Getting booted: Angels to move press box down the rightfield line

Posted on by

At least the writers still are in the ballpark.

Late last week, it was disclosed that the Los Angeles Angels will be moving the press box from its prime location behind to a less than ideal perspective down the rightfield line.

From Mike DiGiovanna of the Los Angeles Times:

The Angels are in the process of converting their press box to a luxury seating area that will feature upgraded dining opportunities and amenities for about 80 fans, a move that will push writers covering the team to a new press box down the right-field line in Angel Stadium.

There will be no changes to the radio and television broadcast booths, which will remain on the club level behind home plate, or in the Diamond Club restaurant and seating areas on the lower level behind home plate.

“It really boils down to building revenue streams and finding as many ways as possible to grow,” said Tim Mead, Angels vice president of communications. “In talking to other teams, the seating behind home plate is a prime area to do things.”

Mead noted the White Sox made the move with their press box a few years ago. The writers aren’t happy about it.

Upon hearing the news about the Angels, Paul Hoynes, the longtime baseball writer for the Cleveland Plain-Dealer, wrote in a Tweet:

Selig promised BBWAA no team would be allowed to move pressbox from behind home plate after Chi did it. Angel writers should go to Bud.

I don’t know that it will do any good. Given that the Angels have committed a zillion dollars on about four players, the Commissioner is not going to rule against the team trying to find some new revenue sources.

Sorry, Hoynsie. I don’t think the protest is going to go very far.

 

 

 

Posted in MLB

New columnist for GolfChannel.com: Some new guy named Palmer

Posted on by

Who knew that Arnold Palmer always wanted to be like one of us? Does this mean he has to apply for a press credential if he wants to attend the Masters?

What’s next? Arnie on Twitter?

Golfchannel.com announced this morning that Palmer will become a regular columnist on the site. At age 83, I guess it’s never too late to try new things.

By the way, Palmer is a founding partner in the Golf Channel. Does the guy ever lose?

Of course, Palmer’s columns will be ghost-written. Still, it will be the voice of the King. His first column is titled: “State of the Game.”

Palmer opens:

I have been around the game of golf since I first hit a ball when I was 3 years old. That was 80 years ago. I still have interests in golf course design, course ownership and so on, but I haven’t really played competitive golf for quite some time. So as 2012 comes to an end, I’m seeing the game as you do: as a casual player, as a fan and as a businessman. And I like what I see.

Not a fan of the long putter:

Do we have issues? Sure – what truly global enterprise doesn’t? We need to keep bringing the game to youngsters and women. We need to address the distance that today’s ball travels. Slow play is turning time-starved people away from the sport. We need to encourage nine-hole rounds. We have environmental concerns to deal with and we have to keep a vigilant eye on the standards of sportsmanship that set our game apart. The U.S. Golf Association and R&A recently announced a ban on the practice of “anchoring” clubs – usually a long or belly-length putter – against the body. I applaud them for not only their ruling, but also for the patient and thoughtful approach they took, studying the issue for years and across all levels of golf before making their decision. There was nothing knee-jerk about it. The game is in good hands.

Dan Jenkins might have said it in a different way. Then again, Palmer hasn’t had as much practice as Jenkins.

 

Top newsmakers for 2012: No denying that everyone talked about Skip Bayless

Posted on by

When I launched ShermanReport on April 16, I had some initial concerns that there might not be enough fresh content to do a daily site.

Couldn’t have been more wrong.

There’s so much territory to cover, it can be overwhelming at times. For a solo performer, it is a challenge to keep up. It’s never dull, that’s for sure.

As 2012 nears a close, I’m going to reflect on the year in sports media this week. Today, I begin with newsmakers. My criteria is people who were interesting, intriguing, controversial, and generally seemed to be in the news cycle, for better or worse.

Here we go:

Skip Bayless: Yes, Skip Bayless. I can see your eyes rolling, but name me someone who has generated more sports media talk?

I know he is extremely polarizing, and he routinely gets obliterated from the critics. Twitter nearly exploded when he got nominated for a Sports Emmy.

This isn’t to say that Bayless and First Take rank as the best in 2012. The latest episode involving Rob Parker off-mark comments about Robert Griffin III are an example why many people feel the show is a stain on ESPN. A blow to its credibility.

However, whenever the topic is sports media in a podcast or elsewhere, I’m hard pressed to think of a time when the discussion didn’t include Bayless and First Take. My former Chicago Tribune colleague receives a remarkable amount of attention for a mid-morning show on ESPN2. Not exactly prime time. Love him or hate him, people tune in to hear Bayless’ and Stephen A. Smith’s views. The show continues to do a strong rating and Bayless has nearly 1 million followers on Twitter, up from 550,000 in April.

More so, athletes react over what he has to say. Kevin Durant, Jalen Rose, Charles Barkley, and Terrell Suggs, to name a few. Again, somebody must be listening.

In a Q/A I did with Bayless in April, I asked if he saw himself wearing the black hat. He said: “The thrust of our show is people trying to take me down. They just want to see me lose. That’s why they love Stephen A (Smith). He calls me Skip “Baseless.” Fine. Then I quickly prove to the audience that I’m not baseless and win the argument from him, using live ammo, real facts that he can’t refute.”

Will Bayless be at the top of the list again in 2013? I wouldn’t bet against him.

Bob Costas: Costas hit a milestone birthday, turning 60. While it’s just a number, he continued to define his status as perhaps the sportscaster of his generation in 2012. He tied it all together in hosting yet another Olympics for NBC. Even more so, he stepped out on controversial issues: The failure to do a memorial of the slain Israeli athletes at the Olympics and his anti-gun commentary during halftime of a Sunday night game. If sports has a social conscience and voice, it is Costas.

Mark Lazarus: Unlike his predecessor Dick Ebersol, the NBC Sports president took a low profile in being at the helm for his first Olympics. While the tape delay issue had viewers screaming, they still watched in record numbers. Bottom line: The Games even turned an unexpected profit for NBC. Lazarus didn’t have to say much more than that.

John Skipper: The ESPN president oversaw the network’s buying spree in 2012, locking in important long-term rights deals. Skipper also is refreshingly frank. He earned plaudits for admitting that ESPN went overboard with its Tim Tebow coverage.

Joe Posnanski: No sportswriter faced a more intense spotlight than Posnanski. His much-anticipated book Paterno was roundly criticized. The response was so extreme, Posnanski did limited interviews and virtually no public appearances. As a result, his move from Sports Illustrated to being the signature name for the SportsOnEarth site received little fanfare.

Clearly, Posnanski’s book was hurt by a deadline that was moved up to cash in on the timeliness of the story. But even worse, he appeared too close to Paterno and his family to write an objective book that this subject required.

Michelle Beadle: After several months of over-the-top speculation about her future, Beadle bolted ESPN for a package at NBC. She shined in a hosting role at the Olympics. Always entertaining, Beadle will add a new show at NBC Sports Network in 2013.

Erin Andrews: Speaking of over-the-top, Andrews also left ESPN and signed on at Fox Sports. The big lure was a chance to host a primetime college football studio show in advance of Fox’s Saturday night game. Alas, Andrews and the show generally got panned. Look for some changes in a second attempt in 2013.

Chris Berman: Speaking of polarizing figures, it’s often target practice on Berman. His act, once unique and fun in another decade, now is viewed as old and tired. It’s almost as if he has become a characterization of himself. If only he listened to the many people who have to be begging him to tone it down.

Sports Illustrated’s Richard Deitsch blew him up several times. Following Berman hosting the NFL draft, he wrote: “The bellowing never stops. It pummels you over the head like a hard rain.”

Of the critics, Berman told Michael Hiestand of USA Today: ”I just talk to people everyday walking down the street,” he says. “That’s what I care about. That’s good enough for me. They didn’t like Ted Williams either. Now, I’m not Ted Williams.”

That is quite true. He is not anywhere close to comparing his situation to Ted Williams’.

As for ESPN making any changes with Berman? Don’t count on it. He signed a long-term deal in 2012.

Jim Rome: Another escapee from ESPN, Rome took his act to CBS, where he was given many platforms. His daily show on CBS Sports Network reaches a limited audience simply because the network still doesn’t register in the mind of most sports viewers. He recently launched a weekly show on Showtime. We’ll see how that goes. In a few weeks, he will take his radio show to the new CBS Sports Radio Network.

The biggest Rome news occurred when he got in a flap with NBA Commissioner David Stern. It stemmed from a poorly-worded question about whether the draft was fixed.

The move to CBS clearly is a work in process for Rome. He knew it would take some time. However, he will want to see some progress in 2013.

Jeff Van Gundy: Van Gundy has emerged as a star for his blunt, honest analysis of the NBA for ESPN. You have to listen closely because he is capable of saying anything at any given moment. He wasn’t shy about criticizing the network when it backed out of a deal to hire his brother, Stan. He’s become one of my favorites.

Bill Simmons: ESPN’s franchise man on so many different platforms was given another toy by being added to NBA Countdown. The studio show is a work in progress, but Simmons’ addition has made for a different feel. A basketball junkie, he has a unique and at times quirky perspective on the game. I have found myself listening to hear what Simmons has to say.

Tim McCarver. The announcer called his 23rd World Series, a record. He also received the Ford Frick Award at the Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, an honor that was long overdue.

John Clayton: Who knew that the 58-year NFL analyst wore a ponytail, worshipped Slayer, and lived with his mother? The cult of John Clayton grew with one of the year’s best commercials. It even received a tweet from LeBron James.

Darren Rovell: Hey, somebody actually jumps to ESPN. What a concept. Rovell left a gig at CNBC where he was the big fish in a little sports pond. Now he’s swimming among fish of all sizes in the ESPN ocean that is the Pacific. The move has some risks, but Rovell felt when ESPN calls (a second time for him), you dive in.

Frank Deford and Vin Scully: Let’s finish with two legends who still are going strong. Deford wrote his memoirs in a terrific book, Over Time: My Life as a Sportswriter. As you would expect from Deford, it was entertaining and insightful, covering more than a generation of sports writing. At age 74, Deford still goes strong with his commentaries for NPR and work on Real Sports for HBO.

What can you say about Scully, the ageless wonder? Now 85, he gave us the best gift possible by deciding to return for yet another year in 2013. Remarkable.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sally Jenkins weighs in on Lance Armstrong: Why I’m not angry

Posted on by

Sally Jenkins did two books with Lance Armstrong, chronicling his struggles and celebrating his triumphs. The Washington Post columnist hadn’t weighed in on revelations that the cyclist was less than honest about what he put in his body.

Until now.

The headline of her column read: “Why I’m not angry at Lance Armstrong.”

I’ve searched high and low for my anger at Lance, and I can’t find it. It’s just not there. I checked — looked in every corner, and I’m empty of it. I’ve tried for weeks now to summon the moral certitude and outrage that others seem to demand, and I don’t have it, maybe because he’s my friend and co-author of “It’s Not About the Bike,” but also because my opinion of him was never based on what he did in a bike race in France 10 years ago. And while we’re on that subject, there is no question in my mind he was the hardest-working cyclist in the world, and for the life of me, I can’t find the competitive injustice in his seven Tour de France victories.

And:

Maybe I’m not angry at Lance because I’ve decided that the smoldering wreckage of the bonfire that burned down Big Tex was wildly out of proportion to the offense. And because, much as I would have liked a personal or public confession from him, I suspect that he understood what the price of it would be, and found the stakes too high to call up his friend at The Washington Post and bring it all down on his head.

And:

Maybe I’m not angry at him because after reading the USADA report and the affidavits of the riders who spoke with USADA, I have some common-sense questions that preclude anger. Such as: Shouldn’t an organization with the initials U.S. in front of it have to follow due process? And: According to the affidavits, the U.S. Postal Team had a highly organized “doping” system in place long before Lance became a member of it, so why is he the target of this report? Or: The affidavits taken by USADA make it clear that while Lance refused to use HGH, Floyd Landis introduced it to younger riders, so why is the federal government considering giving Landis whistle-blower protection?

This is the way it goes throughout the column. Perhaps it is admirable that Jenkins didn’t throw her friend under the bus. All relationships are different, and as much as you and I think we would be hurt if somebody lied to us, you never know how you’re going to react until it happens to you.

Jenkins, though, faced some tough criticism. As of 10:30 a.m. ET, there were nearly 500 comments on her post, a number that surely will grow throughout the day. As you would expect, the reaction was extreme, mostly against her.

Maybe you are not angry with Lance because you would have to be angry with yourself for having defended a cheating bully. Maybe you are not angry with Lance because like so many of his colleagues, your fame as a journalist came from drafting on his rear wheel. Maybe if you repeat you are not angry with Lance enough, people will forget the fawning columns you wrote trying to suppress the truth that would eventually emerge. Maybe you are not angry with Lance because you would have to acknowledge that now you have to write columns in his defense to avoid feeling like you made a damn fool of yourself.

However, there were a few that supported Jenkins.

Thank you for your column. I find your points very well taken, and agree with your comments about the great good Mr. Armstrong has done for people with his Lance Armstrong Foundation, as it was formerly known. I have received a great deal of useful information from livestrong.com. I am sure that Mr. Armstrong will appreciate your kind words, as I do. They brought tears to my eyes. That said, as someone who has taken steroids for medical issues, I believe that taking steroids is like making a deal with the devil. You cannot win. The side effects are myriad. Having experienced them, I would rather never do it again. But, I agree with you that it should be a personal choice.

 

 

 

Sunday books: Q/A with Nick Faldo on his new instruction book; It’s all in the knees

Posted on by

I didn’t realize I was setting up Nick Faldo for an easy line.

In Faldo’s new book, A Swing for Life, he talks about the important of stable knees in the golf swing. Not that this 15-handicapper knows much about the game, but I told him that I’ve been trying to get my wife to focus on her knees on the rare occasion she plays.

“It helps her from swaying all over the place,” I said to Faldo.

Not missing a beat, Faldo quickly replied, “It’s not a good thing to have a wife that sways all over the place.”

Rim shot.

If you’re looking for a Christmas gift for your swaying golfer, you could do much worse than getting instruction from a six-time major winner. Technically, Faldo updated his 1995 version of the book.

However, the 2012 version features new pictures of Faldo demonstrating the swing. And here’s something you wouldn’t have found in 1995: The book includes at least one Microsoft Tag. When readers scan these tags with their smart phone, they’re taken directly to a video of Faldo giving a lesson within that section of the book.

Also, Faldo has a different perspective of the game since sitting in the tower at CBS. He has learned a thing or two through the years.

It’s interesting to see how Faldo breaks down the swing and his approach to the game. If only it was that easy.

Here’s my Q/A with Faldo:

If there’s one thing you emphasize over and over, it is the knees in the swing. Why?

If you stand correct at address and go to impact, you see how little the knees move. But boy, do people make it difficult. Their right knee might move a foot.

When I do clinics, I ask, ‘do your buddies say your head is moving in the backswing?’ They all put their hands up. I demonstrate the knees going over all the place. What happens to the head? It bobs up and down. If your knees move the right way, it’s quite amazing how everything works more efficiently.

Do golfers make the game too complicated?

When I walk the range, what are the pros working on? 7 of 10 will say grip, set-up, posture, alignment. They’re trying to get it to all click in place.

It all goes back to the building blocks. It’s like a building. If the brick are crooked, good luck. It’s the same thing for golf. You better get good building blocks.

I didn’t want to do a book on 1,001 ways to fix your swing. I’m trying to condense your thoughts. There are a half-dozen main areas that if you get right, it will make a big difference in your game.

How much has he learned in the booth?

Not a lot. I’m blessed that I picked golf. One of the great things is that you learn something about the game every day. Every round is different.

How has the booth changed your perspective?

You see the great players hit great shots. Yet they’ll take a bogey with a wedge in their hands. You think, ‘I’m the only person that’s ever done that.’ You beat yourself up playing this game.

When you sit in the tower, you see mistakes happen all the time to the great players. Then it’s about the guy who can recover from that and bounce back the best. You see the scramblers. You understand how everyone makes a score differently.

 

 

 

 

In wake of ESPN’s decision, does this mean nobody should tweet about sports?

Posted on by

I’m not trying to be insensitive here. This is an unspeakable tragedy.

It hits especially close to home for ESPN since it occurred only 30 minutes away from its headquarters in Bristol. It is understandable that executives would ask staffers not to tweet until noon Sunday, per a report in Deadspin.

But I do have a question:

Does this mean none of us should tweet about sports until noon Sunday?

Despite our collective mourning, sports will go on today. Sports news will be made. ESPN has a full slate of games and SportsCenters on tap today.

ESPN.com is loaded with stories and highlight packages. The same holds true for the other networks and sports sites.

As far as I can tell, it looks like a normal Saturday.

Why then draw the line at Twitter?

Sorry, if that seems insensitive, but I just felt the question should be asked.

Sports always has served as a diversion. People will be turning to games on ESPN and elsewhere today to escape from the heart-breaking realities on CNN. They also will be looking at their Twitter feeds for the latest sports news. And other reporters and outlets are tweeting about sports.

Bottom line: Everyone has to do what they think is best for them.

Bottom line II: Keep those families in your prayers.

 

 

 

 

Second screen: Chicago Tribune goes video for analysis during Bears games

Posted on by

The Chicago Tribune is experimenting with a “second screen” for Bears games.

The term, “second screen,” is thrown around quite a bit these days. It refers to the idea that while viewers watch a game on television, their first screen, they also are surfing the net on their computers–hence, the second screen.

Usually, the concept focuses on the networks that are airing the games. But anything goes in the brave new media world, and that has the Tribune going the video route during Bears games.

For Sunday’s Bears-Green Bay match-up, the Tribune will feature live video analysis from experts on its site just prior to kickoff, at halftime, and immediately after the game when they will take questions from fans.

“A lot of people are watching games while also checking out Twitter, Facebook, looking at their fantasy stats,” said Mike Kellams, the Tribune’s associate managing editor for sports. “They’ve got the game on TV and something else. We want to be that something else.”

This will be the third Bears game for the Tribune’s second screen. In the previous two games, Kellams’ crew came on during commercials with analysis. The Tribune is going with a different format this week “to see what works best,” Kellams said.

“We’re still experimenting,” Kellams said.

The entire experiment is yet another example of sports sections trying to reinvent themselves on their web sites. Kellams wasn’t aware of any other newspaper doing the same thing.

“We wanted to think out of the box and see what happens,” Kellams said.

Michelle Beadle will launch new NBC Sports Network show in February

Posted on by

For the second time, I was the opening act for Michelle Beadle in the latest Sports Media Weekly podcast with Keith Thibault and Ken Fang. One of us broke some news, and it wasn’t me. Not that anyone would care if I had any news.

Beadle disclosed in the podcast that she will debut a new show called The Crossover on NBC Sports Network during Super Bowl week in New Orleans. She said the show will run 30 minutes Monday through Friday in a late afternoon time slot.

Much like SportsNation, where she made a name for herself on ESPN, the new program will feature a mix of sports and pop culture, she said.

“Basically what I did before again,” Beadle said. “I love sports and pop culture. I never wanted to do only one. They’re giving me a chance to do a show that I’ve envisioned.”

Part of the plan for Beadle when she left ESPN for NBC was build a show around her. NBC Sports Network needs some big-name personalities to serve as anchors of the network. Obviously, it hopes Beadle will work well in that role.

Beadle said she wasn’t at liberty to disclose the name of the co-host. In fact, NBC likely wasn’t thrilled she went public about the show before the official announcement.

“I’m probably going to get in trouble,” she said.

 

 

 

 

 

Update: Rob Parker suspended: His stupid statement sign of larger problem at ESPN and elsewhere

Posted on by

Update: ESPN spokesman Josh Krulewitz just posted this tweet: “Following yesterday’s comments, Rob Parker has been suspended until further notice.  We are conducting a full review.”

*******

These kinds of stories make me sad. I’d rather be writing about something else than somebody making stupid statements on television. I call it chasing fires. Some people love it. I don’t.

Yet you can’t ignore what Rob Parker said yesterday on First Take. And it appears as if he is about to incur ESPN’s wrath.

In case you missed it, Parker went off about Robert Griffin III.  “Is he a brother, or is he a cornball brother?” Parker said.

Parker went on: “I’ve talked to some people in Washington, D.C. Some people in [Griffin’s] press conferences. Some people I’ve known for a long time. My question, which is just a straight, honest question, is … is he a ‘brother,’ or is he a cornball ‘brother?’ He’s not really … he’s black, but he’s not really down with the cause. He’s not one of us. He’s kind of black, but he’s not really like the guy you’d want to hang out with. I just want to find out about him. I don’t know, because I keep hearing these things. He has a white fiancé, people talking about that he’s a Republican … there’s no information at all. I’m just trying to dig deeper into why he has an issue. Tiger Woods was like, ‘I have black skin, but don’t call me black.’ People wondered about Tiger Woods early on — about him.”

Stephen A. Smith, in one of the smartest things he said on the show, cut off the discussion: “I’m uncomfortable with where we just went.  RGIII, the ethnicity, the color of his fiance is none of our business, it’s irrelevant, he can live his life any way he chooses… I don’t judge someone’s blackness based on those types of things.”

Apparently, Parker’s views on Griffin didn’t go over well in the corporate offices at Bristol. An ESPN spokesman said the comments “”were inappropriate and we are evaluating our next steps.”

So why does something like this happen? I think it is due in part to the environment that’s been created at ESPN and elsewhere with these debate shows. It’s all about getting noticed. Get your name out there on Twitter. Get people talking about you. Get people wanting to tune in to hear what you say next.

In order to do that, you have to be controversial, outrageous. At times, you have to be really out there. Really, really out there.

It’s cause people to cross the line and then some. They don’t think and consider the impact of their statements, especially when it is about a volatile subject like race. Then the trouble begins.

Rob Parker got himself noticed with his comments about RGIII. His clip, posted by Awful Announcing, has received nearly 300,000 pageviews on YouTube as of this morning. However, I can’t imagine he is enjoying this kind of attention.