Daily Super Bowl Hype Meme: Photo Day

After a few days in which there were no stories dumb enough to warrant a DSBHM post, we here at the GRBG were all set to give some rare praise to the mainstream media. In years past, the flow of media effluent started pretty much the moment that the conference championship game winners came down off of their Percocet buzzes. But this year the media seemed happy to wait until Super Bowl week, a move which would bring some much-needed sanity to the Super Bowl hype process.

Then Photo-gate broke out.

For those unaware, a very, very mild controversy erupted last week around whether the Green Bay Packers were trying to exclude players on injured reserve from appearing in the team's Super Bowl photo, presumably because the injured guys wanted to go with the cool laser background, while the team wanted to go with the more modest "pool of light on a black background" option.

above at left: LAZ3Rz!!!

Then the Packers decided to let everyone be in the picture AND throw in a free wallet-size potrait to those who registered in advance, and everything was cool.

Except somehow it wasn't, because Green Bay's gravy-brained QB, Aaron Rodgers, for some reason decided to dredge the whole thing up again by taking his injured teammates to task for not being around more, we guess because if they'd have been around, they'd have gotten the photo day message in their cubbies after snack. So now we're apparently supposed to believe that there is enough dissention within the ranks in Green Bay that it will somehow affect their performance on Sunday.

We've debunked the dissention meme before around here, so we won't bother doing it again. But what really irked us about this meme is the way it was presented on SportsCenter this morning. ESPN talking neck Sal Paolantonio all but winked his way through his report, trying to acknowledge the ridiculousness of the story while further fanning its flames. This is the sort of cutesy stuff that droves us bonkers, because it involves an implication that ESPN is smarter than its audience. The attitude that comes across is "We know this is stupid, but so are you, so sit there and take it." It is, but we're not and we won't. Knock it off.

For getting Super Bowl week off to just the wrong start, we're giving this meme an 8 on the hype scale. If this keeps up, we'll have worn the Mute button right off of our remote by Wednesday.

Toward a Unified Theory of Jim Lampley

Over the past few days, we have consumed copious amounts of Olympic sports via a range of telecasts on the NBC family of networks, and as a result have been exposed to near-toxic levels of NBC daytime anchorman Jim Lampley. This in turn raised the question of how exactly Lampley, a man whose on-air persona consists of a ratio of three parts smugness to one part haircut, landed such a coveted anchor slot. An investigation was clearly in order.

Based on what we've seen, each NBC sub-network has a different anchor for each daily broadcast segment, with (figuratively) big guns like Bob Costas being wheeled out only for prime time coverage on the mother network. With that in mind, it seems worthwhile to work through a compare-and-contrast of the anchors, broken down by network, to see what Lampley's peer group looks like.

MSNBC: Melissa Stark

Stark is probably best known as the proto-Erin Andrews, a sports sideline reporter who both looks good on camera and is capable of holding multiple, independent thoughts in her head at any one given time. Neither skill should be undersold--after all, Eric Dickerson failed signally at both.

Stark is now at MSNBC doing general reporting. Her current Olympics work has been typical of her past sports work: solid and professional, if just the slightest bit dull. Still, Stark has gotten her facts and pronounciations largely right, and has consistently under- rather than over-played the emotional content of stories. For example, she was the only NBC anchor who did not call for the destruction or occupation of Lyon following the men's 4X100 meter freestyle relay the other day, a welcome and notably un-Lampleyian take on the story.

Of course, perhaps as a result of this, Stark has been relegated to America's third-most popular cable news network. Still, on a viewer-annoyance scale of 1 Jim Lampley to 5 Jim Lampleys, Stark receives a winningly low 2 Lampleys.

CNBC: Teddy Atlas & Friends

CNBC's coverage is given over entirely to boxing, apparently on the theory that financial analysis is closely linked to the violent imposition of brain trauma. At any regard, CNBC's single-event focus and total lack of sporting pedigree has led to one of the biggest upsets in broadcast history: the anchorless sports broadcast.

Yep, it's just a play-by-play guy, a sideline reporter, and color man Teddy Atlas out there running the entire show. While this might sound like a good thing, the lack of an anchor quickly points up exactly how much broadcast time a skillful anchor can entertainingly waste between televised events. In the absence of such an anchor, we're left with a series of endless, droning fight "previews" by Atlas, all of which sound something like this:

P-B-P Guy: So, Teddy, tell us about today's upcoming fight between U.S. fighter Cardigan Lopez-Wong and the newcomer from Turkmenistan.

Teddy Atlas: Well, the key here is for Lopez to punch the Turkmeni fighter in the face a lot. It is crucial that Lopez punch the Turkmeni in the face more than the Turkmeni punches him in the face. However, Lopez's task will be made more difficult by the Turkmeni trying to stop Lopez from punching him in the face, while also trying to punch Lopez in the face. Should be an interesting fight.

[CUT TO beer commercial]

This analysis is riveting after its fashion, but doesn't show much in the way of anchor skills. Give Atlas a 4 on the Lampley scale.

USA: Matt Vasgersian

We're sorry, but to us this guy will forever be the "Armenian Teen Heartthrob", as Vasgersian was christened by Bill Dwyer in those 989 Sports videogame commercials back in the day. Nothing else Vasgersian has done or will ever do will top that nickname. His Olympic performance on USA is mostly bearable, though there is just the slightest soupcon of a Lampley-style smugness lurking underneath. We'll just give him 3 Lampleys and move on to more pressing concerns.

NBC: Jim Lampley

Ah, Lampley. This guy has been around since the beginning of time, feeding off of the scraps left behind by the A-list guys like Costas, Mussburger, et al. He seems to have modeled himself after Muppet announcer Guy Smiley in terms of both appearance and broadcasting style, yet he gets gigs as though it was still 1962 out there. His Olympics coverage has been marked by a jarring combination of Limbaughian jingoistic content (see the above-referenced 4X100 relay story) and the total lack of personal affect common to sufferers of Asperger's Syndrome. This would not seem to recommend him to the second-highest profile Olympic broadcasting slot for NBC.

Plus, in perhaps the ultimate indignity in all this, to the extent that Lampley holds any respect in the broadcasting field it's as a BOXING announcer. Thus, NBC could solve two problems at once simply by demoting Lampley to CNBC, thereby relieving poor Teddy Atlas of the most onerous of his time-filling responsibilities, and tap someone like Keith Olberman as the NBC anchor. This makes so much sense that it's almost painful.

Additionally, it's not like Lampley's non-Olympic life makes up for his broadcasting shortcomings. Lampley was one of the original "personalities" on WFAN, the New York City sports-talk radio station whose novel format helped publicize such the emotional disorders of fans nationwide. Also, in a gossip-style note that doesn't merit much space here, last year his fiancee accused him of slamming her head against a wall on New Year's Eve. So, Lampley's artistic performance scores are right down there with his technical merit numbers.

So why, then? Why does Lampley get the NBC gig over other, more qualified anchors? The only answer we come up with is the hair. Lampley's hair is just so magisterial that it overwhelms his manifest other shortcomings in the eyes of the NBC brass. While we yield to no one in our admiration of a solid haircut, we can't help but think that this is a thin reed on which to rest an employment decision.

It's not too late, NBC. Rescue Olberman from the purgatory of MSNBC, let him run amok in Beijing for week 2 of the Olympics, and send Lampley back to the Rotary Club awards dinner circuit. We'll all thank you for it in the end.

No Means No, Mr. Kenny

We're loathe to pile on ESPN, as there are plenty of other blogs out there already dedicated to ESPN bashing, and most of which are better written than this one. That said, we would be doing a disservice to humanity if we failed to note the "interview" of Chris Mortensen by Brian Kenny that ran during the 6:00 P.M. eastern SportsCenter on Thursday. The interview concerned the report that former New England Patriots video assistant Matt Walsh has provided the NFL with additional videotapes of opponents' signals.

To us, the interview and evinces either a mindless determination by Kenny to continue hyping the story in the face of Mortensen's calm recitation of the facts, or a signal failure by an ESPN intern to brief Kenny on anything resembling the factual background of the story. Either way the interview looked like it killed whatever was left of Mortensen's respect for his employer.

Serious notes before we begin: What follows is a partial transcript of the interview. It includes everything but the last part of the last answer by Mortensen, which related to league rule changes and which we cut to save space. We have not otherwise altered the content of the transcript. However, as with any transcript, other listeners might have differently chosen to punctuate or add indications of emphasis or parenthetical clarifications.

It's lengthy, but hang in there. As an incentive, we'll do before and after shots of the increasingly beleaguered Mortensen. Here's the before, with Mort looking wary, but resolute:


Brian Kenny: We're joined now by our own Chris Mortensen. Mort, Commissioner Roger Gooddell had said that he could consider further punishment against the Patriots. These are [tapes of] different games, and there's film now of offensive and defensive signals--is this enough now to open it up?

Chris Mortensen: No. Not based on what we know from the letter of certification Matt Walsh's attorney sent the league. The tapes are now in the league's offices . . . league hands, being reviewed.

But we need to go back and maybe make sure chronologically that we understand that, number 1, the NFL always had information that this taping took place back through 2000. There's no new revelation there. And if you go back to the September 13th release when Belichick was penalized as well as the Patriots, you will see in there that it covers offensive and defensive signals.

So, therefore, unless Matt Walsh has some new testimony that he can corroborate outside of these tapes, there's no new information. And let's don't forget that Belichick admitted to the commissioner that he had been doing this since he'd been in New England.

BK: Going back to 2000, then?

CM: Absolutely, yeah. We reported it. We reported that first week of Spygate that Belichick had admitted that. So, that's not necessarily . . . that's not a new revelation.

BK: Mort, how will the teams that were taped--especially the Steelers, in a conference championship game--take all this?

CM: Well, again, when Commissioner Gooddell met with Arlen Specter, the senator from Pennsylvania, he briefed him on on what were in the notes in addition to the tapes they had, because the notes dated back to 2000, and in those notes, as Gooddell told Specter in their meeting, it included these Pittsburgh Steeler AFC Championship games in '01 and '04. The Boston Globe reported that on February 16th, and then Dan Rooney, the Pittsburgh Steeler's owner and chairman of their board released a statement saying 'there is nothing in the tapes of our coaching signals that would have an impact on the games, and it is no issue with us.'

So, so far I'd say all that damage control has been done.

BK: Walsh says he does not have the Rams 2002 Super Bowl walkthrough tape--that's a potential smoking gun that's been reported out there. Do you think it wasn't done, or that Walsh doesn't have a tape of it, because Walsh hasn't spoken to the commissioner yet.

CM: Well, let's also remember that the only report concerning the Rams' walkthrough, Matt Walsh was never named as the guy who allegedly videotaped it. And he's never said he's had it, and I think that's one thing commissioner Gooddell really wants to speak with [Walsh] about on Tuesday is, OK, even though you were identified, this thing lingered out there a couple of months, why didn't you clarify this, why did you let this thing linger?

And so, if Walsh has information, and he can identify another videotape assistant who videotaped that Rams walkthrough, that'd be one thing. But right now there's no evidence there is such a videotape.

BK: Mort, does this change anything though around the league as far as how Bill Belichick should be viewed, now that there's this hard evidence on precisely what they were doing and it's a pattern that goes back to 2000?

CM: Not around--it doesn't change the perception around the league; everyone knows Belichick's been doing--he admitted that he'd been doing it. [Remainder of answer cut for length.]

* * *

Gee whiz, Brian, you think maybe there's no story here? Christ. Did Belichick sleep with his wife as well? Kenny better hope that Buzz Bissinger doesn't get hold of this transcript, or he's likely to bite off Kenny's ear. In any event, somebody should put Mortensen on a suicide alert--here's the "after" shot:


We all feel you, Mort. Drinks on us next time you make it out Gowanus way.

I'm Adriana Monsalve; Now, Back to Sports-CENTER

One of the myriad joys of unemployment is the freedom it gives you to indulge in leisurely watchings (and occasionally re-watchings) of the morning reruns of SportsCenter. After engaging in a week or so of restful contemplation of these reruns, the extremely stringent dress ESPN anchor dress code begins to pop out at you. For example, as I type this I'm watching an SC rerun featuring John Andersen in a dark grey suit and Steve Levy in a dark grey pinstriped suit that will no doubt result in Levy finding an HR memo waiting in his cubby following the broadcast.

But one ESPN personality appears to be joyfully exempt from the ESPN anchor mold:

Above is the lovely Adriana Monsalve, who is periodically tapped to guest anchor a short segment on SportsCenter dedicated primarily to soccer. One aspect of her uniqueness is readily apparent from that picture--not that John Buccigross isn't an good-looking man, but Ms. Monsalve clearly scores higher than the average SC anchor on most conventional attractiveness scales. This difference is understandable, though, given that TV has a long-standing preference for pretty people.

A second aspect of Ms. Monsalve's uniqueness is obvious as soon as she begins delivering her lines, as her native Venezuelan accent is . . . not subtle. For example, her efforts at narrating a highlight involving German soccer club Bayern Munich almost resulted in a call for the Jaws of Life. But this difference is also understandable given that (1) she is on SC as part of a cross-branding effort with ESPN Deportes and (2) I suspect that the Spanish language skills of, say, Barry Melrose aren't quite up to snuff for an appearance on Deportes.

But by far the biggest aspect of Ms. Monsalve's uniqueness are her wardrobe choices, which appear to have been made by the same person who dressed Charles Nelson Reilly for his appearances on Match Game '77. For example, I'm 92% sure that she wore the outfit at left last week while discussing the Barca-Man U Champions League semifinal.

Why Ms. Monsalve alone is allowed to break free of the chains of ESPN corporate dress policy is a bit of a mystery. If we're lucky, though, it represents the first crack in the charcoal grey wall that is the average ESPN anchor.

For example, just think of the ratings spike that would result in, say, Linda Cohn breaking out this little number at right for the 11PM Sunday SC. Admittedly, this outfit is more 1985 Bond villain than Match Game '77, but in this bold new post-dress code universe, who cares?

So get those cards and letter in to ESPN demanding that Ms. Monsalve's sartorial lead be followed by all ESPN anchors ASAP. After all, if they insist on broadcasting SC in high-def, we might as well push the technology as far as it will go.

Stupid Announcing, Part Deux

Gary Cohen, who I normally love, on John Maine entering the 8th inning of the Mets-Rockies tilt:

"And with that pitch, John Maine becomes the first Met pitcher to throw a pitch in the eighth inning!"

Clearly, at Shea Stadium they only play by high school rules, in which case I'm glad I traded Billy Wagner when I did. Needless to say, Keith Hernandez was too busy applying hair dye and picking his nose to notice the error.