goat's picture

goat


MEMBER SINCE   January 27, 2015

Recent Activity

Comment 27 Jul 2020

The main problem with the Shoe's crowd noise isn't the peak, it's the average.  The place can get really intimidating for big moments of big games.  But our fans are not great at maintaining that level for three hours.

Agree with this. I think 2018 stands out for a lot people because it was an exception. 

Comment 27 Jul 2020

2018 Michigan was rowdy as hell in the stadium. It definitely felt like the crowd had chip on its shoulder. Probably the most fun I've had at a game. 

Earthquake games I can think of that I attended: 2009 USC basically the whole game, 2005 Texas especially after AJ Hawk's interception in the first half, 2003 NC State after the last play, and 2002 PSU after the Gamble pick. 

Comment 16 Jun 2020

I don't see the distinction. Equity is supposed to bear risks, including global pandemics. Its reward for bearing risk is profit. In the case of baseball, that means lavish profits in most years. The players get what they bargain for, and ownership gets everything else. 

To raise my point from earlier: imagine of 2020 was not the year of the plague, but instead was the year baseball surged in popularity and profitability. Would the owners cut a big fat bonus check to all the players? hell no. The owners don't expect to share profits when times are good, why do they expect to share "losses" (lets be real, no one is losing money, just making less than they would have) when times are tough?

Comment 16 Jun 2020

So the deal on the table is the owners take a loss while the players get 80% prorated? 

This is not the offer on the table. If the owners were really going to lose money the season would've been cancelled already.

Comment 16 Jun 2020

Baseball isn't going to lose money this year. If it was we wouldn't be having this discussion, the season would already be cancelled.

To answer your question though, if I owned a multi-billion dollar business that relied on fan interest, I would take a hit this year to make sure I maintained that interest long term. Baseball could've had opening day on the 4th of July. Imagine how great that would've been for the sport and the country. It's a huge lost opportunity. 

In any normal industry, employees take pay cuts when recessions hit or even risk being furloughed.

This is not the truism you make it out to be. Certainly it's not the case in industries with high profit margins and strong labor. MLB isn't a restaurant chain. It doesn't need players to take paycuts to survive the recession.

You do make one point that I agree with though: whether there is a season or not is entirely within the hands of the owners.  

Comment 16 Jun 2020

I'm deeply skeptical of the owners' claims that they would lose money from playing games this season. Those claims are all based on the notion that gate receipts, concessions, in-stadium merchandise sales, etc. are an enormous percentage of MLB's revenue. The fact that so many clubs play in half-empty (or less) stadiums every single game yet are worth in the billion-dollar range suggests otherwise. The fact that the owners haven't simply cancelled the season also suggests there's no real risk of them being in the red on a game-to-game basis. 

I guess it comes down to who you believe, the guys who have the personality it takes to become a billionaire, or the guys who play a game for a living. 

Comment 16 Jun 2020

Players have mortgages, utilities, groceries, school bills, cars, netflix subscriptions, etc., to pay for. Like any other worker, they are taking a loss as long as they aren't getting paid. 

I saw the $640,000 loss per game number coming from the owners, I didn't see anywhere that the players agreed with it. I would be shocked if they had, because the number is literally unbelievable. But even if it's true, it doesn't make the owners' position more reasonable. They want to sell fans a watered-down product not for safety reasons, but for their own bottom line. And they are demanding the players help pay for it.  

Comment 16 Jun 2020

So if owners are making far less or even losing money on the season, why would the players deserve a 1-1 ratio on pay?  Wouldn't they be expected to take a cut?  Everyone else on the planet it.  So if they were making $100 for playing 100 games, why should they make $50 for playing 50 games when everyone else is taking a hit?  $45 for 50 games is less, yeah, but doesn't suck.

Because that's the difference between equity and labor. If, in a given year, baseball has a spectacularly successful season profits wise, you won't see the owners suddenly cutting bonus checks to the players. Why should the players subsidize the owners in down years?

Also, people in other lines of work are losing money because they aren't working, just like the players. I'm sure some workers who have gone back to work have taken paycuts, but it's not anywhere near so widespread as you make it sound.

In any event, baseball's owners lack the legal or moral high ground here. If they have to take losses for one year, that's capitalism. 

Comment 16 Jun 2020

Players on the other hand are not losing a penny in the current situation.

This is factually incorrect. Every game that isn't played is money lost for the players.  If they play 81 games, the players get 50% of their salary, if they play 40  games they get ~25%, etc. 

Comment 16 Jun 2020

It's their money to do what they please with, they literally owe the players nothing outside of any agreed on contract.

That's the thing though, they are trying to stiff the players on their agreed contract.

If you and I make a contract where I pay you to provide a service, and then market forces change so that I don't get as much money as I planned on getting from your services, you wouldn't much like it if I demanded we tear up the contract so I can pay you less money for the the same services. That's what the owners are doing. They are trying to shift the costs associated with the risk of ownership onto the players.

What's really going on is that the owners have realized the most profitable thing for them to do is have the playoffs and as few regular season games as possible. They can't just come out and say that's what they want to do because the fans and players would revolt. So instead they've ginned up a labor dispute to try and shift the public backlash to the players. 

Comment 15 Apr 2020

Thanks Berserkr! Always appreciate your insight into the lacrosse program. I think its interesting you mention the lacrosse-specific stadium as being a potentially big factor in future success. What are your thoughts on the Horseshoe as a lacrosse venue? I went to the first game (I think) in the shoe against Navy in 2008 when we barely filled up a handful of sections in AA Deck, but I've also been to a few of the games when we had 60,000 plus prior to the spring game.

P.S. sorry to be that guy, but Woody's name was Wayne Woodrow Hayes, not Woodrow Wilson Hayes. 

Comment 01 Mar 2019

This is better, but still not what we need. In-game ejections should go away. Targeting or borderline-targeting plays should be reviewed by the conferences every Sunday, as a whole, by a small committee. Any ejections (i suppose suspension would be a better word at this point), if warranted, should be issued then.  

This would improve the consistency of the calls, ensure each hit is given a thorough review without disrupting play, remove concerns over whether ejections are being issued (or withheld) based on the potential effect on the game being played, and guarantee that every ejection results the same penalty. 

Comment 21 Feb 2019

Pretty sure a big chunk of this would replace Beekman Park. Waterman Ag looks safe, because the northern border looks a lot like Lane Avenue. The southern border of the project looks like Kinnear. Guessing the other borders are Kenny and North Star. 

Lots of good memories at Beekman playing baseball as a kid and intramural sports as an OSU student. I'll bummed if it gets replaced with...this.

Comment 11 Feb 2019

Count me as one of those who believe we did not have the best man for the job at linebacker coach the last two years. 

With that in mind, I'm going to try to look at all the players at LB with a fresh set of eyes this year. Hopefully OP is on to something and we'll see some major steps forward for Werner (and all the other LBs)

Comment 15 Jan 2019

What a bizarre take. Bill Davis isn't a bad coach because people keep hiring him? Bill Davis isn't a bad coach because Fick had some five stars that didn't turn into world beaters? (and what an odd choice of examples, as both Sabino and Grant were captains and solid starters by their senior years on an undefeated team and a national championship team, respectively).

Maybe Davis isn't a bad NFL coach. But we know the last two years were the worst we've had at linebacker since at least 2000. And we know the roster is stacked with linebackers who were very highly recruited. Yes, it's possible some of them are busts. But I think it's far more likely that Bill Davis just doesn't know how to coach linebackers.  

Comment 09 Jan 2019

Am I reading the chart correctly that he's asserting that OSU lost half a billion dollars in "value" (33% of its total!) in one year? A year in which we went 13-1 and won a Big Ten championship?

The amount we supposedly lost is greater than the entire "value" of all but thirteen programs in the country. 

This is a silly exercise from start to finish. 

Comment 24 Oct 2018

^^^Thread over. Either we improve enough to beat Michigan State and Michigan or we don't and lose to one or both. 

If the former, we crush whoever makes it out of the west, which is unlikely to be Purdue in any event. If the latter, we won't be in Indy. 

Given that the problems areas on this team have been obvious since game 1, right now it's hard to have faith that this group of coaches can get things fixed at this point in the season. I'd love to be wrong. 

Comment 11 Oct 2018

3:30 would be the best of both worlds--early enough that cold isn't a major factor, late enough that the crowd is awake and you get to play the second half under the lights. 

2006 was a 3:30 start and it was amazing. 

Comment 05 Oct 2018

Alabama is not the problem. There have always been teams that are so good it's boring. 

If you're worried about butts in seats, there are three easy fixes:  1) stop playing body bag games; 2) stop jacking ticket prices up; and 3) reduce the number and duration of commercial breaks.

The product on the field is as good as its ever been; the problem is that it's watered down and overpriced. 

Comment 11 Nov 2017

For real. Take it a step further even: imagine they switched teams so urban is coaching us and tress is coaching florida. I think we all know the result of that game.

Comment 26 Jul 2016

@Kyle: From campus outward, and just off the top of my head; Adriatico's, Rotolo's, Panzera's, Tommy's (Upper Arlington edition). I'll add more as I think of them.