Bleacher Report - Articles by George Burdell

Gator Bit: ACC Leadership Fumbles... Again

George Burdell — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 23:11:17 -0400

Based on early reports from Jacksonville and Orlando the ACC is almost complete in shuffling its bowl lineup for the next four years. Sadly, the net changes appear for the worse, and given events of the past 6 years ACC fans shouldn't be surprised.

The news broke as several outlets reported the ACC finalizing a renewal with the Champs Sports Bowl in Orlando. However, the renewal will feature the ACC's No. 3 selection as opposed to the current No. 4. It coincides with the bowl changing the opponent from the Big 10 No. 5/6 selection to the Big East No. 2. The ACC would be seeing a slight increase in payouts, but this would mean the ACC would be losing it's current No. 3 tie-in—the Gator Bowl in Jacksonville.

According to Jackonsville.com the 6th oldest bowl game in the country is poised to announce a four year deal to make the game an SEC vs Big Ten matchup. Yes, that would be the third such game to take place in Florida on New Year's Day between 11 AM and 4 PM. Woe to anyone wishing for variety during this day once steeped in college football tradition.

The marketing appeal of both those conferences is well known, and despite hosting an ACC team for at least 14 years running, Jacksonville is a decidedly SEC town.

It's no secret the Gator Bowl organizers have wanted to crash the SEC bowl establishment experienced in Orlando and Tampa. The Bowl is strong enough and connected enough that they're making this change with a decent idea of what they stand to gain.

Which leaves ACC fans fearing what they stand to lose.

With various bowl contracts up for renewal this year all the big conferences made some changes. The ACC moved to drop their far western ties for bowls closer to home: The Emerald Bowl in San Francisco pairing ACC No. 5/6 against the PAC 10 and the Humanitarian Bowl in Boise against the WAC were dropped in exchange for the GMAC Bowl (Mobile/MAC), the EagleBank (DC/TBA) and the Sun Bowl (El Paso/ PAC 10).

All in all things were looking decidedly better, for while these were mostly lower tier bowls with little differences in payouts, the new lineup was far more accessible for ACC programs and their fans.

Then things looked even better when, according to SI.com, the Gator Bowl decided against renewing ties with the Big East and announced they were negotiating for the Big Ten #4 selection.

In essence the ACC would simply be seeing their opponents in Orlando and Jacksonville switch places. The appeal lay in having the Big Ten matchup in the higher profile bowl. From the ACC's stand point it would be like a validation that this game would be on par with the national appeal of SEC/Big Ten games also being played that day.

Amazingly the ACC leadership appears ready to let that slip away. Now the conference stands to lose their only New Year's Day exposure. It will also likely experience a drop in net bowl revenue and lose another bowl game vs a BCS conference.The only tie in with the Big Ten, to boot. Suddenly, that addition of the GMAC bowl seems less appealing...because of its increased necessity.

How did this happen? As suggested the Gator Bowl has longed to become part of the SEC family. Therefore, there may not have been much the conference could do in these negotiations.

The blame lies in letting the negotiations get to this point, a point where a national bowl game and its partners said they'd prefer the SEC No. 6 selection over the ACC No. 3.

I don't doubt, given the City's location, there's appeal to the idea of seeing South Carolina, Kentucky, Auburn or Ole Miss come calling. (Let's be real as we know Florida, Bama and such are unlikely to drop this far.)

How many SEC vs. Big Ten matchups can one day take. Knowing additional pairings may yet be happening within the BCS bowls? Meanwhile, at ACC No. 3, the Gator stood to choose from Miami, FSU, VT, Georgia Tech and Clemson. And if the likes of UNC, NCSU or UVA did make it they've proven their fans would travel to such an event.

The problems, however, stem from everything else the conference has to offer and how the ACC has handled things during and since the expansion.

- Without delving into the overall merits of the conference's membership, the expansion left the conference with 4 modest-to-small private schools and two others with humble enrollments compared to their average SEC and Big Ten brethren. So while the conference has some programs that travel well and strong alumni support, by comparison they are a much shallower conference in terms of nationally appealing programs.

- The ACC placed the new football championship game in Jacksonville in an effort to increase their appeal in recruit rich Florida. In doing so they failed to account for accessibility for all ACC fans. The travel woes were compounded by a bowl selection order that all but forced the championship game runnerup to return to Jacksonville 4 weeks later.

- The ACC's response to the above problem was not only to move the championship game—a good decision but handled in a way that angered the Gator Bowl officials—but they moved it to another Floridia city (with which Jacksonville is competing for business and prestige). They then dropped the Gator Bowl in the ACC selection order to No. 3. Not just to No. 3, but behind a bowl that matches the ACC No. 2 with the 5th selection from the SEC!

Clearly the current, weaker level of play by so many ACC programs is a factor, but this compounds the problem. This will surely impact recruiting, influence fan support and possibly compound matters as the ACC moves towards new TV contracts next year. How can you justify asking for money to stay within the same stratosphere as the SEC when your No. 3 bowl game is now literally the Orlando undercard to the SEC?

This isn't to say the folks behind the Gator Bowl actually feel slighted or that the ACC hasn't been giving their best to the city and the event organizers. Since 2001 every Gator Bowl has drawn above 60,000 fans, most above 67,000—this despite participation from some non-traditional programs like UVA, NCSU and Maryland.

Yet while it's safe to assume all parties involved understand the nature of the business the reality is ACC fans will be disappointed by the new arrangements. Perhaps the ACC could have pulled its No. 2 selection back to Jacksonville and kept both the Gator and Champs bowls. Alas, it appears the option no longer exists and now the ACC must find yet another way to prove its worth.

And just like the bulk of its current programs, the ACC appears to lack the leadership to quickly and effectively pull this one out.

The Growth of Arsenal: In Praise of Motion without the Ball

George Burdell — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 11:23:43 -0400

Under Arsene Wenger, Arsenal Football Club has been touted as employing a modern take on Johann Cryuff's Total Football, full of grace and progressive ball movement.

While no one will claim Arsenal is the only club attempting this style, or even the foremost in its application, it's clear that Wenger and the club are determined to play in a certain fashion, and will sink or swim on their own terms.

As such, pundits to date have also defined this style as pass-happy and suggest its success is dependent on the originators of the passes: the play-makers and field generals like Cesc Fabregas, Patrick Vieira, and Dennis Bergkamp.

However, in reviewing the evolution of the team since the mid 1990s, one could argue that the success of the style, and thus of Arsenal, might lay more in the talents of those receiving the ball rather than in the flashy distribution.

Bergkamp embodied this vision for passing flair. While not the most gifted athlete, Bergie had excellent ball control and would routinely slip balls between defenders to feed the darting runs of players like Robert Pires, Freddie Ljungberg, and most notably Thierry Henry.

To be sure, most of these dynamic assaults would not have been possible without the skillful passing from Bergie and the rest, but it was the creative movement away from the ball that enabled these passes to even be an option: Pires and Ljunberg drifting from out wide to open space within the defense; Ashley Cole's crashing runs from the deep defensive third to apply more pressure and give midfielders options for moving the ball around.

As these players moved around, quality shot opportunities would eventually open up and someone would invariably be good enough to capitalize.

Now fast forward as Arsenal transition to a new crop of players. Two seasons ago Arsenal, with a lineup startlingly different from "The Invincibles" of 2004, made a surprising run for the EPL title—despite having just released offensive talisman Henry to make a big money move to Barcelona.

Pundits tipped the Gunners to struggle, however, Cesc Fabregas emerged as a confident field general while Emmanuel Adebayor played like a revelation in Henry’s place. A comparable level of flair and offensive potency remained though the names had changed. Now the passes flowed from players named Hleb, Rosicky, van Persie, and a young Theo Walcott.

Conventional wisdom suggested Arsenal had simply replaced capable ball handlers with more capable ball handlers, but there was more to it than that.

Defensive midfielder Mathieu Flamini did a masterful job patrolling the back line, working with William Gallas to maintain the ability of the defense to push forward in a way that contributed to the offensive flow.

The outside midfielders, then, were able to continue their integrated fluidity, making the type of runs that eventually freed space for Adebayor or others to take quality shots.

The next season (last season), however, Flamini and Hleb were no longer on the side and Rosicky succumbed to injury. Samir Nasri was brought in to bolster the midfield and youngsters Denilson, Abou Diaby, and Alexandre Song were given more playing time.

Arsenal still retained players capable of making fine passes, however, the availability of more and better options to move the ball was absent because the players were not providing the same level of support, not making the same runs, or making the same moves to penetrate the defenses.

Opposing teams would bottle the midfield and the inexperienced side would relinquish under pressure before a quality shot was available.

Yes, injuries and player apathy contributed, but the telling sign that was both cause and effect of the weakened Arsenal game came in the form of less dynamic and aggressive movement by the players who didn’t have the ball.

Four games into this new season and it appears Arsenal are back playing the style desired. Is this because Cesc and company have become better passers? Hardly. In fact I feel safe in asserting they could all readily pass the ball from point A to point B well enough years ago.

What’s apparent from these early games, however, is the level of movement by the attacking players and how that has afforded the ball handlers more options, especially more safe and/or aggressive options for pressing the attack.

Andrey Arshavin and Eduardo da Silva are far more dynamic at the front than anything Adebayor could’ve hoped to provide, able to not only field a better first touch upon receiving the ball (and thus securing more passes as complete), but they move much faster and do more lateral movement to create space.

Denilson and Diaby's patience has grown immensely as well as their ability to make space with the ball. Biding time in possession while knowing the other players will eventually get open.

Meanwhile, Song, Gallas, and new acquisition Thomas Vermaelen have done well to bond in the central defense and afford the midfielders more direct support, again providing more options for the ball handlers.

Yet the revelation about this hasn’t come from watching Arsenal, but rather from seeing the exact opposite in action in MLS. I am very fond of this league and extremely proud of the progress being made in professional US soccer. That being said, the disparity in talent is revealing, and it comes mainly in the movement off the ball. Or in the case of many MLS players, the lack thereof.

Watching three games from this past weekend revealed large stretches of play where players were guilty of standing, bunching around the ball, or simply not making the type of attacking runs that can really open up space.

Whether this can be attributed to flagging confidence levels, inexperience, or poor coaching I can’t say, but evidently the foremost difference between the levels of play can be seen within how players move without the ball and play with one another.

MLS has many fine players who can juggle and pass as well as Cristiano Ronaldo and Fabregas, but without a fully capable, flowing team on the field the passing options differ and the potency of attack suffers.

Upon reflection this is quite understandable. Those who’ve coached will affirm that learning how and where to move off the ball is one of the most difficult things to grasp. Traditional drills like the 3 vs. 1 “Fox in the Box” allow the players to see the small scale approach and affirm that everyone can do a wall pass.

But while players can perform those drills knowing how and when to put those into play during a live game is a wholly different set of skills. It requires reading the flow of the game and knowing where to be in support/reaction of the play, and the younger the player the less likely they are to recognize how to get into the right positions.

This is epitomized by how youth coaches are often found teaching their players to stay in position: “Brian you’re always behind Thomas, Thomas you should always be between Stephen and Robert…”

Something tells me Arsene Wenger has never done this.

So yes, Arsenal and other high quality teams have skilled players and passing schemes that emphasize the need and value for skilled ball handlers making crisp passes. But I’ll contend the ultimate difference between success and struggle with these schemes rests primarily not in the talents of the ball handlers but in the ability of the supporting cast to understand and execute the movement off the ball needed to make those plays even possible.

The test for this season will be for Arsenal to sustain this dynamism against those teams with the athletes to mark out attacking players, or teams that simply try to clog the midfield and limit passing opportunities. To date, however, Arsenal seem to have found a complement of players able to make this happen to a much better degree than last season. Players who move well with the ball, and without.

Why Not a Major in Sports?

George Burdell — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 23:43:24 -0400

You know the joke: Someone asks what your major was in college and you throw out something clever like drinking, surfing or babes.

Today we often joke about big-time college athletes majoring in football or basketball, but after careful consideration that idea has a lot of merit.

We all know the traditional high school-college-pro progression of American athletes has been under assault lately. Players look to skirt the norm by going pro anywhere from 1-3 years early.

So-called purist fans lament the uncertainty facing modern collegiate rosters, while the pro leagues have differing opinions and abilities in terms of dealing with early entrants.

Some say the answer lies in paying college athletes, especially given the contracts conferences and coaches pull in these days.

But that route is fraught with many more legal issues than is commonly understood.

Wouldn't it be nice if there was a more orderly approach to balancing these new frontiers that could benefit everyone?

Far be it for me to call a hoops coach from UGA genius but when Jim Harrick had his son teach a class for the basketball players with such daunting test questions as "How many points is a three-point basket worth?" he was possibly on to something special.

I say take this the next level. Thus, Ladies and gentlefans, I give you the Associates Degree in Professional Athletics (APA)!

- The NFL and NBA could escape the legal gray area of age restrictions by simply requiring an APA or equivalent experience. Most jobs these days require a degree in their field, including college and HS coaching, so why not pro athletes?

Requiring a standardized degree eliminates the legal wrangling over eligibility (we're not prohibiting careers, just amending the standards for employment) and likely yields better men at the pro level.

An equivalency ratio could be set up for foreign talent or those simply not interested, preferably about three years outside HS. Meanwhile these leagues keep their free minor league feeder system intact.

- Sports management and sports fitness majors are quite common and for an APA it would pretty much be the basics pro athletes should know anyway: Personal finance, health and fitness and so on.

Practice time could also count towards their degree. Most pro rookies undergo training in these things, anyway ("5 drinks + 3 baby-mommas = Less $ 4 U"), so it only makes sense to utilize the college resources to give this a more comprehensive approach.

Plus, wouldn't we all feel a little better if those first round draft picks had a basic understanding of contract law and communication skills?

- By making this a bona fide major, chances are we restore the student namesake of student athletes and they approach their studies with more zeal. Along the way they'll also likely get a better grasp of what's truly required to make the transition, heeding the advice of school counselors as well as lurking agents.

- Making it a two-year degree won't place an undue hardship on the Kobe Bryants of the world, as it's entirely possible such programs can be completed within less than two years.

Early enrolling students could stay on track with the current NBA standard of playing after just one year of college.

Meanwhile, fringe athletes will have good cause to remain in school longer just as today, but more aware of what the pro world is like.

College athletes would have a better grasp of what they need to improve to make it at the next level, or possibly learn sooner how unrealistic the career might be.

- Chances are the athletes become better on the field as well, aided by improved focus and direction.

- Can't cut it in the same profession as your degree? Join the crowd! APA courses will likely lend themselves towards credit for other majors such as fitness, education (coaching), etc.

So, these athletes could continue with school like so many other students but at least have a better appreciation of the collegiate experience as compared to simply scheduling classes based on their ability to help retain your eligibility.

- - - -

Clearly this idea would require more work to even begin serious considerations, but maybe it's time for such innovation.

Maybe it's time we realize that college sports didn't take the student out of student athlete, but rather that the professional ambitions of modern student athletes have evolved.

Maybe we simply need the academic side of the equation to adapt to new forms industry.

Maybe then we'll look back and say "You know, that Jim Harrick Jr. was a real revolutionary."

Nine Ways ACC Football Can Be Improved

George Burdell — Fri, 29 May 2009 11:11:30 -0400

Several factors will forever keep the ACC from matching its SEC and Big Ten peers in terms of fan support and revenue. However, there are many simple steps the conference could still take to improve its appeal.

Winning games goes a long way, but that's not entirely under the control of the conference or the individual teams, and for now we'll also reserve Utopian thoughts on realignment for another day.

Here, though, are nine things I found that the ACC can control and take action on that would likely make ACC football a better product, increase exposure, and strengthen fan support.

1) Make Miami-BC an annual rivalry.

Hampered by smaller enrollments and distant locations in pro sports towns, one thing these programs do have going for each other is a modest rivalry punctuated by an unforgettable moment familiar to all true college football fans, and especially to each school's fanbase.

Renewing this rivalry would give the ACC another decent, marquee game on name recognition alone. This would involve some divisional realignment, but they should find a way to make this happen.

2) Kill the Miami-USF series.

Or at least move it to before conference play. Regrettably the ACC and Miami have allowed DisneyTV to force this upon fans as an end-of-year rivalry game, when in fact that rivalry should be the matchup listed above.

The problem is Miami and the ACC have nothing to gain here and a whole lot to lose. USF would love nothing more than to use this as a platform for solidifying a "big four" in Florida, or better still, supplant Miami as the No. 3 in state.

For this reason USF refuses to treat UCF as a rival, and in that same vein, there's no reason Miami should respect USF's calls. Miami does need to increase attendance, but this is one instance where the risks aren't worth the rewards.

3) No more conference games in the first three weeks.

Unless scheduling conflicts really demand this, please stop putting conference games so early in the season. The benefits of any TV exposure don't outweigh the crude play we've seen in recent examples, and this reduces the chances of creating quality conference games later in the season.

So while something like Miami vs. FSU on Labor Day sounds attractive, true fans know the game would be more intense and better played after each side has a few wins under its belt.

4) Play more games with Army and Navy.

It seems to match what the ACC both wants and needs: more Northeastern exposure without overdosing on the BE and respected opponents that aren't also a real threat to your standing. Plus they're easily accessible for several ACC schools.

If the conference seriously wants to increase their familiarity among Northeastern recruits and fans, this is a good way to go.

5) Awaken the Maryland program and fanbase.

The Terrapins have two national championships (as those things go) and several conference titles.

They have some 35,000 students and are in the DC/Baltimore metro area amidst a strong college football area with VT, WVU, and PSU...and yet continue to struggle on the field and at the gate (comparably speaking).

They could use a marquee rival. A series with PSU or Rutgers might help stir the souls, as Maryland fans seem less enamored with WVU (who'd prefer a series with VT anyway).

Seeing the improvements at UNC is great for the league, but seeing a sustained run and possible stadium expansion at College Park would do wonders.

6) Keep the ACC Championship Game in Carolina.

The folks at the Gator Bowl and Tampa have been very kind to the ACC, and the conference really wanted to bolster their exposure in Florida, but having this event in the Sunshine State is a bad move for right now.

The size of the event mandates accessibility from the casual ACC fan, and that fanbase resides primarily in the mid-Atlantic states.

Staying in NC also removes the possibility of duplicate travel for fans, as both participants are likely headed for bowl games south of Charlotte anyway.

Smaller championships can be more mobile, but for football the ACC lacks the volume of alumni to simply place it anywhere and assume it will prosper.

7) Schedule more games with the Big Ten.

The ACC is already inundated with games against their SEC and BE brethren, but as academic institutions, the conference they've most in common with is the Big Ten. This remains the last big unexplored territory for increasing exposure.

Especially now that the BTN assures every Big Ten game will be on "national" TV, seeing more games against the likes of Michigan State, Wisconsin, Purdue, and others would delight fans and keep perception of the ACC high.

8) Improve support of fan involvement.

Several schools could do more to bolster fan support and encourage fan buy-in: Making tailgating easier, offering better support for travel to away games, and having seating sections for die-hards wanting to be as raucous as the students come to mind.

We also need to see an end to goofy in-game promotions and anything else that distracts from the actual event, and fans should be encouraged to wear school colors EVERY game and not fall victim to one-time White/Black -outs.

If you want to be received as a real major program, it helps to behave like one.

9) Stay with the Kickoff Classic.

Clemson's loss in this event was a blow to the league last year, but not being involved at all would be far worse.

The game is now slated to be an annual national TV event, is in the ACC footprint, and provides the caliber of opponents needed to garner respect and attention.

Failing to support this event would be tantamount to surrendering support for college football in general, and that cannot be allowed to happen.

The ACC is already a better conference than it often gets credit for, but in the game and business of collegiate athletics, the goalposts are constantly being moved further out.

Moves such as these could make the ACC better still, and their fans deserve such an effort.

(One Yellow Jacket's opinion, anyway.)