Not A Fan

Norm MacDonald is back on TV with
a satire sports show on Comedy Central

As if there isn’t enough sports coverage available to avid fans across the globe already, Comedy Central keeps throwing its hat into the ring of sports journalism…only to get KO’d.   

After the debut of the ESPN-parody called the Onion SportsDome this past January (a show whose luster has already faded), the relentless cable comedy channel is taking another shot with Sports Show with Norm MacDonald, which debuted on April 12.  And once again, it’s off the mark.  

The main reason for my disapproval is that with Sports Show, Comedy Central is trying to stretch the definition of “sports journalism” into something it really isn’t: a comedian making lame and even inappropriate jokes out of actual sporting news.

 

The disgusting-ness of this image sums up
MacDonald's new sports show.

Another cause of my disdain for the show is Norm MacDonald himself.  Norm is most known for his time behind SNL's Weekend Update anchor desk…from which he was fired in 1997.  His Wikipedia page notes that Comedy Central (his current employer) graciously crowned him #83 in their list of "100 Greatest Stand-Ups of All Time."  Number 83, what an honor!  Couldn’t they have chosen anyone below, say… #50 to host Sports Show?

This isn’t just a rip-on of MacDonald, but here are the plain facts: He’s awkward.  His delivery is poor and very scripted.  And frankly, his jokes aren’t funny.  Cork Gaines agrees in his critique of the show’s debut:

Norm hits us with a couple of more mediocre jokes. You know the kind. The jokes that you think are funny, but not funny enough to bother laughing. We are only four minutes in, and I am already hoping Adam Sandler will make a guest appearance…The final segment is something called "Garbage Time" with a 90-second running clock. In that period, he tells eight jokes, of which two had nothing to do with sports. But that's cool.

In the premier episode, MacDonald pretends to get a makeover to look like NBA star Blake Griffin, and then MacDonald’s voice is dubbed over Griffin’s words as he practices with a teammate.  To be honest, I did muster an audible chuckle or two when watching this clip.  However, I hate to say it, but the real cause of my laughter was more Griffin’s great acting skills (!) than MacDonald’s comedic powers.  See for yourself:

 

The other part may just be that I really have no desire to watch a sports comedy show.  It’s worthless if it doesn’t provide me with any valuable sports news…and it’s doubly worthless if it’s not even funny.  If I need a good laugh, I always know that the infinite supply of cute baby videos on Youtube is usually good for a giggle.   

Perhaps Craig Sanger put it best in his online review of Sports Show:

During his polarizing three-year reign as Weekend Update anchor on “Saturday Night Live,” mellow funnyman Norm Macdonald splintered viewers into two distinctive factions: love him or hate him.

Unfortunately, I fear more people will choose the latter after watching MacDonald's latest masterpiece.

Locker Room Lockout?

Mark Cuban is a horse of a different color.  He isn’t merely the owner of the NBA’s Dallas Mavericks.  He’s an outspoken NBA owner, actor, dancer (with “The Stars”) and blogger.  He knows how to get his voice heard.

Cuban, the owner of the NBA's Dallas Mavericks, thinks that
Internet reports should be banished from NBA locker rooms

Right now, sports fans are listening to Cuban’s latest complaint from his personal blog: that journalists (particularly “Internet reporters”) should be kept out of the locker room.  However, his idea is as absurd as playing basketball without…well…a basketball.  His logic doesn’t quite add up.  In his blog post from April 4, Cuban explains:

I think we have finally reached a point where not only can we communicate any and all factual information from our players and team directly to our fans and customers as effectively as any big sports website…I think those websites have become the equivalent of paparazzi rather than reporters.

Cuban says that Internet reporters are more interested in bolstering their page view numbers than actually providing valuable content, which can lead to blogs focused on rumors and off-court drama.  Cuban even turned to CNN to present his case:  

In his blog, Cuban claims that there is a sea of amateur, unintelligent and unprepared journalists roaming locker rooms across America asking “questions that make the recipient look at the person asking and either roll their eyes or wonder why that person is even there.”  Sorry Mark, but I’ll have to disagree with you on that one.  No, I haven’t spent any time in an NBA locker room lately, but I have participated in press conferences for NDSU athletics, and I’ve felt the pressure to not be the one to ask the stupid question.  Multiply that pressure by about 11, and I imagine that’s how nervous an unproven Internet reporter would feel strolling through your locker room, looking to strike up a chat with your players.    

NBC Sports blogger Craig Calcaterra addresses Cuban’s claims and supports his comrades in his own April 6 blog post:

Have any of them asked any players any “have you stopped beating your wife?” questions in the name of tabloid journalism?  If they did, they’d be laughed out of the business or kicked out of the clubhouse by media relations people for acting like idiots.      

Cuban would like to see a few less microphones in 
players' faces during post-game interviews

Furthermore it doesn’t make sense (as Cuban suggests) to wipe out actual sports journalists and replace them with tweeting NBA players and media-savvy owners…like Cuban himself.  As Yahoo! Sports blogger Kelly Dwyer explains in his response to Cuban, basketball players should focus on playing basketball, not tweeting and facebooking about their team.  Would Lebron James really be able to provide the fair, unbiased, analytical report on an NBA topic that sports fans want?

In this very blog I have accused certain sports journalists of acting like paparazzi, but this is different.  It’s easy for Adam Schefter to sit on camera in front of his bookshelf and speculate on meaningless things.  But, unlike locker room reporters, there’s nobody there to smack him if he says anything stupid.

Now, there are plenty of Internet reporters wanting to smack Cuban.    

Sports + Science= Sweetness

Stats.  They can be a sports journalist’s best friend. But if (over)used and abused, they can make an audience prefer fingernails on a chalkboard.  Stats are a touchy bunch.

Sport Science takes a unique look at the science
and engineering behind athletic performances and events

While others struggle to mend the relationships they have with the arrays of confusing numbers and decimal points, Sport Science has joined in a healthy matrimony with good ol’ statistics…and this union signifies a new and effective way to cover sports.  (All single sports broadcasters should start taking notes.)

Want to know how many decibels of noise you need to make to cause the opposing team to experience “fatigue and irritability?”  Check out Sport Science. 

Want to know whether Chicago Bears punt returner Devin Hester can run faster than an actual bear?  Check out Sport Science. 

Want to know how much your reaction time decreases after spending 15 minutes in 10-degree weather? Check out Sport Science. 

Brenkus is co-CEO of BASE productions
and host of Sport Science

Sport Science is produced by BASE Productions and originally began airing on Fox Sports Net.  But in 2010, ESPN smartly signed on, realizing the potential behind the genius of John Brenkus, BASE co-CEO, and his production staff.

Because the goal of the Sport Science series is to “uncover sports' biggest myths and mysteries by using cutting-edge technology,” the average segment is loaded with numbers and stats.  While the local sportswriter is probably saying, “Why can’t I get away with that?” Sport Science is reveling in the unchartered territory it has made for itself in the sports broadcasting world.

It’s appealing for many reasons: It’s quirky.  It’s fun.  Sometimes it’s fascinating.  But most importantly, it’s different.  Today, media consumers are on a constant quest for more in-depth, behind-the-scenes coverage.  Sport Science gives viewers information they never imagined they’d get, yet once it’s fed to them, they can’t imagine having never gotten it.  For some reason, a true sports fan’s life is more complete knowing that Cardinals wide receiver Larry Fitzgerald can indeed catch passes upside down:

But not everybody’s on the bandwagon.  Rhett Allain, a professor of physics at Southwestern Louisiana University, complained on his blog that Sport Science “kills one physicist at a time” after a segment that suggested Steelers safety Troy Polamalu is literally as fast as a bolt of lightning:

This seems to be Sport Science’s gimmick:

• Find some cool sports phenomena
• Get some number from that. Really, this could be ANYTHING that you want.
• Find some way of comparing that number to something AMAZING.
• If your number doesn’t have a good match, find a different number and try again.

Let’s face it: The average sports fan will never be able to double-check the accuracy of the Sport Science calculations. And yes, the cheesiness from Brenkus, who hosts each segment, can get a bit thick at times.  But the series can, by focusing on current stars or sporting events, actually provide unique insight into both already-explored and unexplored topics. 

Plus, we should be happy that lots and lots of stats have finally found a suitable partner.