Re: Santo back on the HOF ballot

[biittner77]

Most announcers are horrible. Harry Caray was horrible before the stroke and not much worse afterwards. If you hate Santo for being bad you should hate Harry Caray x 1000. Santo is a fan in the booth. Harry Caray was a guy pretending to be a whining fan in the booth. People act like Harry Caray wore his heart on his sleeve regrading the Cubs. The reality is that he was a broadcaster for Cubs fan's 2 most hated teams the Cards and the Sox.

 

I listen to a lot of Cubs games on XM. The Cubs could do a lot worse than Hughes/ Santo.

[Andy]

I think the Caray/Stone and Hughes/Santo broadcast teams set the standard for what a sports broadcast should be. In their own way, each combines an extraordinary talent for one aspect of sports broadcasting with the sense of raw homer-ism and fun that make sports so enjoyable in the first place. Stone's color commentary could serve as a secondary baseball education over the course of a full season, while Hughes' smooth delivery and remarkable ability to adjust is an example of of gold-medal live reporting.

 

Sports "fans" love to rant and rave about babbling home-town sportscasters as if they have some divine right to be provided with a full broadcast team of the highest quality, so that said "fan" may experience some hypothetical nirvana of sports information dispersal when watching a game. I don't get it. I watch or listen to games to experience the emotional highs and lows, to yell and scream and be a kid again. I watch or listen to games to escape.

 

When something thrilling happens in sports, there's nobody better to have in the booth than a blatant homer. Don't believe me? Listen to the Appalachian State broadcast of last year's Michigan upset. During the decisive play, all you hear is a passionate alum--probably a guy who played, probably a guy who never thought in a million years his little school cold knock off freaking Michigan--screaming his head off. There's no analysis. There's no breakdown of Michigan's blocking scheme versus Appy States' special teams package. Just pure passion. It was beautiful. It was sports.

 

While post-stroke Caray and all-the-time Santo have required WGN to seek out extraordinary talents to balance out the deficiencies of some very deficient homers, I have never in 25 years as a Cubs fan felt like I was missing something. But there have been many times I felt like there was somebody behind the mic feeling the way I felt.

 

Bravo! =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>

More or less what I was going to say. Great post.

[jersey cubs fan]

I think the Caray/Stone and Hughes/Santo broadcast teams set the standard for what a sports broadcast should be. In their own way, each combines an extraordinary talent for one aspect of sports broadcasting with the sense of raw homer-ism and fun that make sports so enjoyable in the first place. Stone's color commentary could serve as a secondary baseball education over the course of a full season, while Hughes' smooth delivery and remarkable ability to adjust is an example of of gold-medal live reporting.

 

Sports "fans" love to rant and rave about babbling home-town sportscasters as if they have some divine right to be provided with a full broadcast team of the highest quality, so that said "fan" may experience some hypothetical nirvana of sports information dispersal when watching a game. I don't get it. I watch or listen to games to experience the emotional highs and lows, to yell and scream and be a kid again. I watch or listen to games to escape.

 

When something thrilling happens in sports, there's nobody better to have in the booth than a blatant homer. Don't believe me? Listen to the Appalachian State broadcast of last year's Michigan upset. During the decisive play, all you hear is a passionate alum--probably a guy who played, probably a guy who never thought in a million years his little school cold knock off freaking Michigan--screaming his head off. There's no analysis. There's no breakdown of Michigan's blocking scheme versus Appy States' special teams package. Just pure passion. It was beautiful. It was sports.

 

While post-stroke Caray and all-the-time Santo have required WGN to seek out extraordinary talents to balance out the deficiencies of some very deficient homers, I have never in 25 years as a Cubs fan felt like I was missing something. But there have been many times I felt like there was somebody behind the mic feeling the way I felt.

 

Bravo! =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>

More or less what I was going to say. Great post.

 

I don't see why somebody needs a homer announcer to help him experience the highs and lows.

[twothousandfive]

Joe Torre is on the Vets ballot, as well. Clearly his most recent go-round as manager is about as good as it gets, even if it shouldn't count toward HoF votes.

 

I'm not sure Torre vs. Santo is such a clear victory for Santo -- largely because of 1966 and 1972.

[Cubfanintheknow]

To all the people who dislike Ron Santo as a broadcaster:

 

Honestly, you try to do what he does for 162 games (all right, I'll concede that he doesn't make every road trip). There's a lot of air time that needs to be filled. It's not like TV where you can let the pretty pictures do the talking. And not all the games are like Tuesday night's nailbiter.

 

It's an incredibly difficult job. Santo isn't the best. But I love how he lets his colors show through. And Pat Hughes is as good as they come. If you think for a second that he'd let something even remotely important slip past without mentioning it, you're crazy.

[robnail]

I think the Caray/Stone and Hughes/Santo broadcast teams set the standard for what a sports broadcast should be. In their own way, each combines an extraordinary talent for one aspect of sports broadcasting with the sense of raw homer-ism and fun that make sports so enjoyable in the first place. Stone's color commentary could serve as a secondary baseball education over the course of a full season, while Hughes' smooth delivery and remarkable ability to adjust is an example of of gold-medal live reporting.

 

Sports "fans" love to rant and rave about babbling home-town sportscasters as if they have some divine right to be provided with a full broadcast team of the highest quality, so that said "fan" may experience some hypothetical nirvana of sports information dispersal when watching a game. I don't get it. I watch or listen to games to experience the emotional highs and lows, to yell and scream and be a kid again. I watch or listen to games to escape.

 

When something thrilling happens in sports, there's nobody better to have in the booth than a blatant homer. Don't believe me? Listen to the Appalachian State broadcast of last year's Michigan upset. During the decisive play, all you hear is a passionate alum--probably a guy who played, probably a guy who never thought in a million years his little school cold knock off freaking Michigan--screaming his head off. There's no analysis. There's no breakdown of Michigan's blocking scheme versus Appy States' special teams package. Just pure passion. It was beautiful. It was sports.

 

While post-stroke Caray and all-the-time Santo have required WGN to seek out extraordinary talents to balance out the deficiencies of some very deficient homers, I have never in 25 years as a Cubs fan felt like I was missing something. But there have been many times I felt like there was somebody behind the mic feeling the way I felt.

 

Bravo! =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>

More or less what I was going to say. Great post.

 

I don't see why somebody needs a homer announcer to help him experience the highs and lows.

 

Didn't say I needed any help. Just saying I like it better as a listener/viewer.

[Mizzou]

How can people not like Harry Caray and Ron Santo? I'm guessing these same people hated Santa Claus as a kid?

[jersey cubs fan]

To all the people who dislike Ron Santo as a broadcaster:

 

Honestly, you try to do what he does for 162 games (all right, I'll concede that he doesn't make every road trip). There's a lot of air time that needs to be filled. It's not like TV where you can let the pretty pictures do the talking. And not all the games are like Tuesday night's nailbiter.

 

It's an incredibly difficult job. Santo isn't the best. But I love how he lets his colors show through. And Pat Hughes is as good as they come. If you think for a second that he'd let something even remotely important slip past without mentioning it, you're crazy.

 

Oh my lord. Incredibly difficult? He works 3 hours a day 150 days a year talking about baseball. Give me a break. If you want to say it's fun to listen to him sound goofy and get all emotional, fine. Maybe that's your thing. But don't try and pretend his job is hard.

[Cynosure]

To all the people who dislike Ron Santo as a broadcaster:

 

Honestly, you try to do what he does for 162 games (all right, I'll concede that he doesn't make every road trip). There's a lot of air time that needs to be filled. It's not like TV where you can let the pretty pictures do the talking. And not all the games are like Tuesday night's nailbiter.

 

It's an incredibly difficult job. Santo isn't the best. But I love how he lets his colors show through. And Pat Hughes is as good as they come. If you think for a second that he'd let something even remotely important slip past without mentioning it, you're crazy.

 

Oh my lord. Incredibly difficult? He works 3 hours a day 150 days a year talking about baseball. Give me a break. If you want to say it's fun to listen to him sound goofy and get all emotional, fine. Maybe that's your thing. But don't try and pretend his job is hard.

 

EXACTLY!

 

And most of the time when he does fill "air time" he's stumbling through one of his stories I can't understand anyways.

[jersey cubs fan]

I actually used to really dislike Santo's work. He was horrible. It's one thing to have some goober jabbering about nonsense on tv, where you can still see the game and know what's going on, but that doesn't work on the radio. I started to warm to him a little bit, and now I find him tolerable. But that's about the extent of it.

[biittner77]

I don't see why somebody needs a homer announcer to help him experience the highs and lows.

 

I think, at some level, fans like to think that the announcers agree with their choice of teams.

[Soul]

I actually used to really dislike Santo's work. He was horrible. It's one thing to have some goober jabbering about nonsense on tv, where you can still see the game and know what's going on, but that doesn't work on the radio. I started to warm to him a little bit, and now I find him tolerable. But that's about the extent of it.

 

I prefer the raw emotion to analysis in the booth. Yes, they need Hughes to balance him out but so what? I don't feel like I'm missing any of the game. Guys who break out the sabermetrics in the booth bore me to tears. I like analysis just fine, but during the game I run on emotion and that's the way I will always be.

[Sammy Sofa]

Guys who break out the sabermetrics in the booth...

 

...don't exist.

[Andy]

Guys who break out the sabermetrics in the booth...

 

...don't exist.

Yeah, Len doesn't even do it very much, and you can tell that privately he is probably a SABR guy.

[Wheelimus]

What Ron Santo brings to the table has absolutely nothing to do with traditional sports broadcasting. If that's the debate, then fine, the haters win. Almost every town in America has local sports broadcasters who would be more proficient at what they do than Ron Santo.

 

But that's not why we love him. We love the emotion and heart he brings. We love (most of) his stories. We love that he says what he's thinking and means what he says. Good or bad. The honesty and love of the game. And so on. Things you can't exactly put down on paper and qualify but I think, someday when (God forbid) Ron isn't around, people are going to be able to feel missing.

 

Same with Harry really. For the last decade of his career you could have found thousands of announcers more skilled at their profession. But damned if I would not give up a single Holy Cow for a lifetime of more technical announcers.

 

As the 80's hairband song goes "don't know what you've got, til it's gone". I've missed Harry for just about every single game since he passed on. I'm going to miss Ron for just about every single game when he passes on. If you're taking this so super serial that you just cannot live with maybe missing a few plays a year due to Ron, the least of your worries in life is Ron freaking Santo and his color commentary skills.

 

It's a game. It's supposed to be played by those who love it and called by those who loved it. This modern era of players who care 10 times more about their salary than their team, and announcers who may be as proficient as it gets but have no heart are a good reason why the game has lost a bit of it's luster.

 

Or, to put it another way, had Babe Ruth been lucky enough to live 30+ years after his retirement you can damn well bet he would have wound up in a Yankees booth. And people would have loved him, no matter how often he came to work a little loaded or how often he rambled and missed a play.

 

In my opinion, Ronny has earned his job until they can pry it out of his cold dead hands.

[Handlebar McSkullet]

"Ron Santo does not deserve to be in the Hall of Fame!"

 

Signed

Satan

[RedFlash]

"Ron Santo does not deserve to be in the Hall of Fame!"

 

Signed

Satan

 

Or if you perfer his human name........Joe Morgan..

[Guest]

To all the people who dislike Ron Santo as a broadcaster:

 

Honestly, you try to do what he does for 162 games (all right, I'll concede that he doesn't make every road trip). There's a lot of air time that needs to be filled. It's not like TV where you can let the pretty pictures do the talking. And not all the games are like Tuesday night's nailbiter.

 

It's an incredibly difficult job. Santo isn't the best. But I love how he lets his colors show through. And Pat Hughes is as good as they come. If you think for a second that he'd let something even remotely important slip past without mentioning it, you're crazy.

 

That works both ways. On TV, you don't have to describe every play in detail because the viewer can see what's going on. That leaves extra time for stories. But on the radio, the fans listening have no idea what's going on unless you tell them to. So if you miss something, the listener does also.

 

I'd argue that there's a lot more air time to be filled on TV then there is on radio because of this.

[CUBZ99]

We get Cubs broadcasts here through a local radio station, and I know several non-Cubs fans that listen to Hughes/Santo because they love to hear Ron. Its funny to hear them talk about what Ron said, or how they wish that the Twins radio announcers were as exciting.

[Cubfanintheknow]

To all the people who dislike Ron Santo as a broadcaster:

 

Honestly, you try to do what he does for 162 games (all right, I'll concede that he doesn't make every road trip). There's a lot of air time that needs to be filled. It's not like TV where you can let the pretty pictures do the talking. And not all the games are like Tuesday night's nailbiter.

 

It's an incredibly difficult job. Santo isn't the best. But I love how he lets his colors show through. And Pat Hughes is as good as they come. If you think for a second that he'd let something even remotely important slip past without mentioning it, you're crazy.

 

Oh my lord. Incredibly difficult? He works 3 hours a day 150 days a year talking about baseball. Give me a break. If you want to say it's fun to listen to him sound goofy and get all emotional, fine. Maybe that's your thing. But don't try and pretend his job is hard.

 

EXACTLY!

 

And most of the time when he does fill "air time" he's stumbling through one of his stories I can't understand anyways.

 

You're entitled to your opinion regarding the value Santo brings to the broadcast. But if you think his job is easy, you are sorely mistaken.

[Cubfanintheknow]

To all the people who dislike Ron Santo as a broadcaster:

 

Honestly, you try to do what he does for 162 games (all right, I'll concede that he doesn't make every road trip). There's a lot of air time that needs to be filled. It's not like TV where you can let the pretty pictures do the talking. And not all the games are like Tuesday night's nailbiter.

 

It's an incredibly difficult job. Santo isn't the best. But I love how he lets his colors show through. And Pat Hughes is as good as they come. If you think for a second that he'd let something even remotely important slip past without mentioning it, you're crazy.

 

That works both ways. On TV, you don't have to describe every play in detail because the viewer can see what's going on. That leaves extra time for stories. But on the radio, the fans listening have no idea what's going on unless you tell them to. So if you miss something, the listener does also.

 

I'd argue that there's a lot more air time to be filled on TV then there is on radio because of this.

 

I can see your logic.

[TruffleShuffle]

To all the people who dislike Ron Santo as a broadcaster:

 

Honestly, you try to do what he does for 162 games (all right, I'll concede that he doesn't make every road trip). There's a lot of air time that needs to be filled. It's not like TV where you can let the pretty pictures do the talking. And not all the games are like Tuesday night's nailbiter.

 

It's an incredibly difficult job. Santo isn't the best. But I love how he lets his colors show through. And Pat Hughes is as good as they come. If you think for a second that he'd let something even remotely important slip past without mentioning it, you're crazy.

 

Oh my lord. Incredibly difficult? He works 3 hours a day 150 days a year talking about baseball. Give me a break.

 

this isn't necessarily true. there's the pre-game show as well as all the prep work done off air. like a sports talk radio host, they might only be on air for 15-20 hours a week, but i suspect they spend at least that much time preparing off air as well. santo is probably a guy who flies by the seat of his pants rather than preparing a bunch of stats and analysis, however.

[erik316wttn]

I can't imagine a Cubs broadcast without Pat and Ron. I hate the days when Dave Otto fills in... he's terrible. And while Corey Provis is at least passable, he's no Pat Hughes. The 5th innings of Cubs broadcasts are my least favorite when I'm listening on the radio.

[Soul]

I can't believe anyone seriously would prefer Otto over Santo on a daily basis. To me that's close to insanity.

[jdelaney5150]

"Ron Santo does not deserve to be in the Hall of Fame!"

 

Signed

Satan

 

Or if you perfer his human name........Joe Morgan..

 

While I certainly believe that Joe Morgan is deserving of just about every criticism leveled against him, this is one rare exception. He was quoted in This Old Cub saying that Santo is a Hall of Famer:

 

"I always enjoyed playing against him, and he's still underrated in that he did things day in and day out, and year in and year out...and I will say this, he will get my vote!"

 

Now, if you believe that he is publicly saying that and then secretly not voting for him, that's something else.