Bacon's new book not kind to Michigan
Listening to the podcast from the WTKA show this morning and on the segment 07 podcast they were talking about how "the folks in Ann Arbor and Happy Valley aren't going to like it very much".
The title of the book is Fourth and Long: The battle for the soul of college football.
Gaggity gag. My guess is that it is more whining from Bacon about money side of college athletics.
News flash: college athletics is a business. Like what he does with Michigan history and the stuff he has wrote ESPECIALLY Bo's Lasting Lessons. Seems any book of his that has "and long" in the title I need to avoid.
This thread just reminded me that it is lunch time. Thank you for that.
If you're doing it right then bacon is dessert.
If you're doing it right, you also eat dessert first.
As long as it is fair criticism. He does care about the school.
Don't kid yourself, he cares about getting paid far more.
Write a book or two that ruffles feathers in one of fan bases in the country, and you are going to sell books. I wish John Bacon went back to being only a professor.
The next post I read of yours that is fully devoid of self-righteous bitching will be the first.
Yeah, heaven forbid someone go against the grain around here.
Just because you're being a contrarian, doesn't make you more insightful than the rest of the board.
You do realize that to become a professor, one must publish? Bacon happens to be a professor of American Culture and Sports Management, so a critique of what is supposed to be amateur athletics becoming a business fits neatly within that niche. Agree with him or not, saying that you wish he "went back to being only a professor" is just willfully ignorant of what professors do.
I'm all for defending John Bacon. I took both of his classes at Michigan. But John Bacon is not a professor. His appointments at Michigan (and, to my knowledge, the other schools he has taught at) have always been as a lecturer, which is about as low on the totem pole as you can get. He is not on a tenure track. He does not have a PhD, nor am I aware that he even has his MA. His publications are not academic publications. They don't count towards anything in terms of the academy.
Teaching college classes does not equal professor.
on the topic than Bacon, even as a lowly lecturer. There are many professors who couldn't outhink the guy driving my subway car.
John is an "instructor," isn't he? Or is he a "lecturer"? And, he has a similar position at Northwestern's Medill School. Right?
I don't think John is a Prof; he's not tenured. And therefore peculiarly vulnerable, if he couldn't defend his work. Is he a U-M Ph.D. candidate? What we know, for certain, is that he's one of the most popular teachers at Michigan, and one of the most popular speakers on the Michigan-alumni banquet circuit.
John U. Bacon has defended Three and Out in speeches and meetings across the country, and in ever major city in this state. In interview after interview. His detractors -- the real ones, not the anonymous message board posters -- have never once explained themselves. As John himself wrote, "The Free Press, which buys its ink by the barrel [a tip of the cap to the old quote -- Twain's? -- "Never pick a fight with people who buy ink by the barrel."] has not spent one drop responding to my reporting on their story in Three and Out."
What a disappointment some of this Board's members have become. Such fan-boyz. Can't anyone wait to read a book before judging it? You boyz can't even wait to judge this book by the cover! You haven't seen the cover!
I'm tempted to say something very general, like This blog used to be so much smarter. But the blog, and the front-page content is still pretty good. Brian Cook hasn't lost his touch. It's the Hokeamaniac fan boyz who have lost their grip.
Bacon is a journalist. He has a Master's in Education, but I don't think he has any specialized training in journalism except later on after he had begun working. He was an undergraduate History major at Michigan.
I agree that the OP (although this is Board-worthy news) might want to think about waiting for the book to come out before making assumptions about it based on non-specific, second-hand information coming from Dan Wetzel -- not that I have anything against Wetzel, but he would want to portray Bacon as supporting his general POV.
If it follows Bacon's general approach, the book will be long on narrative and information, but it will be up to the reader to draw conclusions from it.
I personally find his approach frustrating, as I'd prefer he do both -- provide the story but also make more of an effort to make sense of it. I want to know what he thinks about what he's seen and heard. If he's done it right, I can apply my own critical-thinking skills to decide if I agree with him.
I agree with your basic point (see above), but the derogatory term "fanboy" has to be the weakest brew ever served on the internet. Even more true for the idiotic variant you employ here.
Bacon has been a lecturer at the university - really low pay:
I'm not sure what is up with your posts, but every one of them seems manufactured from the "whiny 14-year-old who just discovered Reddit" factory.
What gross excesses? The only fair way to deal with the situation is to cap AD and coaching pay. All other revenues are turned back into the school in the form of funding for other sports. It's true that college athletic departments are getting greedy, but the greed ends up being sunk back into an arms race to stay relevant, and to stay solvent. Most departments are in the red.
If you think the securities industry is well regulated and without excess, oh boy do I have a start up to sell ya :)
few corners of society that can claim to be well regulated and without excess.
Personally I enjoy the fact the Athletic Department has the money to buy a small or moderate sized country (possibly more if they work the donors hard, be afraid Canada).
As long as we abstain from crass money grabs or other signs of being noveau rich and maintain the proper old money attitude, it's all good. Old Money for example does not allow a dude in a curly fries suit to attend their event. By the way, to any Arby executives reading this, the fact it was near impossible to get certain types of Michigan gear with your damn hat on it has ensured I will go a gas station and live off beef jerky, bottled water, and candy bars rather than ever giving you another dollar.
Your use of "gaggidy gag" is probably more gag worthy than anything in his book.
I'm not surprised.
So you'd be OK with advertising in Michigan Stadium.
Not inside the stadium but it already is inside the gates. Marathon, Meijer, StubHub ads are all around the concourse. It's everywhere but inside Michigan Stadium. Crisler has it, Yost has had it for years.
I suspect some of this book will include complaining about the ticket prices. Those high prices keep the ads off the scoreboards.
Ad money would in no way find its way into ticket holders' pockets. Our ticket prices will remain comparable to any other big time program, or else they're "under valued".
in that advertising inside or outside the stadium will have any impact on the price of tickets.
Dave Brandon has done everything to maximize profits coming into the program. He will continue to try to charge what the market will bear for 110,000 tickets. Ticket prices will continue to rise until he sees demand drop to the point where the department struggles to sell the last few hundred tickets. We've seen this in the ticket prices, the PSD's and with the suites.
And conversely, if a new revenue source is developed (like advertising on the scoreboard), he is not going to discount ticket prices one cent to offset it. That advertising has no impact on ticket prices - the are totally independent revenue streams.
But this is also unrelated to what other programs do, but since Ohio State, Alabama, Texas, etc. are selling a similar product, in a similar volume, to a similar audience, there is going to be a similar end result.
"Insofar as the amount people are prepared to pay for a product represents its value, price is also a measure of value."
Dave Brandon does not set the price, the market sets the price. As long as people continue to pay for season tickets, "dynamic pricing" will contiue to keep prices high.
Fairly simple actually.
In this sense, Dave Brandon (ie, supply of tickets and its pricing) IS part of "the market." The demand side of the market does not set the price all by itself. In its simplest form, it takes two, and Dave Brandon definitely has a role in setting the price. If he was like his predecessors Bill Martin and Tom Goss, he would not push the envelope and thus not maximize revenues. The previous ADs were not very aggressive in their pricing strategy; nor was Don Canham.
Hence the bazillion consecutive sellout games that Michigan Stadium has had since, what, 1970. This, and long waiting lists, are complete indications that profits were not being maximized, and that was all due to the policies of the AD, not the demand side of the equation. The pricing envelop was not pushed hard in order to maximize revenues and hence, given the virtual zero marginal costs, profits.
Prices rise only if you have to have a seller that is willing to risk reduced demand (and in this case, a loss in good will amongst the community). It is important to note that "reduced demand" does not necessitate reduced sales if the demand still outpaces supply. Brandon has understood that he could raise prices, reduce demand, still sell out Michigan Stadium, and make a lot more per game.
DB sets the "initial" price. However, the market sets the price. Stubhub, Craigslist, Scalper guy on State St (my favorite) all factor in to the price. The price will fluctuate depending on many factors, weather, opponent, supply etc.
Why do you think so many season ticketholder sold their ohio tickets to ohio fans in 2009? They (season ticket holders) determined the cash value of the ticket was worth more to them than watching the game. Some people (us) did not value the ticket so we sold them to others (ohio) who did value the game and paid a premium for the tickets.
We are a very unique fanbase. We have the best stadium, the best band, the best game-day experience and dare I say, the best football team in history. So the value of the tickets is higher than most others even though we have the largest supply.
If we cut 30,000 seats, the tickets would cost $300-400 for Indiana. The ohio game would yield over $500. However, I suspect having the largest stadium (supply) has its value in other forms of revenue (advertising).
I would like to know how much revenue is generated for the ads outside the stadium. I would guess it is a pretty penny. By not having advertising inside the stadium, that raises the value for the ads outside the stadium for all 114,480 to see.
Why do you think so many season ticketholder sold their ohio tickets to ohio fans in 2009?
Wrong. By and large, it wasn't faithless "season ticketholders" who sold tickets for the Ohio State game in 2009. We've been through this several times. No; it was a phenomenon of the Athletic Department's sale of "banked" tickets during the short period when they did not want to sell them as season tickets because of the pending reduction of the number of seats in the main bowl when seating spaces and aisles were widened. A flood of tickets went on to the secondary market, and ticket brokers sold them to whoever was willing to pay.
Yeah. Rich people don't stay rich by not maximizing profit sources. I'm fairly certain we'll see advertising in the stadium from seats that cost $200/game. There is absolutely no reason for Brandon not to do so until the supply exceeds demand.
I want something spicy but healthy.....what we thinking?
He no longer can just use Bo's good name to sell books
I haven't read the new one for good reason. But give us a break, Bacon is in the business of selling books. From those who know him he's been out over promoting himself for a long long time. He used hearsay and speculative controversy to sell his RR book and he'll do the same again. Nothing is sacred.
If you're going to accuse somone of impropriety and deceit to make money, don't be dishonest about it. Bacon got a hefty amount of exclusive access to write "Three and Out," and dismissing everything he learned (or TRIED to learn...remember that Lloyd Carr declined to offer anything of substance for the book) as "hearsay and speculative controversy" is disingenuous and reeks of resentment.
put a different way, I don't know how much of 3 & Out of "hearsay and speculation," I just know that it was a spectacularly average read with very little original insight and a staggering inability to capture, or even really identify, important moments both on and off the field. You would have never guessed he had inside access to some very critical moments in the Rodriguez era but he would have you believe that he could speak as a witness to private Rodriguez family moments where he could not possibly have been present. In short, it was pretty much a hot mess. If his new offering is about as good as his previous effort I think I will pass.
That's not "putting" the original attack on Bacon "another way," it's tacking towards a totally different criticism.
1. Carr didn't talk with Bacon cuz he didn't want to point fingers.
2. Bacon opted for the most controversial option.
3. Bacon's approach was biased.
Each of your assertions are what rank speculation actually looks like. Bacon sourced his book--your post, not so much.
Definition of HEARSAY EVIDENCE
: evidence based not on a witness's personal knowledge but on another's statement not made under oath.
He reports on most of the stuff in the book from what Rich tells him. That's kinda of the definition of hearsay. He tells us what happened in the Rich/Lloyd/Martin meeting he wasn't at. He tells us what Coleman did and said to Martin about things. He wasn't present for any of it. Since he has no transcripts to produce recording what was said, a large, large portion of the book is hearsay. To say otherwise isn't only disingenuous, it makes one wonder if you know what it really means.
(And there's lots of speculation, particularly in the controversal areas, but I'm not sure I'd say it's a majority by any stretch.)
You completely miss the point about what "hearsay evidence" is. Rodriguez was at the meeting with Carr and Martin, and was present for what MSC told RR. To say that Rodriquez (the wtiness) is just providing hearsay evidence is absurd.
And Bacon can't be the witness to anything except what he was present for.
In order to accuse Bacon of using hearsay evidence, you have to show that he is relying on a witness that is simply relaying something that witness heard from someone else. To say otherwise isn't only disingenuous, it makes one wonder if you know what it really means.
Is translated into hearsay and specualtion.
So, "BoAndHokeFan," if you didn't actually read the book, how do you know that he used "hearsay and speculative controversy" in it?
Well, considering he was granted quite a bit of access to "3 and Out" and most people involved with program admit that it was a fairly balanced book, I'm going to go with the noted author and journalist over anonymous internet poster when it comes to credibility.
Do you mean Three and Out as your other "and Long" book? Three and Out was a really, really good book, if for no other reason than it gave unprecedented access to a program. The fact that it covered such a tumultuous time in Michigan was a coincidence that happened after he was granted access (it probably wouldn't have happened the other way around.) Despite having unlimited access, Bacon still presented the information he had fairly, and if anything in a pro-Michigan, pro-Rich Rod way. It is anything but just an airing of dirt on the program.