Tag Archives: sports media

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.

 

 

 

 

Watch Tiger Woods’ last interview with CNBC for a while; different from Bartiromo than Rovell

Posted on by

I’m pretty sure Tiger Woods won’t be popping up on CNBC any time soon. His recent appearance in an “exclusive” interview with Maria Bartiromo was awkward to say the least.

Woods’ agent Mark Steinberg always has liked having his client appear on CNBC. He viewed it as a great way for Woods to reach corporate America.

Last November, Steinberg arranged for CNBC’s Darren Rovell to interview Woods live in Florida. Now Woods gives put exclusive live interviews almost as much as he gives reporters his cell phone number. So clearly Steinberg had an agenda here.

Of course! They discussed Woods’ endorsement of Fuse Science, which has something to do with energy and performance. Note that Rovell said it was “an equity deal” in prefacing a question to Woods.

Rovell said, “This is an equity deal. Would you have done an endorsement deal like this two or three years ago?”

Woods merrily said yes.

Well, Rovell has moved on to ESPN. So when the former world No. 1 went for another Fuse hit on CNBC Tuesday, the interview duties were handled by Bartiromo.

The end result probably didn’t go as planned for the Woods camp. Bartiromo’s first question was, “What are your financial interests in the company?”

Woods danced around the question.

Bartiromo then asked again, “Do you have an ownership in the company, Tiger?”

Woods declined to answer even though Rovell noted in the November interview that he had an equity stake. To be fair, I’m not sure why Woods couldn’t admit he owns part of the company.

Later, Bartiromo tried to compare Lance Armstrong’s situation to Woods’, at least as far as endorsements are concerned. Totally different situation: Armstrong cheated in his sport; Woods cheated on his wife. Armstrong is finished as an athlete and an endorser; Woods still is performing and winning again and getting endorsements.

Woods took out his tap shoes again and danced around the Armstrong question as best he could. You could feel Steinberg cringing in the background. The last thing he wanted was for his client to be dragged into a discussion about Armstrong.

Then Bartiromo asked why Woods wasn’t winning more majors. Woods had to remind her that he won three times in 2012 and that he still has plenty of golf left in him at age 36.

All in all, probably CNBC’s last “exclusive” with Woods for a while.

 

 

 

 

 

The rise and fall of Eddie DeBartolo: New NFL Network documentary looks at former 49ers owner

Posted on by

Check out the latest edition for A Football Life on Eddie DeBartolo (NFL Network, 8 p.m. ET). A fascinating look at an owner who had an incredible run. And then it all ended.

Here’s the link to the preview.

NFL Films senior producer Peter Frank talked about the documentary in an interview with Street & Smith’s Sports Business Daily:

Q: Was DeBartolo receptive to the idea of profiling him, or was he hesitant?
Frank: It was hard at first. He and his people were reluctant. I just gather that they’ve been approached by other people about doing his story, too. I think they knew us from his time as an owner and that certainly helped that there are actually people in this building here who know him and who know some of the other 49ers front office folks. We did tell them, “Listen, this is not a whitewash. We have to ask you about all aspects of your life, one of which is why you are no longer the owner of the 49ers.” They said that they were fine with that. There were no stipulations as to what we could or couldn’t ask and Mr. DeBartolo answered every question that we asked to him. He didn’t decline to answer anything.

Q: Was there any pushback from the NFL about profiling DeBartolo, who left as 49ers owner after a highly publicized corruption case involving former L.A. Gov. Edwin Edwards?
Frank: No. All the ideas that get submitted, somebody sees them somewhere and there was actually (no pushback). I did wonder about that at first too, given the way that Eddie D left the league. I didn’t know if there was any problem and apparently it turned out that there’s not. We haven’t had a single problem. [Frank said the league had no editorial input and did not require final approval before the broadcast aired].

 

 

 

New book: How much did dealing with ‘media nonsense’ impact La Russa decision to retire?

Posted on by

I covered Tony La Russa during what had to be the low point in his career. In 1986, I took over as the White Sox beat writer for the Chicago Tribune.

That was the year Ken Harrelson assumed the role of general manager. Let’s just say it was a bad marriage. It resulted with La Russa being fired in June of that year.

Given what La Russa went on to accomplish in Oakland and St. Louis, there’s little question why Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf called it the one decision he regrets the most.

I had a good relationship with La Russa during that season with the Sox and several years thereafter when he was in Oakland. I always found him to be fair, interesting and accomodating. I do recall I have never seen a coach or manager suffer more after a defeat.

Yet through the years, I have heard some writers complain about dealing with La Russa. It appears the feeling was mutual.

In his new book, Tony La Russa: One Last Strike, has a couple of interesting passages about his relationship with the media. Co-written with Rick Hummel, the Hall of Fame baseball writer with the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, he says the media element of his job wore him down. It was a factor in his decision to retire after winning the title in 2011.

Here’s La Russa:

***********

The media evolved over the years to the point where second-guessing and a lot else besides recapping the games took over. I want to make it clear that I understand that media people have to make a living and that, like me and our players, they have to survive in a highly competitive environment. Still, just because I understand all that doesn’t mean that I enjoyed it. It was more like I tolerated it as part of the dues you pay to stay in the game.

One consequence of media proliferation was it seemed as if some members of the media were trying so hard to make a name for themselves that they began to compete with the very players they were interviewing for the attention of the public. Toward the end of my career, these competitive individuals were becoming more the rule than the exception, and as in most competitions, hostilities were a natural result. Being stuck in the middle between the players and the media when this occurred was a taxing and irritating part of my job.

Having to manage the media, though not my full-time job, took up a considerable amount of time and energy and also took some of the enjoyment out of managing.

********

(Later he wrote)

Now, I don’t want to paint with too broad a brush here, because looking back at the span of my career, I have known plenty of appreciative and respectful players, as well as media members who were responsible and loved the game. Call it the squeaky wheel syndrome, the bad apple or whatever; but human nature being what it is, you tend to remember the really good and the really bad, and the big middle becomes kind of blank….

When I added in all the rest–the media nonsense especially–I thought that if I wasn’t getting the same enjoyment even under the best of circumstances with this team, then it really was time to get out at the end of the year.

*****

“Media nonsense”? Yeah, don’t think La Russa misses dealing with the media.

 

 

 

Q/A with ‘Benji’ directors: New 30 for 30 has dramatic interview with Wilson’s killer; powerful message about youth violence

Posted on by

What did I just see?

While watching a screening of ESPN’s new 30 for 30 Benji (Tuesday, 8 p.m. ET), I nearly fell out of my seat about 2/3s into the film.

The documentary recalls the tragic story of Ben Wilson, the No. 1 ranked high school player in the country who was shot down outside his Chicago high school prior to the start of the 1984 season. A 6-8 guard, Wilson drew comparisons to Magic Johnson.

It was a senseless act of violence that rocked Chicago and became a huge national story (opening from the film, below). More than 10,000 people attended Wilson’s funeral.

I covered the story for the Chicago Tribune. While the film was powerful and extremely moving, much of the content was familiar territory for me.

And then appeared the last person I expected to see.

Suddenly, there was Billy Moore, the high school boy who killed Ben Wilson. The kid who broke so many hearts and caused so much pain.

I had to do a double-take. Was it really him? Why was Moore dressed in civilian clothes? Was Moore speaking from prison?

It turns out Moore served 20 years in prison and now works as a youth counselor. He even was cited in a White House ceremony in 2009 as an example of rehabilitation.

In the film, Moore tells his version of what happened on that tragic day. He claims it was an altercation that got out of hand and that Wilson was more of the protagonist.

Whatever, Moore had a gun and used it to kill an innocent person.

Moore said he regrets what happened and how he wasn’t that kind of person. Clearly, he has turned his life around.

Yet I couldn’t help feel the anger about the life Ben Wilson never got to live. I’m sure many people will feel the same way watching the film tonight.

I had a chance to talk with Coodie Simmons and Chike Ozah, co-directors of the film. Simmons grew up on those rough Chicago streets and was 13 when Wilson died.

I wanted to know about the film, but first I had to ask him about the interview with Moore.

Here’s my Q/A:

How did you land that interview with Moore?

Simmons: One of Ben’s friends, Mike Walton, knew somebody who knew Billy. Billy called and said OK.

Really, one of Wilson’s best friends helped set you up with the interview?

Simmons: Yes, they understand what happened. They forgave him.

(Note: I am told Wilson’s friends hugged him after a screening in Chicago.)

How did the interview go?

Simmons: We just related. We’re both from the streets of Chicago. There’s a certain way you move around. He felt comfortable because of the things I went through.

Did you feel any anger in talking to Moore? What he did devastated the lives of a lot of people.

Simmons: I didn’t feel any anger towards him. He never wanted to shoot anybody. He destroyed his life. He said, ‘That wasn’t me.’

I know people who have been shot. I know people who actually have shot people.

When I was that age, we had guns. You felt like you needed one. You felt safe with it. I thought it was natural. This is what it was like in the inner-city. You’ve got to protect yourself.

I understand that could have been me.

It’s been 28 years since Wilson died. Why does his story still resonate today?

Simmons: It hit me a like a family member. I used to sneak in to watch him play. He was this great basketball player who was going to make it.

This was like Superman getting shot. ‘Wait a minute, This isn’t supposed to happen.’

When it happened, everyone came together. He actually changed lives in 1984. For this film, we thought we could bring that same kind of peace by telling his story.

How good was he? Has his legend been exaggerated in death?

Simmons: Everyone said he was Magic Johnson with a jump shot.

Ozah: The one thing that seemed constant from talking to everyone was how good he was. The kid was something special.

Wilson’s girlfriend and mother of his son and his son weren’t in the film. Why?

Ozah: We had some ups and downs with them. The final decision was they didn’t want to do it.

What do you hope people take from this film?

Ozah: I hope these young kids who are carrying guns look at the consequences of what could happen. Hopefully, they’ll step back and see that it isn’t cool.

Simmons: Usually you hear about the person who got killed. You don’t usually hear from the person (who committed the murder). What did he go through? What did he put his family through?

That’s why it was so important to have him in the story. Billy is the one who is going to reach those kids. He’s going to be the one who has the impact.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Q/A with Mike Tirico: On busy schedule; critics of Gruden; overrated impact of announcers

Posted on by

I tell Mike Tirico he needs to work harder.

“Joe Buck is working two games in one day,” I said. “What’s wrong with you? You’re slacking off.”

Tirico laughed. “I sent Joe a text. I told him it must have been awesome to have been a part of that,” Tirico said.

Seriously, Tirico doesn’t have to take a back seat to anyone with his schedule. Actually, October is a slow month for him. He only has Monday Night Football as far as play-by-play is concerned.

Starting in November, he will pick up weekly NBA games. His calendar includes Big Ten college basketball games in the winter and three of the four golf majors in the spring and summer. He also does weekly radio shows and podcasts for ESPN.

For all I know, Tirico calls sandlot games in his spare time.

Tirico and Jon Gruden are in Chicago tonight for the Bears-Detroit Lions game. Here’s my Q/A.

You don’t have one month during the year when you’re not working a significant event for ESPN. Why do you take on such a busy schedule?

My schedule can be a challenge. I have an extremely understanding family and wonderful people who facilitate things for me.

I grew up in New York when Marv Albert was doing Rangers and Knicks game, doing sports on Ch. 4 at 6 and 11, and he was NBC’s guy for boxing on the weekends. I went to Syracuse because of Marv Albert, Bob Costas, Dick Stockton. I wanted to be like those guys, and that meant you just couldn’t say, ‘Oh, this is too much.’

Listen, we’re not digging ditches. We’re talking about sports. Even though you’re drained at the end of the day, it’s not that hard. It’s a pretty good job.

This is the first time you’re working with a two-man booth for Monday Night Football. What has that been like for you?

The most significant part of my job is to get the most out of an analyst–make them relevant. It’s much easier to do it with one person compared to two. I love Jaws (Ron Jaworski). We text all the time.

But the difference with two people is that it is more of a conversation. I can carry on a dialogue easier than trying to deal with a third person. I can ask a second or third question.

What is it like to work with Jon Gruden?Jon is the best prepared of any analyst I’ve ever worked with. I truly understand why he’s been so successful. When we meet with coaches (prior to a telecast), they have so much respect for his knowledge and ability. He’s on the cutting edge of what’s going on.

When you see his preparation, it helps you to understand why good coaches and bad coaches make such a difference in the NFL. When you watch our games and listen to the things Jon says before they happen, it’s incredible.

I bristle at all the people who say Jon is too positive and never gets negative. If they don’t think Jon doesn’t point out mistakes, then they aren’t listening to the game.

Does Jon go to a different level of appreciation about the ability of guys? Absolutely, because he’s coached players. He knows what it takes to be Peyton Manning and what he does out there. Not to get on my soap box, but we’ve turned into a miserable society if we can’t enjoy being around the best in the world.

If you watch a game, Jon will say why a guy is doing that and why a guy is not doing that. When people say Jon’s not critical, I call those people lazy. They need to listen closely to the game.

I’ll get ripped for saying that, but that’s good.

You’re in your seventh year calling Monday Night Football. How have you evolved as an announcer?

I’m sure your 100th column was better than your first. I go back and watch every game. I’m always looking to get better.

However, I always say nobody watches for the announcers. They watch for a good game. If they really watch for the announcers, then on Sunday, the networks should put their best announcers on their worst game.

If Fox put their No. 7 crew on the Giants-49ers game, it wouldn’t change the rating for that game. All we can do is hopefully enhance the experience.

Let’s go back to the end of the Seattle-Green Bay game. How did that play unfold for you?

You start with the fact Seattle had a chance to beat Green Bay. Then the play happened. First, you’re amazed that the ball didn’t hit the ground. Now all my attention goes to the officials and I see nothing.

Then they make two different calls. Wait, what you got here?

Looking back, I’m glad about two things. When I made the call, I used the word ‘simaltaneous.’ Ultimately, that’s the rule they were looking at. I’m glad I used the correct word.

Second, I’m glad after the fire bomb hit, there was the reality that this was the most significant faux pas of the replacement officials. We said it was going to put pressure on the league to make a change. And it did.

Do you really call sandlot games in your spare time?

No, c’mon. Going to the Tigers game tonight (Tirico, who lives in the Detroit area, was going to game 4 of the ALCS). I’m glad it’s one of the one sports I don’t cover. I’ve never taken a credential to a baseball game. I have a partial season ticket, and it’s the one sport where I can truly be a fan. It’s so much fun to be there with the family.

I love waiting in line for the concessions, sitting in the stands. It makes you appreciate the people who fill the stadiums. It helps you be connected to the consumer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

New 30 for 30 on Ben Wilson recalls memories of surreal night in Rockford

Posted on by

The upcoming 30 for 30 documentary on Ben Wilson brings me back to a horrible night in 1984.

The powerful film (ESPN, Tuesday, 8 p.m.) tells the tragic story of a Chicago phenom, who was ranked as the top high school recruit in the country. A 6-8 guard, Wilson was drawing comparisons to Magic Johnson as he was about to begin his senior season at Simeon High School.

Then it all ended when Wilson was shot down in a senseless act of violence. His death rocked Chicago and became a national story.

Here’s a link to the trailer.

I wasn’t much older than Wilson, having just turned 25. I was looking forward to covering Wilson during my first year on the boy’s basketball beat for the Chicago Tribune. I never got to see him play.

Wilson died on Friday morning. Simeon made the decision it still would play that night against Evanston in a game at Rockford. I was assigned to cover that game. Of course, there would be no game detail in my story.

My friend and former colleague, K.C. Johnson, now the Bulls beat writer for the Tribune, also was there that night as a player for Evanston. He appears in the film.

I just remember the whole evening being surreal. There was the scene of the players coming out to the court just hours after their good friend was slain. Nobody knew how to react. Then during the moment of silence for Wilson, there was the unforgettable image of Simeon coach Bob Hambric, who rarely showed emotion, wiping a tear away from his eye. That picture ran across the entire country.

Everything else was a blur. I didn’t have time to write a conventional story. I quickly pieced the story from one deadline to the next.

Coming off Simeon’s victory for their friend, my story began: “The healing process has begun for the Simeon basketball team.”

It probably was a bit too optimistic. Simeon had many painful days ahead.

I didn’t know it back then, but the Tribune editors submitted my story from that night into the Associated Press Sports Editors contest. I won second for best news story.

The award helped my career. The following year, I was assigned to be one of the beat writers for the 1985 Bears.

My family and friends were excited about the award. They framed the story along with the blurb about my second-place finish in the APSE contest.

I had it on my wall for a while, but then took it down. The story was about a young boy dying. I just saw sadness every time I looked at it.

Looking back, I wasn’t out to win an award during that night in Rockford. I did what I had do. Like everyone else, I wish I was just there to cover a normal basketball game.

I would have given anything to have seen Wilson flying across the floor, making us wonder if he was another Magic Johnson.

Tuesday: I speak to the directors of the film and discuss the stunning interview that occurs at the end.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Feinstein moving to CBS Sports Radio Network; will host morning show

Posted on by

This could be bad news for me. I love listening to John Feinstein on Mad Dog Radio via SiriusXM.

Will I be able hear him in Chicago on the new CBS Sports Radio Network? I don’t see Chicago listed among the affliliates. Hopefully soon.

Feinstein is a good catch for CBS, as he joins a lineup that includes Jim Rome, Doug Gottlieb and Scott Ferrall.

From CBS:

CBS Sports Radio today announced it has named John Feinstein as one of the hosts of the network’s weekday programming.  Broadcast live from 9:00AM-12:00PM, ET, “The John Feinstein Show” will feature commentary on the world of sports from the man who has covered most of the major–and many of the not-so-major–events in the world of sports during his more than 30 years as a sportswriter.  The show will be heard on over 50 stations nation-wide, including many in major markets.  In addition to his role as host, Feinstein will continue to contribute his personalized musings on the world of sports to the hourly “CBS Sports Minute” feature heard on CBS Sports Radio stations.

CBS Sports Radio will make its 24/7 debut on Wednesday, January 2, 2013.  It was previously announced that The Jim Rome Show will be broadcast weekdays from 12:00Noon-3:00PM ET, Doug Gottlieb will serve as host of afternoons 3:00-6:00PM, while Scott Ferrall will lead the evening’s “Ferrall on the Bench” from 10:00PM-2:00AM on CBS Sports Radio.

“John is known for his encyclopedic knowledge of and passion for all aspects of sports,” said Eric Spitz, Director of Programming, CBS Sports Radio.  “As a best-selling sports author and journalist, he has relationships with, and an open line to, some of the most fascinating names in sports.  John has a way with words, a trademark sense of humor and is never is shy to offer an opinion, which will engage listeners and translate on the radio.”

How much longer will new Sports Illustrated editor actually put out a magazine?

Posted on by

Last night, my bedtime reading was the latest edition of Sports Illustrated. Not on my Ipad, but the actual magazine.

With the news that Newsweek is ceasing to publish in a magazine format, it made me wonder how long that also would be the case for SI?

I think we’re still years away from SI becoming completely digital. Then again, this week’s edition felt thin and the magazine recently made some cuts in staff. Also, new initiatives seem to be geared toward the online experience.

SI seemed to say as much by appointing Paul Fichtenbaum, who for eight years ran Sports Illustrated’s Web site, as the new editor of the Time Inc. Sports Group. He replaces Terry McDonell.

Fichtenbaum told Richard Sandomir of the New York Times:

“Everything going forward has to have a digital overlay to it because that’s where the industry is going,” Mr. Fichtenbaum said in a telephone interview. “We have a really strong print product, a lot of subscribers — more than three million who love the magazine — and what we need to do is make sure they love SI in whatever form the world takes us. Our magazine is rock solid.”

Later, Sandomir wrote:

Mr. Fichtenbaum said that the print magazine would further extend its efforts in enterprise journalism, while letting SI.com handle daily sports news. “That’s one of the things we can do to differentiate ourselves from our competitors,” he said. “The magazine can do those interesting, unique stories that are hard to come by.”

I hope the magazine remains viable. Call me old-school, but the pictures look better in print. And I like the feel of a magazine in my hands.

Yes, it is hard to imagine SI disappearing as a magazine. Then again, 10 years ago, who would have thought Newsweek as a magazine would be on its way out in 2012?