Archive for September, 2011|Monthly archive page


In MEDIA SOUND BITES Leonard Shapiro on September 27, 2011 at 9:49 am

The latest edition of Real Sports on HBO offered yet another reason to praise the anthology show as best in breed on cable or network television.

The September show began with a feature on sleazy FOX Sports NFL information guru Jay Glazier, followed with a damaging and well-reported story on the obscene amounts of money bowl games are taking in (and paying out to their chief executives) and ended with a poignant piece on Dexter Manley, the former Redskins’ defensive lineman who is still battling demons that twice sent him to prison for abusing drugs.

The Glazier piece was most revealing in terms of how he goes about getting his so-called scoops. Granted, he breaks a lot of stories on FOX, though I suspect not quite as many as HBO gave him credit for, including the announcement the recent NFL lockout was over.

But the Glazier segment definitely raised this old sportswriter’s eyebrows over the way he conducts his business.

Glazier takes great pride in being “friends” with most of his sources, a violation of every basic tenet learned in Journalism 101. I’ve always felt it was wise to be friendly with your sources, while also letting them know that you wouldn’t even think twice about going to print or on the air with information they might not particularly care for.

Watching the piece, I had to wonder how many punches the man has pulled over the years, holding back on so-called negative information to protect his pals.

There was Glazier being filmed by HBO cameras as he made his way around training camps earlier this summer, slapping hands, bumping fists, hugging and mugging with players, coaches and team executives to let the audience know he’s more than just a reporter, he’s really their best bud, as well.

During an interview with a properly skeptical Bryant Gumbel, Glazier was asked if his reportorial tactics, not to mention his side business in training NFL and other athletes in mixed martial arts, didn’t break all the rules about fraternizing with the people he covers.

Glazier essentially insisted that as far as he was concerned — hey, it’s just sports — and the rules have changed. Says who?

Sadly, as long as his employers at FOX don’t seem to have a problem with his multiple conflicts of interest (he even does commercials for Subway sandwiches), I suppose he’ll continue to get away with some of the most egregious breaches of journalistic ethics ever witnessed on network television.

Nice job by HBO in exposing him for exactly what he shouldn’t be.

This Just In — In a recent post on this site, I speculated that Brett Haber’s decision to leave his sports anchor post at the CBS affiliate in Washington, DC (WUSA Channel 9) to pursue other opportunities may actually have been a case of the the station deciding not to renew his contract. According to the web site, his boss at Channel 9 shot down that premise.

WUSA News Director Fred D’Ambrosi told “Brett’s departure is voluntary and was initiated by him. As he explained in the Washington Post when he announced his departure August 1, Brett finds the night-side schedule of a local sportscaster tough on his family, and he intends to move into doing more live sports.”

D’Ambrosi added, “Brett was under contract to WUSA through 2013, and we would have been happy to have him stay. He is a great writer, sportscaster and journalist, and we are proud to have him on our staff. The claim that we were not planning on renewing his contract is also completely false.”

As for sports budget cuts at Channel 9, D’Ambrosi told his station recently added another full-time producer. “We will continue to improve our sports coverage and are looking at a options, including adding additional personnel,” he said.


In MEDIA SOUND BITES Leonard Shapiro on September 21, 2011 at 9:06 am

I vaguely recall that when I began writing this there was a Big 12 Conference and a Big East (football edition). By the time you finish reading this, I cannot personally guarantee that the first sentence will still be accurate.

It’s been dizzying. Discombobulating might be a better word.

The world of college football is both exploding and imploding at the same point in time.

Conferences are expanding, contracting, and possibly disappearing. Or not

And for what ultimate purpose? Greed. TV greed. And, TV greed is good. Or so the conferences believe.

Pitt and Syracuse are to become the newest members of the ACC at some moment in the not-too-distant future. The Big East (football edition) of which they are co-founding members could cease to exist as we have known it. In fact, the more storied basketball version of the Big East could also undergo some major changes to keep itself afloat (relevant?).  It all depends on the ACC determining when “enough is enough.”

The most shocking aspect of this quantum shift in football alignments is the lightning pace at which it’s occurring. The Big Ten (who’s been very quiet of late) took a pragmatic approach to its most recent expansion. The Big Ten added Nebraska as its 12th member only after some serious due diligence to verify that the Huskers would fit in with the other league members both athletically and academically.

Now, the idea of due diligence is completely out the window. The ACC accepted its two new members within 72 hours of application. The ACC’s due diligence probably consisted of checking the Pitt and Syracuse websites to see what other sports they offered.

Historically, the ACC and Big Ten have been very smart with their expansion plans – adding colleges that actually improve their leagues on a number of fronts beyond simply football. I’m not sure the same can be said for the SEC and the Pac-12 (assuming, of course, the Pac-12 sticks with its most recent statement that it will not be adding Texas and/or Oklahoma).

But, the ACC’s current plans to add Pitt and Syracuse could still trigger the death (at least, as we know them) of the Big 12 and, more probably, the Big East (football edition), and do serious domino-style damage to Big East basketball, Atlantic 10 basketball, so on and so forth.

So what kind of damage are we talking here?

Well, assuming that Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech, and Oklahoma State don’t make the move to the Pac-whatever, the Big 12 will focus on finding a replacement for Texas A&M. BYU maybe? Of course, the Big 12 might need more than a replacement for the Aggies; Missouri might become a target for the both the SEC and Big Ten (again). The SEC only has 13 schools with Texas A&M on board, and I doubt that Florida State or any other southern-based ACC team will jump ship knowing that they’ll need to pony up $20-million in exit fees.  So, who best rounds out the SEC? SMU, Southern Miss, or Mizzou?  Or OU?  Think about that for a second.

Mizzou and Oklahoma remain potential SEC targets because ‘harmonious’ isn’t exactly a word I’d use to describe the relationship among Big 12 member colleges.

ESPN is reporting that the Sooners want Texas to share some of the TV wealth from the Longhorn Network with the rest of the conference. Certainly, that seems fair in light of the fact that it may well have been the cause behind A&M’s departure. Not sure what OU might do if it doesn’t get some concessions from the Horns. Could OU really be ready to follow A&M to the SEC since the west coast escape route appears to be closed?

Naturally, the Big East (football edition) has more serious problems. It will need to find a way to survive without any major TV markets except for Dallas thanks to the still-planned 2012 addition of TCU. This will be especially true if the ACC takes the next step of scooping up U-Conn and Rutgers to encircle New York City and complete their 16-piece pie. It’s doubtful that the ACC will touch any other Big East schools. ESPN says that West Virginia’s requests to join the ACC and the SEC were rebuffed.

Once you get past Dallas/Ft. Worth, the pickings are pretty slim from a TV perspective for the Big East. Cincinnati, Tampa, and Morgantown just don’t sound very sexy to a TV network. And, TV networks aren’t going to pay premium rights fees for leagues that lack premium teams in premium cities with premium numbers of viewers.  And, the idea of teaming up with the Big 12 for football only seems awkward, at best, and it seems to have lost steam, as well. What would Texas gain from visits to South Florida, for example?

Other than U-Conn, the remaining football members of the Big East have pledged to stick together. (We’ll see how long that lasts.) ESPN reports that the Huskies are still lobbying hard to join the ACC.

The new-look Big East could eye up expansion of its own. Temple could ironically be a way to bring the Philly TV market into play. That, however, depends on how the much-improved Temple Owls feel about their Big East brothers who booted them out of the league a few years back. Navy football could be an interesting option, too. And, the Midshipmen could help bring the DC/Baltimore markets into the fold.

Then there’s the other Philadelphia school, Villanova. The Big East basketball member, Wildcats, are Division 1-AA in football (sorry, but I detest the lame FCS moniker) and they have been hinting strongly at following in U-Conn’s footsteps and upgrading to the top drawer in football. They reportedly had been buying up land around their stadium as part of a potential expansion of that facility, but they have yet to officially announce any plans related to a move to the Big East for football.

And, Villanova could be caught up in the mess that the basketball-wing of the Big East could become.  The loss of hoop powers like Pitt, Syracuse, and possibly U-Conn could force the Georgetowns, St. John’s, Seton Halls, Providences, and so on, to raid the A-10 and the Horizon leagues for the likes of Dayton, Xavier, and Butler to stay among the nation’s elite basketball conferences.

And, then there’s Notre Dame. The Irish play Big East basketball, but remain steadfast football independents. A true rarity these days.

Notre Dame could trigger an earthquake if it opts to place its storied football program in a conference… any conference.

It’s widely known that the Irish are coveted by the Big Ten, Big East, and the ACC. In fact, I would wager that neither the Big Ten nor the ACC will completely fill their dance cards without a firm “yea or nay” from Notre Dame. U-Conn can lobby ’til the cows come home, but until Notre Dame commits to a league or to continued independence, the ACC will not expand beyond 14. And, the Big Ten will stay at 12 teams unless the Irish say “yes” to their overtures triggering the need for a school like Mizzou to keep the numbers round.

Basketball ties aside, Notre Dame already has some serious football connections to both the Big Ten and the ACC. This season alone, the Irish will play Michigan, Michigan State, and Purdue (and they have a history with Penn State), and they’ll face 3 ACC members along with future member, Pitt. It’s not a long leap into either conference’s fold.

Not happening, you say… No way!

Well, the Fightin’ Irish don’t have the fight in ‘em that they once had on the old gridiron. And, you have to wonder how long a Comcast-NBC union is willing to keep paying conference-sized TV bucks for a single program, and effectively, half a season. Oh sure, the subway alumni are still out there and the Irish remain the lone true “national” team. But, they don’t carry the sway they used to, and they’ve begun to rely too heavily on the ‘echoes’ and not the present to keep Notre Dame football on the front page.

Then there’s the issue of long range scheduling. If the ACC expands to 16 and the Big Ten adds a ninth and, who knows, maybe a tenth league game to its schedule, there’s going to be less and less room to squeeze in dates with the Irish beyond September. So, it could come down to joining the Big Ten or trying to make hay with an “indie” schedule made up of the Big East survivors and the service academies. The BCS bowl championship series is a tough enough nut to crack without trying to crack the top 10 with a weak slate of opponents dragging down your computer rankings.

So, forget Texas and Oklahoma, if there’s to be peace in college football, or another maddening round of expansion, Notre Dame holds the key. And, the Irish might not be in a wild rush to see which lock the key will open.  So, buckle-up, the bumpy ride might not be over for a while.

Ross, the creator of Throwback Baseball 1.0, also blogs about sports memorabilia at:


In THE SPORTS LANDSCAPE Bill Sullivan on September 1, 2011 at 7:48 pm

The headline in the Washington Post zinged me: “It will take $160 million to re-sign Ryan Zimmerman.”

That much for a guy who led his team to five fifth-place finishes and a fourth-place finish the last six years? A guy whose team has never had a winning record? A guy whose team averaged finishing 31½ games out of first place the last three seasons?

$160 million is fantasy land.

The economy leans toward another recession. Fourteen million are out of work. Banks aren’t lending. Home mortgages are underwater. New-home construction is stagnant. Stock portfolios are plummeting. How do you “sell” a contract like this to the austerity-minded general public?

Zimmerman’s not going to blast 50 homers or drive in 140 runs. And the Nats aren’t headed for postseason play, averaging 99 losses the last three years.

Didn’t Carl Crawford sign for $140M last year and proceed to post pedestrian numbers the first half of the season? Prince Fielder may seek more money but he’s headed for an NL MVP award and his team will be in the postseason. By the way, the Nationals are seven games under .500 and a blip from falling into the NL East cellar.

The same Post columnist called Zimmerman a “first-ballot Hall of Famer,” then a “sure-fire Hall of Famer” and finally, a “superstar.”

Zimmerman was first compared to George Brett – who played 21 years for the Royals and led Kansas City to nine postseasons, including a pair of World Series. Zimmerman is nowhere near matching Brett’s legacy, having played 14 less seasons and is 9 postseasons shy of Brett.

But there’s more. She then compared Zimmerman to Albert Pujols.

We’ve seen what happens when teams don’t lock up their Zimmermans early,” she wrote. “The Nats want to avoid an Albert Pujols-type situation because if Zimmerman hits the market, all bets are off.”

They are?

For the record, Pujols has 439 HR and 1,308 RBI in 10 seasons, two of them ending in a World Series. He has nearly 300 more walks than strikeouts. His batting average is .328, about 50 points higher than Zimmerman’s. Pujols, like Zimmerman, missed time this year due to injury, but his 31 HRs currently ties him for the NL lead.

The Nats’ third baseman has played just seven years and hit 126 HRs, an average of 18 a year. His strikeouts nearly double his walks (599 to 326). OK, he played 20 games his rookie season and has played in just 75 this year. But still, he’s a light year away from being ticketed to Cooperstown or compared to any player enshrined there.

Loyalty, dependability and following the rules doesn’t qualify one for the Hall. Too many sportswriters today feel the need to label a good player a great, which is an insult to those who’ve been enshrined in the Hall. She said Zimmerman is a “marquee player who will pay dividends.” She’s right but he’s not yet deserving of a bronze bust. He’s got, oh about 10 more very productive years before that connection can realistically be made.

This spring, New York Mets owner Fred Wilpon said his third baseman, David Wright was not a superstar. And he was spot on. Good, sure. Loyal, yes. Productive, yup. But let’s not use the “S” word for this Hampton Roads native, either. David’s on his way to yet another 225-plus strikeout season while his long balls and clutch hitting vanish in cavernous Citi Field.

In the modern era, Mickey Mantle, Willie Mays, Hank Aaron, Reggie Jackson, Mike Schmidt, Willie McCovey, Ernie Banks, Eddie Murray, Al Kaline, Johnny Bench, Tony Perez and Carl Yastrzemski were superstars. Each amassed huge numbers. And all but Hank and Ernie led their teams to the World Series.

Some may be sentimental to Zimmerman, which I understand. The Nats overpaid for Jayson erth last year and may offer inflated dollars to Fielder in the months ahead. Werth’s a good, not a great player. Fielder just may be “great” (his 102 RBI lead the NL) but will the pressure of a blockbuster contract cause his numbers to decline?

The same goes for Zimmerman. He’s worthy of a long-term deal but it shouldn’t be a record-setter for a third baseman. Just look at his numbers and you’ll see why.