On Monday Night, I attended the John Beilein Radio Show with the rest of my Sports Media Class, and I came away impressed with the show as a whole.
The show is held every Monday Night at Pizza House in Ann Arbor, which provided an excellent atmosphere. Pizza House is a step up from other conventional venues such as Applebees in terms of quality, and has a number of flat screen TVs throughout the dining area, all of which were playing the Michigan/Northwestern game from a few nights before, which I thought was a nice touch. The one issue I had is that the show was tucked away upstairs (which, admittedly, had a nice feel to it) instead of downstairs in front of a window, which would create much more exposure for the show. I'm sure that the fans who regularly attend the show are thrilled with the venue, as it gives the show a very personable feel and quaint feel, which is exactly what you want your interaction with a coach to be like as a fan. But as it is, someone walking by Pizza House during the show has no idea that John Beilein's Radio Show is going on. If someone could just glance inside the window and see John Beilein interacting with the crowd and breaking down basketball, it would greatly increase the exposure for the show. As it is, the only exposure I get to the John Beilein show is when I look at mgoblue.com, which to their credit, puts it on as a lead story the day of taping. But if it was in a more visible place, like Good-Time Charlies, I think there would be a lot more buzz about it on campus.
A reason why I would like to see the show get more publicity is I thought the quality of the show was excellent. The host, Doug Karsch, had a very good repure with Beilein; they both looked comfortable working with eachother, and Karsch seemed to ask the questions that I, as a Michigan fan, would like to hear answered. The majority of the show was Karsch and Beilein talking about the previous games, getting into future matchups, etc, but this was supplemented nicely with a balance of questions from the audience and a call-in. The questions from the audience showed how personable Beilein is. His interaction with the crowd was great, and he did a great job answering people's questions. His response trying to explain the pregame ritual was priceless. One thing I'd like to hear a little more of is call-in's, as there was only one the entire show. If IMG put out an advertisment that anyone who calls into the show gets a free ticket to the next game, I think that would serve as a good motivating tool to get more quality calls in.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Daytona 500
Hey guys- Today we're covering a sport that I don't watch very much of, NASCAR. My experience with NASCAR consists of a pair of races I've attended that past few years in Loudon, NH with a bunch of buddies so I really won't be able to give you analysis that's all that insightful. That being said, when I was at Loudon, I tried to talk up some real fans to see if insightful analysis really existed in NASCAR, and the most thought-provoking response I got was "Man, Jeff Gordon's a pussy." So, consider me skeptical on whether you can really break down a race like you can with other sports. So today, I'll be judging the commentators for the Daytona 500 on how well they break down the race.
Another thing to take into consideration is that I will be watching this race from the persepctive of a casual fan. It will be interesting to see how much Fox aims their analysis towards the hardcore fan that would never miss "The Great American Race" and the casual fan, who may catch a few laps, and not much else this year. Without further ado, here's some things I like and didn't like about Fox's coverage of the Daytona 500.
Fox gives the casual fans a decent start with an "understanding the race" graphic on when the caution and green flags come out. By the way, one big issue I have with NASCAR are the caution laps, especially when races end on them. To have cars that can go 200mph with the best drivers on earth, and end the race with the drivers going half speed and staying in line is a crime.
(Due to prior committments, we'll be picking up the race with 90 laps to go.)
With 84 laps to go, Jeff Gordon goes into make a pit stop, and the announcer talk about the importance of being the 1st car a lap down because it gives him a free pass to be on the lead lap if a caution flag were to come out. The announcer doesn't finish the explanation, but I got enough to understand the rule. Also, the explanation for Dale Earnhearts 1 lap penalty for lining up on the line when going in for a pit change was very thorough. They break down Earnhearts entire pit stop nicely. Two new rules learned in 10 minutes- I like what I hear so far.
Cars going in cricles, cars going in circles, and......... WE HAVE A CRASH!!! The announcers seem to think "That's just wrong" and "uncalled for." Let's break it down. Dale Jr. tries to pass Brian Vickers, and Vickers blocks him, and then Jr. clips Vickers resulting in a 10 car pile-up. Fox does a very good job going to a series of replays to show every possible angle of this wreck, including inside many of the cars involved. Good explanation that the car underneath the yellow line needs to blend in and cannot pass as a rule, and it certainily seems that Dale Jr. is in the wrong on this one. He was underneath the line and then bumped Vickers (is there a penalty for this?). Good overall explanations by the announcers explaining who was at fault in the pile-up, it was Earnhart, but it was relatively understandable because they were both fighting for the "free pass" position if a caution were to come up. I feel like I'm learning something. Solid stuff from the announcing team of Joy, Waltripp and McReynolds.
Now, we get more analysis on the wreck with a race break from Chris Myers and Jeff Hammond, and Hammond's analysis really dissapoints. In what seems to be the most important sequence of the race, Hammond mumbles something incoherent and doesn't take a stand on who was at fault. How much is Dale Jr. in the wrong? Should he be assessed a penalty? Is it fair for drivers a lap down to even be fighting this hard right alongside the leaders? Give me something Hammonds. Hammond seems to be the one weak link on what has been a very good announcing team for Fox. I have got to admit, the announcers have been doing a very good job of analyzing the race, and the chemistry they have seems to be there. I have never heard of McReynolds, but he brings a great energy to the booth, and is on point with a lot of comments. Note again, that this is coming from a casual fan, so I'd be impressed with just about anything, but it's better than I expected.
The anticipated rains finally arrive putting Fox in a tough position with a rain delay. But Fox respond well with a series of field interviews with the racers. And in just about the least exciting, anti-climatic fashion possible, Matt Kenseth is your Daytona 500 champion! He led one lap, and wins more on mother nature than on how well he drove a racecar. In no way did he deserve this, and this is one of the reasons why I just cannot get into NASCAR. NASCAR rules aside, I thought FOX did a very good job covering the race, save for Hammond.
Another thing to take into consideration is that I will be watching this race from the persepctive of a casual fan. It will be interesting to see how much Fox aims their analysis towards the hardcore fan that would never miss "The Great American Race" and the casual fan, who may catch a few laps, and not much else this year. Without further ado, here's some things I like and didn't like about Fox's coverage of the Daytona 500.
Fox gives the casual fans a decent start with an "understanding the race" graphic on when the caution and green flags come out. By the way, one big issue I have with NASCAR are the caution laps, especially when races end on them. To have cars that can go 200mph with the best drivers on earth, and end the race with the drivers going half speed and staying in line is a crime.
(Due to prior committments, we'll be picking up the race with 90 laps to go.)
With 84 laps to go, Jeff Gordon goes into make a pit stop, and the announcer talk about the importance of being the 1st car a lap down because it gives him a free pass to be on the lead lap if a caution flag were to come out. The announcer doesn't finish the explanation, but I got enough to understand the rule. Also, the explanation for Dale Earnhearts 1 lap penalty for lining up on the line when going in for a pit change was very thorough. They break down Earnhearts entire pit stop nicely. Two new rules learned in 10 minutes- I like what I hear so far.
Cars going in cricles, cars going in circles, and......... WE HAVE A CRASH!!! The announcers seem to think "That's just wrong" and "uncalled for." Let's break it down. Dale Jr. tries to pass Brian Vickers, and Vickers blocks him, and then Jr. clips Vickers resulting in a 10 car pile-up. Fox does a very good job going to a series of replays to show every possible angle of this wreck, including inside many of the cars involved. Good explanation that the car underneath the yellow line needs to blend in and cannot pass as a rule, and it certainily seems that Dale Jr. is in the wrong on this one. He was underneath the line and then bumped Vickers (is there a penalty for this?). Good overall explanations by the announcers explaining who was at fault in the pile-up, it was Earnhart, but it was relatively understandable because they were both fighting for the "free pass" position if a caution were to come up. I feel like I'm learning something. Solid stuff from the announcing team of Joy, Waltripp and McReynolds.
Now, we get more analysis on the wreck with a race break from Chris Myers and Jeff Hammond, and Hammond's analysis really dissapoints. In what seems to be the most important sequence of the race, Hammond mumbles something incoherent and doesn't take a stand on who was at fault. How much is Dale Jr. in the wrong? Should he be assessed a penalty? Is it fair for drivers a lap down to even be fighting this hard right alongside the leaders? Give me something Hammonds. Hammond seems to be the one weak link on what has been a very good announcing team for Fox. I have got to admit, the announcers have been doing a very good job of analyzing the race, and the chemistry they have seems to be there. I have never heard of McReynolds, but he brings a great energy to the booth, and is on point with a lot of comments. Note again, that this is coming from a casual fan, so I'd be impressed with just about anything, but it's better than I expected.
The anticipated rains finally arrive putting Fox in a tough position with a rain delay. But Fox respond well with a series of field interviews with the racers. And in just about the least exciting, anti-climatic fashion possible, Matt Kenseth is your Daytona 500 champion! He led one lap, and wins more on mother nature than on how well he drove a racecar. In no way did he deserve this, and this is one of the reasons why I just cannot get into NASCAR. NASCAR rules aside, I thought FOX did a very good job covering the race, save for Hammond.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Sports Media Post- Superbowl Spots
Hey Guys- I'm here to tell you my three favorite, and three least favorite SuperBowl commercials from this past Sunday. Let's dive right in...
Hulu-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpcP9003z7s
Alec Baldwin is the perfect guy for the lead role. He is one of the few guys I always enjoy seeing in whatever role he's in (here's some classic stuff from "The Departed" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTaVxTmB5k4) The special effects of the brain turning to mush is funny to me because that's something my mom would always say to me when I was watching TV as a kid. Also, the fact that I knew about Hulu before this builds up a sense of pseudo-loyalty.
Career Builder- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79tMMFja-Fw
This goes down as my #1 commercial of the SuperBowl. Maybe it wasn't the funniest, but it presented a commercial in a unique format, and that's more than you can say about almost all other commercials in the SuperBowl. It made you wonder what company it was for throughout the commercial, every mini-spot was either amusing or funny (with the koala bear wearing glasses being just fantastic), and it is was crystal clear what the commercial was advertising and why you should invest in the company. Excellent job to the Ad Agency that cooked this up.
Etrade- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5431p7gxWOM
Just as Geico did before, ETrade has struck gold with it's spokesperson. A talking baby is something that flat-out just won't get old. It won't. You can literally just put a talking baby up there with a regular person's voice, and it will be awesome, which is exactly what ETrade does. Family Guy uses this type of humor effectively more than any other show I've seen. Here's the best example I could come up with (http://www.humorscore.com/videos/Family_Guy_Videos/Family_Guy_-_Peter_Hits_A_Deer). They literally just change a person to a deer, and a perfectly normal situation is amusing.
Bonus points in this one because they get across their message clearly, and the word "Shankapotumus" is used. Grade A Stuff ETrade.
Apologies to Denny's and Coca-Cola.
Now let's check out the bad:
Conan Bud Light Comercial: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HazUvFXY2X4
This seems to be a case where you have the design for a great commercial on the drawing board: The Bud Light people were probably thinking "Conan O'Brien, that guy's hilarious, let's put him in one of those crazy international commercial like Arnold Schwarzenegger. (Link here...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skBlEbsM0jM)" For me, either the execution of the ad was off, or it's just one of those things that's only funny if it's true, which is why the Schwarzenegger commercial was so funny, and this one falls short.
Doritos:
Take it easy, not the snowglobe one, which was good, but not quite in my top 3. No, I'm talking about the Magic Chip commercial, and not that it was horrible, but moreso because I thought it has been overrated, with people lumping the snowglobe commercial and this one into the same basket of successful funny commercial. Eating doritoes makes all your desires come true- just not that original. I've seen half-naked girls in commercials, I've seen money flying everywhere, it just didn't do it for me. (I'm OK with the monkey.. you can't hate on a monkey) Plus, if you're gonna run the guy over with a bus, ya might as well finish the job. Why did we need to see that he was still alive at the end? Was there anyone out there who was wondering whether this guy was OK or not? Over-Rated.
Fast and the Furious Part 4- Enough is enough. Just stop it.
Hulu-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpcP9003z7s
Alec Baldwin is the perfect guy for the lead role. He is one of the few guys I always enjoy seeing in whatever role he's in (here's some classic stuff from "The Departed" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTaVxTmB5k4) The special effects of the brain turning to mush is funny to me because that's something my mom would always say to me when I was watching TV as a kid. Also, the fact that I knew about Hulu before this builds up a sense of pseudo-loyalty.
Career Builder- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79tMMFja-Fw
This goes down as my #1 commercial of the SuperBowl. Maybe it wasn't the funniest, but it presented a commercial in a unique format, and that's more than you can say about almost all other commercials in the SuperBowl. It made you wonder what company it was for throughout the commercial, every mini-spot was either amusing or funny (with the koala bear wearing glasses being just fantastic), and it is was crystal clear what the commercial was advertising and why you should invest in the company. Excellent job to the Ad Agency that cooked this up.
Etrade- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5431p7gxWOM
Just as Geico did before, ETrade has struck gold with it's spokesperson. A talking baby is something that flat-out just won't get old. It won't. You can literally just put a talking baby up there with a regular person's voice, and it will be awesome, which is exactly what ETrade does. Family Guy uses this type of humor effectively more than any other show I've seen. Here's the best example I could come up with (http://www.humorscore.com/videos/Family_Guy_Videos/Family_Guy_-_Peter_Hits_A_Deer). They literally just change a person to a deer, and a perfectly normal situation is amusing.
Bonus points in this one because they get across their message clearly, and the word "Shankapotumus" is used. Grade A Stuff ETrade.
Apologies to Denny's and Coca-Cola.
Now let's check out the bad:
Conan Bud Light Comercial: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HazUvFXY2X4
This seems to be a case where you have the design for a great commercial on the drawing board: The Bud Light people were probably thinking "Conan O'Brien, that guy's hilarious, let's put him in one of those crazy international commercial like Arnold Schwarzenegger. (Link here...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skBlEbsM0jM)" For me, either the execution of the ad was off, or it's just one of those things that's only funny if it's true, which is why the Schwarzenegger commercial was so funny, and this one falls short.
Doritos:
Take it easy, not the snowglobe one, which was good, but not quite in my top 3. No, I'm talking about the Magic Chip commercial, and not that it was horrible, but moreso because I thought it has been overrated, with people lumping the snowglobe commercial and this one into the same basket of successful funny commercial. Eating doritoes makes all your desires come true- just not that original. I've seen half-naked girls in commercials, I've seen money flying everywhere, it just didn't do it for me. (I'm OK with the monkey.. you can't hate on a monkey) Plus, if you're gonna run the guy over with a bus, ya might as well finish the job. Why did we need to see that he was still alive at the end? Was there anyone out there who was wondering whether this guy was OK or not? Over-Rated.
Fast and the Furious Part 4- Enough is enough. Just stop it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)