Tag Archives: ESPN

Rick Majerus: ESPN’s Wojciechowski remembers a special friend

Posted on by

I knew Gene Wojciechowski and Dan McGrath were having a tough day Saturday when I heard the news that Rick Majerus passed away.

Gene, a columnist for ESPN.com, and Dan, my former sports editor at the Chicago Tribune, were extremely close to the basketball coach.

Gene assisted Majerus with his autobiography. It’s a fun read, and I know from his stories that Gene had even more fun working with Majerus on the book.

Gene wrote Saturday: “To this day, I think the only reason he agreed to let me write his autobiography is because it would help pay for my kids’ college tuition. That was Majerus.”

Dan, meanwhile, dates back to Marquette with Majerus. He talked of him often and I can remember on several occasions that he had to leave the office to hook up with Majerus as he breezed through Chicago.

Through Gene and Dan, I got to meet Majerus a few times. He was as you would imagine him to be: Friendly, fun and completely unpretentious for a coach who accomplished so much in the game.

Gene and Dan’s relationship with Majerus underscores the best thing about being a sportswriter. It isn’t about the games. It’s about the people you meet.

I know Gene and Dan feel fortunate today that as a sportswriters they got to meet Rick Majerus.

Gene did a wonderful tribute to Majerus. Here is an excerpt.

Majerus was 10 of the smartest people I’ve ever known. The Jesuits educated him well. He was a coach, but he could have been a councilman. He lived in a hotel during much of his career, but his suites often were filled with books. He’d call at night just to talk about a Maureen Dowd column he had read an hour earlier.

He won games, lots and lots of them, but I swear he cared more about seeing his players get diplomas than victories.

He could charm an entire national press corps. He could alienate an entire local media corps. He could hold court. He could hold grudges.

Majerus didn’t suffer fools. He was brilliant, complex and demanding to a fault. He also was loyal, caring and giving to a fault.

NFL TV experience still doesn’t compare to being at a game

Posted on by

I took the family to a Bears game a few weeks ago. I froze despite wearing long underwear; I had limited perspective with seats in the endzone; and somebody forgot to put the chocolate in the hot chocolate I ordered at the concession stand.

And I loved being there.

There has been some concern of late that the TV production quality for NFL games is so superior that people will choose the comforts of their couch over popping for those high-priced tickets. None other than commish Roger Goodell said: “One of our biggest challenges is the fan experience at home. HD is only going to get better.”

ESPN’s Outside the Lines dedicated Sunday’s show to the issue with a report from Darren Rovell. ESPN.com’s Rick Reilly gave more reasons to skip the drive to the stadium. He writes:

7) The yellow first down line.

8) Your comfy couch. Have you sat in an NFL seat for three-and-a-half hours lately? They’re approximately the size of American Girl Doll tea chairs. This makes no sense. American seats are getting wider while American stadium seats are getting narrower?

I’ve heard all the arguments, and I saw the fans in Rovell’s report who gave up their tickets to watch the games at home.

And I’m here to say that it is not the same.

Watching the game at home still is a mostly passive experience compared to being in the stands. I could doze off or watch 20 minutes of Rudy while channel surfing.

If I really care about the game, I’m definitely focused in. But I’m not nearly as engaged as being there.

I’m not standing up with 60,000 of my new friends on third and 1. I don’t feel the emotional swings of the game as intensely.

I’m not taking in all the colors on the field and in the stands, a scene that can’t be replicated on television. There’s still something unique about walking up the ramp and seeing everything for the first time on that particular day. Watching Chris Berman during the pregame definitely doesn’t compare.

In my mind, TV has been good for a really long, long time. Probably since the NBC peacock announced the upcoming game would be shown in “living color.” The fact that it has improved dramatically only makes it that much better.

I bow to the alter of Scott Hanson and NFL RedZone, the best creation since….beer?

But it isn’t the same as being at a game.

As Rovell pointed out in his report, the NFL needs to enhance the fan experience to keep up with the times. At the game I attended at Soldier Field, I required better Internet access to follow my terrible fantasy team. During breaks, I wanted to see more RedZone-like highlights on the video board. There were too few of them.

And I wouldn’t have minded some chocolate in my hot chocolate.

I’m not saying I want to go to every game. I’m fine with one or two a year and definitely not in late November or December.

I know it can be a hassle with traffic and parking. And sometimes you might sit next to an idiot.

Some things in life, though, are worth making an effort. I think plenty of people agree. Despite the Bears’ horrid effort last night, the cheapest tickets for the Chicago-Minnesota game at Soldier Field Sunday are listed at $120 for high endzone on Stubhub. There’s still something special about being there.

I will be watching from the comforts of my couch Sunday. And I know it won’t be the same.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Will he wear red sweater? What to expect from Knight on call of first Indiana game

Posted on by

This won’t be an ordinary broadcast of an Indiana-Georgia game tonight in Brooklyn on ESPN (5:30 ET). Oh no, not with Bob Knight working the game with Dan Shulman.

It will be Knight’s first time breaking down the Hoosiers during a game as an ESPN analyst. He was part of the studio crew for a previous Indiana game at Madison Square Garden, but didn’t call the actual game.

If you’re Indiana, this is a big deal. Knight had to sign off on this, perhaps signaling he is ready to reconcile with the school. It’ll be interesting to see how Shulman draws him out about Indiana.

Veteran Knight watcher, Rick Bozich, wrote at WDRB.com in Louisville:

Knight-ologists will be breaking down the telecast like the Zapruder film, trying to determine if Knight’s decision to work the game signals a legitimate thaw in the icy relations that have existed between the coach and IU in the dozen years after he was fired.

My guess?

I don’t expect to see Knight in Assembly Hall this season, but this is a small step in closing the massive divide. If Knight’s only thoughts about IU were ugly and adversarial, he wouldn’t be working this game. He’d find a way to avoid IU again.

And one wise person who knows Knight well told me this several years ago: Bob Knight will make peace with Indiana when IU is back on top and he isn’t.

Terry Hutchens of Indystar.com writes:

Now, for all of you out there that are reading into this that because Knight is doing an IU game that it means he’s ready to ride on his white horse (with a red sweater probably) back to Bloomington and become part of the Indiana family again, I would say this: Relax, take a deep breath, calm yourself and don’t get carried away here. It’s one game, and it’s one game predicated by the fact that Indiana is the No. 1 team in the nation.  It was the preseason No. 1 team in the land for the first time since the 1979-80 team that Knight coached for the Hoosiers.

Could it be a first step to repairing relations? Maybe. But if I was someone at IU and hoping that would be the ultimate outcome here, I would have my doubts. It’s one game. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Hutchens then wrote of his last encounter with Knight:

Selfishly, I’m looking forward to see if he shakes my hand. I covered coach Knight his final two seasons at Indiana and he would actually had a pretty good professional relationship. But the last time I went to one of his speaking engagements where he met a receiving line afterwards and shook hands with former players and all of the old cronies, I decided to get in line and see if he acknowledge my presence. As he walked down the line, he shook hand after hand. He paused at the gentleman to my left and gave him a warm embrace. Then he looked at me. We made brief contact and … he kept right on walking and shook the hand of the person to my right. So I’m looking forward to seeing if I have any better luck Monday.

Wilbon on why he still writes: It’s who I am; does columns for ESPNChicago.com

Posted on by

Part 3 of my Q/A with Michael Wilbon:

Michael Wilbon was at Soldier Field to write a column off the Bears-Houston game last Sunday. And he plans to be at San Francisco to do the same drill for the Bears-49ers game Monday.

Why?

I am not alone in asking this question. Wilbon already has a packed schedule with two shows at ESPN: Pardon The Interruption and NBA Countdown. And he has various other duties, projects and speaking engagements that keep him plenty busy.

Wilbon earns crazy money, as in excess of seven figures annually. He isn’t grinding out 80 or so columns per year for the money. Knock a couple zeros off of Wilbon’s contract, and that’s what a sportswriter earns.

And Wilbon isn’t even writing for ESPN’s biggest online platform. Most of his columns run at ESPNChicago.com. Hence, his coverage of Chicago sports.

Yet there Wilbon is, trolling the press boxes of his hometown teams. Going down to the lockerroom; checking sources. It can be hard and difficult. Grunt work, for lack of a better term.

Why wasn’t he relaxing at home Sunday night instead of catching a post-midnight ride in the rain outside of Soldier Field?

The answer, Wilbon says, is simple. Even though he has gained fame and considerable fortune on TV, the former Washington Post columnist says, once a writer, always a writer.

Here’s my Q/A.

You don’t have to do this. Why do you continue to write?

Because it’s who I am. I love it. I’m not exaggerating. I’m terrified at the prospect of not writing. That’s who I am. That’s what I do.

What about those TV gigs? Plenty of scribes in the press box wouldn’t mind trading places and paychecks with you.

I’m happy with what I do for ESPN. I’m grateful to do it. It’s fun. The fun level for PTI is a 10. The satisfaction level is a 9. But is that who I am? No. I aspired to be a columnist, not a talker on television. I didn’t grow up with that.

What is it about the creative process of writing a column?

You can’t develop a thought on TV. You have to go to something else. It’s sound bites. It’s 140 characters. It’s tidbits. I kid Bill Simmons about writing 6,000 word columns. You don’t necessarily have to do that, but with a column you get a chance to develop a thought.

I go out of my way to write because I still love it. I live in complete fear every day that I’m not as good at it.

How so?

I went to the Olympics and wrote every day. 20 columns. I loved it, but that’s it. I’m not going to do the Olympics anymore. The writing is harder now. Now I know what the coaches mean about getting the reps.

Once I wrote 230 columns in a year at the Post. Another year, it was 208. When you go down to 80, you’re not going to be as good at it. The words don’t come as quickly on deadline.

At the Bears game Sunday, I told the driver to pick me up at midnight. I walked downstairs at 12:28. It took me an hour-and-half to write that column. That’s twice as long to write what I used to write. And I worried all night, was it any good?

What if they asked you to go to Brazil for the Olympics in 2016?

In four years? Are you kidding? I won’t be able to produce any copy. It’ll take me a week to write a column.

How come you’re writing mainly for ESPNChicago.com and not for ESPN.com?

They’ve got a ton of people over there. I’m not anyone. I’m just a guy who argues on TV.

My first thought  when I (started writing for ESPN) was that I would do more national stuff. I don’t think anyone cares or wants me to. I did not think it would evolve in this direction. I still do some pieces that run nationally. They’ll call me and, ‘Can you write a big picture piece (for ESPN.com)?’ But I’m glad it worked out this way because I care about what goes on in Chicago.

So you’ll be in San Francisco for the Bears game Monday?

I volunteer to cover stuff if (ESPNChicago.com) is going to be there. The writing still is important to me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wilbon Q/A: NBA Countdown isn’t trying to compete with Barkley, TNT; speaks on changes, Simmons, Magic

Posted on by

First of three parts:

It isn’t easy to pin down Michael Wilbon these days. It’s not that he doesn’t want to talk. The notion of silence doesn’t exist for him.

Rather, Wilbon is a constant man in motion this time of year. His regular gigs on NBA Countdown and Pardon the Interruption should be enough to fill his plate. Wilbon, though, still loves to write, which is why he was in Chicago to write a column off Sunday’s Bears-Houston game for ESPNChicago.com.

“It’s crazy, man,” he said.

After many texts, I finally connected with Wilbon Monday. And sure enough, he had plenty to say. Enough for a three-parter.

We discussed the state of sports writing in the wake of him editing and selecting the stories for Best American Sports Writing 2012; and why he feels the need to continue to cover games and write.

The first part of my interview with Wilbon will focus on the changes for NBA Countdown. Out are Chris Broussard and Jon Barry. In are Bill Simmons and Jalen Rose. Wilbon and Magic Johnson remain the constants in a studio show that exists in the same stratosphere as the Charles Barkley fest on the NBA on TNT.

How did you feel about the changes?

For the first time in my life, I understand what happens in the lockerroom when a guy gets traded. Jon wasn’t just a co-worker. He was one of my closest friends. It was every day for five years. It put me in a funk. There was an emotional component I hadn’t been forced to look at before.

Yet having said that, I love the guys coming in, Jalen and Bill. Bill knows so much about basketball. Jalen is terrific. We’ll have four guys with different points of view. We should be able to do some smart talk about basketball.

What about the inevitable comparisons to Barkley and TNT?

We’re not TNT. There’s only one Charles Barkley. I’ve said that Charles is the most important voice in the post-John Madden era. People compare. That’s fine, that’s natural. I love Charles and (Kenny Smith). I guess they’re still trying to figure out how to get Shaq involved. I love watching them. But we don’t compete with them. We shouldn’t try to do the same thing. We should do a different show than the one they’re doing.

Simmons is the wildcard. He didn’t play, and never covered the game the way you did. How will his addition make the show different?

He will be easy to tweak. Some of my job will be to start some fights and be an instigator with Bill. Bill’s personality allows for that, and it will make for better discussion.

One of the producers said, ‘Bring some PTI to this show.’ It wasn’t the case before for this show. Maybe it will be for this one.

What is it like to work with Magic?

I always say, ‘I get to watch basketball with Magic Johnson.’ I know so much more about basketball than I did five years ago. When you’re watching Magic watch Steve Nash, that’s like basketball nirvana. He said LeBron James needed a post game. What does LeBron do? He gets a post game. If you can’t listen to Magic and not learn something, then turn it off.

As a player, Magic was flamboyant, but as an analyst he goes back to his Midwestern roots. It’s just that he’s straightforward. People compare him to Charles. They say he doesn’t do this or that. Hey, they’re different people. Magic just has to be Magic.

What’s your assessment of the new show thus far?

We’ll be fine, but it’s going to take repetition. It’s like the coaches say about getting the reps. The other day, my wife asked how the show went. I said, ‘We were better at 11 than we were at 7.’ I’d expect we’ll be better on Christmas Day than we are today.

Wednesday: Wilbon says the new media age has resulted in a lower quality in sports writing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It’ll be President Romney if ‘Redskin Rule’ holds true to form

Posted on by

Update: OK, the Republicans have to feel good about Romney’s chances based on Carolina’s victory over Washington. Here’s my updated post from Friday.

******

Forget about all the analysis and polls and polls about polls.

The outcome of next Tuesday’s Obama-Romney rumble was decided at the Carolina-Washington game in D.C. Sunday.

So says Steve Hirdt, inventor of the “Redskins Rule.”

Hirdt, the executive vice-president for the Elias Sports Bureau, has determined that the outcome of the Redskins final home game prior to the election has predicted the winner of 17 of the last 18 elections; or 18 for 18 according to a Hirdt “revision” in 2004. If the Redskins win, the incumbent party remains in office. And if they lose, the other guys take control.

So Carolina’s victory bodes well for Romney, who will take everything he can get going into Tuesday.

I talked to Hirdt when he was in Chicago for the Bears-Detroit game. He has been crunching the numbers on Monday Night Football for 31 years, dating back to Howard Cosell and “Dandy Don” Meredith. He has terrific stories, and I’ll have more from my interview at a later date.

With the election coming up, we had to talk about the “Redskins Rule.” In 2000, while preparing for the Redskins-Tennessee game in D.C., Hirdt thought he should do something to link football to the upcoming George Bush-Al Gore election.

“I started to go through the Redskins press guides and look at the scores of the games,” Hirdt said. “And then I tried to figure out each year what happened off their last home game before the election. I went Democrats and Republicans, but it didn’t match up.

““Then I went with incumbents. I was shocked to see it lined up exactly right, that whenever the Redskins won their last home game prior to the presidential election, the incumbent party retained the White House, and whenever the Redskins lost their last home game prior to the election, the out-of-power party won the White House.”

Hirdt noted that Tennessee native Gore shouldn’t have been happy that the Titans won that night in D.C. “He should have been rooting for Tennessee to lose,” he said.

Tennessee’s victory foreshadowed a change in party in the White House, even if it took the Supreme Court to make it official.

“For the next 37 days of indecision, I said, ‘This has been settled already. The Redskins lost,'” he said.

The ‘Redskins Rule’ held true in 2008. Washington lost to Pittsburgh in its final home game before the election. And presto, Obama got the keys.

The only wrinkle was in 2004. The Redskins lost to the Packers in their last home game prior to the election, but Bush, the incumbent, remained in office.

Hirdt then did some playing with the numbers. He prefaced his remarks by saying, “With tongue firmly in cheek…”

“I went back and studied the ‘Redskins Rule’ data and what happened in 2004 was explained in 2000,” Hirdt said. “Because Al Gore actually won the popular vote in 2000 — but lost in the Electoral College – it reversed the polarity of the subsequent election. The opposite of the usual ‘Redskins Rule’ was true.

“Redskins Rule 2.0 established that when the popular vote winner does not win the election, the impact of the Redskins game on the subsequent presidential election gets flipped. So, with that, the Redskins’ loss in 2004 signaled that the incumbent would remain in the White House.”

OK, that may be a stretch. Besides, even 17 for 18 is fairly telling.

Hirdt talked about recently receiving a call from a Wall Street Journal reporter who was plugging NFL numbers into the computer in an attempt to find new election trends.

“I said do any of yours deal with the Washington and with the final score of the game,” Hirdt said. “‘No, he said. OK, the ‘Redskin Rule’ reigns supreme.'”

Here’s the breakdown compiled by ESPN. Keep in mind Hirdt’s “revision” in 2004:

Year Presidential Election Redskins game Redskins
Win/Lose		 Incumbent
Keep/Lose
White House
2012 Obama (D) vs. Romney (R) Redskins vs. Panthers TBD TBD
2008 Obama (D) defeats McCain (R) Steelers def. Redskins,
23-6		 Lose Lose
2004 Bush (R) def. Kerry (D) Packers def. Redskins,
28-14		 Lose Keep *
2000 Bush (R) def. Gore (D) Titans def. Redskins,
27-21		 Lose Lose
1996 Clinton (D) def. Dole (R) Redskins def. Colts,
31-16		 Win Keep
1992 Clinton (D) def. Bush (R) Giants def. Redskins,
24-7		 Lose Lose
1988 Bush (R) def. Dukakis (D) Redskins def. Saints,
27-24		 Win Keep
1984 Reagan (R) def. Mondale (D) Redskins def. Falcons,
27-14		 Win Keep
1980 Reagan (R) def. Carter (D) Vikings def. Redskins,
39-14		 Lose Lose
1976 Carter (D) def. Ford (R) Cowboys def. Redskins,
20-7		 Lose Lose
1972 Nixon (R) def. McGovern (D) Redskins def. Cowboys,
24-20		 Win Keep
1968 Nixon (R) def. Humphrey (D) Giants def. Redskins,
13-10		 Lose Lose
1964 Johnson (D) def. Goldwater (R) Redskins def. Bears,
27-20		 Win Keep
1960 Kennedy (D) def. Nixon (R) Browns def. Redskins,
31-10		 Lose Lose
1956 Eisenhower (R) def. Stevenson (D) Redskins def. Browns,
20-9		 Win Keep
1952 Eisenhower (R) def. Stevenson (D) Steelers def. Redskins,
24-23		 Lose Lose
1948 Truman (D) def. Dewey (R) Redskins def. Boston Yanks,
59-21		 Win Keep
1944 Roosevelt (D) def. Dewey (R) Redskins def. Rams,
14-10		 Win Keep
1940 Roosevelt (D) def. Willkie (R) Redskins def. Steelers,
37-10		 Win Keep

Your thoughts: Why people aren’t watching World Series

Posted on by

Yesterday, I gave my views on what contributed to the record low ratings for this year’s World Series. And the declining popularity isn’t just limited to this year.

I asked for your thoughts and got some interesting responses. You have the floor:

Too many games

They need to end the baseball season sooner. Baseball is a spring/summer sport; don’t allow it to run over into fall. The baseball season is way too long. How to fix baseball? Have a 120-game season and end it in late July or early August. This will allow people not to be complacent and keep baseball from competing with the big boys (NFL and college football).–Ronnie

Ugh, I hate to admit it, because I love baseball as both a former player and a fan. But they need to reduce the amount of games played. This is an always-on world we live in and the huge amounts of content available online has had significant implications for the modern day consumers attention span.–Mark

There’s so many baseball games on during the reg. season that postseason baseball just seems like another game to the average fan. I’ll watch, but I’m guessing many fans tune out once their team is out.–Twins91

My response: Yes, the reason season could use a trim, but it isn’t going to happen.  Too much revenue from those meaningless games.

*******

Less regular season, more postseason

Baseball needs to take a page from NBA: Lengthen your postseason. The NBA soars in April, May, June.  For two months, they are front and center with playoffs. In baseball, it’s (three weeks) and postseason is over.

I’m 36, and I could care less about the baseball regular season. I honestly didn’t watch three innings of baseball all year. Absolutely dreadful; no urgency whatsoever. They need urgency in baseball!!!  Almost every year I do tune into baseball postseason.

Forget 162 games; that is baseball’s biggest problem. Take month or more off the regular season; add a month or more to post season.  That would get me to tune in. I am not for watching meaninless baseball games. Can’t do it.–Brad

My response: I also have kicked around this notion. The purists will say the worst thing that could happen to baseball would be for it to become like the NBA and NHL with too many teams getting in. But wouldn’t an extended playoff format increase the number of meaningful games?

Just a thought. I’m not wed to the idea. Also, like I just said; baseball isn’t going to reduce the 162-game regular season.

********

Too many Latin players

I have talked about this with my friends for several years. A lot of what people watch has to do with the ability to relate and identify with the athletes. In my opinion, the Latin demographic is becoming more and more dominant in baseball. The best players in our supposed “American pasttime” seem to be from Latin America. Therefore, it is hard for American youth, and Americans in general, to idolize, follow and care about athletes they perceive to have nothing in common with. I think this is a major factor in the declining interest from American viewers.–Mark

My response: Latin players have been around for a long time. The Pittsburgh Pirates won the World Series in 1960 with a guy named Roberto Clemente. People definitely identified with the Latin players on the Red Sox: Manny Ramirez, Pedro Martinez and David Ortiz. I think the bigger issue is that there isn’t a large enough pool of players that people identify with these days, American or otherwise.

*******

Yankee-Red Sox factor

When you shove only RedSox/Yankees down national throat. Giants and Tigers not national teams. Only Boston-New York are.–Dave via Twitter

An inordinate % of MLB regular season national TV coverage (Fox, ESPN, and TBS) on a small # of teams–Classic Sports Media via Twitter

I still think the main reason is intrigue of teams. People will watch the games with Yankees, Red sox, Dodgers. Yankees-Phillies in 2009 had great ratings.–Jake via Twitter

My response: Indeed, I overdose on seeing Yankees-Red Sox all the time. At least it feels that way. Baseball needs to do a better job of enhancing the identity of other teams, especially a team that has won two titles in the last three years.

********

Late start times

I was 15 in 1991, and I missed the ending of Game 7 of probably one of the best World Series ever because I had to go to school the next day. Start the games at 7:00pm! (ET)–Lou

I will say the late starts kill it for all sports. My son is 10. He rarely gets to see the end of a sporting event because they don’t start until after 7:30 central. He ends up watching it on SportsCenter or Youtube the next morning. Maybe I should raise my kids on the West Coast or Hawaii–Ralph

My 12-year-old son would rather watch a FC Barcelona or Manchester United Soccer game with me.  Plus they actually play when he is awake!  He can name the starting line-ups for Man U and FC Barcelona, just like I could name the baseball starting line-ups when I was a kid.  With the high cost of tickets and the pace of the game (slow and boring) MLB is totally missing the young demographic–Benjamin

I think the low baseball ratings have to do with length of games; 3+ hrs & late endings of game. Games need 2 end by 10p EST–Andy via Twitter

My Response: I’ve made my points on this issue. MLB might have lost a generation of World Series fans because of the late start times. At least start the weekend games earlier.

******

Enough with the ratings

Don’t get stories about ratings – should I stop watching because ratings down? Same issue w move box office numbers.–Greg via Twitter

My Response: I hear ya, Greg. But this is what I do here. Enjoy your games and your movies.

 

 

 

How TV gets made: A look at massive enterprise that is Monday Night Football

Posted on by

You likely will sit in your easy chair tonight (do people still have easy chairs?) and flip on the Arizona-San Francisco game. You will listen to Mike Tirico and Jon Gruden, see all the replays and camera angles.

You will take it all for granted, and that’s just as well. How much thought do you give to how your car is made or what goes into your hot dog (you really don’t want to know)?

However, I got a chance to receive a behind-the-scenes look at ESPN’s Monday Night Football operation at Soldier Field last week. Make that, a huge operation. It gave me a new appreciation for what goes into the national telecast of a sporting event.

Occupying a large section in the bowels of the stadium, the Monday Night crew consists of credentialed production force of 250-300 people, 11 large 80,000-pound trucks, 35 cameras, and 25,000-35,000 feet of cable.

“Unless you see it up close, you can’t get a feel for the size of it,” said Steve Carter, who is ESPN senior operations director. “People take a look at all these cables, and say, ‘My goodness, this is big.'”

Speaking of the cables, I was sitting in the instant replay truck, looking at a massive board of connections. It literally was a wall of wires, seemingly randomly plugged in. I wondered if I pulled out one of them, would it take down the whole show?

I decided, not a good idea. I didn’t want to cause any headaches for Carter.

Carter is in his 13th year of making sure everything works when they flip the switch. He has a wonderful description for his job.

“I tell people, ‘Have you ever seen the parade for the circus?'” he said. “You see all the tigers, elephants and horses. And then there’s the guy with the shovel who gets to clean everything up. I’m the guy with the shovel.”

Carter, though, doesn’t appear to ruffle easily. He seemed pretty calm for a guy who endured a day of travel nightmares that left him with about an hour to spend at Soldier Field.

Perhaps Carter knows that it all works.

“It’s a controlled chaos,” Carter said. “There are a lot of pieces, but it all comes together. We’ve got such a good group of people. The great thing about this crew is that enough isn’t good enough. They always want to make it right.”

The biggest obstacle, Carter said, is the weather. The crew never had a bigger challenge than in 2010 when Metrodome roof collapse forced the Bears-Minnesota game to be played outdoors at the University of Minnesota’s college stadium.

“That was tough,” Carter said. “We always find ourselves having to adapt to the environment. Some challenges are more difficult than others, but we manage to get the job done.”

Here is one fact that got me: Carter said the entire operation will be torn down and on the road within three hours after the game. I don’t believe him. I can’t pack an overnight bag for a weekend trip in less than 30 minutes.

“Want to stick around and see?” Carter said.

I declined. I’m confident in the wee hours of the ESPN’s drivers had their trucks pulling onto Lake Shore Drive. All told, they’ll log more than 32,000 miles for the season.

They left Chicago and headed for Phoenix, and like Jackson Browne sang about the roadies, ready to do it all over again. After what I witnessed, I’ll be thinking of Carter and his crew Monday.

But you won’t, and that’s just as well.

 

 

 

 

My First Job with Mike Tirico: How Larry King helped land him anchor job in Syracuse

Posted on by

Mike Tirico is an immense talent. He didn’t need a fluke meeting with Larry King to help him land his first job.

Still, it never hurts to have a lucky break.

Earlier this week, while doing a Q/A with Tirico about his jammed schedule with ESPN, he told me a great story about his roots.

And I must share.

In the latest edition of My First Job, Tirico recalls how King unknowingly played a role in launching his professional career as a weekend sports anchor in Syracuse in 1987. Keep in mind, Tirico only was a junior at Syracuse University at the time.

*******

In 1987, Syracuse went to the Final Four. I worked the games at the same college station where Marv Albert, Bob Costas, Dave Stockton, Marty Glickman and Ted Koppel all worked.

Larry King was writing his USA Today column. You know, the dot-dot-dot thing. He writes, “The next time I need a sportscaster, I’m going to call Syracuse and tell them to send me the next one that’s ready.”

We saw that. So when we go to Washington to broadcast the Syracuse-Georgetown game, we ask if we can go see Larry King’s overnight radio show. It was a huge show back then.

The first hour, Larry has a Rutgers history professor talking about the Civil War. It couldn’t have been more boring. Then Larry does “Open Phone America” in the second hour. Larry is opening the mail, writing bills, and he’s on the air. We thought he was unbelievable.

Up to this point we’ve had no interaction with Larry except for a wave from the other side of the glass.

Larry then goes, “Would you like to know what it is like to be in college in 1987? Is it drugs? Sex? Books? We’ve got three college kids from Syracuse who are here, and they’ll be with us for the full hour.”

We’re like, “You’re kidding me.”

We did the whole hour at 2 a.m. One of our professors called in, and he made a big deal out of it. It was written up in the Syracuse newspaper.

At the time, I’m also interning at the CBS station in Syracuse. During that spring, they’re going through weekend sportscasters like they’re giving them away. They went through three in a 9-10 week stretch. Now they’re looking to hire somebody. And they make the great decision everyone makes at some point: Let’s hire somebody young and cheap. I was young and cheap.

Fast forward two months, and this weekend sports job opens up. The old veteran news anchor tells the GM of the station, “You should give Mike a shot. He’s good on the radio. And you read about him on Larry King.”

Larry King.

I got a six-week tryout as a junior in college. I was horrific the first weekend. I was Albert Brooks in Broadcast News with the flop sweat.

For some unknown reason, they gave me a second weekend. I got through that tryout and was there for 4 1/2 years before going to ESPN.

 

 

Does Ozzie Guillen still have a future in TV? Stock is down after Castro flap, dismal year

Posted on by

Ozzie Guillen always seemed to have a future in TV. The Venezuelan version of Charles Barkley, Guillen landed a role with Fox Sports as a studio analyst for the 2010 World Series. He did well enough to earn a nod to sit at ESPN’s table for the 2011 Series.

But Guillen is nowhere to be found during this year’s World Series. And that might be the case for the 2013 season in regards to TV.

Guillen’s TV stock definitely has fallen in the wake of his regretful comments on Fidel Castro and then the disaster he oversaw with the Miami Marlins. There’s definitely not a positive vibe.

In the words of one TV insider: “My hunch is that Ozzie has to go to the penalty box for awhile.”

Guillen may not even be interested in a TV gig. Obviously, he is hoping somebody will offer him another managing job for 2013.

However, if the call never comes, TV might be Guillen’s best option to help rebuild some of the damage done during 2012. It would keep him visible and current with the game. The strategy seemed to work well with Terry Francona.

Will somebody give Guillen a chance? He’s outspoken, fun and knows baseball.

But Guillen is carrying some baggage now. The networks don’t like baggage.