• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Fox's worst nightmare: White Sox vs Astros

K

KeithE

Guest
Houston just beat St. Louis 5-1 to win the NLCS in 6. They'll play the Sox at Comiskey Park-oops-USCellular Field starting Saturday night.

How does Fox promote a World Series between two teams with no national presence? OK, the Sox have a bit more presence and following than the Astros because of their 30 games on WGN, but that's it. My guess is that ad rates will be slashed compared to what a Yankees-Cardinals series might command.

Hopefully they'll send Joe Buck back to football and Tim McCarver back to wherever it is he goes in the offseason since neither one will give a flying crap about this series and it'll show on-air. Say what you want about his style (and maybe I'm prejudiced since I watch him do games in Phoenix), but Thom Brennaman, along with Steve Lyons and Bob Brenly, would do a far better job than Buck, McCarver, and Lou Piniella.

Brennaman & his partners did an excellent job of calling the Astros-Cards series and went out of the way not to play favorites. Buck & McCarver (but not Piniella) couldn't hide their disappointment about the ALCS not featuring the Yankees and Red Sox.

I'd rather see a broadcast combo of Hawk Harrelson and Milo Hamilton (each team's local broadcasters) than Buck & McCarver. Yeah, they'd both be homers, but it'd be more fun to listen to.
 
At least Chicago is DMA 3.
But the more bad that happens to Rupert and his awful baseball coverage the better.

> I'd rather see a broadcast combo of Hawk Harrelson and Milo
> Hamilton (each team's local broadcasters) than Buck &
> McCarver. Yeah, they'd both be homers, but it'd be more fun
> to listen to.

Your average subway conductor on a subway car PA system would do a better job annoucing than McCarver. <P ID="signature">______________
WCBS = We're Crazy Buffoons and Schmucks
<a href=http://chuck.spotteddogs.org/tv/>Spotted Dog TV Talk - for all your non-news TV Talk</a></P>
 
> At least Chicago is DMA 3.
> But the more bad that happens to Rupert and his awful
> baseball coverage the better.
>
> > I'd rather see a broadcast combo of Hawk Harrelson and
> Milo
> > Hamilton (each team's local broadcasters) than Buck &
> > McCarver. Yeah, they'd both be homers, but it'd be more
> fun
> > to listen to.
>
> Your average subway conductor on a subway car PA system
> would do a better job annoucing than McCarver.
>

Why the f--- does it have to be teams that everyone has shoved down our throats all season long...and for the past 20 years???

As much as I deplore most everything about Chicago, at least its someeone different than the friggin Yankees or Red Sox.

And Houston hasnt been to the world series...ever.

Their presenece might just get some other fans interested in baseball...

You ll see enough of the Yankees and Red Sox at least 12 times on Fox next year

Get over it.
 
> At least Chicago is DMA 3.

And Houston is DMA #10. Doesn't matter. The Sox have a smaller national following compared to the Cubs. And even fewer people follow the Astros outside of Texas and surrounding states. The Sox have a slight advantage due to some of their games being shown on WGN.

> But the more bad that happens to Rupert and his awful
> baseball coverage the better.

Actually, tonight's NLCS game was very well done compared to the ALCS. I think Buck & McCarver have a lot (actually, almost everything) to do with how bad Fox's baseball coverage can be.

> Your average subway conductor on a subway car PA system
> would do a better job annoucing than McCarver.

So would the average earthworm. And Joe Buck is so bad doing baseball his dad is probably spinning in his grave. He needs to stick to football.
 
> Why the f--- does it have to be teams that everyone has
> shoved down our throats all season long...and for the past
> 20 years???

Hey, I agree with you. But the NY-based advertising agencies and LA-based Fox probably don't.

> As much as I deplore most everything about Chicago, at least
> its someeone different than the friggin Yankees or Red Sox.
>
> And Houston hasnt been to the world series...ever.

The Astros are there for the first time and the Sox haven't been there since before the first round of expansion teams came into the leagues. I have no complaints about the Sox (of course since I'm a Sox fan) or the Astros being there. Should be the best-pitched series in many years.

> Their presenece might just get some other fans interested in baseball...

Fox doesn't market the WS to baseball fans - they'll watch anyway. They market to casual and non-fans, who want to see celebrities in the stands (and bank on the stars of Fox shows conveniently being at the ballparks) more than they want to see top-notch pitching.

> You ll see enough of the Yankees and Red Sox at least 12 times on Fox next year

Probably more on ESPN than Fox (which is usually regional) but you're right overall.

> Get over it.

I'm ready for it. GO SOX!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
> Your average subway conductor on a subway car PA system
> would do a better job annoucing than McCarver.

Or Buck.

Both are horrid...
 
> What I'd give to hear/watch Uecker and Bob Costas call the
> WS.
>

How about Uecker and Hawk Harrelson in the booth...you can put it on the board......YYEEESS!!
 
I am a die-hard New York Yankees fan. As a result, I'm taking the Chicago White Sox to win the World Series for two reasons:

1- They did me a favor by sweeping the Boston Red Sox.
2- They did me a favor by beating the Anaheim Angels, who had just taken the Yankees out of contention in 5 games with the ALDS. (I'm still ticked about Anaheim's 2002 ALDS victory over us.)

Screw FOX and their ratings. Any baseball purist will still watch, regardless of who's playing. At least there's no pressure on me this time around. I agree that Joe Buck should just stick with football. That plus the fact I dealt with McCarver a few more times a year with Yankees baseball (I think back when they were aired by FOX 5).

Hey! I can say "GO SOX!" this year and not have to cringe! :)
 
With XM Radio and a PVR such as TIVO, you can synch the video with the local broadcasts and listen to Hamilton & Ashby or Rooney & Farmer and never have to hear McCarver and Buck utter a single word. A bit of a pain to be sure but well worth it to avoid the crap on FOX.
 
>1- They did me a favor by sweeping the Boston Red Sox.
>2- They did me a favor by beating the Anaheim Angels, who had just taken the >Yankees out of contention in 5 games with the ALDS.

1 - agreed.
2 - agreed.
 
> And Houston is DMA #10. Doesn't matter. And even
> fewer people follow the Astros outside of Texas and
> surrounding states.

I'm in Houston, and I'll agree with that. The Astros have never had much of a following outside of southeast Texas. Much of this is tied in with the fact that Houston as a city has for decades been too inward looking, refusing to market itself as a trendy or progressive place to outsiders. That attitude has changed in the past few years, but it takes time to alter people's perceptions. A WS victory would certainly help things.

The lack of a blowtorch AM radio outlet for the Astros hasn't helped either. The 50kw non-directional flamethrowers that some teams have (the now-ended KMOX relationship with the Cardinals comes to mind) went a long way in promoting other teams to a wide area.

You gotta know that the Rangers fans in DFW are pissed.

And for us in H-town, the Astros success has distracted attention from the Texans, who have been in freefall mode this year. Looks like a once promising team will be pretty much starting from scratch in 2006.

Yeah, the WS will probably be a ratings distaster for FOX. I don't care. At least it won't be same ol' same ol'.

GO ASTROS!!!
 
Hi everyone:

> Why the f--- does it have to be teams that everyone has
> shoved down our throats all season long...and for the past
> 20 years???
>
> As much as I deplore most everything about Chicago, at least
> its someeone different than the friggin Yankees or Red Sox.
>
> And Houston hasnt been to the world series...ever.
>
> Their presenece might just get some other fans interested in
> baseball...
>
> You ll see enough of the Yankees and Red Sox at least 12
> times on Fox next year
>
> Get over it.

Agreed.

I mean WHEN was the last time ANYONE saw the COLORADO ROCKIES (you know, RUPERT'S OWN TEAM) on MLB on FOX (either home OR away)???

I can't remember the last time.

In fact, they've had more airtime _ON ESPN_ than they have on the big FOX network. Perhaps Rupert might consider selling the team to Disney. Just a thought...

Every time the Rockies play on Saturday, the game is either on FSN or KTVD 20, the local FOX content-laced UPN affiliate (Last year they were mostly on FSN).

As for announcers, I personally can stand Joe Buck (though I too happen to believe he's a better football announcer). He's not the problem to me. However FOX *DESPERATELY* needs to get Tim McCarver out of the booth. I hear GEORGE FRAZIER, the Rockies color analyst, isn't doing anything though...

BUT if you're going to replace Joe Buck as well, why not not replace him with someone who isn't doing anything this time of year? I say this because once baseball is over, Thom Brennaman (sp?) is shifted over to do football games. I say why not just keep Thom doing football games and bring in Rockies announcer DREW GOODMAN??

With the Nuggets and Avs gone to crosstown rival Altitude, FOX really has NO NEED to keep Drew and his knowledge of baseball "hogtied" to Denver. In fact, dare I say this, but he could also be utilized for football as well if needed. Maybe they already do this and we just don't know it, but it's just another thought... :)

Back to McCarver for a second, He has a show on Altitude (Given his name, I'm thinking it's produced & syndicated by someone else). I'd love nothing more than to see them cancel his show there as well.

Just my opinion :)

Cheers for now :)

Pat
<P ID="signature">______________
patspodcast03a.jpg

http://nuke102.blogspot.com/
Radio? Uhh.....What's THAT?? :)</P>
 
It May Not Be Fox's Worst Nightmare

Yes, the White Sox are the "second team" in Chicago.

But the TV ratings may end up being pretty decent for these reasons:

(1) It has been 45 years since any Chicago team (White Sox in 1959) has even been in a World Series, and 88 years (White Sox in 1917) since a Chicago team has won it. As I have pointed out elsewhere, Chicago teams in all of the three other major pro sports have won championships (Blackhawks hockey in 1961, Bears football in 1986, and Bulls basketball several times during the 1990's) since the last time any Chicago team was in the World Series.

(2) This is Houston's first World Series ever. Thus, an interesting storyline opens up: Someone is going to either win the Series for the first time "since the world was flat" or for the first time ever.

(3) Houston pitcher Roger Clemens is 43, and it's possible this may be the swan song of a spectacular career. While Clemens was part of World Series championship teams with the New York Yankees in 1999 and 2000 (so this isn't exactly like hockey star Ray Bourque, who after two decades with the Boston Bruins finally got on a Stanley Cup-winning team with the Colorado Avalanche in 2001), Clemens grew up in Texas (I think it was indeed in the Houston area) and if he indeed is a Houston-area native, what better way to end his career than helping to lead the team he rooted for as a youngster win the big one.

(4) Houston (#10 market) is a much bigger TV market than St. Louis (#21). However, the St. Louis Cardinals do have a huge regional following which makes "Cardinals territory" the eqivilant of a top-ten TV market.

The TV ratings may be down a bit from a year ago, but I don't think it will be more than a minimal decline. Sure, a Yankees/Los Angeles Dodgers World Series would've been ideal (#1 vs. #2 markets) for Fox; a Series between the Boston Red Sox and Chicago Cubs would have been just as high-rated, But it could have been worse for Fox.
 
Re: It May Not Be Fox's Worst Nightmare

> (1) It has been 45 years since any Chicago team (White Sox
> in 1959) has even been in a World Series, and 88 years
> (White Sox in 1917) since a Chicago team has won it. As I
> have pointed out elsewhere, Chicago teams in all of the
> three other major pro sports have won championships
> (Blackhawks hockey in 1961, Bears football in 1986, and
> Bulls basketball several times during the 1990's) since the
> last time any Chicago team was in the World Series.

That Bears championship was SB XX in Jan. 1986, the championship game of the 198*5* season. But Joseph, how could you forget Da Bears 1963 NFL championship over the Giants, 37 months before Super Bowl I (or the AFL-NFL World Championship Game, as it was officially named at the time)?

That 1963 Bears title was the "recognized" pro football world championship of that year except in the minds and hearts of American Football League types. The football "war" was in progress at the time.

ixnay<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by ixnay on 10/20/05 06:42 PM.</FONT></P>
 
I'll admit my biases right up front. I'm a Cubs fan and remember hearing Brennaman split time in the booth with Harry during Cubs games on WGN. I had Brenly as an analyst all this year on Cubs games(where he did a great job) and I used to work with Lyons' daughter.

That all being said, I COMPLETELY agree that the NLCS coverage was noticably better than Fox's ALCS coverage, and it comes back to Buck and McCarver. I remember watching last Wednesday night when both games were on. The Sox/Angels game was a better game, but I had the split screen sound on the NLCS. I just can't take Buck and McCarver anymore.

Also, I'm not so sure this is a horrible ratings situation for Fox. Speaking as a Cubs fan, we still want to see the Sox do well. If anything it would add more fuel to the crosstown series every year. Chicago natives are spread all over the country, so even though the Sox are the second team, we'll still watch and root, especially since they're playing one of our division rivals!
 
> The lack of a blowtorch AM radio outlet for the Astros
> hasn't helped either. The 50kw non-directional
> flamethrowers that some teams have (the now-ended KMOX
> relationship with the Cardinals comes to mind) went a long
> way in promoting other teams to a wide area.

It's an unusual situation with the Boston Red Sox here in southern New England. Their flagship is WEEI-AM 850 of Boston. However, the strongest station on their radio network (arguably) since the 1950s has been 50,000 watt clear channel WTIC-AM 1080 of Hartford, CT. As Scott Fybush will tell you, a transplanted Red Sox fan (which I am not!) out in Rochester, NY won't get to hear many of their games unless they tune in WTIC-AM (or unless he gets the Blue Jays station when they play Toronto?). You won't get them down there thanks to KRLD-AM 1080 of Dallas.

Getting back to TV, imagine what the overnight ratings will be for KRIV-TV (FOX) channel 26? From what I've read, during the 2000 World Series, when the Yankees destroyed the Mets (tee-hee!), WNYW-TV (FOX) channel 5 had a 60 or 61 share. Also, during last year's ALCS run between the Yankees and the Red Sox (OK, Fybush...go ahead, we know the rest), WTIC-TV (FOX) channel 61 of Hartford had one of their highest non-Super Bowl ratings ever. (Hartford is almost exactly halfway between the Bronx and Boston.)

If the White Sox win, great! They've done me a huge favor already! If the Astros win, Clemens and Pettite will each have another ring (and we all know where they got their other ones!).
 
Is Altitude some sort of regional sports network like FOX Sports New England or NESN (New England Sports Network) is for us here in greater Hartford, CT?
 
Re: It May Not Be Fox's Worst Nightmare

1- The Bears victory of Super Bowl XX would technically made them World Champions for the 1985 season.

2- Clemens is from Katy, TX.
 
Hi everyone:

> Is Altitude some sort of regional sports network like FOX
> Sports New England or NESN (New England Sports Network) is
> for us here in greater Hartford, CT?

In a word - YES. Though they also broadcast non-sports entertainment and other programming as well.

Hope that helps :)

Cheers for now :)

Pat
<P ID="signature">______________
patspodcast03a.jpg

http://nuke102.blogspot.com/
Radio? Uhh.....What's THAT?? :)</P>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom