ProfessorBainbridge.com

Fantasy Football Update # 1: The LA Prawfs

It's two weeks into the season and it's time for an update on my fantasy football season for the benefit of the two or three of you following along at home. Let's start at the bottom with the woeful LA Prawfs. You'll recall that they're my team in CT's 10 team non-PPR rotisserie league. In the first two weeks, my starters have totaled 200 points, a whopping 102 points behind the leader, which is good (so to speak) for just 8th place.

 

Position	Drafted	Current Roster
QB	Ben Roethlisberger	Ben Roethlisberger
WR1	DeSean Jackson	DeSean Jackson
WR2	Brandon Marshall	Brandon Marshall
WR3	Santonio Holmes	Santonio Holmes
RB1	Jamaal Charles	LeSean McCoy
RB2	LeSean McCoy	Ryan Mathews
RB3	Ryan Mathews	Ben Tate
TE	Vernon Davis	Vernon Davis
K	Matt Bryant	Adam Vinatieri
DST	New England	New England
BN-QB	Matt Cassel	Cam Newton
BN-RB	Reggie Bush	Reggie Bush
BN-RB	Ben Tate	Thomas Jones
BN-RB	Kendall Hunter	Roy Helu
BN-WR	Steve Smith (Car)	Robert Meachem
BN-WR/TE	Marcedes Lewis	Eric Decker

Losing my first round choice Jamaal Charles for the season early in Week 2 was devastating. Unfortunately, he wasn't the only low scorer that week: DeSean Jackson, Reggie Bush, and Vernon Davis all started and racked up fewer than 3 points. Meanwhile, I left a ton of points on the bench by not starting Mathews (18.6) and Ben Tate (13.5). On top of which, Cam Newton kicked butt scoring 29.6 points on the bench, while starter Ben Roethlisberger turned in just 16.7 points.

My start/sit decisions weren't much better in Week 1, as I left Bush (15.4) and Tate (15.6) on the bench.

Going forward, I need Vernon Davis to start performing at an elite TE level. I drafted Ben Tate as trade bait, but now I'm starting him until Arian Foster is clearly healthy (and hoping Foster proves a slow healer).

Looking specifically at week 3, the pressing questions are (1) choosing between Roethlisberger and Newton. They're playing Indy and Jax, respectively, so both could be in for big games. I'm leaning Newton, expecting that if I do so this will be the week he plays like a rookie.

(2) Should I start Eric Decker over, say, Santonio Holmes?

(3) Trying to find a backup TE. Continuing to monitor the waiver wire.

(4) Wondering whether I'm so far behind that I'm just going through the motions. This is, of course, the drawback of a rotisserie league. It's easy to fall so far behind early that righting the ship by making good waiver wire decisions and better start/sit decisions proves impossible.

The Academics on the NACD Directorship 100 List

The detailed list of persons selected to the National Association of Corporate Directors/Directorship Magazine's list of "list of the most influential governance professionals and institutions" is now available online. There are only 10 academics on the list, including:

William T. Allen--New York University

Stephen Bainbridge -- UCLA

Lucian A. Bebchuk and Jay W. Lorsch -- Harvard University

Duke Bristow -- USC

John C. Coffee Jr.-- Columbia University

Steven M. Davidoff -- Ohio State and NY Times Deal Professor

Charles M. Elson -- University of Delaware

Joseph A. Grundfest and F. Daniel Siciliano-- Stanford University

Jeffrey A. Sonnenfeld -- Yale University

It's  very impressive group and I'm honored to have been included. Interestingly, Charles Elson and I were law school class mates and fellow members of the Virginia Law Review. The Class of 1985 did UVa proud, I think.

Do Millionaires really make more than secretaries?

Obama's been arguing that "there are millionaires all over America paying taxes at lower rates than their secretaries."

"Middle-class families shouldn't pay higher taxes than millionaires and billionaires," Obama said Monday. "That's pretty straightforward. It's hard to argue against that."

The trouble is that it's not true. AP reports that:

The data tell a different story. On average, the wealthiest people in America pay a lot more taxes than the middle class or the poor, according to private and government data. They pay at a higher rate, and as a group, they contribute a much larger share of the overall taxes collected by the federal government.

There may be individual millionaires who pay taxes at rates lower than middle-income workers. In 2009, 1,470 households filed tax returns with incomes above $1 million yet paid no federal income tax, according to the Internal Revenue Service. That, however, was less than 1 percent of the nearly 237,000 returns with incomes above $1 million. ...

This year, households making more than $1 million will pay an average of 29.1 percent of their income in federal taxes, including income taxes and payroll taxes, according to the Tax Policy Center, a Washington think tank.

Households making between $50,000 and $75,000 will pay 15 percent of their income in federal taxes.

Lower-income households will pay less. For example, households making between $40,000 and $50,000 will pay an average of 12.5 percent of their income in federal taxes. Households making between $20,000 and $30,000 will pay 5.7 percent.

The latest IRS figures are a few years older — and limited to federal income taxes — but show much the same thing. In 2009, taxpayers who made $1 million or more paid on average 24.4 percent of their income in federal income taxes, according to the IRS.

Even if you think something ought to be done about those 1470 taxpayers, bear in mind that the AMT started out to deal with a couple of dozen millionaire taxpayers who paid no taxes. Look where it is today. Obama's super-AMT likely would end up applying to millions of taxpayers too.

Additional evidence on point comes from Michigan economics professor Mark Perry:

Yours truly again makes NACD Directorship 100 List

The National Association of Corporate Directors announced that:

Each year, NACD Directorship [magazine] identifies the [100] most influential people in the boardroom community, including directors and officers, as well as corporate governance experts, journalists, regulators, academics and counselors. Reviving economic growth remains a priority for policy makers and directors alike. Therefore, our programs strive to offer a balance between those who do actual board work and those who influence how that work is done.

Among others falling into the latter category was yours truly. This is the second time I've been named to the Directorship 100 list. I previously had been selected in 2008.

 

Il Bruciato (Bolgheri) 2007

A blend of Cabernet Sauvignon (50%), Merlot (30%), and Syrah (20%) sourced from the Tenuta Guado al Tasso estate on the Tuscan coast. It gets a relatively short stay in oak barrels (only 8 months), which leaves the fruit as the dominant element in both the bouquet and the palate. Not a wine for the cellar, but a lovely wine for early drinking with, say, steak. Indeed, the soft tannins and refreshing acidity make it very food friendly and easy to drink at age 4. Black cherry, blackberry, and prunes, with a touch of vanilla and smoke from the stint in oak. Grade: B+

Springsteen science fiction

If you're a fan of both science fiction and Bruce Springsteen, you'll be excited to learn that:

After more than a year of writing and recording, Bruce Springsteen released his 18th studio album Tuesday, a concept record titled Red Dust that explores the everyday lives and struggles of immigrant workers scraping by in the 23rd-century carbonate mines on Mars. ...

"These are songs about growing up on a tough planet," said Springsteen, telling reporters that when the idea of humans and aliens working side by side in an extraterrestrial labor colony first occurred to him, he immediately knew he "had to tell their story." "The Martians aren't trying to run away from their lives or make excuses. They're proud of what they do and where they're from, even if the high-impact ion-compression carbonate mining industry isn't what it used to be." ...

Thus far, the album has earned mixed reviews. While many critics have expressed deep bemusement at Springsteen's sharp departure from realism, others, such as Rolling Stone editor David Fricke, have hailed the effort as "another well-executed and stirring tribute to working-class heroes by the Boss."

Callison on Campos

Practicing lawyer Bill Callison takes on Paul "ScamProf" Campos, concluding that:

Fundamentally, Campos calls law professors (perhaps on the median, perhaps on the mean, perhaps somewhere else) lazy and stupid.  My initial reaction, having spent considerable time in his institution over the last year and in others over the last decades, is that the man must be confusing himself with others.  Narcissus looking into the pond and all that.  My second reaction is something along the lines of “I’ve been watching law schools for years, and I know bullshit when I see it.”  My third reaction is something like “The guy’s lucky that I’m not his dean.”  Confessions of ineptitude and nonchalance don’t ring very well.

My perspective – by and large (with some exceptions) the law professors I have known through the years are decent, smart, hard-working, and thoughtful people who genuinely care about and respect their students and their colleagues.  One really cannot ask for much more than this.  I have watched them teach; I have watched them prepare themselves to teach; I have watched them impart a sense of the ethics of dispassion, open-mindedness and hard work to their students; I have watched them struggle with difficult intellectual assignments; I have heard them talk coherently about difficult and important subjects; I have read a considerable amount of their writings; I have written with them; I have served on legislative drafting and other committees with them; I have watched them participate in, work with and teach to the organized bar; I have watched them apply expertise and real knowledge in myriad ways; I have seen lazy and dumb ones; and I have seen extremely hard-working and smart ones (will the real Bruce Ackerman please stand up?).  But about the last thing I would do is pigeon-hole very many of the many law profs I know into the stylized caricature that Campos constructs.   I wager that extends well beyond the subset that I know.  Period.  End of story.

It's an interestng analysis from a guy with a uniquely well rounded background. Go read the whole thing.

The impact of blogging on scholarship

Joshua Fershee blogs:

David McKenzie & Berk Ozler have posted The Impact of Economics Blogs on SSRN. Here's the abstract:     

There is a proliferation of economics blogs, with increasing numbers of economists attracting large numbers of readers, yet little is known about the impact of this new medium. Using a variety of experimental and non-experimental techniques, this study quantifies some of their effects. First, links from blogs cause a striking increase in the number of abstract views and downloads of economics papers. Second, blogging raises the profile of the blogger (and his or her institution) and boosts their reputation above economists with similar publication records. Finally, a blog can transform attitudes about some of the topics it covers.

I'm curious if this holds true for Business Law Bloggers, too.  My suspicion is that the findings would hold true across disciplines or at least many disciplines. As the authors explain:

This evidence is . . . consistent with the view that blogging helps build prestige and recognition in the profession, with bloggers being more likely to be admired or respected than other academics of similar (or in many cases better) publication records. This is of course only a correlation, and there are several caveats to consider. First, to the extent that blogging serves to increase the RePEc ratings by increasing downloads (as seen in the previous section) and citations, the observed correlation will be a lower bound on the causal impact of blogging. However, if bloggers are also more likely to be engaged in other activities of a public intellectual, such as media appearances, writing books etc., and if these don't all arise directly as a result of blogging, the estimates will conflate the impact of blogging with the impacts of these other activities, thereby overstating the impact of blogs. Nevertheless, given the large magnitude of the coefficient observed, it does not seem likely that all of the observed impact of blogging just reflects omitted variables, and therefore we view this evidence as strongly suggesting that blogging increases the influence, respect, or public image of the blogger. [footnote omitted]

There is always the risk a prolific blogger will get a greater (and disproportionate) share of recognition for being more "out there" more often than a non-blogging colleague.  That said, a consistent, if not prolific, blogger who has a similar publication record may be more connected to current events in his or her profession. And blogging demonstrates a willingness and ability to share opinions (for better or worse).  

Blogging can't, and shouldn't, replace other forms of scholarship. But in addition to tradtional scholarship, it adds to the overall depth, and especially breadth, of knowledge. At least, it does for me. I truly believe my scholarship and my teaching have improved because of blogging, even if, sometimes, it feels like a lot of "extra" work.  As long as it is making me better at what I do, it's work I need to do.

I have no doubt that being an active blogger has helped my SSRN download and law review citation stats. Until california killed the golden goose, I also used to make a few bucks at it. And I still have fun with it, so I just keep grinding away. But I also still see blogging as a mixed enterprise rather than solely a scholarly adjunct.

More from Bradford on the SEC versus Crowdfunding

Steve Bradford has become my go to guy for information on the emergent crowdfunding phenomenon. He's posted on it again, with links to his excellent article on the topic and earlier blog posts. In his latest post, he notes that:

Given the SEC’s history when it comes to small business exemptions, I have not been optimistic that such an exemption will come to pass. But President Obama just changed the odds. The White House has released a statement supporting a number of changes to the regulation of small business, including a crowdfunding exemption. According to the release “"The administration . . . supports establishing a “crowdfunding” exemption from SEC registration requirements for firms raising less than $1 million (with individual investments limited to $10,000 or 10% of investors’ annual income) and raising the cap on “mini-offerings” (Regulation A) from $5 million to $50 million.” That's all the release says; no further details are provided.

Both of these suggestions make sense, but the devil will be in the details.

He goes on to discuss those devilish details.

Don't incorporate corporate law into LLCs

That's the short version of Joshua Fershee's analysis of the recent Delaware Supreme Court decision in CML V, LLC v. Bax:

LLCs are inherently different. And while a reasonable person may think LLCs should be analogous to corporations, the reality is that LLCs can be, but need not be, analogous to corporations. The nature of the LLC is such that those who form the LLC and do business with the LLC must contractually make the LLC analogous if that is what they desire. Default rules and gap fillers will not save the day in the LLC setting as they might in the corporate world.

... the Delaware Supreme Court missed an opportunity to, once and for all, make clear that LLCs and corporations are wholly different entities. While it is of little consequence in this case, in future situations, courts may still miss that point, and again inappropriately apply corporate concepts where the statute is not so clear.

I concur and encourage you to go read the whole thing.

Francis Pileggi links to other comentary on the case and offers his own commentary, along with a link to Larry Ribstein's analysis, here. Here's a direct link to Ribstein.

Liz Warren for Senate

I was fortunate enough to meet Elizabeth Warren when I visited harvard back in 2000-2001. She was super-friendly, obviously incredibly smart, and generally a good egg. Having said all that, however, her announcement of her plans to run for the US Senate inevitably brought to mind William F Buckley's famous quip that "I'd rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University." Ditto. I'll be sending Scott Brown some more money.

Also, check out this post for links to Todd Zywicki's critique of Warren's scholarship and this post on whether Warren will be the Democrat's political savior.

Fiduciary duties to creditors

Bill Callison offers a short but sweet analysis of the state of Delaware law on the fiduciary duties corporate directors and officers owe creditors in insolvency or the vicinity thereof.

"America does not give in to fear"

In his 9/11 memorial speech, which I thought was generally well done, President Obama proclaimed that "America does not give in to fear." In response to which, however, I can't help but wonder why I can't get on an airplane without a TSA agent practically conducting an anal probing that would make a little green alien man proud?

9-11

Charles Stross writes:

I'm going to turn the TV off on September 11th. And close all the web browser tabs I have open on news sites.

This isn't to belittle the events of ten years ago, or to show disrespect for the victims and their bereaved: rather, it's to avoid the narcissistic and indecent media feeding frenzy that battens onto popular sentiment and attempts to jerk every tear from the emotional aftermath of tragedy, the better to milk the advertising revenue stream.

I couldn't agree more.

Fiddling with my fantasy football teams

I am an unrepentant fiddler with my fantasy football teams (although I'm nowhere near as bad as the guy who is the commissioner in a couple of my leagues). I'm always at or near the top of waiver wire moves by the end of the season.
We're one game into the 2011 season, and I'm already fiddling. Dropping Peyton Manning in favor of Josh Freeman in my Cowboys Drool league was sadly necessary. With Mike Vick as my starting QB, the injury risk required that I grab a (close to) elite QB backup ASAP. On the same team, I've put Ben Tate on the trading block. Sell high is my motto and Foster's hamstring surely will induce somebody to bite, even if Foster's owner doesn't.
The other big change was the addition of Robert Meachem as a WR in 2 of my teams. I had gone into the season deliberately avoiding Saints WRs. Brees just spreads the ball around too much. With Marques Colston out for at least 4 weeks with a busted collarbone and Lance Moore likely to remain on the shelf for a while longer, the Saints WR cupboard is suddenly not as full as it was. I figure Meachem to get most of the workload while they're out. Meachem was a free agent in 2 of my leagues. So I had the Unseen Academicals (PPR H2H) drop Daniel Thomas to add Meachem. Likewise, the LA Prawfs (rotisserie non-PPR) dropped Steve Smith (Carolina) to add Meachem.
I did not, however, jump on the Randall Cobb or Darren Sproles bandwagons. Thursday night's game was a freak show in the return game. Going forward, Green Bay has too many WRs and New Orleans has too many RBs for me to see Cobb or Sproles as week in and week out contributors.