You killed them. You killed the Mets. You killed everything. You’re a monster.
Read More...Bob Costas is often evangelical at odd times. His recent ill-timed (if not illogical) remarks about gun control felt like something reserved for the Huffington Post — not the goal post — where he was broadcasting a football game. Now his increasingly throaty, theatrical bent led him to say that the Mets’ celebration after Sunday’s victory was a sign of the “end of Western Civilization.”
But this time ...
Login to Join (1 members)
{/exp:tag:subscribed}Page rendered in 2.0252 seconds, 174 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. Riki Tiki Javy Lopez posted on October 13, 2012 at 08:58 AM # hit 0 | hit 0Just let go of the conspiracy stuff. Start by forgetting the rightfield foul pole “home run.” Buck Showalter himself said in the postgame that wasn’t why the Orioles lost. And by the way, if you were one of the locals complaining about TBS not being pro-Orioles enough all week, you don’t get to cite the channel’s on-field reporter, Craig Sager, reporting that he interviewed an usher in the right field stands who said the ball nicked the pole.
It's sure a funny conspiracy that results in the Yankees' rotation being completely fouled up by the postseason schedule, while the Tigers' rotation is left wholly intact.
This guy also commends Craig Sager for going out to right field to see for himself and condemns other reporters for not doing so. And he found an usher who said the ball "nicked" the foul pole. Um, isn't that why we have instant replay, because we can't trust first looks?
To me, a reporter leaving the press box in the sixth inning to ask fans about a controversial home run call in the middle of the sixth inning is like leaving a presidential debate halfway through, going out outside and doing man-on-the-street interviews about one particular question. Although it's not like Sager had anything else to do at that particular moment. Not disparaging his work but what else was he doing.
Johnson, Ripken, Smoltz and Sager were really outstanding.
Blah, blah from announcers. Machado will learn a lot from being in the game. Jeter is so steady. MacLouth is a valuable addition. Hitters are slumping. Pitchers are doing well, except they aren't throwing strikes. Thome has been in pressure before.
Should be only two voices in booth. The studio cutbacks with Wells and Eckersly were boring, unfocused and inept.
Smoltz is truly the perfect storm: Long and outstanding playoff experience as both a starter and a reliever, as well as having been on the winning and losing side in countless numbers of series.
When he stuck to analyzing and predicting pitch sequences, he was quite good. But he definitely came across as pulling for the Orioles (whether because he was directed, or because he pulled himself together, he did start qualifying "unfortunately" with "for the Orioles" after Game 1)...whereas Mr. Oriole, Cal Ripken, seemed objective and genuinely excited by the outcomes.
I actually found Ripken's insights on infield positioning and play possibilities more interesting and involved than Smoltz's.
Ernie Johnson is kind of annoying in the NBA.
The mute button also mutes the crowd noise. Ideally there would be an announcer mute button, or even more ideally, separate volume controls for the announcers, the crowd, the field noise, and whatever else you can think of. Which reminds me, I thought we lived in the era of "interactive television" or some similar buzzword. Why hasn't this caught on yet?
The sad truth is they will probably never let us mute only the announcers; a large fraction of what they say involves station branding and advertising.
Well, he is human, after all
Did it ever occur to you that this particular "partisan" comment might have been driven by the fact that Smoltz was seeing this from the pitcher's POV, and that it was a critique of the pitch?
I'd have to see those clips again, but as a lifeline Yankee fan, I never noticed any particular partisanship by either Smoltz or Ripken on behalf of either team. What I heard was a lot of terrific commentary from two players who've been there and done that.
The sad truth is they will probably never let us mute only the announcers; a large fraction of what they say involves station branding and advertising.
If you have at least the mlb.tv audio subscription you can watch "condensed" versions of the games that have the sounds of the game and NO ANNOUNCERS. It's a beautiful thing. Well, besides the fact it's not live.
Smoltz overall was pretty good, which is about the best I expect from any announcer.
EJ is kind of a dope, but whatever.
Such as? I thought he was fine.
What are the other 119 wrong things he said? I was at all but one of the Orioles playoff games and I watched the other one on mute, so I honestly have no idea how good Cal was.
I thought Smoltz was awful as was the rest of them. Go figure.
"Atlanta Braves closer John Smoltz criticized those who want to legalize gay marriage. "What's next? Marrying an animal?" he asked derisively."
CBS, Feb 11 2009
Of course not everyone new is good, but, I think this mechanism is at work.
I think McCarver is a strong example of this, he was excellent doing Mets games in the 80s when he had only recently retired from the league and he's become progressively worse since then.
I can understand why he wants to do it with his dad being an ex-Brave and ex-Braves broadcaster. Baseball's probably his favorite sport and he's the face of Turner Sports so he can make it happen.
But he just doesn't have the pipes and he always sounds rusty.
Yes, let's fire anyone who disagrees with you. Please take the tolerance police act somewhere else.
I did not write that I thought he should be fired. In fact, I feel the exact opposite - Greek and Campanis and Smoltz should not have been fired for voicing their opinions and it is impossible to have freedom of speech if you can lose your career by exercising such freedom. I just said it surprises me that Smoltz has his job despite expressing views much more hateful and vulgar than Greek's or Campanis'. I would also be surprised if you got over 300 on the reading section of the SAT.
"it is impossible to have freedom of speech if you can lose your career by exercising (freedom of speech)."
Does not go very well with:
"I just said it surprises me that Smoltz has his job despite expressing views much more hateful and vulgar than Greek's or Campanis'."
Clearly, the reason why it surprises you because you feel that, in a perfect world, people like Smoltz (who say "hateful and vulgar" things) would be kept off the air.
I would also be surprised if you got over 300 on the reading section of the SAT.
And this comment just proves you're a smug jerk. Tolerance, indeed.
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. A lot of announcers, when they start, have a personality and a contribution, and it seems like at some time they are all sent to announcer camp and molded to into being the same as all the rest.
I don't think SMoltz is particularly new, but I remember a lot of praise for him when he was. I think he is crap now to be honest. The same as all the restt.
If you think people are smug jerks for responding to an insult with another insult, then what do you consider yourself for hurling an insult at someone who hasn't insulted you? On the topic of reading comprehension: I wrote nothing about a perfect world, only of what usually happens in these cases. The Mayor is right.
Even though I will strongly fight for people's rights to all speech without losing their job or interference from the government, I will not hesitate to speak out against bigoted ignorant hate speech. Smoltz is a slimy #########. He shouldn't be arrested or fired for it or even forced to apologize, but he should expect people to be upset enough to speak out.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.