Home Blog Page 251

Strictly Content: The better steward of Fox’s assets is Comcast, Disney or…

By
Jeremy Evans
-
0

Until recently, before Comcast dropped out of the bidding, most of the discussion over the sale of Fox’s entertainment assets centered around who could pay more? Disney won the bidding process and paid $20 billion more than their initial offer. However, the more important question is, who is best suited to steward Fox’s entertainment assets? Comcast, Disney, another tech streamer, a cable or telephone company or Fox? 

Assuming the deal is approved by the company board’s and horizontal antitrust issues aside, here is what each prospective buyer might have and will (e.g., Disney) look like as an owner. 

Comcast 

Money, as with Disney, is not an issue. Comcast owns NBCUniversal and a 30% stake in Hulu, like Disney and Fox. Comcast is the largest broadcasting and cable television company in the world by revenue. Disney is second only to AT&T-Time Warner, who recently merged to become the largest pay-TV company, the largest cable TV company, the largest home Internet service provider in the United States and the nation’s third-largest home telephone service provider. Clearly, the infrastructure is in place. Comcast also owns several studios including DreamWorks.   

Comcast would have the ability to distribute content on any of its platforms and channels including Hulu, which it would own a 60% stake in if the sale were completed with Fox. Additionally, Comcast does not have the one, major issue concerning Disney; morality of content. Disney is a family-style content company, specifically when it comes to film and television. Fox is not. Hulu is also a well-known, utilized platform and customers would receive the added benefit of more content on an existing platform, albeit for a likely higher price. This as opposed to Disney’s platform that is in development. Is Disney willing to change its character from a family-friendly company to something broader? Is Comcast too big with Fox’s assets? Would the Justice Department challenge its potential purchase? 

Arguably, Comcast would have been a better television and streaming partner (via its existing networks, platforms and Hulu), but it does not have the current film resources to challenge Disney, which Disney knew and pounced on securing the deal with Fox. 

Disney 

The real question here is, does Disney actually need Fox’s assets? While looking at the most recent film releases, ESPN+’s performance and a Netflix-style platform in the works, Disney is already dominating the entertainment, media and sports landscape and will likely continue to do so. The Walt Disney Company is also the third largest by revenue in the world behind Comcast and AT&T-Time Warner. Although the deal with Time Warner likely places AT&T number one in some categories now, along with having the cell phone market cornered, Disney owns ABC, ESPN, a 30% stake in Hulu and much more including studios Marvel, Pixar and Lucasfilm Ltd. 

However, the United Kingdom’s Sky News property plays a role here because where Disney’s ABC has struggled to compete with Fox’s news service (as has everyone else), both Comcast and Disney have been approved in the UK to purchase Sky and both companies would be wise to add international influence and news where many American studios already have lots and offices. 

Comcast and Disney are also in a race for the control of Hulu, a potential challenger to Netflix with the right leadership and content. Additionally, they already have sports on the platform having broadcast the NHL playoffs and other major events.  

Disney should and must find a way for the Disney and Fox properties to play well together, or separately, like car companies do with brands, makes and models. From a business dominance standpoint, Disney just could not pass on the opportunity to purchase a major studio’s (e.g., Fox) entertainment assets, while letting a competitor do to them what it just did to Comcast/NBCUniversal.  

With its purchase, Disney will now be in a great position to challenge Netflix with its newly added content and 60% ownership in Hulu, plus its own existing and developing platforms. 

Someone Else 

Although there were rumors, no tech/streaming/entertainment giant publicly entered the Fox picture as a potential buyer. Amazon could have benefited from Fox’s content on Amazon Prime. Apple could also have immediately added content to its up-and-coming studio. Also, let us not forget about Netflix, because whoever own Fox’s assets will likely remove their content from Netflix’s platform (like Disney is already doing) and onto their own like Hulu, etc. Then again, the streamers might also be well-suited to avoid horizontal or vertical antitrust issues, not to mention their focus on developing original content, without the legal, clearance, and rights encumbrances. For major news companies, adding Sky News would add to their international exposure, but where a net gain might be a net loss for a competitor, a traditional news company adding significant entertainment properties (and debt), would not be wise. 

Fox 

Rupert Murdoch wanting to sell is the end of a storied career in entertainment, media and sports. Murdoch will still own Fox News, plus FS1 and other sports stations, but Disney must sell-off the regional sports networks as part of the deal. 21st Century as a studio is world renowned and when looking at the success of recent films, is the only studio (in both film and television) competing with Disney in terms of blockbusters and money-makers. It would have been great for business and content to see the company continue to compete with the other greats and at the least split the company between Murdoch’s sons as its new leaders. Moreover, Fox could lose some of its culture in a sale with Disney.  

Maybe Fox should have sold its television programs and rights to Comcast and movie properties to Disney. Maybe the split negotiation would have driven up the price and profit for Fox. Maybe Comcast and Disney refused to deal unless it was for all entertainment assets. 

When it comes to controlling content in today’s environment, everyone wants to own it, distribute it and watch it. How the market shakes out is important, but ultimately, the questions should go beyond just who has the most money to make a purchase. The real question is, who will be the best steward of Fox assets? It may indeed have been Fox itself, but Disney was also best situated to challenge the entertainment newcomers. Fox sold high while turning its focus to news and sports. 

The Chosen 1…

    By
    Julian Shipp
    -
    0
    LeBron James Chosen 1 Tattoo / (AP Photo)

    Louisville Strong: Which Cardinal will have a breakout season?

    By
    Stephen Patrick
    -
    0
    Photo Courtesy of: (USATSI)

    Coach Bobby Petrino and the University of Louisville Cardinals will have a tough order as they look to replace 14 starters from last year’s team. Most glaringly absent is former Heisman Trophy winner Lamar Jackson. Even with its losses, Louisville retains lots of talent and fielded a solid 2018 recruiting class. Which Cardinals will have a breakout season after all the talent has left? Let’s take a look.  

    P.J. Blue  

    After years of drawbacks, P.J. Blue finally takes the field. There might not be a player fans are more excited about than Blue. The 6’4” outside linebacker picked UofL over Oklahoma, Clemson and Alabama, among other powerhouse programs. In 2016 as an athletic linebacker/safety hybrid, Blue was expected to take Josh Harvey-Clemon’s position after he departed. After redshirting, Blue saw his redshirt freshman season come to an early exit due to a knee injury. This season, Blue is finally healthy and is expected to play linebacker after being switched over from safety this spring. After two years of learning the scheme, he should be a leader on defense. 

    Kemari Averett 

    Kemari Averett  (USATSI)

    Averett barely played last season because he was considered too a raw talent as a freshman. But tight end Charles Standberry struggled to produce, Louisville put the giant tight end out there for blocking purposes and it worked. Some say his size limits his athletic ability, but Averett doesn’t think so. Additionally, he’s a solid pass catcher, as evidenced by his 22- yard touchdown run down the sideline on 4th and 11 against Boston College. 

    Averett finished the season with six receptions for 63 yards and one touchdown for the Cardinals. Now, with Standberry gone, Averett appears to be the go-to option as far as the tight end position is concerned. He provides a huge mismatch for almost all defenses, as he’s almost too fast for linebackers and too big and strong for defensive backs. 

    C.J. Avery 

    There wasn’t a higher-rated player in last season’s recruiting class for Louisville than safety C.J. Avery. He was ranked as the 7th best safety in the country according to ESPN’s recruiting rankings. Playing behind two high-quality players in Zykiesis Cannon and Chucky Williams, Avery didn’t get the chance to show his true talent. Avery was moved to the “star” position in Peter Sirmon’s defensive scheme, where he was forced to play a role he never played before.  

    Avery has bulked up since arriving on campus, going from 190 pounds to 215. With the talent of a safety and currently the size of a linebacker, he will help the Cards tremendously as he moves into the likely role of full-time starting linebacker. The talented freshman showed flashes of greatness and posted decent numbers for playing out of position. He racked up 22 tackles and one fumble recovery while getting fans excited about his potential in 2018-19. 

    Raptors lose in trade, Popovich wins

    By
    J.T. Clifton
    -
    0
    Kawhi & Demar trade / Illustration courtesy of: (CLNS media)

    The Toronto Raptors traded DeMar DeRozan and a protected, first-round pick to the San Antonio Spurs for Kawhi Leonard and Danny Green. The protected pick is shielded 1-20 and becomes two, second-round picks after one year. There’s several reasons this trade makes no sense for the Raptors. 

    The first reason is DeRozan was loyal to the franchise and was completely caught off guard by the trade. He posted on his Instagram feed, “Be told one thing & the outcome another. Can’t trust ‘em. Ain’t no loyalty in this game. Sell you out quick for a little bit of nothing…” This is a bad look for a franchise that already has a hard time attracting big time free agents. DeRozan was reportedly told he was not getting traded during the summer by the Raptors’ front office.  

    Another reason the Raptors are losing in the deal is Kawhi seems like a rental player for one year. He’s already said he has no interest in playing in Toronto and Toronto doesn’t have the firepower to beat the Warriors or maybe even a full-strength Celtics team. So, they’ve lost their best player in DeRozan and a first round pick to potentially be in the Conference Finals or lose to the Warriors or Rockets in the Finals. 

    If the Raptors wanted to get rid of DeRozan’s contract, they should have traded for a player who wanted to be there or received a few draft picks in return. If you want to blow it up, it’s a good time. They could have started a rebuild while LeBron, the Rockets and the Warriors duke it out for championships. Toronto needs to try to win Kawhi over or this will be a complete loss for the Raptors. 

    Kawhi Leonard / (Canadian Press)

    Greg Popovich came out the big winner of the trade. He showed that a superstar is not going to dictate to him where and when he’s going to play. There were lots of questions concerning whether Leonard should have sat out in the playoffs to begin with. With Kawhi playing hardball stating the Lakers (another Western Conference team) was the only squad he would play for, Popovich stayed strong. He sent him to the Eastern conference for that team’s best player and a first round pick.  

    This could change the way Superstars are handled in the future. NBA teams often cave to the demands of stars, but it may not be that way anymore. Kawhi is a top 5 player when he’s healthy and Popovich essentially told him to “shove it” when it came down to what he wanted. When asked about Leonard, Popovich declined comment and said he’s only moving forward

    Renegotiating the Dodgers’ TV deal: How Spectrum can reach more viewers and make more money

    By
    Jeremy Evans
    -
    0

    Ironically, or maybe un-ironically, Spectrum (formerly Time Warner Cable, now owned by Charter Communications), is the Los Angeles Dodgers’ exclusive game content distributor via Sports Net LA. Spectrum finds itself in the same position as traditional cable providers before streamers like Amazon, Netflix, Hulu and others arrived; stuck in an old way of thinking, unwilling to change and losing millions of customers along the way. The story is long and has heartbreak for fans as many missed Vin Scully’s last season in the booth and other memories since the deal $8.3 billion deal was signed in 2013. 

    Currently, DirectTV, Spectrum’s competitor, does not provide the channel to its customers after losing the bid to Spectrum’s former namesake to pay to broadcast Dodger games. Dodger fans are still without the diverse viewing capability, while the organization celebrates its 60th year in Los Angeles and 127th overall. What is the solution? 

    It is simple, really; cut out the middle man and go streaming. First, the Dodgers stand to lose nothing as they already have guaranteed money pursuant to their underlying agreement with Spectrum. The Dodgers should be pushing, if they are not already, for all fans to have access (or at least better options) to view all games. 

    Second, Spectrum loses nothing by bringing in other partners. Rhetorically, if Hulu can stream NHL games, YouTube TV can stream LAFC and Seattle Sounders soccer games, Amazon Prime NFL Football (for no charge to Prime customers) and a host of social media platforms including Facebook Live, Snapchat and Twitter, what is preventing Spectrum from doing the same? Spectrum owns the Dodgers broadcast as they purchased it on a 25-year deal. Spectrum increases viewership and potentially more sponsorship dollars by hosting on other platforms. Furthermore, cable subscribers have been decreasing, while viewers are falling in love with content now and everywhere via the streamers. Without change, it is the Dodgers’ “Blue” elephant in the room.  

    Interestingly enough, the streamer Hulu could have played a huge role. Imagine Dodger fans being able to watch all Dodger games on Hulu for $7.99 a month, while cutting their cable cord. However, and this is where it gets confusing, Time Warner Cable, not to be confused with the Time Warner that just sold to AT&T in the $85 billion-approved merger deal, owns a 10% non-voting stake in Hulu. Time Warner Cable was sold to Charter Communications (without the Hulu stake), which also owns Spectrum, the exclusive broadcaster for Dodger games. Comcast and Charter also just entered into a mobile operating platform partnership, while Comcast has its own 30% voting stake in Hulu. 

    Lastly, Comcast just placed a bid for $65 billion to purchase some of Fox’s assets, including its 30% stake in Hulu. Counting that up, there is 70% of Hulu in control of one to two companies that would be primed to broadcast Dodger games as a spectacular get and a first for the Hulu platform. Spectrum would potentially get back the customers it lost to cord-cutting through Hulu. By the way, Spectrum launched Spectrum TV Stream (a smaller version of Hulu) in 2017 and guess what content was missing from it? Dodger broadcasts. There is no word on whether the mobile platform partnership between Comcast and Charter will include Dodger broadcasts, but again a prime opportunity is being wasted without some mobile, streaming, and/or social media options being added for the local fan base/audience. 

    It has been stated before, but the renegotiation or expansion of the current agreement starts and fails (at least for the viewers) in the lack of diversity of distributors and furthermore in the lack of a streamer or streamers beings included. Spectrum gains financially by reaching more viewers and advertisers/sponsors. Although the Dodgers have little to no leverage (having sold the rights in 2013 before streamers were gaining traction into sports), the Dodgers gain in reputation and access by adding a significant portion of the Southern California population by to it viewing audience. 

    Reportedly, the Dodgers have placed pressure on Spectrum to reach more fans. Some deals have made that possible by Charter/Spectrum purchasing smaller cable providers, but not to the extent fans expect or what could be possible via a streamer, mobile, or social media giant. Spectrum cannot solve the Dodgers problem by adding more cable providers. That is the old way of thinking and it has proved itself not to work. Spectrum needs a streaming partner and Hulu might be a great place to start. 

    League of Extraordinary Gentlemen: Our 2018 ACC Player of the Year

    By
    Stephen Patrick
    -
    0
    AJ Dillon / Photo Courtesy of: Michael Dwyer (APSI)

    Now that the 4th of July fireworks have been lit and the barbecue is off the grill, our attention turns to football as teams begin to take the field for summer workouts as the season draws near. Team success is always the primary goal, but there are special players who are just a level above everyone else. These college football players have the opportunity to stand out as the most important contributors in their conferences. 

    While being player of the year in their conference doesn’t automatically put them in contention for the Heisman Trophy, the best players from all the leagues garner national attention. Most conferences award top honors to one offensive and one defensive player. Every game in the ACC will be a battle as few teams in the conference are cupcakes. As the ACC has grown to one of the top football conferences in the country, it’s only fitting they have NFL-level talent. To prepare for the upcoming season, SportsRadioAmerica.com looks at the athletes who could hold the crown as ACC Player of the Year at the end of the season. 

    Top Candidates  

    AJ Dillon, RB, Boston College: Sophomore AJ Dillon could develop into one of the best running backs in the country. During the first six games of his freshman season, Dillon managed 333 rushing yards and two touchdowns. After adapting to the game, he accumulated 1,256 yards and 12 scores in the second half of the season. If he puts in a full year of that level of production, he’ll gain national attention.  

    Clelin Ferrell, Weak-side DE, Clemson: Christian Wilkins and Dexter Lawrence are returning as first-team, All-ACC lineman, but Ferrell is the most explosive lineman and he’ll have great numbers with that talent on the line. Ferrell will still likely emerge, once again, as the best defensive lineman on his team. He led Clemson with 18 tackles for loss and 9.5 sacks last season, also forcing two fumbles. Additionally, he’s a beast in the against the run of play category. 

    Jaquan Johnson, S, Miami: Jaquan Johnson has been ranked the nation’s third-best safety by a number of media outlets. Johnson was the reason for the “Turnover Chain” being sighted on the Hurricanes’ sideline. He had four interceptions and forced three fumbles. He was also the U’s most feared tackler with 96 tackles, serving as a heavy-hitter and playmaking force in the secondary. 

    One to Watch 

    Cam Akers, RB, Florida State: With the uncertainty at quarterback, FSU will rely heavy on the running game. Usually, the Seminoles are guaranteed to compete with Clemson, but that’s not the case in 2018. With a new-look FSU team and new head coach, Akers could provide a wonderful boost. He cracked approximately 1,000 yards while sharing carries as a true freshman. 

    Predicted Winner 

    Dillon’s output behind a seasoned blocking unit gives him an early edge, but any of the Clemson stars could have a major claim to the award. It’s going to be tough for Dillon while others compete for the ACC title. But, as long as Boston College isn’t terrible and posts numbers like the latter part of last year, Dillon will win the award. 

    Sex, lies and money: WNBA to NBA is apples and oranges

    By
    J.T. Clifton
    -
    0
    A'ja Wilson / (AP Photo)

    LeBron James recently signed a four-year, $154 million contract and just surpassed $1 billion in career earnings. Those are insane numbers. No one denies that. What is surely an even more insane number is the amount of money he’s brought Nike, the Cleveland Cavaliers and Miami Heat. 

    WNBA star A’ja Wilson recently reacted to the signing on Twitter by saying, “154M….Must.be.nice. We over here looking for a M 😊 but Lord, let me get back in my lane.”

    This has sparked a debate on Twitter that shouldn’t be a debate, but here we are. It’s sparked a gender pay gap debate, but that’s frankly not what this is at all. And it makes the WNBA players who defend the controversy sound uneducated. 

    Most WNBA player’s salaries start out at $50,000 a year and have a median salary of $76,000. That’s about 20% of the league minimum for an NBA player. 

    Wilson also commented on the talent of NBA players saying, “lolololol ohh it’s about skill set? Because I heard a bench player gets paid more than … nvm.” If she’s asserting salaries should be based on who’s more talented, then a bench player in the NBA would beat a WNBA player 21-0 in a one-on-one game. It’s biology. The male athletes are bigger, faster, stronger, jump higher, etc. 

    Serena Williams once played one of the least-ranked, male tennis players in the world. He was ranked 203rd and was described by one journalist as, “a man whose training regime centered around a pack of cigarettes and more than a couple bottles of ice cold lager”. He beat Serena 6-1 after leading 5-0. He added after the match he played like someone ranked 600 to keep the game fun. 

    Lebron James signs with LA Lakers / (Clutch Sports)

    So, this is why it’s not a gender pay gap issue, as many believe. It’s a different product and the WNBA players are barking up the wrong tree. It’s strictly a business issue. The average attendance for a WNBA game is 7,716 and the average for an NBA game is 17,987. Across the three major networks for 2017-18, the viewership in millions for the NBA was an average of 2.39 (ABC, TNT and ESPN). The average viewership for WNBA is 171,000 in 2017, which is an all-time low. So, there it is. There’s where the money comes from and why males are paid so much more once sponsors are added in. 

    Gender pay gap occurs when a male and female do the same job for similar companies and the female gets paid a lower wage than the male for no apparent reason. The NBA and WNBA are not similar companies and the products they produce are not similar. 

    WNBA players need to lobby for more people to watch. They need to advocate to get more people in the seats and more people to turn on their televisions if they desire a higher wage. They shouldn’t even make NBA comparisons because it’s apples and oranges and will get them nowhere. They need to get out in communities, get more girls interested in basketball, become their favorite players and make them want to watch. That’s how to generate more revenue. 

    The women of the WNBA are very talented at what they do. Indeed, they’re some of the best athletes in the world but biologically, comparing themselves to NBA players gives them an impossible standard to live up to. 

    The X Factor: Will Dez Bryant hit the Music City?

    By
    Stephen Patrick
    -
    0
    Dez Bryant / (AP Photo)

    The Dallas Cowboys made a big decision to release former Pro Bowl WR Dez Bryant, so will Bryant throw up the X in the Music City? The 29-year-old receiver was due $16.5 million, forcing the Cowboys to move on since he hasn’t lived to the contract he signed. So now, Dez plays the waiting game. As the season nears, the market has been awful for Bryant. After he was first released, he turned down an offer from the Ravens. Dez now appears ready to pounce on the best situation to become available. 

    The Titans’ receiver situation isn’t the greatest as training camps are nearly upon us. Corey Davis and Rishard Matthews have dealt with injuries since organized team activities. It was strange the Titans didn’t sign more WR’s to bring to camp. With the WR position compromised, would the team add such a big personality to the locker room? This is not 2014, Mr. X. This is an average receiver at the moment  

    The Tennessee Titans took a big step forward in 2017 by making the postseason and winning a playoff game. But, if the team is going to take the next step and become a serious contender in the AFC this year, Marcus Mariota could use more help. After inheriting a dumpster fire in his first year, Mariota’s gone 18-14 as a starter, including last year’s playoffs.  

    In yet another down year for Bryant, he had more receiving yards and receiving touchdowns than any Tennessee Titans receiver this past season. The Titans had 15 receiving touchdowns over 16 games. Take out the tight end production and that drops to nine. Eliminate the running back touchdowns and now it’s at six. To understand what Bryant would bring to the Titans, let’s look at some statistics. Bryant had six receiving touchdowns last season. From a pure position standpoint, Bryant had as many touchdowns as all of the Titans’ receivers combined in 2017. 

    To some, he’s unemployable despite having talent that cannot be ignored. If a team believes in him, he could find new inspiration to throw up his signature X after scoring. Bryant’s antics have many teams conflicted with adding the former Pro Bowl receiver. He’s been labeled a “locker room distraction” as some believe he physically hasn’t recovered from injuries and the media storm that surrounds them. Still, the Titans have emerged as a team for Bryant. In Nashville the media firestorm won’t be such a force compared to larger markets. The Titans could make a splash move by bringing Bryant to the Music City. 

    Three Keys to Sustained Success in Entertainment, Media and Sports

    By
    Jeremy Evans
    -
    0

    With recent news that a handful of European television and media networks are joining forces to take on their American Netflix and Amazon counterparts to better compete, the first thought that came to mind was innovation is the key to sustained success, not scale. In that light, consider the following three keys to sustained success in the entertainment, media and sports industries. 

    1. Be on Time (and right!)

    Success in life and business is always about timing. Many successful and unsuccessful people have uttered some variation of the phrase that luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity, which was first attributed to Roman philosopher Lucius Annaeus Seneca. Being at the right place and right time always requires some build-up to being at the place you need to be, even if you think it was by a chance meeting. In other words, work always precedes the luck. 

    We can imagine if consumers were polled at the time before some innovation occurred, whether the taxi driver, passenger, movie-goer, movie-maker, distributor or consumer, a majority would have been hoping for the next big thing that was more efficient, cheaper and user-friendly. However, being innovative is as much about being ahead of the competition as it is being right about what consumer wants or may want and how that coincides with government regulators. In some sense, you are creating the disruption by being first, but also being flexible enough to change with the times and regulations as you were before the disruption. Sometimes being too early or wrong creates issues with regulators (e.g., lack of approval) and/or consumers (e.g., lack of interest). In addition, sometimes having the negotiation leverage to push back for a fairer compromise is just as important. 

    1. Be Innovative 

    Paraphrasing, there is a quote about recent innovators and it goes something like this: Uber did not cause the taxi industry to fail; it was the taxi industry’s inability to change. Netflix did not cause the movie and television industry to slump, it was Netflix’s innovation, direct to consumer platform, efficiency and lower pricing. It has been proven again and again, the history of economic change is based on innovation. 

    In the current market, we see entertainment, tech, mobile and media companies combining for scale in the name of competition (AT&T-Time Warner, CBS-Viacom, the Disney-Fox-Comcast negotiation, etc.), but companies should be wary of such moves because buying the competition or vertical industries only goes as far as the innovation goes. For example, as successful as Uber and Lyft have been at revolutionizing the transportation of people in a shared economy, it is also their ability to work with governments around the globe on regulations, and investing in the future of people transportation. Innovation is about an idea as much as it is about the next idea, the idea after that and the execution of that idea or ideas. 

    1. Be Techy 

    This section might as well be titled “do not be scared.” The point here is you should always strive to be the person or company that is using, inventing or teaching the new thing scaring everyone else because new means change. Uber and Lyft’s executives thought, “why not cut out the middle-man (the dispatcher), create an app or platform to hail a ride and make the experience better than the original?” Netflix basically did the same thing by cutting out the distributors, creating a platform and going straight to the consumer. 

    However, all successful companies started as something smaller, but changed and grew with the times. Netflix started as a mailbox movie delivery service. Uber started as a service for the elite. Myspace existed before Facebook. Twitter existed before Snapchat and Instagram. 

    Innovation builds on the original, but offers change; some slight, sometimes disruptive. Disney’s new streaming platform challenging Netflix, while simultaneously purchasing Fox’s movie and television content, is really the perfect example of the above. Like Clint Eastwood once said, “improvise, adapt and overcome.” Companies must be willing to accept, learn and grow with the new and improved. 

    Remember, be on time (and right), be innovative and be techy. 

    One-hit blunder: Will Kentucky ever get over the hump?

    By
    J.T. Clifton
    -
    0
    Ken Weaver (APSI)

    It seems like every year under Mike Stoops, Kentucky football is billed to be the surprise of the Southeastern Conference. They’re always supposed to have a lot of firepower on offense and Stoops is always “improving their defense.” The bad thing for their fans (or at least the teasing part) is, the Wildcats always start out well, but flounder at the end of the season.  

    So, is this year the year?  According to Las Vegas, it’s not. Kentucky has 300/1 odds to win the SEC. They’re tied for third-to-last odds with Arkansas, only in front of Vanderbilt and Ole Miss, which isn’t eligible. Think that’s a good thing for Kentucky? Doubtful.  

    Kentucky returns star running back Benny Snell, who ran for 1,333 and 19 touchdowns last year. The huge question is at the quarterback position. They’ll look to JUCO transfer Terry Wilson, who is the No. 3 dual-threat JUCO quarterback in rankings by 247Sports. 

    The Wildcats return ten starters on defense, while losing second-leading tackler Courtney Love. Obviously, their defense should be improved and needs to be based on assets they have at quarterback and wide receiver. So, how do they get over the hump?  

    It’s not an easy answer, because they haven’t gotten over the hump with Tennessee and Florida, both down by their respective standards. Even though Florida won the East in the recent past, they’ve still struggled. Kentucky clearly has not taken advantage of this. 

    The Wildcats finished 30th in recruiting last year and 26th in 2017, which isn’t going to cut it when it comes to winning the SEC. While Kentucky isn’t a hotbed of recruiting, they have to go into Ohio and south of Tennessee to get top recruits. As big as their basketball program is, they should be recruiting better. 

    The Wildcats ponied up the money for John Calipari and got a National Championship out of it. They’re also nationally relevant every year in basketball. It’s time for Stoops’ seat to get very, very hot. He’s hasn’t won more than seven games in his five seasons at Kentucky and it doesn’t look like they’ll improve that number this year. It’s time for Kentucky brass to quit giving Stoops a pass because they’re a “basketball school.” Have they watched Duke lately?  

    The Wildcats need to bring in someone who wins. They need to bring in someone who’s going to shake things up in the recruiting trail. They need to bring in someone like Lane Kiffin of Florida Atlantic University. That’s when Kentucky will get over the hump and be in contention to win the SEC. 

    1...250251252...255Page 251 of 255

    Shows on the SRA Network