This is a response to a fun piece written by Joe Posnanski. It isn’t a rebuttal per se because I agree with him; rather it is a tiny addendum. * If you didn’t read it, or bother to click the link provided, basically JoPo demonstrates one of the great wonders of baseball. If it happens in the game you’re watching, chances are very good it has happened before. The treat for so many baseball fans is its incredible long history. So when I see a player hit a home run from both sides of the plate in the same inning, it probably happened before. JoPo is right of course, but I think there is more to it than just a connection between two odd events. By bearing witness to a special occasion that has happened in the past, we get connected to that past and it makes the history of the game all the more meaningful. No other American sport holds us in the same way and its why baseball will always matter. It may not get the television ratings of other sports or be the weekly event that football is, but baseball does something very few other cultural events can do it not only makes the past more relevant but it brings us together as well. One of the great joys of talking baseball to my father is hearing about the players I never saw, the stadiums I never visited and the pennant races that are legend. A big reason for this, apart from the revered place baseball history has in our culture, but it also is relatively recognizable to us. Yes, players are bigger, faster, stronger, but they are not the mutated specimens of football or basketball. I’ve encountered athletes from pretty much all sports and the only ones that didn’t make me feel like a child were the baseball players. (Granted I never met the likes of Frank Thomas, but he was also a starting tight end from Auburn.) Also one of the things I hear my dad talk about is how much basketball has changed, how it isn’t the game he once played. Baseball as touchstone also relies on the game itself changing very little over the course of one hundred plus years.
*It’s kind of odd calling a 1,000 word essay ”tiny.” However, compared to JoPo, it truly is a drop in the wordsmith bucket. Also, I find it terribly interesting that I can read an Internet tome from JoPo and be engaged, entertained and informed. Yet I get two paragraphs into a Bill Simmons piece and my eyes glaze over.
I feel that, while it probably has happened before in baseball it still is special. JoPo seems to be discounting that fact and I think he misses a key point.** Yes, there might have been another occurrence of a strange event, like one pitcher starting back-to-back World Series for different teams, or the third baseman loses the ball in his shirt, it is still awesome that I get to see it. The best comparison I can come up with is from the realm of the Grateful Dead and Phish. Among Dead Heads and Phish Heads there is a certain collectors mentality. We love to count the songs we’ve seen, remember the setlists from shows we’ve attended and trade shows that we think are worth sharing. The great thing about all of these activities is that they are very individual pursuits, yet we can all appreciate the significance of a rare moment, or spectacular performance. I am one of the few people to have seen Phish perform Spock’s Brain (Blossom 6/20/95, overall great show but SHITTY Weekepaug Groove), which would be even more awesome if it were actually a good song. It is a great moment in a show when the band plays something that they haven’t played in years, even better than seeing the premiere of a song. Like those episodes from baseball, a song that hasn’t been played in five or ten years makes the fans cheer wildly, congratulate one another and feel a connection between the band and their fellows that I don’t think fans from other bands get to experience. A new song or new moment, doesn’t bring the past with it, it doesn’t have that connection which sparks memory and curiosity. As much as I love Bruce Springsteen, I don’t think a bust out of Mary Queen of Arkansas would make the crowd go wild. More to the point I don’t think many Bruce fans would be know that it had be X amount of performances since he last played it and it was an especially poignant moment in the concert.
** Also, it is probably more accurate to say the JoPo goes WAY OFF into a another line of discussion, and sort of loops back, but well I’m staying here.
And while this is a salient point in most sports, I think because of the frequency of baseball games, the way it becomes a part of every day life throughout the summer, each individual game, each individual play, is unique unto itself. I wrote a while back about this, about how a pretty much nothing game in the middle of the week can still be a special time. Football isn’t played enough to capture that kind of moment and basketball and hockey don’t hold our collective imaginations nor do they get inside that rhythm of life like baseball. Again, Dead and Phish shows are very much like that. (Especially if you’re traveling around the country going to shows night after night.) I’ve seen Phish 44 times and listened to countless Dead shows and yet I never get bored and can point you to a good, great and out of this world version of a number different songs. As the Professor likes to say from the Deadpod, “You wouldn’t know it by the set list, but it is a rocking show.” In much the same way, I’ve seen countless baseball games, yet each one is ultimately its own happening. The game has that historic presence that connects us to the past and yet still provides meaning to us today. Yes, I know it’s just baseball and the meaning I truly gain from it is minuscule compared to so much throughout my life, yet it provides something that I can keep to myself, I share with a friend and pass on to my son and daughter. It provides joy. Or to put it another way: It’s only baseball, but I like it, yes I do.
Some Thoughts on Sports Media
October 30, 2009Those that know me, and I’m guessing that most of those reading this do, know that I enjoy sports. I enjoy sports media* almost as much as the actual events, I think in part because so much of it is pretty awful. This is particularly true here in Chicago, especially when considering everybody’s favorite team the Bears.
*I am loathe to call it sports journalism. What most sportswriters do is not journalism. They watch games (albeit from better seats than me) review what happened and offer their thoughts on what we all saw and make predictions for the next game. Unfortunately, they have become more sarcastic, pettier and more predictable in the last ten years. Also there seems to be a strong strain of gossip culture emerging in sports, thanks Deadspin.
To live in Chicago is to live with the Bears and their fans, which also include all members of the media. There is no hint of objectivity when it comes to Bears coverage and most of the people covering the Bears are as bad as the drunken fan at the end of the bar, believing that every win is proof of a Superbowl run and every loss is the end of the season. The worship of Mike Ditka is fodder for a whole other blog. What is even more galling about Bears coverage is how the writers generally tow the party line and suck up to everyone, coaches, players and front office. The most glaring example in recent weeks was the discussion of Cedric Benson, former Bear now playing for the Bengals. Benson did not have a good stay in Chicago, to say the least. Since being in Cincinnati he has really turned things around, somewhere in the top ten running backs in the league. Leading up to last weeks game he made comments about being blackballed by the Bears, made some less than flattering remarks about the coaching staff and the like. What did the media do with this juicy story? Investigate the allegations of blackballing? No. What the Chicago press did was parrot what the Bears front office said, in effect, “We didn’t blackball Cedric.” As a matter of fact the press took it even further. In two separate stories, the writers used this logic, “the Bears did not blackball Cedric Benson because Benson did not play well for the Bears therefore they did not have to blackball him.” As you can see this is a great fallacy, one doesn’t necessarily equate to the other. Yes, he played poorly for the Bears, but that doesn’t mean they didn’t speak poorly of him. The writers stuck with their logic and as far as supporting testimony, they interviewed “a member of the Bears front office.” Surprisingly that front office person also said they didn’t blackball Benson. It would have been nice if they would have talked to other front offices and see if there was anything to Benson’s claims, but that would have required effort and actually working against their favorite football team.*
* What is even more hilarious about the press coverage of the Bears is that sometimes the players, coaches etc. get mad at the media for asking relatively softball questions, especially if it is questioning a bad play or decision or prying into personal business, like you know, dating Paris Hilton.
An even sadder state of affairs is the Chicago sports radio landscape, especially now that the Bears are in full swing. All Bears all the time, unless the Bulls and Blackhawks are doing really well or really poorly. If the indoor sports are mediocre, don’t expect much from the local gabbers. Even the hosts get tired of talking football, but instead of moving on to other sports, they veer off into various directions, most of which are inane, ill-informed or just plain boring. The greatest offender, at least of late, is Dan McNeil and his Danny Mac Show on 670 WSCR. When he isn’t talking sports he tends to discuss his colleagues in the media and quite frankly how much he doesn’t like them. He does a particularly “good” job of ripping his former airmates on ESPN, especially Harry Teinowitz. I don’t necessarily like the guy either, but it has gotten old really quick. Speaking of Harry and his show “The Afternoon Saloon” all I can say is meh. They don’t offer much in the way of insight, entertainment, or even confrontation. It really is like a stop by a tavern, where most of the conversation is banal at best. Finally, the great hope of Chicago radio is Boers and Bernstein, 1-6 on 670 WSCR. They can be funny, informative and offer strong analysis. Unfortunately more often than not they are reduced to the lower beings of their nature, namely beating up their callers, which they cherry pick for the most insane callers. Case in point, Bernstein wanted to know why they didn’t keep a caller who wanted to argue that the Bulls would win 65-70 games this year. The only reason to have that caller on is to tell him how crazy he is. Unfortunately they do this far too often. It degenerates to a forum where the hosts are constantly telling the callers how dumb they are, in effect lording their wisdom over the audience. They don’t seem to get that by yelling at the callers, calling them stupid, is in effect calling all of their audience stupid. After a half hour of this, it just gets old and not worth listening too. I could mention the other big show, Waddle and Silvy, but what’s the point? It is even more tepid than the “The Afternoon Saloon” but credit must go to Mark Silverman for at least asking tough questions to guests and being the most interactive of the radio cohort in Chicago.
The internet, especially social media is really the future of sports media, unfortunately, not many in Chicago seem to get it. The Score basically have one feed to promo their shows on Twitter, and they don’t seem to do much on Facebook. Silverman is a demon on Facebook, commenting during games, bantering back and forth with other fans and sharing in the experience in general. The other folks in Chicago who are really good are the beat reporters for the respective baseball teams, but I have to say Joe Cowley covering the White Sox is the best. He makes some great jokes on Twitter as well as covering the games and developing stories in real time. It’s too bad he seems to have taken a break during the World Series. Speaking of the Series, it has been awesome to watch while logged on to Twitter. The quips, predictions and insight from some really good national writers has been great, especially Joe Posnanski. I think JoePo is the best example of how games are going to be covered. What I want more of, and Cowley does pretty regularly, is the press using their credentials to get more inside information, like injury updates, breaking news during the game and the like. So far the Series coverage has been lacking in this department. Of course there’s more to discuss about the internet and sports media, but I’ll leave the dark side alone for now.
Posted in baseball, Boers and Bernstein, commentary, Deadspin, Joe Posnanski, sports, sports media | 1 Comment »