I enjoyed what I saw of the telecast–probably
a couple of hundred laps toward the end.
The Bills beat the Ravens, 19-14, to go to
2-4. I flew a friend’s trainer in 10-20 mph
winds on a warm, sunny autumn day. A golden
glow lingered into the early evening hours
in front of the TV set. :o)
They did some nice split-screen coverage
of folks in mid-field.
They explained one of the things JG does:
stay off the brakes for 150 laps so that
he’s got them when he needs them later
in the race. I’ve never heard that before.
I enjoyed watching the last 100 laps or
so.
21 cautions! I wouldn’t have enjoyed that
at the track. At home, I surfed contentedly
while waiting for the cleanup and restarts.
Marty
—
Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.
"Martin X. Moleski, SJ" <mole…@canisius.edu> wrote in
news:13hpankl1eeh206@news.supernews.com:
> I enjoyed what I saw of the telecast–probably
> a couple of hundred laps toward the end.
I only saw the GWC, and the caution laps in front of that. But
based on that, I’d say the telecast sucked, and was remarkably
bad even by the low standard the ESPN crew has established.
There’s an article here which suggests the failings that I saw
in the last few laps extended thru the entire broadcast. As
far as I can tell, John Daly has an accurate grasp of the problems
and causes with which ESPN is suffering:
http://dalyplanet.blogspot.com/2007/10/espn-needs-to-admit-nascar-
problems.html
(mind the wrap, sorry)
John
"John McCoy" wrote …
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> "Martin X. Moleski, SJ" wrote:
>> I enjoyed what I saw of the telecast–probably
>> a couple of hundred laps toward the end.
> I only saw the GWC, and the caution laps in front of that. But
> based on that, I’d say the telecast sucked, and was remarkably
> bad even by the low standard the ESPN crew has established.
> There’s an article here which suggests the failings that I saw
> in the last few laps extended thru the entire broadcast. As
> far as I can tell, John Daly has an accurate grasp of the problems
> and causes with which ESPN is suffering:
> http://dalyplanet.blogspot.com/2007/10/espn-needs-to-admit-nascar-
> problems.html
> (mind the wrap, sorry)
Jarrett to Replace Ousted Wallace in Booth
http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2007/10/17/jarrett-to-replace-ousted-w...
???
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 19:33:49 CST, "WildWeasel" <wweasel…@www.carracing.com> wrote in
<X8ydnRSe2NXQ3IDanZ2dnUVZ_uOmn…@comcast.com>:
>Jarrett to Replace Ousted Wallace in Booth
><http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2007/10/17/jarrett-to-replace-ousted-w…>
That article contains a denial at the bottom
from ESPN that they’re planning to make any
changes.
I don’t see anything about it on Jayski.
Marty
—
Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.
Martin X. Moleski, SJ <mole…@canisius.edu> wrote:
> That article contains a denial at the bottom
> from ESPN that they’re planning to make any
> changes.
> I don’t see anything about it on Jayski.
While RW is only part of the ESPN problem, I’d be happy to see him replaced.
Have not like the guy since he won a race back around 1998 and used his few
seconds on air in victory lane to make a political statement. His whining
over the years only reinforced my opinion of him.
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 08:31:24 CST, Kevin <kevin-no-s…@sonic.net> wrote in <471df79d$0$14072$742ec…@news.sonic.net>:
>While RW is only part of the ESPN problem, I’d be happy to see him replaced.
>Have not like the guy since he won a race back around 1998 and used his few
>seconds on air in victory lane to make a political statement.
I don’t remember that incident–if I ever knew what
his politics were, I’ve forgotten now.
I doubt that he ever spent as much time on political
issues as others have giving prayerful thanks. I’m
sure that kind of public piety rubs some people the
wrong way. It seems to have subsided in recent
years anyway.
>His whining
>over the years only reinforced my opinion of him.
Arguing about rules and enforcement of rules is
part of the sport. NASCAR’s willingness to respond
to agitation during the season for aero changes
made agitating a reasonable part of team strategy.
That, too, seems to have subsided in recent years.
Complaining about other drivers antics on the track
is part of racin’. Not all comments made right
after a tough race are thoughtful, wise, charitable,
or fair. But that’s when the cameras and mikes are
all on. I take pretty much everything that’s said
then with a grain of salt.
Having said that, I do concede that there is something
about Rusty’s style and tone of voice that makes him
stand out in a crowd. He isn’t my favorite voice
but I wish him well.
Marty
—
Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.
Martin X. Moleski, SJ wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 08:31:24 CST, Kevin <kevin-no-s…@sonic.net> wrote in <471df79d$0$14072$742ec…@news.sonic.net>:
>>While RW is only part of the ESPN problem, I’d be happy to see him replaced.
>>Have not like the guy since he won a race back around 1998 and used his few
>>seconds on air in victory lane to make a political statement.
> I don’t remember that incident–if I ever knew what
> his politics were, I’ve forgotten now.
I don’t recall that either, and both Mom and Dear Hubby are Rusty fans.
I’m curious what his point of view was, if anyone recalls…. (I’m
hoping it will give me some ammo against these two, since I’m
outnumbered! LOL)
> I doubt that he ever spent as much time on political
> issues as others have giving prayerful thanks. I’m
> sure that kind of public piety rubs some people the
> wrong way. It seems to have subsided in recent
> years anyway.
And I thank God for that!
Seriously, though, I always had to wonder how much of that was honest
and heart-felt, and how much was just for show. Like all the
celebrities in the DFW area who attend (or profess to attend) church at
the Potter’s House here. It’s a HUGE church with a congregation of
thousands — a place to see and be seen.
> Having said that, I do concede that there is something
> about Rusty’s style and tone of voice that makes him
> stand out in a crowd. He isn’t my favorite voice
> but I wish him well.
I could care less whether Rusty is the man in the box or not. But it
does make Mom happy to still have him hanging around, so I guess it
can’t all be bad….
Cindy Murray wrote:
> But it does make Mom happy to still have >him hanging around, so I
guess it can’t all be >bad….
Ohh, yes it is. She has been brainwashed.
Larry
Cindy Murray <c1ndyl…@tx.rr.com> wrote:
> Martin X. Moleski, SJ wrote:
> I don’t recall that either, and both Mom and Dear Hubby are Rusty fans.
> I’m curious what his point of view was, if anyone recalls…. (I’m
> hoping it will give me some ammo against these two, since I’m
> outnumbered! LOL)
With the passing of the years, my memory has gotten hazy, but thinking about
it now, I think it must have been during the run up to the presidential
election in 1996. As I recall there was an issue with Big Tobacco… I’m
guessing now that it had to do with the dems. wanting to tax BT and the
repubs. opposed. Anyway of course it was the Winston Cup at the time and
Rusty went into this rant about electing Dole and getting the government
off the backs of BT. Probably not a big deal, but it annoyed me that Rusty
would use his time in VL to promote his political views.
Sorry I can’t do better than that. In trying to recall, at first I thought
it involved Bush rather than Dole, but it wasn’t as recent as 2000 so it
must have been Dole and 1996.
Kevin
Cindy Murray <c1ndyl…@tx.rr.com> wrote in
news:471f22c3$0$9605$4c368faf@roadrunner.com:
> Martin X. Moleski, SJ wrote:
>> I doubt that he ever spent as much time on political
>> issues as others have giving prayerful thanks. I’m
>> sure that kind of public piety rubs some people the
>> wrong way. It seems to have subsided in recent
>> years anyway.
> And I thank God for that!
> Seriously, though, I always had to wonder how much of that was honest
> and heart-felt, and how much was just for show. Like all the
> celebrities in the DFW area who attend (or profess to attend) church
> at the Potter’s House here. It’s a HUGE church with a congregation of
> thousands — a place to see and be seen.
It’s always tended to bother me, too, because it seems to be exhibiting
the sin of pride – "look at me, I’m better than you because I go to
the biggest church, and I say thanks more often than you" – and is
thus inherently hypocritical.
I must say I prefer the current, not overtly religous, version of
Jeff Gordon in specific to the prior one. Somehow his manner
was particularly unconvincing.
John