THE MEDIA IS TO BLAME FOR THE T.O. CRISIS THAT HAS EMERGED! I THINK YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN UNFAIR AND TOO HARSHLY CRITICIZED MY CLIENT!"
"Honestly, I believe the media has grossly taken Terrell's comments out of context and the Philadelphia Eagles franchise has responded in a harshly unprecedented manner."
Looking at these two statements, neither of which is an actual quote, would you say that one is better than the other? True, I made the second one sound a little nicer, but it's the same point. If you were on TV, you might be inclined to use the first statement, as much of the TV sports world has resorted to increasing volume to drive a point home.
The concept is a simple one: if your point isn't all that interesting, just say it loud. For sports analysis TV, the easiest place to watch is ESPN, unless you live in a dorm. Look at someone like Sean Salsbury: a fairly unintelligent NFL analyst whose predictions just plain suck.
One of the network's favorite pairings is to put Salsbury alongside a man that could be described as a walking candy apple: John Clayton. Clayton, at least, actually conducts some real football reporting to go along with his crappy game picks. Last year especially, the two would be given a topic and asked of their respective opinions.
What resulted was one answering, the other disagreeing, and then a shouting match ensuing until Salsbury threatened to take Clayton's lunch money. Was this really the best sports analysis out there?
Take a look at Steven A. Smith. As a basketball analyst, he is fairly sharp at keeping abreast of the important issues and making an insightful point or two when the opportunity presents, all qualities of any legitimate analyst or columnist.
On TV, however, he is the closer in the pre-game topic analysis, or the guy that finishes up the conversation by talking the loudest and criticizing a player or coach. How many viewers out there truly enjoy watching this? Now he has his own show, which quite frankly, he doesn't deserve.
And unfortunately, I must place some of the blame for this trend of TV sports analysis on the heads of two of my favorites, PTI co-hosts Mike Wilbon and Tony Kornheiser. This fine program features two guys, a former radio show host and a former sports columnist of the year, talking about everything important in the world of sports, and the little Bill Simmons-like pop culture current events.
And the hosts debate. They argue. They talk loudly. They interrupt each other, as the name of the show implies ("Pardon the Interruption"). As the name implies, the manner with which they cut each other off is pseudo-polite, and clearly well intended. I see two factors that have made the show such a favorite among sports enthusiasts.
First, the two guys have good points to make. The importance of this factor cannot be overstated. Someone can watch people saying the same thing about the same thing for only so long; there comes a point where a well thought-out opinion is what will captivate the viewer.
Second, Michael and Tony have ridiculous chemistry. Anybody who has watched PTI when either Michael or Tony is off can attest to how much the show suffers. And the dynamic between the two is natural, not forced, rather than the straight-from-the-sitcom-playbook polar opposite pairing of Salsbury and Clayton.
But the sports world learned the wrong lesson from PTI. Instead of celebrating truly spirited and intelligent debate, it decided to emphasize the shouting match side of the program.
"Around the Horn" gets mixed reviews among my buddies, as it rightly should. Most of the reporters on the program have a few good points to make, but the actual point contest during the episode makes every "contestant" try to speak with a little extra volume. Woody Page is probably the worst in this regard, relying on loud personal insults much of the time to introduce his opinions.
Maybe people such as Chris Berman, a naturally loud individual who is given continuous spotlight, are partly to blame. Terry Bradshaw could also be placed in this group, although I wouldn't consider him one of football's top 100 analysts anyway. People like Drew Rosenhaus are definitely at fault, as well. For those who watched the T.O. press conference, they were exposed to statements similar to the one at the top of this column. Some jackass didn't have a very good point to make, so he resorted to shouting until people agreed with him.
So let's all turn the volume down a little. If you really want to knock over the viewer, hit 'em with a two-by-four of insight instead of a two-by-four of... loud, not smart stuff.
Cole Liberator is a senior majoring in history. He can be reached at Cole.Liberator@tufts.edu.
