Author Archives: Tom

2007 Weekly local football review

Posted on by
Reply

Andre%20Johnson%20111907.jpg(AP Photo/Dave Einsel; previous weekly reviews here)
Texans 23 Saints 10

The Texans (5-5) enjoyed the return from their bye week with a convincing win over the Saints (4-6), who appear to be a shadow of the team that played in the NFC Championship Game last season. QB Matt Schaub (21/33 for 293 yds, 2 TD’s, no ints), who had his best game as a Texan, and previously injured star WR Andre Johnson (6 rec, 120 yds, 1 TD (73)) were particularly effective, while the Texans defense led by DE Mario Williams and an undermanned but feisty secondary kept the Saints’ offense off-rhythm for much of the game. The Texans go on the road over the next two weeks for games against the Browns (6-4) and the Titans (6-3) before returning home for three of the season’s last four games.

Houston Cougars 35 Marshall 28

The Cougars (7-4/6-2) kept their fleeting Conference USA title hopes alive with a close win over Marshall (2-9/2-5) as the potent Houston offense came alive in the 2nd half after taking a long nap during the debacle last week against Tulsa and during the first half of this game. The Coogs finish up their regular season with a non-conference game next Saturday against hapless Division I-AA Texas Southern (0-10) while awaiting the outcome of Rice’s grudge match against Tulsa at Rice Stadium. If the Owls can pull off the upset against Tulsa, then the Coogs win the CUSA West division title and advance to the conference championship game on December 1st against Central Florida.

Tulane 45 Rice 31

The Owls (3-8/3-4) modest three game winning streak came to an end as Tulane RB Matt Forde rolled up 194 yards and 5 TD’s against Rice’s overwhelmed defense. Rice’s Chase Clement was 35-of-55 passing for 353 yards and four touchdowns, and — with 379 total yards — set a Rice season record for total offense with 3,319 yards. The Owls could do a big favor for their cross-town rival Cougars by upsetting Tulsa (8-3/5-2) in the Todd Graham Grudge Match next Saturday at Rice Stadium. However, without a meaningful defense, the Owls offense will probably have to put 60 points on the board against Tulsa for Rice to have a chance to win the game.

Texas (9-2/5-2) and Texas A&M (6-5/3-4) were idle this weekend as they prepare for their annual Friday afternoon (2:30 p.m./ABC) game, which has taken on added importance with Oklahoma’s (9-2/5-2) loss to Texas Tech (8-4/4/4) on Saturday night. If the Horns beat the Aggies and a beat-up OU loses to Oklahoma State (6-5/4-3) next Saturday, then the Longhorns will win the Big 12 South Division and represent the division in the Big 12 championship game in San Antonio on December 1st.
And finally, in another type of football, the Houston Dynamo won its second straight Major League Soccer Cup Title, defeating the New England Revolution 2-1. The Dynamo are the first team to win back-to-back MLS Cups since D.C. United did so in 1996-97. The Dynamo will celebrate their latest championship on Tuesday at Houston City Hall from 5:30-7:30 p.m.

Transit survey raises more questions than it answers

Posted on by
2

metroraillogo%20111907.gifIsn’t it interesting the different reactions that Anne Linehan, Charles Kuffner and Tory Gattis had to the 2007 Houston Area Survey regarding transit options? The Chronicle and other light rail enthusiasts immediately seized upon the survey as evidence that Houston-area residents want to dump more money into the light rail money pit.
But the problem with such surveys is that they generally ask people questions in a vacuum and do not address Peter Gordon’s three elegantly simple questions regarding economic choices:
1) At what cost?
2) Compared to what? and
3) How do you know?
For example, assume for a moment that the persons surveyed were informed of the fact that the average urban freeway lane costs about $10 million per mile and that the average light rail line costs about $50 million per mile while carrying only one-fifth as many people as the freeway lane. And these are only average figures — as Randal O’Toole recently pointed out, Seattle’s recently rejected light rail expansion was projected to cost $250 million per mile, a whopping 125 times more expensive at moving people than a freeway.
Moreover, let’s also assume that the persons surveyed are informed that the expenditure of a billion or so of public money on expanding a poorly-used light rail system has real consequences, such as leaving inadequate funds to make improvements to Houston’s infrastructure that would dramatically decrease the risk of death and property damage from flooding. Or whether the billion or so being flushed down the light rail drain would be better used to fix various area traffic “hotspots” where accidents or bottlenecks occur with high frequency.
No one knows for sure, but my bet is that the survey results would be dramatically different if the foregoing costs and alternatives were included as a part of the survey. It’s a shame that neither the City’s current leaders nor the mainstream media are asking the simple questions set forth above that would generate a meaningful cost-benefit analysis and ensuing well-informed debate regarding continued investment in expensive public works projects such as Metro’s light rail system.
Instead, we get this:

Metro executive vice president John Sedlak led off [a presentation to the Transportation Policy Council, a group of elected officials and agency staffers that sets priorities for transportation spending in the 13-county Gulf Coast planning region] with a slide show describing the [proposed Metro University light rail line] project and told the panel its approval was needed so Metro could get federal funding and start engineering work.
If there was a short delay, Holm asked, “What would be the consequence?”
Sedlak replied that the project is on “an aggressive schedule” and that a delay “would send a message to Washington that there are issues with our overall program.”
Holm asked why Washington would think there were issues and not just loose ends to tie up.
“They watch every activity that takes place very carefully,” Sedlak said. “The federal government is aware we are having this meeting today.”
Holm asked what the application deadline was. Sedlak said it was “in the month of December.”
“If the delay was just a few days, would it jeopardize the funding of the entire program?” Holm asked.
“I truly believe it could,” Sedlak replied.
Kemah Mayor Bill King had questions, too.
How many more passengers would the rail carry than the buses on Richmond do now?
Sedlak said he did not know, but Metro could get him the answer.
King asked how the line would impact traffic on Richmond.
Sedlak said there would be some negative effects, but the finished line should “take vehicles off the street.” Numerical estimates are in the line’s environmental impact document, he said.
Holm spoke again, her voice a little shaky.
“There are cities,” she said, “that have never been turned down for a funding request. It’s not because they agree on everything they want. It’s because they do their due diligence and they do their battles at home.
“We need to still build consensus in this community. We need to be able to walk hand-in-hand in supporting a project,” she said.

Update: As usual, Tory Gattis has additional insightful thoughts.

“In the Hamptons”

Posted on by
Reply

As economists such as Nouriel Roubini increasingly predict a recession and a hard landing for the U.S. economy, Merle Hazard channels Merle Haggard, Arthur Laffer, Milton Friedman, Mac Davis, Ben Bernanke and Elvis — to name just a few — in expressing Wall Street’s current trepidation. It doesn’t get any better than “In the Hamptons” (H/T to the NY Times via Larry Ribstein):

Thinking about the Bonds case

Posted on by
1

bbonds%20111707.jpgTwo topics on this blog are legal matters and baseball, so Barry Bonds has been a frequent subject of posts here over the past four years. Inasmuch as this post from over two years ago speculated that Bonds would be indicted, regular readers of this blog weren’t surprised when the shoe finally dropped on Bonds this past week.
The Bonds indictment was met with typical self-righteous vindication by much of the mainstream media, but the blogs have thankfully provided a much more measured analysis of the charges. For example:

Peter Henning provides this excellent analysis (see also here) of the indictment and the probable course of the prosecution. Also, JC Bradbury compiles some thoughts from other legal commentators about the Bonds case, and Keith Scherer provides this extensive analysis of the Bonds case;
Norm Pattis provides this interesting post that analyzes the probable prison sentence that Bonds is facing, which is far less than those typically reported in the mainstream media. Thankfully, Bonds does not appear to face a draconian trial penalty if he chooses to defend himself at trial;
Reason’s Hit & Run blog provides this balanced compendium of blog posts and articles from over the years that remind us that witch hunts are common when a controversial person such as Bonds is prosecuted for covering up an alleged crime when the investigation was actually into the alleged crime, not the cover up; and
Along those same lines, Scott Henson questions the prosecution’s motives and judgment in pursuing Bonds.

And as Bonds is being singled out while more popular ballplayers have had a pass on being investigated for alleged illegal use of steroids, I’m trying to figure out why the Apple Rule is not available to protect Bonds? Could it be for the same reason that it was not available to former heavyweight boxing champion Jack Johnson during an earlier era?

The managing partner

Posted on by
Reply

The incomparable Stu Rees of Stu’s Views passes along a common experience shared by most attorneys who have had the “pleasure” of managing a law firm:
Stu%27s%20Views%20Managing%20partner.gif

Mike Leach’s Selective Memory

Posted on by
9

By now, most folks who follow college football know that Texas Tech head coach Mike Leach received a record fine and public reprimand from the Big 12 Conference for his post-game comments questioning the integrity of the referees who officiated last weekend’s Texas-Texas Tech game in Austin in which the Horns hammered the Red Raiders, 59-43.

But not as well publicized as Leach’s outburst is Leach’s hypocrisy in making the remarks in the first place.

One of Leach’s main gripes with the officiating crew last weekend was that one of the officials on the crew was from Austin, referee Randy Christal. However, what Leach failed to mention is that the last two Tech-Texas games also have had a Lubbock resident as an on-field crew member — Tim Pringle last year in Lubbock and Kelly Deterding this past weekend in Austin.

Moreover, this week’s Tech-Oklahoma game in Lubbock renews a similar controversy after the controversial ending of the 2005 Tech-OU game in Lubbock, but Leach wasn’t complaining about the referees after that game.

Both Lubbock resident Deterding and Austin resident Christal were on the officiating crew during that 2005 game when the officials flagrantly missed a spot on a key fourth down play that kept a last ditch Tech drive alive and then allowed Tech to win the game on a disputed Taurean Henderson touchdown run on the final play of the game.

The video of the blown spot call that kept the final Tech drive alive is below.

It’s 4th down and 3, Tech QB Cody Hodges’ pass is batted in the air and Tech WR Danny Amendola and an OU defender come down with the ball well-short of the first down mark. After the play, both television announcers observe that, even if Amendola caught the ball cleanly, he was stopped well short of the first down marker. The announcers are incredulous when the officiating crew spots the ball and gives Tech a first down:

Of course, that play is followed by the last play of the game where the video shows Tech RB Henderson s-t-r-e-t-c-h-e-s the ball over the goal line. At least Henderson’s TD stretch was a closer call than the Amendola “phantom first down” catch.

To his credit, Oklahoma head coach Bob Stoops didn’t make a public issue of it at the time even though he had a better case than Leach did after his recent outburst in Austin. Stoops’ maturity is one of the many reasons that he is a better and more successful coach than Leach.

By the way, that controversial 2005 Tech-OU is also famous for the following video, which establishes that Lubbock is not only one of the toughest places for a visiting team to play, but also one of the toughest places for a visiting player to give a post-game press interview:

Update: Tech upset the Sooners, 34-27.

Remembering 1968

Posted on by
Reply

1968.jpgIn 1968, I was a 15-year old concentrating on playing various high school sports in Iowa City, a Midwestern college town. However, even in that somewhat sheltered environment, it was impossible not to realize that 1968 was an unusually tumultuous year. This Daniel Henninger/Opinion Journal op-ed reminds us of just what a wild ride 1968 was:

In 1968, Nicolas Sarkozy was 13 years old. John McCain was 32 and Hillary Clinton was 21. Barack Obama was 7. It is not beyond imagining that the precocious Messrs. Sarkozy and Obama were alert to events in 1968, but for the first wave of baby boomers just touching adulthood that year, it was the beginning of a strange journey.
Nearly any one of the events that went off in 1968 would have been enough to dominate another year. To list what actually happened that year even today boggles the mind, and spirit.
The year began with sales of the Beatles album, “Magical Mystery Tour.” In retrospect, it was a premonition. In late January, North Korea captured the USS Pueblo and crew members. A week later, the North Vietnamese army launched the Tet offensive.
On Feb. 27, Walter Cronkite announced on CBS News that the U.S. had to negotiate a settlement to the Vietnam War. On March 12, Sen. Gene McCarthy defeated incumbent President Lyndon Johnson in the New Hampshire primary, aided by antiwar students that Sen. McCarthy called his “children’s crusade.” Two weeks later, LBJ announced on TV that he would not run for re-election. One week later, Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated. It was only April 4.
There were race riots everywhere. On April 24, students occupied five buildings at Columbia University, protesting the war. In May bloody student riots erupted in France, likely witnessed by the impressionable Mr. Sarkozy.
On June 3, Valerie Solanas shot Andy Warhol in a New York City loft. Two days later, Sirhan Sirhan assassinated Robert F. Kennedy Jr. In August, the Soviet Union occupied Czechoslovakia. Seven days later, antiwar demonstrators at the Democratic convention fought pitched battles with the Chicago police.
On Nov. 4, having absorbed all this, the people of the United States voted. They gave 43.4% of their vote to Richard Nixon and 42.7% to Hubert Humphrey. Alabama Gov. George Wallace got 13.5%. Four years later, George Wallace was shot while running for president. 1968 lasted a long time.
Whatever civic culture the U.S. had until the 1960s, it was now transformed. After ’68, we had a new kind of political and social culture, pounding like a jackhammer into the older bedrock. The country cracked. Look at those 1968 popular vote numbers; half the country went left and half went right.

Read the entire piece.

The nation’s worst-managed transit system

Posted on by
Reply

metrocar%20111607.jpgTom Rubin is an accountant who has audited many transit agencies and is an expert in transit system accounting. Randal O’Toole channels a Rubin presentation in describing the nation’s worst-managed transit system:

Participants in the Preserving the American Dream conference were encouraged to ride [the] light-rail line to one of the conference events. What they saw was not a pretty picture. Trains were infrequent (one of the supposed advantages of rail is that they run so frequently that riders donít need to consult schedules), the in-street tracks are dangerous (one conference goer slipped on a rail and fell into a curb), and the fellow patrons are not always people you want to be around (several conference goers were treated to the scene of someone becoming violently ill on board, leading one of our members to say, ìSo thatís what they mean by ëvibrant streetsíî).
Beyond these impressions, Rubin observes that [the light-rail system] has ìthe worst operating statistics of any American transit operator.î The reason for this, he says, is that [the area] ó being built mostly after World War II ó is one of the most spread-out urban areas in the country. Not only are people spread out, but jobs are spread out, with no job concentrations anywhere.
This makes large buses particularly unsuitable for transit because there is no place where large numbers of people want to go. So what was [the transit system’s] solution when its bus numbers were low relative to other transit agencies? Build light rail ó in other words, use an expensive technology that requires even more job concentrations.
Now it has one of the, if not the, poorest-patronized light-rail systems in America. So what is its solution? Build heavy rail, a technology that requires even more job concentrations.

What transit system are O’Toole and Rubin describing? Well, it sure sounds like it could be Houston’s, but it’s not. They are talking about San Jose, California’s system.
But how long do you think it will be until Houston’s light rail system is in similar shape?

What goes up, usually comes down

Posted on by
Reply

oil_well%20111507.jpgThe BBC’s Evan Davis provides a short article on how to keep the recent spike in oil prices in perspective:

It’s clear that $100 a barrel is very high. Although it’s worth saying, it’s still not a record.
1864 was in fact the most expensive year for oil. It was over $104 in today’s money. Notwithstanding that record (and most of us in the media will ignore it when talking of record highs in the next few weeks – we’ll be using the high of $104.7 reached in 1980 after the Iranian revolution) we can at least say an impending $100 barrel is getting historically significant.

And Davis provides the following observation about the market for oil that echos that of former Exxon chairman, Lee Raymond:

But the point of volatile market is that it swings both ways.
The longer we have higher oil prices, the more we can economise on oil – by switching to smaller cars for example. And the more oil that gets produced ñ a small excess of supply over demand – and the price can plummet.
The lesson of history, is that when oil prices soar up to record levels, they usually then fall back down.

And here’s one final price of oil thought for the day, courtesy of Shai Agassi:

The cost of the average used car in Europe is now cheaper than the cost of gasoline to drive it for a year . . .

Edwards returns to demagoguery

Posted on by
Reply

After an effective television ad, the John Edwards campaign returns to Edwards’ usual form of demagoguery against business interests in the ad below:

By the way, one of Edwards’ proposed ways in which to force Congress to take action on his call of universal health care coverage won’t fly.