ESPN Credits Deadspin with McGwire Story

Jay McGwire's intention to write a book revealing the "McGwire family secret" was big news yesterday. The story led Sports Center and amazingly contained a credit to Deadspin, the original source.

I'm not an expert, so I don't know if Deadspin, or any other blog has been credited on ESPN's flagship program before. The guys at Awful Announcing would know if it's been done, and they seem to be of the opinion this is a first.

A win for the bloggers, via ESPN of all places. I suppose if you're going to get a big win in the sports media world, it almost has to come from ESPN. Kudos to Deadspin for the recognition and also to ESPN for, well, doing what it should. Here's the video:

Makes You Wonder What he Said to the Team

Rod Marinelli said his goodbyes to the Detroit media today at Senior Bowl practice in Mobile, Alabama. According to Tom Kowalski on Mlive.com, as three reporters from Detroit approached Rod at the practice, Marinelli waved them off, pointing his thumb over his shoulder and saying "goodbye ladies."

Oh Rod Marinelli, we hardly knew ye. Kowalski also points out that he had been told that Marinelli did not like the media in Detroit and would often bad-mouth them behind closed doors (I bet Ed Werder would let us know what Rod said). As a battered Lions fan, I saw Rod's weekly spewing of the same sound bytes over and over.

This kind of disdain for the media Marinelli showed recently is not the best way to make friends or win over public opinion, but it certainly would have been more exciting. Especially after he was 0-14 or so and had nothing to lose it would have been nice to see him go off on the press once in a while, or throw a punch at Rob Parker.

Another thing this story made me think of was Rod's farewell to his team. I'm sure he liked them a lot more than he liked reporters and may have been beaten badly if he called them ladies, but you have to think he had some ammo for the players if he felt so inclined.

Personally, I would love to learn that he went off on Kitna, berated Orlovsky for running out of the endzone, or told the offensive linemen and defensive backs that they could trade positions and the team wouldn't be any worse for it.

All in all, Marinelli is a respected position coach with a reputation for discipline and he should be a good fit for the Bears. It is scary to hire a coach that just went 0-16, but the Bears made a nice hire.

Whose Brow?

As in, whose brow will be part of the "Mt. Rushmore of Sports"? In case the ridiculousness of the idea didn't give it away, this will be ESPN's new fan-driven gimmick that we all will hate after...well, we already hate it. Awful Announcing fittingly has the release from ESPN:

SportsCenter, ESPN’s flagship news and information program, and ESPN.com, the leading online sports destination, will combine to present a five-week, fan-based series to celebrate the sports icons from all 50 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. The series, titled “SportsCenter Mount Rushmore of Sports,” will use fan-generated nominations on ESPN.com to identify the top four sports greats in each state/region, and online voting to select the state with the most impressive collection of sports luminaries worthy of being etched in the state’s Mount Rushmore of sports.

By flagship news and information program, they of course mean advertising mecca and gossip train; and hasn't Yahoo Sports surpassed ESPN in hits on their site? Oh shoot, I'm getting off message.

This catastrophe will take a little over a month and will be graced with the hosting of Rick Reilly and Michael Wilbon, who will choose representatives from each state to form the nominees. Fans will then vote for the rest...I think. I stopped reading the press release.

I'm really struggling with what to say here. If you follow the link above you can read the entire release and try to wrap your mind around the awfulness of this idea. We saw it with Who's Now and Titletown, and this one is just as bad. Ryan Leaf bad.

So do we just try to ignore it? Should we try and fix it so it ends up being something like Tebow, Joey Harrington, Pacman Jones, and some WNBA player? I don't have anything else to say about this monstrosity right now, but I'm open to ideas about how to best make fun of or destroy ESPN's latest abortion.

ESPN loves Talking About ESPN

One of the best things on ESPN's website is the column by the Ombuds(wo)man Le Anne Schreiber. It's her job to call ESPN on all of their crap, not to mention sift through the e-mounds of complaints that the world-wide leader receives every day. She really does a great job and I highly recommend reading the columns.

The latest piece by Schreiber deals with a familiar practice by ESPN: making itself the story. The column points out four recent incidents in which ESPN reporters or personalities drew the spotlight away from the story and onto themselves. Two were courtesy of everyone's favorite reporters who when they report something you know it is false, Ed Werder and Chris Mortensen. Of course Werder was shoved into the spotlight after all of his unnamed sources made T.O. mad and ESPN followed up with an interview between Owens and Stephen A. where Owens told his side of the story about Werder. Mortensen had a falling out with the Raiders when the Raiders denied that one of his reports was true. Shocking. Morty told the AP that he no longer ran his stories by the Raiders for comment. Awesome.

Another issue was also T.O. related. Cris Carter told a couple different ESPN radio shows that he would deal with T.O. by shooting him. Obviously he was just making a point, but also awesome. Carter, after his second time of the day using the same words said that it was a "poor choice of words." You think? At least the NFL doesn't have a problem with gun violence.

Finally, viewers seemed to take issue with the Vitale-Tirico announcer swap. Well, not so much the swap, but the hours ESPN spent promoting their own employees.

I didn't even know about two of these issues, but I'm not surprised at all. This is common practice for ESPN. Whether it is Skip Bayless arguing, Lou Holtz and Mark May spitting and blubbering on about things, or any of these situations above, ESPN doesn't just report stories, it makes or shapes the story. This is a point that is brushed over in Schreiber's piece. While ESPN tilted the spotlight in its direction in these cases, the issue I have is that the guy moving the spotlight has on one of those ESPN fleeces that everyone got with their subscription to the Mag.

I've seen countless stories by ESPN that only give one side, have misleading headlines to pump up hits, or simply beat a played out story to death. Reporters, producers, and executives at ESPN will routinely choose the flash of Dallas locker room gossip over the substance of...well, anything has more substance than that.

On a final note of this latest rant against ESPN, I've seen extensive coverage on the NFL coaching carousel recently. Is it me, or is the coaching talk starting to overwhelm the playoff talk? I want to float an opinion about this media coverage and the shortened tenure of NFL coaches in recent years. I think ESPN, as the driving force of sports media, is at least partially responsible for the short leash on coaches in all sports. Of course many will say that organizations have developed a "win now or else" mentality, and they have, but this is because anytime a coach struggles, ESPN starts the "Is Bob Stoops on the Hot Seat?" story. Just another example of ESPN shaping and choosing the story so they have something interesting to talk about. We'll have to wait and see where the guy with the fleece points the light today.

Gary Danielson Tries to Make SEC Football Unwatchable

This Saturday has been a fantastic day for football. Army-Navy early, USC-UCLA and the SEC Championship this afternoon and the Big 12 Title game to cap it off. However, for the last three years, one thing has made the SEC Championship game difficult to watch, or at least to listen to.

Gary Danielson has to be among the worst announcers in the country. It doesn't have a lot to do with his analysis or insights into the game. Danielson is awful because he is biased and has no shame in putting it on display.

Other networks show favor to some teams, like ESPN and the Yanks and Sox, and some announcers obviously love a particular team, like Vitale and Duke, but this is a whole new level of annoying favoritism and irresponsible broadcasting.

For two straight years, Danielson lobbied throughout the broadcast for the SEC's teams to get into the National Championship games. He would launch into long narratives about the merits of the SEC's teams over the other contenders. He was at it again this year saying things like "I'm not watching the National Championship game if Florida is not in it."

This year, the campaigning for Florida wasn't enough. Danielson had to throw in his endorsement of Tim Tebow for the Heisman Trophy. Telling voters to pay attention to Tebow and slurping the junior quarterback just about every chance he got. "How could you not get down the field fast after Tim Tebow pumped you up." Or after a fairly simple slant for a touchdown, "you can't do this stuff!" It was a damn five yard slant.

Look, Tebow is a great college quarterback and thrives in that offense, but we don't need to hear about it all game long. It's number one against number four. How about we focus on the game? Danielson's lobbying is getting so old and tiring and he really makes it impossible to listen to the game. Unless you're in Tim Tebow's family.

ESPN to BCS: "It's your destiny!"

Sports coverage has changed significantly in our lifetime. A lot of it has been good, but there are some things that have gone horribly wrong. Every week I'll be taking a little time to whine about one of these things with no hope whatsoever that anything will change.

Somehow when I think of the new deal between the BCS and ESPN for television rights from 2011-2014, I picture the Emperor from Star Wars convincing the BCS to come over to the World-Wide Leader. Well, the BCS has come over to the dark side.

Not that Fox has done a good job, or has ever done a good job at anything sports related (except those Best Damn top 50 countdowns), but there are so many reasons I don't like this relationship between the BCS and ESPN:

1. I hate the BCS and I hate ESPN. I want to take them out in a field and beat them down, Office Space style.
2. Don't expect anyone on the network to rail against the BCS system when they have the rights to broadcast. They'd get excited about a checkers match if it made them some money.
3. Now we have to listen to Lou Holtz say "BeeScheeeEsssch" more.
4. Not everyone has ESPN. I know this doesn't impact most people reading a blog, or most sports fans, but I really think it should be on a major network.
5. There are more reasons, but they mostly stem from number one.

There are obviously some good things about this. The broadcasts on Fox were horrible and no one does a better job showing a sporting event than ESPN. The analysts on Fox were also bad; Barry Switzer didn't get the job done. While Holtz and May can dig a deep hole and jump in, the Gameday crew is solid and Rece Davis or Fowler will be 100 times better than anyone Fox has hosting their coverage.

This is still a win for the Empire and I can't support the move to ESPN. The main thing to be disappointed about is that I think this makes things exponentially tougher to get rid of the BCS before 2014. Your move Barack.

Only 90 Days Left!

Sports coverage has changed significantly in our lifetime. A lot of it has been good, but there are some things that have gone horribly wrong. Every week I'll be taking a little time to whine about one of these things with no hope whatsoever that anything will change.

This week's column takes us to the front page of CBS Sports College Basketball section. Here, in the top right corner of the screen, you'll find a countdown clock. These aren't too common on sports sites or on ESPN's ticker leading up to a big game. In this case, it's even more understandable with the start of college basketball. So what's the big deal?

Well, this particular countdown is for an event 90 days away. Well what's going to happen in 90 days worth mentioning? Bob Knight's return to coaching? Indiana players file for injunctive relief against Kelvin Sampson and his incessant calling? Stephen Curry's first missed shot?

Wrong, wrong, and yeah right he's not going to miss. This is the countdown to the Duke - North Carolina game! Wooo! Now when I get that mid-November fit of "oh my God, when conference play finally starts, I wonder when Duke and UNC meet up" out of my head. Just a quick trip to CBS Sports. Thanks Jim Nantz!

Forget great non-conference games like UNC and Michigan State at Ford Field, UCLA at Texas, or UConn at Gonzaga, we all can't wait for this overrated rivalry game! Plus, maybe none of those other games are on CBS.

Shame on you CBS. This is ESPN-league stuff. When I heard there was a countdown to this game somewhere on the Internet, I immediately blamed ESPN, but you beat them to it. I hope the game gets postponed on account of weather. Then how will anyone know when it starts?!!!

Preseason Polls are not Ranked High

Sports coverage has changed significantly in our lifetime. A lot of it has been good, but there are some things that have gone horribly wrong. Every week I'll be taking a little time to whine about one of these things with no hope whatsoever that anything will change.

This week I want to spout off about preseason rankings in college sports. They're ridiculous. No one knows which teams will be the best year in and year out. Where were Alabama and Penn State ranked to start the college football season? In the AP poll, Penn State was 22nd and Alabama was unranked. They were 22nd and 24th in the Coaches' Poll. Nice call boys. Clemson at number nine was another great call, not to mention Wisconsin at 12 or 13. Clemson is 4-4 and Wisconsin is in last place in the Big Ten.

Why do they even bother with these things? People are interested I guess, but what's wrong with just a preview? You'll still get people to watch to see what the "experts" think will happen and watch Lou Holtz spit at cameramen.

It even becomes problematic later in the season when teams and pundits start spewing facts at us. "They beat four ranked teams this season." No, they didn't. Maybe they beat four teams that were ranked at the time they played those teams, but maybe three of those wins came in the first four weeks, before some preseason hype was proven idiotic.

Plus, if a team is ranked toward the top at the beginning of the season, it effects their ranking the rest of the year. It becomes a little harder to move them down if they falter. It becomes easier to move them back up after a big win.

Polls come out early for one reason in my opinion and that is to try and generate interest so people will watch games, analysis, and the release of the polls themselves. This is borderline moronic. Ohio State and USC would have been an intriguing match-up without fans having to be reminded that both teams are in the top five in the nation.

Why not make teams earn their positions in the first three or four weeks of the season? Don't worry Mark May, that will give you plenty of time to still argue about the rankings and why Pitt should be in the top ten. A week four debut will be more exciting than a preseason poll because fans will actually have some arguments to make for their team when it comes out.

So as college basketball season gets started up, we have the polls out already, so you know who will be good. You know what else pisses me off? These stories on ESPN's site that have titles like "Northwestern #1 in new Coaches' Poll", then I click on the story expecting to see the actual poll, and it turns out to be a long narrative in which teams are talked about in a random order. Stop that!

Let's get rid of these preseason polls. Just something else for Obama to think about.

Make it Stop!

Sports coverage has changed significantly in our lifetime. A lot of it has been good, but there are some things that have gone horribly wrong. Every week I'll be taking a little time to whine about one of these things with no hope whatsoever that anything will change.

I'm admittedly no expert when it comes to critiquing the media. However, it doesn't take an expert to figure out that a Gilbert Brown body fat-like percentage of what is on television sucks. I don't need to be an expert to watch an episode of Sportscenter or read something in the sports section and think to myself "who really cares about this?"

Well here and now is where I grab my e-megaphone and complain to all (six) of you about some topic the sports media is covering that should be beaten to death with a tire iron.

So today, I'll pick what I consider one of the most egregious practices of ESPN and Sportscenter. "Dancing With the Stars" does not belong on your network. No one cares if Emmitt Smith and Jeff Garcia just need to dance. Charles Rogers is working at a 7-11 somewhere and I'm not seeing any special features on serving Big Gulps or stocking shelves.

I understand that the show is on ABC and through the miracle of media synergy, you feel obliged to help Walt Disney out and give 'em some pub. You know what else is on ABC sometimes? F*^$ing sports! Why don't we try covering those thoroughly before moving on to reality shows?

Now I don't watch a ton of Sportscenter anymore, I can get my sports news from legitimate sources, like Deadspin and other sites that feature crass language and pictures of cheerleaders; but when I was watching recently and saw a teaser for a "Dancing With the Stars" update after the break, I was frighteningly close to requiring a change of shorts.

Unless some NFL player was arrested for stalking one of the dancers, or they actually made Emmitt Smith talk on the show, then this is an abomination. It seems like we used to get at least 15-20 seconds of highlights on every game played the night before, and while the six segments per show talking about the Pats and Cowboys is a topic for another week, eliminating this ridiculous coverage could at least give us a few more seconds of actual sports.

_______ Would Play in Europe; It's not News!

I came across this last night and it made me yearn for the days of Kobe vs. Shaq or thirty straight minutes of Celtics coverage to start Sportscenter.

Fans really don't give a shit if a player would go to Europe to play basketball. Oh, wow LeBron would think about going? If they paid him 20 mil per year? I'm shocked. What's that? Jeff Foster would consider playing in Europe? Well, screw me in the ear!

What is the current list of players we have heard about in connection with Europe? LeBron, Kobe, Ben Gordon, Hedo...and I don't even pay attention to the NBA until April, so I'm sure there are a ton more. Sure, Josh Childress braved the Atlantic to go play in Europe, but that doesn't mean every player's stance on the subject needs to be unearthed. When Gooden and Stevenson had a beard growing contest no one thought to inquire as to whether Chauncey Billups and Ron Artest would have a similar contest with porn-stasches.

NBA reporters really don't have much to do apparently. They've started a mini-streak of these runon stories. First it was the ground breaker that Josh Howard smoked pot; better ask everyone else if they do. Now the Europe kick. "I know you said you have proof there are more officials involved in the gambling scandal Mr. Marion, but would you consider, in your wildest dreams, playing in Europe?"

Just so you know, I have not considered going to Europe to practice law, or for my more likely profession of blogging for no money. The people smell funny and I automatically think most of the men are homosexuals (nttawwt).