Connect with us
blank

BSM Writers

Reliving McGwire and Sosa’s ‘Long Gone Summer’ Is Exactly What Baseball Fans Need Right Now

Avatar photo

Published

on

blank

Baseball needed a bounce back. Fans weren’t coming out to games as often, thanks in part to the strike that wiped out part of the 1994 season and playoffs. The game itself was trying anything to spark an interest. In 1997 MLB debuted Interleague Play, hoping fans would show up to see teams that their club didn’t normally face. That worked to some extent, but nothing would rally the game like the Summer of 1998 did. 

MLB capitalized on the Mark McGwire/Sammy Sosa home run race during that summer and now ESPN is hoping to do the same. On the heels of The Last Dance, the network has produced Long Gone Summer about both sluggers’ chase for history. The film documents the twists and turns of the 1998 season, with interviews from both McGwire and Sosa. It will also brush the subject of PED’s and whether or not the luster is off the pumpkin as a result. 

Film Review: Long Gone Summer (ESPN 30 for 30) - LaughingPlace.com

Chip Caray had a front row seat to it all. He along with Steve Stone were the Cubs television team in 1998 on Superstation WGN. He had a bit of a different take when it came to the home run chase really saving baseball. 

“I don’t know if it’s fair to say Sosa/McGwire brought baseball “back” per se. Baseball was always there, and for the fans who were able to look away from the labor disasters of previous years, that never changed”, Caray told me via email.  “However, for the casual fan, or better yet, the skeptical, ‘still-mad-at-my-partner’ fan, the HR chase of 98 captured their attention and yes, brought many of them back to the game they loved more than being mad at it.”

After a lot of back and forth in the chase to 62, McGwire would get there first. In a game against the Cubs in St. Louis he hit the epic blast. Now it was no ordinary home run obviously, it put some pressure on the broadcasters at the time. Do I script it? Do I let it come naturally? That’s always a dilemma in big moments in broadcasting. Joe Buck who was also around a lot of the homers the Cardinals hit that year, was calling it for Fox.  The record breaker caused some issues in the way it got out of Busch Stadium. 

“Down the left-field line, is it enough? Gone! There it is, 62. Touch first Mark, you are the new single-season home run king!” Buck said before letting the pictures take over for the next 3 plus minutes.  The silence ended with Buck saying, “Folks, it couldn’t happen to a better man. You will always remember where you were when it happened – 8:18 central time, Sept. 8, 1998.”

Buck admitted after the game that he had a different call prepared and written down on his scorecard. But the moment happened so fast, he had to improvise.

“That home run shot he hit was the old script buster,” Buck said. “I had come up with, ‘There it goes. Here it is. A new single-season home run champion with 62. Mark McGwire as he floats around the bases and into the history books.’ I even had it written on my score sheet to make sure I wouldn’t mess it up,” said Buck after that night’s game. “The long drawn out call that you dreamed up some day away from the ballpark, forget about it. That’s one you watch and hope you get call right.”

Caray agreed and he was equally challenged by the shear nature of how the ball got out. 

“When it went over the fence, I was surprised–like the 50,000 people there–that he did it,” Caray recalled. “All I could think to say was, ‘He did it! He did it! He did it!’ I think that’s what everybody in America was saying when the ball went over the fence. And then I finally figured out, ‘OK, he did it. Now shut up,’”.  Caray though, did not have anything etched on his scorebook to remind him of what to say in that moment.  “My own personal feeling is, if you plan something to say, it’s going to sound . . . planned. I think the great beauty of this game is its spontaneity.”, said Caray. 

Knowing now, what we didn’t know then, like the use of PED’s, didn’t change the moment for many. The race was compelling, McGwire got off to a hot start that season and Sosa heated up late to make it a race in September. Sosa hit a then record 20 home runs in June, McGwire hit 16 in May and 14 in September. There were twists and turns that made it special at the time for Caray in ’98. 

MONTHMCGWIRESOSA
MARCH/APRIL116
MAY16 (27)7 (13)
JUNE10 (37)20 (33)
JULY8 (45)9 (42)
AUGUST10 (55)13 (55)
SEPTEMBER15 (70)11 (66)
TOTALS7066

“Look, there are a lot of people who want to rewrite their memories, and look at 98 through the prism of revisionist history. I am NOT one of those,” Caray said. “In the moment, 98 was a total blast, if you’ll pardon the pun.  Two guys going toe to toe for two great franchises who share baseball’s best rivalry and it captured everyone’s attention. It was great theatre and like baseball fans everywhere, we as broadcasters and fans were pulled along in the vapor trail.” 

“That was all over baseball a lot more than we knew at the time.”, said Buck during a 2018 sit down with Graham Bensinger. Buck isn’t convinced to this day that it’s fair or even possible to pick out those that did and those that didn’t.

I covered that Cubs team on occasion and you could sense the buzz around the team and Sosa. He came off as the jolly underdog that was loving every minute of the attention and accomplishment. Sosa was the loveable character, while McGwire came off as the grumpy grandpa of the chase. Sosa was available to the media and the swarms of cameras and reporters near his locker everyday was proof. 

Ex-Chicago Cub Sammy Sosa Looks Completely Different Now

“I thought he (Sosa) played his part in the HR chase perfectly.”, observed Caray.  “Endorsements came rolling in, he was everywhere. I would never say he was “Jordan-esque”, but overnight, he became an International baseball icon. Pretty amazing for a guy that had a lousy year in 1997, and grew up shining shoes and selling oranges in the DR. Anything I needed to ask of him, he was willing to answer and most of all, he treated my wife and infant daughter extremely well. I’ll never forget that.” 

Buck came to the defense of McGwire and the attitude he seemed to give off. “Mark was always misunderstood to me, he was kind of the reluctant superstar at that time.”, Buck told Bensinger in 2018. “That’s kind of how he was genuinely so when he became the new single season home run guy and he’d be around St. Louis and people would come up to him he was just like ‘what do you want?’, he didn’t buy into all that stuff. I give him a lot of credit for it.” 

Some do forget that in the midst of this epic home run race was a playoff race being run by the Cubs. They would eventually win a wildcard spot with a victory in Game 163 v. the Giants. They’d run into the Braves though and were swept out of the playoffs. But during that year, Caray would have some memorable games and other statistical milestones to call including Kerry Wood’s 20 strikeout game at Wrigley Field in May. 

With all that went on during the ’98 season, it was Caray’s first year with the Cubs. He headed to Chicago with the idea of working with his grandfather, Harry Caray. The elder Caray unfortunately passed away in February of that year. So, facing Chip now was a rather daunting task. 

“1998 was a huge year on a personal level, obviously, going to Chicago and trying to do the impossible, ie follow Harry Caray. I mean, there is/was no “replacing’’ him.” Caray told me.

He did have some allies to help him through, “luckily I had Steve Stone, Arne Harris (producer/director), John McDonough (Cubs VP of Marketing), Ed Lynch (Cubs GM) and Andy MacPhail (Cubs President) in my corner, they all understood (way more than I did) the enormity of the job I had ahead.”, said Caray. “I had Harry’s name…but I wasn’t him…luckily, all those guys allowed me to be ME. Best of all, we had a fun, entertaining team that captured the city’s imagination….and as you know, nothing helps a new broadcaster than to break in with a good team.  And the 98 Cubs were exactly that.” 

Chicago Cubs: What if the 1998 Cubs had Greg Maddux?

So was the 98 season in general. So much went on, the Diamondbacks and Devil Rays debuted as franchises, Wood struck out 20, David Wells threw a perfect game, Bud Selig was named the 9th Commissioner in baseball history, and Randy Johnson was traded.

All of that paled in comparison to “Big Mac” and “Slammin’ Sammy” assaulting the record books and hitting home runs like they were going out of style. It is indeed a Long Gone Summer, which should be a lot of fun to relive. 

BSM Writers

Who Handled the Tua Concussion Discussion Best?

Rex Ryan, Rodney Harrison, and Boomer Esiason stood out with their commentary on the Tagovailoa story.

Avatar photo

Published

on

blank

The major story going into the bulk of Week 4’s NFL action on Sunday was the concussion suffered by Miami Dolphins quarterback Tua Tagovailoa in Thursday’s game versus the Cincinnati Bengals.

Amazon’s Thursday Night Football telecast, particularly its halftime show, faced heavy criticism for neglecting to mention that Tagovailoa had been tested for a concussion in his previous game just four days earlier. Additionally, the NFL Players Association called for an investigation into whether or not the league’s concussion protocols were followed properly in evaluating Tagovailoa.

In light of that, how would the Sunday NFL pregame shows address the Tagovailoa concussion situation? Would they better inform viewers by covering the full story, including the Week 3 controversy over whether or not proper protocols were followed?

We watched each of the four prominent pregame shows — ESPN’s Sunday NFL Countdown, Fox NFL Sunday, CBS’s The NFL Today, and NBC’s Football Night in America — to compare how the Tagovailoa story was covered. With the benefit of two extra days to research and report, did the Sunday shows do a better job of informing and engaging viewers?

Here’s how the pregame studio crews performed with what could be the most important NFL story of the year:

Sunday NFL Countdown – ESPN

ESPN’s pregame show is the first to hit the air each Sunday, broadcasting at 10 a.m. ET. So the Sunday NFL Countdown crew had the opportunity to lead the conversation for the day. With a longer, three-hour show and more resources to utilize in covering a story like this, ESPN took full advantage of its position.

The show did not lead off with the Tagovailoa story, opting to lay out Sunday’s schedule, which included an early game in London between the Minnesota Vikings and New Orleans Saints. But the Countdown crew eventually got to issue on everyone’s minds approximately 28 minutes into the program.

Insider Adam Schefter provided the latest on the NFL and NFLPA’s investigation into the matter, particularly the “gross motor instability” Tagovailoa displayed in stumbling on the field and how the Dolphins initially announced that the quarterback had suffered a head injury, but later changed his condition to a back injury.

Schefter added that the NFL and NFLPA were expected to interview Tagovailoa and pass new guidelines for concussion protocols, including that no player displaying “gross motor instability” will be allowed to play. Those new rules could go into effect as early as Week 5.

“This is an epic fail by the NFL,” said Matt Hasselbeck to begin the commentary. “This is an epic fail by the medical staff, epic fail by everybody! Let’s learn from it!”

Perhaps the strongest remarks came from Rex Ryan, who said coaches sometimes need to protect players from themselves.

“I had a simple philosophy as a coach: I treated every player like my son,” Ryan said. “Would you put your son back in that game after you saw that?

“Forget this ‘back and ankle’ BS that we heard about! This is clearly from head trauma! That’s it. I know what it looks like. We all know what it looks like.”

Where Sunday NFL Countdown‘s coverage may have stood out the most was by bringing injury analyst Stephania Bell into the discussion. Bell took a wider view of the story, explaining that concussions had to be treated in the long-term and short-term. Science needs to advance; a definitive diagnostic tool for brain injury doesn’t currently exist. Until then, a more conservative approach has to be taken, holding players out of action more often.

Grade: A. Countdown covered the story thoroughly. But to be fair, it had the most time.

The NFL Today – CBS

CBS’s pregame show led off with the Tagovailoa story, going right to insider Jonathan Jones to report. He cited the key phrase “gross motor instability” as a significant indication of a concussion.

Jones also clarified that the unaffiliated neurotrauma consultant who helped evaluate Tagovailoa made “several mistakes” in consulting with the Dolphins’ team doctor, leading to his dismissal by the NFL and NFLPA.

The most pointed remarks came from Boomer Esiason, who said any insinuation that the Dolphins, head coach Mike McDaniel, or the team medical staff put Tagovailoa back in the game in order to win was “off-base.” Phil Simms added that the concussion experts he spoke with indicated that Tagovailoa could miss four to six weeks with this injury.

Grade: B-. The opinions from the analysts were largely bland. Jones’s reporting stood out.

Fox NFL Sunday

The Fox NFL pregame show also led off with the Tagovailoa story, reviewing the questions surrounding how the quarterback was treated in Week 3 before recapping his injury during Week 4’s game.

Jay Glazer reported on the NFL’s investigation, focusing on whether or not Tagovailoa suffered a concussion in Week 3. And if he did, why was he allowed to play in Week 4? Glazer noted that Tagovailoa could seek a second, maybe a third medical opinion on his injury.

Jimmy Johnson provided the most compelling commentary, sharing his perspective from the coaching side of the situation. He pointed out that when an injured player comes off the field, the coach has no contact with him. The medical team provides an update on whether or not the player can return. In Johnson’s view, Mike McDaniel did nothing wrong in his handling of the matter. He has to trust his medical staff.

Grade: B. Each of the analysts shared stronger opinions, particularly in saying a player failing “the eyeball test” with concussion symptoms should be treated seriously.

Football Night in America – NBC

Sunday Night Football was in a different setting than the other pregame shows, with Maria Taylor, Tony Dungy, and Rodney Harrison broadcasting on-site from Tampa Bay. With that, the show led off by covering the aftermath of Hurricane Ian, its effects on the Tampa area, and how the Buccaneers dealt with the situation during the week.

But after 20 minutes, the show got into the Tagovailoa story with Mike Florio reporting what his peers told viewers earlier in the day regarding pending changes to the NFL’s concussion protocol and “gross motor instability” being used as a major indicator.

Florio emphasized that the NFLPA would ask how Tagovailoa was examined and treated. Was he actually examined for a back injury in Week 3? And if he indeed suffered a back injury, why was he still allowed to play?

When the conversation went back to the on-site crew, Dungy admitted that playing Thursday night games always concerned him when he was a coach. He disclosed that teams playing a Thursday game needed to have a bye the previous week so they didn’t have to deal with a quick, four-day turnaround. That scheduling needs to be addressed for player safety.

But Harrison had the most engaging reaction to the story, coming from his experience as a player. He admitted telling doctors that he was fine when suffering concussion symptoms because he wanted to get back in the game. Knowing that was wrong, Harrison pleaded with current players to stay on the sidelines when hurt because “CTE takes you to a dark place.”

“It’s not worth it. Please take care of yourself,” said Harrison. “Don’t depend on the NFL. Don’t depend on anybody. If something’s wrong with your head, report it.”

Grade: B+. Dungy and Harrison’s views of the matter from their perspective as a coach and player were very compelling.

Continue Reading

BSM Writers

Jason Barrett Podcast – Terry Dugan & Adam Delevitt, BetRivers

Jason Barrett

Published

on

blank

Sportsbooks are creating their own media now, and no company is doing that using more guys that have made their names on sports radio than BetRivers. Terry Dugan & Adam Delevitt talk about the strategy behind that decision for today and for the future.

iTunes: https://buff.ly/3nTJC5K 

Spotify: https://buff.ly/3z9hErM

iHeart: https://buff.ly/3oyi0U0

Google: https://buff.ly/3vh7Tqu

Amazon: https://buff.ly/3w9hqAh

Continue Reading

BSM Writers

Joe Rogan Betting Admission Reveals Gray Area

Rogan’s admission raises a question as to just how ethical it is to place bets with insider information, and whether it should be legal or not.

Avatar photo

Published

on

Joe Rogan

For nearly a decade, I’ve been fortunate enough to cover the football and basketball programs for the University of Kentucky in some form or fashion. Whether writing for blogs or working with ESPN Louisville as co-host of the post-game show, I’ve gotten to know people around the program I grew up supporting, and other individuals in the media doing the same. I’ve made some terrific friendships and cultivated quite a few relationships that provide me with “inside information” about the teams.

As an avid sports bettor, that information has sometimes put me into some difficult personal situations. There have been times when I’ve been alerted to player news that wasn’t public, such as a player dealing with an injury or suspension. It’s often been told to me off-the-record, and I’ve never put that information out publicly or given it to others.

I wish I could also say I’ve never placed a wager based on that information, but that would be a lie. While it’s been a long time since I’ve done so, I’ve ventured into that ethical gray area of betting on a team that I’m covering. I’ve long felt uncomfortable doing so, and I’d say it’s been a few years since I last did it.

At least I know I’m not alone. On his latest episode of The Joe Rogan Experience, Rogan told guest Bert Kreischer that earlier in his UFC broadcasting career he regularly bet on fights. He claims to have won nearly 85% of the time (which I highly doubt but that’s another discussion for another time), either via bets he made or ones he gave to a business partner to place on his behalf.

From his comments, Rogan doesn’t seem to have been using sensitive information to gain an edge with the books, but he also didn’t state that he didn’t. He indicates that much of his success stemmed from knowing quite a bit more about fighters coming from overseas, and he said he “knew who they were and I would gamble on them.”

But Rogan undoubtedly has long been in a position where he knows which fighters might be dealing with a slight injury, or who are struggling in camp with a specific fighting style. It’s unavoidable for someone whose job puts him into contact with individuals who tell him things off-the-record and divulge details without perhaps even realizing it.

But let’s say Rogan did get that information, and did use it, and was still doing so today. The fact is…there’s nothing illegal about it, not in the United States at least. While it’s against the rules of some entities — the NFL, for example, has stated they could suspend or ban for life individuals who use inside information or provide it to others — it’s not against any established legal doctrine. Unlike playing the stock market, insider betting is not regulated by any central body or by the government.

However, Rogan’s admission raises a question as to just how ethical it is to place bets with insider information, and whether it should be legal or not. Many of the after-the-fact actions that have been taken in the realm of legalized sports betting in this country, or those being discussed currently (such as advertising limitations), fall in line with changes made in Great Britain following their legalization.

One of their big changes was making it illegal to utilize insider information, with very specific definitions about the “misuse of information” and what steps the Gambling Commission may take. It lays out what information can be used, the punishments that may be levied, and at what point it might venture into criminality.

Sportsbooks do have recourse in some instances to recoup money on insider betting, but not many. If they can prove that a wage was influenced, they can cancel the bet or sue for the money. The most well-known instance is the individual who bet $50,000 at +750 odds that someone would streak on the field during Super Bowl LV –which he did– and then was denied the payout when he bragged about his exploits. But unless someone foolishly tells the books that they’ve taken them with information that the public wasn’t privy to, they have little to no chance of doing anything about it.

There are ramifications to insider betting that raise truly ethical dilemmas. Just like stock trading, information can be immeasurably valuable to those with stakes large enough to change prices. If I’m placing a $20 prop bet with the knowledge that a team’s starting running back might be out for a game, or dealing with an ankle injury, I’m not going to harm anybody else playing that line. But if I give that information to a shark, who places a $20,000 wager on that same line, I’ve now enabled someone to move a line and impact other bettors.

Online sports betting in this country continues to grow, and every day we are reminded that there are still aspects of the space that can feel like the wild west. As individuals in the media, we have to decide personally what our ethical stances are in situations like this. We also have to keep in mind the impact that betting can have on our biases–especially if we’ve bet using inside information. A prime example is Kirk Herbstreit, who won’t even make a pick on College Gameday for games he is going to be doing color commentary for lest he possibly appears biased on the call.

At one end of the spectrum, you have someone like Herbstreit, and on the other end, you have folks like Rogan who, while he no longer does so, was more than happy to not only wager on fights himself but gave the information to others. And in the middle, you have hundreds of people in similar situations, who might lean one way or another or who, like me, may have found themselves on either side of that ethical line.

There is no black or white answer here, nor am I saying there’s necessarily a right or wrong stance for anybody in the sports media industry to take. I would say that each person has to take stock of what they’re comfortable doing, and how they feel about insider information being used. Rogan didn’t break any rules or laws by gambling on the UFC, but his admission to doing so might be the catalyst towards it no longer being accepted.

Continue Reading
Advertisement blank
Advertisement blank

Barrett Media Writers

Copyright © 2022 Barrett Media.