Skip to main content

Steve McManus is full of crap! No offense...

On Friday's episode of Chris Russo's Sirius XM show Mad Dog Unleashed, CBS Sports chairman Steve McManus said the following:

"From a television standpoint, you really root for the big teams. Last night's Kentucky outcome was not good for us and not good for TBS at all. Kentucky being the blue bloods that they are, and having the television draw that they have, that really hurt us. Kansas State winning - I have nothing against Kansas State as a school or a team - but that really hurt us."

He added:

"It's [Loyola-Chicago] a great story, I think Sister Jean is terrific, but to have an upstart like that go this far is not a disaster obviously, but not the bets of all scenarios for us."

I'm sorry, but this is BS. Why does he think the NCAA Tournament is nicknamed March Madness? Because it's good for the predictable to always occur? I don't think so. The movies about college basketball that come out of Hollywood, do they tend to revolve around the two top seeds making the national championship game? Again, no. Let's be honest, the quality of play is inferior in college basketball than in the NBA, as well as the officiating. Also, with the one-and-done format, the odds of craziness ensuing are far greater than in the NBA and its best-of-5/7 series'. Half the fun of the NCAA Tournament is seeing this craziness unfold before our very eyes. It's why we fill out brackets, why we choose sleepers, why we take that first Thursday and Friday off work. Sure, it's fun to watch an evenly matched game between two "blue bloods," but nothing can match the joy and excitement of seeing 16-seed UMBC beat 1-seed Virginia; of 11-seed Loyola-Chicago making it to the Final Four; of an overmatched team beating all odds and coming up victorious when they were given no shot at doing so. While two one-seeds like Villanova and Kansas matching up in the Final Four may provide good temporary ratings, a team like 11-seed Loyola-Chicago making it to the Final Four provides a lifetime of memories.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/college/cbs-sports-chairman-sean-mcmanus-big-upsets-hurt-ratings-article-1.3893971
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun
2 comments
Read more

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i
Post a Comment
Read more

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"
Post a Comment
Read more