Point Blank – November 11
Dunces on Display, in the Fantasy World (cue Joe Grushecky for some “Idiot’s Delight”)…But not even Eric Schneiderman would have rated Iowa #5…Leave it to Pops and the Spurs, to bring at least some dignity to the day…
This day begins a little differently than others, the focus more on an industry matter, rather than the next opportunity to cash a ticket (thought hopefully there will be one of those forthcoming in Portland tonight; hang on till the end for that), but it is an important one for many of us, so with several threads having been started here yesterday on New York state banning fantasy sports for now, I thought it would be time to add a little clarity. The problem is that in doing so it involved snorkeling across a cesspool of silliness and misinformation, leading me to curse the fact that John Kennedy Toole had already taken “A Confederacy of Dunces”, which would have been a lovely title. So I settle for something lesser, and plow ahead.
The fantasy sports issue has come up in this column multiple times this autumn, mostly as a cautionary tale of the explosion happening far too quickly, numbers being thrown about that were not legitimate, and contest structures poorly set up, allowing sharks to devour bait fish in what was not going to be a sustainable sea. Now many of the issues are coming to a head, but it is through the mind-numbing stupidity of Tuesday that I am not confident that there will be positive resolutions anytime soon. That matters, because the sports betting world is a close cousin to fantasy, except for the fact that those on the “house” side of the sports betting counter have long legacies to fall back on, with proven models. It is in the regulatory aspect that each faces challenges moving forward, one of the biggest challenges being that the regulators themselves bringing many unnecessary obstacles to the debate.
So instead of a tribute to the great Allen Toussaint, who passed away yesterday in Madrid, there is a different musical background today, one befitting of the low-level players on this particular stage, a live version of Joe Grushecky bemoaning how we have been around as a species for quite some time, yet still can not list common sense as a trait (I will save Toussaint for a proper and dignified moment later in the week) -
The jackals leave here laughing as they slip into the night
How did something so beautiful turn into an idiot's delight
So let’s begin with New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, in announcing the decision -
"Daily fantasy sports is neither victimless nor harmless, and it is clear that DraftKings and FanDuel are the leaders of a massive, multi-billion-dollar scheme intended to evade the law and fleece sports fans across the country. Today we have sent a clear message: not in New York, and not on my watch.”
That is just incomprehensibly stupid to come from a high-ranking public official. Shame on Schneiderman, but at least for those of us of a certain generation we can enjoy the notion that even in this new millennium, the word balderdash can still be used on occasion. I have done a bit of political consulting in my lifetime, and continue to help set odds on elections (something that will provide some good discussion fodder here over the next 12 months), so following misstatements of politicians has been a pastime. By this stage I am rarely offended by falsehoods, because they are a somewhat necessary part of those processes, but if you are going to lie, at least lie well. The true posers are those that cannot even do that.
Schneiderman stumbles out of the gate by saying “Daily fantasy sports”. Does that somehow imply that weekly or seasonal is OK? Why add that specific word unless there is a reason for it. To say that it is “clear” that these companies have a “scheme intended” for anything requires a knowledge that I doubt that Schneiderman has. That is just terrible usage of the English language, and even if the goal was to manipulate, it was sophomoric. It is so easy to prove that something is not “clear”, the burden only requiring a single shadow, and Schneiderman made the classic error of judging someone’s intent from a distance. That is egregious for a person in his position, who should have the fundamental legal background of knowing just how difficult it is to prove intent in a court of law. Especially, of course, when you are wrong, which Schneiderman is in this inference.
Schneideman also drastically missed the boat on the “multi-billion-dollar” aspect, which I will get to in a moment. "Fleece"? Compare the take-out of the fantasy pools to horse racing, which New York manages through legal OTBs. And of course, in not realizing that he had just tripped and fallen down the stairs, with his shirttail out and tie crooked, Schneiderman finished with the comic-book hero arrogance of “not on my watch”. Of course, if you are planning to run for governor, you play that game. And in using both "we" and "my" in the closing sentence, it was one last sign of sloppy amateurism.
Instead of moving on to higher office, you would get cut during a tryout for your high school debate team with that statement, and Schneiderman would get the Dunce of the Day award if the reps from FanDuel and DraftKings had merely sat back and let the wind blow, allowing themselves to calmly craft the appropriate response. It would have been as easy as shooting fish in a barrel. But as has been the case on other recent occasions, they could not resist the pissing contest, and instead of letting the wind blow they aimed directly into it, leaving a mess on their own shoes.
First, from FanDuel -
"The game has been played - legally - in New York for years and years, but after the Attorney General realized he could now get himself some press coverage, he decided a game that has been around for a long, long time is suddenly now not legal."
Just what is “The game”? Might there be some forms of fantasy-type play that are legal, and the FanDuel model outside of that boundary? Since New York law has not changed, there should not be the assumption that it was played “legally” for years and years; it may now be said to have been illegal all of that time. And does FanDuel have proof that Schneiderman unilaterally “decided” this, or is there a foundation of New York law behind it? What on earth does getting some press coverage have to do with the genuine legal issue? How about saying nothing at all, until you are ready to say something of merit.
But DraftKings managed to lower the bar even more -
"New York’s actions today are an unfortunate example of a state government stifling innovation, technology and entrepreneurship and acting without full and fair consideration of the interests of consumers."
Stating that certain fantasy sports models are a violation of New York state law does not say anything about innovation, technology or entrepreneurship. Innovation, technology and entrepreneurship go on all day every day. This is about fantasy sports. The folks at DraftKings are hoping to make money by raking contests; they are not going to figure out a new way to split the atom.
"We are very disappointed that New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman took such hasty action today, particularly since he did not take any time to understand our business or why daily fantasy sports are clearly a game of skill. We strongly disagree with the reasoning in his opinion and will examine and vigorously pursue all legal options available to ensure our over half a million customers in New York State can continue to play the fantasy sports games they love."
No, just no. It is never good policy to make statements about things you could not have known or verified, and if someone at DraftKings were to be asked how they knew that Schneiderman “did not take any time” to understand their business, how would they answer? Did they have his mind followed by meta-physical private detectives? I would also be willing to wager that they will not pursure “all” legal options; let me know if any of you see a prop on that posted anywhere.
"We continue to see a number of other officials, including Senator Negron in Florida, Representative Zalewski in Illinois and the Federal Trade Commission, take a reasoned, informed and measured approach to the daily fantasy sports business. We hope this trend continues along with due consideration for over 56 million sports fans across the country who enjoy playing fantasy sports."
Will somebody please, please, please give that "56 million" label a rest? It just isn’t true, and I do not believe it is even close. There are an estimated 245 million people in the United States that are 18 or older. To submit that 23 percent of them “enjoy playing fantasy sports” is a preposterous ratio. There is an irony to that, of course – the 56 million was the smoke and mirrors billboard that helped these companies to raise the hundreds of millions in venture capital that they took in over the past two years. Yet in using that number for one purpose, they also made the scope of the industry look much larger than it really is, which has accelerated the amount of scrutiny they are now receiving. They have not died by their own sword yet, but there is blood flowing.
So what needs to happen? What should have taken place before the fool's-gold rush. First, establish the proper numbers. There are millions of people that want to play fantasy sports. It can be done for great entertainment value, with the chance to have a big win indeed a part of that, and it is not of any significant risk to the consumer, if properly regulated. That number is not 56 million, but it is enough for reasonable business models to be built, and then executed.
Second, those in governing positions need to make decisions that best fit the wishes of their constituencies. Consumers want to play. Businessmen want to offer the product. There are no crimes being committed on either side of that equation. Let the consumer do what he wants, regulate just enough to protect that consumer, and the basic models of capitalism will take care of the rest. It just isn’t that damn hard. In a press release later yesterday, New York congressman Chris Collins called his own state’s decision “draconian”, finishing up with “Let’s take a timeout from government overreach and make sure we get it right.” Amen for that.
But then again, we live in a world in which educated, seemingly-sane adults believe that Iowa is the fifth-best team in college football…
Grading the “Process”
So as the day went on it was time to push those in their dunce caps to the proper corner, and get back to sports. But that did not make it any better. One of the tasks I have each week at this time of the year is to provide RJ Bell with a set of power ratings for the upper echelons of the NCAA football ranks, so that there can be comparisons with how the teams look for a betting/bookmaking/Las Vegas perspective, compared to how The Committee comes up with their ratings. My numbers are then mixed in with those of Bruce Marshall, senior Editor of the Gold Sheet and someone who has been following Saturday scoreboards about as along as I have, and the in-house numbers from CGT, Cantor Gaming here in Nevada. Some of that info can be found here.
My Tuesday morning ritual is to usually do a quick cut-and-paste the top 10, but when I realized that because Iowa is unbeaten, and in truth gets to the Playoffs by winning out, then it was necessary to go all the way down the list until the Hawkeyes were included. You will see in the link provided in the first paragraph that they were #13 in the “Vegas” ratings, but that is only because Bruce and CGT both had them a bit higher than I did. So you can guess where my range was.
So where does The Committee place them? At #5. File that way, because it will be important to re-visit when the season is over, much like the LSU #2 of last week. I do not believe they are even close on this one, and it brings insight into what may be a seriously flawed process.
And while thinking about Iowa this week…
The Hawkeyes will attempt to go to 10-0 when they host Minnesota, and it is worth noting that the interim tag has been taken off of Golden Gopher DC Tracy Claeys, who has been contracted as HC for the next three seasons. I am not sure it is a good move long-term, with Claeys perhaps better suited to an assistant’s role. But the University did get him relatively on the cheap, $1.4 million next year, then $1.5 in 2017 and $1.6 in 2018, far below the four-year $11 million that was going to go to Jerry Kill. In other words, if Claeys does not pan out, it will not be an expensive buy-out, though it is not pleasant to think that way.
For now consider this a boost for the Gophers, with Claeys well-liked by the players. By taking the pressure of uncertainty off of the team, they could be a little more relaxed over the final three games, with wins in two of them needed to become bowl eligible.
In the Sights…
After all of those assaults on common sense some dignity is needed, and I believe we can find some from a trusted source today, Gregg Popovich and #721 San Antonio, as the LaMarcus Aldridge return to Portland sets up a rather unique situation.
I believe this matters because Popovich had to do a bit of a sale’s job to get Aldridge to commit to joining the Spurs, assuring him that while his offensive numbers would decline a bit, he would still be a showcase in the rotation. Aldridge was willing to accept that for a better chance at a ring. It is because Popovich understood his particular issues, and in fact grasps the individual characters of athletes about as well as anyone in professional sports, that I believe tonight’s game brings a special focus from both the San Antonio players and coaches. Because the schedule is also set up so well, having had last night off, and with nothing ahead until hosting winless Philadelphia on Saturday, this is a game the Spurs can go after, not only putting more focus into the game plan, but by also not holding back. It would serve as a ceremony fully incorporating Aldridge into being one of them, and that is how Pops does things.
It also helps, of course, that with Aldridge on board the San Antonio defense (#2 in the NBA so far) and rebounding (#3) have become major strengths. That creates matchup problems for a limited Portland front-court, and that is where this one gets decided, the Spurs having both the focus, and the tools, to build the final margin into double figures.
The complete Point Blank Archive
@PregamePhd (a work in progress, feedback appreciated)