Mike Greenberg said something stupid today
I was watching the Best of Mike & Mike in the Morning on good ol’ ESPN2 (the same network that brings us the daily rantings of Skip Bayless), and heard Mike Greenberg say the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard him say. I’m not a regular watcher/listener, but I’m familiar with the guy.
He and Mike Golic were discussing John Lackey’s near no-hitter against Boston, and “Greeny” said that since the Red Sox were going to lose anyway (they were down 6-0, so the chances of a comeback were indeed slim), if he were a Boston player he would root for the no-no because he would want to witness history.
This is the problem with having people who don’t have a competitive sports background commenting on sports. He does a fine job of giving his opinion of an average sports fan, but in a case like this – when he’s saying that the Red Sox players should be rooting for Lackey to complete the no-hitter – he’s spouting utter nonsense.
Anyone who has played sports at a high level – I’m talking about most college programs as well as a few of the more successful high school programs – would cringe at this thought. No one, and I mean no one, who considers themselves a true competitor would want to see a no-hitter thrown against their team. It’s not just a sign of great pitching; it’s a sign of inept hitting. No competitor wants the opposing team to have its way.
To my point, Golic, who had a long NFL career, disagreed with Greenberg’s comments.
My advice for Greeny is to stop trying to put yourself in the shoes of the athletes – just comment on sports from a fan’s perspective.
Follow the Scores Report editors on Twitter @clevelandteams and @bullzeyedotcom.
It was a very dumb comment, but let’s not generalize about people who haven’t played competitve sports. If you want to line up idiotic comments, my guess is current and former athletes say more stupid things than just about any demographic group on the planet, let alone sports commentators who have not played competitively.
Yes, former athletes offer a perspective that those who have not played on organized teams can’t provide, but at the end of the day it’s a matter of using your brain. One can write and speak intelligently about anything, including the athletic experience, because by using your brain you can listen to those who have played and offer an insight based on that knowledge.
Athletes often make the fatal mistake of looking at every situation through the lense of their own limited experience. Great commentators/writers are able to listen and learn, and can sometimes offer a much more insightful analysis. This holds true for many aspects of life. Of course, former athletes can also do the same.
In the end, it’s not the personal experience of the writer or commentator, but the argument.analysis that he or she presents.
So, Greenie said something stupid. He does that often, as does his ex-jock partner. Let’s leave it at that
Couldn’t agree more, G. You don’t need to be a former college or pro athlete to understand the art of competition. I’m stunned that Greenie would say something like that.
I’ll split the difference here. I’d say anybody who has played in a mildly spirited church league softball tourney would know better than to suggest such rot.
Respect and brotherhood is for after the game. Within the game, only a maximum effort is acceptable, and I would guess that Lackey would expect no less. Matter of fact, I’d suggest that, were I in his position, I’d be disgraced to pitch against anything less than their best effort.
History being made against you team is nothing to root for – OK, if a guy I was bowling against had a chance at a 300 game, I might pull for him.
But only if it wasn’t a money league.
I don’t believe I generalized. I lauded Greenberg’s usual work and skewered the lack of reasoning behind this particular statement. I notice this sometimes with sports commentators that are non-athletes. They have difficulty separating their fan instincts and what they believe to be their athletic/competitive instincts.
In this case, Greenberg was so caught up in the history of witnessing a no-hitter that he believed it would trump a competitor’s desire to try to win the game, or in this case, to try to at least break up the no-no.
What prompted me to post was the stubborn take of his position. Did he defer to Golic on the matter? No, he argued his point, twisted the situation to fit his argument (if you listen to the clip you’ll see what I mean), and was fairly belligerent about his position. At times, this tenacity is an advantage, but in this case, Greenberg needed a good shot of humility.
I believe that you can be taught fierce (some would say extreme) competitiveness as a child. Growing up, we all had friends/foes that acted like they didn’t really care if they won or lost. For others, it’s a switch that is flipped when they enter a high-quality athletic program, whether it is a successful college or an elite high school program. For me, it was the latter. I went into college as a fairly easy going athlete. After five years of being around Bo Ryan, I now find myself getting pissed (at 34) when my team loses a game in my Tuesday night rec league.
Athletes absolutely say a lot of stupid things. No one would argue that point.