South? Well, first remember I'm the guy who picked Mizzou to win the North, that might explain something right there. The other explanations are that I don't think Stephen McGee can throw the ball out of a wet paper bag and Fran will probably kick a lot of PATs when he should be going to two-point conversions. Four key losses (Bullitt, Thornton, Warren and Jack) on defense don't help matters either.

Predicted finish, 4-4:
9/29, vs. Baylor. Win for A&M. The Bears have kind of been a thorn in the Ags' side lately, but it ain't happenin' in College Station.
10/6, vs. Oklahoma State. Win for A&M. I pick an A&M win despite the feeling this could be a lot like the early-season game against Tech last year, where A&M just couldn't quite get it done. But I think the Aggies do just enough to pull it out and, unfortunately, just enough to give their fans some serious hope before...
10/13, at Texas Tech: Loss for A&M. Tech won at Kyle last season, and I don't think they got much worse. Winning in Lubbock would be a big boost for aTm, but I don't see it happening.
10/20, at Nebraska: Loss for A&M. The noose may be starting to get tight around Fran's neck. Yeah, A&M had Nebraska all but beat last year, but this is this year and this isn't Kyle Field.
10/27, vs. KU: Win for A&M. Don't fuck this one up, Ags. And if you do, fire Fran on the spot.
11/3, at Oklahoma: Loss for A&M. Inconsistency strikes again. Win one, lose one, win two, lose two, whatever. I don't see a win in Norman this year.
11/10, at Missouri: Loss for A&M. This game will likely be decided by which team's coach does a better job of staying out of his own way. Mizzou has too much firepower to lost to A&M, especially in Columbia.
11/23, at Texas: Win for A&M. The ultimate irony may be that losing to A&M means every UT fan gets their wish if Bill Byrne decides to keep Fran on as coach because he's beat UT twice in a row.

6. Baylor: The bad news for the Bears is they lost their best player, punter Daniel Sepulveda. The even worse news is they also lost starting QB Shawn Bell. It's rare for the Bears to have two good players at one time, so losing those two hurts bad. Add that to the fact that this university is located in Waco, Texas, and you all have my deepest sympathy. Good luck this year, you crazy Branch-Davidians..err...Baptists.

Predicted finish, 1-7:
9/29, at Texas A&M: Loss for BU. Get ready to hear this phrase a lot.
10/6, vs. Colorado: Win for BU. An answer to the pregame prayer...the Buffs come to town, and BU makes it two in a row in the shithole over CU.
10/13, at KU: Loss for BU.
10/20, vs. Texas: Loss for BU.
10/27, at K-State: Loss for BU. If we blow this one, I will write an homage to Waco as the center of the universe on this site.
11/3, vs. Texas Tech: Loss for BU.
11/10, at Oklahoma: Loss for BU.
11/17, Oklahoma State: Loss for BU.

So all of that leaves us with a Big 12 Championship game matchup of Texas vs. Missouri. In San Antonio which, for you non-Texas aficionados, is only about 80 miles down the road from Austin. I'm predicting there will be a maximum of 800 Missouri fan in attendance. In spite of the overwhelming odds, Mizzou will come out strong, looking for all the world like they may pull the upset of the mighty Longhorns. Alas, Pinkel and Co. will remember who they are, and the result of their last trip to Texas (last year's Sun Bowl) and will promptly choke away a late lead in true MU Tiger fashion. But hey, at least they made it this far.

The next three months can't go fast enough.

Coming this week: Thoughts on possible Sprint Center tenants, and pictures from the K from the Royals big 17-5 win over Philadelphia on Sunday. Also, if I'm lucky, maybe some pics from the I-70 Series, which starts tomorrow.

Saturday, June 9, 2007

National Champion!

K-State sophomore Scott Sellers is the NCAA outdoor high jump champion. Way to go, Scott!

Thursday, June 7, 2007

What's up with the Wichita Eagle?

As good a job as I did all spring covering the track and field team, it's kind of inexcusable that I would miss such big news for so long. K-State high jumper Scott Sellers was named the Big 12 Performer of the Year, as well as the Midwest District track athlete of the year. Congratulations Scott!

This weekend, Sellers and fellow high jumper Kyle Lancaster are representing the Purple and White in Sacramento at the NCAA Outdoor Track and Field Championships. The two advanced to Friday's finals in the high jump (and are joined there by women's high jumper Kaylene Wagner. What's up with all these Cats who have ups?). Updates to come this weekend on how they finish.


Jeffrey Martin from the Wichita Eagle recently wrote an article in which an "advisor and trainer" (Hey Jeffrey, in j-school, they taught me it's "adviser") to two Wichita East football players who are highly recruited. Apparently, Brian Butler (the "advisor and trainer") has a bone to pick with K-State and KU fans who think he's not doing enough to funnel top-notch Wichita talent to the in-state schools, while he thinks K-State and KU don't recruit Kansas heavily enough.


First of all, this whole thing is really stupid on a lot of levels. Can we please move past the idea that one or a few men have almighty power over the lives of 17-year-old high school students? College football fans need to realize this guy isn't going to make up Arthur and Bryce Brown's mind for them. He might advise them that one path is better than another, but the ultimate decision is up to the kid and his family.

Second, I'm trying to figure out what cut of grass this guy is smoking, because it must be good. K-State and KU don't recruit Kansas heavily enough? Did I really read that right? I must have, here's the direct language of the article...

According to Butler, the logic in the past was why take a chance on a second-tier prospect from Kansas when a passed-over, fourth-tier kid from Texas was available? Send the Kansan to a junior college --"the farm system," Butler said -- and take the Texan, if for no other reason than perception.

I don't have the time, patience, or stomach to look up the beaks' football roster for the last few years to determine how many Kansas players it contained. But here's a look at the last few K-State rosters:

2007: 41 players from Kansas high schools, 39.8% of the roster.
2006: 50 players from Kansas high schools, 46.8% of the roster.
Those are the two rosters from Ron Prince's first two squads. Butler indicated in the story the attitude of disfavoring Kansas players "still exists under Ron Prince" but he thought it was worse under Bill Snyder. So just for comparison sake, here's the roster of the 2003 team that won the Big 12 Championship.

2003: 60 players from Kansas high schools, 46.5% of the roster.

Things have clearly gone downhill from the Bill Snyder era as far as recruiting Kansas players.

Butler is particularly irked that the in-state BCS conference programs pass over Kansas kids for some fourth-rate Texas kid that A&M and UT (and presumably Tech, Baylor and Houston) don't want. In particular, Butler is mad that both K-State and KU didn't offer Frank Delarue, a running back from Wichita.

Well, for one thing, the level of play in Texas is so much higher than it is in Kansas that these Texas kids will have played against better opposition than the average Kansas kid. Also, as to Delarue, never mind the fact that he only had offers from two MAC schools. Never mind the fact we signed James Johnson (beat Texas A&M out for him) and Leon Patton (a freshman) last year. Our squad is not hurting for running backs, so why the hell would we compete with a couple MAC schools for a kid from Wichita?

As the title of the article says, sometimes in-state players are too good to stay home. Right now K-State is not on a level with USC and the other elite programs from whom the Browns have offers. I can't fault them for wanting to go out of state. But if that's the case, Brian Butler (and his mouthpiece, Jeffrey Martin) need to stop bitching about K-State not being loyal to in-state players, especially when I just empirically demonstrated that they are. We've offered the Browns scholarships. We want them in Manhattan. But in-state players leave. I understand that. Scott Frost left Nebraska to go to Stanford (for a while). Barry Sanders left Wichita to go to Oklahoma State. That's fine, I don't have a problem with it.

But let's leave the irresponsible, non-fact-based journalism to the tabloids. If you're going to say K-State and KU aren't loyal to in-state players, come up with more than one example, and admit that K-State and (I assume) KU have an overwhelming number of Kansas kids on their roster. We do what we can for Kansas kids.

Does Brian Butler?

No sports this morning, sorry

Authorities found the body of Kelsey Smith yesterday near Longview Lake, which is just south of Kansas City. Also, an Olathe man was arrested in connection with the abduction and homicide.

Johnson County, Kan., attorney general Phill Kline announced his office would file charges. Whoa there, cowboy. I want to see this guy fried as much as anyone else, but let's think about this a moment. I'm not sure this is a capital case anyway, but the Kansas death penalty is in a severe state of flux right now. Conversely, the Missouri death penalty just got the go-ahead from the Eighth Circuit. On top of all that, Phill, just because the girl was abducted in JoCo doesn't mean she was killed there. Her body was found in Missouri, so there's a good chance she died there.

If there's any possibility of it, try this guy in Jackson County, Mo. Phill Kline is a fucking idiot, and this is one homicide case I don't want to see screwed up.

God's speed to Kelsey Smith's family, and may justice be swift for Edwin Hall.

(Photos courtesy the Kansas City Star and

Tuesday, June 5, 2007

More basketball news

Frank Martin and the basketball team have had some new developments this week. In addition to having one of the top-rated classes of incoming recruits, the team added Miami point guard Denis Clemente.

Sounds like just what we need. A fast point guard who can make things happen. Not to mention, he scored 9.8 ppg, shot 43.5% from the field and 38% from three-point range. Clemente is also a 73% free-throw shooter, and had 3.3 assists per game. On the other hand, he was suspended for UM's first game last year, and was suspended late in the year. The article (and 610 sports here in KC) indicated the problems were related to class attendance, like that wasn't a big deal.

I hope our coaches don't think that's not a big deal. I'm happy to have a prospectively good player added to the roster, especially at a spot where we could use some help. But a kid who doesn't go to class is a risk. Even more, that COULD (not saying it is) be the sign of a deeper attitude problem. I hope I'm wrong. I hope Martin got an assurance from Clemente that the problems were behind him, as well as some hard evidence (for example, his grades) that he is serious about it. We'll see.

The team also released part of the schedule for next year. Most of the attention is focused on the Old Spice Classic, where the Cats will open up play with George Mason. I hope that's not the headliner game of the non-conference, though. Yeah, GMU was the darling of the Big Dance two years ago, but they were an unimpressive 18-15 last year, and did not make the NCAA Tournament. If the Cats get by the Patriots, they could face Villanova, which would be a good test early in the season (not to mention a possible resume-boosting win).

Sportsradio here in KC today mentioned K-State and Notre Dame may face off this year on the hardwood. No linky on that one, sorry.

Friday, June 1, 2007

One of the greatest athletes ever

Last weekend, Joe Posnanski wrote a great piece about Bo Jackson. Hard as it may be to believe, it's been 20 years since Bo Jackson debuted with the Royals. The column runs down some of the more amazing things Bo did in baseball, as well as football. It really is a shame for people of my generation that Bo got hurt like he did. He had the pure physical ability to be one of the greatest athletes of all time (5.4 yards per carry in the NFL? Ridonkulous). I know my dad has never stopped talking about his amazement at seeing Bo throw a strike from the warning track to home plate, on a frozen rope. For your enjoyment, here are some photos and videos of Bo...

Here's some football video of Bo, including his classic flattening of the Boz...

Royals Bo Jackson