War On the Rooftops

It seems like a lot of my favorite teams have interesting quirks that make them unique compared to any other franchise in sports. For Green Bay, it's the fact that they're publicly owned. More relevantly, for the Cubs, it's that they're a team with neighborhood ballpark and a tough contract with some of the neighbors.

Last week, Cubs owner Tom Ricketts decided that he'd had enough shenanigans with the city and the neighborhood, and decided to file his proposal for the much-needed renovations of Wrigley Field. Problem is, he opted to file the original plans for the ballpark, involving the jumbotron and ad signage for the outfield. And as anyone who's been paying attention knows, this means the owners of the rooftops on Waveland and Sheffield are going to fight.

I've never been to a game on one of the rooftops, and sure, it provides a unique experience and adds something different to the area around the park that others don't have. And up until 2004, the rooftops admitted people and paid nothing to the Cubs for the rights to the view. Finally the old administration decided to allow the rooftops to operate without any blockages to views in exchange for 17 percent of their revenue. At the time, I didn't really have much of an opinion one way or the other, other than noting that proposed "wind screens" to obstruct their view was a stupid idea, and thankfully that didn't pass. But it didn't really hurt the Cubs. At least, not until talk of renovation and modernization came up.

Today, I saw some proposed plans for how the ballpark would look after the renovation. I'm not super crazy about some of the signs there (the green Cubs logos are just kind of meh), but the jumbotron ideas look good. It's something I think the ballpark needs to get to the 21st century. I saw someone on Twitter who laughed about one fact with the signs though: all of the rooftop views are now to some degree obstructed. It's like the ultimate middle finger to the people that have held up the renovation plans.

It's all but a certainty that the rooftop owners will sue over this for a breach of contract. They may have a case, as the deal runs through 2023. But Comcast SportsNet's David Kaplan got to see the contract, and the case comes down to one provision.

"6.6: The Cubs shall not erect windscreens or other barriers to obstruct the views of the Rooftops, provided however that temporary items such as banners, flags and decorations for special occasions, shall not be considered as having been erected to obstruct views of the Rooftops. Any expansion of Wrigley Field approved by governmental authorities shall not be a violation of this agreement, including this section."

Would you consider this project an expansion of Wrigley? Since it's not just advertising but also a video screen that can be used for in-game purposes, I think it would be. And if a judge agrees, there go the rooftops.

I had no problem with them for years, even though until 2004, it could have been argued that they were thieves. Even with the deal, I didn't really have anything against them. It wasn't until they meddled in the affairs of ballpark renovations that I had issues. The Cubs are a Major League Baseball club that has the right to fix up its home park as it pleases, with approval of the city of Chicago. No other Major League team has to bow to the pressure of neighbors over what they can and can't do to their ballpark. And the Cubs shouldn't have to either. I understand that the rooftops are businesses and they're trying to protect their "product", but their "product" involves someone else's business, and they don't have the right to dictate terms like that to a sports franchise. Call me vindictive if you will, but I hope they get shafted. Wrigley has needed fixing up. This will finally put an end to the interference of allowing that to happen.

Webucator Asks Confessions of a Sportscaster

In the two and a half years since I started writing Confessions of a Sportscaster, I've been involved in a lot of shenanigans. Most of it has been legitimate talks of what's going on in the world of sports and commentary on major issues on and off the varying playing surfaces, predictions that haven't really been super accurate, documentation of yelling "THREEEEEEEEEEEEEE!" over a hundred times in the span of three months in an effort to be the greatest home court advantage in the CCIW, to convoluted attempts at running logistically impossible tournaments due to either the fact that time travel doesn't exist or the tournament I'm running is frowned upon by elitists with way more money than I could ever dream of having. Maybe someday I'll actually try to do a study to see how feasible the latter is, but that's a story for another day. Today, I have people to help.

It's May, which means we're in the thick of graduation season, primarily at the college level (unless you're a North Central student, in which case you poor saps still have like three or four weeks left). It also means that another group of young adults is getting ready to transition into the real world, which is a scary thing. It can be especially so if you're like me and majored in broadcasting. It's a very hard field to get into. I know a few friends from my time at WONC have found work or internships of some sort in broadcasting, and I'm thrilled for them. For others, it can be more of a struggle.

I was approached by Bob Clary, the Community Manager over at Webucator.com, a company that "provides onsite and online training on technologies such as Microsoft ASP.NET, XML, Windows, Java, Adobe Flash, HTML5, JavaScript, Dreamweaver, and much more," according to their website. Bob asked me to share advice for the upcoming graduating class in the form of skills I think are important to know when searching for a job in this market. It's something I'm more than happy to do.

When it comes to just about any job, having a resume is obviously important, but having demonstrations of your skills available is just as important. In many professions, this means having a portfolio. In broadcasting, it means having demo reels or airchecks ready to send to potential employers. I have DVDs of some of my work from video and TV classes from North Central, and have access to find old airchecks from my time at WONC. While those are good to have, you want to stay up to date, so being able to use a studio while you still have time to go build new airchecks is a must. Not only does it showcase what you can do in an on-air setting, it also gives you some practice in production, which in today's radio market, you MUST have. As important as Microsoft skills are in the corporate world (hence why in May Webucator is focusing heavily on it, including offering a free Powerpoint class), skills in programs like Adobe Audition or Pro Tools (if you're more Mac-centric) are a necessity. Of course, knowing how to use Microsoft Office helps out too, so if you want to brush up on certain things, these guys might be a good resource.

When I was first asked to do this post, my first thoughts actually went to more intangible things, and it's something that I think applies across all fields. First of all, don't be afraid to try something new or go out of your comfort zone. When I first started college and joined WONC, I'd intended to only do sports-related activities, but needed to do about three hours a week of shifts, so I picked up a Saturday afternoon music shift. I was nervous and kind of shy, even being on the radio with that level of listener interaction, but I had mentors who pushed me and encouraged me to experiment around a little bit, and before long I found that I absolutely loved it. It became a cornerstone of my experience there.

I added to that experience piece by piece, and during my junior year, talk of who the station's senior staff the following year came up. I said to myself, "Why not go for the top?" I applied to become the station manager for the 2010-11 school year, and got the job. It came with challenges certainly, but I'm proud of the fact that I oversaw the day to day operations of 70 people being on air 24/7 and the fact that the faculty mentor who I reported directly to felt comfortable enough with how I was running things to take a pro term my final trimester and only be on campus two days a week. Heck, my public address work only started because a nervous, awkward 16-year-old me decided that in addition to running the statistic portion of Aurora Christian's scoreboard for the girls' basketball team I'd announce the game as well. I'd always loved doing it back to my days of apparently reciting Ray Clay when I was three, but that was when I started actually doing it.

I think this last piece of advice is the most important one though: network yourself. It seems like who you know has as much of an impact on your ability to land a job as what skills you've developed. During my college years, I interned for both ESPN 1000 and WGN-AM in Chicago, and loved my time at both. While I'm sure my experience at North Central and WONC was a major factor in getting internships at both stations, having a North Central grad and WONC alum as ESPN's internship coordinator and having fairly close connections with a TV producer from WGN (and Dean Richards) didn't hurt. The WONC connection has also helped me land the gigs I've gotten since I left college. I worked for about six months at WROK in Rockford for program director Scot Bertram, another WONC alum who I'd some some stringer work for a couple years prior, and having the connection there certainly helped. While not in broadcasting, my current full time job with HERE Traffic in Chicago was probably helped by the fact that one of the people I interviewed with is married to another WONC alum. This one was probably more subtle, but I don't think it hurt my chances. Heck, even my current career as North Central's women's basketball announcer was a result of the school's Sports Information office looking for a body for a tournament my senior year that I snatched up and haven't looked back at since they offered me the gig full time after I graduated. Simply put, if your program offers alumni networking events, by all means go. It can create a relationship that could help you out down the road.

Graduates, you're entering a scary time in your life. No matter what your field, these tips and some others that other Webucator folks have for you as a part of their Marketable Skill Campaign can help you out as you plan for your futures.

Game Notes: Milwaukee Brewers @ Chicago Cubs (5/16/14)

Final Score
Brewers 4, Cubs 3

Game Summary
About a year ago, Kristen kidnapped me to take me to a Cubs game. I said then that I needed to be more suspicious. Today, instead of participating in a round table with Senator Dick Durbin about student loans, I was kidnapped... again... and made the all-familiar trek to the Friendly Confines. Kristen put together a plan for a month that included buying tickets, getting my dad in on making sure I was home, and informing the people in charge of the aforementioned round table that I wasn't going to be able to make it. I stand by my decision, and my future bride.

On a cold afternoon, the Brewers (27-15) jumped to an early lead in the first with a pair of unearned runs (though honestly, one should have been earned, but whatever) thanks to some poor defense. They added another pair in the second before the Cubs (13-27) responded in kind with a Darwin Barney two run shot. The Cubs would add another run in the third on a solo blast by Junior Lake. After that, the Brewers settled in and didn't allow any more shenanigans. The Cubs got into and out of a couple jams, and couldn't string together another rally late to finish it off.

Pitchers of Record
Win: Kyle Lohse (5-1)- 7 IP, 3 ER, 7 H, 1 BB, 2 K. While he wasn't dominant in terms of stuff, he minimized the damage to those two home runs and worked out of a couple jams early, then retired the final 13 batters he faced. Despite only two strikeouts, when you can keep any lineup from doing any damage for that long, you earned the win.
Loss: Jeff Samardzija (0-4)- 5 IP, 4 R (2 ER), 6 H, 3 BB, 6 K. Shark got roughed up a bit early, but wasn't helped after errors by Junior Lake and Starlin Castro enabled two runs to come across. The other two runs were more so his fault, but a passed ball by Welington Castillo didn't really help either. His pitch count was really high after two innings, so while he settled down, that meant the bullpen had to take over early.
Save: Francisco Rodriguez (17)- 1 IP, 0 ER, 1 H, 0 BB, 0 K. K-Rod looked awful on his first two pitches, missing badly and prompting a visit from Jonathan Lucroy. He then gave up a solid single to Starlin Castro to lead off. He proceeded to get a fielder's choice on a bunt by Chris Coghlan, got Castillo to fly out, then saw Schierholtz line out to end the game. Honestly, it wasn't that great an outing, but he got some help from his defense and a bad bunt by Coghlan. Still counts.

Key Stats

• Starlin Castro/Anthony Rizzo (CHC): 3-7, BB. This was the big question for the Cubs coming into this season: how well would these guys rebound? They have fairly well. Castro had two hits and Rizzo had one, though neither one came in a major spot or resulted in any damage being done. Still, it's a good omen on an otherwise dreary day.
• Jean Segura (MIL): 3-5, R, 2 RBI. Segura proved to have the game-winning hit when he singled in a pair of runs in the top of the second. It's a different game if Welington Castillo doesn't allow the passed ball before said knock, as if the rest of the game played out that way, it's 3-3 going into extras. Then again, both Ryan Braun and Carlos Gomez were off today.
• Cubs: 3 errors. This was what ultimately killed the Cubs I think, aside from not getting a hit between the third and ninth innings. The first error was a bobble in the outfield by Junior Lake on a Jonathan Lucroy base hit that Segura scored on. Segura probably would have scored without the error, but it went down as an unearned run. The following play, Castro threw a ball hit by Lyle Overbay too low over to first, and it allowed Lucroy, who had been at second thanks to Lake's error, to score and make it 2-0 at the time. In the third, Samardzija made a beautiful move to pick off Mark Reynolds, but on the ensuing rundown, Anthony Rizzo threw over Castro's head and allowed Reynolds to advance a base. While it didn't come back to bite the Cubs, it defined the "#Cubes" meme that has become prevalent in the past season or two to come to light.

Final Thoughts

Yes, it was cold. Sure, there was some rain, but we were under cover the whole game. Was it worth the trip? You bet. I was completely floored that we were going. Kristen orchestrated the perfect surprise that I didn't even have an inkling about. Guys who are reading this: if your girlfriend/fiancee/wife does this sort of thing for you, keep her. I'm not giving up mine.

I wasn't sure when this year I'd make it to Wrigley, given the chaos of a wedding and the ensuing honeymoon, but I'm glad we made it, even with the weather. It was a nice throwback weekend, and we got Babe Ruth "Called Shot" bobbleheads, which was cool. The game itself went... pretty much as expected, but there are some silver linings to take out of it. And at the end of the day, if you get to spend a day with the person you love in one of your favorite places, you take it every time.

Confessions of a Probably Horribly Off Mock Drafter

I've been writing for COAS since September of 2011, and have done NFL picks for the past two seasons. The one thing I haven't done yet? Actually trying to do a mock draft.

Honestly, trying to predict how a draft will go is one of the biggest crapshoots in sports. But that hasn't stopped countless people from trying to guess what players will go in what order. The tops of drafts more often than not go as planned, but as you go deeper, you start to have a harder time pegging stuff.

None of this is going to stop me from trying. What follows is the official COAS NFL Mock Draft. To track everything, I used the ESPN Draft Machine. If you want to throw together a last-minute mock, you can go to that page to do so. Let's get started. As a foreword, I'm not making any trades here, so each team will pick with the picks they have going into Radio City Music Hall tonight.

Dropping the Banhammer

Photo from Getty Images

This news is almost a day old and probably overtalked at this point. But I feel like I should take note of what was a milestone day in American sports history. Yesterday was a day that could have far-reaching implications for years to come.

I'm sure by now you've at least heard about the comments Donald Sterling made to his girlfriend, if not actually heard the recordings. And after a couple days of deliberation for due process, as should have been done, the NBA determined it was Sterling, and thus banned him for life from anything NBA-related for all intents and purposes, and fined him $2.5 million. It's chump change for Sterling, but does make a statement. The biggest deal out of all of this is that commissioner Adam Silver is going to try to push the other owners to call for a vote to force Sterling to sell his stake in the Clippers.

I'll cut to the chase. What Sterling said was despicable. It's 2014; we should be far beyond all this racial nonsense. Sadly, these tensions still exist and we have a long way to go despite what anyone else may say. It's an attitude that has no place in society.

Screenshot of clippers.com (from Bleacher Report)

That being said, there's a major component ignored by the media at large that deserves some mention, and a lot of public commentary on a lot of the news stories ask these questions.  No one seems to be talking about the culpability of V. Stiviano, who made the recording. A lot of arguments have been made about the fact that Sterling was recorded and whether or not it was done knowingly. Some sources quoted in the ESPN story linked above say that Sterling knew he was being recorded, which is in accordance with California law (in California and some other states, both parties have to be aware of and give permission to be recorded; in others, only one party needs to be aware). Either way, the fact that these recordings were released, likely without Sterling's permission is alarming. I'm not sure if she can be prosecuted, but a defamation lawsuit from Sterling may follow. Some commenters on these news stories have called Stiviano a "gold digger" in that she may have released these tapes to get some money from Sterling. I'm not sure whether or not that's true, but it's something to be considered.

Photo by Mark J. Terrill/AP

The other argument that baffles me that other people have made is that somehow Donald Sterling's First Amendment rights have been taken away. I was required to take a Communication Law class as part of my Broadcast Communication major at North Central, and we did talk about the First Amendment in there. What a lot of people don't realize is that the First Amendment only protects you from government punishment based on what you say. Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences. If I said something on here that was incredibly offensive, as long as I'm not placed under arrest or the government at any level doesn't try to shut COAS down, my First Amendment rights aren't being infringed on. You would have the right to call me an idiot, call for me to stop posting, demand I take the post down, or what have you, and I wouldn't be able to claim infringing of my rights.

There's one big matter that hasn't been attended to yet, and that's whether or not the Clippers can/will be sold. Silver did say he would like the owners to pursue this. And according to ESPN legal analyst Lester Munson, they can call for a vote to revoke his ownership. This would be a dangerous precedent, however. Even though I think you could make the argument that Sterling did damage the brand to adversely affect the league, the question is whether or not he did anything to violate a contractual obligation. If they can successfully argue that he did, we could see him forced to sell the team. But let's be honest: even though owning an NBA team is a privilege, not a right, and the government isn't involved, this is a largely unprecedented case for the NBA and American sports as a whole. Mark Cuban is right to call it a "very, very, very slippery slope". Even though I don't think Sterling should own the Clippers, is it the right move to force him to sell? What if, down the line, another owner says something in private that comes off maybe not quite as offensive as what Sterling said, but enough furor ensues that people demand he or she be forced to give up their ownership? Do we really want to open that can of worms?

Like others have said, this should have been taken care of years ago. Donald Sterling is a scumbag; this is not up for debate. What is is what should happen going forward. Even though it's 2014 and we've made progress, there's still more to be made. And I hope all parties involved don't do anything that could mean major trouble down the road.

Happy Birthday Wrigley!

If you read my MLB previews, and in particular the NL Central preview, you know that for the third year in a row, I have absolutely no faith in the Cubs this season. I think I've already tweeted out something to the effect of "#Cubes" about half a dozen times so far this year, which seems light given how bad the Cubs have been so far unless they're facing the somehow worse Arizona Diamondbacks. But today is a special day.

A lot has changed since April 23, 1914. My grandparents weren't alive yet, the World Series drought was at a whopping five, going on six years, and Weeghman Park was a single-tier stadium that held fewer than 20,000 fans. The Chicago Tribune has a great interactive graphic on how the park has changed in the last 100 years and what's to come.

Photo from April 13, 2009 game vs. Colorado

Wrigley was not my first Major League ballpark; that distinction belongs to the Metrodome when I was about three or four and Kirby Puckett was still doing Kirby Puckett things (RIP Kirby). I didn't want to stay for the whole game though; we left in about the seventh inning. My first full game though was a trip to Wrigley in the summer of 1998 when Sammy Sosa was on the juice baseball was undergoing a rebirth following the '94 lockout. Sosa would hit his 38th of 66 home runs that year and the Cubs would win.

Since then, I've been to Wrigley at least once every season. And despite most of those years ranging from mediocre to abysmal, the Cubs have had a minimum of a .500 record when I've been there every season except, weirdly enough, 2008.

Photo from April 22, 2009 game vs. Cincinnati

I have a lot of great memories of times at Wrigley Field. I skipped school one day in April of my sophomore year of high school to freeze my butt off for a double header. I've had seats right behind home plate thanks to connections with the Muscular Dystrophy Association. North Central has had alumni outings here every year towards the beginning of the season, and I was for all intents and purposes kidnapped into going last season by my wonderful fiancee. I was out in the bleachers the day Fergie Jenkins and Greg Maddux had their numbers retired in 2009, and again last year when Joel Quenneville brought the Stanley Cup with him to throw out the first pitch. I've heard multiple insults thrown at opposing outfielders and laughed at the chorus of boos directed at a guy wearing a Cardinals shirt at a Cubs-Orioles game (and the call in the ninth inning from a probably drunk guy that "It's not too late to throw him onto the field!"). It's where I saw my first two walkoff wins in person, including one from the bleachers after a phenomenal pitcher's duel between Ryan Dempster and Tim Lincecum. It's also the site of my favorite game I've attended in person back in 2003 when the Cubs blew out the Brewers behind a wealth of home runs; Kerry Wood was part of a set of back-to-back-to-back jacks, and Sammy Sosa hit a pair of bombs, including one that went at least 520 feet (I can still see that ball sailing well past me out over Waveland and onto Kenmore Avenue).

Photo from May 3, 2013 game vs. Cincinnati

My dad has been going to games at Wrigley since he first moved to Chicagoland in 1984, and he's the one who introduced me to this cathedral of baseball. He'll be the first to tell you that "Wrigley is a pit", and even said so in a project I did during my senior year at North Central for my Writing Across Media class. But he and I can both attest to the magical feeling that you get when you're on the Red Line approaching the Addison stop when you can first see the lights atop the ballpark, and the atmosphere you get when you first step out of the station and into the neighborhood. Just being among that throng of people and seeing the history in and around the ballpark... you can't really put it into words. If you haven't been yet, you need to.

I'm not sure yet when I'm going to make it to Wrigley this season. Planning a wedding while working on a new home, plus a honeymoon takes up a lot of your time. Hopefully I'll be able to make it there after all the excitement is past and I can celebrate the Party of the Century with the Birthday Park itself.

Way Post-Super Bowl, Pre-Draft NFL Quarterback Ratings

Instead of doing this right after the Super Bowl this year, I opted instead for a crazy tournament where a simulator determined that the 1999 St. Louis Rams were the greatest team of all time (or at least, the greatest Super Bowl winner).

Two months later, ESPN finally did what they did last year and added a ranking poll of 34 NFL quarterbacks. Being the sucker I am, I went for it.

Obviously there's some debate in terms of particular order, but like I did last year, I'm going to separate these quarterbacks into tiers. The tier names may change, but the principle is pretty much the same. I'm also including the overall SportsNation rankings as of the time I submitted my list.