Author Archives: admin

Q/A with Jay Mariotti: On two years out of spotlight; his side of what happened on that night and aftermath; and his next step

Posted on by

I’m going to be out for a couple of weeks. However, I’m leaving behind some gifts for the holidays: The best of my Q/As. I’ll feature a new one each day through Jan. 2. Please check in. Happy Holidays to all.

*******

Posted on Oct. 29

The email in my inbox had a familiar name: Jay Mariotti.

Earlier that day a couple weeks ago, I had written a post about Mariotti. I wondered why he had taken two years off and if anybody would hire him again?

The email read: “You’re welcome to ask me questions. Don’t have to guess when I can give you context.”

Mariotti has a point. If I am going to comment and speculate about him, I should allow him to give his side. That’s the way I operate.

I followed up, asking if he was up for doing a Q/A. Prior to sending out questions, I did read his book on Amazon, The System: A Manual on Surviving Liars, Loons, Law, Life. Much of the book is Mariotti’s account of a domestic violence incident with a woman he was dating in 2010. He gives a condensed version in this Q/A.

Mariotti has been mostly on the sidelines ever since. However, he says he is ready to jump back in, and that there are opportunities out there for him. And if you think Mariotti has mellowed, well, guess again.

So here is “context” from Mariotti.

Why have you been off for two years? Obviously, you know the speculation out there. People don’t believe it is by choice.

Mariotti: “People” need to stop guessing when they really have no clue about me and what’s happening in my life. How irresponsible is that? They don’t realize what a great life I have here in Los Angeles. As I write this, I’m sitting under a blue sky by the pool in Santa Monica, with the ocean a few yards away. I read, write, ride my bike and work out here every day. Not really missing two bogus Sun-Times deadlines in Green Bay, eating bratwurst at halftime and getting back to Chicago at 4 a.m. That was a kamikaze mission for a failing newspaper — this is the good life.

When I’ve written more than 6,000 columns, done 1,800 TV shows on ESPN and 1,000 radio shows, covered 14 Olympics and 24 Super Bowls and dozens of golf majors and seen the world – and made a very comfortable living doing so — what possibly is wrong with voluntarily taking some time off in a beautiful place? I’m fortunate to not have to work, and I’ve taken advantage and cleared my head with two wonderful years away from the media business. I’ve had a rewarding and successful career, and not unlike some people in sports and Hollywood, I’m chilling until the opportunities are just right. I poured about 50 years of hard work into two decades. I’m preparing wisely for my next two decades in media.

Taking this break HAS been my choice, and whatever the speculation is, I can’t say I care when my two daughters are healthy and well and I don’t have to work for a corrupt Chicago newspaper as I did for 17 years. I’ve never been in better physical shape, and I’ll be back in sports media when the timing is right.

And just because I haven’t worked in sports media doesn’t mean I haven’t worked. I’m thick into a documentary project, for instance, and being in L.A. has opened new avenues to creativity. I’ve spoken to virtually all the big players in national sports media, including some the last few weeks. Right now, I’m mulling over three possibilities — all terrific jobs. If they happen, great. If not, Mumford & Sons are coming to the Hollywood Bowl next week. I would pay to see Alvin and the Chipmunks at the Hollywood Bowl — not exactly Tinley Park, you know?

Why did you decide to do the ChicagoSide columns? What was the reaction?

Jon Eig, the editor, is a best-selling author who wants to do a smart, responsible sports site. I like smart, responsible sports sites because there are too many bad, amateur-hour sites that are sludging up the business like rat feces. Jon asked me to do pieces when the urge strikes. He said the reaction has been great and the site traffic off the charts. I suggested a piece on the White Sox when they were in first place so I could show people I’m not the anti-Christ of the South Side.

What happened? The Sox choked out here in Anaheim and faded away. I had to write it. Can’t win with that franchise.

Jon then suggested a piece on why I still love sportswriting. It attracted national attention, and I did an hour on Sirius/XM Radio about it. No doubt I still resonate, and I very much appreciate all the nice words from folks.

Do you want to work again? And in what capacity?

Again, I have been “working” — I’m doing documentary work, wrote a detailed book about my career and court case and have a standing offer to do another book. When I regularly return to the sports media, I assume it will be in a mutimedia capacity — TV, radio, writing. And maybe for more than one employer — I’ve always worked for two or three at a time.

Have there been any previous offers? If so, why did you turn them down?

Yes. I’ve turned down some sports media things. One would have required a cross-country move to do a daily afternoon-drive radio show. Another involved a book that didn’t interest me. Someone wanted me to invest in a restaurant — thought about it, said no. I’d actually like to be a roadie for the Black Keys, but they haven’t asked. I have an agent out here at Octagon, a Chicago native. He talks to people all the time about me.

How have/will your legal issues impact your ability to get hired? For lack of a better word, are you “tainted”?

That’s a fine word. And the answer is no, I’m not tainted. Anyone who knows the real story, as I’ve written in meticulous detail in my Amazon/Kindle book, knows I was victimized by a system that enabled a troubled and vindictive woman to lie about me, abuse me and stalk me in the neighborhood in which I live. I’m pleased that top executives at some major media companies have taken time to read the book — one said it was commendable that I spent many months trying to help the woman, who was broke and had personal problems after being fired from her advertising job and going through a divorce.

Ever see “Fatal Attraction,” the movie? I often felt like Michael Douglas. But that doesn’t matter in post-O.J. Simpson L.A., where even a battered man doesn’t stand a chance when a couple is arguing on a street and a third-party witness calls 911. Prosecutors saw an opportunity for a quick series of headlines in the L.A. Times. They never wanted to hear my side of the story; they just funneled me through a preliminary hearing and left it up to me to take it to a trial, not caring about the invaluable witnesses we brought to the courtroom and my $250,000 in legal expenses, plenty of which made its way to a financially ailing city via outrageous court costs. I could have taken the case to trial, but what a circus that would have been. How do I know a jury wouldn’t profile me unfairly, as an opinionated ESPN commentator of Italian heritage, and assume guilt regardless of the truth? I chose to take a no-contest plea bargain for one low-level misdemeanor, which allowed this person to stalk me in attempts to entrap me and cause me more trouble.

It appeared I was headed back to work for AOL, where I was the lead sports columnist. It was the best job in the business, with unlimited travel and terrific camaraderie among the staffers, unlike the Sun-Times insane asylum. But the company suddenly cut me a large financial settlement while not telling me or anyone else that it was dumping the sports site while doing a lucrative deal with Arianna Huffington. I was not “fired” because of this court case. That hasn’t stopped sleazy bloggers from writing otherwise. Wish these guys would take some journalism classes and stop being reckless gossips.

Since then, the woman and her attorneys have demanded money. I have refused to pay a cent. If my fellow journalists do their due diligence instead of just assuming I’m guilty — or, worse, WANTING to assume I’m guilty — then they’ll see what this was: a desperate money grab. I was put through a hellish ordeal despite never going to jail or pleading guilty. I was exploited as a public figure, lied about by bloggers who don’t corroborate their wild guesses — one said I was going to jail for 12 years — and harassed by lawyers who wanted to make a quick buck in a settlement. I’m proud to say I didn’t budge, but that decision still hurt me because the woman then told more lies to police and prosecutors, who were all ears. All of these details are in my book. Thank God it’s over, and shame on the legal system for allowing the chaos to interrupt my life.

Everyone makes mistakes — and mine was getting involved with a person who clearly was using me. It’s no coincidence that since I wrote the book, everyone has gone away — lawyers, prosecutors, the person herself — while the presiding judge says he is strongly considering an expungement of the entire case so that it’s completely wiped off my otherwise clean record. In more than two decades of marriage, we never had such problems in a loving, peaceful household in suburban Chicago. The LAPD is reckless. The system out here is a money-gouging, plea-bargain machine. And it didn’t help that the Times — owned by the Chicago Tribune, my rival for 17 years — was basically re-running the district attorney’s press releases.

I don’t hit women – never have, never will. As the father of two daughters, I abhor domestic abuse. In truth, I was the one abused in the relationship; one night, she punched me 22 times in the chest, right against the stent inserted during my 2007 heart attack. I’ve discussed all of this on two Fox Sports podcasts and in a Sirius/XM interview. I’ve written a book about it. Now it’s time for everyone to move on and realize that men, too, can be victims of domestic abuse. Sometimes life can be so messed up, you have no choice but to smile, be happy that you and your loved ones are well and just enjoy another beautiful day in paradise.

I read your book and your version of what went down. However, the vast majority of people won’t read your book. All they know is that you were involved in a domestic violence incident. Is there any way for you to undo that perception about you?

The book manuscript was sent to a couple of thousand people — family members, friends and media. While it’s available on Amazon, I didn’t feel it was appropriate to aggressively market it. It’s a for-the-record narrative that corrects the preposterous lies and reckless investigative work. Once I return to the media, I assume more people will read it. I just want it out there to counter all the lies that were reported.

Perception? Only two people know what actually happened. One is a successful sports media personality with two successful, well-adjusted daughters; the other was broke, jobless, abusive and emotionally unbalanced. Shame on anyone else who pretends to know more than they do, which is nothing.

And who says no one is reading the book? The numbers were excellent initially, but when you change the pricing and update content on Amazon, the sales numbers start over. I wasn’t consciously monitoring sales, but one day, an alert popped up and said I’d cracked the top 30 among media authors, ahead of Dan Rather and Chuck Klosterman. My mother must have bought extra copies that day.

You wrote columns about athletes involved in domestic violence issues. Has your perspective changed? I’m coming at it from the angle of the rush to judgement and people not knowing both sides of the story, as you feel was the case in what happened to you.

Uh, remember Tiger Woods and the SUV? I wrote that night that we shouldn’t rush to judgment. Turns out I was too soft initially on his marital infidelities, which shows it’s wrong to categorize me as an impulsive hatchet man. I’ve criticized athletes for many transgressions, and most deserved it. But I sure will think twice — or maybe three or four times — before assuming guilt in the future.

Yes, after my first brush with the law in 50 years of life, I now have a keener understanding of how the truth can be manipulated for financial motives. I’ve met a few bad people in my life, many in the media or wanting a piece of my wealth as a media person. Away from the public eye, it has been nice to meet terrific people.

Could you write a column about domestic violence given what happened to you?

No one is better qualified. I know what it’s like to be physically abused. Remember Chuck Finley, the former major-league pitcher? People in sports laughed when he was abused by Tawny Kitaen, the actress. Well, guess what? It’s 2012. Men are abused, too, by women who know they can manipulate the system. Know how many times I wanted to call the police or a hotel front desk? I couldn’t because I worried about the fallout, even if the headline might say, “ESPN analyst accuses woman of domestic abuse.” Even that would have been frowned upon in Bristol. Such is the pressure.

How do you feel about ESPN?

I’ve been to Bristol twice this year. Starting with John Skipper, they’ve been very supportive. The network has a zero-tolerance behavorial policy because of its powerful brand name and recent issues with personnel, and I made the mistake of not getting out of a toxic relationship when I knew a person could hurt me professionally. I always had been extra-careful about my associations in the public eye, but I had a blind spot in this case. ESPN had every right to be disappointed in me, but our chats have been very positive.

I am concerned about the network and its ability, with so many business deals in place with sports leagues, to let its commentators have editorial freedom. That might be a bigger issue in my situation than you think. People such as Bud Selig and Jerry Reinsdorf weren’t happy I was on a five-day-a-week TV show on the flagship, and if ESPN really did reject Stan Van Gundy because David Stern didn’t want him on the air, I’m frightened for the network’s future. Somehow, I lasted eight years there.

For now, I’d like Adam Schefter and Kirk Herbstreit to stop posing in front of those little football helmets in their home-office studios. They look like little kids. What will we see next, their Hot Wheels collections?

Much has happened in the last two years in our industry. What stands out for you?

A softening of commentary. Rather than writing the tough piece for the readers, too many writers are writing marshmallowy crap for each other. And those with the guts to speak their minds with conviction — Skip Bayless and Stephen A. Smith — are maligned for it. Please. When did the business become so mushy? Are people that scared for their jobs? On the sleazy side of the spectrum are these numbnuts who put $12,000 in a paper bag for alleged pictures of Brett Favre’s penis. I hope that blogger’s parents are proud of him, but I doubt it.

More distressing is the lack of investigative sports journalism. Other than the new USA Today initiative, documentaries and profiles on HBO, the New York Times and a few people at Yahoo, who is busting big stories?

You wonder why I’ve taken my time returning. It’s not as if sports media is a sacred cause. There are some good, genuine, honest people in the business. But there are more sellouts, creeps, liars, cowards and lazy asses.

Do you think you still have your fastball? After being out for two years, do you think you’ll be able to summon the same fire/passion for a topic.

Theo Epstein is a fraud.

Curt Schilling should be in jail.

Too many people are piling on Lance Armstrong and forgetting the great work he has done in the cancer fight, which still outweighs his shame as a juicer.

The Bulls are doing Derrick Rose an injustice by not surrounding him with better talent. Why do the Lakers have four major stars and the Bulls one? When did Chicago stop acting like a major market?

Without Michael Jordan, whom he inherited, Jerry Reinsdorf would be 1-for-62 as a sports owner. That percentage would make him a bum if he owned teams in his native New York.

Until the Bears beat a real good team, slow down on the Super Bowl jabber. I still don’t trust Cutler and Lovie in the biggest moments.

The Sun-Times will die in 2013. The Tribune will die in 2015.

Fastball up near 100.

Will you be working in 2013?

Yep, assuming I’m alive.

 

Q/A with Jeremy Schaap: On missing Olympics; goal for radio show; and long-form journalism at ESPN

Posted on by

Note: I’m going to be out for a couple of weeks. However, I’m leaving behind some gifts for the holidays: The best of my Q/As. I’ll feature a new one each day through Jan. 2. Please check in. Happy Holidays to all.

*******

Posted on Aug. 7

Jeremy Schaap has one clause specifically written into his contract with ESPN: The network has to send him to the Olympics.

So why isn’t he in London? And why wasn’t he in Vancouver in 2010?

As fate would have it, his wife, Joclyn, gave birth to couple’s first child during the last Winter Olympics, and they welcomed a boy Monday morning.

As a result, Schaap had to stay home again and watch on tape delay on NBC like everyone else.

“I had to call and say, ‘Hey guys, you know that whole Olympic thing? Sorry about that,” Schaap said.

Schaap, though, has plenty to keep him busy. He is hosting his own radio show, The Sporting Life and is a correspondent for E:60, among his other endeavors.

The radio show finally is available on podcast. It’s terrific. It features excellent long-form stories and interviews that go way beyond the Tebow-Sanchez debate. The show is a nice refuge from the shrieking that dominates sports talk radio.

As was the case with his father, Dick, I’ve been a long-time admirer of Jeremy. His bio on ESPN’s site lists his many honors, which includes six Emmy awards. It makes journalists like me feel inadequate. Stop being so perfect, Jeremy.

When I started my sports media site, he was high on my wish list of interview subjects. I recently had lunch with him in New York.

Here is my Q/A:

Is it hard not to be at the Olympics?

Na. I relish it, but I’m pretty jaded about the Olympics in general. There’s still something about the Olympics. I grew up in a house where the Olympics were a big deal. My father did books on the Olympics.

In this day and age, they don’t have quite the same meaning that they had. During the Cold War, let’s face it, it was us against them. There was a drama that’s lacking today.

Some of the stuff the IOC does. The fact that they won’t honor the Israeli athletes. The thing that’s objectionable to me is that I suspect if it were any other country, they would do it. But because it’s Israel, they won’t do it.

The IOC ignores the Olympic charter. Not just the Arab world, but in most of the Muslim world, women aren’t allowed to compete. How can Saudi Arabia be in good standing with the IOC?

What is your objective with the radio show?

We’re trying to tell stories. Four segments and it ends with an essay from me. I do a lot of interviews with authors. The books that are being written are great stories. So much works goes into putting them together. I like the publishing industry. I’d like to help these guys sell a few books.

It’s also the only place where I have the opportunity to do those cultural interviews. People I’ve known for a long time who I want to have on. For instance, the Olympics. I’ve known Bob Beamon my whole life. So I have him on with (fellow Olympic great) Ralph Boston.

There are things that they make fun of me up in Bristol. There are things that are of interest to me that are of less interest to other people in the building. I always say you have to include (discus thrower) Al Oerter when you talk about clutch performers. They start laughing. I say, ‘Al Oerter won four consecutive golds and each time with the longest throw of his life. You can’t be more clutch than that.’

The radio show is Al Oerter for me. I get to talk about the stuff I want to talk about.

Is there a place for storytelling on radio?

There has to be a place for it. Look at the success of NPR. If we could come close to approximating what they do on those show, in terms of storytelling on radio, that’s great. The show gives us another platform to get some storytelling out there.

I think we’ve done good work. I’ve gotten a chance to do longer versions of the TV pieces I do. One I liked the best: I did a piece on the 20th anniversary of Douglas-Tyson. It was a long TV piece: 10-11 minutes. But we had so much good stuff we did a 20-minute version for radio.

What kind of feedback have you received?

The show has gotten a lot of awards. That’s a big deal in our business.

It’s niche programming for ESPN Radio. It’s certainly not a rating grabber. I know that. If they wanted ratings, they wouldn’t be putting this show on the air. Some of the affiliates probably air it between 3-5 in the morning.

Nobody does what we do on (sports talk radio). We’re different.

How do you feel about the podcast?

This is exactly the show that should be podcasted. It’s evergreen. You could listen to what we’ve done six months from now.

With all the work that goes into the pieces and all the storytelling we do, it’s nice to have an opportunity to push it into another platform.

Talk about your work on E:60. What do you have planned for the upcoming season?

We’re putting a lot of pieces together right now. There are a few I shouldn’t talk about because of the competition. I’m doing something on Rob Gronkowski. I’m doing something about a soccer team in Israel.

I like human rights related stories. That’s what I’m always looking for. Sports is the starting point, and it gives us this platform to do these kinds of stories.  We’re working on athletes and insurance. I think of health care as a human right. To me, that’s a human rights story.

The Arab spring is something that’s not often talked about on ESPN.  It gave us an opportunity to educate our audience about what’s going on in the Middle East through the story of a few soccer players in Bahrain who have been tortured by their government.

Does ESPN take full advantage of their resources to do the long-form stories? Should the network do more?

To me, that’s what I do. I understand, it’s not what drives the ratings, although we (E:60) hold our own. Our commitment to journalism is there. In the conversation about what’s on ESPN, the focus is going to be on the less edifying stuff. But I don’t think we’re there as a counterweight. I think there’s a sincere interest in doing this kind of journalism.

How do you feel about where you’re at during this stage of your career?

You do the work because you think it’s important and you hope that it resonates with people who watch. It’s a great platform. I don’t tell them this during negotiations, but I think I have the best job in the country.

Over the years, there have been opportunities to work full time in Bristol or to do the debate stuff. It’s not what interests me, and ultimately that’s not what they want me doing.

One baby arrived during Vancouver. The next during London. Should we put you down for baby No. 3 for Sochi in 2014?

No, that would be too fast. Perhaps, Rio for 2016.

Q/A with Andrea Kremer: Why NFL Network hired her to cover league’s most controversial issue: player safety

Posted on by

Note: I’m going to be out for a couple of weeks. However, I’m leaving behind some gifts for the holidays: The best of my Q/As. I’ll feature a new one each day through Jan. 2. Please check in. Happy Holidays to all.

*******

Posted on Oct. 15

The biggest threat to the future of the NFL is the repercussions of increasingly bigger players banging into each other at increasingly higher speeds.

Not to be a doom and gloomer, but if something truly catastrophic happens during a game, it will cause the country to re-examine this thing called football.

So it’s big news that the league-owned NFL Network just hired Andrea Kremer to cover the one issue that threatens the entire sport.

Sunday, Kremer made her debut on the network as the new “health and safety” correspondent. She did a story (here’s the link) on Oakland receiver Darrius Heywood-Bey, who recently had to be carted off the field after a concussion. Heywood-Bay talked openly about what happened, and Kremer’s interview with a doctor at Cleveland Clinic showed with graphics what happened to Bey’s brain. Sobering stuff, to be sure.

Kremer is an important hire for the league and the network. It begs many questions about the motives and how much she will be allowed to do.

A long-time reporter for HBO’s Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel, Kremer is one of the best in the business as an investigative journalist. Given the subject, her reports on “health and safety” could make things uncomfortable for the NFL and football, in general. She said her domain will span the entire spectrum, including youth programs.

Kremer also is anxious to learn some of the answers. Several times she used the phrase, “cautiously optimistic” about her work with NFL Network during an interview with her last week.

How did it come about?

The NFL Network decided they wanted to launch this unit covering health and safety issues. When I first heard about it, my skepticism oozes out from every fiber of my being. What? Why?

I talked to Mark Quenzel, (senior VP of programming and production). He says to me, ‘Look, we feel we need to do more substantive stories. And the key issue is health and safety.’

They are hiring my credibility, my reputation. I didn’t build that–put it in parentheses over 30 years–to have it reduced to propaganda. That’s not the way it is going to be.

My role isn’t to take anyone down. My role is to present the issues out there. We are not bereft of ideas.

What were behind your initial reservations?

You don’t want to be a mouthpiece for the NFL. There are a lot of issues that exist. I view this as trying to enlighten the audience about these issues in a deeper way. It’s that simple. There is a lot of stuff out there about concussions. What can we show differently about it? There is a lot of concern and misinformation about concussions.

This is like a managing editor position. My job is to generate content. We walked into a brain-storming meeting with 12 very smart people in the room. I have this huge file in my hand. I go, ‘You guys have been thinking about this for about 10 days. I’ve been thinking about this for about 20 years.’

When you talked to Quenzel, what did you say to him? What kind of assurances did you get?

There are never assurances for anything. There’s always good faith, but it’s not as if I had anything written in my contract. I know what I’m comfortable with and not comfortable with. It’s a fluid situation. We’re working on a case-by-case basis. I go back to what I said: ‘I didn’t spend my entire career building up my credentials to have it tossed out here.’

The best way to put it is that I’m cautiously optimistic. I have no reason to not think I won’t be able to bring a different level of programming and ideas to the network.

What kind of statement is NFL Network making by hiring you?

I give them a lot of credit. I know there are people there who said, ‘Do you understand what you’re doing by hiring her? Do you understand what you’re getting yourself into?’ That was respectfully, not negatively. They said, ‘Yes, we do. If we’re going to be credible, taken seriously, this is what we need to do.’

I sense the network is fully aware that this is a huge issue. They have not fully dealt with it. They need to deal with it from a journalism perspective, and they will. But it’s definitely a learning curve for them.

Former players have filed lawsuits against the NFL. Will you be able to report on stories on an NFL-owned network when the league is a defendant?

I haven’t been told (she can’t). Dealing with the lawsuit would be no different than how the NFL Network–or quote-unquote–TV partners with the league dealt with the CBA, handled the refs, or other issues. You had plenty of people at the NFL Network pining about how poorly the refs were. The commentators have been very honest with their assessment.

That’s part of what’s going on. If there’s a former player we wanted to profile who had a number of significant issues, in my mind, as long as we go to somebody at the league or with the players association, if we can find that person to tell their side of the story, then we’ve presented both sides. Our job is to provide the audience with enough information to reach their own conclusion.

Are you concerned that people will view your reports through the prism of the NFL Network? As a result, people might not feel you are totally objective.

I learned through the Twitter universe there’s nothing I can do to mold people’s opinion if they have some agenda.

I can say this: Not only have I been given any indication of censorship, I’m sure not being given any special treatment. I’m not going to get people just because I work for the NFL Network. I’ve been trying to work on a story, and I’ve put in requests and I’ve been rebuffed.

I know how I’m going to approach my job. I know my comfort level; I know what my obligations are, and that’s what I’m going to adhere to.

You’re a top reporter. If you found a story that blew the doors off this issue, are you confident you would be able to run it on NFL Network?

It’s so hypothetical. Here’s all I can say: I’m going to try.  I am cautiously optimistic that we’ll be able to do something that’s impactful.

 

Q/A with John Clayton: His 24/7 study (obsession) of football; That’s what I do

Posted on by

Note: I’m going to be out for a couple of weeks. However, I’m leaving behind some gifts for the holidays: The best of my Q/As. I’ll feature a new one each day through Jan. 2. Please check in. Happy Holidays to all.

*******

Posted on Sept. 17

Here is what’s more amazing than John Clayton becoming a YouTube sensation (more than 2 million views) with his new ESPN SportCenter ad: The fact that he even took a day off to shoot the ad.

Clayton rarely takes days off. Maybe 10, 15 tops, all year, he says.

The truth is, a day off separates him for doing what he truly loves: Studying football.

Study, not cover, is exactly what he does for ESPN. Hence, his nickname, “The Professor.”

I always have been fascinated by Clayton. In Chicago, he does a weekly report on Wednesday at 4 p.m. on WMVP-AM 1000, the ESPN-owned sports talk station. I am continually astounded at his knowledge and his ability to name players buried deep on a team’s depth chart

How does Clayton do that?

I now know how after talking to Clayton late last week. His schedule is insane. For instance, after covering the Atlanta-Kansas City game during week 1, Clayton woke at 3 a.m. the next morning so he can begin watching replays of the other games prior to going to the airport.

Note: Our interview was interrupted twice because he had to takes call from NFL front office people. No doubt, calling him for information.

Here it is:

Who is the third string running back on the Bears?

They just made the change. Remember, they had Kahlil Bell, and they cut him. They made the adjustment with Armando Allen, who they brought up.

How do you keep track of all that? You’re talking about a guy who barely gets on the field. Do you have photographic memory?

Oh, well. Any free moment I have, I study it.That’s what I try to do. I’m even doing more things this year than I ever have before. I find it so essential to do.

I want to know everything I can about a roster. Everything.

I keep track of every contract in the league. I have every roster in the league. I make sure my rosters are updated every day.

I have these databases. One data base has every salary of every player, every age of every player, every height and weight of every player, every year of experience, every entry level.

What I do with the salaries I build a program, takes the salaries and add them up. I have the proration of their signing bonuses, and the money they are likely to earn. I mix that all together so I can put together a salary cap number of every team in the league.

Second data base: How they were built. I’ll have the name of the player; what year he came into the league and position he plays. I can keep track of whether the team is too old, how many new players they have.

I keep track of the inactives on Sunday…

Why do you need to know all this?

Because that’s what I do.

Not everybody does this.

OK, do I follow the salary of a player because I care about what he makes? No. A decision is made for that guy to make that salary. What does it mean that you have a back up who is making $2 million? Well, before the start of the season, they’re going to come to him and ask for a pay cut. You know going in, certain guys are going to go.

If you’re above the cap, you know Kyle Vanden Bosch is going to redo his contract to give (the Lions) cap room.

I also need to know who is the third receiver. When I talk about fantasy receivers, how do they use those guys? People want to know.

You live in Seattle. Nothing is close to you besides the Seahawks. Why do you feel you have to be at a game every Sunday as opposed to watching all of them on DirecTV?

To me, it’s the best way to get a feel for football and finding the changes and finding the trends. The game changes to a certain degree every 3 or 4 weeks. I’m at the game and I’m watching every game. I’ve got the iPad.

When you’re at the game, you get a full view of what’s going on and the immediacy of going down to the lockerroom and answering those questions. You don’t have the ability to ask those questions if you’re sitting at home.

I go to Atlanta-KC. I see what I see. Then I have the ability to go over to Matt Ryan and talk about what he’s doing with his offense; get a feel for the Chiefs.

I’d go to 32 training camps if they let me. When you’re watching practice, I’m pretty intense about following everything. You watching and saying, ‘this guy is in good shape, this guy has lost some speed…’ You’re putting that all in perspective and you have the immediacy of asking somebody.

Do you watch every game eventually?

Before I’d tape every game I could. Now thanks to NFL.com, they have the digital version of every game in 30 minutes. So literally in KC, I got up at 3 on Monday morning. I watched four games at the hotel. Went to the airport and watched three more. I had seven games done by the time I flew back home. When I got home, I watched the rest.

Does anyone do what you do?

The teams are. If teams are doing it, and if I can get in the heads of the teams, it might help me out a little bit.

You go, ‘All of the sudden. Wait a second. If the fourth round pick is ahead of the third round pick, then you start to realize maybe the third-round pick is being phased out.’

Do you have GMs hitting you up for information?

Yeah.

How do the players treat you? I imagine it is different than when you were covering the NFL as a newspaper reporter.

In 2000, ESPN did a Clayton Across America. I went to 31 teams in 28 days. The top players would be nice enough to come over to you, particularly on teams 23 and 24. They were following me. They would come over and say, ‘Hey John, I know you must be really tired. Do you need me for anything?’

I always do the Inside the Huddle notebook, because I’m trying to stay on top of trends. Once I started doing that segment, the top players on the teams were so cooperative. They would tell the little things they were doing differently. What trends they spotted.

If you’re a negative, ripping person, they’ll like you or hate you. I am what I am. I try to find the trends and do the most honest job I can. For whatever reason, that’s gone over well. Most of the top players are good to me when I see them or need them.

So what’s your daily routine?

I get up every day at 4,5,6. I try to go as long as I can before I get fatigued.

How much writing do you do?

Today, I did 3,500 words. Tomorrow, I’ll do about 1,400 words.

Do you ever see your wife?

Every Friday night is date night. As soon as I get done with my last segment, I take her out.

Do you ever take any days off?

Year round, maybe take 10-15 days off. It’s a seven-day-a-week job.

Do you feel if you did anything less, you’d be slacking off?

I would, yeah. What it all comes down to is that even though I’ve been doing this for a long period of time, I’m trying to always reinvent myself. I’m trying to get better. You can only get better when there’s so much new information out there.

You really love this, don’t you?

My only goal in life was to be an NFL beat writer for a team. Now instead of doing it for one team, I get to do it for 32 teams.

It’s phenomenal how much fun it can be. There’s so much information out there. I would like to do more with the numbers from a sabemetrics perspective. Sort of like what they do for baseball. Could I find a wins against replacement number for a QB, WR, Offensive tackle? I can see things visually, but I’d like to translate them into numbers.

It’s a fantastic job, and it’s only getting better.

Posted in NFL

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

Posted on by

Note: I’m going to be out for a couple of weeks. However, I’m leaving behind some gifts for the holidays: The best of my Q/As. I’ll feature a new one each day through Jan. 2. Please check in.

*******

Posted on July 9

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.

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.

 

Q/A with Frank Deford: Legendary sportswriter tackles toughest subject: Himself

Posted on by

Note: I’m going to be out for a couple of weeks. However, I’m leaving behind some gifts for the holidays: The best of my Q/As. I’ll feature a new one each day through Jan. 2. Please check in.

Today I start with my favorite: Frank Deford.

******

Posted on May 29

If somebody asks what’s the best part of doing this site thus far, I say that’s easy: Interviewing Frank Deford.

If there was a Mt. Rushmore for great sportswriters of the last 50 years, one of those faces would belong to Deford. While it would embarrass him to hear it (or maybe not), he remains a hero to people like us who grew up turning to the back of Sports Illustrated to see if Deford had a piece in that week’s issue.

I’m not going to wax poetic about Deford’s work in SI, NPR, HBO and elsewhere, because it wouldn’t do him justice. I know he would write it so much better.

Fortunately for us, Deford decided to wrap up his glorious career in a new book: Overtime: My Life as a Sportswriter.

It’s a terrific read. Deford chronicles his early days at Sports Illustrated in the 60s, when the magazine really hit its stride and changed the face of sports journalism, thanks in part to writers like himself. He writes about covering the biggest of the big; Wilt Chamberlain, Bobby Orr, Arthur Ashe, along with his fondness for obscure tales, such as spending time on the road with a roller derby team. He also weaves in a fascinating treatise on the evolution and current state of sportswriting.

Deford writes that legendary Sports Illustrated editor Andre Laguerre once gave him a piece of sage advice. He said: “Frankie, it doesn’t matter what you write about. All that matters is how well you write.”

Nobody did it better then, and at age 73, Deford shows he still has his fastball, along with several other pitches. He elegantly sums up our craft as only he could.

I asked the bartender if there is any drink named ‘Sports Journalist’? No, he says. So I have made it up: Cheap scotch and Gatorade. Slivorice for hard-nose-ness, sherry for sentimentality, and a dash of steak sauce.

I recently did a Q/A with Deford. It was one of the best hours I have enjoyed in a long time.

Did you ever think you’d write your memoirs?

People would say to me in the last 10 years or so, ‘Hey you ought to write a book.’ I’d say, ‘Nobody wants to read about a stupid sportswriter.’

My wife, Carol, we’re having a drink, and I said, ‘Can you believe it? They want me to (write a book).’ She said, ‘All the stories you tell all the time that I had to hear…Yeah, you’ve got book in you. People are interested in the people you’ve talk to.’ It’s not the Frank Deford story. It’s Wilt Chamberlain relating to me. Or Bobby Orr when he finds out that Larry Bird worships him.

What was it like writing about yourself?

The hard part was writing about me. I think I have a pretty good idea when I write a story through the years of what the reader is going to like. When it’s you, and you’re thinking, ‘That was interesting to me, but will it be interesting to everyone else’?

For a memoir to be any good, people have to relate to you the writer. I had this idyllic life (as a writer). I didn’t have to pull myself up from the bootstrap. I just sort of drifted along.

You didn’t have a conventional career as a sportswriter. You weren’t a press box kind of guy.

I wanted to write about the people more than the games. What I got to do was what I wanted to do. Not many people get to do that. I feel blessed in that regard. And I got to do it at a time when SI was the crème de la crème.

Obviously, dealing with athletes in the 1960s is much different than today. You often were inside their circle. What was that like?

You’ve got to understand that’s the way it was when I got into it. I just assumed that’s the way it was going to be. You’d hang out these guys. They’d bum drinks off you, cigarettes off you. I chased girls with them. I was their age. Remember that too. I was just another guy.

I had an expense account. ‘Hey, let’s let Frank buy a couple of rounds for us.’ I did make a point in the book that I got in with the athletes not because I was Frank Deford. It was because I was Frank Deford from Sports Illustrated. I got more access than someone from the Bloomington Herald. I would get through to people. They would call me back.

You dedicated an entire chapter to Arthur Ashe. What kind of impact did he have on your life?

He was an incredible guy. The first thing I say about him, hey, he had a tremendous sense of humor. Everything thinks he was a serious person, which he was and because he died so tragically. But he was great company. He was fun to be with. Great laughs. I traveled all over the world with this guy. It was important for me to say that. I wasn’t just writing about this serious historical figure. When I was with Arthur, it was two guys hanging out. He happened to be a tennis player, and I happened to be a writer.

Tennis also turned into a favorite sport to cover. Why?

Tennis players were great. Now, they’re all surrounded by entourages. But then, they were delighted to see any press at all.

Tennis was the best thing I fell into. Everyone said, la-de-da, tennis anyone? Oh crap. But it was fabulous people, great places to go in the world. All of sudden, it became very popular. The world moved underneath my feet because of Connors, McEnroe, Billie Jean King. Billie Jean is like Arthur. She is this iconic figure. Back then, she was just this chubby little kid. It was like being with George Washington at Valley Forge in sporting terms. Who knew?

In the book, you write that your favorite stories were on off-beat subjects, such as roller derby. Why?

I always liked Americana, for lack of a better word. That embraces a lot. It was interesting. None of that stuff is left because it’s on TV. Even it’s an obscure sport, it’s still on TV. You can’t introduce it to the world. All the goofy stuff going on. Only people still out there are the Globetrotters. They still barnstorm.

There were only three channels back then. When I could write a story about the roller derby, it was like writing about aliens. Most people had no idea what this was. I wrote about a guy who carried a whale around. I loved that. Selfishly, it was me getting to see America and to meet people who were very different than me.

I loved obscure coaches. I remember doing a story on a guy at Idaho State. Nobody would want you to do that today. They’d say, no, you do that on Bill Self. So the characters that were out there..Nobody making any money, and a lot of them coming from nowhere. All of sudden, this guy parachutes in from Sports Illustrated. The funny thing is, they looked at me the same way I was looking at them. They were a laboratory specimen for me, but I was a laboratory specimen for them too. They were checking me out. This guy is going to write about us? In a national magazine? They always were so disappointed when I’d show up because I was so young.

While writing about yourself, you also weave in your view on the evolution of sportswriting. It includes a spirited defense of the craft. You don’t think sportswriters get enough credit.

This is important. When (it was mentioned) to do something about sportswriting, it gave me a chance to defend sportswriting. I didn’t want it to be a polemic. C’mon the Pulitzer Prize. If Jim Murray had been writing politics, he would have gotten it 10 years before. I do get ticked off when people put down sportswriters.

I came in at a time when guys still were fighting (the emergence of) TV. I’ve seen a tremendous part of that.

Dan Jenkins was a storyteller. Even though he was writing deadline pieces, they were storytelling pieces. You go to the other side. Mark Kram. He was writing almost poetry, lyric poetry about these Greek gods. And I’m somewhere in the middle.

What’s your view on the current state of sportswriting?

Unfortunately, we’ve gotten swamped by the numbers. People have gotten buried under the numbers. Statistics. That has become everything. Pitch count is more interesting than what the guy is made of. I think that’s a shame because so much of sports is drama.

There are wonderful personalities. These guys are entertainers, and a large percentage are show-offs in one way or another. They do give of themselves. They’re young and they say stupid things.

However, I don’t think there are nearly as many characters  because kids grow up seeing how you’re supposed to behave if you become a star. They learn to talk in clichés. I don’t think they give of themselves as much as they used to.

It’s partly we’re not looking for the stories of people, and the other part is, the people are a little more reluctant to reveal themselves. They’re surrounded by professionals. I can’t remember the first time I ever had to go through I had go through an agent, but I remember it was shocking. Mostly, you’d just walk up and say, “Hey, I’d like to do a story on you.’ Guy would say, ‘Yeah sure. Want to have dinner tonight?”

Did you find yourself being careful about saying, ‘It was better back then…”?

I remember when I broke in, the old guys were saying that. I said to myself, “If I ever get to be an old sportswriter, God forbid me from doing that.”

It’s always the case that the people playing and people covering it think that when they broke in that was the best time. I think it is simple enough to say it was the best time for me. I’ll stick to that.

I do think this, though, in so far as what I could write and the access I had, because TV did not dominate it, it was the best time for a writer.

This is such a personal book. This is your life as opposed to somebody’s else life. How do you feel about the reviews?

I don’t think there’s any question that if I read a review and somebody thinks I’m an asshole, I’m not going to like it. If somebody says, “Deford comes off as a blowhard, and he’s not very interesting…” We all want to be loved. It’s not like I’m a politician trying to support a point of view. It’s not an advocacy book. It’s a book of remembrances.

Yeah, I want to be loved. I want people to like me in the parts where I hope I was self-deprecating enough. There were times when I had to show off, because it worked. I couldn’t have false modesty. I tried to walk a line between making fun of myself and saying, ‘Yeah I can write a little bit.’

And one last point.

I was a natural writer, but that doesn’t mean I was better than other people. Simply being natural means you were born with a gift, you still have to play it to its fullest. I hope I did that.

Mission accomplished, Frank.

Memorial: Steve Sabol heads list of losses on sports media front in 2012

Posted on by

We said goodbye in 2012 to many individuals who elevated the level of sports media. With gratitude.

Steve Sabol: A true genius who revolutionized how we watch the NFL. His favorite quote:

“My dad has a great expression. “Tell me a fact, and I’ll learn. Tell me a truth, and I’ll believe. But tell me a story, and it will live in my heart forever.'”

Sabol’s stories will live forever.

Beano Cook: ESPN’s colorful college football analyst who had a unique perspective on the game. Unfortunately, he wasn’t granted this wish:

“I’d like to do the last scoreboard show and then go,” he once said. “I don’t want to die in the middle of the football season. I have to know who’s No. 1 in the last polls.”

Even though Cook died during the middle of the season, I’m fairly sure he is giving heaven the lowdown on Notre Dame-Alabama.

Robert Creamer: The long-time writer and editor for Sports Illustrated and the author of Babe, perhaps the best sports biography. Just before he died, he wrote about what he enjoyed about baseball:

“That’s easy– the wonder of ‘What happens next?’

“When I’m watching a game between teams I’m interested in, sometimes that wonder — and the fullfilment of it, as in the sixth game of the 2011 World Series — can be excruciatingly exciting, and its fullfilment as you watch and wait can be almost literally incredible.”

Furman Bisher: The legendary columnist in Atlanta who still was churning them out in his 90s. Dave Kindred recalled his old friend:

“One time, two years ago, his glorious wife, Linda, called him in the Augusta  press room and Furman became a high school kid in love. “I just finished,  honey,” he said. “It wasn’t much. I keep trying. I’ll do that perfect column  someday.”

Jim Huber: One of my favorites, the Turner Broadcasting analyst was known for his writing and terrific essays. This was the opening to his last book on Tom Watson’s near miss at the 2009 British Open.

“He climbed out of bed for what must have been the tenth time that interminable Sunday night. Making certain he did not awaken his wife, he made his way silently onto the balcony off the bedroom of the hotel high atop a hill. Clouds hung low over the dark Irish Sea, but he could still see the outline of the Ailsa Craig miles off the shoreline. A sliver of Scottish moon sprinkled shadows across the land.

“The grandstands, empty and cold now, hid the 18th green from view, but there was no shrouding the huge, familiar old yellow scoreboard off to the left. He did not have to squint to read the names still at the top. He would see them imprinted on his intricate mind for all time.”

Well done, Jim.

Jim Durham: The veteran play-by-play for the Bulls and ESPN. His long-time partner, Jack Ramsey, had this assessment when Durham was honored by the Hall of Fame in 2011:

“He’s the best I’ve ever heard on radio,” Ramsey said. “He seems to have been taken for granted because he’s such a self effacing guy. But he has everything—the great voice, the instinct for coming to the exciting parts of the game so that you can feel it in his voice. He never misses a tip, a pass, deflection, every shot, every defensive play and with great recall. He’s just amazing. This was long overdue.”

Chris Economaki: A pioneer as a motor sports journalist. From no less than A.J. Foyt:

“He saw the sport grow to where it is today and how it grew, including NASCAR. And he contributed to that growth. I’d say when he was in his heyday of writing that more people would read his column than any column that’s been written today by far. I know I did.”

Bert Sugar: The colorful boxing writer and sports historian. From Sports Illustrated’s Richard Hoffer:

“Mostly, though, he was there to provide atmosphere, some of it coming from his  ever-present cigar, to be sure. Just the sight of him in his equally  ever-present fedora (no one — nobody — ever saw the actual top of his head),  his plaid pants, waving that cigar in one hand and a glass of vodka in the  other, was enough to restore the sport to its Golden Age. He was a one-man  re-enactment of a Toots Shor bar scene, a gentle reminder that this is all  nonsense, not to be taken too seriously, that to truly witness greatness demands  a jaundiced eye as well as jaundice.”

Bill Jauss: The veteran Chicago Tribune sportswriter who was part of the cult show, Sportswriters on TV. From Rick Telander, a panelist on the show:

“Jauss loved the little guy. He spoke — he likes to say — for Joe and Jane Six-Pack. But he sells himself short. He spoke for Joe and Jane Martini, too. He spoke for everyone with a heart.”

 

 

 

 

Lundquist recalls Laettner shot for CBS special: You hope you get call right

Posted on by

Received a nice holiday gift yesterday. Dan Sabreen of CBS Sports PR asked if I wanted to talk to Verne Lundquist.

Most definitely. Lundquist is an all-time favorite and one of the true all-world nice guys.

The focus of our interview is the kickoff of CBS’ special programming celebrating 75 years of the NCAA basketball tournament. The series begins Saturday, Dec. 29 (2 p.m. ET) with two shows: 75 years: Behind the Mic and 75 years: A Coach’s Perspective.

Lundquist has a segment in the “Mic” show. Naturally, it centers on his call of the best college basketball game of all-time: Duke-Kentucky in 1992 and the legendary Laettner shot. Below, Lunquist, Len Elmore, who was the analyst for that game, and Laettner recall an interesting incident from earlier in the game.

Here’s my Q/A with Lundquist on his memories of calling that game.

You went more than 10 years without watching a replay of that game. Why?

I thought I had a good broadcast. The truth of the matter is I didn’t want to intrude on the reality of my memories. I didn’t want to look at the tape and say, ‘For crying out loud, why did I do that?’

About 10 years ago, Billy Raftery and I were getting ready to do Marquette-Kentucky (in the NCAA tournament). He called and said they were airing the game on ESPN Classic. He knew I hadn’t watched it. I picked it up midway through the game. At the end, I thought I did a pretty good job.

What was going through your mind as Grant Hill got ready through the in-bounds pass?

At first, I was surprised that Rick Pitino didn’t have anyone guard him. I think if Rick had one do-over, he would have put somebody 6-8 on him.

Then for a split second, I remembered I announced Grant Hill’s birth on a Dallas TV station. His father, Calvin, and I were good friends. Now here’s this guy (Grant) about to throw in the pass. I thought, ‘Oh my God.’ It was very personal to me.

What was your assessment of the final call?

You hope you get the call right. Mine wasn’t particularly brilliant. I channeled my inner Marv Albert and yelled ‘Yes!’

Somebody once asked if I was proud of that call? I’m proud I didn’t muck it up. It wasn’t an innovative piece of broadcasting, but it captured the moment. Len and I then had the good sense to shut up and let (director Mike Arnold) do his job.

 

Sean McDonough recovering: Continued broadcasting despite near debilitating symptoms

Posted on by

Good to hear Sean McDonough is on the mend. Chad Finn of the Boston Globe talked to the ESPN announcer as he recovers from brain surgery earlier this month.

“I’m getting there, a work in progress, but getting out pretty regularly,’’ said McDonough, who was in the operating room at the Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary for more than four hours as Dr. Daniel Lee repaired a hole in the bone near McDonough’s left ear that separates it from the brain. “I still have fluid in the left ear, and my hearing is low in that ear. I have sensitivity to loud noise and some dizziness. But they’re pretty common effects during recovery. They just take a while to resolve themselves.’’

McDonough put off the surgery for nine months so he could continue to work.

“It was a long time to live with it, but the surgery is major, and it’s very invasive,’’ said McDonough, who was originally scheduled to have the surgery Aug. 7 but put it off until a time when his schedule was lighter and the weather wasn’t as good. “They have to cut a hole in your skull and move your brain and have to lift your brain off the bone that they’re fixing. It’s daunting, it’s scary, and I really had to weigh, which I did for a long time, the pluses and minuses of the surgery.

“The symptoms were awful, to the point of almost being debilitating. But you can live with them, and you have to make that decision. I realized they can get worse over time, you risk the onset of vertigo, and a lot of people try to live with it, go back to the surgeon one, two, three, or five years later, and say I can’t live with it anymore. And you’re left asking why didn’t I just do this four or five years ago? I just figured I don’t want to live with this. Plus, I’m hoping the titanium in my head gives me 10 more yards off the tee.”

 

 

ESPN suspends Rob Parker for 30 days; says it will ‘enhance editorial oversight of First Take’

Posted on by

Rob Parker didn’t get fired for his statements regarding Robert Griffin III.

From ESPN:

“ESPN has decided to suspend Rob Parker for 30 days for his comments made on last Thursday’s episode of First Take. Our review of the preparation for the show and the re-air has established that mistakes both in judgment and communication were made. As a direct result, clearly inappropriate content was aired and then re-aired without editing. Both were errors on our part. 

“To address this, we have enhanced the editorial oversight of the show and have taken appropriate disciplinary measures with the personnel responsible for these failures. We will continue to discuss important issues in sports on First Take, including race. Debate is an integral part of sports and we will continue to engage in it on First Take. However, we believe what we have learned here and the steps we have taken will help us do all that better.”

Couple of things:

This is about what I expected. In most cases, not all, ESPN allows for second chances depending on the circumstances. I don’t think the network wants to get rid of Parker.

Also, the part about enchancing “the editorial oversight of the show” would seem to suggest Parker’s position on RGIII might have been brought up at a pre-show production meeting. Perhaps not in those exact words which eventually caused all the trouble, but something was discussed.

Given what happened, on sensitive topics such as race, I’m betting ESPN will want the dialogue to be played out more fully before the show to avoid these situations again.