The Rangers offseason has been a polarizing one.
Tyson Ross and Andrew Cashner are here, Carlos Gomez and Josh Hamilton are back, while Mitch Moreland and Ian Desmond have moved on. Fans are still salivating about the possibility of Mike Napoli coming back for one more run. Others are angry that (insert player here) didn’t get signed, and will continually complain that the Texas offseason has been too quiet for their liking.
While I’m not high on Mike Napoli and do wish Edwin Encarnacion was bringing his home run swing (and parrot) to Arlington, that’s not the decision that’s held my greatest curiosity this winter.
No, the decisions Texas made that most intrigued and confused was how they reworked their television announce team.
For the record, the vitriol Dave Raymond has been subjected to is both premature and unnecessary. The difficulties of doing a job requiring a full time commitment with only part time work opportunities can’t be understated. Raymond’s situation is similar to that of Jurickson Profar or Joey Gallo, who need more playing time to grow and develop. Raymond will get his chance to shine with a full commitment this season. It’s hard to imagine the impact of that being anything but positive.
His shotgun riders will be Tom Grieve and C.J. Nitkowski. Grieve, the known quantity, will be the constant fans have known. His experience is unassailable, and will be a bridge for the new announcers to the fans.
Nitkowski is regarded as a rising star, doing games for Fox national before being hired by Texas. His biggest hurdle will be toning down his abrasive off air personality. Rangers fans won’t take well to being talked down to, nor will more progressive fans appreciate his more antiquated viewpoints on the game. Granted, judging by Nitkowski’s frequency of Twitter blockage, one can question how many of those people’s concerns he will receive.
With all that said, Texas’ failure in this process was being a slave to procedure. Regardless of what you think about the people they hired, they fit into a certain mold baseball (and all sports) fall into when hiring announcers. They get the straight man play by play person, then surround them with the ex-player(s) as a way to give perceived credible analysis. It’s safe, easy, and above all else expected. Nobody complains too loud when the expected occurs.
However, I’d like you to imagine along with me an idea. An idea where instead of sticking to the constraints bred deep into sports commentary, you reframe your expectations and look at the situation a little tilted. Where you can set your franchise apart from all the others, making it the standard bearer for a new idea instead of falling in line with everyone else.
If I had been asked about what should have been done, I’d have said you’re looking for storytellers. Not a play by play man or a color guy, but two/three people who will tell the stories of 162 games.
A clear directive would be issued: Loosen up on the formality. On television we can see everything, and combining that with graphics means a lot of the work commentators do is redundant. Why do I need you to tell me Adrian Beltre is walking up to the plate when there’s a graphic with his name and stats on it, his name on his jersey, and his face in full view? I’ve got visual stimuli to inform me of that. The words can be better spent on something else.
The model that best befits my vision is English soccer. When you watch the games, gone are much of the rigidity expected of North American commentator roles. The game is the emphasis, and the announcers providing the backing track accompanying the on pitch action. It’s less two people calling a game, more two people with microphones talking about a game they’re watching. They’re still knowledgeable and passionate, but it puts the emphasis where it belongs. It feels more authentic, and creates a whole new feeling to the overall presentation.
It’s worth noting that we have a test case for this already. One team did something similar to this, and everyone loved it.
Vin Scully, anyone?
Vin rocked with the format quite a bit still, but his broadcast was one that stood above the rest. It was devoid of clichés and other things found in your average broadcast. Instead Scully became baseball’s storyteller in chief, captivating audiences nationwide with his virtuoso like command of the moment. He had the right emotion for every situation, the right nugget for every player.
He pioneered the idea I’m suggesting; I’m just here to take it one step further.
Of course there was only one Vin Scully. That said, I promise you somewhere in this great big world of ours there are two or three people who are more than capable of filling this role. They likely aren’t in pro baseball right now. They’re in college trying to get noticed. They’re in other sports looking for their big break. Whoever and wherever they are, they’re looking for the team that’s willing to be different and take chances.
Texas could have been that team. Instead, Ranger fans got more of the same.
For a sport that has a lot of problems with doing “more of the same” in more ways than just who talks on microphones, a changing of the guard here might have been an encouraging sign of things that might come.
Instead, we’re left with reality: that what we’re going to get going forward is what we’ve always had.
More of the same.
What are your thoughts on the new broadcast crew? Share them with Samuel on Twitter @thesamuelhale.
