Jack’s Blog

Note:  There are many jobs in broadcast journalism.  This blog encompasses the person doing play-by-play, color commentator, studio show participants, sideline reporters, anyone who has an on-air position behind a microphone.

Basically, there are two types of sports announcers.  One is the former successful player or coach who, while having no formal training or academic background in broadcasting, gives the viewer the inside look on the field of play or in the locker room.  The other group is composed of well-educated men or women who probably were the manager or writer for the school paper due to their lack of athletic ability.  Naturally, there are others in the field who don’t fall into either category.  If you’re interested in those people, this isn’t the place for you.  I only include that because it seems people are facing legal action if no such disclaimer is stated.

Listeners are usually split as far as which group they like better.  Or, because the world has become so negative, dislike less.  However, each has followers from the other’s side.  From the “non-jock” organization, many of those fans may have a favorite superstar they loved when they were growing up.  On the flip side, the ex-athlete or coach might, especially if he or she is cynical, enjoy the talking heads whose acts are based on sarcasm.

It’s difficult for anyone not to appreciate the skills and delivery of veterans Al Michaels, Bob Costas, James Brown or my favorite of all-time, Vin Scully.  Similarly, the ex-jocks/coaches who are unanimously appreciated for their knowledge of explaining the game are Doug Collins, Mike Fratello, Gary Danielson, and in his own way - and no one else has quite the “way” - Charles Barkley.

Where the debate arises is in the presentation strategy of the two groups (excluding the above and selected others), i.e. the manner in which they choose to educate, inform or entertain the listener.  It’s appallingly evident that some of the former athletes don’t do their homework, feeling they’re entitled to the job and need only to throw in an occasional comment or relate a story, however meaningful, or not, it might be.  Their feeling is they busted their butts for so many years - physically.  Nobody out there in the audience has any idea how difficult it was.  And because of that sacrifice - and commitment - they should get a pass, i.e. a great paying job (although it’s a major cut for them).  Even when told that’s not the way the world works, their response is, “It is for me.”  Read Robert Parish’s recent comments as the perfect example.

Then there’s the “new wave” of reporters, i.e. the post-Jim Rome/Keith Olberman era.  They have their own set of rules as well.  “We went to school to learn our craft, not have it bequeathed to us.”  And, with this kind, anything goes.  Many are bitter.  Maybe because they were cut from their teams, relegated to the scorebook or collecting the equipment, while the jocks got everything they wanted - including girls.  This injustice burned inside them.  The serious ones went to college to become as good at reporting the game as their prima donna friends were at playing it.  Undoubtedly, there are a good number who simply wanted a job in journalism and possessed that same work ethic their athletic friends had.  And they have the majority of fans.  Those who didn’t want the rigors of school; they just want to bitch.

As has been stated earlier, the world has turned highly cynical, for whatever reason - from pampered athletes to people buying political offices to others stealing money from and bankrupting friends to banks defrauding people while their CEOs walked away with multi-million dollar packages.  That would upset most people - and it certainly has.  People have become more concerned, not with what they don’t have but with what other people do.  Why?  How does it help?

Maybe it doesn’t but complaining feels good and if you’re good enough, you can get paid.  Except for the slackers (and it’s becoming more and more apparent who they are), it comes down to either knowledgeable people (former player/coach or not) talking their listeners: the ones who understand what’s happening and want to know more, or the guy who comes on, baring his teeth, ready to pounce on whatever story that listener - the one who thrives on other people’s misery - can complain about the rest of the day.  Even though it does no one any good.

My main man, the late John Savage’s line was:

“You don’t strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.”

Remember when you were a kid - a real young kid - and you wanted a present really bad?  Sure you do.  Most of you aren’t that old.  Remember what happened when you finally got it?  You played with it non-stop, morning to night.

When people asked me what I was going to do when I retired, there were a very limited number of items on the list.  Visiting the boys, naturally, is one of them and with one living in Newport Beach and the other in Monterey, it doesn’t much matter which we choose - to Jane and me.

Another way I tell people I’ll be spending time is with the baby gift business I began a couple years ago, www.CuteBabyNameGifts.com.  The website is being revised and should be updated in a week to ten days.  On the home page will be a short story of why I started it.  The even shorter version is back in the ’80s I needed to buy a baby gift, called my mother (an expert on such matters) and got one from a lady in New Jersey.  You could say the reactions I got those who got it, as well as their friends, were life-changing.

The last thing I have always said I would do when I retired is jigsaw puzzles. I love sudokus and did them often during my spare time.  Still do.  It’s just that I have a lot more free time.  Sure, I’m looking forward visiting the kids and to spending a great deal of time with the baby gift business (hint: 559 287-3305 to order) but there will always be down time.

So, on Friday, I went out and bought two jigsaw puzzles.  Each one is 1000 pieces.  One is a picture of seven kittens.  My wife was a cat lover when we got married but after getting a dog (a basset hound named Bubba who tragically died a year ago last Xmas), that changed.  She still loves cats, but dogs?  If you think my stories are long, well, I won’t even try to put that one into words.  The other puzzle is a Thomas Kincaid portrait.

I had to decide which one I’d do first so I flipped a coin.  Since I was going to use our dining room table and Jane had some things stacked on it she planned on doing - probably when she retires at the end of the year - I wound up starting with the kitties.  Had to flip that coin twelve times.

Bright and early yesterday morning, around 10:00 am (with retirement comes “sleep in Saturday” which is distinguishable from “sleep in Sunday,” “sleep in Monday,” . . . you get the idea - retirement is great!) the pieces were out and, other than morning stretching (which allows the rest of the day to take place), lunch, putting out the empty water bottles (Monday is delivery day), dinner and a few bathroom breaks, the day’s plan consisted of nothing beside “here, kitty, kitty, kitty.”  How serious I am about this new endeavor can be told in this manner.  From our dining room the television cannot be seen.  Which means I listened to Gary Danielson and Verne Lundquist do the Florida-LSU game (if Danielson is doing the color it’s just as good - see 11/8/09 blog).  Then it was the audio of South Carolina-Georgia and Fresno State-Colorado State.  I admit I got up to find and use the remote.  Yet, I’m only half done - and I worked in it until 2:00 am.  Which kinda explains “sleep in Sunday.”

What Bette Davis once said made me wonder exactly how many jigsaw puzzles there are:

“I am doomed to an eternity of compulsive work.  No set goal achieved satisfies.  Success only breeds a new goal.  The golden apple devoured has seeds.  It is endless.”

During part of my tenure at Fresno State, I did the color commentary for the Bulldogs locally televised basketball games.  While it was nice to get noticed around town, especially when it was on an occasion either or both of my sons were with me, I fully realized that not one of the people complimenting me (the ones who think you’re awful may write a letter-to-the-editor, but at least they have the decency not to confront you publicly about it) were tuning into the broadcast because of my analysis. 

It’s the same with any game on TV.  I have heard of viewers mute a game because they can’t stand a certain announcer, but no one is watching or listening to a contest just because a certain person is doing play-by-play or color.  Yet, having a competent color commentator certainly enlightens the experience and makes watching the game much more entertaining and enjoyable.

Here’s what makes a good color analyst.  First of all, the person needs to be prepared.  Knowing how to pronounce the names of the players from both teams, researching the strengths and weaknesses of the participating teams, having the up-to-date statistics and being aware of injured players and whether they’ll play or not.

Then, a thorough understanding of the game and its strategies is essential, as is a knowledge of the rules.  Being able to explain what happened - in a language even casual fans can comprehend (without feeling you’re “talking down” to them) - and even to predict what will happen - but through the use of reasoning and not just what the guy at the end of the bar is saying because he heard somebody in a studio show say it. 

The upper tier guys are also quick on their feet (or whatever part of their body is grounding them), so they can interject a quip, whether it comes from playing off their partner, a graphic, a promo or camera shot.  And the absolute best have a voice easy on the ears and speak English the way it’s taught in school.  Slang is OK and there are even some highly regarded commentators who will say things like, “They shoulda went for it.”  An occasional grammatical error can be oevrlooked, but butchering the English language will doom the career of even the most popular former athlete.

The reason for this blog is I was in complete awe of Gary Danielson’s performance during the Alabama-LSU game.  He plays off of partner Verne Lundquist (a perfect straight man) extremely well and he had obviously done his homework.  When LSU’s talented cornerback Patrick Peterson was out of the game due to cramping, Danielson noted, “Alabama’s got Julius Jones matched up on a safety, which is much different than a corner.  Look for them to take advantage of that.”  73 yards later, Peterson was in the end zone with what proved to be the winning points.  The replay showed his comments that 1) safeties give more (meaning too much) cushion and 2) they don’t open field tackle as well as corners were spot on.

At halftime, he correctly pointed out the Tide was relying too heavily on the pass and needed to get Heisman Trophy candidate Mark Ingram more carries.  The Crimson came out on the first possession and did just that, resulting in a ‘Bama TD.  Later, on a poorly thrown pass by QB Greg McElroy, a UA offensive lineman (who, we were informed carried a 4.0 GPA) turned around and seemed to be questioning the accuracy of his quarterback.  Danielson, realizing that the best humor is of the self-deprecating kind, told a similar story about a throw he made during his career and one of his “O” linemen saying to him, “What was that, GD?”

On a 4th & goal, the Tide broke the huddle with 12 twelve players.  The cameras showed Alabama’s McElroy, Jones and coach Nick Saban all were frantically trying to call time out.  Danielson interjected, once again correctly that the rules stated that in that particular situation, the offending team could not be bailed out by taking time out.

“GD” also observed when LSU scored a go-ahead touchdown, making the score 15-10 that it was too early to go for a two-point conversion because, failing to score, two field goals would beat them.  The Tigers did and their pass was incomplete.  The next possession, ‘Bama kicked a field goal and after scoring a TD - since the score was 19-13 -went for two themselves and were successful.  A field goal in the fourth quarter put the game out of reach, giving the Tide a nine point lead.  Had LSU kicked the PAT, the score would have been 16-10, meaning when UA scored their TD, the score would have been 19-16 and they would have gone for one.  Thus, the late FG would have made the score 26-19, putting the Tigers behind by only seven, still having a chance.

There are many great color commentators (mainly because there are so many televised games that there are about a zillion color guys) and, for my money, Gary Danielson ranks up there with the best.  Those I think are, or were, outstanding are John Madden & Pat Summeral, Hubie Brown & Jeff Van Gundy and Joe Morgan & Joe Garagiola.  Each of them subscribes to Samuel Johnson’s theory:

“Knowledge is of two kinds.  We know a subject ourselves, or we know where we can find information on it.”Â