ESPN The Magazine Body Issue: A lot (too much) of Rob Gronkowski

Posted on by

Not sure what to say, but that’s a tad much of Rob Gronkowski for me. Again, it’s probably a matter of perspective if you know what I mean.

ESPN The Magazine’s body issue comes out Friday. The editors decided to go with six covers that will be randomly distributed. However, clearly the one featuring the New England Patriots tight end will get the most attention. Easy to see why the porn stars love him.

The other covers feature Jose Bautista, Tyson Chandler, Daniela Hantuchova, Candace Parker and Ronda Rousey. Here’s the link with the photos.

Is it a bit over the top (be careful for bad puns)? Sure, but it’s all about selling magazines. Gimmicks sell. While it isn’t Sports Illustrated’s swimsuit issue on the hype meter, the Body Issue does liven up a sleepy July afternoon.

Here’s a Q/A with deputy editor Neely Lohmann that ran on ESPN’s Front Row:

This is your first Body Issue as the top editor. How does this assignment differ from other issues you’ve been responsible for?

Well, I’m pretty sure no other issue involves asking athletes to get naked! But it’s a process that’s taken very seriously by everyone involved. Each athlete has different reasons for wanting to be in the issue — different reservations, different personal feelings about doing it. The whole process — from the initial ask, to all the conversations with them about what they want out of the experience, to finally being with them on the set when they see the images on the monitor and their eyes light up — it’s a very personal journey for the athletes that’s so rewarding to be a part of.

How did you decide on who would be the six cover subjects, and why are there six?

We had an overwhelming number of truly amazing photographs to choose from this year, which is why there are six covers. We wanted to have as many as we could get because whittling the photographs down to the best of the best isn’t easy. When making the final call, we paid attention to diversity — we like to have a good mix of men and women, a good mix of different body types represented, different sports, etc. (NOTE: Distribution of covers is completely random.)

How is a cover shoot different from shoots for a layout? They really aren’t that different. In fact, we often shoot athletes without having any preconceived notions about whether or not they will end up on the cover. We are always in pursuit of the most compelling, most unique photographs we can get. But when we see an image that blows us away, something that everyone really responds to, we know it’s going to be seriously considered for a cover spot—no matter who the athlete is.

How bold and/or shy are the subjects?

We’ve seen it all. You really never know what to expect. Some athletes who you might expect to be shy are totally unencumbered on set — their robe is no where in sight. Others who don’t have any reservations sometimes end up with a last-minute case of nerves. But in all cases, once the athlete spends time with the photographer and sees the images on the monitor, they get excited about what they see and they start to have a lot of fun with it.

How many images were shot for the issue, and how did you whittle it down to the final number of shots used in the final?

I can’t begin to imagine how many images we shot for this issue — thousands, certainly. And whittling down those images to our favorites is both tremendously fun and incredibly difficult. But the photographers do the first edit; they send us the ones they are most happy with. From that group, I work closely with the photo editors, Karen Frank and Nancy Weisman, creative director, John Korpics, and Editor-in-Chief, Chad Millman, to select the ones we feel best represent the athlete. But even then, we have some tough calls. That’s why we include exclusive extras in our online photo gallery. You can view them and behind-the-scenes video with some of the Body athletes at www.espn.com/bodyissue (LIVE at Noon ET)

 

Despite its flaws, glad All-Star Game still means something; social network experiment

Posted on by

The big game is tonight, and like I have since 1967, I will be watching.

It’s still the only All-Star Game that is relevant in sports. There’s something special about seeing the players wearing their team’s uniforms. It truly is unique.

Yes, you can argue about the winning league getting home field advantage in the World Series. There are incredible flaws in the entire concept. I mean, with so much on the line, you should have your best players in for the entire game.

Still, I like the fact the outcome of the game matters. It does elevate the tension in the stadium.

Obviously, Fox Sports also likes it. Here’s Joe Buck:

I mean I have answered more ‘this time it counts’ questions maybe more than anybody except the commissioner. I have said from the beginning that we have noticed when we go down to talk to managers, talk to players, that it has had an impact on way these guys manage games. They are looking for specific matchups as opposed to just trying to get everybody in the game, which they did prior to the change. I think it has brought a competitive fire back to this game that for awhile was lacking. And this isn’t the same game that was played in ’60s. You would have guys who would do there one at-bat and bolt out of the park. It’s not happening anymore. I think it has been a great change for this game which is by far the best of all the all-star games. Not even close.

******

I have to admit it sounded a bit funny to hear Bud Selig talk about Twitter during a conference call last week. I definitely wanted to be in the room when the concept was explained to the 77-year old commissioner.

Social media is going to be a big part of Tuesday’s game. Once a player leaves the game, he will be able to tweet his views to the masses.

Said Selig:

It’s after players are removed from the game. It’s another contact to our fans which is important to me. It’s a reason this sport is growing as much as it is. One thing I’ve learned in this job is never to say never. I like what we’re doing in the All-Star Game and I think this will contribute to our younger fans having the kind of contact they want to have with players. I’m very comfortable with where we are now.

Added Fox Sports vice-chairman Ed Goren:

This is really an exciting step for the All-Star Game. It’s being handled properly by baseball. The player is out of the game and now here is an opportunity to reach out, through social media, to baseball fans. This is a fun experiment.

It could be fun. However, I hope it doesn’t clog up the broadcast.

The hard part won’t be getting players to tweet. It’ll be getting them to tweet something that’s interesting.

 

 

 

Powerful column about Paterno: Visiting Sandusky’s home; adjusting view on legendary coach

Posted on by

This column by David Jones of the Harrisburg Patriot-News ran on July 1. Thanks to a tweet from SportsbyBrooks, I saw it the other day.

This is a powerful and important column that deserves wide-spread attention. Jones writes about his reaction to the CNN report of an email that could implicate Joe Paterno in failing to stop Jerry Sandusky from his unthinkable crimes.

In covering the man and his football program for 21 seasons, the single most dominant thread is this: his ambition and drive. He would allow nothing and no one to disparage the institution he had built without some form of retribution. And he had complete power over his domain.
He could be a vindictive man. At times, he was pointlessly petty and nasty.
Just like the rest of us. Except that in the case of a man who had accumulated such power, the consequences of his actions could take on much greater impact.

Jones writes of hearing about possible allegations involving Sandusky in Aug. 2011. Eventually, he went to Sandusky’s home to try to track down the coach.

I drove to State College on Sept. 16, knocked on his door in a rainstorm and was met by his wife, Dottie.
I asked if Jerry was home. No, said Dottie cordially, he wasn’t. I fished out a business card and handed it to her and said he might remember me as a reporter from when he was a coach more than a decade before and please would she have him call me. She pleasantly said she would.
And then, I mentioned police. Had police questioned him about anything lately? The question was that benign. I wanted to test her reaction.
It was not quizzical. Not: “Police? What do you mean, police?”
Instead, it was immediate and forceful. Dottie Sandusky narrowed her eyes and said to me: “If you have any other questions, you can ask the people at The Second Mile. And I do not appreciate you coming to my house.” She slammed the door in my face.

Then I knew. What I had heard about Sandusky had been heard by others. Police were very likely involved, even if no charges had been filed. And that lent credence to everything else I had been told.

Jones concludes his column, cautioning people to expect to hear the worse about Paterno in an upcoming Penn State investigation. He writes:

We don’t know the totality of what the Freeh investigation will uncover. I would just ask those who cannot get their minds around the concept of Joe Paterno acting in self-interest — acting to preserve his institution rather than individuals — to prepare themselves to have their bedtime story disrupted. You don’t get to be as powerful as this man was by sitting idly by and allowing others to call shots.
Such power breeds fame, and vice versa. Soon, we bestow the mantle of greatness on men who do not warrant it, as often as we ignore the anonymously noble, those truly worthy of our praise.
How many times do we instill intrinsic goodness in those we don’t even know? Have the Roman Catholic priest scandals in Boston and Philadelphia taught us nothing?
It does not have to be a lesson of bitter disillusionment, only one of caution. Trust those few you personally know.
The vast majority of you have never known these men at Penn State. You only knew of their station atop your chosen club buttressed by the trappings of their fame.
The most famous of them all was the head football coach. His fame did not make him a saint.

The column elicited 262 responses on his site. Reaction was split. Here are some samples.

Critical thinkers?….What’s there to think?…Joe Pa lied and covered things up……But you are right about one thing….The brain washed penn state fans will never believe it.

******

We do agree that he could have done more. We choose to support him because he has done great things for hundreds of thousands of people. He has been an inspiration in so many other areas. He made a big mistake. We all do from time to time. This is not black and white. He is not a bad person based on one mistake. Even if it was a huge one

******

Sorry, Joe Paterno was one of the greatest men that Penn State ever had working for it, if not THE greatest.  It was a sad day when he was fired, and the board over reacted.  People can put him down all they want, but he was a very special person to anybody who ever went to Penn State.  He turned boys into men on that team, and was an inspirational figure for the entire university and community.  He will be missed greatly, and nobody could fill the gap that was created by the board when he was fired.

He reported this incident to not one, but two different people at the university.  One of these people was the HEAD of campus police at the time.  So essentially he DID report this to the police, so many people fail to grasp this.  It was the university, Spanier, the state attorney generals office at the time, and the Centre county DA at the time, that dropped the ball.  Not Joe Paterno.  Please read up on the entire situation before throwing guilt around, there is a reason he was cleared of any legal wrong doing from the beginning of this whole thing.

******

He may have turned boys into men “on that team” but he apparently failed some even younger boys who needed his help like none of the football players ever needed his help.

 

McCarver on working with Kiner, Buck and Buck, and possible retirement; I’ll know when had enough

Posted on by

Part 2:

It was one of the five nice days we get in Chicago: A cloudless sky with just enough of a breeze to knock the humidity out of the air.

Over breakfast on that June day, I had spent more than an hour talking to Tim McCarver. It was after 10, and I could tell he was getting antsy.

“You have to get out to the park, right?” said McCarver, who was going to be on the call for the Cubs-Boston game Wrigley Field the following night.

“Yes. I want to get some information of (Cubs pitcher) Jeff Samardzija,” he said.

I asked him: Do you still like the work?

“Not only do I like it, I think it is as important as it was 30 years ago,” McCarver said. “Yes, absolutely. You can tell when someone isn’t informed.”

Therein lies the secret of lasting 32 years in broadcasting, with the last 27 or so as baseball’s leading analyst. It all culminates next week when McCarver will receive the Ford Frick Award for excellence in broadcasting at the Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown.

Yesterday, in part 1 of my interview, I talked to McCarver about his broadcast style and how he viewed his role. Today, he reflects back on the start of his career, his broadcast partners, and at age 70, how much longer he wants to work.

Do you remember your first game?

In 1980, my first year (as a broadcaster with the Phillies) I did an inning in spring training. I went to Richie Ashburn for some some advice. He said, ‘You know, the best advice I can give you is, ‘If you don’t have anything to say, don’t say it.’

I said, ‘Is that all you have for me?’

Richie said, ‘Come to think of it, yeah.’

That’s how I got started in broadcasting.

How did you hook up with the Mets?

In ’82, the Mets called me. They wanted me to work with Ralph Kiner. I was interested, but my kids were in school and we didn’t want to move. The Mets called again after the ’82 season. By that time, (Phillies exec) Bill Giles said, ‘We’ll keep you, but we really don’t need you.’

I said, ‘I get it.’ It was time to make the move to New York.

You were with the Mets for 16 years. What was it like to work with Ralph Kiner?

Ralph and I clicked right away. Neither one of us had a lot of play-by-play experience. With our styles, it ended with me doing the bulk of the play-by-play.

The Mets teams were extraordinary. The Mets owned New York. The Yankees weren’t even on the radar until 1995. We had a lot of fun.

Ralph’s non-sequiturs were part of his charm. Gary Cohen always said, ‘He’s so comfortable in his own skin.’ That’s as accurately as you can put it.

He used to call me Jim McCarthy. One time, he said, ‘Now I turn over the play-by-play to my good friend, Ken MacArthur.’ The Mets were getting blown out that night.

I said, ‘Earlier in the evening, you referred to me as Ken MacArthur. ‘You must have been thinking of Gen. Douglas MacArthur. One of his lines was, ‘Chance favors a prepared man.’ The Mets obviously weren’t prepared tonight.’

Without missing a beat, Ralph said, ‘MacArthur also said, ‘I shall return, and so will we after this break.’ It was brilliant.

In 1985, you did your first World Series for ABC. What do you remember from that experience?

We worked the second game of the World Series in 1985. Al Michaels said to me, ‘Is it tougher to play in a World Series than announce in one?’

I said, ‘Are you kidding? Announcing is tougher. You can’t do anything about the outcome. When you’re playing, you can do something about the outcome.’

I felt it was tougher back then, and you know what, I still feel that way today.

You’ve said Michaels had a big influence on you. How so?

He taught me more about the business than any announcer I ever worked with.

I learned television from Al. I learned how to take my time, to take a step back. I learned appropriateness. If you listen to Al, his appropriateness with his remarks is incredible.

What was it like to work with Jack Buck?

He was the voice of a franchise for 48 years. Think about that. His presence was something else. Reggie Jackson used to say (Yankee Stadium public address announcer Bob Sheppard) was ‘The voice of God.’ Believe me, I’ve worked with a few voices of God in baseball, and Jack was one of them.

Then a few later, you work with his son Joe. How would you describe your relationship with him?

I knew from our first telecast Joe and I would hit it off. It’s amazing how close you become when you’re under the pressure of calling a World Series or an All-Star game. Joe found that out later.

When Kirby Puckett hit the homer (to win Game 6 of the 1991 World Series), Jack said, ‘We’ll see you tomorrow night.’ Then to be with his son 20 years later, and David Freese hits a homer in Game 6 and Joe said, ‘We’ll see you tomorrow night.”…To sit next to father and son (and hear those lines). You talk about serendipitous. Wow.

How much longer do you want to work?

I don’t have an answer to that. My contract runs through next year. I don’t know. Like anyone else, your health is paramount. I hope I’m clear enough to say, ‘I’ve had enough. This is it.’ I’m good at that. I’ll know.

You’ve been in baseball since breaking into the big leagues in 1959. After all these years, how do you view yourself: As a player or a broadcaster?

I severed that relationship (of being a player) a long time ago, the minute I entered the booth. I didn’t intentionally do it, but I did it. I realized it was a different job. I had to take on a different intensity.

I’ve been extremely lucky. I don’t take any of this for granted.

How much has the game changed?

It’s changed a bit. The players make a lot more money. But the player really hasn’t changed. He still wants to get a hit and win the game. It’s still the same.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Columnists shuffle: Harvey says hello in Houston; Knapp says good-bye in SF

Posted on by

Randy Harvey wrote his first piece as the new columnist for the Houston Chronicle. The Texas native is coming back to his roots.

He writes:

There’s no such thing as a former Texan.

I  understand the culture, which not everyone does. While at the Los  Angeles Times, I was working last fall on a business deal involving  sports coverage with a kind, smart man from Switzerland. Over lunch one  day, we began talking about college football, which means about as much  to the Swiss as schwingen does to us.

I quickly realized  Jean-Francois had never heard of the Sooners and Longhorns. I explained  the rivalry to him as best I could as he made mental notes. A couple of  days later, he ran into my office excitedly, pointed to the television  and shouted something about the Sooners and Longhorns.

As he stood  by proudly, I turned on the television to find a game between Texas  A&M and Oklahoma State. One small step for mankind.

Meanwhile, Gwen Knapp is leaving the San Francisco Chronicle. She is joining the new Sports on Earth site.

Knapp writes:

The 49ers‘ chances of winning the next Super Bowl have just improved. They claimed their last Lombardi Trophy only months before I arrived to write a sports column in July 1995. Now, on nearly the same date 17 years after I appeared in a San Francisco newspaper, I am going to work for a website called Sports on Earth, due to launch in seven weeks.

The past 17 years saw the Raiders‘ return to Oakland; Steve Mariucci‘s Midwestern goofiness; a merger of The Chronicle and old Examiner; “Moneyball”; Mike Singletary; Tim Lincecum; trips to court with Barry Bonds and Bill Romanowski; trips to the Final Four with Jamila Wideman, Candice Wiggins, Jayne Appeland Nneka Ogwumike; a reefer-scented World Series parade; and the 49ers’ renaissance – but not a Super Bowl celebration, which had become as constant as fog on the Fourth of July in the years before my arrival.

I’m not taking responsibility, mind you. I didn’t introduce Eddie DeBartolo Jr. to the governor of Louisiana, or hire Terry Donahue. But I believe in jinxes just enough to suggest that the mayor’s office stock up on confetti for February.

 

A Wimbledon without Bud Collins; ratings surge on ESPN

Posted on by

Wimbledon’s shift to ESPN sparked a big jump in the ratings. Unfortunately, one of those TV viewers was Bud Collins.

For the first time in 45 years, the colorful (emphasis on coloful as you can see) tennis analyst/writer missed the big tournament. Jason Gay of the Wall Street Journal did a piece on Collins, 83, sitting with him at home while he watched the men’s final on TV. It included this passage:

Last fall, during the U.S. Open, Collins ruptured the quad tendon in his left leg in a fall in his New York hotel room. Surgeries followed, nine in total, to repair the damage and complications and what Collins described as “a lot of unsavory things.” He missed the Australian Open and the French, but not attending Wimbledon was the hardest.

He was feeling better, but he wasn’t in England.

“I really don’t allow myself to miss it,” Collins said.

“Be honest,” Anita said.

Collins shrugged in his chair. “Of course I miss it.”

Collins said he intends to be at Wimbledon in 2013. Let’s hope so. He’s an all-world nice guy.

*******

Nearly everything broke the right way for ESPN. Fans loved the live matches. ESPN then got some dream scenarios with Serena Williams winning the women’s final and the drama of Brit Andy Murray trying to make history against Roger Federer Sunday.

ESPN earned a 3.1 overnight rating for the finals, up 48% from a 2.1 last year on NBC for Novak Djokovic’ win over Rafael Nadal.

 

 

Poytner on social media issues at ESPN: fails to examines controversies

Posted on by

The never-ending debate over Twitter is the latest issue examined by the Poynter Review Project for ESPN. In a long piece, including an overly long explanation of Twitter and social media (most of us already get the concept), writer Jason Fry talks to various ESPN folks about Twitter.

Interestingly, he didn’t quote Vince Doria, ESPN’s senior vice-president for news, who called Twitter “a headache” and voiced strong concerns over it compromising journalistic standards in an interview with me.

Also, Fry didn’t detail the latest ESPN controversy over Twitter: NBA reporter Chris Broussard’s handling of Deron Williams and his re-signing with Brooklyn and other stories last week. I think if you’re going to do an exhaustive review of the subject, you need to touch on what’s currently making news.

In fact, I thought the piece barely scratched the surface on what has been written regarding ESPN and Twitter on many other outlets.

At the end of the piece, Fry did question ESPN’s internal policies regarding Twitter. He writes:

We found the biggest sticking point for reporters and analysts is also a source of considerable confusion. ESPN’s latest social-networking policy forbids breaking “sourced or proprietary news” on Twitter, saying that such information “must be vetted by the TV or Digital news desks. Once reported on an ESPN platform, that news can (and should) be distributed on Twitter and other social sites.”
Some reporters we spoke to repeatedly cited that policy and expressed frustration with it, bemoaning busy times when a news item gets stuck behind other things the desk has to review, allowing competitors to tweet the news first.

However, here’s why ESPN needs to be careful about tweeting news. There’s a passage on Adam Schefter on holding off on a tweet about Tim Tebow getting traded to Jacksonville:

Take March’s Tim Tebow trade, Schefter said. The Denver Broncos agreed to trade the quarterback to the New York Jets, but when the deal apparently fell apart, they tried to work out a trade to the Jacksonville Jaguars instead, only to reverse course and return to the Jets. At one point, Schefter recalled, a credible person involved in the deal told him that Tebow was headed to Jacksonville. Rather than tweet that, Schefter waited to check in with other people — and another credible source told him to hold off.
“The story had changed so much that day, I thought it was really important for me to double- and triple-check it,” he said. “I could have put on Twitter that Tim Tebow was being traded to Jacksonville. Had I done that, I would have been remembered as the guy who got the Tim Tebow story wrong.”

As Doria said in my interview, being right still is what it’s all about.

 

Q/A with Tim McCarver: On being candid, his critics, and going into the Hall

Posted on by

First of two parts:

Tim McCarver gave me my one and likely only mention during a national telecast of a World Series game. He credited me for a line in the Chicago Tribune during the 1987 Minnesota-St. Louis series on ABC.

I wrote that the teflon roof of the ugly Metrodome “looks like your grandmother’s old jello mold.”

“I remember that line,” said McCarver 25 years later when I reminded him of it.

Whether he did or not, it was quite a thrill for a young reporter to get some exposure on national TV.

Fortunately for McCarver, he has had much better material to work with through the years. It’s been quite a run for the former St. Louis and Philadelphia catcher, who decided to give broadcasting a try in 1980.

The pinnacle comes next week when McCarver will be honored in Cooperstown. He is the 2012 recipient of the Ford C. Frick Award presented by The National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum for excellence in baseball broadcasting. McCarver only is the second primary television analyst to win the Frick Award, joining Tony Kubek, who received the honor in 2009.

The honor is long overdue. His numbers during a 32-year broadcast career are almost Gretzky-like. Tuesday, he will work his 21st All-Star Game. The next closest are Joe Buck and Curt Gowdy with 14. In October, he will be on the call for his 23rd World Series.

McCarver had a notable 16-year stint working games for the Mets. He has the distinction of being the only MLB analyst to have worked for all four major broadcast networks. Since 1996, he and Joe Buck have been a team at Fox.

Now 70, McCarver remains trim and enthusiastic about his job. Yet with one more year remaining on his contract, he knows he might have a decision to make about his broadcast future after the 2013 season.

I met with McCarver on a Friday morning while he was in town to call a Cubs-Boston game at Wrigley Field. Here’s the first part of our Q/A.

How do you feel about getting this award?

If somebody told me back in 1980 that I would have a 32-year career, and that I’d be receiving this honor, I’d say no way. For three years, I couldn’t even break into the Phillies broadcast booth. I was just hoping to make it, much less be mentioned as a Ford Frick winner. Believe me, when I started out, this award wasn’t even close to being on the radar.

How do you think you’ll feel being up on the stage in Cooperstown?

I’ve only been to Cooperstown once when Steve Carlton was inducted. I suppose it’s a very personal summation of your professional life. It makes me proud of what I’ve accomplished. That’s what makes this award so fulfilling.

How have you viewed your role as an analyst?

I had no training to be a broadcaster. My training came from being behind the plate. When you come to think about it, that’s a good way to be trained.

You see the choreography of the game from behind the plate. Without realizing it, you’re storing up all this information.

You’re looking at all the positions on the field. You see what the shortstop is doing. You see the second baseman cheating in for a doubleplay. So it all gives you an advantage.

Your timing was good. The baseball broadcast in the 80s evolved into putting more emphasis on analysis.

My job was different than the great voices of the game. My job was to explain the how and why. Whenever I’ve gotten into trouble, it’s because I’ve gotten away from explaining the how and why.

People watching on TV can see how something happened during a game. Fortunately, whether they realized it or not, they wanted to know the how and why it happened. I was in a position to explain the game as I saw it, and I saw it differently than a lot of people.

Early on, you had a reputation for being extremely candid, perhaps more so than what was the norm back then. How did players react to you?

Remember, I had played with a lot of the guys. One night, I did a Phillies game and Mike Schmidt hit a ball off the top of the wall. He always hustled, but he watched the ball and got a double. I said, ‘Schmidt should be on third base.’ Then I said, ‘Often, hitters are like artists. They step back and admire their work. They don’t run as hard. It’s understandable why he’s on second, but he really should be on third.’

Mike and I are close friends. The next day, he was acting cool towards me. Common sense says you should deal with it right away. I said, ‘Schmidty, is everything OK?’ He said, ‘No, it’s not. Don’t ever on the air say I didn’t hustle.’ That’s what his father told him I said.

I said, ‘I didn’t say that.’ I explained to him what I said and we were fine.

In New York, I guess I got this reputation (for being overly candid). Listen, I played with a lot of guys who were very direct and honest. Bob Gibson, Bill White, Curt Flood. They said what they felt. I learned it from them. I always approached playing the game in a candid way. I guess it carried over into broadcasting.

Some players may be upset with me from time to time, but overall, nobody can question my fairness. I have no regrets in the way I approached things back then and the way I approach things today.

You have your own critics. Some people say you talk too much and overanalyze.

Did I talk too much (when he first started)? Absolutely. I talked too much because of my enthusiasm for the game. That was applicable back in 1985, but then it followed me into the 90s. (By then), it wasn’t true. I learned. Of course, I did. You’re always trying to improve yourself. You’re talking about your business. You’re talking about the way you do your job.

How do you feel about the critics?

Whenever you hear the term human nature, it’s always for something negative. Nobody will ever say, ‘He’s a great guy, but that’s human nature.’ What is it about we humans that we tend to use that term negatively?

I try not to get caught up in it. I don’t read the blogs. I’ve got a job to do. I don’t pay attention to the negative stuff.

Tuesday: McCarver reflects on his broadcast partners and talks about how much longer he wants to work.

 

 

 

 

 

Sunday book shelf: Perfect timing for R.A. Dickey book

Posted on by

R.A. Dickey’s new book coincides with him having a huge season. Think he might sell a few more copies after Tuesday’s All-Star game?

This isn’t a conventional autobiography of a baseball player. There were many bumps in the road for Dickey, to say the least.

It all makes for compelling reading. The Sports Book Review Center gave it 5 stars.

From the review:

Therapy and faith play a big part in the story. Dickey spent plenty of time talking with a Nashville therapist, and one of the lessons was to get Dickey’s demons more out in the open with honesty. This book, he writes, is part of that process. As for faith, everyone will have a personal reaction to the role it played in Dickey’s life. But if it helped him get through his struggles, good for him.
There aren’t many laughs in “Wherever I Wind Up,” but the pages go by pretty quickly considering the subject matter. It wouldn’t be surprising to see more books in Dickey’s future; a journal of a season probably would be quite revealing. In the meantime, any reader will come away impressed by Dickey’s resilience, and will be rooting for him by the time the last few works are reached.

Here’s the write-up on Amazon.

 The Glass Castle meets Ball Four as Mets knuckleballer R.A. Dickey weaves searing honesty and baseball insight in this memoir about his unlikely journey to the big leagues.

An English Lit major at the University of Tennessee, Dickey is as articulate and thoughtful as any professional athlete in any sport-and proves it page after page, as he provides fresh and honest insight into baseball and a career unlike any other. Fourteen years ago, Dickey was a heralded No. 1 draft choice of the Texas Rangers, only to have an $810,000 signing bonus, and his lifelong dream, ripped away by an X- ray-and the discovery that he did not have an ulna collateral ligament in his right elbow.

Five years ago, he gave up a record six home runs in three innings to the Detroit Tigers-and was effectively consigned to the baseball scrap heap.

Sustained by his profound Christian faith, the love of his wife and children, and a relentless quest for self-awareness and authenticity, the immensely likable Dickey details his transformation from a reckless, risk-taking loner to a grounded, life- affirming big leaguer. He emerged as one of the premier pitchers in the National League in 2010-and the knuckleballing embodiment of the wonders that perseverance and human wisdom can produce. Dickey views his story as one of redemption. Readers will come to see it as something more-a uniquely American story of beating back demons, listening to your heart, and overcoming extraordinary odds.

 

Sunday Funnies: Norm Macdonald kills on the ESPYs; Watch the athletes squirm

Posted on by

Rob Riggle will host the ESPYs Wednesday. He will have to go a long way to top Norm Macdonald’s performance in 1998.

He had everyone squirming. A Jerry Jones joke: “He said, ‘We have to get back to what made us a championship team: Strippers and crack.'”

On Charles Woodson becoming the first defensive player to win the Heisman Trophy: “That’s something they never can take away from you…Unless you kill your wife and a waiter. In which case, all bets are off.

Enjoy.