Tag Archives: Boston

Must read: ESPN Boston Edes gets positive (not really) in writing about Red Sox woes

Posted on by

ESPN has put Tim Tebow aside for a minute to get into its other obsession: The Boston Red Sox.

Really, enough with the Red Sox. The only Sox I care about wear White. And by the way, thanks Boston for Kevin Youkilis. He’s been great.

However, I do want to point out a piece by ESPN Boston’s Gordon Edes. In response to all the whining that the media has contributed to Boston’s woes, he plants his tongue firmly in cheek and writes a positive tale about the Red Sox going into their series with the Yankees.

Here’s Edes:

NEW YORK — A weary but gallant group of Red Sox players, led by their plucky skipper Bobby Valentine, gathered in Baltimore’s Penn Station late Thursday night to board the iron horse that will carry them to the Big Apple and a rematch with the Mighty Bombers of Gotham.

The Sox played their hearts out the past three nights against the Orioles, but Fate and Lady Luck dealt them a tough hand. Despite their best efforts — which included a five-inning no-hitter (!!!) by Aaron Cook — the Sox were able to claim just one hard-earned victory, steady Clay Buchholz spinning a beauty Thursday night in Camden Yards. Once again, the game’s greatest fans were represented in large numbers, having made the arduous journey down the Jersey Turnpike to show their support for A-Gon, Pedey, Our Josh and all the Boys.

And more:

It was only three weeks ago, you may recall, that the Sox last visited Gotham and had their spirits lifted by the team-only pep rally organized   by their wise and benevolent owner, John W. Henry. Gosh, was Mr. Henry embarrassed when someone spilled the beans on Henry’s private cheerleading.

“No good deed goes unpunished, does it, Larry?” an abashed Henry declared to his most trusted adviser, Larry Lucchino, who along with Smiling Tom Werner had secretly assembled at the Palace Hotel in New York to surprise the lads with a morale-boosting rendezvous. They beamed as one player after another paid tribute to their skipper, Bobby V, who was detained in another room for fear he would literally burst with pride at all the compliments sent his way.

And finally:

It grieves this correspondent to note that the division title might now be out of reach for your heroes, but while they arrive here wounded, they remain unbowed. There is no quit in these Red Sox, no loss of determination by Bobby V, for whom the word “surrender” does not exist in his vocabulary. Do not abandon your heroes in their hour of need. Invite Don and Jerry into your living rooms this weekend, Joe Castig and O’B on your car radios, and root, root, root for the home team. Remember the words of Al Michaels: “Do you believe in miracles? Yes!”

Great stuff, Gordon.

 

 

Forget about records: Horrible Cubs-disappointing Red Sox game still gets Buck-McCarver treatment from Fox

Posted on by

I asked Tim McCarver a simple question:

When was the last time he and Joe Buck worked a game in mid-June featuring two last-place teams and with one of those teams having the worst record in baseball?

McCarver replied: “I don’t know. I can’t think of one.”

Fox Sports’ No. 1 crew will be on hand for tonight’s game, which will go out to 39 percent of the country. The telecast will be about the uniqueness of the two historic franchises playing a game and the ivy of Wrigley Field.

Forget about the records. Please, especially in Chicago where the Cubs are epic bad.

“There’s something about these two teams playing in Wrigley Field,” McCarver said.

Clearly, it isn’t the best match-up Saturday. The top game is the Yankees at Washington. So why not primetime for that game?

According to Fox, there are limitations on appearances for the Yankees, and the schedule for the primetime games had to be locked up prior to the season. Thus, Cubs-Red Sox.

Get ready to hear plenty of stories of Boston pitcher Babe Ruth beating the Cubs in the 1918 World Series.

 

 

Who needs ESPN? NHL exec: Playoffs validate choice of NBC Sports Network

Posted on by

ESPN’s Vince Doria definitely stirred the ire of hockey fans last week. In an interview with this site, he attributed hockey’s limited presence on SportsCenter to the sport not generating “a national discussion.”

When I asked John Collins about the comment Monday, the NHL’s COO and Commissioner Gary Bettman’s right-hand man for business and media, took it in stride.

“The national discussion definitely is increasing around the Stanley Cup,” Collins said.

Indeed, Collins and the NHL have reason to feel bullish about the first year of their long-term deal with NBC Universal. The move to televise every playoff game on either NBC, NBC Sports Network, CNBC and the NHL Network has produced dramatic results. Ratings soared with more than a combined 60 million viewers tuning in to watch first-round games on either national or local outlets.

NBC Sports Network averaged 744,000 viewers for first-round games, up 16 percent. Those are the highest numbers for hockey on cable since 2001, when ESPN’s first round coverage averaged 745,000 viewers.

The multi-network platform had an NCAA basketball tournament feel, with viewers switching from game to game. The NCAA comparison went even deeper with numerous overtime games producing buzzer beaters. It happened again last night with the New York Rangers winning an overtime thriller against Washington.

Would it have been the same if the NHL went with ESPN? Probably not. With MLB and NBA games, and the NFL draft on ESPN, the playoffs likely would have been relegated to ESPN2 on several nights, leaving the notion of being second class.

Yep, not hearing so much that the NHL needs to be on ESPN anymore.

Indeed, the NHL made the right move with potential for future growth. Yet Doria, who was ridiculed for his comment, hardly is off base. With the Blackhawks out, there has been zero discussion about the Stanley Cup playoffs on sports talk radio here in Chicago. You’ll be hard-pressed to find NHL discussion outside of cities that still have teams in the hunt. It’s not that way for the NBA.

Also, the league is faced with the likely prospect of having a non-traditional hockey team in Phoenix or the No. 8 seed Los Angeles Kings in the finals. Not exactly the same drawing power as recent West winners: Detroit (2008, 2009), Chicago (2010), and despite being a Canadian team, Vancouver, with its stars and stories, had significant U.S. appeal in 2011. Los Angeles might be big market, but the Kings aren’t the Lakers.

I addressed those issues and more in a Q/A with Collins.

Given what’s transpired, how does the NHL feel about its decision to go with NBC and the NBC Sports Network?

Collins: The thing we felt was lacking from a marketing standpoint was the idea of national scale.

(In 2010), 40 percent of the games in the first two rounds weren’t on national television. None of the Flyers games in the first two rounds were nationally televised. The Flyers were a Cinderella story (going to the finals against Chicago), but nobody knew the stories on a national level. The first time they popped up was in the finals, and frankly at that point, it was too late.

Now we have every game on. We’re able to show the casual fan how unique the Stanley Cup playoffs are. They can see how tough the road is.

It’s been very satisfying. The ratings are up. We attribute that to the way NBC has embraced these playoffs.

Would you have gotten the same kind of treatment from ESPN?

Collins: We spent a lot of time talking to ESPN. There was a lot of interest. One of the deciding factors to go with NBC Universal was that hockey would be the centerpiece of their entire programming (for NBC Sports Network). That’s not to say ESPN wouldn’t have devoted more time to hockey than they did in the past.

But for (the NBC Sports Network), the Stanley Cup playoffs are their focus. They have dedicated all their time to building this platform. They’ve offered us enormous flexibility. They’ve changed their schedule on the fly to accommodate us.

How does the league view Doria’s comments on hockey not generating the national discussion?

Collins: The national discussion around the Stanley Cup definitely is increasing. We hope ESPN will validate it with the amount of coverage for hockey on SportsCenter.

They’ve been pretty good to us in our big moments. They went to the Winter Classic. They’ve been at the last couple of Stanley Cup finals with Steve Levy and Barry Melrose

What we’re working to do is to round out that schedule so that it’s more than the Stanley Cup finals. Now it’s all four rounds of the Stanley Cup.

How does the NHL increase the discussion for hockey on a national level?

Collins: An important step was getting all the playoff games on national television. We checked that one off and go from there.

We’re working to expose fans to our storylines. The power of (HBO’s 24/7 documentaries) is showing fans something they haven’t seen before. Then when you have all the games on, and people discover or re-discover Martin Brodeur or the team aspect of the Rangers. Those stories start to resonate with fans.

Also, we have so many markets where hockey does well locally. In important markets like Boston, Philadelphia, Detroit, and Washington, hockey does better ratings than basketball. Maybe, that will be the case one day in Chicago. It’s another sign of the potential to have (increased) national discussion.

How does the NHL feel about the prospect of having a non-traditional team in the finals?

Collins: Any sport, whether it’s baseball or basketball, would love to have its big markets (going for) the championship. It doesn’t always work out that way.

A lot of myths got broken last year. The idea that you needed two big U.S. media market teams to get ratings. Boston-Vancouver exploded that myth.

We’re seeing casual fans getting turned on to our stories during the playoffs. There are a lot of healthy signs. At the end of the day, the ratings are ratings. If you look at the first year, the Stanley Cup ratings is not the only metric of success. We’ve made a lot of progress, and it’s only going to get better.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A no-no: Berman links his situation to Ted Williams

Posted on by

I winced when I saw the quote and I’m sure the ESPN PR folks did too.

In Michael Hiestand’s column about the NFL draft in USA Today, ESPN’s Chris Berman is asked about his critics. This is his response:

 “I just talk to people everyday walking down the street,” he says. “That’s what I care about. That’s good enough for me. They didn’t like Ted Williams either. Now, I’m not Ted Williams.”

Yes Chris, you’re not Ted Williams, but you just compared your situation to that of Ted Williams. Not good.

It’s totally, totally different. If Williams was a good guy and had a good relationship with the press, much like Ernie Banks in Chicago, he doesn’t hear boos in Boston. Williams, though, could be quite nasty, and it took him longer to be beloved.

Berman receives criticism because there are people out there who don’t like his work. The barbs definitely hurt, regardless of what he says.

Berman would have been fine if he ended his quote with “That’s good enough for me.” Instead, he opened the door to more ridicule by linking his name to that of a sporting icon.

That’s dangerous territory, Chris. Don’t do it again.