It must be said - Hawk Harrelson has to go

[chw42]

I agree....I have seen the other 60-70 guys that do this job and I can tell you most of them suck ass...

 

One of my personal favorites is Jim Palmer. Mark Grace does a nice job for the DBacks. Don Orsillo is good on Nesn. Of course I love Vin Scully. Ray Fosse is excellent in Oakland, and Glen Kuiper, their pbp man is pretty solid too.

 

Other than that there aren't a whole lot of guys I can tolerate, whether they are color guys or pbp.

 

Some especially awful guys? Dick Bremer on the Twins broadcast, Rick Manning in Cleveland (talk about a dick), Buck Martinez in Toronto, Gary Thorne in Baltimore, Mark Gubicza and Victor Rojas in Anaheim.

 

What's so bad about Gary Thorne?

[fathom]

D. Sutton out in Arizona is far and away the best, IMO

[Steve9347]

Fangraphs: Hawk the Worst

 

GQ Magazine: Hawk the Worst

[iamshack]

What's so bad about Gary Thorne?

He's a homer as much as anyone on earth, so if you're holding that against Hawk, you've got to hold it against Thorne. Secondly, he tries to be incredibly overdramatic and it gets old in baseball...hockey, that works, baseball....no.

Thirdly, in the past, it has been painful listening to him trying to make the Orioles sound respectful...maybe it's working better now that they actually have been winning a bit.

 

I've always thought Palmer was by far the better member of that team...

[iamshack]

D. Sutton out in Arizona is far and away the best, IMO

I don't quite see it...I think he's good, but I've heard Kal say he liked Sutton as well and I just find him to be solid...

[iamshack]

Fangraphs: Hawk the Worst

 

GQ Magazine: Hawk the Worst

Well we all know GQ would know...

 

Let's face it, not many other fans are going to like Hawk...he's incredibly annoying if you're not a Sox fan...(and obviously annoying to some that are).

 

He's obviously had quite an impact on the industry though...and IMO, the entire point of a broadcaster is to excite and interest his own team's fans. I could give a s*** what other fans think. Go watch your own team's broadcast.

[jhonnydanks]

i will cry the day hawk is gone. we got a guy there.

[iamshack]

i will cry the day hawk is gone. we got a guy there.

I agree...I think people take him for granted...the fact that I miss Harry Carey even though I only saw him as a Cubs' broadcaster has taught me enough about appreciating the Hawkeroo.

[Baron]

I don't even know that the dull as bleep guys know the game all that well. I certainly don't hear as many good stories with those guys as I get with the extreme homer guy.

 

The Cleveland guys were talking about Viciedo for a little bit. Seemed like they knew a bunch about him. But other than that it was dull.

[Baron]

I like Stacey king, gives a lil chuckle to the broadcast. I rather have hawk his passion is great, we could have Len kasper or chip Carey or Joe buck or mccarver

 

 

Trust me Stacey King is one of my favorites to listen to. The best games are when Scal comes in and scores. Stacey goes nuts.

[greg775]

With MLB.TV on the PS3, I get to hear a lot of announcers. It's like a breath of fresh air, listening to people who are younger than 100 years old talk about the game and reference players from the 90s, and have conversations that engage me that I haven't heard a million times before - Hawk doesn't do this.

 

Hawk's schtick - I am finally tired of it. You could just have a Hawkbot at this point and really have no idea he wasn't actually there. Cue up his catch phrases and have someone record player names in his voice.

 

As for Stone, I think he's brilliant, and with the right sportscaster he can be great, but with Hawk it just doesn't work. The reason is simple - no one with Hawk will work. He always turns it into a dick measuring contest, cuts the other broadcaster off, and winds up telling me about some garbage player from the Red Sox in the late 60s.

 

The tv feed needs a breath of fresh air, and someone who went to broadcasting school, a real broadcaster, doing the play by play, and then save the homerism and the baseball references for a guy like Frank Thomas to be the color analyst.

 

I have spent my entire lifetime listening to Hawk. I have laughed at his calls for years. I have yelled "HE GAWN" "STRETCH" "HEEYEEESSS" "DAT GUMMIT" "YOU GOTTA BE BLEEPIN' ME" - I have enjoyed it. (not so much the "HELL YEAH" though)

 

I am so f***ing ready for it to end and to finally have an on screen duo that entertains me.

 

Let the flaming begin.

 

I don't know what to tell you if you think the other teams' broadcasts are better than Hawk. If you want plastic announcers, go for it. Hawk is amazingly good. I love he and Stone together. I really enjoy watching the games on mlb.com and listening to the Hawk/Stone duo.

[SI1020]

Getting rid of someone fine...the question is who do you replace him with?

When he is replaced it will probably be by a boring, banal, cookie cutter type cliche spouting automaton so popular on the sports networks.

 

[Jake]

If you're looking for some magically insightful announcer, keep looking. There are none. Once you know as much as many of us Soxtalkers do, nobody's going to really blow your mind with insight. Most announcers end up stating the extremely obvious when trying to be insightful or just say asinine things ("Dunn hit a home run at Wrigley, but it was wind-aided"). I say just shut up and repeat the interesting stats the behind the scenes guys give you.

 

The best broadcaster is going to accurately give you a feel for the ebb and flow of the energy in the game. I think Hawk does that. Play by play is not really relevant in this medium, and Hawk knows that and brings some fun to it. Stoney is about as insightful as it gets and rarely has more than one non-obvious thing to say in a given game.

 

Unrealistic standards...and I think it has more to do with overexposure than anything else. Every "average" fan I speak to loves Hawk and I doubt you see him go unless it is on his own terms.

 

 

[iamshack]

If you're looking for some magically insightful announcer, keep looking. There are none. Once you know as much as many of us Soxtalkers do, nobody's going to really blow your mind with insight. Most announcers end up stating the extremely obvious when trying to be insightful or just say asinine things ("Dunn hit a home run at Wrigley, but it was wind-aided"). I say just shut up and repeat the interesting stats the behind the scenes guys give you.

 

The best broadcaster is going to accurately give you a feel for the ebb and flow of the energy in the game. I think Hawk does that. Play by play is not really relevant in this medium, and Hawk knows that and brings some fun to it. Stoney is about as insightful as it gets and rarely has more than one non-obvious thing to say in a given game.

 

Unrealistic standards...and I think it has more to do with overexposure than anything else. Every "average" fan I speak to loves Hawk and I doubt you see him go unless it is on his own terms.

He said he wants to die in the booth

[SI1020]

I like Stacey king, gives a lil chuckle to the broadcast. I rather have hawk his passion is great, we could have Len kasper or chip Carey or Joe buck or mccarver

Exactly. Most announcers today are tear and anger inducing awful.

 

[Jake]

He said he wants to die in the booth

 

lol I know...that was a riot. I love him but I wouldn't even be sad if he died in the middle of a home run call. Would be too epic

[ScottyDo]

I've had MLB.tv for years now, too, so I've heard plenty of broadcasters. I hate almost all of them. I've been a Sox fan for years now, and while I used to enjoy Hawk (somewhat as a mascot), I'm very over his brand of announcing right now, too.

 

Verdict: everyone is bad. I'd rather take the devil I know, though. Keep Hawk on, because boring announcers are worse than bizarre old codgers.

[GoSox05]

I would like to see someone else besides Hawk, but I think he will call games until he dies. He kinda joked about dying in the booth before.

 

I also don't see anyone firing him anytime soon.

[Marty34]

When he is replaced it will probably be by a boring, banal, cookie cutter type cliche spouting automaton so popular on the sports networks.

 

I think when the time comes they will think outside the box and go with a personality. Can't go from Harry to Hawk to dull FOX guy. Might be someone who's not an announcer.

[Dick Allen]

I love Hawk and hope he realizes his dream and announces White Sox games until he dies. I love the catch phrases, I love he wants the White Sox to win as much as I do and even more during spring training. Every poster has been influenced as to how they watch the game by the Hawkeroo. I could do without his umpire bashing. I could do without the Jerry Manuel bashing that is still occurring, but for my money, I don't know how you would want to replace a guy that understands the game as much or more than anyone else you would bring in, and who would be more happy if the Sox won or as upset if they lose.

 

 

[rowand's rowdies]

Be careful what you wish for... ESPN got rid of a lot of old timers and replaced them with what....women!

Is anyone else tired of watching sports shows on ESPN networks that are 33%-67% women?

They even have women commentatorsbasketball and college football. I'm not talking sideline reporters. I'm talking color commentators and lead journalists.

 

Now there are some great women sports journalists that earned it. Jackie mcmullen, jamelle parker, and linda cohn come to mind, but the equal rights bs has to go. There is no way most these young women sports journalists have earned to be where they are at. But they have a better chance being attractive women. Totally unfair and total selling out by ESPN.

 

Anyway I know were not going to replace hawk with a woman but still I agree that unless the replacement is a rare talent, were better off with hawk.

Edited May 22, 2012 by rowand's rowdies

[ScottyDo]

Be careful what you wish for... ESPN got rid of a lot of old timers and replaced them with what....women!

Is anyone else tired of watching sports shows on ESPN networks that are 33%-67% women?

They even have women commentators on basketball and college football. I'm not talking sideline reporters. I'm talking color commentators and lead journalists.

 

Now there are some great women sports journalists that earned it. Jackie mcmullen, jamelle parker, and lauren cohn come to mind, but the equal rights bs has to go. There is no way most these young women sports journalists have earned to be where they are at. But they have a better chance being attractive women. Totally unfair and total selling out by ESPN.

 

Anyway I know were not going to replace hawk with a woman but still I agree that unless the replacement is a rare talent, were better off with hawk.

No. I admit it sounds weird, but only because it's so unusual. Try to judge them on content alone and it's fine.

 

EDIT: The attractiveness rule is incredibly irritating, too, though. It makes the company look like cavemen and essentially undermines what little progress they've made.

Edited May 22, 2012 by ScottyDo

[mr_genius]

This thread is unamerican.

 

 

^^^

[iamshack]

No. I admit it sounds weird, but only because it's so unusual. Try to judge them on content alone and it's fine.

 

EDIT: The attractiveness rule is incredibly irritating, too, though. It makes the company look like cavemen and essentially undermines what little progress they've made.

I don't know what you're talking about...I couldn't even tell you what Erin Andrews looks like.

[ScottyDo]

I don't know what you're talking about...I couldn't even tell you what Erin Andrews looks like.

I get that ESPN's target demographic is almost exclusively male. But seriously, who tunes in to ESPN to satisfy their dongs? That's just weird. If you want sports information, tune into a sports channel. If you want hot women, fire up the old Intarwebz machine. Why must your 24-7 Tebow coverage be interspersed with boner induction? Compartmentalize, people!