All hail Preposterous, High Ruler of Sports TV!
Another one of those weekends, Mr. Peabody. Where do we start?
Well, for late winter weekend watching, there’s nothing more entertaining than tracking TV’s tracking of Tiger Woods.
Saturday night, ESPNews excitedly noted that Woods, that day, had shot a sizzling 66. A graphic provided his full scorecard — as if we had the inclination or were provided the time to read his entire scorecard! Video from Woods’ round was included. No one else, just Woods.
The anchor, however, did find three seconds to hint that Woods wasn’t entered alone (in fact, not that ESPN cared, the field was loaded with world-class players). He had to note Woods actually wasn’t winning. Some dude named Patrick Reed was three shots ahead of him.
That was it from The Worldwide Leader in Sports.
Throughout Saturday night, “The Lead” on ESPN’s “Bottom Line” read, “Tiger posts 66, pulls to within 3 of leader.” Over and over and then over. Again, that was it. Friday night, ESPN’s “Lead,” read, “Tiger, +5, 6 shots back entering the weekend.”
On NBC, no one else much mattered, either. Saturday’s live coverage opened with Woods — on tape.
Again, with Woods present, TV’s “coverage” was rude, insulting, a betrayal of golf as a sport. We were again treated less as golf fans or sports fans than as dim-witted, drooling groupies.
At the top of Sunday’s telecast, Johnny Miller declared, “I’m pulling for Tiger,” adding that Woods, though, has had trouble on Sundays.
Hmmm. Outside of a horse race, never before heard an ostensibly objective national TV analyst declare his rooting interest. But maybe Miller figured no one else is worthy of his support. Or maybe openly rooting for Woods is in everyone’s NBC contract.
As long as this sycophantic coverage persists — and it has since 1997, and that’s not Woods’ fault — reader Mike Panzella has a suggestion:
A new, on-screen scoring system — AT (ahead of Tiger) and BT (behind Tiger). If, say, Dustin Johnson is four shots ahead of Woods, Johnson’s score would be given as “4 AT.” If, say, Jim Furyk is two behind Woods, it will be seen as “2 BT.”
But what if someone’s tied with Woods, especially late in the final round? I’d suggest he be listed as “HSDD” — he should drop dead.
Still, no network is more driven to load weekends with nonsense than ESPN.
College basketball analyst/blatherskite Jay Bilas, who specialized in speaking serous, self-important silliness long before we heard from Mike Mayock, early in North Carolina-Duke, stated that Duke’s Andre Dawkins has — nurse! — “shooting credibility.” But we’re all always wiser for Bilas’s presence.
Two-part Pop Quiz: Which network most encourages young basketball players to abandon easy layups, lay-ins and simple dunks for monster, showboating, glare-at-the-TV-camera slams by rewarding them with night-of and day-after cameos? Correct! ESPN!
Now, which network regularly ridicules young basketball players — give them the Nelson Muntz “Ha-ha!”—- for failing to successfully make monster, showboating slams instead of making the easy two? Correct, again! ESPN!
Saturday morning’s SportsCenter was pleased to show UConn’s DeAndre Daniels, the night before in a close win against Rutgers, botch his rim-rocking “Top 10” reel audition, thus the clip was shifted to the shame-shame bin.
Saturday’s SportsCenter also featured “Friday Funnies,” three clips from games from the night before. One “funny” was of NHL linesman Andy McElman being flattened by an errant punch to the head while trying to break up a hassle. Hysterical! A laugh riot taken from ESPN’s “He Got Jacked Up!” days.
What ESPN continues to do to what it hasn’t yet done to sports should have provided FOX, in its second try to compete with ESPN, inspiration to shape itself — then pitch itself — as the anti-ESPN. But, as we’ve frequently noted, in TV there is no idea so bad that it’s unworthy of duplication and perpetuation.
Fox Sports 1’s St. John’s-Marquette, Saturday, was filled with curiosities, as in “What?!” For starters, St. John’s was identified in the score graphic as the team in red. Neither team wore red. The Red Storm wore blue — instead of its recent black.
Next, if FS1 would prefer we watch the game as opposed to read all-time graphics, why not make those graphics quick and easy? For example, all game we read, “Coming Up Next:” A simple, “Next:” wouldn’t have worked?
Play-by-player Mike Gleason seemed eager to encourage us to watch a game we already were watching. Three times, early in the second half, he told us we were watching an “entertaining” game. If he says so.
Gleason also saw fit to tell us that Marquette’s Todd Mayo had a lot of second-half “touches” — touches! — as if a 6-foot-3 guard normally wouldn’t much handle the ball.
And Gleason twice was awestruck that at 91-90, late in double OT, nine players were in double figures. With 181 points scored and the game always close, why was that astonishing?
Anyway, a few years ago, someone on TV first said, “score the basketball.” Of course, “score the basketball” is ridiculous, which is why the phrase spread like a juicy rumor in a coed dorm.
Analyst Stephen Bardo, over tape of a Marquette forward scoring inside, said he was “able to score the basketball.” No bad idea . . .
Yogi knew, and appreciated, just how special Carmen was
Carmen Berra was a gracious, beautiful woman, and no one knew how lucky Yogi was better than Yogi. He’d shrug, then say he never could figure it out, either.
Can’t imagine an independent sort such as Phil Jackson, who also has a mostly open, mostly good-faith relationship with the media, being allowed to succeed under Jimmy Dolan any more than was Donnie Walsh.
If George Steinbrenner, twice convicted felon — but only for trying to rig a presidential election then for trying to rig the federal investigation of his crime — and twice suspended from The Game, can be appointed to the Hall of Fame’s Board of Directors, then what exactly are the Hall’s standards for admission?
It never ends. How could Oregon’s win against No. 3 Arizona, Saturday, be so widely reported by experts as a “shocking upset” when Oregon, at home, was a mere two-point dog?
Be Careful For What You Wished: Oh, there are different rules for half-inning-ending replay challenges? Gotta get ’er done before the defense leaves? “Getting it right” is only a maybe thing? Ah, this is gonna be great!