Joe Buck Hates The Yankees

How many times have you heard someone say something similar to that headline? I've heard it a lot. Why do people think that announcers hate their team? Why Buck specifically?

First, I think it goes without saying that Buck is infinitely more competent than Chip Caray. Or as Craig Calcaterra said during the ALDS, "He's still basically terrible, but he's less offensive than the other terrible announcer who only has his job because of nepotism". Bill Simmons jokingly suggested that HBO create the "Chip Caray Show" and put it on before Buck's to make the latter look better by comparison.

Fro the record, I don't have a problem with Joe Buck and wouldn't say he's "terrible". I think he does an satisfactory job of calling the game and that's something most of us took for granted until Caray came on the scene. Say what you will about Buck, but he doesn't inaccurately describe what's happening on the field very often or repeatedly shove words like "fisted" up our... well, you know.

I think a big part of the reason that people don't like Buck and McCarver (aside from ol' Tim's sometimes nonsensical declarations) is the tone of Joe Buck's voice. He comes across as slightly smug and smarmy. People believe that Joe Buck thinks he's better than them. I don't know whether or not that is actually the case, or to what extent other announcers feel that way, but I think it oozes through the speakers from Buck to a much greater extent.

The other reasons that people dislike Buck are the same for all national broadcasters, especially in baseball. Most teams have home announcers that sound more folksy and are easy on the local nine. When a player fouls up, fans are going to be upset, and therefore much more likely to misdirect their anger towards the announcer. So Buck might point out the same thing that Michael Kay would, but the voice isn't as familiar, the tone a bit sharp. Sometimes it's not the message as much as it is the messenger.

Local broadcasters also know the team inside and out and tailor their calls to fans who know more about their guys. On the weekends during the season and all games in the playoffs, whether we like it or not, the marginal viewers that represent that giant increase in ratings are casual fans or supporters of other teams. We are the ones watching all the games regardless, so why are the networks going to cater to us? So if FOX wants to maximize its ratings, they have to kowtow to people who aren't intimately familiar with Robinson Cano's lack of production with runners in scoring position.

In the end, I think the most telling thing is that a certain section of fans from all over the country think the announcers hate their team. I've heard countless Red Sox fans say that Buck hates the Red Sox. The Angels blog we kept talking about during the ALCS thought Buck had a pro-Yankees bias. Is it possible that Buck and McCarver hate every team? I guess, but isn't it more likely that fans all hate the same announcers? I would have to agree with McCarver when he sad said, “Quite simply, the bias comes not from the voice, but from the ears”.

When it comes right down to it, which announcers are universally liked? Vin Scully. Anyone else? Would Vin Scully have been so widely revered if his career was beginning now and we could all bitch about his calls on Twitter?

Broadcasting is a tough job and due to the duration of time on the air and proximity to the fans, it's the one position in sports that might be more scrutinized than what happens on the field. Maybe there's someone in broadcasting school right now with a killer voice and background in sabermetrics who is going to universally beloved 15 or 20 years from now.

But I kinda doubt it. People are going to find something to hate about that guy too. We hold our announcers to impossibly high standards and sports fans are always going to find something to critique during the countless hours they are on the air. With the lines of communication now available on the internet, I think it's fair to wonder if any national broadcaster will ever be truly loved again.

The 2009 Postseason: Where The Correct Calls Are Controversial Too!

One of the most questionable plays in last night's game (the most questionable according to Joe Buck) came in the 10th inning when Melky Cabrera was bearing down on second base after Jorge Posada chopped one to the right side. It appeared to be a tailor-made double play ball and Eric Aybar turned what looked to be the Yankees' 4th twin killing of the night. Except Jerry Layne called Melky safe.

The throw was clearly there in time, but upon further review, it appeared that Aybar had not touched the bag. As 'Duk at Big League Stew pointed out, the "neighborhood play" is commonly accepted in lieu of actually tagging the bag. His take:

From my viewpoint, I can see where Aybar and manager Mike Scioscia were coming from. That's an awfully gutsy call to make in that position. How can umpires look the other way nearly every other time, but enforce it the one time it actually matters? Considering the cold and wet conditions at Yankee Stadium, why couldn't Aybar get a free pass that's never debated in any other circumstance?

To say that this was "the one time" it actually mattered is a little misleading. At one point on the FOX Broadcast, Tim McCarver said they reviewed each of the three previous double plays the Yanks hit into and Aybar had touched the bag every time. They'd been consistent throughout the night.

Lane probably thought this was a particularly egregious offense of the unwritten rule. He could have very easily turned a blind eye to the play because even if replays showed that Aybar never touched the bag, he wouldn't have taken any real heat since people accept that the infielder doesn't have to actually make contact with the bag. But they do have to come close and make some sort of a effort or phantom tag.

Melky slid in hard, running into Aybar and doing his best to best to break up the DP. If Aybar actually stepped on the bag, Melky would have got there sooner and possibly broken up the play all together. That split second mattered.

Joe Buck brought up the play at least 75 more times in the broadcast, saying at one point that it was a good thing that no runs scored in the inning before it would have been terrible for baseball fans to see a call like that factor into the outcome of the game. A technically correct call. How awful!

In a postseason of blown calls, during a came with several wrong calls by the first base umpire, this should be a non-issue. But the fact that it was the 10th inning brings it under intense scrutiny. Props to Jerry Layne for having the balls to make the right call.

Miscellaneous Friday Linkaround

I've got a lot of browser windows open but don't have a specific post in mind. As a result, here is a collection of some of the better stuff to come across my Google Reader over the past day or so. This should get you through the afternoon.

Jeff Pearlman, weighing in on the Artie Lange-Joe Buck brouhaha:

That’s what the Lange-Buck collision fascinated me. It was the coming together of two disparate beings—one who sees bullshit in everything and takes joy in exposing it; the other who sees poetry in everything and takes joy in elongating it.

Men like Buck fancy themselves as oral symphonies. Men like Lange fancy themselves as oral rot. Men like Buck take their worlds very seriously. Men like Lange do not. Mike like Buck view humor through a very, very, very narrow prism—self-depreciation, but only to a very slight degree. Mike like Lange view humor without boundaries.

I think he nailed exactly why it was so captivating: You couldnt get two more polar opposites that the uptight holier than thou demeanor of Buck and the irreverant assclownery of Lange. I'd like to think we bring a little of both to the table.

-----

Can someone's defensive seasons really fluctuate this much? Or is it just an indication that the metrics are still extremely flawed? Neyer has some thoughts as well.

-----

Joel Sherman, on A-Rod and Phil Mickelson:

Someone enlighten me why the New York fans love Phil Mickelson, the Alex Rodriguez of golf, but don't like Alex Rodriguez, the Alex Rodriguez of baseball.

I'd love to. If Phil Mickelson played for a theoretcal New York golf franchise called the Longballs or something, people would hate him. It's easy to root for the underdog when the U.S. Open only comes around once in a while. New York fans have no ownership of Mickelson's failures. When he blows it on the final hole at Winged Foot and refers to himself as "an idiot", we can laugh as the lovable loser. When A-Rod strikes out to end the game, it offends the fans ina much more personal way, because his failures are projected directly on them.

-----

Remember Len Berman?

-----

Drew Magary's column in Penthouse regarding badassery (URL obviously NSFW, but the page isn't graphic):

There’s no official definition of badass in the Oxford English Dictionary. This is a pity, as badass is one of those universal ways of categorizing the American male species. Everyone employs the term, and its meaning is more or less collectively agreed upon. Like douche bag or asshole, the word badass instantly evokes a recognizable male archetype, one that is impervious to rocket-propelled grenades and enjoys banging waitresses while skydiving.

>8

Do they live up to every romanticized notion of what we think a dude should be? No, they don’t. Think about it. Would a badass ever sit at a desk? No. Badasses do not sit at desks. Badasses get up and do shit. Would a badass ever use a BlackBerry, typing away at those tiny fucking keys like a dipshit princess? No. A badass might use a regular cellphone, if only for angrily shouting instructions to people (“Dammit! There isn’t fucking time! The Russians have the package!”). But never a BlackBerry, that’s for sure.

The column reads a lot like his better Balls Deep columns from Deadspin, except he doesn't try to bring it back to sports. I'm sure some people like Drew for all the creative swearing and dick jokes, but even after to you peel all that back, he's always making connections and genuinely insightful observations on human nature.

-----

If you can't guess who these two pitchers by the end of the second paragraph, God help you...

-----

Tom Brady flipped his kayak in the Chaaahles and and had to be rescued by a woman.

When they got near the couple, they realized Brady was not in his kayak, but in the water. Leeds helped pull Brady into a motor boat.

"I actually asked him why he fell in," she said. "He said he was racing one of his friends. It was Tom, Giselle and his friend...so he was racing his friend."

Leeds asked him if she could take a picture with him. She said Tom said, "Of course, you saved my life. ... I talked with Giselle. We talked about how beautiful the weather it was," Leeds said.

And by "motor boat", I'm assuming that Tom Brady shoved his face in between her breasts when he was being rescued. And that Gisele... how deep! "Hey I just saved your husband from drowning...". "Yeah, it's beautiful out, isn't it?"

Wasting Time On An Off Night

Tonight is the first of three Mondays that the Yankees will have off in a row. It's probably a welcome relief for the players and beat writers, who have only had two days off (not including rain outs) since April 23rd. For most fans, the void of not having a game to watch on a weeknight is not as highly anticipated. One of the things that's great about baseball is that's it's there almost every night. When you come to the realization that you might have to find something else to do or watch on a weeknight, it can be a bit of a letdown.

The NBA Finals just wrapped up, the Stanley Cup finals are over and baseball finally has the summer all to itself. And on the first night that is the case, there are a whopping two MLB baseball games to chose from and one from the College World Series.

• Brewers vs. Indians - 7:05 - ESPN - Carl Pavano starts for the Cleveland against David Bush. This is a tough sell for Yankees fans, or anyone who isn't a fan of these two teams for that matter. It's not a natural rivalry and although the Brewers are in first place in the NL Central, it's hard to get excited for this one.
  
  
• Angels vs. Giants - 10:05 - MLB.tv, MLB Extra Innings or a couple of stations in California that I'm not going to bother to look up because if you get this broadcast you already know what they are - John Lackey vs. Barry Zito. Another not-so-appealing match-up for East Coasters but might be worth your while if Zito gets shelled in the first few innings.
  
  
• Arkansas vs. LSU - 7:00 - ESPN2 - Tune in to probably see some player(s) who will make the major leagues one day who you will never remember.

Perhaps you would like to avoid sports all together for one night? How about:

• No Reservations : Peru, Hong Kong - 7:00, 8:00 - Travel Channel - A show about traveling by the seat of your pants and eating great food. Yes, I am a fan of Anthony Bourdain.
  
  
• If shitty reality TV shows are your thing, Uproxx's Warming Glow has some recommendations for you.
  
  
• Real Time With Bill Maher - 8:00 - HBO - A re-run from Friday night, but it's a solid episode. First guest is Larry King and the panel consists of Chris Matthews, a former homeland security advisor and the head of the NAACP.
  
  
• Joe Buck Live - 9:00 - HBO - Just in case you didn't hate this show just because Joe Buck is hosting it, Brett-fucking-Favre is his first guest.
  
  
• Weeds - 10:00 - Showtime - It's an entertaining show that's a little bit over the top at times, but still a lot of fun to watch. It's amazingly already in it's 5th season and feels like it still has some plotlines to explore.
  
  
• Nurse Jackie - 10:30 - Showtime - Piggybacking off of an established show is a pretty good way to develop a viewership. Snagging Edie Falco from the Sopranos doesn't hurt either.

Or, if you happen to be kicking around the Upper West Side of Manhattan this evening, stop by the Amsterdam Ale House for an event that The Bruery is hosting. That's where I'll be wasting time.