Open Letter from New Orleans Saints Fans To The City of Miami
This is a great read. (Hat tip @satchkow)
Share ThisDear Miami,
The Saints are coming. And so are we, their loyal, long-suffering and slightly discombobulated Super Bowl-bound fans.
While there’s still time to prepare — although a few hard-core Who Dats will be trickling in early, most of us won’t arrive until Thursday or Friday — we thought we’d give you a heads-up about what you should expect.First things first: You need more beer.
Yeah, we know. You ordered extra. You think you have more than any group of humans could possibly consume in one week. Trust us. You don’t.
New Orleans was a drinking town long before the Saints drove us to drink. But it turns out beer tastes better when we’re winning. (Who knew?) So let’s just say we’re thirsty for more than a championship; adjust your stockpiles accordingly.
And look. When we ask you for a go-cup, be nice to us. We don’t even know what “open-container law” means. Is that anything like “last call”?
It’s Carnival season in New Orleans (that’s Mardi Gras to you), and we’ll be taking the celebration on the road. So don’t be startled if we throw stuff at you as we walk past; that’s just our way of saying hello.
Oh, and sorry in advance about those beads we leave dangling from your palm trees. We just can’t help ourselves.
February is also crawfish season, and you can be sure that more than one enterprising tailgater will figure out a way to transport a couple sacks of live mudbugs and a boiling pot to Miami.When the dude in the Who Dat 2010 The National Football League All Rights Reserved T-shirt asks if you want to suck da head and pinch da tail, resist the urge to punch him. He’s not propositioning you. He’s inviting you to dinner.
And if you see a big Cajun guy who looks exactly like an old Saints quarterback walking around town in a dress ” don’t ask. It’s a long story.
We know that crowd control is a major concern for any Super Bowl host city. Our advice? Put away the riot gear.
Reason No. 1: Indianapolis is going to lose, and their fans are way too dull to start a riot.
Reason No. 2: New Orleans showed the world on Sunday that we know how to throw a victory party. We don’t burn cars. We dance on them.
Reason No. 3: Even if we did lose, which we won’t, leaving the stadium would be like leaving a funeral, and our typical response to that is to have a parade.Speaking of which: If you happen to see a brass band roll by, followed by a line of folks waving their handkerchiefs, you’re not supposed to just stand there and watch. As our own Irma Thomas would say: Get your backfield in motion.
And hey, Mister DJ! Yes, we know you’ve already played that stupid Ying Yang Twins song 10 times tonight, but indulge us just one more time.
To us, “Halftime (Stand Up and Get Crunk)” isn’t just a song; it’s 576 points of good memories. It’s the sound of a Drew Brees touchdown pass to Devery Henderson, a Pierre Thomas dive for first down on 4th-and-1, a Garrett Hartley field goal sailing through the uprights in overtime.
It’s what a championship sounds like. You may get sick of hearing it. We won’t. Encore, dammit.
Inside Sun Life Stadium, you may find your ears ringing more than usual. We’re louder than other fans. Seven thousand of ours sound like 70,000 of theirs.
Don’t believe us? Ask the 12th man in the Vikings huddle.
Some people think it’s just the Dome that heightens our volume. But you’re about to discover a little secret: We can scream loud enough to make your head explode, indoors or out.
It’s not the roof. It’s the heart.
Well, OK, and the beer.
Don’t be surprised if there are more Saints fans outside the stadium than inside. A lot of us are coming just to say we were part of history, even if we can’t witness it up close. The Saints are family to us, and you know how it is with family: We want to be there for them, whether they really need us or not. Because we know our presence will mean something to them, whether they can see us or not.
Come to think of it, seeing as how you’re taking us in for the week, we pretty much regard you as family, too. So we’re warning you now: If you’re within hugging distance, you’re fair game.
Hugging strangers is a proud Who Dat tradition, right up there with crying when we win.
Most sports fans cry when their teams lose. Not us. We’ve been losing gracefully and with good humor for 43 years. Tragedy and disappointment don’t faze us. It’s success that makes us go to pieces.
Hurricane Katrina? We got that under control. The Saints in the Super Bowl? SOMEBODY CALL A PARAMEDIC!!!
So anyway, don’t let the tears of joy freak you out. We’re just ” disoriented”.
OK. Let’s review:
Order more beer. Throw me something, mister. Suck da heads. Wear da dress. Stand up. Get crunk. Hug it out. Protect your eardrums. Pass the Kleenex. Hoist the trophy. See y’all at the victory party.
Faithfully yours,
The Who Dat Nation
A Redskins Fan Reflects On A Season Lost Before It Started….
I was going to blog about how well Jason Campbell is playing or how Jim Zorn’s playcalling has contributed to the Redskins woes in the red zone or Zorn’s job security….but what’s the point? This season was over before it started just like every season has been over since Dan Snyder bought the Washington Redskins.
Living in the Bay Area, I was reminded of an column I read by local sports columnist Tim Kawakami at the time of Zorn’s hiring. Kawakami used his one interaction with Zorn to conclude that Zorn to the Redskins was “probably the worst NFL hire of all-time”. That’s quite a statement coming from someone who covers the Al Davis’ Raiders full time.
Kawakami, after his brief interaction with Zorn, described him as:
“over-emotional, antsy, defensive and very short on the ability to communicate general NFL knowledge…”
…and after adding a number of other colorful adjectives summed it all up with:
“Zorn is the worst: Least prepared, worst communicator, most obvious risk for total failure, right from Day 1.”
And that’s certainly consistent with the impression I got based on the NFL Network’s “Sound FX” segment where they mic’ed both Zorn and Jason Campbell. Zorn comes off as a goof-ball who is guessing more than coaching. Feeling more than thinking. Zorn sounded nothing like a Joe Gibbs, Bill Belichick, or Bill Parcells.
And Zorn, who was never a coordinator before, is coaching the quarterbacks, calling the plays and trying to be a head coach at the same time. Having never taken on any of those responsibilities before, expecting Zorn to be able to successfully assume all of them at once seems like a short-sighted decision at best. None of Snyder, Cerrato or Zorn should have been ok with that arrangement.
Don’t get me wrong, I like Jim Zorn the person. He’s absolutely the kind of guy I’d like to have a beer with and watch some football with, but he’s clearly not head coach material (to say nothing of maybe not coordinator material either, considering that’s the role he was originally hired for).
So with Zorn, by all appearances, having lost the team by week 3 of the season, will Dan Snyder and/or Vinny Cerrato accept any responsibility for putting Zorn in a position he clearly isn’t qualified for? We know Zorn will end up a fall guy, but will Cerrato and Snyder accept responsibility for a badly flawed roster?
There is no longer a question as to whether the Redskins unorthodox practices of trading draft picks and overpaying for free agents might work. It hasn’t, and that the strategy is the exact opposite of the strategy employed by consistently strong franchises like Pittsburgh, New York (Giants), New England and Baltimore speaks volumes. Combine the mismanagement of the personnel with the similar complete mismanagement of the front office and coaching staff and you have a season that is over before it started. And now, seasons plural.
It’s an ironic situation when the franchise is pursuing a lawsuit against fans for not upholding their end of the bargain. The Redskins charge some of the highest ticket prices in the NFL and combine a terrible game-day experience with a terrible team which makes it Dan Snyder who isn’t upholding his end of the bargain. For that matter alone he should drop the lawsuits and hire someone else to run the football operation as a positive PR move.
At what point does a man smart enough to make enough money to buy the Redskins figure out where the fault, and accountability, lies. One would think the losing and constant mismanagement would be enough to get rid of the real culprit, Vinny Cerrato. Snyder must bring in a real General Manager and stop playing a billion-dollar game of fantasy football. One wonders whether Dan Snyder the Redskins fan will overcome Dan Snyder the owner.
Share ThisHow Jason Fried Whiffed On the Mint Acquisition and the Role of VCs
Jason Fried of 37 Signals stirred up a bunch of controversy on Friday with his blog posted titled “The Next Generation Bends Over”. Jason suggested that evil VCs forced Mint-founder Aaron Patzer to sell his company prematurely. And while I have a lot of respect for Jason, his “my way or the highway” approach to entrepreneurship (and blogging) rubs some folks the wrong way. And so when he falsely accused some very honorable and accomplished investors of acting out of sheer greed and at the expense of the Founder(s), Fried was appropriately taken to task.
Alexander Muse at Texas Startup Blog gave the most reasoned, thoughtful response noting that The Founders Fund and DAG Ventures, who led a $14M Series C round of funding last month, certainly are not happy with their return. Those firms spent more time doing diligence than as shareholders of preferred stock. But Muse didn’t go the extra step and spell out the real reason why Fried’s post was so far from the mark.
The truth is that Mint’s willingness to be acquired for $170M is actually an unmitigated disaster for the venture capital industry. Sure, DAG and Founders Fund are unhappy with their investments, but its a good bet that Patzer, Mint’s early employees and earlier investors are all pretty happy with their outcomes. First Round Capital claims to have done better than the 14X return they got when Ebay acquired Stumbleupon. That means Mint’s other Angel and Series A investors are likely to be pretty happy with their outcome (including Felicis Ventures, Shasta Ventures, Ron Conway, Dave McClure and other Angels).
Benchmark Capital led a $12M Series B round in March of 2008 and there’s no way they are happy with the outcome. For arguments sake, let’s assume they put in $6M of the $12M round and the Company was valued at $60M post money (both are somewhat arbitrary guesses and likely inaccurate but this is a ballpark placeholder. Valuations were falling at the time but Mint was a hot deal). Even then, Benchmark would have gotten about 3X or about $18M of the $170M. For a firm that just raised a $500M fund, $18M doesn’t move the needle very much. Needless to say, Benchmark was expecting needing a much bigger return.
But Fried was very much on point when he wrote:
Here’s a fresh new company that was gunning for an aging incumbent. And not only gunning, but gaining. They had a great product, great design, and great potential. They were growing rapidly and figured out the revenue game. They were on their way to redefining an industry — one that was left for dead by the current custodians.
There is no doubt that Mint is/was one of the more promising Web 2.0 startups yet Benchmark didn’t come close to making enough money to make their LPs happy. So what does this say for $500M funds and their ability to invest in Web startups?
I’m in no way picking on Benchmark- they are a fantastic firm with a hugely successful track record and all entrepreneurs should be so lucky to work with them - but funds of that size are will have a very tough time investing in capital efficient Web startups. Simply put, they can’t put enough money in to make it work. Web based startups just don’t need that kind of capital anymore to provide great outcomes for Founders and early, early stage investors. As Ron Conway noted recently, the Real-Time Web is going to create $5B in market opportunities, but given that these companies are certain to leverage Web economics it will be very difficult for firms managing large funds will be able to invest in most of those opportunities.
This is a great, great sign for smaller, more nimble firms like First Round, Alsop-Louie Partners and True Ventures. But the percentage of the global Venture Capital asset class that can actually make these economics work remains pretty small and serves as a great illustration of the Venture Capital Math Problem.
Share ThisHow The Pittsburgh Steelers Can Fix Their Running Game
With the 2009 NFL season about to kick-off, everyone wants to know if the Steelers can navigate all the usual challenges that usually prevent NFL teams from defending their Super Bowl titles.
The Pittsburgh Steelers return 20 of 22 starters, and in adding Trai Essex and Lawrence Timmons to the starting lineup, it’s possible that they have upgraded with the 2 new starters. The Steelers #1 ranked defense looks to be back with a vengence. With the return of punter Daniel Sepulveda and the addition of exciting return-man Stefan Logan the Steelers look to be much improved on special teams. And with young Head Coach Mike Tomlin at the helm, the focus looks like it’s there. In fact, I think Hardnosed over at Steeler Fury said it best when he observed “Tomlin’s personality is like a melding of Vince Lombardi, Yoda and John Shaft.”
But the Steelers offense underachieved badly in 2008, ranking 22rd overall in yardage and 20th in points, leaving plenty of room for improvement from the defending champions on that side of the ball. It’s fair to say that the Steelers and their dominant, #1 ranked defense won the title in spite of their offense, not because of it.
Ironically, the Steelers are loaded with talent on the offensive side of the ball. Ben Roethlisberger, with his 2 Super Bowl rings, a QB rating thanks ranks in the top 10 all-time, and the all-time record for most wins in his first 5 seasons (ahead of Dan Marino, John Elway, Otto Graham and Tom Brady), Big Ben looks like he’s already well on his way to the Hall of Fame and just entering his prime. With Hines Ward, Santonio Holmes and Heath Miller, there is plenty of talent in the passing game.
But the questions about the running game remain, where a running game featuring Willie Parker, Rashard Mendenhall and Mewelde Moore looks to improve. The franchise known for slobber-knocker, 3-yards-and-cloud-of dust, Jerome Bettis and Franco Harris-esque rushing attacks couldn’t run the ball in 2008. The Steelers rushing attack ranked 23rd overall in yardage, the Steelers 2nd lowest total since the NFL merger in 1970, managing a meager 3.7 yards per carry good for 29th in the league.
And the conventional wisdom all points to the same party line. As Chris Brown, author of “Smart Football” and a blogger at the New York Times Fifth Down blog wrote about the outlook for the 2009 Steelers run game:
…this year’s Steelers squad shouldn’t be as depleted by injury, and the run game should improve with a healthy Parker and a promising second-year player, Rashard Mendenhall.
The conventional wisdom here strikes me as missing the forrest for the trees, because to my eyes it sure looked like Willie Parker was the problem with the Steelers run game in 2008. A quick check of the facts seems to lend a lot of credence to that theory.
Willie Parker started 11 games for the Steelers in 2008. Parker averaged a mediocre 72 rushing yards per game at 3.8 yards per carry. In those 11 games, the Steelers averaged 20 points per game and 301 yards of total offense, numbers which would actually lower Pittsburgh’s already mediocre offensive ranks to 24th in yards and 26th in points.
And while that conventional wisdom says that injuries, a mediocre offensive line and suspect playcalling were the cause of Parker’s woes, those excuses fall by the wayside when you consider that Mewelde Moore found plenty of success playing with the same constraints.
Moore started 4 games last season and in those games averaged 90 rushing yards per game at a healthy 4.5 yards per carry, and because Moore is a threat out of the backfield he added another 20 yards per game receiving. These numbers are significant increases from Parker’s production across the board. And not surprisingly, the increased production at RB made the entire offense much more productive.
In Moore’s 4 starts, the Steelers offensive averages jumped to 327 yards per game and 24.5 points per game, numbers which would have given the Steelers offense numbers that ranked #17 in yards and #9 in points. (Moore’s 4 starts came against the New York Giants (5th overall), Indianapolis (11th), Cinncinnatti (12th) and Jacksonville (17th), no cupcakes in there).
If you subtract the rushing and offensive totals from those 2 games where Parker started but Moore got more than 25% of the carries (eliminating Moore’s more substantial impact on offensive numbers), Parker’s rushing yards per game rises a paltry 2 yards per game while the team offensive numbers fall off a cliff.
In the 9 games that Parker started and took the more than 75% of the team carries the Steelers averaged 18.4 points and 291 yards per game, numbers that would drop the Steelers offense to 25th in scoring and 27th in yards.
Despite fewer touches, Moore ended up with more yards from scrimmage, 1st downs, plays of 20 yards and touchdowns.
Willie Parker: 213 touches, 804 yards, 3.7 yards per touch, 29 1st downs, 4 plays 20+ yds, 5 TDs
Mewelde Moore: 180 touches, 908 yards, 5.0 yards per touch, 53 1st downs, 7 plays 20+ yds, 6 TDs
It seemed obvious at the time that Moore’s versatility and ability as a receiver out of the backfield made the Steelers staid offense one that became harder to defend. Then Colts DC Ron Meeks said about Moore:
“He definitely gives them a dimension they really needed”
Despite Moore’s obvious impact on the offense, Moore disappeared from the game plan down the stretch and in the playoffs, and no matter how poorly Parker performed Moore only saw time on 3rd downs.
This issue has flown under the radar, but Dutch at the well-regarded Steelers blog Post Game Heroes, recently brought the topic to light when he opined Mewelde Moore Might Be the Steelers Best RB.
Fast forward to the dawn of the 2009 season and all the stories are about Parker and Rashard Mendenhall with nary a mention of Moore. Mendenhall has been underwhelming to say the least, with the word “Bust” being bandied about. But being a 1st round draft pick, Mendenhall will get his chances regardless. What I found bizarre were Steelers OC Bruce Arians’ typically candid comments regarding Mendenhall and Moore:
“The job Mewelde Moore did for us last year was probably the most underappreciated job for us getting to the Super Bowl. He stepped in and hit some home runs. Those should be Rashard’s plays. That’s the role he should have.”
I’m confused why an offensive coordinator would acknowledge the contribution of a guy who “hit some home runs” and “[his contribution] in getting to the Super Bowl” then go on to give that role away so quickly and surely? Since the beginning of preseason, Arians and Tomlin have been clear that either Parker and Mendenhall would split carries or Parker would be “the guy”.
Moore’s career averages of 4.6 yards per carry and 9.1 yards per reception compare very favorably to other versatile RBs who have become key offensive players such as Tiki Barber, Brian Westbrook and Maurice Jones-Drew.
Barber, in particular, has a lot of similarities to Moore. given that 3 years into Barber’s career the Giants were so sure that Barber was only a 3rd down back that they used a 1st round draft pick on Ron Dayne. It wasn’t until Sean Payton became the Giants OC in 2000, when he said to then-Head Coach Jim Fassell:
Jim, every time Tiki gets his hands on the ball he’s gaining six or seven yards. We’ve got to get the ball to Tiki more.
As Fanhouse’s JJ Cooper noted, Moore has been extremely productive throughout his career when given the opportunity. Moore has 10 games with 15 or more carries and has averaged a gaudy 98.9 yards per game rushing at 5.0 yards per carry with 31.5 yards receiving per game.
Conversely, Willie Parker was, as recently as 2 years ago, an elite speed back…albeit one with limited vision. Parker turns 29 during the season and is rapidly approaching that age where RB production starts falling off a cliff. Parker’s yards per carry has dropped .3 yds each year for 4 straight years now and injuries are piling up so rationalizing an upward trend in production or durability at 29 seems a stretch.
Word from Tomlin and Arians is that Parker is not only the feature back but also likely to take goal-line carries, actually increasing his role from 2008. This seems shortsighted to say the least, given that the minimal likelihood of Parker being able to handle 250-300 carries without getting hurt. I can’t imagine too many franchises making such a poor between-the-tackles runner their goalline back, much less a back like Parker who would ideally be kept as fresh as possible. Parker’s reputation and status with the rabid fanbase seems to cloud objective thinking.
We know the Steelers defense will be an elite unit again in 2009 with even a precipitous fall meaning it’s still a top 5 unit. How quickly the Steelers figure out how to fix their running game will be the key to their return hopes. Bruce Arians has a seemingly hot-and-cold reputation around the league and one wonders if he would still have his job had the Steelers not won the Super Bowl. If Arians stops trying to fit a square peg in a round hole, the Steelers stand a very good chance of repeating.
For as much as “sabermetrics” and advanced statistical analysis are utilized in sports these days, it seems hard to figure how the Steelers can’t figure this out. It’s hard to rationalize a gameplan that includes either Willie Parker as a true, exclusive “feature back” or Mewelde Moore with fewer than 15 touches, but the Steelers seem intent on doing just that. If the Steelers continue basing their running game on past reputation and false theories rather than production the Steelers will have a very difficult time repeating.
Share ThisSome NFL Observations After the Third Preseason Game
The Denver Broncos Are A Mess: It’s difficult to imagine how badly Broncos’ owner Pat Bowlen has screwed the pooch in 2009. It’s one thing to fire a long-tenured, Hall-of-Fame-caliber coach, but another thing completely to hire an unqualified, over-his-head rookie who has undone years of progress and stability for one of the NFL’s traditionally more-successful franchises in less than 9 months.
It takes some elephant-sized cajones for any NFL coach to try to replace a franchise-caliber QB coming into his prime, but Josh McDaniels’ ego led him to try just that. Neither Matt Cassell, McDaniels’ initial target, nor Kyle Orton are in the same ballpark as Jay Cutler, and that kind of mistake is a career-killer for a coach.
No one would place the blame for the Brandon Marshall-circus squarely at the feet of McDaniels, but it does speak to McDaniels’ inability to garner the respect or support of the Broncos’ most talented players. For whatever reason, Mike Shannahan was able to keep Marshall in line enough to eliminate distractions.
Last night’s performance by Jay Cutler drove the point home. It seems difficult to believe, but Josh McDaniels career as a head coach looks over before he’s even played a game. As bad as the Cutler and Marshall situations have looked in the offseason, the Broncos record on the field looks likely to be even worse.
McDaniels’ Struggles Call For An Examination of the Belichick Coaching Tree: At what point will NFL teams stop hiring someone simply because they worked under Bill Belichick? With McDaniels looking like he’s in way over his head, he stands to join Eric Mangini, Romeo Crennel, Nick Saban and Al Groh as Belichick disciples who have failed as NFL head coaches. When you add the disappointing tenure of Charlie Weis at Notre Dame, it looks more like a lot of the genius starts - and stops - with the Hooded-One.
While Thomas Dimitroff looks like a good executive so far in Atlanta, Scott Pioli has made some questionable moves in Kansas City. Trading for Matt Cassell is one thing, but giving him $26 Million in guaranteed money is another. Cassell looked an awful lot to me like a “system” QB who does not have the arm or accuracy to stretch the field. If that’s the case, Pioli has dug himself a big hole to dig out of, adding General Managers and QBs to the list of positions and people who weren’t nearly as good without Belichick pulling the strings.
Byron Leftwich Beats Out Luke McCown…..Why Is This A Surprise?: I had to rub my eyes and look twice when I saw that career backup Luke McCown got a 2 year, $7.5 Million contract with a $2.5 Million signing bonus in the offseason. It’s doubly surprising in light of the fact that Byron Leftwich sat on the open market with few suitors until the Buccaneers finally brought him in on an identical contract.
How is it that Luke McCown has as much or more value on the market than Byron Leftwich? I’m certain that people will point out Leftwich’s long windup, lack of mobility and tendency to fumble, but at the end of the day the guy has proven that he can play at the NFL level while McCown has not. Leftwich has 54 career TD passes, 16 more TDs than Interceptions over his career, and has been the starting QB on a playoff team.
Luke McCown has a total of 9 career TDs and 10 INTs in 7 starts and has never shown the ability to lead an NFL team. Luke McCown looks an awful lot like his brother, Josh McCown, who also possesses rare athletic ability, but will never have the pocket presence or raw intelligence needed to successfully lead a team to the playoffs. It’s amusing that the McCown brothers identically painful-to-watch QB play reinforces each other’s inevitable failure at the NFL level, yet both continue getting quality opportunities.
This while Leftwich got little attention on the market for two years now. Here’s to a good guy and a QB with upside rightfully getting another shot.
Share ThisEarly Thoughts on the Microsoft/Yahoo Deal….Yahoo Did Better Than People Think
Lots of early takes on the MSFT/Y! deal so far and most seem to think Yahoo got fleeced. The post getting the most attention so far is Jason Calacanis take that Yahoo committed “seppuku” while Mike Arrington thinks Yahoo “gutted itself”.
I want to take the other side of this and say that this was a good move for Yahoo (even if the implementation is overly complicated and holds plenty of execution risk.) The only opinions that I have seen that think Yahoo did ok with this are Bill Gurley and John Furrier.
Frankly, this deal is complicated and may end up hurting both companies, but I think this deal was better for Yahoo than people think.
Let me bring up a few points.
Getting out of the search market: Calacanis and Robin Wauters at Techcrunch both write that Yahoo has given up on the search market….How do they know that for sure? Certainly Yahoo is no longer developing an algorithmic keyword search engine and will no longer play in the crowded search marketing game, but is that really the entire search market? For two people with ties to Techcrunch, which recently put on a conference devoted to the opportunity presented by real-time, they certainly seem to be missing the opportunity for real, not incremental, innovation in search. There is certainly no guarantee that Yahoo will go down that path but it would seem a smarter path rather than chasing Google in a game that Google is dominating.
Company Focus: The critics of this deal seem to miss the fact that Yahoo will emerge a much more focused, streamlined company. As the deal stipulates, Yahoo will maintain the ad salesforce force for premium search advertising. So rather than addressing every piece of the search marketing ecosystem, Yahoo will focus on cultivating premium, high-margin search deals and pair that with their numerous content properties that rank #1 in the world (finance, sports, etc). Search seemed like a distraction when viewed through the lens of Yahoo’s strengths. Even if this move simply gets Yahoo to focus on its strengths rather than weaknesses, it seems like a step in the right direction.
Whither, MSFT?: This is a 10 year deal? Really, what will MSFT look like in 10 years? I have been thinking about a blog post about the future of Microsoft. Given Microsoft’s announcement that quarterly revenue fell 17% year/year and with the threat of Google’s ChromeOS and the emerging Netbook market possibly making the bleeding worse in the years to come, what will MSFT look like in 5 years? Forget about 10.
But 5 years is an interesting period of time because Yahoo will keep 88% of the search revenue for those 5 years. MSFT is making an enormous monetary bet on search (on top of what they’ve already spent)…which is a game they can’t win. What will the search market look like in 5 years? What kind of growth in social media marketing, breakthroughs in social search or real-time search and any innovation or any comeback in display advertising affect the market or marketshare? Five years is a long time in the Internet business, and doubly so at this particular moment. By the time any meaningful revenue, not just marketshare, goes to Microsoft, what will being #2 in the search market really mean?
One last point where I would like to vehemently disagree with Jason Calacanis…betting on a space because Microsoft is betting on a space is NOT a good strategy. John Dvorak and MG Siegler have both penned eloquent responses that suggest as much so I won’t add anything to their analyses. 5 or 10 years from now, maybe Carol Bartz will be seen as having fleeced a directionless dinosaur who was still throwing money around at a declining opportunity.
Share ThisWhy Wizards Fans Should Be Thrilled With the 2009 Draft
I had plans to bring the blog back, or a Posterous version anyway, and have a few blog posts in process, but I could not help but put something out there regarding Ernie Grunfeld and The Wizards big move this week.
Now that social media is really arriving, fan reactions to the NBA Draft are aplenty around the Interwebs and as a Wizards fan, I have been surprised to find that most Wizards fans are not merely unhappy, but borderline irate at the Wizards haul given their draft position and expiring contracts.
As is well known by now, the Wizards shipped the 5th pick in the draft along with Etan Thomas, Darius Songaila and Oleiksey Pecherov to the Minnesota Timberwolves for Mike Miller and Randy Foye.
Wizards fans are looking at the alternatives, which appear to be Ricky Rubio and DeJuan Blair, Vince Carter or Richard Jefferson and thinking that the Wizards ended up with the worst of the options. That analysis is shortsighted.
For starters, the negative fan reaction to 2 unknowns in the draft is simply silly. The Wizards are an NBA team looking to get older, not younger, and fans are bemoaning passing on an 18 year-old, 180 lb guard and an undersized PF with very serious knee issues. Even if both pan out as NBA players, neither would benefit the Wizards in the current scheme of things. For better or worse (and I think it is not only better, but great), the Wizards are constructed from the ground up around a ball-dominant Gilbert Arenas, which makes Ricky Rubio a bad fit as long as Arenas is in town. By the time Rubio would be ready for primetime, the Wizards would have a completely different roster anyway.
And the consternation about Richard Jefferson and Vince Carter is also misplaced. In the NBA, a players contract situation is almost relevant as his talent level, and both players are under contract for more than $15M through 2010. While Mike Miller and Randy Foye will make less combined than either player in 2009, both have contracts that expire at the end of the 2009 season. So not only did Grunfeld get 2 contributors for less than the cost of 1, but the Wizards will have significant financial flexibility at the 2009 trade deadline (and another expiring contract), when teams will be looking to trade serious talent in order to open up cap room. So neither the VC nor RJ acquisitions would have made sense from a financial perspective.
The financial flexibility will allow the Wizards to test the Miller/Foye fit to see who will be worth resigning and comfortably resign Haywood, whom fans are dramatically underrating. And next offseason will be the best buyers market since the onset of NBA free agency with lots of talent and a bad economy keeping prices down.
But fans seem to be overlooking how well Miller and Foye fit with the Wizards roster as currently constructed. Sure there is a glut at the 1/2/3, but that’s no big deal. First, assume that Mike James will have his butt firmly planted on the bench. If Deshawn Stevenson isn’t healthy, he will have a comfortable seat next to James and Jarvaris Crittenton is still a project who will not crack the rotation.
We know that Arenas and Butler will play ~ 35 minutes per game each. That leaves about 75 minutes per game at the 1/2/3 to split between Nick Young, Mike Miller, Randy Foye and perhaps Stevenson. And Young, Miller and Foye are all versatile enough to play at least 2 of those spots. And Dom McGuire is still in the picture for playing time at the 3 (and maybe a little 4 in a small lineup).
Foye and Miller are both excellent spot up shooters and will make defenses pay for collapsing on Arenas…or Butler or Jamison for that matter. Foye and Miller have been passable #1 and #2 options on NBA teams before, and will be exceptional when they are asked to be 4th/5th/6th options. These guys are legitimate threats to score 15+ ppg on any given night….what other NBA team has that kind of firepower? Maybe the Denver Nuggets and they sure fancy themselves contenders.
While some additional front court depth would be nice, Brendan Haywood and Jamison are likely to get big minutes at the 4/5 and Blatche, if he steps up, fits in nicely as the first big off the bench. Depending on how quickly he progresses, McGee will be able to provide a few minutes of shot blocking and rebounding when needed. Neither Blair nor anyone available on the free agent market was likely to change this rotation. Saunders only goes about 8 deep in his regular rotation anyway.
I see a team that, assuming relative health, wins at least 53 games and has the flexibility and ammunition to make a big move. Why 53+ wins? Here are 2 reasons…
1) Flip Saunders averages 49 wins per season over his coaching career. Has he ever had a team this deep or talented? Probably not. If you want to argue that his Pistons teams were more talented…fine, but Saunders averaged 59 wins in his 3 years in Detroit.
2) The Wizards were already a 48 win team….in 2006. Fans seem to lose sight of how hard hit the Wizards have been by injuries. The Wizards have only started Arenas/Butler/Jamison 118 games together (I am discounting the 10 or so games in the past 2 seasons as it was not a healthy Arenas). In those 118 games, the Wizards are 69-49, or a win % of 58%. 58% over the course of an 82 game schedule is 48 wins….and that was a team that got big minutes from Arvis Hayes, Songaila and Etan Thomas. The current Wizards roster is much improved and certainly at least 6 games better.
So I am looking at a ridiculously deep, athletic, talented team with plenty of youth, upside AND financial flexibility. Ernie Grunfeld, my hat is off to you.
Share ThisJustin Timberlake’s “I Love Sports” steals the show at the ESPYs
Despite the fact that this video combines two things I truly dislike, overhyped award shows and Justin Timberlake, this musical number is fantastic.
A Social Media Success Story: Mike Arrington punks the NYT and AP
It’s telling that the New York Times and Associated Press, two companies at the top of the traditional media pyramid with unlimited resources, have erred embarrassingly in the recent AP quote policy brouhaha. This mess has cost them not only credibility but also clearly demonstrates that they don’t understand the social media phenomenon at its most fundamental level.
These two traditional media titans, recognizing they are in deep trouble, resorted to citing an “Association” that no one has ever heard of to try to lend credence to whatever crap they invented to save their hides. And in a pre-social media world they would have gotten away with it.
The difference now is that Mike Arrington is big enough to have become an insider to the traditional media’s inner circle. And Mike has the understanding of the benefits of truth and transparency that underlie social media, to let folks know what’s going on. And the balls.
Never before did the masses have immediate and widespread access to an insider looking two media titans in the face and calling “Bullshit”.
How could the NYT/AP think a “Media Bloggers Association” that didn’t already include Arrington be credible? Arrington got most of the major Presidential candidates for interviews and broke the YouTube acquisition among other journalistic successes. It would be fair to consider him the top media blogger/web journalist in the blogosphere. (Who knew coming from an unaccomplished lawyer and failed entrepreneur?) Simply put, a “Media Bloggers Association” that doesn’t include Arrington, or more specifically one that he’s never heard of, doesn’t matter.
And that makes this a great example of how social media is taking a sledgehammer to existing media practices and principles.
This is also a little analog to the “early adopter” meme and further serves to illustrate just how early we are in the adoption curve. If the NYT and AP, two large companies whose future success is directly impacted by their ability to understand and make the transition into social media can screw up this badly, just how many people really understand social media today?
Share ThisDMX Will Never Use Twitter or Friendfeed
I’ve been collecting my thoughts for my eventual conclusions (and subsequent blog post) regarding whether or not I think services like Twitter and Friendfeed will ever be adopted by the other 89%. While I find both services to be continually more useful and interesting, I’ve yet to be convinced that these tools will be adopted by the mainstream in a meaningful way in their current form. (Italicized for emphasis)
As I noted in a recent post, those who are currently avid users of these services, the 1%, have some shared characteristics most of which can be traced back to some variation of “smart”. And amongst the 89%, there are a whole lot of people who are….not so smart, to put it lightly.
To that point, I saw this interview with DMX earlier today and thought to myself, “Here’s someone who will never use Twitter or Friendfeed.” While I don’t think DMX represents any majority, I don’t think Scoble represents any majority either. To further make a comparison, DMX has sold 20 million records, which represents a lot more paying customers than Scoble and Arrington have non-paying readers combined.
Additionally, I found this interview to be not only a relevant, if not sad, cultural datapoint, but also amusing in that “can’t look away from the trainwreck” kind of way. Consider the following recent interview with rapper DMX at XXL (for those with virgin ears, look away):
Share ThisAre you following the presidential race?
Not at all.You’re not? You know there’s a Black guy running, Barack Obama and then there’s Hillary Clinton.
His name is Barack?!Barack Obama, yeah.
Barack?!Barack.
What the fuck is a Barack?! Barack Obama. Where he from, Africa?Yeah, his dad is from Kenya.
Barack Obama?Yeah.
What the fuck?! That ain’t no fuckin’ name, yo. That ain’t that nigga’s name. You can’t be serious. Barack Obama. Get the fuck outta here.You’re telling me you haven’t heard about him before.
I ain’t really paying much attention.I mean, it’s pretty big if a Black…
Wow, Barack! The nigga’s name is Barack. Barack? Nigga named Barack Obama. What the fuck, man?! Is he serious? That ain’t his fuckin’ name. Ima tell this nigga when I see him, “Stop that bullshit. Stop that bullshit” [laughs] “That ain’t your fuckin’ name.” Your momma ain’t name you no damn Barack.So you’re not following the race. You can’t vote right?
Nope.