Fueled largely by programming fee hikes demanded by sports networks, monthly cable bills have risen steadily in recent years, a trend likely to worsen. ESPN says it won't increase programming fees to pay for "Monday Night Football," but when its contracts with cable systems are renewed, the network undoubtedly will try to offset its higher costs with higher rates. So will NBC, which will want to raise prices for its cable channels, such as MSNBC, the USA Network and Bravo, to make up for the costs of its NFL deal. Ditto for the other networks that broadcast sports.

Cable operators have proposed a solution that makes sense: pushing sports networks out of basic cable packages and parking them in higher-cost tiers so customers could decide whether sports programming is worth the added cost.

But sports networks, leagues and advertisers are dead set against that idea because they want their broadcasts and commercials to run in front of the greatest possible number of eyeballs.

The cable industry is headed in the right direction, but it's not going far enough. Why not let the free market sort it all out? Let viewers pick programming on an a la carte basis — choosing their own packages from a menu in which each network has a set price. It's a revolutionary idea, but so was football under the lights on Monday nights.

What purpose did the age floor serve Frank Gore? What good did it do him or his family?

In response to Greg’s post below about the age debate, I found neither the drafting of Maurice Clarett nor that of Mike Williams most telling. Rather, I was most struck by the drafting of Frank Gore, who was selected in the third round by the San Francisco 49ers.

As many of you know, Gore was one of the most heralded high school players in the country in 2000. He attended the University of Miami and had one of the best freshman seasons of any running back in college history. At the time, had he been eligible to enter the NFL Draft, he likely would have been a first round selection, perhaps even a high first round pick. But, as we all know, NFL rules didn't offer him that option. So he returned to Miami for his sophomore season. But tragedy struck before that season began: he tore the ACL in his left knee. After taking one year to recover, he suffered a similarly-devastating injury in his other knee.

Leading up to this draft, I can't tell you how many stories I read about those knee injuries have robbed Gore of his trademark speed, and turned one of the most dynamic running back prospects into merely a good or very good one. Even the 49ers acknowledge that he is a serious health risk, while other observers question how long Gore's reconstructed knees will hold up.

Gore had another year of eligibility remaining, but because his mother needs costly medical treatment for a kidney problem and because their family lacks the means to pay for it, Gore felt that he had no choice but to enter this year’s draft.

I'm sure I wasn't the only one who thought, "What might have been?" Forget the potential money that Gore lost over the last two seasons (which is somewhere in the neighborhood of $10 million, including what he would have received as a signing bonus as a first round pick). And forget the money that he loses by being a third round pick instead of a first round pick. And you can even forget all the money that he might lose going forward, particularly since injuries have 1) made him a worse player; and 2) decreased the expected length of his career.

Instead, just ask yourself this: What purpose did the age floor serve Frank Gore? What good did it do him or his family? Had he been eligible for the NFL Draft after his freshman season, I don’t know if Frank Gore would have declared. The only person who knows that is Frank Gore. But that’s not really the point. The point is that an age floor has real costs on people and their families, who are often very poor, just like their ancestors were. And after centuries of poverty, when a family finally sees one of its own possess the rare skill to get them out of poverty, it finds out that, unlike if he were a baseball player, hockey player, basketball player, soccer player, tennis player, golfer, musician, artist, actor or just about anything else in life, he can’t earn that money because his rare skill happens to be in football.

Sure, I understand college football is much better off with Frank Gore and others like him. But is it so much better off to justify how much worse off he is?

Gore’s saga is reminiscent to that of high school basketball phenom Randy Livingston. In the early 1990s, Livingston was deemed the "next Magic Johnson", and had he made himself eligible for the 1993 NBA Draft, was a sure lottery pick. But he took the safe route: he chose to attend college instead. However, before his first college practice, Livingston blew out the ACL in his right knee and was never the same thereafter.

Of course, Randy Livingston made a choice, whereas Frank Gore had no choice. And in that sense, it seems much worse.

One person or two people getting seriously injured, or even killed, while a tragedy for the families and friends of the individuals; do not give us a reason to create even more "risk-preventative" laws. Or put another way, you cannot legislate risk, although we continue to try and do so regardless of the cost. Children in most states can no longer ride a bicycle without a safety helmet, even though the facts do not support the claims that it saves lives, although it seems that it does reduce the number of children actually riding bikes.

Do we really need to have all young pitchers and infielders wearing helmets because there is a one in a million chance that they could suffer serious injury?

It all happened so quickly -- I don't really remember what happened. It seemed like the fan was taking a shot at me and so I reacted without thinking, and I apologize for that. The fan was wrong to have reached into the field of play, but I was wrong to react as I did in confronting that idiot fan.

You don't need bad vision to get the surgery. Wavefront, if you've got the bucks for it, reliably gives you 20/16 or better. If your vision ends up corrected but not enhanced, you can go back for a second pass. Players calculate every increment. Pro golfers seek "to optimize any competitive advantage," a LASIK surgeon told the Los Angeles Times. "They're already tuned in to the best clubs, the best putter, the best ball. ... Clearly having great vision is one of the best competitive advantages you can have." Eyes are just another piece of equipment. If you don't like 'em, change 'em.

The sports establishment is obtuse to this revolution. Leagues worry about how you might doctor bats, balls, or clubs. They don't focus on how you might doctor yourself.

The Italian government backed a series of new "zero tolerance" measures Thursday designed to curb fan violence at soccer matches.

Effective immediately, matches will be abandoned if objects are thrown from the stands. The team whose fans threw the objects will be penalized with an automatic 3-0 loss.

"There is such a remote possibility the NCAA would lose that we're not uncomfortable at all," NCAA vice president David Berst said. "The difficulty is that the five schools on the MIBA side have the same opinion. We are confident an association can set season limits, rules and say you have to participate in the association's championship."

The problem of the sale is a complicated one. Delorme says the deal would probably have been completed weeks ago if not for the issue of Youppi's trademarks. When Youppi! was first created in 1979, the Expos registered their logos on his cap and shirt. The registers lasted even as the team's insignias changed. Now in order to get rid of him, they must first "de-register" every logo, Delorme said, then register it again without the word "Expos."
And so Youppi! rests in his duffel bags while Montreal waits to hear what will become of him.

We conclude that the material in question is not patently offensive, and thus, not indecent. In particular, the “Monday Night Football” segment, although sexually suggestive, is not graphic or explicit. Owens is fully dressed throughout the segment, and, with the exception of a moment when her bare back is exposed to the audience, Sheridan is at all times fully covered with a towel. No sexual or excretory organs are shown or described, and no sexual activities are explicitly depicted or described. Furthermore, the scene where Sheridan drops her towel and jumps into Owens’s arms is brief. Although the scene apparently is intended to be titillating, it simply is not graphic or explicit enough to be indecent under our standard.

"As a black guy, you kind of think [race is] the reason why it's coming up. You don't hear about it in baseball or hockey. To say you have to be 20, 21 to get in the league, it's unconstitutional. If I can go to the U.S. Army and fight the war at 18 why can't you play basketball for 48 minutes?"

Once the current collective bargaining agreement between the NBA and the NBPA expires on July 1, 2005, the parties expect to negotiate a new steroids testing policy. The existing policy, which was instituted in 1998, calls for a five-game suspension for the first positive steroid test, 10 games for the second, and 25 for any subsequent positive results. Veteran players are tested only once a year--and only during training camp--unless there is "probable cause" for additional screens. In contrast, first-year players may be tested as many as three times during the season, in addition to once during training camp.

Since implementation, only three players have tested positive: Don MacLean (suspended five games in 2000); Matt Geiger (suspended only two games in 2000 because substance had been only recently banned); and Soumaila Samake (suspended five games in 2002).

Although neither the NBA nor the NBPA believes that steroids use presents a significant problem among basketball players, fallout from the recent congressional hearings on baseball/steroids has prompted reconsideration. Look for any new NBA steroids policy to include more frequent testing. (Hu, "Steroid Issue a Layup, So Far", San Fran. Chron. 4/10/05)

The one constant through all the years, Ray, has been baseball. America has rolled by like an army of steamrollers. Its been erased like a blackboard, rebuilt, and erased again. But, baseball has marked the time. This field, this game, is a part of our past, Ray. It reminds us of all that once was good, and could be again.

By placing the protective screen behind home plate, [the city and team] did not assume a duty to use reasonable care with respect to the design of the barrier beyond seeing that it did not deviate from the established customs used in baseball stadiums. To conclude otherwise would lead to absurd results in that it would require an amusement facility to have screens encircling the entire field, or, alternatively, would allow an amusement facility to avoid liability by leaving stands unprotected, but expose the facility to liability when it erects protective barriers.

The Home Run Record Resolution now moves to the North Dakota House for additional review.

The sponsor of the resolution, Sen. Joel Heitkamp (D), believes that although this matter may appear neither deserving of a state legislature's attention nor germane to any state policy, it actually reflects a broader commitment among North Dakotans to prevent cheaters from rewards.