If you feel a little extra gloomy or tired today, there’s a good reason for it. Today is historically the most boring days of the sports year (in the U.S. at least). It’s the last day of the all-star break, so no baseball games. Hockey, basketball and football are out of season. Normally there aren’t even any soccer games, although there is one lone MLS game tonight. There’s technically a tennis tournament going on, but most top players take this month off.

Recognizing that there’s nothing on the schedule today, this means there is an opportunity for some sports-entity to step forward and get attention that they might not be able to get on another day of the year. There are so many sports-crazed consumers in this country, that it almost doesn’t matter what sport is involved. With no other options available, there will be interest.

Here are a couple of off-the-cuff ideas:

• A non-PPV UFC or other MMA event with a couple of top-tier fighters involved
• A made-for-TV, one-day action sports competition
• A soccer “friendly” featuring the U.S. national team (tough in World Cup years)
• The debut of this year’s 2010 World Series of Poker TV coverage (currently finishing up in Las Vegas)
• A one-hour special featuring a top free agent’s contract decision (relax, I’m kidding!)

The point is, there is this wide-open day on the calendar for some entity to get a lot of unhindered attention. Who’s going to step up and fill our empty sports day? If you have an idea, leave a comment below!

Thanks to Sean O’Hara for reminding me of this opportunity in his LinkedIn update from this morning (“ Special day in sports today as it comes and goes so quickly each year. Surprised no brand/sport has tried to capitalize on it.”)

By now, you’ve heard about the United States’ Men’s Soccer team’s win over Algeria. If you live under a rock or have no friends, the short story is that even though they had a valid goal disallowed, and Algeria had many solid chances, the U.S.  pulled out a win when Landon Donovan (right) buried a rebound in the 1st minute of stoppage time. This goal not only continued the Yanks’ World Cup hopes, but also had executives for ESPN breathing a sigh of relief.

As a soccer fan, I’d like to commend ESPN for going ‘all-in’ (to use a poker term) for this year’s World Cup. In the past, U.S. games might be shown, but many of the other games were nothing but afterthoughts. This year, every single match (all 64) will be shown on one of the many ESPN/ABC networks. They have been rewarded for their support, with the US/Slovenia match garnering the largest ever audience for an ESPN-televised soccer match (just under 4.7 million viewers) and the U.S./England match, the second-most watched U.S. soccer match of all time behind a U.S./Brazil match in 1994, garnering over 13 million viewers.

If you average all of the games through this past Sunday, you get just over 2.1 million viewers per game. That means that the U.S. playing in a game increased viewership by more than 300%. With higher stakes (single elimination) and the flood of press that Wednesday’s game will bring, I’d guess final numbers will well exceed the U.S./England match.

To put these numbers in some perspective, the 13 million that watched the U.S./England game exceeded the number of viewers for every single game in the NBA Finals except for game 7. The U.S. will be taking on Ghana in a rematch of a first-round tie in 2006. That game also ended in controversy, with Ghana winning 2-1 on a dubious penalty kick.

Add up all the story lines:

• The United States winning their group for the first time since 1930
• The U.S. advancing into the round of 16
• The U.S. taking on Ghana in a revenge match
• Record-breaking ratings for previous matches
• Prime Saturday afternoon (EDT)/morning (PDT) time slot

This adds up to be a great day for ABC/ESPN execs. They took a chance by signing a $100 million deal in 2005 to show six FIFA-sanctioned tournaments. Not including the advertising revenue they’ll rake in for this Saturday, the networks also stand to gain an increased following from soccer-mad Americans who are grateful that their sport is finally getting the coverage it deserves. I know this soccer fan will remember what network brought all this excitement into her living room, and in HD no less.

So congratulations to the U.S. Men’s National Team. Today they made the country proud, and saved a few jobs over in Bristol, CT.

Let’s take a look at two sports-related commercials that I saw for the first time yesterday and couldn’t be on more opposite ends of the sports advertising spectrum:

#1 – Tiger / Earl Woods and Nike Golf

At this point, I think everyone has seen this ad, and the reaction is all over the place from what I can tell. On the negative side, I’ve heard:

• Too soon for Tiger to be in any commercial
• Inappropriate to use his father’s voice, and a bit creepy
• Nike shouldn’t emphasize their relationship with Tiger right now
• Tiger still come off as unemotional just staring at the camera

On the positive side, I’ve heard:

• It’s the right way to re-introduce him to the market
• Creative way to acknowledge the scandal and start moving forward
• Honest, emotional and connects with the viewers
• Strong move to show Nike’s dedication and support of Tiger

Personally, I think this will end up being an effective approach, especially if Tiger can keep up his strong showing this weekend. Nike is so dependent on Tiger’s success for the health and growth of their golf line that they needed to do something in conjunction with his return, and if they tried to overlook the scandal to make a more traditional Tiger ad, it would have been a massive failure. Now the important question is, what did you think of the ad? Leave your opinion in the comments!

#2 – David Wright / “The Situation” and Vitamin Water

I don’t really have too much to say about this one, but I thought it was a particularly funny way to combine an athlete with a reality show/pop culture figure like “The Situation.” Vitamin Water continues to do well with their creative ad campaigns, and this is a perfect fit with their brand.

Have you noticed the slightly new look that ESPN has rolled out for their news articles? Take a look at the screen shot to the right (or click here to view the article). Right up top in prime viewing position,  you can see:

• Email/Print links (have been there for a while)
• A Comments quote box with count
• Twitter and Facebook share buttons

I don’t know what you think, but all of a sudden, this layout has a lot more of a “blog” feel to it, and I think it’s great. To me, this is an example of how “traditional” media (a news website) has identified elements of “social” media (blogs) that will positively influence their business. These elements highlight an emphasis on generating conversation and sharing information, two key principles of social media.

Now you might say that ESPN has been using their “Conversation” product on their website for a while. However, instead of burying it at the bottom, they’ve put it above the fold, showing an increased dedication to this aspect of their site. They’ve also made the Facebook and Twitter buttons more prominent, which will easily lead to more active sharing of their content across these social channels.

It’s great to see how new forms of communication and media continue to be a positive influence on more traditional channels, and a company like ESPN trying to combine the best of both worlds.

Rather than just giving you my opinions of the Tiger Woods press conference from this morning, I decided to ask everyone on Twitter what they thought. I felt that this would be a more accurate gauge of how the public viewed his statements. Feel free to share your response in the comments below, and thank you to everyone that responded to my Twitter request!

• sportsarizona - Tiger reax: An acting performance that would have made William Shatner proud.
• Stefmara – I didn’t watch! Haven’t cared about this story since the news broke back around Thanksgiving that he cheated.
• 7thWoman – “insincere.”
• khuda1 – Narcissistic
• MeganCassidy – I like that he apologized and defended Elin, I didn’t like how it was delivered at all. Message was right, not the presentation
• js_bizofsports – A heavily-scripted yet ultimately fascinating performance by Tiger Woods. Not necessarily effective, but riveting.
• sports_business – who cares? 1st step to return to normalcy. Time/performance will make him like everyone else (Lewis, Phelps, Kobe, etc.)
• amandarykoff – My take on the Tiger statement: “I screwed up. I got caught. And now I need to say these words.” Blah blah blah.
• nikegoal - it was artificial & hollow, carefully calculated by team Tiger, lack of a true human touch
• EdisonLee – Took a half step forward, TW will still need to answer questions – press won’t be satisfied w/ the staged presser
• IOnSportsMedia – “He did what he had to do as part of his “recovery” process (i.e. apologize), so only time will tell”
• mmahoney13 – Tiger’s anger was believeable, if not poorly timed, but his apology was not believable.. Just play golf please
• jhalitsky – Sure, he’s robotic. We knew that. Did every1 really expect a charismatic Tiger to magically show? Didn’t love it, but w/in expecs
• SteveDittmore – I see lot of vitriol to Tiger’s speech. What is that ppl wanted him to say? Or, is it reaction to delivery and sterile delivery?
• Anita_Lobo – wasted opportunity i.e. going through the motions drags Tiger’s image a few notches lower #sportsbiz #tiger / on the other hand now that the apology is done; let’s get back to #golf!
• WesleyMallette – Perfect today? No. Starting point? Yes. He owned it. Addressed most important issues. Now? Time to rebuild. Most important comment? Owning the money, power, fame and entitlement issue.

The folks over at The Goldklang Group have been running a marketing campaign called “Be Your Own Fan” across the four professional baseball organizations that they represent. To support that initiative, they’ve created a great website called “Be Your Own Fan TV” (byoftv.com). Every two weeks, they release a new video that provides an inside look at a different element of sports business. So far, they’ve produced seven videos that cover topics such as reporting, television production, public relations, baseball operations and more.

I’ve included two of their recent videos here to give you all a preview. They do an excellent job in creating both entertaining and informative content. You can visit their website, byoftv.com, to view additional episodes.

Time to recap the Super Bowl with a special Sports Business Winners and Losers breakdown. I’ll also try to capture most of the questions I posed in my “Pre-Super Bowl Thoughts” post from Friday:

Winner – Drew Brees – An easy selection for the player that should make the greatest marketing leap because of the Super Bowl. He already got to give the trademark “I’m going to Disney World” line, and there should be many endorsements to follow (hopefully something a little more glamorous than Pampers).

Loser – Peyton Manning – Not that I expect his endorsements to drop off, but as one of the most marketable players in the league before the game, I don’t expect Peyton Manning ads to get a lot of extra airtime this week.

Winner and Loser – Twitter and #SB44 – The Super Bowl completely dominated the Twitter-scape last night, showing its power to unite sports fans into one giant conversation. However, right after the play of the game (Porter’s INT return), Twitter crashed, probably due to everyone wanting to comment on that play. That was bad timing for Twitter.

Winner – Bridgestone – Of all the big time presenting sponsorships that connect to the NFL, Bridgestone really seems to capitalize on their halftime deal. The Who also came through with a solid performance (although not on the level of Bruce Springsteen’s from last year, in my opinion).

Loser – GMC – For a company that was supposedly the presenting sponsor of the biggest sporting event of the year, I still had no idea that they were involved except for the mentions on the NFL website.

Winners – CBS and the NFL – The game had a 46.4 rating and a 68 share, up 10% over last year’s game and the highest ratings since Super Bowl XXI in 1987 (USA Today). In total, this represents almost 100 million viewers.

Winner and Loser – Bourbon Street – The drinks were flowing and the celebrations ran through the night, leading to a good time…for most. However, one individual ruined the night by firing shots from his gun that injured three others. This is not the type of celebrating that New Orleans needs.

Winner – Las Vegas – Based on how the line move throughout the two weeks, it seemed like most of the Las Vegas betting action was on Indianapolis. With the Saints’ win, the casinos may have taken in quite a score.

Advertising Winners:  (Note: this is purely my opinion – I’m sure others will disagree, and that’s fine. Leave your opinions in the comments!)

• Google – A simple, effective and heart-warming ad that should have lasting brand value.
• Doritos – Pretty funny across all their ads, and they did a great job building interest leading up to the game since the commercials are all based on fan ideas that were submitted and voted on through their website.
• Denny’s – Their two ads will have more impact on a company’s bottom line than any other from this year.
• Boost Mobile – A little anti-climactic after the recent build-up, but still a fun parody and something that should drive a steady stream of visitors to their site that they can convert to sales.
• Budweiser – Pretty much the same staple of humorous ads like any year. I enjoyed the Voice Box ad the most, but the human bridge and house made of bud light cans were also strong entrants.
• CBS – Normally I’m not impressed by a station advertising its own shows, but I thought their ads stood out this year and they made the most out of their spots.

Advertising Losers:

• All movie trailers – I still do not understand how this is a profitable marketing approach, unless you are debuting a new trailer and want to make a splash (at least this was the case for Prince of Persia). I doubt that a 0:15 second spot for Wolfman will have any noticeable effect since this ad has been in heavy circulation for weeks now.
• Teleflora – Is it me, or did they run a nearly identical ad in a recent Super Bowl as well? Although, considering how close the Super Bowl is to Valentine’s Day this year, maybe it was a smart move.
• truTV – I just think that this ad was a little creepy, and even if they are launching a new football show, I think its a stretch to say that they’ve added 6 more weeks of football. After all, we have the NFL Network for 52 weeks.
• GoDaddy – These ads were controversial at the time, but now the schtick is getting a little old. Of course, I say that and I’m sure they get more hits to GoDaddy.com this week than any other time of year.
• Dr. Pepper – For all intent purposes, this is the same ad they’ve run with Kiss as part of their “Trust me, I’m a doctor” series of ads. I know they wanted to take advantage of Pepsi’s decision to not advertise this year, but was this the best they could do?
• E*TRADE – I might be in the minority here, but just like my complaint about the GoDaddy ads, I think this joke has run its course – using a new baby doesn’t change anything.

For a die-hard sports fan, the news that the Washington Times was doing away with its’ ENTIRE sports section was a shock. I have family in DC and have probably read the Times once or twice. I’m sure I’ve pulled up a Washington Times article online when searching for the latest on the Gilbert Arenas debacle, or maybe even when I got curious about the Washington Nationals’ record last August (editor’s note: that never actually happened). Regardless, a major newspaper in the nation’s 9th-largest city laying off every beat reporter, every columnist, every editor in its’ sports department was quite possibly the largest development in media since spell check was invented.

Now, we’re all busy people. We have filled our lives with work, family, blogging, reading, UFC, Conan and/or shopping. So, if you’re anything like me, you read about the demise of the Washington Times sports section, your mouth fell open, you retweeted it, and then you moved on to the next thing. I don’t blame you at all, but I had to bring it up one more time… because we have an epidemic on our hands.

Ok, maybe it isn’t actually an epidemic. But I can just about guarantee you that TWT won’t be the first major newspaper to do-away with its’ sports section. I think Bob Dylan said it best: Times, they are a-changin’. I’m not lamenting that fact, I just think this is a great opportunity to see the future before it happens.

Think about what a world without traditional sports news looks like:

• That two and a half minutes in your local news broadcast, that used to be sports (and which has been slowly shrinking over the years), gets re-appropriated to weather/traffic/muggings.
• The empty suites at your hometown stadium become part of the press box to accommodate the 250+ blogger/fans that cover each game.
• You have to bookmark 10+ sites to make sure you really know what happened on the team plane, because there were no actual reporters/bloggers there, and no one has been able to get the story from more than one player to corroborate it.
• You save roughly $300 a year since you can now cancel that pesky newspaper subscription, millions of trees are saved, global warming ceases to exist, and 2012 becomes just another year, instead of ‘the end of the world.

Ok, to be serious, it just hit me this week what a major development this is. It’s easy to dismiss it now, because I have ESPN, Sports Illustrated, and countless team forums/official web sites/fan pages to give me the news that I want at the touch of the ‘Search Now’ button. Plus, I have Twitter, which is like a sieve that helps me catch those stories that I would otherwise have missed.

In closing, I think the shuttering of the Washington Times sports section was like the lighting of the Olympic torch. There is still a journey to take: a journey that will consist of other major papers taking  the same route. Some day, our kids (or grandkids) will have to ask us what ’sports section’ means. Maybe Wikipedia will even have an entry for it. So let’s take a moment to remember the sports section fondly… the newsprint on our fingers (and eventually on our clothes), the asterisk next to the late game that didn’t finish before the paper went to print, the endlessly optimistic or pessimistic view of the local teams’ beat writer, depending on their personality. If you’re feeling as nostalgic as I am, go out and buy your local paper and read the sports section one more time, for old times sake. And if you’re a Washington Times subscriber, hmmm… I guess there’s always USA Today!

By now, we’ve all heard the updates on the Tiger Woods saga… possibly ad-nauseum. For me, this was the moment I realized I no longer want to hear about the private lives of athletes. Don’t get me wrong, I check People.com occasionally, but I also spend half my day on ESPN.com. Also, I understand the millions of dollars in endorsements that can be wiped out by a US Weekly-worthy single transgression and it’s definitely news-worthy if there is a major criminal offense that has been committed.

But my question is this: is sports better or worse off in this era of 24/7 news cycles?

On one hand, you don’t have to hear about the “shot heard ’round the world” from a newspaper article. You don’t have to imagine Babe Ruth calling his shot and moments later hitting a homerun to that same spot. You don’t have to wonder for 12 hours who won Ali-Frasier II (or III or IV).

What’s left to wonder these days? How many dunks will make the sports show’s Top 10? Why the Monday Night Football highlights weren’t the lead story last night? Whether soccer will get a mention on SportsCenter?

Are we better off for knowing all the intimate details of how Latrell Sprewell choked his coach? For hearing Allen Iverson complain about practice? For having the sports highlight shows seem more like police blotters? Or for reading about Tiger’s philandering?

Does this extra knowledge actually add to our game-watching experience? Some people could argue that knowing more about the players helps us to identify with them. It helps us feel closer to our favorite players and therefore be more interested in buying game tickets and merchandise.

But what we end up with is subtraction by addition. By knowing all of this additional, real-time information, we lose the ability to idolize these players without a nagging feeling that someday it will be their name on the front page of the paper tomorrow. How do fathers look their sons in the eye and say “there is a man you can emulate” when they aren’t truly sure if that player is clean. The athlete could be taking performance-enhancing drugs, driving drunk, carrying around illegally concealed weapons, or cheating on their wives – and sooner or later we’ll know about it.

What I do know are the attributes that draw me to sports: the competition, passion, athleticism and skill that athletes display on their chosen field. They don’t have to be perfect husbands, drivers, or moral-compasses to thrill fans.

For now, besides the athlete’s pocketbook, the coprorate sponsors are the biggest losers. Marketing executives have to be shivering in their shoes when they sign contracts from here on out. Tiger was untouchable. Other than his infamous swearing on the course, he was the closest thing we had to ‘clean.’ This incident will go to show companies that no endorsement is safe. All of them have inherent risks because their products are endorsed by humans, and humans make mistakes.

I for one will long for the days when we knew a little less about our sports stars, so that we could enjoy them a little more.

The 11th Annual FSA Sports Media & Technology conference, hosted by the Sports Business Journal, is taking place today and tomorrow in New York City. Unfortunately, I was not able to attend this conference, but on the bright side, a lot of the conference attendees are sharing some of the best ideas and comments through the Twitter hashtag #sbjsmt.

Here is a live stream of all of today’s conference tweets. Enjoy!