A Whole New World

College sports were forever changed once NIL legislation was passed and went into effect, allowing athletes to cash in on their personal brand.  Now we're even seeing star high school athletes making millions in endorsements and other promotional opportunities before they even enroll in college.  Well, as it turns out, that was just the tip of the iceberg.

Almost as soon as this new era in college sports dawned, schools began creating NIL "collectives," which are basically a recruiting tool that ensures them a certain amount in NIL dollars will head their way if they choose that program...but only if they choose that program.  Recruiting turned into an arms race to see who can offer the best NIL deal, and it drove coaches like Nick Saban out of the game.  These collectives were established because boosters wanted to make sure the program doesn't lose out on top recruits, but NCAA rules prohibit student-athletes being directly compensated by their school.

Or, I should say, NCAA rules used to prohibit student-athletes from being paid directly.  Not anymore.  If the NIL opened the door a crack, it's suddenly been swung wide open.  Because last week, the NCAA reached a landmark $2.8 billion settlement that resolved three pending lawsuits and paved the way for schools to share revenue with student-athletes.  Once approved by the judge overseeing the case, schools will, for the first time, be able to directly pay their student-athletes.

Needless to say, this agreement completely changes college sports as we know them.  Athletic Departments will suddenly need to find room in their budgets to pay their student-athletes.  Division I schools will be allowed (but not required) to set aside up to $20 million of their sports revenue to share with the players.  It would be up to the schools how to divide it, but you'd have to figure it would disproportionately go to football and basketball players.  You'd also have to figure it would disproportionately go to Power 5 schools, furthering the financial gap between them and other Division I members.

The settlement also provides compensation for the nearly 25,000 former college athletes who were represented by the plaintiffs in the original lawsuit, which paved the way for what has been called a "new world."  The $2.8 billion settled that antitrust suit and will effectively give those athletes backpay for revenue they've already foregone.  While the distribution is one of the things that needs to be worked out over the next several months, the damages will be paid out to athletes in three different categories: Power 5 football & men's basketball, Power 5 women's basketball, everybody else).

Had the suit gone to trial, it's very possible the NCAA would've lost and had to pay out much more in compensation.  The NCAA hasn't been faring well in court over the past few years and, despite repeatedly asking for some sort of federal guidelines or standards, has gotten no help from Congress on the legislative front.  So, seeing the writing on the wall, they settled.

Naturally, not everybody is happy about the settlement.  Schools in the Power 4 conferences will figure it out.  The SEC and Big Ten are both starting their new TV contracts next season, which will bring them even more revenue, even after carving out a chunk to give to the student-athletes.  I'd imagine the other College Football Playoff conferences and leagues like the Big East will also have no issue coming up with the money while also having enough to keep their Athletic Departments afloat.  They don't really have a choice in the matter, and they've already managed to do it with the NIL collectives, so this really shouldn't be much different.

What about the schools that aren't in the Power 4 or have CFP football programs, though?  How will they keep up?  These are schools and conferences that are already operating on a fraction of the budget those larger schools have.  That's why they play guarantee games!  Just like there was no way around letting athletes benefit from the NIL, there's no way for them to avoid directly compensating players.  But will they be able to afford it?

You'd also have to figure there will be Title IX implications.  Schools are required to have proportional scholarship and participation opportunities for men and women, as well as equal funding.  Will the same rules apply when it comes to athlete compensation?  I doubt they'd be able to get away with paying just football and basketball players, but does that mean everyone who's on scholarship also receives a salary?  What about those who aren't on scholarship?  And what's the percentage?

While all of those questions still need to be answered, the conferences are taking a proactive approach on how to move forward.  The SEC and Big Ten have come together to form a joint advisory group to address the "significant challenges" facing college sports.  The group will have no administrative authority and will only serve as a consulting body, but the goal behind it is clear and important.  College sports are changing like never before and the schools/conferences want to make sure they have an active role in what happens.

There's been rampant speculation for a while that the Power 4 conferences will eventually split off into a separate division.  Even the NCAA President has suggested it's a possibility.  He was speaking about it more for football governance purposes, but, considering the recent developments, it seems more than ever like it would be a wise and prudent decision.  I can easily see Division I being separated into one group for the larger schools that can afford to pay their student-athletes and another for those who can't.

Make no mistake, this is nothing short than the professionalization of college athletics.  Some might argue that's a good thing.  But no one will dispute the fact that it'll forever change the model.  Especially now that the transfer rules are also being completely blown up.

That's the latest major change coming to college athletics.  A federal judge has ruled that the NCAA's transfer rules requiring an athlete to sit out for a season whenever they change schools constitute an "unfair restriction of trade."  As a result, student-athletes will be able to transfer schools whenever they want without penalty.  In effect, they're allowed to essentially become free agents every year.  If you thought the transfer portal was out of control before, just imagine what'll happen now!

We already knew that we'd see a massive shift next season with the Power 5 becoming the Power 4.  As it turns out, the supersized conferences will just be the start.  College sports are changing like never before.  The 2024-25 season will be the start of a new era.  In more ways than one.

Negro Leagues A Part of History

Despite being 93 years old and not having played in a Major League game since 1973, Willie Mays got 10 hits on Tuesday.  How, you ask?  Because Mays got 10 hits for the Birmingham Black Barons in 1948, and those have been added to his career total, giving him 3,293.  

Those 10 extra hits are the result of MLB's 2020 decision that the Negro Leagues would be recognized as "Major" Leagues and those stats would be added to the Major League record books.  In total, seven different leagues that played between 1920-48 were given that distinction.  Now, after nearly four years of research, those Negro League statistics have been incorporated and the Major League record books look a whole lot different.

Perhaps the most significant change is at the top of the all-time batting average list.  Ty Cobb's legendary .367 career average has been the standard for a century.  It no longer is.  Josh Gibson's .372 mark is now the record (and likely will remain so).  The Top 10 now includes five Negro Leaguers, in fact, as Hall of Famers Oscar Charleston (3rd), Jud Wilson (5th), Turkey Stearns (6th) and Buck Leonard (8th) have also been added.  (Shoeless Joe Jackson's name it notably absent despite his .356 career average, which would place him fifth on the updated list.  Not sure if it's because of his lifetime ban or not because Pete Rose is still listed.)

Gibson has actually jumped to the top of the all-time list in several different categories.  His .718 slugging percentage and 1.177 OPS are also the new career standards.  Gibson's .459 on base percentage, meanwhile, is now the third-best all-time.  Known as the "Black Babe Ruth," Gibson is estimated to have hit 800 home runs.  However, not all of those were in official games that can be verified, so his career total (which is subject to change) is officially 174.

That's actually why it took so long (nearly four years) for the Negro League stats to be added in.  They very meticulously went through box scores, tracked down incomplete information, double-checked repeat names and nicknames, and so much more in order to get as accurate a picture as possible of the Negro Leagues from 1920-48.  It's estimated that what they have is about 75 percent complete, so it's possible, if not likely, that there will be further adjustments as more box scores are found, verified and added to the totals.

Incomplete information was the biggest challenge that came with such a massive undertaking.  Another is the inconsistency in the length of Negro League seasons.  There wasn't a standard like the 162-game (or, in those days 154-game) MLB schedule.  Teams played seasons of varying lengths, and many paid their bills by playing barnstorming exhibition games (which don't count for their career totals).  In general, Negro League seasons seemed to average around 60 games, though, so that's the standard they went with in calculating single-season qualifiers.  And, MLB played a 60-game schedule in 2020 because of COVID, so there's already a precedent for using that number.

They also wisely applied the same minimums to Negro League seasons as they do in the Majors.  Players must have 3.1 plate appearances or one inning pitched per team game in order to qualify.  In MLB, those are "hard" standards of 502 plate appearances and 162 innings.  For the Negro Leagues, that's a minimum of 186 plate appearances and 60 innings, but those aren't "hard" numbers since they depend on the number of official games a team played, which were different from team to team and even from season to season.

However, as a result of playing so many fewer games, the Negro League players are nowhere near the top in any of the all-time counting totals.  Also because of the shorter seasons, the benchmarks for career totals had to be adjusted.  For MLB players, it's 5,000 at-bats and 1,620 innings, which is roughly 10 years of meeting the 162-game minimums.  For Negro League players, they based it on 10 years of a 60-game schedule--1,800 at-bats and 600 innings.

For the same reason, Negro League players aren't near the top on the single-season list in stats like home runs, RBIs and hits.  Much like the career batting average list, though, the single-season batting average list has dramatically changed.  The new Major League record is Gibson's absurd .466 in 1943.  Rogers Hornsby's equally ridiculous .424 average in 1924, which was the highest in the 20th Century until Tuesday, is now 10th!

On the pitching side, Satchel Paige is the most famous name to have played in the Negro Leagues.  He had a 1.01 ERA for the Kansas City Monarchs in 1944.  That now qualifies as the third-best for a single season in history.  Paige's career totals, meanwhile, no longer include just his time with the Indians and Browns.  His career record is now 125-82, and his career ERA of 2.74 is among the Top 50 all-time.

When MLB announced that the Negro Leagues would be recognized as "Major" leagues and those totals would be integrated into the record books, the decision was met with universal acclaim.  It was both a long time coming and long overdue.  It's an acknowledgement that the baseball played in the Negro Leagues was on par, if not better than, the baseball played in the American and National Leagues at that time.  Now that the record books have been combined into one, we have further proof of that.

It also righted a historical wrong.  That's probably the biggest reason why this initiative was so important.  It's not the Negro Leagues players' fault that they weren't allowed to play in the American or National League.  They certainly had the talent for it, as the newly-updated Major League record book indicates.

Whether it was intentional or not, it's fitting that the first wave of this project was completed only a few weeks before the Cardinals face the Giants in MLB's tribute to the Negro Leagues.  The game will be played on June 20 (one day after Juneteenth) at Rickwood Field, which opened in 1910 and is the oldest professional ballpark.  More significantly, it was the home of the Birmingham Black Barons, where a teenage Willie Mays began his professional career and got those first 10 hits.

Of the more than 2,300 Negro League players who've been added to MLB's database, Mays is one of just three who's still alive (along with Bill Greason and Ron Teasley).  The game at Rickwood Field won't just celebrate the living legend, though.  It will celebrate all of those 2,300 Negro League players.  Scratch that.  All of those 2,300 Major League players.

Indy's Big Weekend

The focus of the sports world always turns to Indianapolis on Memorial Day Weekend.  This year, Memorial Day Weekend is even bigger than usual.  The Pacers are in the Eastern Conference Finals, and their home games are Saturday and Monday.  Sunday was wisely kept open.  Because everyone's attention, as it has nearly every year since 1911, will be on the Brickyard on Sunday.

Well, the Brickyard, then Charlotte for NASCAR's Coca-Cola 600.  It's been a decade since Kyle Busch was the last driver to attempt "Double Duty," racing all 1,100 miles at both races in the same day.  Jimmie Johnson has raced both since then, but he didn't enter the Indy 500 until after his NASCAR career was over.  This year, though, Kyle Larson will make the attempt.  He even skipped part of the NASCAR All*Star Race last weekend so that he could complete the Indy qualifiers.  Which turned out to be a smart move.  Because he qualified fifth.

Larson is one of six rookies in the field, but the only one who'll be in the front of the field.  The others are in Rows 6, 8 & 9.  So, while it might be a stretch to say Larson is a contender for the milk (he wouldn't have time to do the celebration and still get to Charlotte in time anyway), it does seem realistic that he can carry on the trend of NASCAR drivers winning Indy 500 Rookie of the Year honors.  And, really, finishing is the primary goal.  He can't complete all 1,100 miles if he doesn't finish all 200 laps at Indy.

Should he pull off the win, though, Larson would become the first rookie to kiss the yard of bricks since Alexander Rossi in 2016.  Rossi, coincidentally, will be starting alongside Larson in Row 2.  There are also a pair of former Indy 500 champions in the front row--2018 winner Will Power and defending champion Josef Newgarden.  The pole sitter, meanwhile, is Scott McLaughlin, who'll be driving that historic No. 3 Chevrolet, looking to give team owner Roger Penske (who owns the track, as well) another Indianapolis 500 victory.

Helio Castroneves used to drive the No. 3, winning three of his four Indy 500s in the car.  Castroneves has also finished second three times and has 16 career Top 10 finishes.  Simply put, he's one of the greatest drivers in the history of the Indianapolis 500.  He can really solidify that status by becoming the first five-time winner.  However, Helio is no longer a full-time IndyCar driver.  The Indy 500 is the only race on his 2024 schedule, in fact.  But still, the guy is magic at the Brickyard, so can you ever really count him out?

Starting next to Castroneves is another former champion--Scott Dixon.  Dixon's been having a great season.  He already has a win and is currently third in the driver standings.  He's never started this far back in the Indy 500 field, though.  Will he be able to get past all that traffic in front of him?  He usually starts near the front, so we've never seen him have to try.

This season's points leader is Alex Palou, who I think is somebody we should very much be on the lookout for.  He finished second (barely) in 2021, then started on the pole before placing fourth last year.  Despite the fact that he'll be starting in the middle of the field (14th), I really think this might be Palou's year.  I won't go so far as to pick him as the winner.  I do expect him to lead a few laps and be in the mix at the end, though.  And I do think he will eventually win an Indy 500.

So, if not Palou, who do I think can win his first Indy 500 this year?  Well, McLaughlin is starting on the pole, so he can't be discounted.  I also have a feeling about Felix Rosenqvist.  Outside of a fourth-place showing in 2022, he hasn't found much success at the Brickyard on race day.  Some of that has just been bad luck, though.  He's qualified in the "Fast 12" three years in a row, so you know his car is fast leading up to the race.  If everything goes his way, why not Rosenqvist?

Like Rosenqvist, Rinus VeeKay has been great in qualifying throughout his Indy 500 career, but it's never translated to the race itself.  This is the first time he's starting outside the first two rows (on the inside of Row 3), but only twice placed in the Top 10.  For Pato O'Ward, it's been the opposite.  He finished sixth, fourth and second in his first three races before falling to 24th last year.  If he keeps up that trajectory, it sure seems like that win is inevitable.

Then there's Santino Ferrucci.  He's raced at Indy five times.  He's finished in the Top 10 every time.  Last year, he started fourth and finished third.  This year, he's starting sixth.  Expect him to run in front all afternoon and be in the mix at the end.  I'm actually tempted to take Ferrucci for the win.

All of those drivers I just mentioned are in their 20s.  There's definitely been a youth movement in IndyCar, with this new generation rising to the top while champions from not too long ago are either retired (Tony Kanaan, Dario Franchitti) or running part-time schedules (Castroneves, Takuma Sato).

That new generation also includes the offspring of Indy 500 champions.  Graham Rahal and Marco Andretti are Indy 500 veterans by this point, although neither has been able to follow in his father's footsteps by kissing the yard of bricks.  I doubt that changes this year.  Emerson Fittipaldi's grandson, Pietro, meanwhile, returns to Indy for the first time since 2021.  He, too, seems unlikely to pull off the victory.

So, now that I've gone through pretty much everybody I think won't win, who do I think will?  I'm actually tempted to say it'll be somebody new like Palou, but I think he's starting too far back.  Instead, I think a former champion will win the race for a second time.  Newgarden has a good chance to become the first back-to-back winner in more than 20 years.  Instead, I'm going with the former winner who'll be starting right next to Newgarden in the middle of Row 1.  Will Power has had a string of bad luck at Indy since winning in 2018, but when he starts in the front, he usually runs well.  And that's why I'm giving him the nod to capture his second Indy 500 title.

Or will someone else make history?  One of the things that people say about Indy is the track decides who wins.  It's hyperbole, obviously, but there's also been enough crazy stuff to happen late in races to understand why people believe it.  The track has let Will Power win before.  The track will let him win again.

Rafa Says Au Revoir to Roland Garros

It shouldn't come as a surprise to anybody that I'm a Roger guy.  Always have been, always will be.  And because I'm a Roger guy, I was never a Rafa guy.  Yes, I know they're friends in real life and members of a mutual admiration society, but it took me a long time to come around on Nadal.  Even though I eventually stopped calling him "Clay Boy," I never really did.  I was a Rafa guy.  I couldn't like Rafa.

With the benefit of age, however, I grew to respect Nadal more.  Every great champion needs a rival, and the Big Three Era of Roger, Rafa and Novak is something that has never been seen before and will likely never be seen again.  The reason they're 1, 2 & 3 in all-time Grand Slam wins is because they kept pushing each other.  They each had to keep improving to stay ahead of the other two.

Age and injuries eventually caught up to Federer, and now they've done the same to Nadal.  He had previously announced that he's likely going to retire after this season, so, barring a surprise selection to the Spanish Olympic team, this year's French Open will be his final appearance on the red clay of Roland Garros--a place where he's won an incredible 14 times!  So, in many ways, this year's French Open will be all about Rafael Nadal's farewell, much like the 2022 US Open was all about Serena Williams' farewell.  As it should be!

Unfortunately, it looks like Rafa may be saying "au revoir" fairly soon.  His first-round match is against Alexander Zverev, which is actually apropos.  Because Zverev and Nadal were engaged in a battle in the 2022 semifinals when Zverev suffered a gruesome ankle injury that knocked him out for the rest of the year.  Zverev easily could've won that match.  Instead Nadal cruised to his 14th French Open title, which was his then-record 22nd Grand Slam trophy.  He hasn't won one since and, if not for Zverev's injury, might not have won that one, either.

Even if he does beat Zverev (who's been to the semifinals here three years in a row), it seems highly unlikely Nadal's body will allow him to win seven matches on clay in a two-week span.  Especially since he and Zverev aren't the only heavyweights on that side of the draw.  It also features defending champion Novak Djokovic, back-to-back finalist Casper Ruud, Holger Rune and Daniil Medvedev.

On the bottom half of the draw, there's another blast from the past matchup between the only other men to win multiple Slams during the Big Three Era.  This might also be the final French Open for Andy Murray and/or Stan Wawrinka.  One will end the other's tournament.  The other may very well have to deal with Australian Open champion Jannik Sinner, whose run in Melbourne was extremely impressive!

Sinner's just one of a number of contenders on the men's side.  In fact, this is the first time in recent memory where we go into the French Open without a clear men's favorite.  And they all have a legitimate reason to think so, as each of the European clay-court tune-up tournaments has had a different winner--none of whom are named Djokovic (who hasn't even made a final this year) or Nadal.

There is one name who stands above the rest, though.  Carlos Alcaraz.  When he burst onto the scene in 2021, it was pretty clear Alcaraz was the next big thing in men's tennis.  He's already won a US Open and a Wimbledon.  He's already been No. 1 in the world.  Clay is his best surface.  I can think of no other way for Nadal to go out than for the French Open men's champion torch to be passed to the Spanish star of the next generation.  Alcaraz wins the first of what should be many Coupes des Mousquetaires. 

While there's no clear favorite among the men, there very much is among the women.  Iga Swiatek has won three of the last four French Opens.  She's 28-2 career at Roland Garros, including a 25-1 record since 2020.  Her only loss in that span came to Maria Sakkari in the 2021 quarterfinals.  It would be a shock if Swiatek doesn't make it three straight and four in five years.

Of course, Swiatek isn't the only player in the women's field.  She isn't even the only former French Open champion on the top half of the draw.  After Swiatek lost in the quarters, Barbora Krejcikova won that 2021 title.  They could end up meeting each other in the round of 16 this year.  Jelena Ostapenko, meanwhile, was the French Open champion in 2017.  She hasn't made it to the second week here since, but is a top 10 player who's actually playing some of the best tennis of her career.

Coco Gauff made the final here two years ago and got her butt kicked by Swiatek.  Now she's ranked third in the world and a Grand Slam champion, having won the 2023 US Open.  Could a deep run be in the cards for her?  Or how about Ons Jabeur, a three-time Grand Slam finalist who made the quarters at Roland Garros for the first time in 2023?  And Marketa Vondrousova is a former French Open finalist who's seeded fifth.  She could be Swiatek's biggest challenge.

The French Open often produces a random women's finalist (or two random finalists).  I can absolutely see that happening again.  Because, behind Swiatek, this field is wide open.  That's especially true when I look at the bottom half of the draw, where I see multiple potential finalists, but I also see those same women potentially getting bitten by the upset bug early in the tournament.

People seem to forget how wildly consistent Aryna Sabalenka is.  She's made it to at least the semifinals of all six Grand Slam tournaments she's played since she was prohibited from entering Wimbledon in 2022 due to the ban on Belarusian players.  Elena Rybakina, who had to withdraw before her third round match last year, has won three titles in 2024, including a clay court warm-up tournament in Stuttgart.  And don't count out Maria Sakkari.  Or Sorana Cirstea.  Or Madison Keys.

Still, though, it all comes down to Swiatek.  If she's on her game, she'll be tough, if not impossible, to beat.  She's No. 1 in the world and the favorite for a reason.  Which isn't to say I don't think somebody like a Sabalenka or a Rybakina or a Gauff can beat her, because they absolutely can.  I just think they need a lot to go right and/or have something go majorly wrong for Swiatek.

There's also an intriguing side competition at this year's French Open worth keeping an eye on.  This is the final tournament in the Olympic qualifying period.  The rankings following the French Open will be used to determine the Olympic field.  Countries can only enter a maximum of four singles players, though.  And there are some tight races for the fourth spot from some nations.  So, if players want to return to Roland Garros two months from now for the Olympic tournament, they know that a run at the French Open is the best way to solidify their chance.

Even with all of this other stuff going on, this French Open is about one thing and one thing only.  If this is, indeed, "au revoir" to Roland Garros for Rafael Nadal, what a legacy he's left!  For the first time in forever, Nadal isn't the favorite.  It's doubtful he'll go far.  So, let's just enjoy this final ride, then, after he's eliminated, focus on the rest of the 2024 tournament.  It's taken me long enough to say it, but Rafa deserves every bit of the adulation he'll receive at Roland Garros as he says farewell.

Football Down Under

This season, the NFL will play its first-ever game in Brazil.  Next season, there will be a game in Madrid.  The next stop to be added to the slate of international games?  Looks like it might be Australia.  And it could be as soon as 2025.

Don't forget, in 2025, the number of international games goes from four to eight.  The Jaguars will continue to have their annual game in London (which doesn't even count as one of the four), and the other two games in London likely aren't going anywhere, either.  Then, even after you throw in Germany and Spain, that's still three more.  Mexico City will be back in the rotation soon enough, but probably not until 2026 since Estadio Azteca is still undergoing renovations for the World Cup.  So, it makes sense that Australia is the next market the NFL will want to tap into.

Melbourne appears to be the frontrunner to land the game, and discussions have already taken place between the NFL and the Melbourne Cricket Ground.  All of that seems to indicate Melbourne is all but a done deal.  All that's left is to dot the I's and cross the T's.  As well as, of course, deciding on the teams.  The Eagles and Rams both have international rights in Australia, so they'd seem to make the most sense.  But, with the Eagles already playing in Brazil this season, do you have the Rams go to Australia?

Two other key details that would need to be figured out involve when the game would be played!  Both the date and the time.  The AFL Grand Final, the championship game of the Australian Football League is at the end of September, so you'd figure it would have to be after that.  Which likely means October or even early November, which is the Aussie Spring.

Figuring out the date is actually the easy part.  Figuring out the time is a totally different challenge.  Melbourne is 14 hours ahead of the East Coast of the United States...17 hours ahead of the West Coast.  It's not as easy as scheduling the games in Europe, which is only five hours ahead and gave the NFL a totally new broadcast window at 9:30 on Sunday mornings!  That wouldn't work in Australia, where 9 AM is midnight.

The way I see it, there's only one real viable option that makes sense for both the Australian and U.S. time zones.  You play on Monday afternoon/Sunday night as that week's Sunday Night Football game.  Or, it could be on Tuesday afternoon/Monday night.  Friday afternoon/Thursday night isn't really a viable possibility since that would require traveling to Australia on a short week...unless both teams were coming off their bye.

That's another factor that needs to be considered.  Teams returning from Europe don't necessarily have their bye the following week anymore.  And the Packers-Eagles game in Brazil is in Week 1, so they obviously won't get a bye after it.  With Australia, though, they'd have to.  It's simply too great a distance and too much of a time difference to expect them to play again the next week.  So, they'd either have to get their bye before playing a Friday afternoon/Thursday night game, which would give them the long week to recover before playing again on Sunday, or have their bye immediately after playing in Australia.

Personally, I think the second option would be better.  The NFL can easily pick two teams that would be an attractive Sunday Night Football matchup, guarantee it won't be flexed out (obviously), then take the whole operation Down Under that week.  It would be a marquee game played in the middle of the season at a unique location.  Just imagine how much NBC and the NFL would play that up!  Seems like the best possible scenario.

Since the Rams already have territorial rights in Australia and it's "only" 8,000 miles from Los Angeles to Melbourne, they'd seem to be the logical choice as the home team.  The Rams are certainly an attractive enough team in their own right to warrant a Sunday night selection, and their 2025 schedule has a few matchups that would definitely work.  It seems unlikely they'd play a Rams-49ers game overseas, but they also host the Texans, Bucs and an NFC North opponent.  If that's either the Packers or Lions, that could be your choice right there.

Australia isn't the only place being considered as a site for a future NFL international game.  Dublin hosted Notre Dame-Navy last season and is on the NFL's shortlist.  That one seems like a no-brainer.  Whether it's for 2025 or later on, Dublin will almost certainly be added to the NFL's list eventually.  Especially since Dublin was the only other location specifically mentioned as having already been visited by the NFL.

Where are some of the other places the NFL might consider?  Well, you'd have to figure they'll look to further increase their presence in Europe.  Rome and Milan seem like possibilities in Italy, and the idea of a game at the Stade de France seems like too much to resist!  Likewise, once upon a time, the Barcelona Dragons and Amsterdam Admirals were two of the more successful teams in NFL Europe.  So, it's not hard to imagine playing a regular season NFL game in either of those two cities (although, Barcelona would have to wait until the renovations at Camp Nou are complete).

And, while the NFL doesn't seem too focused on Asia right now, you've gotta figure that'll change eventually.  They look all set to go to Australia, which has very similar logistical issues as Asia.  So, if the Australia game goes well, Asia would seem to be not too far around the corner.  Tokyo's got a shiny, quasi-brand new Olympic Stadium.  China's got a billion people.  And there are a lot of American servicemen in Korea, which could make Seoul a very attractive option.

Regardless of where they go, the NFL will undoubtedly add new cities and countries to its slate of international games.  That was the entire point of doubling it from four to eight games a season and requiring every team to "host" one at least once every four seasons.  So, the NFL international games aren't going away (as if anyone thought they would).  We're getting more, as the NFL continues to expand its reach into new overseas markets.

Brazil this year, Spain next year, Australia after that.  Where else in the future?  Who knows?!  The possibilities really are endless.

Two Signature Shows Signing Off

All TV shows come to an end.  There are exceptions, of course.  The news, for example, will never not be on, and, I'm not entirely sure how, but it sure seems like Grey's Anatomy, NCIS and Law & Order will be on until the end of time.  But, for the most part, all TV shows come to an end.  That includes signature sports shows (except for maybe SportsCenter, which has been on every night in ESPN's 40-plus year existence).  Even good signature shows.

Another show that's been on the air since Day 1 at its network is NFL Total Access.  The first episode of NFL Total Access aired the day NFL Network launched in 2003.  The final episode aired on Friday, leaving Good Morning Football as NFL Network's new signature program.

This development most likely came about because the NFL is actively trying to sell a majority stake in NFL Network, so they're trying to cut costs.  That's already reflected in NFL Network's program schedule, which is now mainly just game replays and the NFL Films library.  Original programming isn't disappearing completely.  They're moving production to Los Angeles and will still have on-air personalities.  Just not as many.

As a result of the cost-cutting measures, NFL Total Access met the ax.  Whether it will be revived in the future is up in the air, and it wouldn't surprise me if some sort of replacement program that's shocking similar just with a different name ends up on NFL Network once the move to LA is complete.  But for now, NFL Total Access is no more.

Other shows are cancelled simply because the network that they air on lost the rights to that particular sport.  That's what happened with the original NFL Primetime, which aired on ESPN before the Sunday night game before NBC got the rights to Sunday Night Football.  NFL Primetime was revived as a streaming show on ESPN+ a few years ago, but will never come close to the original.

Speaking of Chris Berman-hosted programs, ESPN also used to have a nightly version of Baseball Tonight.  The screaming cartoon baseball before the clips of the day's home runs at the end of the show was the best!  Baseball Tonight is still technically on the air...as the Sunday Night Baseball pregame show.  That's it.  Once a week for an hour.  Fortunately, you can still get your nightly highlights fix from MLB Network's MLB Tonight and Quick Pitch.

Likewise, as great as the NHL On NBC's studio show was, it was pretty obvious it wouldn't continue once NBC's hockey contract went to ESPN and TNT instead.  Then NBCSN was shuttered entirely and all of their hockey talent moved on to the new rightsholders.  Although, TNT's NHL studio show, which is essentially the NHL On NBC's replacement, is amazing!

TNT's other signature program, Inside the NBA, has long been the gold standard among studio shows.  Inside the NBA has been a staple of TNT's coverage ever since the network started covering the NBA in 1989-90 and has won an incredible 18 Sports Emmys.  It's the perfect blend of highlights, analysis and the ridiculousness that is Shaquille O'Neal, Charles Barkley and Kenny Smith.

Unfortunately, it looks like the final game of this season's Western Conference Finals will also mark the end of Inside the NBA.  While not official, it looks like it's a done deal that Turner will be losing its NBA rights to NBC next season.  All three analysts have opt-outs in their contracts, so it appears likely Chuck, Shaq and Kenny will either head to NBC and join their NBA studio show or go to ESPN and become another panelist on the Stephen A. Smith Show.  Sorry, I mean NBA Countdown.  Or maybe one of them moves to Amazon, which will also evidently become an NBA rights holder next season.

What's a bummer about that, aside from the sheer quality of Inside the NBA, is it would also likely mean we no longer get Charles Barkley & Kenny Smith in the studio during the NCAA Tournament.  Seriously, the highlight of March Madness every year is watching Chuck act like he's been watching both of the 16-seeds playing each other in the First Four all season when, in reality, he's most likely never heard of either school before!  Then, as the tournament progresses, how he becomes the biggest fan of the 13-seed that made the Sweet 16.

I'm sure that NBC will have its own NBA pre/postgame show, which will effectively be the Inside the NBA replacement.  Whether it's anywhere near as good as TNT's NHL studio show, it'll clearly be no Inside the NBA.  I can say with some confidence that it'll be better than ESPN's NBA Countdown (aka. The Stephen A. Smith Show), though.  And the loss of Inside the NBA will create a definite void.

When/if TNT regains NBA rights once the upcoming NBC/ESPN/Amazon deal ends, I'm sure one of their first orders of business will be the revive Inside the NBA.  Will it be the same, though?  We've seen that with every iteration of The NFL Today, none of which has ever come anywhere close to the magic of the original!  (They won't be making any documentaries about the Phil Simms/Boomer Esiason version.)

Or maybe TNT won't ever get NBA rights back and Inside the NBA will be relegated to sports TV history alongside other great programs like This Week In Baseball.  That's a fate Inside the NFL has so far been able to escape, although the quality of that show has gone down with each successive network.  It was excellent and groundbreaking on HBO, still decent on Showtime, then moved to streaming on Paramount+.  Now it's on The CW and terrible.  A shell of its former self.

So, maybe the end of Inside the NBA will be for the best, then.  Because its success is something that can never be replicated (even if the show is one day revived).  And, since that's the case, we should just celebrate Inside the NBA's place in history.  As one of the best sports studio shows ever.

More On the NFL Schedule

Yesterday, I took a look at the NFL schedule as a whole and made some general observations.  Some good, some bad, some just random, but mostly focused on individual teams.  Today, I'm gonna look at it week-by-week, all the way from Week 1 and its plethora of national games up to the all-division Week 18 to start 2025.

Week 1: Playoff rematches all around.  The AFC Championship Game rematch in the Thursday night season-opener, with Lions-Rams on Sunday night.  And we already knew about the Friday night Packers-Eagles game in Brazil.  The Sunday afternoon slate is pretty weak.  Jacksonville-Miami is probably the best game in the 1:00 window, while Cowboys-Browns isn't a great national game, but it's the national game nonetheless.

Week 2: Thursday Night Football officially kicks off with Bills-Dolphins in Miami.  Last season, it was the final game of the season with the division at stake, so I'm surprised they put it this early.  Cincinnati-Kansas City is also incredibly early.  That's the national doubleheader game on CBS.  And the Lions just seem to be repeating their playoff schedule since they host the Bucs a week after hosting the Rams.  Chicago-Houston is the Sunday night game for some reason.

Week 3: They stay in the AFC East on Thursday night, as the Patriots visit the Jets.  This is also the first week with two separate Monday night games.  Jaguars-Bills is on ESPN, Commanders-Bengals is on ABC.  Personally, I think it should be the other way around.  Baltimore-Dallas is a pretty good national game in the late window.

Week 4: In Week 4, we've got another Monday night split.  Tennessee-Miami is on ESPN, Seattle-Detroit on ABC.  That's three home games, two of them nationally televised, for the Lions.  They were last season's darlings, and all of this early exposure indicates the NFL is high on their chances to do it again.  The previous team that America adopted, the Bills, will also get the spotlight on Sunday night in Baltimore.  I'm also very intrigued by that Chiefs-Chargers game, as the Super Bowl and College Football Playoff-winning coaches square off for the first time in Jim Harbaugh's return to the NFL.

Week 5: Jets-Vikings gets the London slate started on the first of those four-game Sundays.  The Giants are a late game on the same network as the national game, which means I've got them against the Seahawks instead of Packers-Rams.  Ravens-Bengals will probably be the most widely-distributed early game, while Cowboys-Steelers wraps it up on Sunday night.  If you still need more after that, Saints-Chiefs is the Monday night game.

Week 6: Last season, Detroit-Dallas had that controversial finish in the Week 17 "Monday" night game (that was played on a Saturday because of the Sugar Bowl).  This season, they meet early, which was a bit of a surprise to me.  I would've figured they make it the Thursday night game the week after Thanksgiving.  Both New York teams are playing home primetime games, the Giants on Sunday, the Jets on Monday.

Week 7: Our Super Bowl rematch is nationally exclusive.  As it should be!  Frankly, I'm shocked they gave it to FOX instead of putting it in primetime.  This is also a double-Monday night week with a twist.  Instead of getting one of the London games like last year, the ESPN+ exclusive is a second Monday night game this season.  Baltimore-Tampa Bay on regular ESPN, with Chargers-Cardinals only available via streaming.

Week 8: As I noted yesterday, Jerry Jones evidently campaigned for the Cowboys' game in San Francisco to be Week 1 Sunday night.  Instead, they held it for midseason.  Still on Sunday night, though.  There's also a matchup between the top two picks in the Draft when Chicago visits Washington.  And Baltimore visits Cleveland, which I bring up only because of how good the AFC North was last year and figures to be again.  Which makes all of those division games incredibly important.

Week 9: There is one good thing about an 18-week season.  Week 9 is the official midpoint not some random game midway through Week 8.  Anyway, the best Week 9 offering this season is Lions at Packers.  Last season, Green Bay's playoff run pretty much started with a win in Detroit on Thanksgiving.  The Lions should be the NFC North favorites again, but the Packers could definitely challenge them, especially if they get the head-to-head win.  It's also round 2 of Dolphins-Bills, so the AFC East could be essentially decided very early.

Week 10: Giants-Panthers in Munich concludes the international slate.  Cincinnati-Baltimore gets the week started on Thursday night.  The NFL clearly took Al Michaels' frustration about how bad the Amazon games were in that first season to heart.  Because this year's Thursday night schedule has some good ones, like that one.  Eagles-Cowboys is the national doubleheader game, but on CBS, not FOX.

Week 11: Philadelphia then immediately turns around and plays four days later in Washington.  There's also a Battle of Texas to conclude the week.  The best game, though, is the national late game on CBS.  Chiefs-Bills.  It's developed into a full-fledged rivalry, even though it's been incredibly one-sided.  Last year, the Bills won the regular season game, only for Kansas City to win in Buffalo in the Divisional Playoffs.

Week 12: It's usually a pretty good slate the weekend before Thanksgiving, and this season is no exception.  It starts with the Steelers-Browns rivalry and ends with the first Harbowl in 12 years.  The Bengals have their bye, so, unfortunately, not the entire AFC North will be featured nationally.  There's also a yummy playoff rematch between the 49ers and Packers in Green Bay, while the Eagles visit the Rams on Sunday night.  So, like MetLife, SoFi will also have a back-to-back Sunday night-Monday night this season.

Week 13: Thanksgiving weekend, which means six games in national windows.  Of the 10 that are not, a few are particularly enticing.  Eagles-Ravens gets the full national treatment at 4:30, while Texans-Jaguars and Steelers-Bengals are both early games.  That Rams-Saints game in New Orleans could have some potential, too.  The NFC South appears to be wide open, and I can definitely see the Saints being the team in that division that makes a run.

Week 14: Six teams have a bye in Week 14.  I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous!  All byes should be done by Thanksgiving.  Teams shouldn't have to wait until December to get theirs.  Anyway, I get my Chargers-Chiefs primetime game, while Round 2 of Packers-Lions gets it underway.  The Jets will also make a rare Sunday afternoon appearance when they visit Miami.

Week 15: With the Lions playing the Bills at home and having the CBS Thanksgiving game this year, I was certain that would be the matchup.  But they gave Detroit a division game on Thanksgiving instead and have Buffalo wrapping up a three-game homestand.  The Lions' schedule is very interesting.  They play three of their first four at home, then have a three-game homestand starting on Thanksgiving.  That's six of their nine home games in a seven-week period, with a lot of road games during the eight weeks in between.

Week 16: In order to play on Christmas, a Wednesday, they had to schedule two games on Saturday, much to the chagrin of those who'll want to watch the College Football Playoff first-round games that day.  Frankly, there was no way to avoid it this year.  What they do moving forward will be interesting, however.  The entire AFC North plays each other on either Thursday (Browns-Bengals) or Saturday (Steelers-Ravens), while the Lions visit the Bears.  Something that was noted on one of the NFL blogs is that both Detroit and Pittsburgh play all six of their division games from Week 11 onwards.  What's even crazier is that it wasn't deliberate!

Week 17: Because they had to predetermine the Week 16 Saturday games, NFL Network's Saturday tripleheader gets pushed back a week.  My (extremely) early guess is that Denver-Cincinnati will get the primetime spot, Falcons-Commanders starts the day (because no one will care), and Cardinals-Rams in the middle.  Of the already-scheduled games, we've got Cowboys at Eagles, Lions at 49ers and Jets at Bills.  Should be some good late-season matchups.

Week 18: And, of course, we wrap it up with all divisional matchups on the first weekend of the New Year.  My spidey sense is telling me that the AFC North won't be settled yet, so I'm tabbing Browns-Ravens and Bengals-Steelers as the ESPN Saturday doubleheader.  As for Game 272 on Sunday Night Football, let's go with Saints-Bucs, with Dolphins-Jets as the dark horse candidate.

Making the NFL schedule is a difficult process that requires many drafts, many reviews and input from way too many interested parties.  It goes without saying that with so many hands in the cookie jar, somebody's bound to be unhappy.  Which plenty of teams are.  Others, meanwhile, love it.  I fall squarely in the middle.  I realize it's not easy, but I'm often left confused by the final product.  This is definitely one of those years where I'm confused.  Way too many questionable primetime choices and way too many weeks with not enough marquee games.  It's not like I could do better, though, even if I tried.