I finally had a chance to sit down last night and watch the MLB Network's "Hot Stove" show, a one-hour nightly program that will serve as sort of a practice run for the network's full-evening programming during the season which will run highlights and cut-ins of all the games going on each day.
I was pleasantly surprised by how good it looked, less than a week after its debut. Hosted by Victor Rojas, former Texas Rangers broadcaster and son of ex-player and Cub coach Cookie Rojas, who is amiable, well-spoken and keeps the show moving, it examines the top stories of the day (yesterday's was the press conference introducing Mark Teixeira to the NYC media) and also has various features. Yesterday, they had each of their ex-player analysts (Harold Reynolds, Al Leiter and Joe Magrane) play the role of the GM of a downtrodden team (Reds, Padres and Pirates) and choose ONE pitcher they would sign as a free agent.
Reynolds, the longtime ESPN veteran, is very comfortable on the air and made good use of the huge studio, which also serves as a backdrop that the ex-players can use to demonstrate various plays. I assume they'll do quite a bit of this during the season. Leiter, who has worked for both Fox and the YES Network doing color commentary, and Magrane, a longtime color commentator on Tampa Bay games, are both well-spoken. MLB has chosen well in getting men who both played the game and who know how to talk about it in an articulate fashion.
I also liked Tom Verducci's contributions as the non-player analyst. He's got useful opinions without being smarmy as ESPN's Tim Kurkjian is or know-it-all like Buster Olney.
MLB has also hired two female reporter/anchors, Hazel Mae (from NESN) and Trenni Kusneirek, a Milwaukee native who worked for FSN Wisconsin on Brewers games last year. Kusneirek's very good -- she's a former TV sports anchor from both Milwaukee and Pittsburgh and knows the game. Hazel Mae... well, let's just say she's nice as eye candy. She did two taped interviews, one with Teixeira, one with Yankees manager Joe Girardi. The questions seemed pretty ordinary and she seemed somewhat uncomfortable.
Those interviews were among the couple of quibbles I had with the production, less from a baseball standpoint than from a TV production standpoint -- this is my TV directing background speaking now. In the interviews, both Hazel Mae and the interviewee were holding microphones; that not only looked odd, but must have been strange for the person being interviewed.
Also, the network needs to ditch the fake crowd noise and fake ball-hitting-bat sound effect during highlight video. They were distracting and made it difficult to hear the voiceover narration. And, some of the shots of Rojas squeezed him onto a small sliver of the right-hand side of the screen, dwarfed by a plasma screen with a mostly meaningless graphic in it. In general, though, the graphic style is good -- readable without being overbearing, and their "crawl" is occasionally used as a "flip", where you see one story at a time, which is much more readable than a continuous crawl.
Overall, I was pleasantly surprised by how good the show looked, and I'm sure they are tweaking it as they go, considering they still have about seven weeks before the first spring training games. The network also has some other off-season programming that looks interesting, including detailed looks at various seasons in baseball history, "Baseball's 9", which is a look at the "Top 9" in different categories, and other baseball history, including running all of Ken Burns' "Baseball", and some old World Series films. Last night, they ran the 1946 World Series -- fascinating to see the way those were filmed, using extreme closeups of players obviously shot before the game, intercut with game action, to make it look semi-live; remember, in those pre-TV days, this was the only way anyone who wasn't at the game got to see any baseball action.
That's something that from a 2009 perspective, where if we pay for it we can watch almost every game we want to (and maybe the MLB Network will eventually allow everyone to do so regardless of location), and see highlights and keep up with scores nearly instantaneously. I give the MLB Network high grades so far, and if they keep up the good work, there should be no need to watch "Baseball Tonight" any more -- since ESPN often pre-empts it for other sports, and the MLB Network will be constantly updating scores and highlights for six or seven hours every night.
Good work, MLB. Didn't think you had it in you.
0 recs | 321 comments
Al I could not agree
more about what a good MLB has done with this programming. I also am very impressed with Victor Rojas in the job he has done so far. I am looking forward to seeing waht type of role Dan Plesac is going to play on the Hot Stove!
cubdreamer - January 7, 2009
Another MU Grad
Trenni is a Marquette grad along with Len Kasper. Guess I majored in the wrong thing there.
MerigoldBowling - January 7, 2009
my brother
is an MU grad. Go WADE!
clarknaddison - January 7, 2009
Dish Network User
I have not yet had the pleasure of watching this channel but I have contacted Dish about this and hope it will be added to my lineup soon.
tony412 - January 7, 2009
I'm thinking
of going to Direct TV, I emailed dish and they sounded like it would not be added anytime soon. FWIW.
StevenABQ - January 7, 2009
Similar thing happened
when the NFL and NBA networks went online and they put those on relatively soon. It’s a competetive market so I’m pretty sure they will add them eventually, just hoping it’s before spring training to help me thru the cold boring winter.
tony412 - January 7, 2009
Cool
Wel I hope your right too, it sounds like a cool network. If both you and I emailed Dish you can bet there are lots more…maybe it will happen.
StevenABQ - January 7, 2009
Cookie Rojas
There is a name that brings back memories and makes me feel old. I would love to see Verducci on air as he is
probably the writer closest to Maddux.
Doggie Stalker - January 7, 2009
I'm surprised as well
Al as you might recall I was trashing the talents of some of the people who work for MLB Network…maybe unprofessional on my end but it was a true honest opinion.
They seem to have their act together. However, the true test will be either Spring training or the first day of the season when their crew works in crunch time getting clips together from all the games.
ak123 - January 7, 2009
Right.
Which is why it’s good for them to have a couple months of “rehearsal”.
Al Yellon - January 7, 2009
Sounds like the need to start obeying the rule of thirds, Al...
ZING.
PurpleLineToWrigley - January 7, 2009
GOOD SHOW....
So far was very impressed . Harold Reynolds has always been objective . We will have to see what the rest of the year brings . Gotta say I did get very tired of watching the Dodgers-Yankee series night after night …..
cubs north - January 7, 2009
I miss Harold Reynolds
He was the best part of BBTN.
dtpollitt - January 7, 2009
I agree
it really went downhill, IMO, after he left
gwood - January 7, 2009
hugs
Maybe Harold could give you a hug.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
If Gwood started working for him...
and was a woman, I’m sure he would. :)
I kid, I kid.
CubsWin!Oregon - January 7, 2009
Was thinking the same thing
gwood - January 7, 2009
why
If you don’t care for a woman’s reporting skills then giving reasons why is great but it seems rather demeaning to refer to Hazel Mae as “eye candy.” I’m sure she has had to work very hard to get where she is and her appearance has helped her but that kind of language seems really insulting.
It also seems strange when a person of color is referred to as “well spoken.” Is it a surprise that Victor Rojas or Harold Reynolds are “well spoken?” If it is surprising please let us know why. As broadcasters we expect them to be “well spoken” so it’s only necessary to mention if they aren’t. I don’t mean to be overly sensitive but it seems really offensive to me when women and minorities are singled out like this. Yeah, I know Joe Magrane was thrown in there too but I suppose people figure ex-jocks shouldn’t be able to put a sentence together either. I’m rather disappointed in this type of “analysis.”
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
I thought it was a good review
and a worthy analysis. I didn’t have a problem with it.
I think the reporters and analysts require more of a close-up review for MLB Network than others because it is trying to pull us away from MLB.com, ESPN Networks, or the other traditional formats we have received our baseball knowledge from for the last few decades. If they appear to be under a microscope, I’d say hell yes they are, I want to know if the reporters are eye candy, well-spoken, or if I should stick to BBTN or ESPN.com.
Dan
dtpollitt - January 7, 2009
not against a review
I am not against a fair review of content. But to call women, eye candy and men of color well-spoken, seems tired, worn out, and stereotypical.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
and your politically-correct-nonsensical outrage is stupid and annoying...
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
Outrage?
I’m not outraged and I didn’t resort to name calling.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
She posted pictures of Obama photoshopped into a clown. Tune in some Limbaugh and you will hear exactly the same stuff. Ironically, its politically correct.
ol Pete - January 7, 2009
Hazel Mae knows baseball
Whether or not she is attractive, i.e. “eye candy,” is another topic. She is coming from NESN where boosterism for the Red Sox isn’t discouraged. She was interviewing one of the world’s biggest dorks, Mark Texeira, and had to navigate politically correct waters. There are plenty of real issues, but given MLB and the introduction of the network so far, I doubt she could have asked about him negotiating with other teams, including the Red Sox after he had decided to join the Yankees. She wasn’t going to ask about Bloomberg trading favors with the Yankees to arrange a luxury box that he controls or whether the “winning” was diminished by a near quarter billion dollar payroll.
ol Pete - January 7, 2009
Maybe I'll see more of her baseball knowledge later.
It wasn’t in evidence last night.
Al Yellon - January 7, 2009
I would disagree
watching Hazel on NESN, one of the knocks against her was that she didn’t ‘know’ baseball – at least not enough for a baseball-saturated market like Boston.
Bill Potter - January 7, 2009
And for the record, broadcasters do not have to be well-spoken.
Not at all. See: Entire Cincinnati Reds broadcast team; Santo (I love listening to Ron, but he’s not your prototypical radio guy), and my personal favorite, Joe Morgan. No, you do not have to be well-spoken to be on TV or radio. Not in the sports world.
Dan
dtpollitt - January 7, 2009
also agree w/ dan
Al’s pretty cognizant of people’s sensitivities on this website- i can’t complain w/ his review either. The “well-spoken” remark is important in the case of athletes who are hired to give analysis on TV- I much rather listen to someone who can articulate his/her viewpoint based on their experiences from having played the game. Anyone who’s listened to Orestes Destrade on BBTN knows what I’m talking about- when MLB or ESPN hires former athletes to be analysts on TV, they damn well should have some personality so as to make my experience watching them better. Color of skin is completely irrelevant here- John Kruk is not “well-spoken” in my opinion either.
cubfan1982 - January 7, 2009
I would agree
that John Kruk is not well-spoken, but he is a lot of fun to listen to sometimes for that very reason.
gwood - January 7, 2009
pfffft....
You’re a total wiener…sorry, but I didn’t read it that way, and I’m sure Al didn’t write it that way. Why do people force themselves to be offended by things? Seriously…I’m an ex-jock and didn’t take it to be offensive. I’m not a bigot either, so the “well spoken” comments didn’t even cross my mind as being racially motivated considering he also said the same thing about Leiter and Magrane. It was nothing more than a compliment. Some people, black, white, asian, whatever, don’t speak well or articulate their points. He thinks they do, simple as that. Seems like you’re really reaching here and forcing yourself to be offended by those statements. The “eye candy” thing was the only thing you can maybe claim to be offended by, but hey, believe it or not, he’s probably right and the world does work that way…if you don’t believe it, you’re naive.
Lows05 - January 7, 2009
Agreed.
So if I say ESPN’s BBTN Eric Young isn’t “well-spoken” – because he isn’t – does that make me racist or something?
tville - January 7, 2009
thesaurus
How about inarticulate? “well-spoken” has a lot of negative stereotypical connotations.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
Somehow...........
…………I don’t see you accepting “inarticulate” either.
tville - January 7, 2009
what you see
Well, I just used it. I chose to use inarticulate instead of repeatedly calling people “well-spoken.”
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
Now this is a well-spoken comment.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
Chris Rock
Chris Rock addressed white people calling Colin Powell well-spoken. “He’s so well spoken. He speaks so well. ‘Speaks so well’ is not a compliment. ‘Speaks so well,’ is something you say about retarded people who can talk!” I guess I’m not the only one that thinks calling people of color well spoken is a tired and worn out cliche.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
I don't believe you are still allowed to use the word retarded.
just sayin.
N Oakley - January 7, 2009
After my successful..........
……….lobotomy, I wrote a letter to Rock to tell him about the insensitivity of his remarks.
tville - January 7, 2009
waiting
If you notice the quotation marks it was Rock that said that.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
The quotation marks
make your comment well-spoken.
PurpleLineToWrigley - January 7, 2009
Or at least..........
……….well-punctuated.
tville - January 7, 2009
so if inarticulate is acceptable, does that mean that using articulate is also okay?
ballhawk - January 7, 2009
articulate
Articulate wasn’t used though was it? Nope, an old tired out stereotypical cliche was used.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
I understand that. I'm just trying to see if you agree that articulate is a better option.
ballhawk - January 7, 2009
Serious?
If you are in fact serious, it is obviously a preferable choice. Calling someone articulate doesn’t have the same connotations as calling a person of color “well-spoken.” Wouldn’t you agree?
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
Yes, I'm serious and yes, I would agree.
Unfortunately trying to get people to agree on issues like this is tremendously difficult because the real issue here, or at least it should be, is intent.
To prove my point, scroll down a bit and you’ll see a little “gotcha” I’ve posted in response to your Biden comment.
ballhawk - January 7, 2009
intent
Does intent matter if there is willful disregard for the feelings of others? It may not be one’s intent to degrade and stereotype to call men of color, “well-spoken,” or women “eye candy,” but it is offensive and demeaning.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
I think this is a good reminder that words are important.
Also, words mean different things to different people. I think it’s interesting to read reactions from different people when we all read the same words but they meant different things, depending on the perspective of the reader.
What I take from this is that it’s important to choose our words carefully. Particularly, since we’re only reading words, there’s no body language or voice involved to give us keys to the meaning of words.
cowsarecool220 - January 7, 2009
I take issue with the notion....
that all language is relative to the person hearing it/using it. It’s a carry-over from the dismal era of Deconstructivism that came about in the 60s.
And it’s a bunch of crap. That someone decides that a given word is offensive doesn’t mean that I’m required to act as if they’re justified in doing so.
In the end, words have denotative and connotative meaning. Some people seem to forget the former. Yet its the former that provides context to the latter.
If you remove that, you end up with the absurdity of today where words rotate in an out of “acceptibility” as people arbitrarily decide what is and isn’t proper speech. It makes us all a bunch of clowns.
CubsWin!Oregon - January 7, 2009
This is so true...on the outside I'm a happy clown...
but I’m really a sad clown on the inside.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
I'm picturing...
the clown from Billy Madison.
Good news kids! Luckily he wasn’t dead; he just had severe internal bleeding!.
CubsWin!Oregon - January 7, 2009
Amen...
TheRiot Police - January 7, 2009
A proper word?
I’m not saying that any specific word used here was improper. I’m saying it’s a stereotypical cliche to call men of color “well-spoken.” Why are we so surprised that these men are “well-spoken,” how is that note worthy? Is it wrong to question ignorance? Let me know if a broadcaster is inarticulate, otherwise why mention it? It’s also not unremarkable to note that in our language minorities and women have been demeaned for hundreds of years so many find it acceptable and normal.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
Where did Al feign surprise about their "well-spokenness"?
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
Further....
… I used that word to describe two white men. It’s surprising in a way, because they are former professional athletes, a group not always known for being able to put sentences together.
Accusations of racism are simply false.
Al Yellon - January 7, 2009
Gotcha! Victor Rojas is CUBAN AL!!!!
WHY DO YOU HATE CUBAN PEOPLE AL…WHY?
YOU WERE EVEN AGAINST MARK CUBAN BUYING THE TEAM!
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
Hmmm.
Cuban is Jewish. I must hate Jews, too.
Al Yellon - January 7, 2009
That depends...
would you say Mark Cuban is…well-spoken? Articulate? Clean?
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
Would you say those things about me?
Then you probably hate Cubans and Jews, too.
Al Yellon - January 7, 2009
Everybody hates Jews Al....
Jews and Vegetarians.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
well, I would argue that "willful disregard for the feelings of others"...
…is very much part of intent and should definitely be taken into account.
ballhawk - January 7, 2009
YES!
ATP, a sense of humor, let me show it to you. As a “person of color” myself (I’m Latino), I have no problem with calling things as I see them and was not in the least offended by Al’s comments. For instance, take Fernando Vina. Good personality? I suppose. Good speaker? Not so much. as I’ve yet to see him construct a complete sentence together since being on BBTN.
Jayo525 - January 7, 2009
sarcasm?
Al wasn’t using sarcasm when he called Rojas and Reynolds “well-spoken.” I never said people should be offended and if you aren’t great. My point is that it is in fact a very stereotypical token way to refer to an articulate person of color.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
hmmm...
ATP, are you a liberal?
Lows05 - January 7, 2009
hmmmm
does that matter/ any of your business?
SignedSealed&Delivered - January 7, 2009
So I guess Al is racist
against white people since he used the same comment to describe Leiter and Migrane. I guess Al is an ALF and is racist against homosapiens.
I use well spoken any time I evaluate a person’s public speaking ability regardless of race.
TheRiot Police - January 7, 2009
racist?
I certainly never called anyone racist. If you are writing a critique of someone’s abilities it might serve you well to steer clear of tired worn out cliches.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
Can you point me to this
manual of approved adjectives to be used to desribe people? You injected race into this argument when you only choose to call out the black people being called well spoken and not the white folks.
TheRiot Police - January 7, 2009
your interpretation
I took issue with calling men of color “well-spoken” and a female journalist, “eye-candy.” I never called anyone racist or sexist. I am bring up the fact that these terms are worn out, tired, cliches and it would be nice to see it stop. You don’t mind it, I do. If you read my initial comment I also mentioned that referring to ex-jocks and Magrane specifically as “well-spoken,” seems a little tired as well.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
Your interpretation is incorrect.
I meant no racism nor sexism, and anyone who knows me would know I’m not like that.
Those were my impressions of the individuals involved. I do not judge by sex nor color of skin.
I trust this will end this part of the discussion.
Al Yellon - January 7, 2009
Incorrect?
My interpretation is not incorrect as I never said there was any intent to be racist or sexist. I am saying the phrases used are tired, worn-out, stereotypical cliches. That is really without question. Why is it note worthy that a man of color or an ex-jock is articulate? Let us know if they aren’t, but why so surprised? It will be nice when such things are unremarkable and a woman’s appearance isn’t relative to her ability to do her job. Minorities and women have been demeaned through many common references in our language for generations and when people start to become aware of this and stop perpetuating it, it will be nice. I won’t bother to discuss this any further as those that disagree obviously won’t concede that it’s prejudicial language. No point in trying to convince others that their ignorance is not acceptable.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
Yes, leave us dumb bigots alone.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
Your choice I guess
I choose to view words as words. It is the user of those words and how he uses them that makes somebody/something said racist not the words themselves.
By trying to tell us we can’t use words, you are being racist against the English Language.
Al was responsible in his use of these words and many others so your statements to HIS use of these so called questionable words are just plain ignorant.
TheRiot Police - January 7, 2009
Was about to post the same.
The point he was making was that an ability to play baseball doesn’t necessarily translate to an ability to talk professionally about baseball. This is in contrast to someone like, say, John Kruk.
And, no, I have nothing against people with one testicle.
neverAcquiesce - January 7, 2009
John Kruk
only has one testicle? Wow. How did I not hear that before?
CubsWin!Oregon - January 7, 2009
You can't hear testicles.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
haha.
Thank God for small miracles.
CubsWin!Oregon - January 7, 2009
yea...
Vina is a butcher when it comes to speaking. Same can be said of Bill Cower. Maybe out of their confort zone?
Lows05 - January 7, 2009
Vina is..........
……….horrible on BBTN. How he and EY have managed to stay on the program is beyond my comprehension. They are clearly inarticulate.
tville - January 7, 2009
Emmitt Smith.
Enough said.
PurpleLineToWrigley - January 7, 2009
naive?
You are in fact naive if you think that calling people of color “well-spoken,” isn’t offensive. I believe Joe Biden took flack for saying that very kind of thing about Barack Obama. It is insensitive and I personally would never refer to someone in that manner.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
that’s ridiculous! you’re taking it out of context. It’s like when someone says something in a non perverse way, but people take it that way…maybe you’re the one thinking those thoughts, not us.
Lows05 - January 7, 2009
is calling a white dude “well spoken” racist??? Or should we just assume he is because he’s white?! seriously…ridiculous.
Lows05 - January 7, 2009
racist?
I never called anyone racist.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
not overtly....or in a very well-spoken way.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
nice
I see what you did there.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
Here's Biden's quote
Notice what word he used? And he still took a lot of flack.
No further questions at this time, your honor…
ballhawk - January 7, 2009
Hmm
I don’t think it was that particular word that was the problem, though….
JohnM - January 7, 2009
clean?
The reason the comment was pointed out is because he said he was articulate and clean. Had he simply said articulate no eyebrows would have been raised.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
So the term "clean" is also offensive.....
good to know…I’ll try and never refer to any minority as “clean” so as to not offend them.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
It isn't any one word in that sentence, it is the whole sentence
If you delete clean, it’s still bad. If you delete articulate, it’s still bad.
JohnM - January 7, 2009
now you're definitely being naive
yes, the use of “clean” caused a ruckus, but so did “articulate”. And either one by themselves would still have raised many an eyebrow.
ballhawk - January 7, 2009
And don't forget "first"....
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
Could you maybe do us all a favor...
and post a list of the rest of the seemingly innocuous everyday terms that are racist, offensive, and bigoted? I don’t want to inadvertently use one of those in everyday conversation with the wrong person.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
Unaware
If you are unaware then I certainly can’t help you.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
Calling me "unaware" is mildly offensive...
you should really know better.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
choices
I felt unaware was a better than calling someone stupid like you did me.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
You like to make up your own meanings of sentences don't you?
I didn’t call YOU stupid….try reading my comment again, and this time pay special attention to the subject and predicate.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
Yeah
I’m not stupid just my opinions right?
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
You did better that time...
but you still didn’t comprehend it. Try again…third time’s a charm.
HINT: the word “opinion” does not appear in my comment.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
opinion
I used opinion because there is no outrage on my behalf. You actually seem much more outraged with me than I am with the insensitive remarks that were made.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
That's true...I hate you...but that's only because I'm a mostly white person.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
I think you're being deliberately thick here SWL
The “well-spoken” thing is very widely regarded to be a loaded term. The question it raises is why we bother to point it out regarding African American commentators and athletes, when we don’t for white commentators and athletes.
I don’t think this is a case of political correctness either, since this seems to be tripping whatever knee-jerk anti-PC defenses you have. This doesn’t get raised simply because people think you should use a different word to express the thought, i.e. Indian vs Native American. This questions why you’re even raising that thought at all, why anyone would think it’s noteworthy that a black athlete can form complete sentences.
Wreckard - January 7, 2009
Wait...we're talking about black people?
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
dood.
cmon.
drewishdrewid - January 7, 2009
Drew...it's OK...I'm being "deliberately thick".
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
...
just let it go.
drewishdrewid - January 7, 2009
I was giving you the benefit of the doubt on that one
I guess I was off on that.
Maybe “shrill” would’ve been a less presumptuous way to put it.
Wreckard - January 7, 2009
I’d just say that it is a knee-jerk use of the term “politically correct” to attack, not actual political correctness.
ol Pete - January 7, 2009
After trudging through this whole sub-thread...
…some of you really need hobbies.
Al works in broadcasting. He directs, he knows talent, and given that he’s at a network O&O in a Top 3 market, he’s had to work with all sorts to get there. I don’t doubt for one minute that he was referring to the ex-player factor rather than demeaning (by damning with faint praise) anyone for their ancestry.
Having not seen the show, I’m not in a position to speak to his “eye candy” comment.
That said, why is it that some people are so quick to presume bad intent? Is there no longer such a thing as an innocent comment? Let alone an innocent mistake?
Let those without sin…
MN exile - January 7, 2009
What is that supposed to mean buddy?
You really shouldn’t insult us all like that so covertly. And for the record…I am most certainly NOT a militant vegan Druid as you’ve so cleverly insinuated.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
Do NOT make me stop this car...
n/t
MN exile - January 7, 2009
Calm down there, SWL
I’m pretty sure MN’s “Let those without sin…” comment was a clear and obvious invitation for Worf to join this thread… ;-)
ballhawk - January 7, 2009
shhhhh....
Emelie - January 7, 2009
Thank you.
That’s exactly what I was doing.
Al Yellon - January 7, 2009
So, if a station hires a female reporter...
and she looks nice but can’t improvise on the air, we can’t call her ‘eye candy?’ Even though she doesn’t seem to show the skills that her job would normally require?
And ‘well-spoken’ is now racist? What happens if I refer to a fellow white guy as well-spoken? Is that like calling him a distinguished cracker? (aaaaaaaaaand here come the PC Police…)
I’m so confoozed… I thought with Obama headed to the White House, all this was going to change… I’m gonna go listen to my blues records now…
znohitter - January 7, 2009
really
How often do you hear male reporters referred to as “eye candy?” I suppose you would like people reviewing your wife (if you have one) at her job to call her eye candy?
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
Quite often if
you hung out with some of the girls in here.
sue369 - January 7, 2009
Geovany who?
neverAcquiesce - January 7, 2009
hee :D
sue369 - January 7, 2009
don't forget DLee tying his shoes!
Emelie - January 7, 2009
Uh, I could
never forget that. :D
sue369 - January 8, 2009
I recall a certain male reporter whose real name escapes me at the moment
but he was often referred to as the “SCUD Stud” during coverage of the Gulf War.
ballhawk - January 7, 2009
Arthur something or other?
JohnM - January 7, 2009
Arthur Kent
Didn’t last all that long afterward, did he?
And for that matter, Charles Jaco, who I remember as CD Jaco from WXRT back when I lived there, long, long ago – what ever happened to him?
MN exile - January 7, 2009
He works here in St Louis now.
neverAcquiesce - January 7, 2009
I work in TV.
Some of the male reporters are exactly that, and I know there are women viewers who see them that way.
Al Yellon - January 7, 2009
So you're saying you work for a TV station...
so this is all kinda funny to you?
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
I think you're our eye candy on BCB, Chad.
dtpollitt - January 7, 2009
and no…it’s not really me.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
aaaaaaaaahhhh!
drewishdrewid - January 7, 2009
TWSS
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
What was this guy thinking??
It looks like he’s wearing jeans. Is this his senior picture or his wedding photo? I really like the magenta blinds in the background, and the fog emanating from his back area.
dtpollitt - January 7, 2009
you forgot the cumberbund
that really makes a nice accent with the jeans.
Bill Potter - January 7, 2009
is that a third nipple or a zit in the bermuda triangle of his chest?
Emelie - January 7, 2009
It looks
like a mole to me.
sue369 - January 8, 2009
Triple Nipple?
santoswoodenlegs - January 8, 2009
Honest to
god SWL as your running mate I’ve never thought of you as “eye candy”. Well not on a regular basis any way.
sue369 - January 7, 2009
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
If I had a wife, girlfriend, or even a close female friend who would talk to me on a regular basis, I would be flattered to hear her being referred to as ‘eye candy.’ But that’s beside the point.
If a person (male or female) is hired for a job because of how they look and not because of their ability to do the job, they are ‘eye candy.’ Period. If they know how to do their job, no one will call them ‘eye candy.’
znohitter - January 7, 2009
grow up
quit trying to make everything a race issue.
clarknaddison - January 7, 2009
If you don't like
what is said here feel free to move on.
sue369 - January 7, 2009
DING! DING! DING!
We have a winner in the response to this whiner.
tville - January 7, 2009
Yep
Get in lock step or leave?
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
Is that some kind of white supremacist remark?
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
Felt like it to me.
I take umbrage to such comments.
tville - January 7, 2009
"lock step" is a loaded term you know...
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
sure is
It sure is and that’s the message that is being sent by people like yourself and sue369. “Get in lock step or leave.” I suppose that can be your only response as thinking for yourself can be difficult and painful.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
Funny how your comments objecting to Al's use of words is ok...
and my comments objecting to your objections aren’t. Sure wish it worked both ways.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
comments?
Your “comments” in regard to my opinions were actually name calling. You are welcome to disagree with me but I’ve yet to see you put together a logical refutation of repeatedly calling announcers of color “well spoken.”
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
namecalling...huh...
trying to find my “namecalling” comment….leeme see….nope, can’t find it.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
Stupid?
I’m sorry I guess you don’t consider calling people’s opinions stupid as being “name calling.” I suppose you think that’s logical refutation. I’m still waiting for you to tell me how it’s not a stereotypical cliche to refer to men of color as well spoken.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
Here is my stupid annoying opinion...which doesn't count for much...
Referring to “men of color” – (which I happen to believe is a worse term than “well-spoken”) – in any way is going to be seen as insensitive and racist by some. You can’t really use any adjectives at all….some people will always find an offensive slant in comments about any group of people (race/sex/etc.).
If Al had mentioned ethnicity somewhere in his review…then I could almost maybe see your point. He didn’t…so it’s almost comical to me that your holding up his “well-spoken” reference as a transgression. Al runs a very respectable site (in spite of me), and he goes out of his way to make this a place of civil discourse. He’s the last person you should be lecturing. Now me on the other hand….
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
I'm not lecturing anyone
I know Al comments on keeping the discourse civil which is why I pointed out my disappointment in his remarks. I never called him names nor did I call anyone that disagrees with me names. I have cited well known examples in which men of color were referred to as “well-spoken” and how this is in fact a stereotypical cliche. Now you can brush it off by saying, “some people will always find an offensive slant..” That is a great way to excuse inappropriate behavior. Maybe you could admit that many people do find it insensitive and it shouldn’t have been said. Why would we think that Reynolds or Rojas weren’t “well-spoken?” You also fail to address the fact that the female reporter was referred to as “eye-candy.” These remarks were 3 separate incidents within the same piece and I felt it was inappropriate.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
But he also commented that Magrane and Leiter were well-spoken
Should Al completely ignore the “men of color”.
As for the eye-candy comment, maybe not the best term but why do you think she is there on a show primarily directed to men? The truth hurts sometimes.
rlpete - January 7, 2009
baseball?
Gee, I thought it was supposed to be a show about baseball. Since she has reported on baseball I would assume that’s why she was hired. But according to the review she is just “eye candy.”
As far as the Magrane and Leiter are concerned I stated previously that they were being complimented as being ex-jocks that can actually talk. That seems a little demeaning as well.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
So...
how exactly would you rewrite Al’s review? I’d really like to see that…make a new fanpost…please.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
Inarticulate..........
………will be used quite often.
tville - January 7, 2009
Jesus.
What he simply implied was that her skills weren’t up to par with the rest of the team (including, mind you, another woman) and that he believes she was hired more for her looks than talent (not solely, but more). Shocking that they would try to reach a bigger audience with sex appeal innit?
neverAcquiesce - January 7, 2009
She’s better than Leiter or Magrane. And if he believes she was hired for her looks more so than her knowledge, that’s at least debatable.
ol Pete - January 7, 2009
I'm not gonna pretend
to know enough to debate this. I simply inferred Al’s article and defended to seemingly foreign concept that attractive women have an advantage in television roles.
I’m not at all saying that’s why she was hired, only that it happens.
neverAcquiesce - January 7, 2009
And its highly debatable whether Leiter whimpering that Yankees sell out on the road or Magrane’s dopey comment that “a rising tide raises all boats” along with his managerial suggestion for the Reds that they trade away pitchers including Harang so they can hire FA pitchers including Randy Wolf is articulate.
ol Pete - January 7, 2009
The broad is there to look at...
get over it.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
What do you base that conclusion on?
ol Pete - January 7, 2009
Mostly just...
a gut feeling I have.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
dood
that’s SO not your gut.
drewishdrewid - January 7, 2009
Wow! She
swings a big bat.
sue369 - January 7, 2009
Okay...well than I object
to your user name.
TACO and Pie = Can be used as a disparaging remark about a woman’s anatomy
“Acapulca Taco” Pie = are you making fun of Felix Pie’s Latino Heritage
It is not the words that are spoken it who is speaking the words and how they are speaking them.
TheRiot Police - January 7, 2009
Acapulco Taco Pie
Take up your beef with Seattle Sutton.
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
Wow...
You totally did not get the meaning of that post. I guess that tells me all that I need to know.
TheRiot Police - January 7, 2009
this thread is becoming quite convoluted so I might have missed this, but...
I believe a few people here have commented that the phrase “men of color” borders on being inappropriate and demeaning, yet you continue to use it. The part I might have missed is where you explain/defend your use of that phrase?
ballhawk - January 8, 2009
Hey Acapulco Taco Pie...
you have a call on line 2. It’s congressman Bobby Rush. He was curious if you wanted him to pop in on the chat and make frivilous racial claims. Oh wait, you already did that. Nevermind.
chi-townbleacherbum - January 7, 2009
LOL
Emelie - January 7, 2009
It smacks of..........
………..“goose step”, and I’m of German heritage.
Off to watch “Valkyrie” and feel better about myself after the heinous things said about me on this post.
tville - January 7, 2009
And as we all know...
Geese have been considered second class citizens of the aviary world for far too long.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
Don't goose..........
……….the Eye Candy!
tville - January 7, 2009
So...
If someone disagrees or wants to bring a topic to light they should just leave? Maybe if you don’t agree you could provide a thoughtful response as to why? Would you like to be called eye candy by someone reviewing your job performance?
Acapulco Taco Pie - January 7, 2009
Dude if someone
called me eye candy I’d kiss them.
sue369 - January 7, 2009
Sue,
you’re eye candy.
dtpollitt - January 7, 2009
oooh, he's lookin' to lay a big one
RIGHT on ya kissah…
drewishdrewid - January 7, 2009
I have a sudden desire to go to Toys R Us.
neverAcquiesce - January 7, 2009
THE GIRAFFE DEMANDS IT!
drewishdrewid - January 7, 2009
Aw, that's cute.
sue369 - January 7, 2009
It's a blog, dude.......
not a performance appraisal.
Get over it.
tville - January 7, 2009
dying
I’m seriously laughing out loud reading this…
Lows05 - January 7, 2009
Please explain
what is wrong when Al also commented that Leiter and Magrane are well-spoken. Can he only comment on white guys and “men of color”?
rlpete - January 7, 2009
it has been used to express
surprise that a black person could speak well. Not in this case, but historically.
drewishdrewid - January 7, 2009
I know but in this case
it was applied to all the commentators.
rlpete - January 7, 2009
I know.
drewishdrewid - January 7, 2009
The PC Law
is that you can only comment on people of your own race, creed, religion, orientation, etc.
So if I read any glasses jokes the gloves are coming off…
neverAcquiesce - January 7, 2009
I guess I failed that class in college
rlpete - January 7, 2009
Ok foureyes....
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
The better to see you with...
neverAcquiesce - January 7, 2009
Geez...
You apparently never watch Baseball tonight, nor announcers generally. “Well-spoken” is a much rarer quality in tv personalities than you seem to imply, and noting its existence has nothing to do with minorities or women.
John Kruk is a good example of a mainstream broadcaster who is not well-spoken. Same with Tim McCarver, and a host of other commentators (if you’ll excuse the pun). Particularly in sports reporting, there is a much lower correllation between eloquence and job-placement. A lot has to do with image, and the other major factor is name recognition.
In short, I would politely suggest that your high-horse is misplaced.
(And if I can get on my own high-horse on language: things don’t “seem” offensive. They either are offensive, or they aren’t. The concept of something “seeming offensive” is a weaseling way of saying that while you aren’t offended, someone else might be. To which the proper response would be: It’s not your place to decide if other people are offended.)
CubsWin!Oregon - January 7, 2009
I have Comcast in Arlington, VA - MLB Network is not carried
I couldn’t find the channel so I went to the MLB.com channel locator and typed in my zip code and nope – it’s not offered on Comcast in my area.
How is it that Comcast has a stake in the network, but they don’t even offer it in my area (not even on the sports package).
I hate Comcast, so I was thinking of switching to Verizon anyway – but they’re not even listed in my area as having it or not having it.
Ugh.
Texas Wahoo - January 7, 2009
Thumbs up from me so far
I’ll be interested to see how much better it gets once the season starts, I like all the on air personalities so far…..but why dont they just call it MLBTV, it rolls right off the tongue, I think thats the name of their online service though?
bren - January 7, 2009
Yup.
EM-EL-BEE-TEE-VEE
dtpollitt - January 7, 2009
If I have to see Victor Martinez
commercials all next summer, I’m not responsible for what I might do!
I sincerely hope they make some new commercials!
cowsarecool220 - January 7, 2009
I like the show, although
Leiter’s kinda weird.
CubFaninCA - January 7, 2009
As someone who's inherently weird
I find this comment offensive.
Jayo525 - January 7, 2009
ahahaaha....
Lows05 - January 7, 2009
Ken Burns, Baseball
I really liked that and am probably going to buy that DVD set also really enjoyed the old WS footage as well. I’m not so into them showing last year’s WS. Too recent and not that entertaining. I wouldn’t mind seeing some late 90’s Yankees or something like that. Hopefully they will do that soon.
Lows05 - January 7, 2009
is this channel
freely available on cable systems? I must check my Uverse lineup…
drewishdrewid - January 7, 2009
It's not up yet on my UVerse lineup
I’ve called a couple times, but I have no idea when or if it’ll get added.
Bill Potter - January 7, 2009
Check the complicated blackout rules for the MLB Network....
you may be out of luck.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
I hadn't seen those
have a link handy? I hadn’t heard about any potential blackout problems, but that would be bad news.
Bill Potter - January 7, 2009
AT&T has not signed a contract with MLB
Most cable systems were locked in for MLB Network about two years ago when the Extra Innings package was renegotiated. UVerse didn’t exist at the time, so they are a bit behind. Since Verizon FiOS was able to negotiate a deal for MLB Network and Extra Innings 2-3 weeks ago, AT&T should have an opportunity to do the same. We’ll just have to see.
Qixotl - January 7, 2009
That's what I was thinking
I figure AT&T will get on board soon enough. They are pretty responsive – I’ve been impressed with them so far – so hopefully it’ll happen.
Bill Potter - January 7, 2009
I hope so.
is it just another channel? That would rock…
drewishdrewid - January 7, 2009
I would guess it would be on the 200 level and higher
That’s what Versus and CSN Chicago (at least in Indianapolis) are at for me.
Bill Potter - January 7, 2009
yeah, I got 200 level too. Here’s hoping…
drewishdrewid - January 7, 2009
I would imagine it would show up there.
that seems to be where the rest of the sports-tier resides (unless you want all the FSNs).
Bill Potter - January 7, 2009
I also watched hot stove for the first time
And although I am very excited about the network, really questioned some of the moves that they were making. I don’t remember who it was but one of the commentators (Not Reynolds) was talking about he would trade Arroyo and Harrang to sign Randy Wolf and Garland. I understand that Harrang had a bad year but us that pay attention to baseball in the NL Central know that he is a powerhouse of a pitcher and probably the most underrated pitcher in all of baseball the last couple years. Why would you want to trade him to sign mediocrity like Wolf and Garland? I know its only one point, but it irked me.
KButler - January 7, 2009
It's an opinion
The world is full of them, get used to it.
Since they have you thinking about the show, they did their job. Your promoting it unintentionally and that’s what they want!
I also agree, Harang is a beast. I wouldn’t mind him in cubbie blue.
I am sure this won’t be the last thing you disagree with. Don’t be so sensitive,
MrShowtime - January 7, 2009
I honestly don’t think its an opinion. Its just a guy forced to answer a question about a team he doesn’t know or care about and will be irrelevant for at least the near future. It was an astonishingly lame attempt. I doubt if you asked him today he could name 3 or 4 position players on the team.
ol Pete - January 7, 2009
exactly my point
If it really is his opinion, its an astonishingly bad one. Obviously, that can be argued. But Harang was only the 9th pitcher since 1960 to lead the NL in wins and strikeouts. He also led the league in complete games that year with a 3.7 ERA. All of this on a TERRIBLE team. All other pitchers tlead the nl in strikeouts and wins won the cy young. Harang didn’t even receive a single vote, which is why this guy is talking about trading him so he can sign Garland.
I wouldn’t call what I said being sensitive. I was simply pointing out how ridiculous this comment was and how it makes me very skeptical of what this collection of former players actually knows about baseball players today. You don’t see someone saying that Zambrano should be traded so that we can sign Brandon Backe.
KButler - January 7, 2009
I just found out I got it.....
I am extremely happy :)
fischisgod - January 7, 2009
Would rather have this than the stupid Big 10 network I get on basic cable
It looks like I might have to upgrade my digital package. I want them to show a ton of spring training games; perfect for overnight programming.
Mordecai - January 7, 2009
At least BTN battled Comcast
to get the channel on regular in lieu of the sports package.
N Oakley - January 7, 2009
Thanks
to DirecTV for bringing this to me. Things are looking up here in the boonies. Now I have MLB, WGN, and CSN Chicago summer-ready. Plus yesterday I hooked up the required elements for Digital TV; instead of 3 fuzzy channels, now I have 13 crystal-clear ones (including Fox).
MLB is exciting and classy. The Ken Burns documentary is a must-see. Play ball!
NWIowaCubFan - January 7, 2009
I have DirecTV
and was wondering if you could tell me what channel it’s on?
sue369 - January 7, 2009
Never mind.
I found it.
sue369 - January 7, 2009
Mitch Williams
This past weekend, they threw Mitch Williams behind the Hot Stove desk and he really surprised me. He was much more articulate than I remember and had some decent insights. They appear to have him on the weekends for a reason (only been doing analysis work since 2007), but you can see that he has worked on his craft.
And after watching Hazel Mae on NESN in the past, I would say that she is very solid as a sports news anchor, but a bit too fluffy for my taste on actual interviews. I see her being a bit more in her element when games start and she can cover highlights and actual newscasts.
Qixotl - January 7, 2009
I would agree on Hazel
she never seemed to go in-depth on interviews, but if you’re a network looking for someone who can move a program along from clip to clip, she’s not bad.
I wonder how she’ll do in a live-action format though, since she always had the benefit of the Sox game being over when she was in studio for NESN.
Bill Potter - January 7, 2009
Kusneirek
I would differ on Trenni Kusneirek’s performance as a baseball host in general. As a Wisconsin resident, I’ve seen her work numerous times on Brewer telecasts and find her to be quite boring actually. I don’t share Al’s opinion that she understands baseball but rather, find her to be pretty educated by local and national media on the current happenings in MLB. I would argue that her own knowledge of the game is mediocre.
As a studio host she is decent but nothing better than average. She doesn’t ask terribly detailed questions of the “color” analysts but rather asks or offers broad topic-specific comments and allows the others to further develop them. There are worse studio hosts than her but I wouldn’t put her at anything better than average. Just my two cents.
I do enjoy the program so far however. It has potential and Baseball Tonight finally has some decent competition judging from the early shows.
krummy12 - January 7, 2009
Eye Candy, Al ?
How about “totally hot” or “easy on the eyes” ? Those are somewhat complimentary terms. Eye candy is demeaning, as if she exists only for men to get their rocks off.
“I’ll miss DeRosa because he was such good eye candy” – bleah…
coral - January 7, 2009
She is eye candy.
PurpleLineToWrigley - January 7, 2009
Well I will miss DeRosa because he was Eye Candy
and could play up to 7 positions but damn he was one sexy looking guy.
Doggie Stalker - January 7, 2009
I'm gonna miss his wife, oh and the fact he could hit the ball
in the playoffs.
N Oakley - January 7, 2009
Joey Gaithright is on XM 175 MLB Home Plate right now!
He’s being interviewed on XM’s Hot Stove.
cowsarecool220 - January 7, 2009
I was very surprised to see I got the station
seeing how Charter lists every other sports network (ESPNews, Classic, NHL TV, etc) on a second-tier package. I’m looking forward to having the channel once the season starts…if I don’t break down and get EI.
neverAcquiesce - January 7, 2009
Charter had no choice
As part of the deal for carriage of the Extra Innings package about two years ago, all cable operators and DirecTV were required to add MLB Network to an expanded basic package. Charter almost missed out completely as they dilly-dallied as usual and took an extra month to get a deal signed. They lost out on a chance to be a part owner of the channel in the process because of that delay.
Qixotl - January 7, 2009
Did you write the Wikipedia article I read yesterday?
neverAcquiesce - January 7, 2009
Nope...
…but I was using it to jog my memory a few weeks ago when I was discussing the situation on another board.
Qixotl - January 7, 2009
For all the ladies out there-
Marv Albert is some real eye candy.
PurpleLineToWrigley - January 7, 2009
Just don't let his teeth anywhere near you.
N Oakley - January 7, 2009
Kenny Albert is even better.
PurpleLineToWrigley - January 7, 2009
Between ape and man there was...
Kenny Albert.
neverAcquiesce - January 7, 2009
He's dreamy.
PurpleLineToWrigley - January 7, 2009
Jillian Barberie is a respected weather-person for FOX. Not eye candy. A journalist.
PurpleLineToWrigley - January 7, 2009
Really?
Cos she can tell me the temperature for the Bears game?
neverAcquiesce - January 7, 2009
Look at that picture.
They obviously hired her for journalistic purposes only. And for the record, I don’t even think she can tell the temperature. She mostly giggles.
PurpleLineToWrigley - January 7, 2009
But her giggles are very "well-spoken".
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
I saw her giving some pointers............
………..at a Bears game. All the fans were watching intently.
tville - January 7, 2009
Easy, easy...
Almost as well-spoken as the giggles of Terry Bradshaw.
PurpleLineToWrigley - January 7, 2009
Anyone notice that her "giggles" are bigger this year?
N Oakley - January 7, 2009
Yeah. They're huge.
PurpleLineToWrigley - January 7, 2009
the offensive word there
is “FOX.”
drewishdrewid - January 7, 2009
Do I need to get the soap?
neverAcquiesce - January 7, 2009
just don't drop it.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
neverAcquiesce - January 7, 2009
With what? Gravity?
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
No, that's apples.
neverAcquiesce - January 7, 2009
I truely love apples...
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
it ain't just a good idea...
it’s the LAW.
drewishdrewid - January 7, 2009
I think the thing I will be most looking forward
to is when they stop airing their promo commericials. I get what the channel is…you don’t have to tell me.
Other than that, it has been fine so far.
TheRiot Police - January 7, 2009
that's probably
because they have time to fill.
drewishdrewid - January 7, 2009
NFL Network
does the same thing.
drewishdrewid - January 7, 2009
Agree..but they just
seem so touchy feely and campy that it grates on my nerves. Sort of like nails on a chalkboard.
TheRiot Police - January 7, 2009
"Prime 9:
Guaranteed to start arguments, not settle them."
Yeah, I’ve heard that one enough already.
neverAcquiesce - January 7, 2009
It beats seeing all the ads
on BTN for the “Illinois Football: The Journey.” Yes, tell me more about an underachieving 5-7 football team, please.
Bill Potter - January 7, 2009
The Juice was not entirely loose this year.
PurpleLineToWrigley - January 7, 2009
No sir
he was bottled up.
Bill Potter - January 7, 2009
I never did understand
running promo commercials on the channel the commercials are promoting. It’s like being that guy that wears the t-shirt of the band he is going to see.
The person watching the commercial is already tuned into the channel.
gwood - January 7, 2009
But a startup network is different.
They need to let every viewer, whether they’ve been watching for a few weeks or happened upon the channel two minutes ago, know what they’ve got to offer every night. It’s like getting kids to smoke: attack em early and you got em for life.
Agree with the concert shirt, though.
neverAcquiesce - January 7, 2009
They had my attention early
since they are a baseball only network.
gwood - January 7, 2009
it's to get the attention of someone channel flipping
or someone who is at a sports bar. After all, everyone thinks sports bars are all about ESPN…
drewishdrewid - January 7, 2009
Criminy.
Is it really getting to the point where political correctness means you can’t analyze or review or comment on a performance without looking at each and every word you say?
Try this: Pat Hughes is well-spoken. Ron Santo isn’t. They’re both white maies. Did I just make a racist remark? No, I simply described one quality they both have, or don’t.
It’s that simple. To read anything else into what I wrote is just plain wrong.
Al Yellon - January 7, 2009
Now you resort to namecalling?
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
Who did I call a name?
Al Yellon - January 7, 2009
LOL...you'll have to read much further up in the tread to get that joke.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
It was only
one person who had their undies in a knot. Don’t worry about him.
sue369 - January 7, 2009
So Al, are you saying only people without Type I diabetes and the associated health concerns are well-spoken?
Thank you, thank you. I will now step back into obscurity and patiently wait for baseball to start so we can talk about the real important stuff.
MetsSuck - January 7, 2009
LOL
Thanks for making my point in a funnier way.
Al Yellon - January 7, 2009
That Taco Guy
is obviously, and successfully trolling.
Do not feed trolls.
Nice review, Al, BTW. I just called my cable operator, (who was quite well spoken, I might add) and they were clueless, but would “pass it along”.
I’m not inclined to hold my breath on this one.
Tekboy - January 7, 2009
It's winter.
Feeding the trolls passes the time.
znohitter - January 7, 2009
I can't wait....
until all your daughters grow up to be very attractive women and have to demean themselves in order to land the job of their dreams
-all because they are considered “eye candy” instead of unqualified.There is nothing wrong with commenting on the attractiveness of a women (or a man). But when the terms you use place them in a certain category — there are consequences.
coral - January 7, 2009
Not all Candy is sweet
TheRiot Police - January 7, 2009
Plus your comments make no sense
if you comment on somebody’s attractiveness no matter what words you use, you are placing them in a category.
Again words are words…try not to cliff jump
TheRiot Police - January 7, 2009
I can't wait until all your daughters grow up too....
::rubs hands together and glances around::
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
got your overcoat ready?
drewishdrewid - January 7, 2009
"Sitting on a park bench..."
znohitter - January 7, 2009
Ummm.
A Mr. Hansen from NBC is at the door asking for you…
N Oakley - January 7, 2009
NO BROWNIES?!?!?!?!
PurpleLineToWrigley - January 7, 2009
Ah, I'm just hear to talk, man.
I always carry condoms and wine coolers around.
neverAcquiesce - January 7, 2009
Ohhhhh, just bein' STOOOPID I guess...
PurpleLineToWrigley - January 7, 2009
"Take a seat."
“God, how does he do that?”
neverAcquiesce - January 7, 2009
Thank god I did a quick review of the previous comments...
…The eye candy topic has been covered adequately.
I had heard about 1/2 way through the 2008 season that MLB would have their own channel and I for one am super grateful. I think Al did a fine job pointing out the pros and very few (if any) cons of the show.
Overall a channel like this is long overdue. ESPN hardly gives baseball its due, even during the season. ESPN has turned into NFL central. Even though I no longer need their baseball tonight, I’m all for competition and having more than just one place to get news and information.
As long as MLBn doesn’t saturate its coverage with SOX / YANKS! I’ll be fine.
Oh, and if we’re talking about on-air eye candy, check out the dame (Rebecca) on Fox Business channel’s Happy Hour. Whew!
LOUtheMETandNATSfan - January 7, 2009
new MLB network
I watched the first couple shows when it debuted last Thursday evening and I really was impressed. I wasn’t sure I would be really interested if there wasn’t an actual game on at the time, but I ended up watching for a few hours, until I was too tired to stay up!
Dsrjane - January 7, 2009
Man!
I really hope dish network gets this channel. They’re the only one without it!
wrigleyrocker12 - January 7, 2009
Don't hold your breath...
DishNetwork also refused to pay the “extortion fee” MLB asked for to carry Extra Ticket when MLB signed the exclusive contract with DirectTV and congress stepped in and suggested that they still make the package available to cable outlets….I don’t see Dish getting access to the MLB Network for awhile.
santoswoodenlegs - January 7, 2009
I've always been jealous
of the NFL network too.
wrigleyrocker12 - January 7, 2009
Because ESPN
isn’t an NFL network already.
neverAcquiesce - January 8, 2009
Not sure
if this has been brought up, but there’s an NL Awards show coming on in a few minutes, which will look back at the 2008 award winners (including Geo and Lou).
kanderber - January 7, 2009
I nominate this post
as the “Most Hijacked Thread of 2009”
If this thread were a pie chart of posts related to MLB Network and posts related to ridiculousness of word choice, the latter would be Pac-Man.
dtpollitt - January 7, 2009
Good sir
Can you elaborate?
LOUtheMETandNATSfan - January 7, 2009
drewishdrewid - January 8, 2009
Aha!
Brilliant!
LOUtheMETandNATSfan - January 8, 2009
Seeing how it's now lunchtime
I’m really craving me some dots…
neverAcquiesce - January 8, 2009
but it was
an amusing hijack, dan
here’s hoping ‘amusing’ is OK
Emelie - January 7, 2009
I think you're in the clear on that one...
…I hope.
dtpollitt - January 7, 2009
Was it a well-spoken hijack?
Oops, I did it again.
Al Yellon - January 8, 2009
Are you saying
Britney Spears ain’t well-spoken?
neverAcquiesce - January 8, 2009
No...
but she used to be eye-candy.
santoswoodenlegs - January 8, 2009
Used to?
I don’t see a whole lot wrong with her now.
neverAcquiesce - January 8, 2009
hmmm
perhaps you haven’t seen her exiting a vehicle sans drawers?
LOUtheMETandNATSfan - January 8, 2009
Certainly wasn't my vehicle.
neverAcquiesce - January 8, 2009
LOL!
Hey…I had a picture here before (not THAT picture)…what happened?
LOUtheMETandNATSfan - January 8, 2009
Good thing she doesn't look crazy.
N Oakley - January 8, 2009
what a babe
Emelie - January 9, 2009
eww
N Oakley - January 8, 2009
Anybody seen the promos on MLBN...
for how the live look-ins during the season will work? They say that they’re installing dedicated cameras in all the stadiums that they will go to, and have control over, during their regular evening show. Doesn’t MLB own, or at least have the rights to broadcast MLB games without the broadcast entity’s permission?… why not just show the broadcast when something interesting is occurring.
MillsChC - January 7, 2009
Yes, they do have the rights.
But I can see why they’d want to have editorial control over their own camera(s), rather than just take the home or visiting team’s broadcast.
Al Yellon - January 8, 2009
Guy really got crucified for throwing out his criticism
I had no problem with Al’s comments, but I actually found it rather odd how hateful the reaction to the opposing poster was given BCB’s respectful nature. He was barely debated; only mocked about an issue some people do take seriously.
Oh well…I can be a sarcastic prig from time to time also.
Kansas25 - January 8, 2009
You've hit upon something
The actual attitude, not just on SB Nation, but on almost all blogs, regardless of content are read with the initial attitude that the comment is being made in a facetious nature. It seems unless a person replying to an original post, prefaces his/her remark with: “I’m not being facetious / sarcastic” then the originator will take it as such.
This same problem can be seen in work emails. The moment a responder makes a remark that is not necessarily in the negative, but not necessarily positive, the originator is up in arms or thinks that the responder is being mean. Too much is perceived due to misunderstandings.
It’s hard to remove sarcastic tone from public discourse once it starts. Especially in the written electronic form.
LOUtheMETandNATSfan - January 8, 2009
the thing is
Acapulco Taco Pie is RIGHT — in a GENERAL sense. Referring to an african american as “well spoken” HAS been used as a backhanded insult for decades.
In this particular context, he’s not right — Al’s not that guy. But it happens all the time, and all the complaining about Political Correctness is really inappropriate.
Oh, well.
drewishdrewid - January 8, 2009
I agree...
The issue itself is important, but I don’t believe there were any racial undertones to Al’s post. I was just a little disappointed that he got attacked and constantly mocked for his stance. He wasn’t belligerent and did not call Al a racist by any means. Disagreeing with him and debating him is one thing, but I don’t understand why he became the point of comedic attack simply for his stance. As I said above, I can be overly sarcastic as well, but personally I’d stay away from this issue because it just might be something ATP has had personal experience with or takes very seriously.
Kansas25 - January 8, 2009
Just in case you thought all this was over.....
Hey Al,
Pulled this off the SI.com truth and rumors section. I know how much you love talking about this guy!
The Cubs finished off the Jason Marquis-for-Luis Vizcaino trade with the Colorado Rockies as expected Tuesday. But will it look more like a Marquis-for-Jake Peavy deal by the time they open spring training next month? Those close to GM Jim Hendry expect him to restart the Peavy talks with the San Diego Padres that broke down a month ago at the winter meetings. If Hendry can’t land Peavy, plenty of free-agent pitchers remain on the market, although Derek Lowe is pricing himself beyond reason. Productive innings-eaters such as Braden Looper and Tim Redding more likely would fit the Cubs’ needs.
nmcubsfan - January 8, 2009
It's possible, I suppose...
…. that some of the pitchers the Cubs got in the DeRosa deal might be interesting to the Padres.
The “those close to Hendry” line probably comes from Wittenmyer’s article. I wouldn’t put more credence than that into it.
Al Yellon - January 8, 2009
Actually, I kinda like Kurkjian.
OmahaCub - January 8, 2009
To each his own.
Al Yellon - January 8, 2009
I hate to beat a dead horse.....
…. and all that, but if a long time ago the phrase “colored people” turned into a more acceptable “negro”, which became “black”, which begat “African American” which morphed into “people of color”, does that mean we’ve come back full circle to “colored people”?
BeerCub - January 10, 2009
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Bleed Cubbie Blue to post a comment.