fivethirthyeight--2020-11-23--The Birther Myth Stuck Around For Years. The Election Fraud Myth Might Too.

A significant number of Americans currently believe the 2020 election was stolen , even though it wasn ’ t .
A Reuters/Ipsos poll last week showed 52 percent of Republicans believe President Trump “ rightfully won ” the election .
But the only “ evidence ” of election fraud has been widely debunked .
An optimist might think the public will gradually drop this election fraud myth as the Trump campaign ’ s lawsuits are thrown out , recounts and audits are conducted , and , eventually , Joe Biden is sworn in as president .
But we ’ ve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president is illegitimate before , as he spent years claiming without evidence that President Obama wasn ’ t born in the United States , and thus ineligible to be president .
If this recent saga is anything like the birtherism movement , it ’ s not going anywhere .
What divided the electorate in 2020 | FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast “ If you ’ re asking if this is going to go away , I would bet a lot of money that it won ’ t , ” said Adam Berinsky , a political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a book about political conspiracy theories .
Birtherism first emerged in 2008 during Obama ’ s primary campaign through the now very quaint medium of chain emails .
After securing the nomination , Obama ’ s campaign published a copy of his certification of live birth in Hawaii .
Many assumed this would put an end to the myth that he wasn ’ t born in America .
Trump was one of the main people who ensured it did not .
In 2011 , Trump began aggressively beating the birtherism drum , including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Conservative Political Action Conference in February .
Over the next five years , in media appearances , speeches and on Twitter , Trump repeatedly made false claims that Obama was not born in America .
This continued even after Obama released his long-form birth certificate in April 2011 , a piece of evidence Trump had demanded .
It wasn ’ t until Trump ’ s own campaign for president in 2016 — when his birtherism was thought to be among the reasons he wasn ’ t polling well among Black Americans — that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was born in the United States .
But that admission was brief ( the statement lasted less than a minute ) and included Trump blaming Hillary Clinton for originating the myth , which isn ’ t true .
When the birther myth first emerged , there wasn ’ t much in the way of public opinion polling about it .
It wasn ’ t until Trump revived the conspiracy theory in 2011 that pollsters started to track how much of the public believed it .
And over the years , even as more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ birth certificate and contemporaneous newspaper announcements — proving Obama was born in the U.S. , the belief has persisted .
As recently as last year , a YouGov poll found that 34 percent of Americans think it ’ s “ probably true ” or “ definitely true ” that Obama was born in Kenya , as the birther myth often claimed .
Among self-identified Republicans , that number was 56 percent .
“ There were these temporary dips in birther beliefs when major events happened and news coverage was reminding people of that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a professor of government at Dartmouth College .
“ But birther misperceptions typically reverted back to their prior levels after that information shock had dissipated.
” In April 2011 , for example , a YouGov poll found that 55 percent of Americans believed Obama was born in the U.S. That was before Obama released his birth certificate .
After he released it , the same pollster found that number had climbed to 67 percent .
But a year and a half later , the number had dipped again , down to 59 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percentage of people who reject the rumor , it doesn ’ t really move at all .
All of the movement is in and out of this ‘ not sure ’ category , ” said Berinsky .
There are a number of reasons why the birther myth remains so tenacious even in the face of hard evidence , according to Tali Sharot , a cognitive neuroscientist at University College London who studies how emotions influence people ’ s beliefs .
Sharot said myths are shored up by how much a person is motivated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that belief sits with their current worldview .
[ Related : What Trump ’ s Refusal To Concede Says About American Democracy ] “ Most beliefs we have are in fact true .
We believe the sun rises in the morning .
We believe that winter is cold and that if we walk forward we move forward , ” Sharot said .
“ If I come and tell you the sun won ’ t rise in the morning , you don ’ t believe me and you would be right .
It doesn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ belief every time there ’ s a piece of evidence that counters it .
How can you operate in a world where your beliefs are changing every second ?
” With birtherism , many Americans didn ’ t want Obama to be president , so the belief that he was ineligible was a convenient narrative and they were motivated to accept it .
It was also bolstered by racism against the first Black president .
But Sharot said the election fraud myth is likely going to be even more persistent because it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many pieces of disinformation that are harder to discredit .
There ’ s no single document — à la the long-form birth certificate — that can definitively say the election was free and fair .
Trump supporters are highly motivated to believe there was election fraud , because they want their candidate to have won .
Add in that Trump and the GOP establishment continue to spread their fraudulent narrative , and it ’ s understandable that so many Americans think something is wrong .
But even as more information is revealed and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fraud has occurred , it ’ s likely those beliefs will linger for years to come .
“ I think the current situation is going to be much , much worse than birtherism in terms of people believing it , and believing it for the long run , ” Sharot said .
‘ I buy that COVID was a factor in polls underestimating ’ GOP : Nate Silver

A significant number of Americans currently believe the 2020 election was stolen, even though it wasn’t. A Reuters/Ipsos poll last week showed 52 percent of Republicans believe President Trump “rightfully won” the election. But the only “evidence” of election fraud has been widely debunked.
An optimist might think the public will gradually drop this election fraud myth as the Trump campaign’s lawsuits are thrown out, recounts and audits are conducted, and, eventually, Joe Biden is sworn in as president. But we’ve seen Trump try to falsely claim a president is illegitimate before, as he spent years claiming without evidence that President Obama wasn’t born in the United States, and thus ineligible to be president. If this recent saga is anything like the birtherism movement, it’s not going anywhere.
What divided the electorate in 2020 | FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast
“If you’re asking if this is going to go away, I would bet a lot of money that it won’t,” said Adam Berinsky, a political scientist at MIT who is working on a book about political conspiracy theories.
Birtherism first emerged in 2008 during Obama’s primary campaign through the now very quaint medium of chain emails. After securing the nomination, Obama’s campaign published a copy of his certification of live birth in Hawaii. Many assumed this would put an end to the myth that he wasn’t born in America. Trump was one of the main people who ensured it did not.
[Related: How Trump Changed America]
In 2011, Trump began aggressively beating the birtherism drum, including via some comments he made at the Conservative Political Action Conference in February. Over the next five years, in media appearances, speeches and on Twitter, Trump repeatedly made false claims that Obama was not born in America. This continued even after Obama released his long-form birth certificate in April 2011, a piece of evidence Trump had demanded.
It wasn’t until Trump’s own campaign for president in 2016 — when his birtherism was thought to be among the reasons he wasn’t polling well among Black Americans — that Trump admitted the obvious truth: Obama was born in the United States. But that admission was brief (the statement lasted less than a minute) and included Trump blaming Hillary Clinton for originating the myth, which isn’t true.
When the birther myth first emerged, there wasn’t much in the way of public opinion polling about it. It wasn’t until Trump revived the conspiracy theory in 2011 that pollsters started to track how much of the public believed it. And over the years, even as more evidence emerged — such as the long-form birth certificate and contemporaneous newspaper announcements — proving Obama was born in the U.S., the belief has persisted. As recently as last year, a YouGov poll found that 34 percent of Americans think it’s “probably true” or “definitely true” that Obama was born in Kenya, as the birther myth often claimed. Among self-identified Republicans, that number was 56 percent.
“There were these temporary dips in birther beliefs when major events happened and news coverage was reminding people of that evidence,” said Brendan Nyhan, a professor of government at Dartmouth College. “But birther misperceptions typically reverted back to their prior levels after that information shock had dissipated.”
Hard evidence of falsehood doesn’t sway birthers Share of respondents who say they believe Obama was born in the United States, or believe he was not born in the United States, 2009-17 Many Americans were wrongly skeptical after Obama was sworn in date pollster Born in U.S. Not Born in U.S. 8/17/09 PPP 62% 25% 9/21/09 PPP 59 23 4/12/10 CBS/NYT 58 20 4/25/10 ABC 77 20 6/3/10 CBS News 63 13 7/21/10 CNN/ORC 71 27 11/15/10 Knowledge Networks 55 15 3/13/11 CNN/ORC 72 25 4/5/11 Fox News 67 24 4/10/11 Pew 55 23 4/20/11 CBS/NYT 57 25 4/23/11 Gallup 57 24 4/26/11 YouGov 55 15 Releasing Obama’s long-form birth certificate in April 2011 didn’t have a lasting effect date pollster Born in U.S. Not Born in U.S. 5/1/11 CNN/ORC 80% 17% 5/1/11 The Washington Post 86 10 5/3/11 YouGov 67 13 5/8/11 Gallup 65 13 1/31/12 YouGov 59 17 7/2/12 YouGov 55 20 9/11/12 AP/GfK 49 39 9/17/12 YouGov 59 21 9/8/15 CNN/ORC 75 13 1/17/16 Morning Consult 48 34 5/9/16 PPP 57 30 Neither did Trump admitting Obama was born in the U.S. in September 2016 date pollster Born in U.S. Not Born in U.S. 9/19/16 YouGov 61% 22% 9/24/16 Selzer 75 11 3/5/17 Morning Consult 57 26 Numbers do not add up to 100 percent because respondents could indicate they were undecided on the matter.
In April 2011, for example, a YouGov poll found that 55 percent of Americans believed Obama was born in the U.S. That was before Obama released his birth certificate. After he released it, the same pollster found that number had climbed to 67 percent. But a year and a half later, the number had dipped again, down to 59 percent.
“If you look at the percentage of people who reject the rumor, it doesn’t really move at all. All of the movement is in and out of this ‘not sure’ category,” said Berinsky.
There are a number of reasons why the birther myth remains so tenacious even in the face of hard evidence, according to Tali Sharot, a cognitive neuroscientist at University College London who studies how emotions influence people’s beliefs. Sharot said myths are shored up by how much a person is motivated to believe them, and how well that belief sits with their current worldview.
[Related: What Trump’s Refusal To Concede Says About American Democracy]
“Most beliefs we have are in fact true. We believe the sun rises in the morning. We believe that winter is cold and that if we walk forward we move forward,” Sharot said. “If I come and tell you the sun won’t rise in the morning, you don’t believe me and you would be right. It doesn’t make sense to change your belief every time there’s a piece of evidence that counters it. How can you operate in a world where your beliefs are changing every second?”
With birtherism, many Americans didn’t want Obama to be president, so the belief that he was ineligible was a convenient narrative and they were motivated to accept it. It was also bolstered by racism against the first Black president. But Sharot said the election fraud myth is likely going to be even more persistent because it’s more personal, and based on many pieces of disinformation that are harder to discredit. There’s no single document — à la the long-form birth certificate — that can definitively say the election was free and fair.
Trump supporters are highly motivated to believe there was election fraud, because they want their candidate to have won. Add in that Trump and the GOP establishment continue to spread their fraudulent narrative, and it’s understandable that so many Americans think something is wrong. But even as more information is revealed and it becomes apparent that no widespread election fraud has occurred, it’s likely those beliefs will linger for years to come.
“I think the current situation is going to be much, much worse than birtherism in terms of people believing it, and believing it for the long run,” Sharot said.
Additional reporting by Mary Radcliffe
‘I buy that COVID was a factor in polls underestimating’ GOP: Nate Silver


fivethirthyeight--2020-11-24--What Does Makur Maker Mean For The Future Of HBCU Sports?

In their Howard University dorms in the early 1990s , Milan Brown and his classmates used to discuss how their school and other historically Black colleges and universities could become basketball powerhouses .
“ You ’ d be surprised at how many talks we had , ” said Brown , now an assistant men ’ s basketball coach at Pittsburgh .
Brown , whose jersey number is retired at Howard ’ s Burr Gymnasium , started at point guard in 1992 , the last time the Washington , D.C. , HBCU reached the NCAA Tournament .
And while Howard ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its men ’ s basketball team has fallen flat over the past quarter-century .
But Brown is ready for his former program to stage a comeback after landing its most impressive recruit , Makur Maker .
“ I was so proud , ” Brown said of Maker ’ s commitment in July , “ because I know my program can hopefully now make another jump .
I ’ m also glad , bragging-rights-wise , that we can say we have the first .
It won ’ t be the last .
But I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I know the power of my university .
You know that it ’ s called the Mecca for a reason , right ?
” Maker is the first five-star high school basketball recruit to commit to an HBCU since ESPN unveiled its recruiting database in 2007 .
In doing so , he eschewed offers from college basketball royalty , including UCLA and Kentucky .
And so it is that a young Kenyan-born man with professional basketball aspirations chose a program that has lost more games than all but seven Division I teams @ @ @ @ @ @ @ idea why it ’ s been over 40 years that not even one five-star basketball player in the United States has decided to play basketball at an HBCU , ” Maker said in an interview with Jerry Bembry of The Undefeated .
“ But I do know that in this Black Lives Matter movement that ’ s empowered and assembled many different people across the country and the world that it won ’ t be another 40 years until it happens again.
” The sports world will be watching for the immediate on-the-court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Howard kicking off its season on Thanksgiving .
But what can Howard head coach Kenneth Blakeney expect now that his roster includes a blue-chip prospect ?
Even if the program doesn ’ t take an instant leap , the off-the-court effects are likely more important .
Will Maker ’ s historic decision create a domino effect for HBCU athletics ?
Has it already ?
It wasn ’ t a coincidence that Maker made his school announcement in the midst of this summer ’ s civil rights reckoning .
Maker committed to Howard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mobilize other elite athletes to play for predominantly Black institutions .
That mobilization seems well on its way .
Roughly a month before Maker ’ s announcement , four-star recruit Nate Tabor withdrew his commitment to St. John ’ s and committed to Norfolk State .
Nojel Eastern , a former top 100 recruit , announced in August that he would join Maker at Howard after transferring from Purdue , writing “ For the culture ” on Twitter .
Cam Mack , a former three-star recruit , left Nebraska and transferred to Prairie @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Black Lives Matter hashtag in his announcement post .
Future recruiting classes have taken note .
Multiple high-level players in the class of 2023 are considering HBCUs .
Most notably , Mikey Williams , the No .
3 prospect in the class of 2023 , included five HBCU programs in his top 10 .
The movement isn ’ t exclusive to men ’ s basketball , either .
Korey Foreman , Rivals ’ No .
1 football player in the class of 2021 , included Howard in his list of top seven schools @ @ @ @ @ @ @ man that is happy and proud of my race , ” Foreman ’ s announcement post read .
“ The Black Lives Matter movement is and forever will be powerful.
” Twin volleyball players Bria and Cimone Woodard transferred from Texas A & M to Howard .
Earlier this month , Se ’ Quoia Allmond became the first top 100 women ’ s basketball recruit in the ESPN era to commit to an HBCU when she signed with Jackson State .
One highly coveted commitment like Maker ’ s , or even a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ summer , doesn ’ t guarantee the athletic success of HBCUs , said Tyler Does , the co-founder and chair of HBCU Jump .
The action network , which launched in June with the resurgence of the Black Lives Matter movement , promotes the recruitment of top-tier Black athletes to HBCUs .
“ There are no saviors here , ” Does told me .
“ The civil rights movement didn ’ t start with any singular person .
It stemmed from many .
One [ player ] is fantastic , but we want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ certainly excited to see the commitments and transfers , but this is just the start.
” Black athletes have typically turned to predominantly white institutions to showcase their talents .
And it ’ s not difficult to understand why .
The USA Today database of athletic department revenues at public universities for the 2018-19 academic year lists 227 Division I programs , and seven of the bottom 10 schools are HBCUs .
The median revenue of the 18 HBCUs listed was $ 11.3 million ; Prairie View A & M led with $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 40 major-conference programs are raking in at least $ 100 million , including the University of Texas , which brought in more than $ 220 million .
For decades , an overwhelming majority of NBA draft picks have attended major conferences , which boast gargantuan budgets , shiny facilities and countless opportunities for exposure .
Of course , those disparities have ramifications on the recruiting trail .
Although the correlation between money spent in college basketball recruiting isn ’ t as strong as it is in college football , there ’ s a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the room where these conversations happen .
Craig Meyer wrote in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that Kentucky and UCLA , two schools that tendered scholarship offers to Maker , spent more than 10 times the amount Howard did on men ’ s basketball during the 2018-19 academic year , according to data from the Department of Education .
Last season , Howard played two games on ESPN+ while all the Kentucky men ’ s basketball games were nationally televised .
College athletics is rife with inequities , and breaking up the powers that be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ busting cartels .
“ The more financial flexibility that Black colleges have , the more things they ’ ll be able to do , ” Brown said .
“ That ’ s always been an issue.
” Before the Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court decision in 1954 , HBCUs were the only universities that allowed Black athletes to play .
Football coach Eddie Robinson turned Grambling into such a superpower that the program was referred to as the Black Notre Dame .
Though racism continued to keep Black athletes off predominantly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Black athletes eventually began to leave HBCUs behind .
“ More and more players decided to go that route , ” Brown said .
“ And not only did that happen , but more and more predominantly white institutions decided to not play HBCUs because of self-preservation .
And that hurts.
” Every major recruiting service has a unique methodology for appraising athletes , but five stars represents the pinnacle at seemingly every site .
Just as there aren ’ t many surefire locks in recruitment , not all stars are created equal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ While Maker is ranked among the top hundredths of a percentage point of basketball players in the country at his age , there ’ s a clear gap between him and the top tier of his class .
ESPN projects Maker to be a mid-second-round NBA draft pick at best , while the top four players in the class of 2020 are projected to be selected with the top four picks in the 2021 NBA draft .
To get a feel for what Howard might have on its hands next season , FiveThirtyEight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recruit since Rivals began classifying the designation in 2002 .
It ’ s hardly surprising that teams with a stockpile of talent are successful .
But in the world of five-star recruits , that success is less immediate than some might think .
For every national title-winning team like the 2011 Kentucky Wildcats and the 2014 Duke Blue Devils , there are many more that underachieved .
Washington had one season with former No .
1 overall pick Markelle Fultz on the roster , and it was the Huskies ’ worst in nearly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ season with two blue-chippers in Darius Garland and Simisola Shittu and went 0-18 in conference play .
Since 2003 , teams in the six major conferences that added at least one five-star recruit saw a median bump to their winning percentage of 0.027 in the following season .
Those teams also improved on average according to Sports-Reference.com ’ s Simple Rating System , but only slightly .
Perhaps that ’ s what one expects when each season brings in a stockpile of talent , but teams touting five-star recruits were hardly guaranteed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tournament .
Seldom does a five-star recruit commit to a program outside the six major conferences .
Of the 439 five-star recruits to play in Division I since 2003 , only 31 went outside of college basketball ’ s six major conferences .
Those teams saw an even smaller median bump in win percentage ( 0.01 ) .
Maker committed to an HBCU that has been a bottom-barrel program for years .
For any losing school , that kind of recruiting success is rare : Only five five-star recruits since 2003 committed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 30 percent of its games the previous season .
Howard has usurped the 2017-18 Missouri Tigers as the worst team by percentage of previous-season wins to land a five-star recruit .
Maker told ESPN Daily host Pablo Torre that one of his goals is to get Howard back to the NCAA Tournament , a tall order for a team that won four games a season ago and ranked among the very worst in the country .
But theoretically , a one-bid conference that last season rated as the worst of any in KenPom @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opportunity for a single-player splash .
As Brown put it , “ He ’ s going to have the green light to make history.
” But as Blakeney acknowledged in an interview with The Undefeated , there are limitations on the impact his new player can make .
“ Just because we have a young man that ’ s considered to be one of the top players in the country doesn ’ t mean that you can change 75 years of , you know , not-great history that we have at Howard University @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” he said .
Like the ascension of Ja Morant , whose rise resulted in a gate-revenue spike and sellout crowds for Murray State , Maker ’ s mere presence is likely to draw more fans and sell more tickets .
In his 2015 paper , “ The Financial and Competitive Value of NCAA Basketball Recruits , ” Richard Borghesi calculated that each five-star recruit generates $ 625,000 in marginal revenue for his university and attracts academic donations to the tune of $ 5.8 million on average .
Borghesi told me that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on how successful Howard is on the court but acknowledged that it ’ s difficult to assess Maker ’ s incoming impact given the unprecedented nature of the situation ( and the season ) .
Without having played a single minute of college ball , Maker was picked to earn first-team all-conference honors this year .
The Bison should be able to benefit not only from Maker ’ s basketball talents but also from his social capital .
Maker ’ s announcement drew national attention on social media , and his platforms spiked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Howard ’ s .
Maker has nearly 100,000 followers on Instagram and Twitter combined .
On Twitter the Howard men ’ s basketball team has a little more than 3,000 .
So what value does Maker ’ s social capital have ?
With name , image and likeness rights still likely at least a year away , Maker probably won ’ t be able to profit off all that he ’ s bringing to campus .
But if the purported future NIL rules and regulations were in place , Opendorse CEO and co-founder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ earning potential would be $ 4,538 over a calendar year .
Given that a lot of that assessment has to do with the university ’ s lack of revenue and its market size , Lawrence noted that Maker ’ s annual earning potential could have exceeded $ 117,000 if he had chosen to enroll at Duke University .
Howard likely has only a few months to turn Maker ’ s experience into something that will outlast the 6-foot-11 center ’ s time on The Yard .
Something that other star athletes will want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lands , we can ’ t mess it up , ” Blakeney told ESPN ’ s Jeff Borzello .
“ If we mess it up , we may not have another opportunity to be able to do it.
” Maker could be the first player selected in the NBA draft from an HBCU since Kyle O ’ Quinn in 2012 .
Of the 529 players who appeared in an NBA game last season , only two came from HBCUs .
If nothing else , Maker ’ s experience could open a wider pathway @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ranks .
Brown believes this trend will have legs in the long term .
“ I do think in today ’ s climate and with the focus that has come regarding racial equality and people wanting to be treated the same way , it ’ s being thrust to the forefront , ” Brown said .
“ These players are saying , ‘ Man , you know what ?
Maybe we can do something here.
’ And maybe they can .
”

What Does Makur Maker Mean For The Future Of HBCU Sports? The five-star recruit starts play Thursday with the Howard Bison.
In their Howard University dorms in the early 1990s, Milan Brown and his classmates used to discuss how their school and other historically Black colleges and universities could become basketball powerhouses. “You’d be surprised at how many talks we had,” said Brown, now an assistant men’s basketball coach at Pittsburgh.
Brown, whose jersey number is retired at Howard’s Burr Gymnasium, started at point guard in 1992, the last time the Washington, D.C., HBCU reached the NCAA Tournament. And while Howard’s academic pedigree is without question, its men’s basketball team has fallen flat over the past quarter-century. But Brown is ready for his former program to stage a comeback after landing its most impressive recruit, Makur Maker.
“I was so proud,” Brown said of Maker’s commitment in July, “because I know my program can hopefully now make another jump. I’m also glad, bragging-rights-wise, that we can say we have the first. It won’t be the last. But I was also proud because as an alum, I know the power of my university. You know that it’s called the Mecca for a reason, right?”
Maker is the first five-star high school basketball recruit to commit to an HBCU since ESPN unveiled its recruiting database in 2007. In doing so, he eschewed offers from college basketball royalty, including UCLA and Kentucky. And so it is that a young Kenyan-born man with professional basketball aspirations chose a program that has lost more games than all but seven Division I teams since 2011.
“I have no idea why it’s been over 40 years that not even one five-star basketball player in the United States has decided to play basketball at an HBCU,” Maker said in an interview with Jerry Bembry of The Undefeated. “But I do know that in this Black Lives Matter movement that’s empowered and assembled many different people across the country and the world that it won’t be another 40 years until it happens again.”
The sports world will be watching for the immediate on-the-court impact of Maker’s signing, with Howard kicking off its season on Thanksgiving. But what can Howard head coach Kenneth Blakeney expect now that his roster includes a blue-chip prospect? Even if the program doesn’t take an instant leap, the off-the-court effects are likely more important. Will Maker’s historic decision create a domino effect for HBCU athletics? Has it already?
It wasn’t a coincidence that Maker made his school announcement in the midst of this summer’s civil rights reckoning. Maker committed to Howard with the hope that his decision would mobilize other elite athletes to play for predominantly Black institutions. That mobilization seems well on its way.
Roughly a month before Maker’s announcement, four-star recruit Nate Tabor withdrew his commitment to St. John’s and committed to Norfolk State. Nojel Eastern, a former top 100 recruit, announced in August that he would join Maker at Howard after transferring from Purdue, writing “For the culture” on Twitter. Cam Mack, a former three-star recruit, left Nebraska and transferred to Prairie View A&M, using the Black Lives Matter hashtag in his announcement post.
Future recruiting classes have taken note. Multiple high-level players in the class of 2023 are considering HBCUs. Most notably, Mikey Williams, the No. 3 prospect in the class of 2023, included five HBCU programs in his top 10.
The movement isn’t exclusive to men’s basketball, either. Korey Foreman, Rivals’ No. 1 football player in the class of 2021, included Howard in his list of top seven schools. “I am a young black man that is happy and proud of my race,” Foreman’s announcement post read. “The Black Lives Matter movement is and forever will be powerful.” Twin volleyball players Bria and Cimone Woodard transferred from Texas A&M to Howard. Earlier this month, Se’Quoia Allmond became the first top 100 women’s basketball recruit in the ESPN era to commit to an HBCU when she signed with Jackson State.
One highly coveted commitment like Maker’s, or even a group of commitments like we saw this summer, doesn’t guarantee the athletic success of HBCUs, said Tyler Does, the co-founder and chair of HBCU Jump. The action network, which launched in June with the resurgence of the Black Lives Matter movement, promotes the recruitment of top-tier Black athletes to HBCUs.
“There are no saviors here,” Does told me. “The civil rights movement didn’t start with any singular person. It stemmed from many. One [player] is fantastic, but we want and need more. … We are certainly excited to see the commitments and transfers, but this is just the start.”
Black athletes have typically turned to predominantly white institutions to showcase their talents. And it’s not difficult to understand why.
The USA Today database of athletic department revenues at public universities for the 2018-19 academic year lists 227 Division I programs, and seven of the bottom 10 schools are HBCUs. The median revenue of the 18 HBCUs listed was $11.3 million; Prairie View A&M led with $19.7 million in revenue. Meanwhile, 40 major-conference programs are raking in at least $100 million, including the University of Texas, which brought in more than $220 million.
For decades, an overwhelming majority of NBA draft picks have attended major conferences, which boast gargantuan budgets, shiny facilities and countless opportunities for exposure.
Of course, those disparities have ramifications on the recruiting trail. Although the correlation between money spent in college basketball recruiting isn’t as strong as it is in college football, there’s a baseline requirement to even be allowed in the room where these conversations happen.
Craig Meyer wrote in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that Kentucky and UCLA, two schools that tendered scholarship offers to Maker, spent more than 10 times the amount Howard did on men’s basketball during the 2018-19 academic year, according to data from the Department of Education. Last season, Howard played two games on ESPN+ while all the Kentucky men’s basketball games were nationally televised.
College athletics is rife with inequities, and breaking up the powers that be in the NCAA has been compared to busting cartels. “The more financial flexibility that Black colleges have, the more things they’ll be able to do,” Brown said. “That’s always been an issue.”
Before the Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court decision in 1954, HBCUs were the only universities that allowed Black athletes to play. Football coach Eddie Robinson turned Grambling into such a superpower that the program was referred to as the Black Notre Dame. Though racism continued to keep Black athletes off predominantly white campuses for decades after, top-tier Black athletes eventually began to leave HBCUs behind.
“More and more players decided to go that route,” Brown said. “And not only did that happen, but more and more predominantly white institutions decided to not play HBCUs because of self-preservation. And that hurts.”
Every major recruiting service has a unique methodology for appraising athletes, but five stars represents the pinnacle at seemingly every site.
Just as there aren’t many surefire locks in recruitment, not all stars are created equal — even at the five-star level.
While Maker is ranked among the top hundredths of a percentage point of basketball players in the country at his age, there’s a clear gap between him and the top tier of his class. ESPN projects Maker to be a mid-second-round NBA draft pick at best, while the top four players in the class of 2020 are projected to be selected with the top four picks in the 2021 NBA draft.
To get a feel for what Howard might have on its hands next season, FiveThirtyEight analyzed the first-season impact of every five-star recruit since Rivals began classifying the designation in 2002. It’s hardly surprising that teams with a stockpile of talent are successful. But in the world of five-star recruits, that success is less immediate than some might think.
How much do five-star recruits really help? Men’s college basketball programs with at least five five-star recruits since 2003, with average change in win percentage and Simple Rating System (SRS) from the season before the recruit joined to the season after Average change in… School Win % SRS No. of five-star recruits Kentucky +0.022 +0.520 48 – Duke -0.002 +0.187 35 – Arizona -0.008 +0.478 26 – Kansas +0.003 -0.335 24 – North Carolina -0.008 +0.880 19 – UCLA +0.075 +1.275 17 – Texas -0.043 -1.054 16 – Louisiana State +0.018 +0.064 12 – Connecticut -0.077 -1.277 11 – Florida -0.047 -3.046 11 – Memphis +0.017 +0.554 11 – Ohio State +0.025 +2.246 10 – Florida State +0.049 +2.201 9 – Michigan State -0.001 -0.006 9 – Villanova +0.003 -0.954 9 – Louisville +0.096 +2.063 8 – Alabama -0.003 -0.849 7 – Indiana +0.054 +1.691 7 – Mississippi State 0.000 +0.493 7 – UNLV +0.013 +0.397 7 – Oregon +0.021 +1.196 7 – Southern California +0.040 +1.431 7 – Syracuse -0.073 -2.520 7 – Washington -0.155 -4.067 7 – NC State -0.009 -0.840 6 – Oklahoma State -0.094 -4.172 6 – Tennessee -0.130 -1.888 6 – Wake Forest +0.098 +2.792 5 – Sources: Rivals, Sports-Reference.com
For every national title-winning team like the 2011 Kentucky Wildcats and the 2014 Duke Blue Devils, there are many more that underachieved. Washington had one season with former No. 1 overall pick Markelle Fultz on the roster, and it was the Huskies’ worst in nearly three decades. Vanderbilt entered the 2018-19 season with two blue-chippers in Darius Garland and Simisola Shittu and went 0-18 in conference play.
Since 2003, teams in the six major conferences that added at least one five-star recruit saw a median bump to their winning percentage of 0.027 in the following season. Those teams also improved on average according to Sports-Reference.com’s Simple Rating System, but only slightly. Perhaps that’s what one expects when each season brings in a stockpile of talent, but teams touting five-star recruits were hardly guaranteed to cut down the nets or reach the tournament.
Seldom does a five-star recruit commit to a program outside the six major conferences. Of the 439 five-star recruits to play in Division I since 2003, only 31 went outside of college basketball’s six major conferences. Those teams saw an even smaller median bump in win percentage (0.01).
Maker committed to an HBCU that has been a bottom-barrel program for years. For any losing school, that kind of recruiting success is rare: Only five five-star recruits since 2003 committed to a school that had won less than 30 percent of its games the previous season. Howard has usurped the 2017-18 Missouri Tigers as the worst team by percentage of previous-season wins to land a five-star recruit.
Maker told ESPN Daily host Pablo Torre that one of his goals is to get Howard back to the NCAA Tournament, a tall order for a team that won four games a season ago and ranked among the very worst in the country. But theoretically, a one-bid conference that last season rated as the worst of any in KenPom’s ratings should provide the biggest opportunity for a single-player splash.
As Brown put it, “He’s going to have the green light to make history.”
But as Blakeney acknowledged in an interview with The Undefeated, there are limitations on the impact his new player can make.
“Just because we have a young man that’s considered to be one of the top players in the country doesn’t mean that you can change 75 years of, you know, not-great history that we have at Howard University and our men’s basketball program,” he said.
Like the ascension of Ja Morant, whose rise resulted in a gate-revenue spike and sellout crowds for Murray State, Maker’s mere presence is likely to draw more fans and sell more tickets. In his 2015 paper, “The Financial and Competitive Value of NCAA Basketball Recruits,” Richard Borghesi calculated that each five-star recruit generates $625,000 in marginal revenue for his university and attracts academic donations to the tune of $5.8 million on average.
Borghesi told me that Maker’s financial impact will depend on how successful Howard is on the court but acknowledged that it’s difficult to assess Maker’s incoming impact given the unprecedented nature of the situation (and the season). Without having played a single minute of college ball, Maker was picked to earn first-team all-conference honors this year.
The Bison should be able to benefit not only from Maker’s basketball talents but also from his social capital. Maker’s announcement drew national attention on social media, and his platforms spiked as a result. So too did Howard’s.
Maker has nearly 100,000 followers on Instagram and Twitter combined. On Twitter the Howard men’s basketball team has a little more than 3,000.
So what value does Maker’s social capital have?
With name, image and likeness rights still likely at least a year away, Maker probably won’t be able to profit off all that he’s bringing to campus. But if the purported future NIL rules and regulations were in place, Opendorse CEO and co-founder Blake Lawrence calculated that Maker’s earning potential would be $4,538 over a calendar year. Given that a lot of that assessment has to do with the university’s lack of revenue and its market size, Lawrence noted that Maker’s annual earning potential could have exceeded $117,000 if he had chosen to enroll at Duke University.
Howard likely has only a few months to turn Maker’s experience into something that will outlast the 6-foot-11 center’s time on The Yard. Something that other star athletes will want to replicate.
“Wherever a five-star lands, we can’t mess it up,” Blakeney told ESPN’s Jeff Borzello. “If we mess it up, we may not have another opportunity to be able to do it.”
Maker could be the first player selected in the NBA draft from an HBCU since Kyle O’Quinn in 2012. Of the 529 players who appeared in an NBA game last season, only two came from HBCUs. If nothing else, Maker’s experience could open a wider pathway for HBCU talent to reach the professional ranks.
Brown believes this trend will have legs in the long term.
“I do think in today’s climate and with the focus that has come regarding racial equality and people wanting to be treated the same way, it’s being thrust to the forefront,” Brown said. “These players are saying, ‘Man, you know what? Maybe we can do something here.’ And maybe they can.”


fivethirthyeight--2020-11-24--Could Social Alienation Among Some Trump Supporters Help Explain Why Polls Underestimated Trump Agai

Could Social Alienation Among Some Trump Supporters Help Explain Why Polls Underestimated Trump Again?

Donald Trump was once again underestimated by the polls .
On the one hand , this polling error is fairly normal .
We ’ re not talking about huge polling misses , and the polls still “ called ” the election correctly : Joe Biden won .
But that said , it does seem as if polls are still failing to capture some of Trump ’ s support .
There are a number of possible explanations for this , and no definitive answers , but one thing I ’ ve come across in my public opinion research is that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disconnected from society is on the rise .
And these voters disproportionately support Trump .
The idea that some of Trump ’ s supporters are more likely to be disconnected from civic life is hardly a new one .
During the 2016 Republican primary , Yoni Appelbaum at The Atlantic noted that Trump was drawing support disproportionately from those who said they were civically disengaged .
An analysis by Emily Ekins of the conservative-leaning Cato Institute found that despite Trump ’ s continued strong support among white evangelical Protestants , he was actually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t involved in regular religious practice .
Finally , research on the 2016 election by David Shor , a Democratic pollster , echoed what we found in our own pre-election 2020 survey : There was a large swing to Trump among white voters who had low levels of social trust — a group that researchers have found is also less likely to participate in telephone surveys .
In our pre-election survey on the strength of Americans ’ social networks , we found that nearly one in five Americans ( 17 percent ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with , marking a 9 percentage point increase from 2013 .
What ’ s more , we found that these socially disconnected voters were far more likely to view Trump positively and support his reelection than those with more robust personal networks .
Biden was heavily favored by registered voters with larger social networks ( 53 percent to 37 percent ) , but it was Trump who had the edge among voters without any close social contacts ( 45 percent to 39 percent ) .
And this was especially true among white voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , education level , and racial attitudes .
Sixty percent of white voters without anyone in their immediate social network favored Trump , compared to less than half ( 46 percent ) of white voters with more robust social ties .
Of course , the fact that Trump had considerable appeal among those who report feeling socially disconnected is not conclusive proof that these folks were missed in the polls .
In fact , it is really hard to capture these people in the first place : Many who fall into this group @ @ @ @ @ @ @ answer a survey .
However , there is good reason to believe that the polls might be missing some of these people who don ’ t have strong social ties .
Social isolation , or the lack of social integration , has long been thought to reduce willingness to participate in surveys .
Americans who feel alienated or isolated from society do not feel compelled to participate in surveys out of a sense of civic obligation .
Researchers at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Hiroshima University have shown that Americans with weaker social @ @ @ @ @ @ @ survey requests and that some survey estimates may be “ systematically biased due to nonparticipation from socially isolated people.
” Our survey was not suited to uncover the reasons for why people didn ’ t participate , but we did find that those with smaller social networks are far less politically engaged .
For example , Americans with at least four social ties are three times more likely than those with none to have contacted an elected official in the last 12 months .
However , there may not be an easy solution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to bolster cooperation might help , as would increasing the duration of the survey field period .
These are standard practices in survey research to increase representation among difficult to reach groups .
But it ’ s not clear at this point whether incentivizing respondents or lengthening the interviewing period would increase participation rates among Americans who are socially isolated .
A 2000 study found that increasing an interview period from five days to eight weeks made little difference in the final results — although perceptions of the Republican Party were more positive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interviewing schedule .
The consequences of this , of course , extend much further than our elections .
When Americans are more distanced from society , they become untethered to local and national institutions andare less invested in their continuing function .
What ’ s more , they are more inclined to distrust political processes and believe they are serving illegitimate ends .
And they may lose faith in the messy and plodding process of democratic change .
A lot of time will be spent over the next few years trying to explain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economic and political problems , but we should not forget that political reforms and economic fixes are not going to address more fundamental problems of loneliness and social isolation in this country .
And that may mean we increasingly have less insight into how a growing portion of the country feels .

Donald Trump was once again underestimated by the polls.
On the one hand, this polling error is fairly normal. We’re not talking about huge polling misses, and the polls still “called” the election correctly: Joe Biden won. But that said, it does seem as if polls are still failing to capture some of Trump’s support.
‘I buy that COVID was a factor in polls underestimating’ GOP: Nate Silver
There are a number of possible explanations for this, and no definitive answers, but one thing I’ve come across in my public opinion research is that the share of Americans who are more socially disconnected from society is on the rise. And these voters disproportionately support Trump.
[What We Know About How White and Latino Americans Voted In 2020]
The idea that some of Trump’s supporters are more likely to be disconnected from civic life is hardly a new one. During the 2016 Republican primary, Yoni Appelbaum at The Atlantic noted that Trump was drawing support disproportionately from those who said they were civically disengaged. An analysis by Emily Ekins of the conservative-leaning Cato Institute found that despite Trump’s continued strong support among white evangelical Protestants, he was actually viewed more positively by supporters who weren’t involved in regular religious practice. Finally, research on the 2016 election by David Shor, a Democratic pollster, echoed what we found in our own pre-election 2020 survey: There was a large swing to Trump among white voters who had low levels of social trust — a group that researchers have found is also less likely to participate in telephone surveys.
In our pre-election survey on the strength of Americans’ social networks, we found that nearly one in five Americans (17 percent) reported having no one they were close with, marking a 9 percentage point increase from 2013. What’s more, we found that these socially disconnected voters were far more likely to view Trump positively and support his reelection than those with more robust personal networks. Biden was heavily favored by registered voters with larger social networks (53 percent to 37 percent), but it was Trump who had the edge among voters without any close social contacts (45 percent to 39 percent).
And this was especially true among white voters even after accounting for differences in income, education level, and racial attitudes. Sixty percent of white voters without anyone in their immediate social network favored Trump, compared to less than half (46 percent) of white voters with more robust social ties.
Of course, the fact that Trump had considerable appeal among those who report feeling socially disconnected is not conclusive proof that these folks were missed in the polls. In fact, it is really hard to capture these people in the first place: Many who fall into this group, for instance, wouldn’t answer a survey.
However, there is good reason to believe that the polls might be missing some of these people who don’t have strong social ties. Social isolation, or the lack of social integration, has long been thought to reduce willingness to participate in surveys. Americans who feel alienated or isolated from society do not feel compelled to participate in surveys out of a sense of civic obligation.
Researchers at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Hiroshima University have shown that Americans with weaker social connections are less inclined to cooperate with survey requests and that some survey estimates may be “systematically biased due to nonparticipation from socially isolated people.” Our survey was not suited to uncover the reasons for why people didn’t participate, but we did find that those with smaller social networks are far less politically engaged. For example, Americans with at least four social ties are three times more likely than those with none to have contacted an elected official in the last 12 months.
[Trump Probably Won’t Be The Last Politician To Reject An Election Outcome Without Evidence]
However, there may not be an easy solution to this problem. Providing financial incentives to bolster cooperation might help, as would increasing the duration of the survey field period. These are standard practices in survey research to increase representation among difficult to reach groups. But it’s not clear at this point whether incentivizing respondents or lengthening the interviewing period would increase participation rates among Americans who are socially isolated. A 2000 study found that increasing an interview period from five days to eight weeks made little difference in the final results — although perceptions of the Republican Party were more positive in the survey that included the longer interviewing schedule.
The consequences of this, of course, extend much further than our elections. When Americans are more distanced from society, they become untethered to local and national institutions and are less invested in their continuing function. What’s more, they are more inclined to distrust political processes and believe they are serving illegitimate ends. And they may lose faith in the messy and plodding process of democratic change.
A lot of time will be spent over the next few years trying to explain the country’s growing social, economic and political problems, but we should not forget that political reforms and economic fixes are not going to address more fundamental problems of loneliness and social isolation in this country. And that may mean we increasingly have less insight into how a growing portion of the country feels.
Trump is setting a dangerous precedent for American democracy


fivethirthyeight--2020-11-24--Trump Probably Won’t Be The Last Politician To Reject An Election Outcome Without Evidence

In this installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast , the crew discusses President Trump ’ s continued refusal to concede @ @ @ @ @ the results of the election .
They also consider how the government is responding to @ @ @ @ @ .

Trump Probably Won’t Be The Last Politician To Reject An Election Outcome Without Evidence
In this installment of the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast, the crew discusses President Trump’s continued refusal to concede and his attempts to subvert the results of the election. They also consider how the government is responding to rising number of COVID-19 cases.


fivethirthyeight--2020-11-25--The NBA Champs Look More Dangerous Than Ever

Think back to last summer , when the teams that had just played for an NBA title were hit with one bombshell move after another in free agency .
The first bolt of lightning struck instantly , when two-time Finals MVP Kevin Durant said he ’ d be leaving the runner-up Golden State Warriors to join Kyrie Irving in Brooklyn .
The second came days later : Kawhi Leonard , who had just led the Toronto Raptors to a championship , was heading to the Clippers and would be joined by Paul George , who had requested a trade there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make what we saw this past weekend from the Los Angeles Lakers so impressive .
At a time when title contenders often have to play defense to prevent their star talent from being poached , the reigning champions went out and almost certainly made themselves better .
Sure , it helps that they never faced an actual threat of losing free agent Anthony Davis , who figures to sign a new deal to stay in Los Angeles soon enough .
But heading to a year that will be plenty strange because of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s hard to imagine how the club could have done any better to widen its margin for error as it goes for the repeat .
Before free agency even opened , general manager Rob Pelinka made a deal for Oklahoma City point guard Dennis Schröder , trading a first-round pick and swingman Danny Green to land him .
The move gave Los Angeles a far younger , more scoring-oriented lead ball-handler than it previously had in Rajon Rondo , which should benefit the club in at least two ways .
First , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the 27-year-old — who is coming off a much longer break than the rest of the Lakers had — more than it would have been able to with Rondo , who struggled with injuries last season .
( Understandably , there ’ s been talk that LeBron James , who turns 36 in December , may want or need more than a two-month break . )
Second , Schröder gives the Lakers a better threat to pair with Davis during James ’ s sub outs — a much-needed boost , given that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ per 100 possessions last year with Davis on the court but James on the sideline .
Beyond setting themselves up to be able to rest James more effectively , Los Angeles also brought in reinforcements that should make life a bit easier for Davis in the post : Sixth Man of the Year Montrezl Harrell and former Defensive Player of the Year Marc Gasol .
When that deal was announced — surprising many , given that Harrell played for the rival Clippers — it would have been understandable to wonder just how much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Howard , who could have been retained at a veteran-minimum salary .
Yes , Harrell is far younger and is a more active offensive player than Howard at this point .
But Harrell looked like a sieve on D in the playoffs , with the Clips hemorrhaging 116.3 points per 100 possessions with him ( versus giving up just 103.8 with Ivica Zubac ) .
Whatever concerns might exist about Harrell , though , should largely evaporate once you realize Gasol will be part of the roster , too .
The Lakers won @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a center if they don ’ t want to — both Gasol and Davis can serve as rim protectors while playing alongside him .
And because those two are both good perimeter-shooting bigs , Harrell can serve as the roll man while either Davis or Gasol spread out to the wing to keep defenses honest and confused .
( Another key point : While Davis has somehow never suffered an injury that held him out for considerable time , he ’ s had more close calls than just about anyone .
Having @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the team a good amount of depth at the position , even though Gasol is older and Harrell struggles to defend the rim . )
None of this takes into account the other massive moves the Lakers made .
While Los Angeles lost Green in the deal for Schröder , it did pick up another solid veteran wing in Wesley Matthews , who opted to walk away from Milwaukee .
The Lakers also managed to keep Kentavious Caldwell-Pope , who came up huge in the Finals .
The moves themselves certainly make Los @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even before you look at the strange state of the Western Conference .
The Suns will generate playoff hype now with Chris Paul playing alongside Devin Booker , and the offense-heavy Blazers may be closer to contending with their improved lineup on defense .
But Klay Thompson suffered another serious injury , a season-ending Achilles tear , dealing a brutal blow to Golden State and to basketball fans generally .
No one knows whether the James Harden-led Rockets will even be led by James Harden a few months from now .
In Dallas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the start of the season , and possibly more , to rehab his knee .
The Nuggets lost and cut Jerami Grant and Torrey Craig , respectively , maybe their two best defenders against LeBron .
And while the Clippers got Luke Kennard and Serge Ibaka , they still could use a better option at point guard , especially since the Lakers just flipped Harrell ’ s allegiance .
All things considered , no team out west appears to have closed in on the Lakers in a significant way .
At least not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re going into yet another abnormal campaign — without a bubble this time — and the Lakers will be led by a 36-year-old , albeit one who ’ s developed a reputation for being nearly indestructible .
Any number of things could ultimately unravel the Lakers ’ plans .
But if they fall short , it won ’ t be because of what they failed to accomplish during the whirlwind free-agency period .

Think back to last summer, when the teams that had just played for an NBA title were hit with one bombshell move after another in free agency.
The first bolt of lightning struck instantly, when two-time Finals MVP Kevin Durant said he’d be leaving the runner-up Golden State Warriors to join Kyrie Irving in Brooklyn. The second came days later: Kawhi Leonard, who had just led the Toronto Raptors to a championship, was heading to the Clippers and would be joined by Paul George, who had requested a trade there.
Those big moves of last season make what we saw this past weekend from the Los Angeles Lakers so impressive. At a time when title contenders often have to play defense to prevent their star talent from being poached, the reigning champions went out and almost certainly made themselves better.
Sure, it helps that they never faced an actual threat of losing free agent Anthony Davis, who figures to sign a new deal to stay in Los Angeles soon enough. But heading to a year that will be plenty strange because of the brisk turnaround and truncated schedule, it’s hard to imagine how the club could have done any better to widen its margin for error as it goes for the repeat.
Before free agency even opened, general manager Rob Pelinka made a deal for Oklahoma City point guard Dennis Schröder, trading a first-round pick and swingman Danny Green to land him. The move gave Los Angeles a far younger, more scoring-oriented lead ball-handler than it previously had in Rajon Rondo, which should benefit the club in at least two ways. First, the Lakers should be able to lean on the 27-year-old — who is coming off a much longer break than the rest of the Lakers had — more than it would have been able to with Rondo, who struggled with injuries last season. (Understandably, there’s been talk that LeBron James, who turns 36 in December, may want or need more than a two-month break.) Second, Schröder gives the Lakers a better threat to pair with Davis during James’s sub outs — a much-needed boost, given that the team was underwater by 3 points per 100 possessions last year with Davis on the court but James on the sideline.
Beyond setting themselves up to be able to rest James more effectively, Los Angeles also brought in reinforcements that should make life a bit easier for Davis in the post: Sixth Man of the Year Montrezl Harrell and former Defensive Player of the Year Marc Gasol.
When that deal was announced — surprising many, given that Harrell played for the rival Clippers — it would have been understandable to wonder just how much of an upgrade Harrell was from Dwight Howard, who could have been retained at a veteran-minimum salary. Yes, Harrell is far younger and is a more active offensive player than Howard at this point. But Harrell looked like a sieve on D in the playoffs, with the Clips hemorrhaging 116.3 points per 100 possessions with him (versus giving up just 103.8 with Ivica Zubac).
Whatever concerns might exist about Harrell, though, should largely evaporate once you realize Gasol will be part of the roster, too. The Lakers won’t necessarily have to use Harrell as a center if they don’t want to — both Gasol and Davis can serve as rim protectors while playing alongside him. And because those two are both good perimeter-shooting bigs, Harrell can serve as the roll man while either Davis or Gasol spread out to the wing to keep defenses honest and confused. (Another key point: While Davis has somehow never suffered an injury that held him out for considerable time, he’s had more close calls than just about anyone. Having both Harrell and Gasol on hand gives the team a good amount of depth at the position, even though Gasol is older and Harrell struggles to defend the rim.)
None of this takes into account the other massive moves the Lakers made. While Los Angeles lost Green in the deal for Schröder, it did pick up another solid veteran wing in Wesley Matthews, who opted to walk away from Milwaukee. The Lakers also managed to keep Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, who came up huge in the Finals.
The moves themselves certainly make Los Angeles a solid bet to repeat, even before you look at the strange state of the Western Conference. The Suns will generate playoff hype now with Chris Paul playing alongside Devin Booker, and the offense-heavy Blazers may be closer to contending with their improved lineup on defense. But Klay Thompson suffered another serious injury, a season-ending Achilles tear, dealing a brutal blow to Golden State and to basketball fans generally. No one knows whether the James Harden-led Rockets will even be led by James Harden a few months from now. In Dallas, Kristaps Porziņģis is going to miss the start of the season, and possibly more, to rehab his knee. The Nuggets lost and cut Jerami Grant and Torrey Craig, respectively, maybe their two best defenders against LeBron. And while the Clippers got Luke Kennard and Serge Ibaka, they still could use a better option at point guard, especially since the Lakers just flipped Harrell’s allegiance.
All things considered, no team out west appears to have closed in on the Lakers in a significant way. At least not yet.
That said, we’re going into yet another abnormal campaign — without a bubble this time — and the Lakers will be led by a 36-year-old, albeit one who’s developed a reputation for being nearly indestructible. Any number of things could ultimately unravel the Lakers’ plans. But if they fall short, it won’t be because of what they failed to accomplish during the whirlwind free-agency period.


fivethirthyeight--2020-11-25--How Do College Football Dynasties Fall?

How Do College Football Dynasties Fall?

College football has lacked drama in recent years , at least in the national-championship picture .
Clemson has won five straight titles in the ACC .
Ohio State has won three straight in the Big Ten .
Oklahoma is a five-time reigning champion in the Big 12 .
In the vaunted SEC , Alabama has won four of the past six years .
All four schools are in the hunt for their respective conference championships this year , and three of the four are sitting in the top four of the first College Football Playoff rankings , released Tuesday night @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rankings doesn ’ t give much reason to believe those trends will change .
Alabama and Ohio State have the top two classes ; Clemson ranks No .
6 , first in the ACC ; Oklahoma is No .
12 , first in the Big 12 , led by the No .
1 quarterback prospect .
It ’ s fair to say the same schools have popped up over and over , and it ’ s fair to expect that they ’ ll continue to do so , outside of a one-year explosion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Historically , these long periods of dominance by an exclusive tier of top programs are not unusual .
In the first decade of this century , Oklahoma , Ohio State and USC won at least five conference championships , and in the 1990s , so did Michigan , Nebraska , Florida State , Florida and Miami — five programs with a combined record of 18-14 this season .
Dynasties rise and fall in this sport , and it appears the contemporary rulers have cemented their place .
So it raises the question : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ periods , and when might that happen for the four in place right now ?
Since 1960 , 14 programs — some ( Alabama , Texas ) more entrenched than others ( West Virginia , Arkansas ) — have , in one 10-year period , won five championships in what at the time would have been considered a major conference .
When we looked at how those programs waxed and waned , four rough themes emerged .
The most common culprit for the end of a long period of prosperity is a coaching @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gone through a fallow period at some point in the past half-century because a coach ( or several coaches ) didn ’ t uphold the predecessor ’ s standards .
It happened with Gary Gibbs , Howard Schnellenberger and John Blake at Oklahoma , and with Mike DuBose , Dennis Franchione and Mike Shula at Alabama .
Even Ohio State — the gold standard of consistency , with 16 double-digit win seasons in the past 18 years — suffered a one-year blip in 2011 as it went 6-7 and transitioned from Jim Tressel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these schools found that returning to dynasty status simply required hiring another championship-level coach , as Oklahoma did with Bob Stoops , Alabama did with Nick Saban and Ohio State did with Meyer .
Though both took over programs with losing records the previous season , both won national championships in their second or third years .
But making that hire is easier said than done .
Some programs still haven ’ t made it back to the mountaintop — such as USC , which has tried Lane Kiffin , Steve Sarkisian and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the NFL .
In the past 11 seasons , the Trojans have more midseason coaching changes ( two ) than conference championships ( one ) .
Michigan has had the same issue with Rich Rodriguez , Brady Hoke and now Jim Harbaugh since Lloyd Carr retired after the 2007 season .
Indeed , maintaining a program at the highest level requires constant attention .
In total , seven schools have coaches who won at least 10 conference championships at the school since 1960 .
The first takeaway from their records is that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — all but Bobby Bowden at Florida State won or shared a conference championship in one of their last two years , so anybody projecting the end of those dynasties had to wait until the coaches were out the door .
It ’ s not surprising that of those seven coaches ’ successors , only one finished with a higher winning percentage than the legendary coach before him — Jimbo Fisher managed to go 83-23 ( .783 ) at FSU , just ahead of Bowden ’ s 315-98-4 ( .760 ) .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not that significant .
The successors , after all , were still in control of high-achieving programs with winning cultures and access to top recruits .
All seven won at least 65 percent of their games .
It may be surprising , though , that in each case but one , the successors ’ successors also suffered a drop-off in winning percentage from the previous coach .
That list includes some names that wouldn ’ t necessarily be remembered fondly around the campuses of their respective schools , such as Nebraska ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ John Cooper and Florida State ’ s Willie Taggart .
In other words , hiring a successor may not be a school ’ s most important job — it may in fact be hiring the coach after that , who may need to uphold some traditions that could have weakened over the years .
What does this mean for the current elites ?
It ’ s unclear what the future holds for the modern dynasties and their coaches .
Saban , who turned 69 on Oct. 31 , seems likely to retire at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ off those rumors .
His departure , whenever it comes , will likely set off the hiring circus to end all hiring circuses , as Alabama hopes to safeguard its dynasty .
But whoever succeeds Saban may be set for a few years , after inheriting a roster stocked with five-star recruits from the previous era .
Perhaps the more scrutinized hire should be the next one .
Clemson coach Dabo Swinney , who grew up in Alabama and played for Gene Stallings as a walk-on , has always been a natural candidate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the Tigers will , in turn , need a new coach to continue their run of success .
As for Oklahoma ’ s Lincoln Riley and Ohio State ’ s Ryan Day , they ’ re newer in their roles , but the NFL will naturally seem like a proper landing spot for both .
Ascending to and staying in the top level of college football requires a financial commitment from the school .
Perhaps the best example of what money can buy is in the ACC , where Florida State won @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2015 before Clemson started a streak of five in a row .
The Seminoles were the conference ’ s top program under Bowden , and Fisher continued that tradition with a national championship in 2013 .
But the school soon lagged in spending .
Last week , ESPN.com detailed how Florida State became hesitant about renovations and raises for support staff .
At the same , Clemson began to infuse money into its program .
The Tigers have managed to retain star defensive coordinator Brent Venables , who now makes $ 2.2 million @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the country ) .
The full salary pool for the 10 on-field assistant coaches in 2019 was $ 7.41 million ( second to Alabama ) , and beyond them is an army of coaches Clemson calls “ analysts.
” At most schools , such expenses are superfluous , but among the top programs , they ’ re becoming essential .
“ If we say we want to compete on the field with those teams , ” Texas coach Tom Herman told The New York Times in 2017 , “ we have to do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Spending on bells and whistles for the football program , of course , depends on the athletic department .
Texas A & M , with its network of donors , made a power move in 2017 by luring Fisher away from Florida State on a fully guaranteed , 10-year , $ 75 million contract — perhaps signaling an intent to better fund the program and an effort to edge its way into the top tier .
The juxtaposition was clear : A & M ’ s last coach was Kevin Sumlin , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in his first season but averaged eight wins over the next five , and the school wanted more .
Fisher went 17-9 in his first two years but is 5-1 this season .
Recruiting is the lifeblood of any program , and historically , the top programs have all been located in fertile recruiting areas .
This isn ’ t an exact science , of course : The state of Wisconsin , for example , ranks 32nd in the number of top-300 recruits it has produced in the past 20 classes , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has played good football for most of this century .
But geography can still be instructive .
For years , Texas relied on lying right in the heart of the state richest in young football prospects , and the state still churns out loads of coveted players .
But another state is making a play as a hotbed for football talent .
Georgia produced 98 top-300 recruits from 2002 to 2006 but has 149 in the past five classes .
Considering the programs that have grown more powerful in the past decade — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , all within about 200 miles of Atlanta — the state a program resides in can give it a boost .
Location in itself won ’ t build a program .
But for a school outside the South , like Nebraska , which has fallen out of the dynasty tier , access to talent may play a role .
A new winner on the block Sometimes , a thriving juggernaut doesn ’ t tail off — rather , a new competitor knocks the champion off its pinnacle , often during conference realignment .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ from 2003 to 2011 , a run that spanned three coaches ( Rich Rodriguez , Bill Stewart , Dana Holgorsen ) .
But all of those titles came in the old Big East , and the Mountaineers haven ’ t found the same success in the Big 12 .
This provides a faint ray of hope for any aspiring Alabama-slayer — that the Crimson Tide can be overtaken not because of their own demise but because of another school ’ s growth .
It ’ s what motivated schools like Tennessee ( with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Florida ( Will Muschamp ) to hire Saban disciples as head coaches .
We can see this strategy playing out at Georgia : Under former Alabama defensive coordinator Kirby Smart , Georgia reached the national championship ahead of schedule in year 2 and might have knocked off the Tide if not for Tua Tagovailoa ’ s miraculous throw .
Smart ’ s program even started matching Saban ’ s on the recruiting battlefields .
But on Oct. 17 , in perhaps a testament to how slow the fall is from the throne , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time .
Even as the rest of the SEC keeps its targets trained on Saban and Alabama , the Tide ’ s 2020 team is undefeated and No .
1 in the country , as strong as ever .

College football has lacked drama in recent years, at least in the national-championship picture. Clemson has won five straight titles in the ACC. Ohio State has won three straight in the Big Ten. Oklahoma is a five-time reigning champion in the Big 12. In the vaunted SEC, Alabama has won four of the past six years. All four schools are in the hunt for their respective conference championships this year, and three of the four are sitting in the top four of the first College Football Playoff rankings, released Tuesday night.
A look at the 2021 recruiting rankings doesn’t give much reason to believe those trends will change. Alabama and Ohio State have the top two classes; Clemson ranks No. 6, first in the ACC; Oklahoma is No. 12, first in the Big 12, led by the No. 1 quarterback prospect. It’s fair to say the same schools have popped up over and over, and it’s fair to expect that they’ll continue to do so, outside of a one-year explosion like LSU’s in 2019.
Historically, these long periods of dominance by an exclusive tier of top programs are not unusual. In the first decade of this century, Oklahoma, Ohio State and USC won at least five conference championships, and in the 1990s, so did Michigan, Nebraska, Florida State, Florida and Miami — five programs with a combined record of 18-14 this season. Dynasties rise and fall in this sport, and it appears the contemporary rulers have cemented their place.
[It’s Hard To Measure NFL Matchups, So We Built A Better Metric]
So it raises the question: What usually spells the end of these periods, and when might that happen for the four in place right now? Since 1960, 14 programs — some (Alabama, Texas) more entrenched than others (West Virginia, Arkansas) — have, in one 10-year period, won five championships in what at the time would have been considered a major conference. When we looked at how those programs waxed and waned, four rough themes emerged.
Coaching changes
The most common culprit for the end of a long period of prosperity is a coaching change. Virtually every blue blood has gone through a fallow period at some point in the past half-century because a coach (or several coaches) didn’t uphold the predecessor’s standards. It happened with Gary Gibbs, Howard Schnellenberger and John Blake at Oklahoma, and with Mike DuBose, Dennis Franchione and Mike Shula at Alabama. Even Ohio State — the gold standard of consistency, with 16 double-digit win seasons in the past 18 years — suffered a one-year blip in 2011 as it went 6-7 and transitioned from Jim Tressel to Urban Meyer.
Of course, these schools found that returning to dynasty status simply required hiring another championship-level coach, as Oklahoma did with Bob Stoops, Alabama did with Nick Saban and Ohio State did with Meyer. Though both took over programs with losing records the previous season, both won national championships in their second or third years.
But making that hire is easier said than done. Some programs still haven’t made it back to the mountaintop — such as USC, which has tried Lane Kiffin, Steve Sarkisian and now Clay Helton since Pete Carroll left for the NFL. In the past 11 seasons, the Trojans have more midseason coaching changes (two) than conference championships (one). Michigan has had the same issue with Rich Rodriguez, Brady Hoke and now Jim Harbaugh since Lloyd Carr retired after the 2007 season.
Indeed, maintaining a program at the highest level requires constant attention. In total, seven schools have coaches who won at least 10 conference championships at the school since 1960. The first takeaway from their records is that they were dominant until they stepped down — all but Bobby Bowden at Florida State won or shared a conference championship in one of their last two years, so anybody projecting the end of those dynasties had to wait until the coaches were out the door.
It’s not surprising that of those seven coaches’ successors, only one finished with a higher winning percentage than the legendary coach before him — Jimbo Fisher managed to go 83-23 (.783) at FSU, just ahead of Bowden’s 315-98-4 (.760). But in most cases, the drop-off was not that significant. The successors, after all, were still in control of high-achieving programs with winning cultures and access to top recruits. All seven won at least 65 percent of their games.
It may be surprising, though, that in each case but one, the successors’ successors also suffered a drop-off in winning percentage from the previous coach. That list includes some names that wouldn’t necessarily be remembered fondly around the campuses of their respective schools, such as Nebraska’s Bill Callahan, Ohio State’s John Cooper and Florida State’s Willie Taggart. In other words, hiring a successor may not be a school’s most important job — it may in fact be hiring the coach after that, who may need to uphold some traditions that could have weakened over the years.
[Is College Football Abandoning The Punt Return?]
What does this mean for the current elites? It’s unclear what the future holds for the modern dynasties and their coaches. Saban, who turned 69 on Oct. 31, seems likely to retire at some point, though he steadily shrugs off those rumors. His departure, whenever it comes, will likely set off the hiring circus to end all hiring circuses, as Alabama hopes to safeguard its dynasty. But whoever succeeds Saban may be set for a few years, after inheriting a roster stocked with five-star recruits from the previous era. Perhaps the more scrutinized hire should be the next one.
Clemson coach Dabo Swinney, who grew up in Alabama and played for Gene Stallings as a walk-on, has always been a natural candidate to replace Saban. If he does, the Tigers will, in turn, need a new coach to continue their run of success. As for Oklahoma’s Lincoln Riley and Ohio State’s Ryan Day, they’re newer in their roles, but the NFL will naturally seem like a proper landing spot for both.
Money
Ascending to and staying in the top level of college football requires a financial commitment from the school. Perhaps the best example of what money can buy is in the ACC, where Florida State won three straight conference titles from 2013 to 2015 before Clemson started a streak of five in a row.
The Seminoles were the conference’s top program under Bowden, and Fisher continued that tradition with a national championship in 2013. But the school soon lagged in spending. Last week, ESPN.com detailed how Florida State became hesitant about renovations and raises for support staff.
At the same, Clemson began to infuse money into its program. The Tigers have managed to retain star defensive coordinator Brent Venables, who now makes $2.2 million (second among all assistant coaches in the country). The full salary pool for the 10 on-field assistant coaches in 2019 was $7.41 million (second to Alabama), and beyond them is an army of coaches Clemson calls “analysts.” At most schools, such expenses are superfluous, but among the top programs, they’re becoming essential. “If we say we want to compete on the field with those teams,” Texas coach Tom Herman told The New York Times in 2017, “we have to do business the way business is done.”
Spending on bells and whistles for the football program, of course, depends on the athletic department. Texas A&M, with its network of donors, made a power move in 2017 by luring Fisher away from Florida State on a fully guaranteed, 10-year, $75 million contract — perhaps signaling an intent to better fund the program and an effort to edge its way into the top tier. The juxtaposition was clear: A&M’s last coach was Kevin Sumlin, who came from Houston and won 11 games in his first season but averaged eight wins over the next five, and the school wanted more. Fisher went 17-9 in his first two years but is 5-1 this season.
Geography
Recruiting is the lifeblood of any program, and historically, the top programs have all been located in fertile recruiting areas. This isn’t an exact science, of course: The state of Wisconsin, for example, ranks 32nd in the number of top-300 recruits it has produced in the past 20 classes, and yet the state’s flagship school has played good football for most of this century. But geography can still be instructive.
For years, Texas relied on lying right in the heart of the state richest in young football prospects, and the state still churns out loads of coveted players. But another state is making a play as a hotbed for football talent. Georgia produced 98 top-300 recruits from 2002 to 2006 but has 149 in the past five classes. Considering the programs that have grown more powerful in the past decade — among them Alabama, Clemson and Georgia, all within about 200 miles of Atlanta — the state a program resides in can give it a boost.
Location in itself won’t build a program. But for a school outside the South, like Nebraska, which has fallen out of the dynasty tier, access to talent may play a role.
A new winner on the block
Sometimes, a thriving juggernaut doesn’t tail off — rather, a new competitor knocks the champion off its pinnacle, often during conference realignment. West Virginia reeled off six conference titles from 2003 to 2011, a run that spanned three coaches (Rich Rodriguez, Bill Stewart, Dana Holgorsen). But all of those titles came in the old Big East, and the Mountaineers haven’t found the same success in the Big 12.
This provides a faint ray of hope for any aspiring Alabama-slayer — that the Crimson Tide can be overtaken not because of their own demise but because of another school’s growth. It’s what motivated schools like Tennessee (with Derek Dooley and Jeremy Pruitt) and Florida (Will Muschamp) to hire Saban disciples as head coaches. We can see this strategy playing out at Georgia: Under former Alabama defensive coordinator Kirby Smart, Georgia reached the national championship ahead of schedule in year 2 and might have knocked off the Tide if not for Tua Tagovailoa’s miraculous throw. Smart’s program even started matching Saban’s on the recruiting battlefields. But on Oct. 17, in perhaps a testament to how slow the fall is from the throne, Alabama beat Georgia for the sixth straight time. Even as the rest of the SEC keeps its targets trained on Saban and Alabama, the Tide’s 2020 team is undefeated and No. 1 in the country, as strong as ever.