"The Most Ambitious Single Media Project In History"

From today's Globe and Mail:

The ambition of this year's Olympic Games coverage - and the reason why I admire Bob Costas.

Thought Of The Day

http://egan.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/02/save-the-press/

Something every budding journalist, and everyone concerned about the state of the world, should read.

I Don't Know If I'd Call It A Frenzy...

So, Happy Canada Day and all that. Canada's lone baseball team is playing a series on the other side of the continent in another country. Remember when Canada Day weekend meant the Jays played the Expos every year? Ah, memories.

But of course, July 1 is the first day for unrestricted free agents to sign with new teams in the NHL. There were plenty of signings to satisfy the cravings of hockey fans who cannot wait the 3 months in between the draft and training camp, so let's break them down.

First, Brian Campbell signed the biggest deal of the day, going to Chicago for 8 years. Nice to see him mention the classy nature of the Sharks organization twice to James Duthie on TSN. Good luck, Brian. Your playing elsewhere next year helps me forget that you were in the penalty box for the elimination goal against Dallas. But, he's a great player and Chicago is looking dangerous in the years ahead - the next Pittsburgh. And apparently he owes Duthie dinner...

Speaking of Chicago, they also picked up Cristobel Huet today to (presumably) back up Nik Khabibulin. But, as was pointed out by Gord Miller, the B-Hawks are over the cap right now, and with two quality goalies, does this mean the end of the Bulin Wall in Chicago? Seriously, name the last team with two starting goalies that won the Cup. Exactly. One of these two will fail and either be traded or released by this time next year. Mark my words, it'll be Nik.

Meanwhile, Huet's former team, Washington, let him and his competition last year, Oleg Kolzig, go. So, to make up for it, they signed - say it with me now - former Hart Trophy winner Jose Theodore for 2 years. You know, Jon Stewart said it best about Sly Stallone, and it's oddly appropriate in this case: Once you win an Oscar, they can't take it away from you for any reason. So why would a team with 2 quality starting tenders let them both go to sign Theodore? Between Chicago, Tampa Bay (Kolzig's new home) and Washington, there will be failure in 2009.
And of course, it wouldn't be a free agent discussion with Mats Sundin, who was offered $20 million over 2 years to play in Vancouver. And of course, we won't hear his decision until, what? Thanksgiving?

All in all, not a bad day for these players. Once Marian Hossa and Jaromir Jagr sign, though, the frenzy will be over.

Oh.

The Jays are wearing red-coloured logos on their hats. That makes up for it.

In a Few Years

In a few years, when we look back at the week that was in professional sports, we may realize that this week has had a profound impact on the sporting world more than we do today. In a stunning allegation, gambling's favourite son, former NBA referee Tim Donaghy, claimed that the outcomes of past playoff games were fixed by "company-men" refs who called the games in order to see the series extend to a game 7, and therefore, give the league the extra ratings it needed.

Many writers who covered one of the series in question, the West Final between the Kings and Lakers in 2002, said at the time that the calls in Game 6 were "offensively bad". Whether one believes the disgraced referee now or not, revelations like this, when tied to recent history, are too much of a coincidence to ignore.

If, in the next few weeks and months, more revelations of this sort come out against the NBA, the NFL's SpyGate will seem like minor shoplifting when compared to the game fixing the NBA will be accused of. How can we know it's not going on now? The league already admitted they wanted a Celtics-Lakers Final before the playoffs began; now we have one. Coincidence? When so much circumstancial evidence is presented, it's difficult to give the league a free pass. Let's hope the league steps up and tries to clean up after itself like baseball did after allegations of steroids.

In other (seemingly) more important news, CBC did not renew the famous "Hockey Theme" song, leaving the door open for rival CTV to purchase it for TSN and for its Olympic coverage in 2010. Besides my obvious joy from this (being an intern at TSN this fall), I can't help but wonder if this is the beginning of the end for hockey on Canada's public broadcaster. Will CTV go after Don Cherry next? Bob Cole? And when will the next eventual bid for full broadcasting rights be? One year, two tops?

In a few years, we may look back at June 2008 and pinpoint this week as the time that the NBA hit rock bottom and the death of hockey on CBC. And if not, it's just another week in sports.

Maybe Next Year

Today, Trevor Immelman, a golfer who only his parents have heard of, won the Masters by three strokes over the heretofor invincible (or maybe it just seemed that way) Tiger Woods. The talk this morning was that even though Tiger was FIVE shots back, and even though he has never come back to win a major on Sunday, that today was the day for Tiger to do it and win yet another green jacket.

Immelman shot a poor 75, yet still cleared Tiger by 3 strokes.

The point of all this? It's time for the sports media to open their collective eyes and realize that Tiger Woods, amazing as he is, is still a human being. He has bad days, or even bad tournaments. Although he wasn't bad this weekend, he was too far behind on Thursday and Friday to have a legitimate shot to win the Masters in '08.

The second point? Never again (or, at least until next April) will we have to hear about Tiger's chances at the grand slam.

Yet, I have a hunch we won't hear that talk about Trevor Immelman either.

I've Never Been So Happy To Be Wrong

24 hours after the upset to end all upsets, it still seems hard to believe: New York Giants 17, New England Patriots 14. 18-0, and then...18-1.

There were, of course, many factors that gave the Giants the win: excellent pass rush, timely catches, a consistent running game, and so on, but to me, the greatest factor in the upset was the Patriots' inability to control the ball offensively. All year, Tom Brady and company were able to beat their opponents any way possible; short passes, long passes, play action, and, towards the end of the season, running the ball. On Super Sunday, Laurence Maroney was non-existent, and the Giants defense shut down everyone on the Pats' receiving corps not named Wes Welker, who, if the Pats won, would certainly have received the MVP award.

One more point on the game: I didn't have the cahones to pick the Giants, even though I wanted to. All credit to Mike Ditka, who was the only member of ESPN's countdown show to pick New York, and, of course, John Smylie, who was even really close on the final score.

Now, to copy one of my favourite writers, Chris Zelkovich, here's my Good, Bad, and the Ugly from the coverage of Super Bowl XLII:

The Good:
- Joe Buck and Troy Aikman, the Fox commentators for the game, didn't mention the Pats pursuit of perfection until about the 5 minute mark in the 4th quarter. They left the empty rhetoric to the 4 hour pregame show and focused on the game itself. Great job.

- All the postgame coverage on both Fox and NFL network focused on the Giants' win, instead of the easier trap of directing their attention to the Pats' collapse. The game belongs to the winners, and the interviews should also.

- Curt Menefee, the host of Fox's pregame show, questioned Jimmy Johnson's opinion of Bill Belichick's tactics during the season, asking if the praise of Belichick was because of the friendship between the coaches. It's not often that a host will openly question the integrity of an expert on his panel. Good work.

The Bad:
- There were two significant issues with the clock in the first half, but only one of them was from the game itself. On the Giants' opening drive, 2 minutes were suddenly taken off the clock after the commercial break. Was there a time warp or something?

- In the postgame scrum, Marshall Faulk of NFL network told Giants coach Tom Coughlin that he liked Coughlin's term of "green zone". As Faulk said it, Deion Sanders beside him rolled his eyes so far back, he could have seen the inside of his skull. Wouldn't PrimeTime realize he's on camera there?

The Ugly:
- Okay, CTV, I get it, Dexter and Jericho are debuting this month. The 20-odd commercials for each only makes me want to watch it less. Next year, mix up the ads; your viewers aren't going anywhere.

- When Bill Belichick walked off the field with 1 second left in the game, not only did Chris Myers and the rest of the reporters covering Belichick's press conference ignore the issue, no one talked about it afterwards, either last night or today. When Randy Moss walked off in Minnesota, he was villified. What Belichick did was worse, since he's in charge of his team. It was a classless move by a classless man, and the media completely ignored it.

The NHL's Backyard Rink

On New Year's Day, the NHL held its second regular season game outdoors, but the first to be played in the U.S., and the first to be broadcast nationally south of the border. In a dull game, Pittsburgh beat Buffalo 2-1 in a shootout, with wunderkid Sidney Crosby scoring the winning goal.

Frequent stoppages for snow removal aside, the game was a resounding success, as over 70,000 people braved the elements at Ralph Wilson Stadium in Orchard Park, New York, and NBC enjoyed their highest hockey ratings by a country mile.

There is, of course, talk now about making this an annual event, because if it worked once and everyone watched, why wouldn't it work again? And again... and again...

The problem here is that repeating a regular season game outdoors once a year, or even once every two years, has the very real potential of becoming stagnant and boring, something no league, or network, wants to have happen.

I think the outdoor game is a great idea, and the lack of offense aside, the Pens-Sabres game was immensely entertaining. But there is a better solution than merely playing a game for 2 points outdoors. (Oh wait, it's the NHL. 3 points.)

Why not have the All-Star Game played outdoors? The outdoor idea is still new enough to attract the casual or curious viewer, and showcasing the league's best talent in a game that ultimately means nothing will appease the GM's and coaches who fear the outdoor game may cost their team just enough points to miss the playoffs in the pathetic NHL.

Also, the game could be made into a real event, with the skills competition, oldtimers game, and rookie game also being played on the largest backyard rink. The players who have played in either Buffalo or Edmonton have already said they loved the game and are more than willing to do it again.

The league is calling in for a miracle, and the phone was answered with the results of the Winter Classic. Now the league needs the message to get through to the right people, and an outdoor All-Star Game should do that.

Is There An Echo in Here?

This past July, I mentioned that the Wednesday of the baseball all-star break was the worst sports day of the year, and I praised the NHL for releasing their schedule on that day.

Now, here we are, Tuesday October 2nd, the second worst day of the sports year. The baseball playoffs begin tomorrow after a fantastic wild-card playoff game last night in Denver. The NFL is always off during the week this time of year, and NBA training camps are getting set to open.

The NHL starts (in North America) tomorrow. How great would it be for this struggling league to open up with a huge slate of games on a night where NOTHING else is on tap? A league that has virtually no television exposure in the U.S. needs a break, and opening on a night against 3 baseball playoff series opening up is ridiculous.

I have no game to watch tonight, which is unfortunate, because tomorrow, I and other sports fans (especially in Canada) will have to choose between the Leafs/Sens and the Red Sox/Angels.

It shouldn't have to be this way, and the NHL had the control to change it for their own benefit. They blew it.

The Worst Day of the Year

In 2007, it is Wednesday July 11, and in most years, it is the second Wednesday in July.

This is the worst sports day of the year.

Between the middle of June and Labour Day weekend, the only major North American sport in operation is Major League Baseball, and its only competition in that time span in Canada is the CFL, and yesterday was the only day that there was no baseball anywhere across the continent, with their all star break concluding.

The NHL knew this, and took advantage of the media's free space to release their schedule for the upcoming season. On the Canadian sports news programs, this story was the focal point of their show.

The CFL, on the other hand, did not have a game on last night, instead sticking to their usual games on Thursday, Friday, and Sunday this week.

Sports news programs are an hour long and the sports section in the newspaper isn't any smaller on the worst sports day of the year. The CFL, already reduced to a minor league in the eyes of football fans, would have the full attention of Canada's sports media for a day, something any league that is not on top would relish.

A doubleheader on the Wednesday of baseball's all star break by the CFL makes a lot more sense than scheduling games on Sunday afternoons in September. But, maybe that's why the CFL is a minor league.

That and the lack of talented players.

Steroids and the Media

In relation to an article written by my father, Ted Griffith, in Friday's Hamilton Spectator and Ottawa Citizen regarding Barry Bonds' chase of Hank Aaron's record of 755 career home runs, I am now posting a condensed version of an article I wrote in December 2006 regarding the media's coverage of steroid use in sport.

And for the record, it would be nice to see Bonds retire at 755, but the chances of that happening are as likely as Babe Ruth coming back from the dead to pitch a no-hitter in Yankee Stadium against the Red Sox.


The Media and Steroid in Sport

The element of steroid use in sport has been an issue for 20 years, from Ben Johnson's drug scandal at the 1988 Olympics in Seoul, to recent U.S. Congressional hearings on steroid use in baseball. For a large period of that time, however, it had been the elephant in the room. Many people, both in and outside of the media, knew or suspected that many athletes were bending the rules in order to gain a competitive advantage over their opponents. That all changed on March 27, 2006.

March 27, 2006 was the day that Game of Shadows was released into bookstores, a book detailing the steroid use of baseball's greatest modern player, Barry Bonds, by two sports reporters at the San Francisco Chronicle, Mark Fainaru-Wada and Lance Williams. Game of Shadows brought the issue of steroid use, particularly in baseball, to the attention of North America more than any other issue.

The book, based on articles published in the paper in 2004, was the basis for America's premier sports magazine, Sports Illustrated, using the information to label Bonds as guilty, going so far as to headline the cover of the issue with the words, "The Truth: Barry Bonds and Steroids". This story and subsequent book were released just weeks before the baseball season began, with Bonds only 48 home runs away from one of the sport's greatest records, most career home runs. Certainly the timing of the publishing was not coincidental.

Whether Barry Bonds used these substances to attain his record setting numbers is irrelevant in the world of baseball; at the time of the accused drug use, steroids were not illegal in baseball. They were outlawed after the 2002 season.

But this story, and the story of all steroid use in sport, has little to do with the rules of the game.

It is clear from the cover of the issue of SI regarding Bonds that the magazine went with a headline to draw in people and sell magazines. But this is a trend that the sports media has continued with since: convicting people before all the facts are in.

The best example of this is the case of former Arizona Diamondbacks pitcher Jason Grimsley. On Sunday, October 1, 2006, AP picked up a story from the Los Angeles Times stating that Grimsley, suspended from baseball for steroid use, named five high profile players who used steroids, including one of the best pitchers in recent history, Roger Clemens. This information was obtained through a leaked affidavit, and the story spread throughout the continent. For two days, questions arose about these players, but on the following Tuesday, it was reported that the prosecutor in the case stated that these reports contained "significant inaccuracies", effectively saying that the players named were not guilty. It is often said that a bell cannot be unrung, and if the truth had come out much later, the suspicion of the players named may have not disappeared as quickly as it did.

All this doesn't mean that all in the sports media are blind to what has been happening. Some are now ready to admit that they did not do their jobs properly.

In an article from Editor and Publisher, sports writers discuss their failure in exposing steroids in sports like baseball earlier. Bill Dwyre, a columnist for the Los Angeles Times, discusses how many in the field did not translate their work from one sport to another. "We did a very good job of jumping on performance-enhancing drugs in Olympic sports, but you don't treat baseball the same as something like weightlifting in the Olympics. It didn't register on our radar like it should have."

The media's treatment of the subject of steroid use in sports has been slanted heavily towards America's pastime. In the NFL, for example, San Diego Chargers star linebacker Shawne Merriman was suspended for 4 games for steroid use, and the issue was largely ignored, and when CBS News reported that multiple members of the NFC Champion Carolina Panthers were using steroids, other media outlets did not pick up the story with any interest, especially when compared to the Jason Grimsley story of last October.

It is evident that the media has little to no interest in drug stories outside of baseball, and that is a shame. All sports are susceptible to this problem, not just baseball, and the media needs to evenly focus its attention on all of them. Too often we hear stories of "juicing" in baseball, but why is that the only sport that matters? Why are all cyclists and sprinters using performance-enhancing drugs, but hockey and basketball players go unsuspected? This problem will only get worse in the coming years, and it is the media's responsibility to fairly and accurately cover all sides of the story, and that means covering all sports equally.

If a NBA Finals game was on and no one watched, did it exist?

This week, the San Antonio Spurs defeated the Cleveland Cavaliers in 4 dull, lifeless games to win their 4th championship in the last 10 years. And as with the NHL finals, the television ratings were extremely disappointing for the broadcasting network.

While this shouldn't come as a surprise for hockey, it is a little odd for the NBA. After all, this was the "coming out party" for superstar LeBron James, and this alone should have brought enough interest from the casual basketball fan to tune into the series.

Alas, the (lack of) appeal of the Spurs in the series, frequent shots of Eva Longoria notwithstanding, sent viewers away in droves, apparently preferring summer reality programming to championship hoop.

There are many valid reasons for this, such as the localization of sport, where viewers' focus is on their home team rather than the sport as a whole, but when the two "best" teams can't break 40 points at the half, it seems as clear as day to me.

The San Antonio Spurs are ruining the NBA for the casual sports fan. With defensive lockdowns and a slow style of play, the only thing worse than the Spurs in the Final is if the Pistons joined them there.

The glory days of the NBA are being rejunevated in places like Phoenix and Golden State, with fast breaks and high scores the name of the game there, and if teams like the Spurs and Pistons don't change over, rule changes to the sport are necessary to boost scoring, reduce stoppage, and generally improve what was once a great game.

My solution: cut the number of fouls a player needs to foul out from 6 to 3, and increase the roster by at least 3 more players to compensate for the increased foul outs. What will this do? It will reduce fouls to the most important ones, and leave these highly skilled players more room to produce the type of play we want to see in a basketball game.

Teams shouldn't be winning games in the 70's, they should be doing so in the 100's. Eliminate the fouls, and the game speeds up and the skill players do what they do best. Less fouls will also mean more shot attempts, which will create more transition baskets, which will also increase scoring.

I also think the number of timeouts should be cut in half, and the shot clock cut down to 18 seconds, but one problem at a time.

Here's hoping for a Phoenix/Toronto final next year. Not for any basketball reason, just because I want to see it.

A Disgusting Turn of Events

On Saturday afternoon, I was watching Game 5 of the Ottawa-Buffalo series on CBC, a game that eventually went to overtime with the Senators winning the game and the series, heading to their first Stanley Cup Final in team history.

For viewers in the United States, they may have missed the end of this game because NBC, the league's U.S. network partner, switched their coverage over to the pre-race show for the Preakness Stakes.

Overtime hockey bumped for talking about a horse race. Only in America.

A couple of points are necessary here before I rant against this atrosicity. First, NBC's contract with horse racing required it to go to pre-race coverage; that deal was in place before the league signed with NBC. Also, ratings for the pre-race show was nearly triple that of the hockey game.

Now, the NHL needs to realize that afternoon hockey doesn't work like basketball, football, and baseball do in the States. For Sunday's Ducks-Wings game, any viewers that would be on the fence about watching would likely be on ABC, where the Spurs-Jazz series began at the same time.

Us Canadians know that evening hockey works, and there's no reason to think that it won't work in the U.S.. Hockey is not as popular as the 3 major sports right now down south, but it can be. With the right programming.

Secondly, with this pre-existing condition in place, the league should have had the gumption to overrule the network showing its product and schedule the game at night, even if it would then be on Versus.

You can't blame NBC for this debacle; a contract was in place, and ratings would triple if they dumped the overtime period onto Versus. But this incident speaks to a bigger problem for the NHL - ever since the lockout, they have no leverage with the networks in the U.S., and they need to change that, even if that means losing them altogether.

In the end, I'm glad my television was tuned to CBC. Too bad American hockey fans didn't have that option.

NHL Programmers Finally Get It Right

After a first round programming schedule that was meant to appease NBC in their weekend games (which, in fact, hurt both NBC and CBC), the NHL fixed their mistakes in their schedule for the second round of the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

On the first Saturday of the playoffs, the league scheduled Sidney Crosby and the Penguins for the afternoon game on NBC, and rightly so. My issue with it wasn't that CBC lost a Canadian game on Saturday night, but that NBC wanted multiple games in that time slot, meaning the future of the league and hockey in general south of 49 was only seen in some markets in the U.S., not all of them.

If the league wanted to market their young superstar properly, they would have made an agreement with NBC to air the Pens-Sens game across the country at 3 p.m. Instead, some markets miss out on Crosby, and one of the top reasons for non-hockey fans to tune in.

This Saturday, there is but one game in the afternoon (Sharks @ Wings Gm 2), and one in the afternoon on Sunday (Sabres @ Rangers Gm 3). This is the best option for the league and NBC; get one big game with a major market in both games shown coast to coast.

Plus, CBC gets the Senators game on Saturday night, as they would want.

Everybody wins. Especially the fans.

How Do You Measure The Importance Of A Tournament?

Many tournaments are popular because they have been around for many years. Everyone in Canada born in the last fifty years or so has grown up with the Stanley Cup playoffs, and have generally understood its importance in the Canadian sporting landscape. It is, after all, the official playoff of the best professional league to play our most popular game, and therefore, it is regarded with the appropriate attention.

All other professional sports share this distinction, of course. When the post-season rolls around for a major league such as the NFL, NBA, or MLB, the tournament that follows is watched with interest by those who follow the sport, and sometimes even those that don't.

But what about the other tournaments? The ones that, on the surface, seem to be nothing more than an exhibition bundled in television wrapping with a HD bow on top?

The World Baseball Classic failed in the U.S. and Canada, probably because the teams weren't very good, but more likely because we are hesitant to change our traditions. Baseball is not important in February or March, unless you are a diehard fan who pays close attention to training camps. And even then, a tournament where the casual fan only knows 5-10% of the players involved brings little viewership. In other countries around the world that participated in the WBC, it was met with interest because their teams could prove to the world that the game of baseball went beyond Major League Baseball. But in the end, it was a failure. The same could be said for the World Cup of Hockey, with similar reasons.

This all has a point. Tomorrow, the World Junior Hockey Championships begin in Sweden, with the odd future NHL player teamed up with young kids who will likely never reach this level of competition again. But why is it so important?

It seems to me that TSN, the Canadian broadcaster for the WJHC, pushes the interest of the tournament onto the public. The tournament, only 30 years old, does not hold the interest of a country the way TSN would have us believe. The only reason, for example, that the World Hockey Championship is not regarded in the same way is that it occurs against the NHL playoffs. I guarantee you, if the situation were reversed, and the WHC was scheduled for the dreary post-Christmas season, it would be celebrated in the same fashion, and the Junior tournament, if held in late April, would be largely ignored.

It's all about timing, and it's all about marketing. Showing players that "could be" future superstars is an excellent angle, and TSN is wise for playing to it. Those of us who watched past tournaments relished in seeing players like Sidney Crosby and Eric Lindros before their NHL stardom. But a tournament, outside of a post-season for a pro league, is only as important as the marketing behind it. Maybe TSN should pick up the World Baseball Classic.