Archive for the ‘Sporting Life’ Category

“Just change, baby!” – Passages in the barber chair

Monday, January 4th, 2010

Welcome to The Entroporium. If you like what you see, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Be seeing you!

Flickr: doggylama

The words every man dreads hearing: “You’re getting a little thin up there.”  And with that – no fanfare, no drama, no time for a neurotic outbreak – my barber Daniel snipped off the strands of my faux combover.  ”It’s 2010,” he went on.  ”Time for a fresh start.”

It was true.   One always wonders about the guy who has that one strand of hair carefully arranged over an obviously bald head.  How does he do that?  How does he face his loved ones when he gets wet?  Isn’t he worried it might be windy today?  For the last year, I was well down the road to becoming one of those guys.

What I learned over the last few years is that nobody plans for a combover.  They’re insidious.  They are the product of years of attrition, denial, compensation and the simple refusal to adapt to new ways of brushing your hair.

Rocky Becker has been a barber for nearly 50 years. He attributes his success and longevity to keeping it simple.

SF Chronicle: Carlos Avila Gonzalez

There’s something comforting about the No BS treatment at traditional men’s barber shops, a fading breed, run for the most part by old guys who have been doing nothing but giving no-BS quick & dirty haircuts for eons.  San Francisco has a couple of fancy locations – Mister and The Barber Lounge – which say they are barber shops but are in reality more like ultra-masculine salons.  More memorable, though, is Original Palace Barber Shop at 2nd and Mission.  Basically a bunch of chairs pushed together in a mound of the eccentric absentee owner’s garbage (must be seen to be believed), Original Palace is staffed by a crew of several 50+ men, all foreign with indeterminate nationalities, and one terribly unlucky woman. Never a wait and never out of there in more than 20 minutes.

My local barber shop is the simply-named Montclair Barber Shop.  Its proprietor, Rocky Becker, a near-silent character I see all the time on Mountain Boulevard smoking and sucking down coffee, was recently profiled in the San Francisco Chronicle.   To be in Rocky’s chair is to be transported somewhere into the early 1970s.  He’s got his Raiders calendar, a few shots of his Harley – and that’s all you get to see because after 5 minutes you are done, $20 and a pile of hair lighter. Not the greatest haircut, but that’s not what you were there for – nothing some pomade and an encore in four weeks can’t fix.

Al Davis, early 1960s

Al Davis, early 1960s, current hairstyle

The Chronicle was principally interested in the shop because of its longtime relationship with Oakland Raiders owner Al Davis, who’s been getting his hair cut by Rocky for 49 years.  The Raiders of the 70s were known for their hard partying, rebellious personae and straight-up intimidation of their opponents.  ”Just win, baby” was their mantra. And of course they were one of the most successful franchises, a regular visitor to the playoffs and winner of three Super Bowls.  Al Davis is one of the founders of the modern NFL, one of the world’s great business growth stories, and a member of its Hall Of Fame.

Davis may not be loved, but the media and Raider Nation remains entranced by the Davis mystique.  They are fascinated by Davis for never changing, a throwback – and for almost 40 years one of the cleverest, most influential men in football.  They also lay his lack of success in the last decade – the Raiders now officially own the worst 7-year run in NFL history – for never changing.  ”He still likes to maintain his look,” Becker told the Chronicle. “You’ve got to maintain what you have. Al’s a big believer in that.”

Change is hard work.   Sometimes it needs to be tough love, other times it’s letting someone or something just go to town on you.  You gotta cut off those old strands flying in the wind and move on.

Hurrah for traditional barber shops!  Thank you for letting me stay the same as long as I could and then making me change when it was the right thing to do.  Long may you wave.

Baseball’s media strategy for its best customers: magazine subscriptions?

Wednesday, July 22nd, 2009

Several weeks after casting my dutiful homer “Vote For Pablo” to make the NL All-Star Team, I received an E-mail invitation from Major League Baseball inviting me to subscribe to MLB Insiders Club.  Baseball has always had backwards-looking marketing overly reliant on its heritage, but debuting a dubiously Official Magazine in the era of social networking and 24/7 sports news shows baseball’s marketing at its worst.

Baseball-dedicated magazines have been around since time immemorial and – like every other magazine segment – they aren’t exactly killing it these days.  Baseball Digest, founded in 1942, recently downshifted to an 8x schedule from monthly, while the baseball-heavy Sporting News showed a 39% decline in ad pages for the first half of 2009.  The biggest players in sports magazines, Sports Illustrated and ESPN: The Magazine, saw ad pages down 28% and 31% respectively in Q1 2009.  (Curiously SI for Kids is one of only 11 magazines that showed an ad page increase so far this year.)

MLB InsidersMLB Insiders Club would need to bring something different to the table in order to succeed and what it promises is attractive: “Behind The Scenes looks into the clubhouse and front office of MLB teams” and “MLB Insiders Club Fantasy League Tips!”  First off, it’s surprising to hear that a major league would directly support fantasy leagues.  It would be a lucrative opportunity for a major sport league to get involved in fantasy leagues, but it’s also tantamount to supporting gambling – which has a history, especially in baseball, of being the worst crime a player or manager can commit.  One wonders if the MLB Powers That Be is aware that an official licensed product of this tacit endorsement.

As for “Behind The Scenes,” a review on Baseball Reflection reveals that the magazine practically begs for user-generated content.  The official license may get some access, but it certainly doesn’t guarantee more or better; the premiere issue features an interview with Oakland A’s General Manager Billy Beane, but he’s probably MLB’s most open GM, frequently giving long interviews to blogs like Athletics Nation.  And if UGC is the majority of content, you can be pretty sure the fans mailing it in don’t have any special access.

MLB Insiders Club is published by North American Media Group, a company that specializes in niche media with a few key licenses, including the Professional Golf Association and History Channel.  In addition to magazines, it also pumps out expensive coffee table books.  So for $24/year, you get some indeterminate number of baseball magazines (they don’t say whether its monthly or what) and the opportunity to buy more books (or as the come-on says “Preview Great Books and DVD’s”).  Ouch.

Baseball’s marketing and media sophistication continue to be disappointing and well behind its rivals for attention in the NBA and NFL.  Few of MLB’s teams or players are involved in social networking, while Shaquille O’Neal is the world’s ninth most-followed twitterer (as of this writing) and the NFL has so many tweeters that it had to conjure a “No tweeting during games” policy.  When these other leagues and their team are putting together their communications strategies, they are way past trying to sell magazines to their best customers. With overall attendance down nearly 6% so far this year, MLB needs to do something to make itself more compelling – more necessary – to its fans.  A clever coordinated social networking policy would be an inexpensive, low-risk way to go, especially in light of the vitality of fantasy baseball – one of the original pre-Internet social networks.

More on point: yesterday the Giants E-mailed me an offer for $5 tickets for next week’s Pirates series for my “vote for Pablo.”  Now that’s something I can use.

Postscript to Rockets-Lakers

Tuesday, May 19th, 2009

As it turned out, the Rockets-Lakers series did not turn out to be the art versus science showdown that I’d been hoping for.  The key game turned out to be Game 2, in which the Lakers -- having lost its home court advantage in Game 1 -- simply decided to fight.  As Ron Artest demonstrates here, it’s tough to stick to the plan with an elbow in your throat.

And then things get even tougher when you lose one of the second of your two best players to a broken foot, as Yao Ming did in Game 3.  Although the Lakers lacked the killer instinct to put away the Rockets, even after a horrible 40-point beatdown in Game 5, the theories on offer in the Michael Lewis article did not seem possible to apply after that point.

One of the hottest topics in sports player management over the last decade has been whether the scientific approach to roster-building really creates competitive advantage.  I had hoped this series would bring some light to its relative chances at success in the NBA.  What it ultimately proved -- again -- is that the playoffs are still a crapshoot with any team having a 45% chance of winning on a given night, especially when emotions and injuries throw one team off its game.

Further reading: Why Don’t The A’s Win in October?  (or “Why Doesn’t Billy Beane’s S*** Work in the Playoffs?”)

Rockets-Lakers: A Tipping Point For The NBA?

Sunday, May 3rd, 2009

As a Golden State Warriors fan – and admittedly a fair-weather one – I could not have found the 2008-09 NBA season much duller or depressing. The play of this uninspired, oft-injured squad and its possibly insane coach drove me well away from following the team despite a raft of discount ticket offers. My inner Assistant General Manager, though, is entirely intrigued by the playoff series opening tomorrow night: the clearly-best-in-the-league Los Angeles Lakers against the Houston Rockets.

Shane Battier with a hand in Kobe Bryant's face

Shane Battier defending Kobe Bryant

This story starts back in February when the New York Times Magazine published “The No-Stats All-Star” by Michael Lewis. One of my favorite writers for his ability to cross great business writing with incisive observation about sports and its hidden-in-plain-sight economy, Lewis had previously written on applying market theory in baseball (Moneyball: The Art of Winning An Unfair Game) and football (The Blind Side: The Evolution Of A Gameexcerpt).

The NYT article centered on the Houston Rockets and in particular Shane Battier, who is used as an example of how basketball statistics are enormously deceptive by only depicting production with the ball. As he’d done so well in his previous books, Lewis makes the argument that glamor statistics like points per game, rebounds and so forth don’t necessarily show how much a player actually helps its team earn what really counts: wins. The Rockets have put together a team of statisticians to develop metrics for what truly produces wins. With those metrics in hand, they targeted Battier, a well-regarded player who had some tough seasons with the woeful Memphis Grizzlies, but had a record otherwise of always playing with winners. I’ll leave the statistical discussion to Lewis’s article, which I highly recommend, but suffice it to say that the Rockets’ stats-based defensive theory is to learn where opposing players become the least efficient on the floor.

The story was published in February. Before Los Angeles played Houston on March 11th, master motivator Laker Coach Phil Bradley showed Kobe this passage:

The reason the Rockets insist that Battier guard [Kobe] Bryant is his gift for encouraging him into his zones of lowest efficiency. The effect of doing this is astonishing: Bryant doesn’t merely help his team less when Battier guards him than when someone else does. When Bryant is in the game and Battier is on him, the Lakers’ offense is worse than if the N.B.A.’s best player had taken the night off. “The Lakers’ offense should obviously be better with Kobe in,” [Rockets General Manager] Morey says. “But if Shane is on him, it isn’t.” A player Morey describes as “a marginal N.B.A. athlete” not only guards one of the greatest — and smartest — offensive threats ever to play the game. He renders him a detriment to his team.

Sure enough, Kobe put up 37 points – lit up Battier and scored 16 in the fourth quarter alone (albeit with Ron Artest guarding him, not Battier) – to lead the Lakers to a 102-96 come-from-behind win.

So now we get a week or two of this matchup. Not to denigrate the Rockets, which fields two other great defenders in Artest and Yao Ming, but this should be an interesting test of schemes versus skills and of statistical gambits versus the NBA’s most successful coach. If this goes the Rockets’ way, expect a sea change in the way NBA franchises run their teams in the very near future.

Personally, I’m rooting for the Rockets – and selfishly. In reading Lewis’s article, it was apparent that my hometown Warriors are definitely not users of any kind of statistical theory in evaluating its talent or running a game. Warriors forward Stephen Jackson was spotlighted for his bizarre tendency:  [he] “is statistically better going to his right, but he loves to go to his left — and goes to his left almost twice as often.”)  Instead the Warriors rely on a well-loved ex-player to run its front office – with disastrous contracts thrown at players of ‘good character’ – and a coach who appears to run the team more on feeling, fear and witchcraft than good sense. Please, Warriors, take a note.

Sports franchises need to take a cue from airlines and Apple

Tuesday, April 28th, 2009

Joba Chamberlain opens the second game ever at the new Yankee Stadium and empty seats outnumber full ones in the exclusive areas behind home plate and the dugouts. The Stadium was packed otherwise.  (Flickr / Fansherpa)

Joba Chamberlain opens the second game ever at the new Yankee Stadium and empty seats outnumber full ones in the exclusive areas behind home plate and the dugouts. The Stadium was packed otherwise. (Flickr / Fansherpa)

With all the fuss over the empty luxury seats at the new Yankee Stadium, I was mildly surprised to find something similar – dramatically so – happening in my own backyard.  We went to Sunday’s A’s-Rays game at the Oakland Coliseum.  All the ingredients for a great day at the ballyard were in place: sunny April weather, last year’s AL champions in town and a Sunday afternoon.  What we found instead was a micro-market in disarray. As the credit markets teetered last October, the market for sports tickets anecdotally seems to be following.

The first indication there was a problem was the total lack of online ticketing activity.  There were practically no offers on CraigsList, even from brokers, and none at all on eBay.  At the walk-up ticket booth, we found that we could buy any section in the house, including the Diamond Level.  This should simply never be the case.  The Diamond Level is a very limited “VIP” area, maybe 60 seats tops, right behind the plate on the playing field level.  Seats go for $225 but also include free food and drink service for the whole game.

Weirdest of all was the scene inside the stadium.  The A’s bifurcate each of the two seating levels – a minimum of two pricing levels in each deck.  In both decks, there was a cluster of people behind the plate, practically nobody for several sections as the seating moved towards the outfield, another cluster in the sections starting the new pricing tier, again fading to nothing.

The mystery to me is why shouldn’t the people forced out to the outfield be able to sit in these empty “mezzo-sections.”  The answer could come from a nimble dynamic pricing system at game time.  As airlines like Virgin and JetBlue have discovered with exit rows sold at check-in, why not enable ask fans as they arriveto purchase a better seat for an extra few dollars?  It would be an easy thing to equip ushers with Palm-style barcode and credit card machines like those carried by the clerks at The Apple Store.  Everybody gets the opportunity to move closer (or elect not to), getting rid of the weird empty spaces and (I’m assuming) presenting a better, more invigorating environment for the home team.  (I know they’re supposed to ignore the crowd, but ask any actor or musician if they’d rather play to a full orchestra than have the front rows empty and the crowd loosely dispersed.)

Meanwhile across the bay, the Giants are trying out a number of dynamic pricing policies.  First, the team partnered up with a firm to build elastic pricing around its unsold inventory for the least attractive games.  Last week, though, came the real reckoning – and a big indication that the team is running scared about its attendance.  Ticket prices were dropped 40% for the Giants series this week against the Dodgers, traditionally the most attractive opponent.  Granted the team is trying to stir up interest for later in the year – it appears they’ll be competitive in a moderately challenging division – but to have to do this so early and against the team’s best natural rivarly is surprising.  One wonders how scared the Giants are about advance sales for the rest of the year.

Susie is quick to point out that the lack of an Oakland A’s ticket market framed by the fact that the Oakland Coliseum is a horrible dump, getting dumpier every day.  The tarps in the third deck look weathered and horrible, while the bathrooms, parking lot and facilities remain some of the worst for a major league sport.  Nevertheless the empty seat patterns – along with all the unsold display ad inventory throughout the stadium – are clear indications that baseball is not recession-proof.  There are easy ways to make profit from making markets more efficient; marketing and pricing are the classics.  Let’s see if the A’s and their brethren take up the challenge.

Slouching towards Fremont

Tuesday, December 26th, 2006

Last night I was taken to task for not blogging in God knows how long. Rumor has it that I’m a good writer, though you’d never actually know it from my output, or lack thereof. Luckily, 3+ months off may (should?) lead to a queue of interesting things to write about.

As usual, the baseball playoffs took over my life for an unwelcome amount of time in early October. The A’s showed signs of going deep, but lucky for my free time — and for my wallet, since I was sitting on very expensive tickets for the World Series — they reverted to their usual playoff-choking form in the ALCS. With the team all but moved to distant Fremont by 2010, it was time to start disengaging anyway. I’ve got three more years to find a way to remain a  fan before the A’s move a full hour’s drive from my San Francisco abode.

In the meantime, I have these guys to help Bring The Dissent:
[youtube SlTvSUCCqPo]

Roll On You Bears?

Saturday, September 2nd, 2006

Today presents a challenge to my core identity. I’ve been attending Cal games since I was a wee cub of six. That’s thirty-three years (cough) of futility. Not totally futility, mind you — there have been a few bowl games and good years — but thirty-three years without playing in the Rose Bowl or BCS game, winning the conference, or generally having a reason to look forward to New Years Day.

This is not a matter of simple alma mater loyalty; this is something I’ve done my whole life. Everything I learned about humility I learned from Cal football.

It wasn’t just me; it was the whole fan base. The oft-proferred line about Cal — at least when things were going poorly — was that its alumni would rather be proud (and beat Stanford) than become a so-called major program.

But this year looks different. Very different. Not only is Cal ranked in the Top Ten to start the season and opening its season at a bona fide "football school" (Tennessee), but ESPN analyst Lee Corso predicted Cal to win the national championship! This, dear readers, is crazy stuff. Cal hasn’t even got to the Rose Bowl since 1959, many years before my parents were thinking that sex was something they could do.

A national championship simply does not compute. It does not map to my self-image, to root for a team that can and will win. It used to be that I went to Memorial Stadium each week wondering how we’d find a way to lose. Now I have the neurosis of the winner — "Which game is the one where we slip and fall?" Instead of worrying about whether we’ll beat Stanford, my attention turns instead to "How much do we need to beat Portland State by to keep the East Coast writers from doubting the Bears? If we don’t win by 35 points, will it hurt our standing in the computer rankings?" I’m not certain that this is an improvement, fandom-wise.

There are cultural issues to think of, too. I’ve been very happy with the ramshackle stadium and the relatively low-key games. (Note the picture above; that’s the highly successful 1975 team upsetting USC at home. The stands in the background are pretty much empty.) I don’t want to be Texas with the world’s largest HDTV or the Florida teams with their absurd fan rivalries. Or, god forbid, USC with its traveling squad of weirdly mindless fans led by 5,000 band members playing one song over and over. (Cal fans have found ways to get back at idiot Trojans over the years.)

But unfortunately this is what it takes to be a top program in today’s major collegiate athletics. Today we stare into the abyss, sing our fight songs and hope we don’t lose our selfhood along the way.

UPDATE: So much for that.  Jake Curtis at SFGate still thinks Cal has room for hope.  One friend said that we had to break our "culture of losing" and then in the same breath said that we didn’t really want the national championship, just the Rose Bowl.  Sounds like a contradiction to me, but I guess that’s we’ll have to do to break up this culture one step at a time.

World Cup Detour #3: How To Beat Brazil

Tuesday, August 22nd, 2006

Yes, I really am still writing about the World Cup. And, no, that does not mean that all four of you Entroporium fans are going to need to wait another four years before I start posting regularly again.

Sunday, June 18th was a glorious San Francisco summer day with nary a wisp of fog in sight, the perfect opening day for the city’s traditional free Stern Grove concert series. We showed up at 8am to grab prime seats, but the real action that morning was taking place in random bars around town as Brazil took the pitch against Australia. After the match ended, a workmanlike dismantling of the Socceroos, the Brazilian fans — and where did they all come from! who knew SF was so full of Brazilians! — made their way to the Grove to hear opening act Seu Jorge.

Yes, it was kismet. Brazil ruled the day. A glorious victory. A glorious day. Free outdoor Brazilian party music. The stars were aligned with that strange planet thing in the middle of Brazil’s weird flag. The Grove was rockin’, chock-full of sunning dancing Brazilian expats and their newfound empathizers.

But now it was time for the headliner. And Aimee Mann took the stage with nothing but an acoustic guitar and a bass player.

Don’t get me wrong. I love Aimee Mann and she was the reason I was there, but this was a bizarre piece of booking by the Stern Grove folks.

Picture if you will the party that’s come before. And then Aimee took the stage:

Sa-aaaave Me
C’mon and Saaa-ya-ave Meeee

If it was a room, the air would’ve gone right out of it. All of the boisterous Brazilians looked utterly lost and defeated, like the hangover had hit 12 hours earlier than expected. Nobody could believe what they were hearing or seeing. Who was that skinny lady singing morose ballads? What happened to our party?

And from this incident, I surmised that Brazil may not be the unstoppable World Cup force that it’s reputation led us to believe. Just slow the tempo. Add a French model and a PlayStation. Voilà!

[Soundtrack]
Seu Jorge – Life On Mars
A whole lotta Aimee Mann MP3 blog links

Bad Behavior has blocked 712 access attempts in the last 7 days.