Joe McConnell R.I.P.

[Lip Man 1]

Absolutely terrific Sox announcer (as well as the Bears). He was 79.

 

Knew him pretty well, spoke with him often.

 

Here's my interview with him from a few years back:

 

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/rwas/in...=11&id=3734

[Donaldo]

I didn't realize he was 79. I'm a bit young to remember him with the Bears or Sox, but I heard him make a lot of memorable calls at Purdue... especially during the Brees and Orton eras. He was a GREAT play-by-play guy.

 

Rest In Peace Joe

[Thad Bosley]

Absolutely terrific Sox announcer (as well as the Bears). He was 79.

 

Knew him pretty well, spoke with him often.

 

Here's my interview with him from a few years back:

 

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/rwas/in...=11&id=3734

Very sad to hear this news. He was, as you said, a “terrific Sox announcer”, and was so during a tumultuous transition period in the Sox TV/radio booth during the early ‘80s. As the “new ownership” group back then was busy ushering out Harry Caray & Jimmy Piersall and replacing them with Don Drysdale & the Hawk, McConnell represented some consistency during that timeframe, while also delivering a truly top-notch broadcast, both on TV and radio.

 

Unfortunately for McConnell, similar to Drysdale & Hawk, his talents were buried during his years with the Sox due to the very ill-fated “SportsVision” experiment. Not as many people heard him as they should have.

[pcq]

Very sad to hear this news. He was, as you said, a “terrific Sox announcer”, and was so during a tumultuous transition period in the Sox TV/radio booth during the early ‘80s. As the “new ownership” group back then was busy ushering out Harry Caray & Jimmy Piersall and replacing them with Don Drysdale & the Hawk, McConnell represented some consistency during that timeframe, while also delivering a truly top-notch broadcast, both on TV and radio.

 

Unfortunately for McConnell, similar to Drysdale & Hawk, his talents were buried during his years with the Sox due to the very ill-fated “SportsVision” experiment. Not as many people heard him as they should have.

Harry quit because he did not want to be on a pay TV broadcast. He became a beer salesman on WGN. Harry never impressed me as an honorable person. Nor was he a fan of Einsdorf.

[Donaldo]

Here is a tribute to Joe from a Purdue site. There's a link here to listen to a few of his best Purdue calls.

 

 

Profiles in Badassery: Joe McConnell

[Thad Bosley]

Harry quit because he did not want to be on a pay TV broadcast. He became a beer salesman on WGN. Harry never impressed me as an honorable person. Nor was he a fan of Einsdorf.

You are correct - he was not a fan of “Einsdorf”, or Reinsdorf and Einhorn, for that matter. Can’t imagine why. Caray only had 37 years in the business vs. “Einsdorf” and their one year - what did he know!

 

Meanwhile, Caray didn’t “quit” on the White Sox. He made a very astute business decision on his part to not sign up for the disaster of a proposal that was the Sox’ with SportsVision in favor of the sure-fire winner with the Cubs and WGN. As for his honor ability, he never missed a game his entire career, spent 25 years with the Cardinals, 11 with the Sox, and 17 with the Cubs. Seems to me he was as honorable to his employers as they could hope for!

[southsider2k5]

You are correct - he was not a fan of “Einsdorf”, or Reinsdorf and Einhorn, for that matter. Can’t imagine why. Caray only had 37 years in the business vs. “Einsdorf” and their one year - what did he know!

 

Meanwhile, Caray didn’t “quit” on the White Sox. He made a very astute business decision on his part to not sign up for the disaster of a proposal that was the Sox’ with SportsVision in favor of the sure-fire winner with the Cubs and WGN. As for his honor ability, he never missed a game his entire career, spent 25 years with the Cardinals, 11 with the Sox, and 17 with the Cubs. Seems to me he was as honorable to his employers as they could hope for!

 

Its funny to see this post in the 21st century, what with pretty much every single game of baseball being on cable, and WGN being dead as a regional sportscasting network. While this might have been right in 1988, in 2018 it is laughable. It turns out Jerry and Eddie were actually just ahead of their time. Hell the Cubs are about to form their own cable network by themselves.

[Lip Man 1]

Its funny to see this post in the 21st century, what with pretty much every single game of baseball being on cable, and WGN being dead as a regional sportscasting network. While this might have been right in 1988, in 2018 it is laughable. It turns out Jerry and Eddie were actually just ahead of their time. Hell the Cubs are about to form their own cable network by themselves.

 

Harry left the Sox after the 1981 season even though the Sox offered him more money to stay on than the Cubs did to leave. It is true he did not like the new Sox owners although the relationship actually started off very well. According to Bob Logan's book "Miracle on 35th Street" the Sox claimed to have 50 thousand SportsVision subscribers. In reality they had closer to 20 thousand.

 

I've done a long detailed story on SportsVision and it's history for any interested:

 

http://www.chicagonow.com/soxnet/2016/01/t...ision/#comments

Edited April 10, 2018 by Lip Man 1

[Dick Allen]

Joe McConnell was a true pro. RIP.

 

 

But on to Harry. Can someone explain to me if Sportsvision was the Sox death knell and WGN and Harry were the Cubs pot of gold, how come in 1982 the Sox outdrew the Cubs by over 300k. In 1983 the Sox outdrew the Cubs by 650k, and in 1984 the Sox, despite the Cubs making the playoffs, outdrew the Cubs by 25k? Sportschannel was over by then. This was before big money in TV. Bill Veeck's last season as an owner, the Sox were getting $3k a game for TV.

 

1984 happened. That's what turned the Cubs into the darlings they have remained. It wasn't Harry. This stuff does happen. The Bulls couldn't draw flies until Michael Jordan. Now they lead the league in attendance when they try to lose. The Hawks probably will have that. The Bears have no problem filling Soldier Field. Maybe someday it will happen for the Sox, but something really unique is going to have to happen. They will probably have to have an incredible run. It can't be ownership, because if it's anti Reinsdorf, why doesn't it carry over to the Bulls, where so many tried to blame him for the break up of their dynasty which resulted in, at least at the time, the worst 3 or 4 year stretch of any team in NBA history.

Edited April 10, 2018 by Dick Allen

[ptatc]

Joe McConnell was a true pro. RIP.

 

 

But on to Harry. Can someone explain to me if Sportsvision was the Sox death knell and WGN and Harry were the Cubs pot of gold, how come in 1982 the Sox outdrew the Cubs by over 300k. In 1983 the Sox outdrew the Cubs by 650k, and in 1984 the Sox, despite the Cubs making the playoffs, outdrew the Cubs by 25k? Sportschannel was over by then. This was before big money in TV. Bill Veeck's last season as an owner, the Sox were getting $3k a game for TV.

 

1984 happened. That's what turned the Cubs into the darlings they have remained. It wasn't Harry. This stuff does happen. The Bulls couldn't draw flies until Michael Jordan. Now they lead the league in attendance when they try to lose. The Hawks probably will have that. The Bears have no problem filling Soldier Field. Maybe someday it will happen for the Sox, but something really unique is going to have to happen. They will probably have to have an incredible run. It can't be ownership, because if it's anti Reinsdorf, why doesn't it carry over to the Bulls, where so many tried to blame him for the break up of their dynasty which resulted in, at least at the time, the worst 3 or 4 year stretch of any team in NBA history.

I'm surprised you don't know such an obvious answer. It's because the Sox have Kenny Williams.

[Donaldo]

Joe McConnell was a true pro. RIP.

 

 

But on to Harry. Can someone explain to me if Sportsvision was the Sox death knell and WGN and Harry were the Cubs pot of gold, how come in 1982 the Sox outdrew the Cubs by over 300k. In 1983 the Sox outdrew the Cubs by 650k, and in 1984 the Sox, despite the Cubs making the playoffs, outdrew the Cubs by 25k? Sportschannel was over by then. This was before big money in TV. Bill Veeck's last season as an owner, the Sox were getting $3k a game for TV.

 

1984 happened. That's what turned the Cubs into the darlings they have remained. It wasn't Harry.

 

If 1984 single-handedly turned the Cubs into darlings, why didn't 1983 do the same for the Sox? The Sox routinely outdrew the Cubs throughout the 60s, 70s, and early 80s.

 

Will Perdue was in the booth with Benetti and Stone today, and he said that when he was growing up in Florida, his two favorite teams were the Braves (WTBS) and the Cubs (WGN) because those were the only two teams he could watch on a regular basis. WGN CLEARLY explains the Cubs' national appeal.

 

Why is Chicago a Cubs Town, and what will change that? I have no answer to either of those questions.

[Dick Allen]

If 1984 single-handedly turned the Cubs into darlings, why didn't 1983 do the same for the Sox? The Sox routinely outdrew the Cubs throughout the 60s, 70s, and early 80s.

 

Will Perdue was in the booth with Benetti and Stone today, and he said that when he was growing up in Florida, his two favorite teams were the Braves (WTBS) and the Cubs (WGN) because those were the only two teams he could watch on a regular basis. WGN CLEARLY explains the Cubs' national appeal.

 

Why is Chicago a Cubs Town, and what will change that? I have no answer to either of those questions.

Then how come the Braves aren’t like the Cubs? They are more like the Sox really. Maybe worse. When they made they playoffs something like 15 years in a row, you could buy tickets at the box office for their playoff games. If the White Sox made the playoffs that often, no way could you do that.

 

For some reason 1984 turned things around for the Cubs. Wrigley Field became a shrine. I truly think if they were 75-87 that year, and did what they did the rest of the time, they would not be nearly as popular as they are nationally or locally.

[Donaldo]

Then how come the Braves aren’t like the Cubs? They are more like the Sox really. Maybe worse. When they made they playoffs something like 15 years in a row, you could buy tickets at the box office for their playoff games. If the White Sox made the playoffs that often, no way could you do that.

 

For some reason 1984 turned things around for the Cubs. Wrigley Field became a shrine. I truly think if they were 75-87 that year, and did what they did the rest of the time, they would not be nearly as popular as they are nationally or locally.

 

Braves fans got spoiled during that run... LDS and LCS games were so commonplace, nobody cared. Remember when the Bears were good and we took "just getting to the playoffs" for granted? In those days, anything short of the NFC Championship was treated like a regular season game.

 

You are 100% correct about 1984. The only Cubs game I ever went to was in 1982. The attendance that warm August afternoon was just over 15,000.

 

Blackhawks games were NEVER televised locally over-the-air in the 80s, 90s, or 2000s, and the fanbase took a hit for it. They had no problem winning the city over because they have no competition. Chicago has only one NHL (and NBA) team, so Chicago is a Blackhawks (and Bulls) town by default.

 

Chicago is a Cubs town, and it will be for the foreseeable future. What will cause the pendulum to swing south again? I don't know. Maybe the Cubs (like the Braves of the 90s) will become victims of their own success? The "Lovable Losers" label is already history

[Lip Man 1]

Joe McConnell was a true pro. RIP.

 

 

But on to Harry. Can someone explain to me if Sportsvision was the Sox death knell and WGN and Harry were the Cubs pot of gold, how come in 1982 the Sox outdrew the Cubs by over 300k. In 1983 the Sox outdrew the Cubs by 650k, and in 1984 the Sox, despite the Cubs making the playoffs, outdrew the Cubs by 25k? Sportschannel was over by then. This was before big money in TV. Bill Veeck's last season as an owner, the Sox were getting $3k a game for TV.

 

1984 happened. That's what turned the Cubs into the darlings they have remained. It wasn't Harry. This stuff does happen. The Bulls couldn't draw flies until Michael Jordan. Now they lead the league in attendance when they try to lose. The Hawks probably will have that. The Bears have no problem filling Soldier Field. Maybe someday it will happen for the Sox, but something really unique is going to have to happen. They will probably have to have an incredible run. It can't be ownership, because if it's anti Reinsdorf, why doesn't it carry over to the Bulls, where so many tried to blame him for the break up of their dynasty which resulted in, at least at the time, the worst 3 or 4 year stretch of any team in NBA history.

 

1. Going to WGN Superstation was monsterous for the Cubs. With them winning something in 1984 it took off after building for a few years. Even here in Idaho I can't tell you the number of Cub fans I've met and when I ask why the answer most often is because of WGN.

 

2. The Sox meanwhile had a real buzz around them when the new owners took over. They were spending money, they were bringing in good players, they had a real positive vibe. Going to SportsVision basically killed it because very few could see how good the Sox actually were. Great idea but the wrong timing. As Harry Caray said in Bob Logan's book on the 83 season, "If the Sox were on WGN they'd be a byword across the nation." He was right.

 

3. As you well know attendance isn't really impacted by a great season until the year after. That's how the Sox outdrew the Cubs in 84. It was a carry over from the success in 83, and I'd argue the build up and gradual success they had in 81 and 82.

 

4. Around 1984 the Wrigley area started to become a haven for young, up-scale individuals with money to spend. They "discovered" Wrigley and the Cubs as a good place to party. That led to the area around Wrigley to start being developed with more places where they could drink, mix and celebrate or commiserate.

 

5. The Sox also were guilty of not even trying to fight for their own turf basically conceding Chicago to the Cubs. Why they did this I have no idea. It's almost as if ownership was more concerned about pissing people off then protecting their own investment. Basically nothing was done to counter the Cubs PR campaigns until Brooks' brilliant "Us vs. Them" ad campaign which pissed off a certain segment of the media because it exposed some of the myths about the Cubs and their fans.

 

History happened because of some unexpected success by the Cubs in 1984 coupled with the Sox collapse, the Superstation, the Chicago Tribune owning and marketing the Cubs through their outlets, John McDonough (who grew up a Sox fan ironically) and the Sox unwillingness to go after the Cubs and protect their own market. Some of these things were not of their doing and they no control over (much like the Comiskey Park is in a dangerous area myth after the social unrest of the 1960's) but a lot of it, was caused by their own doing.

 

[Dick Allen]

1. Going to WGN Superstation was monsterous for the Cubs. With them winning something in 1984 it took off after building for a few years. Even here in Idaho I can't tell you the number of Cub fans I've met and when I ask why the answer most often is because of WGN.

 

2. The Sox meanwhile had a real buzz around them when the new owners took over. They were spending money, they were bringing in good players, they had a real positive vibe. Going to SportsVision basically killed it because very few could see how good the Sox actually were. Great idea but the wrong timing. As Harry Caray said in Bob Logan's book on the 83 season, "If the Sox were on WGN they'd be a byword across the nation." He was right.

 

3. As you well know attendance isn't really impacted by a great season until the year after. That's how the Sox outdrew the Cubs in 84. It was a carry over from the success in 83, and I'd argue the build up and gradual success they had in 81 and 82.

 

4. Around 1984 the Wrigley area started to become a haven for young, up-scale individuals with money to spend. They "discovered" Wrigley and the Cubs as a good place to party. That led to the area around Wrigley to start being developed with more places where they could drink, mix and celebrate or commiserate.

 

5. The Sox also were guilty of not even trying to fight for their own turf basically conceding Chicago to the Cubs. Why they did this I have no idea. It's almost as if ownership was more concerned about pissing people off then protecting their own investment. Basically nothing was done to counter the Cubs PR campaigns until Brooks' brilliant "Us vs. Them" ad campaign which pissed off a certain segment of the media because it exposed some of the myths about the Cubs and their fans.

 

History happened because of some unexpected success by the Cubs in 1984 coupled with the Sox collapse, the Superstation, the Chicago Tribune owning and marketing the Cubs through their outlets, John McDonough (who grew up a Sox fan ironically) and the Sox unwillingness to go after the Cubs and protect their own market. Some of these things were not of their doing and they no control over (much like the Comiskey Park is in a dangerous area myth after the social unrest of the 1960's) but a lot of it, was caused by their own doing.

The other thing everyone forgets is who owned the Cubs and who owned WGN. They weren't going to cede that to the White Sox. As long as the Tribune owned both, the Sox were only going to get limited play at best on their station.

 

The other thing many forget is until the end of the 1988 season, the Cubs played all of their home games during the day, so if you had a job with regular day hours, you didn't see too much of them. Most of the Saturdays you would have to see the Game of the Week, and that wasn't Harry.

Edited April 12, 2018 by Dick Allen

[southsider2k5]

The other thing everyone forgets is who owned the Cubs and who owned WGN. They weren't going to cede that to the White Sox. As long as the Tribune owned both, the Sox were only going to get limited play at best on their station.

 

And the Chicago Tribune.

[Dick Allen]

And the Chicago Tribune.

Yes. Even with all of their denials, it was for all intents and purposes proven the Sox got the short end there as well. And not only with the baseball coverage. If something horrible happened within 2 miles of the park, it was near Comiskey Park. If it happened across the streeet from Wrigley Field, it happened in Lakeview.

Edited April 12, 2018 by Dick Allen

[Lip Man 1]

Eddie Einhorn was right in 1983 when he stated that the Sox could never get fair coverage as long as the Tribune Company owned the Cubs (I still think they have 5% of the team), the Tribune, WGN-TV, WGN Radio and (at that time) CLTV.

 

It was in their best interest business-wise to promote the Cubs as much as possible.

[Thad Bosley]

Its funny to see this post in the 21st century, what with pretty much every single game of baseball being on cable, and WGN being dead as a regional sportscasting network. While this might have been right in 1988, in 2018 it is laughable. It turns out Jerry and Eddie were actually just ahead of their time. Hell the Cubs are about to form their own cable network by themselves.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Yes, that’s what good, ‘ol “Jerry and Eddie” were guilty of back in the golden age of “SportsVision” - being “ahead of their time”. On the contrary - they were guilty of being complete dunderheads in understanding the marketplace in front of them in those days with 150 free games of the Cubs in the same town (hosted by Harry Caray, no less!).

 

 

[southsider2k5]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Yes, that’s what good, ‘ol “Jerry and Eddie” were guilty of back in the golden age of “SportsVision” - being “ahead of their time”. On the contrary - they were guilty of being complete dunderheads in understanding the marketplace in front of them in those days with 150 free games of the Cubs in the same town (hosted by Harry Caray, no less!).

 

Yeah, baseball on cable networks really turned out to be a complete failure.

[Donaldo]

Yeah, baseball on cable networks really turned out to be a complete failure.

 

Today, nearly 90% of all Americans have cable or satellite television. That number was MUCH smaller in the early 80s. IIRC, the original Sportsvision was PREMIUM cable (like HBO).

 

[southsider2k5]

Today, nearly 90% of all Americans have cable or satellite television. That number was MUCH smaller in the early 80s. IIRC, the original Sportsvision was PREMIUM cable (like HBO).

 

Hence the AHEAD of their time. That and WGN is dead as a regional broadcasting entity.