Jan 10, 2010 9:50 PM In the pressbox at Gillette Stadium during the Ravens playoff route of the Patriots, much of the buzz amongst media types and NFL observers was not so much about the Ravens winning- but how the thorough nature of the New England defeat served as a symbol of an end to its "dynasty."
Literally run over by the Ravens in a 33-14 loss, the weakness of the once-proud Patriots defense was laid open for all to see. The Patriots won three Super Bowl titles in the decade of the 2000's and with future Hall of Fame quarterback Tom Brady leading the way, New England had risen to esteemed status in a league in which there is usually little difference between the top and bottom teams.
But after losing the Super Bowl two years ago, missing out on the playoffs a year ago (despite an 11-5 record) and then the quick one-and-done defeat to Baltimore, New England has lost its luster.
Super Man Tom Brady is human after all (one fumble and three interceptions) and "genius" coach Bill Bellichick is no longer invincible. NFL Network reporter Kara Henderson (whom I worked with at CNN-SI) opined that the loss to the Ravens capped the "fall of Rome." A dynasty died in Foxborough and the Ravens are alive and kicking in the playoffs. Jan 8, 2010 3:10 PM All NFL football players are injured to some degree, some more than others. So it’s not news that a player is “dinged up” after 16 games. If you’ve seen the video we’ve posted at WJZ.com of Joe Flacco at practice, you notice a pronounced limp as it’s clear the quarterback is dealing with discomfort in his right leg/hip. Flacco’s been dealing with various bumps and bruises this season: hip, ankle and upper body. We got that practice video on the Thursday before the Ravens playoff game at New England. On Friday, Troy Smith quarterbacked some plays with the Ravens first team at practice. Are the Ravens concerned that Flacco may not be a full-time participant against the Patriots? Coach John Harbaugh tells the media that his QB is fine.
Meanwhile in New England, news Friday that Pats’ star receiver Randy Moss sat out practice Friday and was seen limping around the locker room. Former Raven Mike Flynn says it’s not unusual for veterans like Moss to have scheduled days off, and that may be the case in his missing practice Friday.
In summary, everyone’s on alert for injury news at playoff time- especially when it comes to QB’s and star wideouts. I don’t discount the video, reports or comments, but beware that where you see a player who’s gimpy- it could just as well be gamesmanship at play, too. Jul 15, 2009 7:31 PM You can take for granted some things you love. Baseball is a passion of mine and has been since childhood. The 2009 Major League Baseball All-Star Game reminded me that I still love the game- that the memories I hold dear and the daily pace of the game I look forward to as an adult are still close to my heart.
I’m a sucker for nostalgia and that was served to me in abundance watching the All-Star game being played in my hometown of St. Louis. I’m a proud St. Louisan and to hear the announcers heaping praise on my birthplace as one of the best baseball towns in America validated my pride. The archived clips narrated by Jack Buck brought me back to my childhood, brought me back home. Stan Musial, Lou Brock, Bob Gibson and Bruce Sutter (all former Cardinals) mingled with the current stars. The mix of old and new was just right.
The game itself played out in a distinct National League style: good pitching and strong defense (St. Louis Cardinal style, in many ways, too). The winning run scored on a sacrifice fly- boring but fundamental, just good, old-fashioned baseball.
It was a feel-good night, as it was supposed to be. Baseball has its issues: steroid suspicions, tainted records, stratospheric salaries, and a generation of fans that seems to be losing interest. In the sell-out crowd at Busch Stadium in St. Louis I saw on the TV fathers and sons taking in memories of a lifetime. I saw young All-Stars like Adam Jones and Curtis Granderson appreciating the honor of being there, and playing like they belonged. I saw a hard-fought exhibition of baseball. I enjoyed what I saw.
I’m a Midwesterner and a simple man. Give me a baseball game on a summer evening with the sun setting over the edge of the ballpark. Give me a scorecard and a beer to sip. I’m happy with that. Greater still, I’m in love. Jul 2, 2009 9:37 PM  Baltimore baseball fans went through a wild ride in the Red Sox series June 29-July 1 with the highest of highs and the lowest of lows. The high was the greatest comeback in O’s history: down 10-1 they rallied to beat Boston 11-10. The next day, the O’s had a 5-1 lead in the 9th inning, then the Red Sox rallied to score 4 and eventually win in extra innings.
The loss ignited heated discussion and criticism regarding the removal of starting pitcher Brad Bergesen from the game after 8 innings. The bullpen blew the lead and manager Dave Trembley is blamed for what many feel was a “bad” decision to take out his starter who was cruising with a 5-1 lead, having thrown 103 pitches. I’ve fielded the angry phone calls and heard the arguments- some wanting Trembley fired for the loss. Ridiculous.
Second guessing and arm chair quarterbacking is part of the sports experience, I know. And being a fan is a pass for being irrational, I realize. But for those who are ready to fire Trembley for a pitching decision that EVERY manager routinely makes- let’s get a reality check. On the same day that Trembley took the ball from Bergesen and handed it to his bullpen, 5 other managers did the same thing in games in which their starter went at least 7 innings and their team had a lead of 3 runs or more. The Orioles, Blue Jays, A’s, White Sox, Twins and Cubs all had games that fit that description. In ALL of those games, the starter was relieved. Only in the O’s game did the relievers give up the lead. Only in the O’s game did the relievers allow ANY runs. In research done by RETROSHEET, in all Major League games since 1901, a team with a 3 run lead after 8 innings wins 96% of the time. What happened to the O’s happens just over once per year per Major League team, on average. Managers turn games over to relievers EVERY night, and with a lead- more times than not the plan works. Trembley didn’t make a bad decision, he just got a bad result from the same decision every manager makes. His relievers in the 9th inning- Jim Johnson and George Sherrill- were the most effective tandem in all of baseball for the past month. He asked them to get 3 outs while protecting a 4 run lead, and they failed. That’s baseball.
I’ve heard callers and other radio hosts in town criticize me for “apologizing” for Trembley. That accusation is inaccurate. Managers win and lose with their decisions and in this case, Trembley (like 5 other managers that same night) played the favorable percentages. His team lost and there’s a mark in the loss column for it. What I don’t accept is that there’s mandatory “blame” to be assessed, and that it’s rational to blame the manager when he played the percentages and his players failed. In that same game, Trembley wrote out a line-up that had Aubrey Huff batting 4th in the order and playing first base. Huff went 0-for-5 in the game. Did Trembley make a “bad” decision by putting his regular clean-up hitter in the line-up in his usual spot? He must have because Huff didn’t get a hit! See where I’m going here? He used Johnson and Sherrill in a situation where they usually excel, and they failed. That’s what happens in baseball sometimes. Blame the manager, or worse yet- fire the manager? Sometimes it’s hard to believe we even have discussions like this. Sports debates are part of the fun of being a talk radio host, and sometimes part of the pain. Jun 15, 2009 6:04 PM When in doubt, blame the media- or blame what the media has become. As a member of the media, I’m naturally on the defensive when it comes to this subject, but let’s take an aspect of media criticism that has come up in Baltimore recently.
I do a radio show on 105.7 The Fan, which is the flagship station of the Orioles. There are some in our town who are of the opinion that what is said on that radio station is “censored” so as not to allow criticism of the Orioles. There are callers to my show (and other shows in town) and e-mailers who have made the suggestion that the flagship radio station is “soft” on the O’s. Stan Charles, editor of the “Press Box” magazine, opined in a recent edition that the O’s media partners engage in “happy talk” that is insulting to fans.
Before I take any of these accusations too personally, I guess I should consider than any reference to O’s “media partners” would include not just 105.7 The Fan, but also MASN television and masnsports.com. That being said, when Stan Charles says the “media partners” are insulting the fans, I would think the least he should do is cite specific outlets and voices. Is it MASN, 105.7 The Fan? And who exactly is saying what? All of us in the media (Stan included) should be able to defend themselves when accused, but who’s being accused and what did they say? Specifics, please.
Now, to those who claim 105.7 The Fan goes easy in its criticism of the Orioles: I can only speak for myself and my show. If you’ve ever tuned in, you know that I call it like I see it and though we may not always see things the same- I’m not one to gloss over or sugar coat my commentary. If I don’t like someone or something, I’ll say so. For instance, I’ve said many times that I don’t think Felix Pie is a Major League talent. He appears to be a good athlete, but not a top-level baseball player. Team President Andy MacPhail knows Pie better than I, so I’ll defer to his judgment on the player’s talent, but I’m on record as saying he looks out of place in the Majors. I’ve questioned why manager Dave Trembley rests certain players when he does, and I have no tolerance of ANY player who fails to run hard to first base on a ground out.
What some may not accept is that MacPhail has been up front about the rebuilding that he is attempting and his admission that there will be some pain in the process of trying to turn the team around (ie- the O’s are likely to lose more than they win while bringing up young players who could eventually make the club better). After 11 losing seasons, it’s understandable that a fan may be unaccepting of the “no pain, no gain” scenario. Wthout apologizing for it, I see the plan, understand it and express my patience for it. Is that “happy talk”? Is that “soft”? More pointedly, if you are opposed to such a plan- what is your solution? We can discuss and do so openly on my radio show: call me at 410 481-1057 Mon-Fri, 10am-1pm and we’ll talk.
Regarding the bigger picture of whether ANY team’s “media partners” might take it easier on the team they carry: in a broad sense that’s likely. But, what are your expectations? Do you see the YES Network or NESN crushing the Yankees or Red Sox? Do you expect WBAL radio to bury the Ravens if things go bad? It boils down to this (for the intelligent sports fan), you know the lay of the land and you know who you trust. Take each voice that you hear on an individual basis and truly listen to what they say. You may tune in with a pre-conceived notiion that an entity goes easy on a team, but what do you really hear when you really listen? Have you heard Dave Johnson on Orioles pre and post-game shows? He is vehement in his criticisms. Have you heard Jim Palmer call out Oriole players for some of their deficiencies? He does, and does so with the credibility of being a Hall of Famer. Are there others who may be less inclined to criticize? Probably so- but listen to each voice before making blanket statements and opinions about the subject. Those who paint with that broad brush (and fail to identify specifics) are just being lazy in their opinions. But that’s just my opinion. May 29, 2009 11:14 PM I write this as I sit in the Oriole Park press box with the starting lineups being announced over the ballpark public address system. The introductions are usually just background noise in the pre-game routine, but before the O’s take the field to face the Detroit Tigers- the lineup announcement commands attention as it’s the night catcher Matt Wieters makes his Major League debut.
”Batting seventh and catching, number 15- Matt Wieters,” and the crowd goes wild. Less than two years after he was drafted out of Georgia Tech- a first-round pick who got a record six million dollar signing bonus- the big catcher has arrived. The excitement and anticipation are palpable at a ballpark starving for hope. What struck me was not just that Wieters is here, but to hear Nolan Reimold (another rookie) batting after him and Brad Bergesen (rookie) announced as the starting pitcher. Much has changed since opening day.
Wieters’ arrival is a big deal, but there are aspects of reporting on the occasion that I dislike- such as being part of a media mob descending on the rookie before the game. I spend much of the baseball season at the ballpark and in the Oriole clubhouse, therefore I have a pretty good sense for the team and some of its individual and collective personality. So it was no surprise that as the mob of reporters gathered around Wieters there were hoots and hollers from his teammates. Much of it sounded like good-natured ribbing, but I know there was some genuine displeasure mixed in regarding the attention being paid a kid who’d not yet played in the big leagues. I get that and I’m sensitive to that sentiment, yet I’m there to do my job and get some recorded comments from Wieters.
After taking part in the mass question-and-answer session with Wieters, I made my way carefuly over to Greg Zaun. Wieters’ arrival means Zaun is demoted to backup catcher, a situation he knew was in the offing when Zaun signed with the Orioles before this season. Greg agreed to talk to me on camera, but only before he let me know that he wasn’t doing what he called a “Matt Wieters interview,” adding that he’d done all of that in spring training and just wanted to talk about the team. Understood. So we talked about working with young players in general as the O’s are a team in roster flux with a dramatic infusion of youth including three rookie starting pitchers on the squad. Out are Adam Eaton, Mark Hendrickson, and Chad Moeller. Moeller was a popular teammate and it’s clear that there’s disappointment among some of the Oriole veterans that Moeller is moved out to usher Wieters in. Everyone certainly understands the business side of such of a move, but there’s the personal side, too, and it can be painful for some.
Overall, it’s an exciting night. Detroit lead-off batter Josh Anderson bunts on the first pitch, and Wieters springs out from behind the plate to gun the runner out at first. And the crowd goes wild.
This should be a more interesting summer than we first thought. May 28, 2009 7:31 AM 
Take away hope and what does a person have left? Instill hope, and possibility expands toward infinity. If you’ve tuned into the Orioles the past few days, you could not help but notice the power of hope. I was in the Oriole Park press box when the word of Matt Wieters’ debut began to spread through the ballpark. The smallest crowd in the park’s history (just more than 10,000) made for an ironic setting for such big news. But the news is larger than the place from which it emanated. The word spread through the so-called Oriole Nation, and a fan base is awakened. That’s what hope does.
Andy MacPhail is manning the tap from which any hope flows, and he’s preaching “tempered” enthusiasm for the near future. Too late, Andy. O’s fans are beyond thirsty for hope and they’re ready to guzzle what’s offered. Fans are grabbling up tickets for Wieters’ Friday night debut against Detroit. One fan told me that he bought tickets so that his teenage son could see what could be a historic day. That fan- who’s in his mid-4o’s- was on hand for the debuts of both Eddie Murray and Cal Ripken, and figures Wieters’ first big league game to be just as significant in Orioles history. No pressure, rookie!
The MacPhail Plan could be developing like a Polaroid picture, slowly coming into focus. Young, talented pitchers now make up most of the starting rotation. A young, talented slugging outfielder hits a dramatic, game-winning homerun in the 11th inning vs. Toronto (Nolan Reimold), while 23-year old Adam Jones captures national attention for his rapid emergence as a five-tool force. And, in case you didn’t hear, Matt Wieters is coming up.
There’s your hope, O’s fans. Something you haven’t had much of for more than 10 years. That’s powerful stuff. Andy MacPhail just hopes that you’re not disappointed down the road.
May 17, 2009 12:16 PM 
Leading up to the 134th running of the Preakness Stakes, there was much discussion in Batlimore about the history and tradition of the race. Those of us who live in Charm City know that so much of the charm of where we live and who we are is just that: history and tradition. Yet the 134th edition of the middle jewel of horse racing’s Triple Crown showed us that we’re capable of change- tradition be darned.
There was some welcomed newness to the event this year. Most talked about were the new rules of entry regarding a ban on carry-in alcoholic beverages by fans who gather in the Pimlico Race Course infield. I say “welcomed” newness, but that’s just my personal take on the change, because clearly there was a dramatic drop in the attendance as a result of the alcohol ban. Thousands didn’t welcome the newness- so much so , they stayed away. Change can be difficult and painful, but change for the better is still possible. I appreciate the bold step by the Maryland Jockey Club in its attempts to change the culture of the event. Chairman Tom Chukas was forthright about his disappointment in the size of the crowd, but stood steadfast in his plan to redefine the experience. The plan is that the more tame infield culture will bring in a new type and a new generation of Preakness goers. That change may take a few years, but the Jockey Club is willing to go through a few down years to make it happen.
I’ve expereinced the Preakness infield in its hey-day. You know the stories and have seen the images: drunkeness, lewdness, violence, etc. It’s not my idea of a good time, but clearly the event has appealed to hard-core partiers for several decades. So I strolled the infield to check out the change in attitude in 2009. I’m offering no grand revelatoin as a man in my mid-40’s when I say I appreciated the relative calm and civility of the new atmosphere. There was beer and alcohol to be purchased, and those who chose to took it in (some to excess), but gone was the prevailing environment of drinking for the sake of drinking too much. I walked around in my television work clothes with my press pass tucked away, not fearing I could be struck by a flying can full of beer (a common occurrence in years past and one of the reasons I’ve avoided the Preakness infield). I joined a spirited gathering that took in a competitve match of women’s Pro Beach Volleyball. Yes, there was beer-drinking and some cat-calling from the audience, but it was no worse than a Ravens or Orioles game. In fact, the match I watched was incredibly well-contested and entertaining. Kudos to the organizers of that infield diversion, those “fillies” are excellent athletes.
Which brings me to the race itself, won by a filly- Rachel Alexandra. She’s the first female horse to win the Preakness in 85 years- now that’s a noteworthy change to history and tradition! I thought her victory was well-placed on a day of change in Baltimore. The Pimlico crowd (especially the women) bubbled with joy over the historic victory. There was a palpable buzz in the post-race celebration and conversation- winners and losers alike agreeing that the rise of Rachel Alexandra was “good for racing.” On this day, I saw overwhelming evidence that despite the deepest of history and traditon- change can be good. May 6, 2009 6:18 AM I appreciate honesty and candor in interviews. Recently I had Ravens receiver Derrick Mason on my radio show for a conversation. I asked the veteran pass catcher a hypothetical: if he were to break the huddle with Joe Flacco as QB, and he (Mason) was headed wide right- which current receiver would he want wide left, NOT including any teammate. Derrick first said it was a "dirty" question, then without further hesitation he said, "TO, Terrell Owens." Mason went on to reason that Owens commands so much attention that any other receiver would be more likely to be open to make a catch. I like that!
In another recent radio interview, I asked Ravens personnel director Eric DecCosta (after what many are calling another successful Baltimore draft) what makes him nervous. There was dramatic silence before Eric said, "The Pittsburgh Steelers." Now, there's some candor I can appreciate! The hated Steelers are on the minds of the Ravens as Baltimore works on its quest to de-throne the champs. So, following my line of questioning to Mr. DeCosta- I wonder what might make other sports figures nervous. Hypothetically, some possible candid answers:
O's manager Dave Trembley: being dealt a bad hand (like so many before him).
Ravens QB Joe Flacco: beginner's luck or the so-called sophmore slump.
Maryland basketball coach Gary Williams: Debbie Yow
O's president Andy MacPhail: "The Plan" going wrong
Ray Lewis: Father Time (whom he'd attempt to tackle if Father Time tried to slow him down)
Brett Favre: Retirement
Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and Alex Rodriquez: Public opinion
Troy Smith: John Beck
Me: marathons and the future of local TV (told you I like candor!) Apr 25, 2009 11:08 PM 
A question on NFL Draft Day: which came first- the mania or the marketing? Were football fans always this interested in the league’s process of selecting from the college crop, or did the NFL’s brilliant marketing machine create the interest itself? No matter the reason, Draft Day serves as further evidence that among sports in the United States- the NFL is the undisputed king. On a sunny, 80-degree late April day in Baltimore, thousands flock to the Ravens stadium for a spring football festival with interactive games, player autographs and cheerleaders- all building up the anticipation to the Ravens pick in the draft. For weeks and months leading up to the draft, local radio shows buzz with Ravens draft talk. Football fans can’t get enough from the game they love, the game they live. And that’s the root of the draft hysteria- football fans don’t just watch football, they live it. I recently reached out to listeners on our radio show and asked for some insights into the “love of the draft”- admitting my interest pales in comparison to the many draftniks and draft die hards. One of the responses that I found telling went like this: the Ravens are like our family, and we eagerly await the arrival of our new family members. Okay, that’s strong. Others noted that in Baltimore’s case, the Ravens have a history of drafting well (Jon Ogden and Ray Lewis in the team’s first-ever draft was a pretty good start!) and fans are therefore excited to see what the “Wizard of Oz” (GM Ozzie Newsome) does this year. I get that, too. I have supreme admiration for the work of Newsome, Eric DeCosta and the Ravens scouts. They’ve managed to out-perform the norm in the inexact science of evaluating and selecting college talent. And while the Ravens have no doubt earned the accolades and attention, I believe that most of the interest in the draft nationwide is driven by the entities that present it- namely ESPN. Kudos to ESPN for drumming up attention for an event they broadcast (that’s their job and they do it well). The hype and hours of coverage are too much for my taste, but I’m not their target- the fervent football fan is. I enjoy the NFL, but as an observer- a journalist. Football fans are hungry and they’ll take every crumb they can gobble up, year-round. I’m amazed annually at the attention and hype surrounding the NFL draft, but I say that with a degree of admiration for the league’s ability to create the need and provide the feed. Equally, I’m amazed at the American football fan: you know what you love and you live it.
Now, just tell me who was picked! | |
