I. PROLOGUE
Derek Jeter’s Yankeeography was among the first of the series to air on YES after the network launched in 2002. It seems like the crew at MLB Productions has to scrap something and update it every year for future re-broadcasts. The next addition: he will stand alone as the Yankees’ all-time hits leader and the video to support the feat will be logged and included.
It is an honor that deserves all the respect we as Yankee fans and baseball fans can provide, especially considering the man he’s passing: Henry Louis Gehrig. A question needs to be asked regarding the coverage and the build-up, though: Did someone think to pull the plug on this, or at least trickle the information piecemeal? The fact that there was little else to discuss because the Yankees have practically locked up the AL East is no excuse.
Did anyone else think it was too much? Were you offended or insulted by the fact that there wasn’t anything new to add to the subject, that there was little we didn’t already know just continuously being regurgitated? It was like being force-fed the same meal every day at the same time, with no other alternative food choices.
To wit: Did the same video footage and nearly the same commentary — verbatim — need to be replayed and repeated night after night, day after day, from the beginning of the Toronto series last Friday? By the time Sunday’s finale came around, it was absurd.
The video from May 30, 1995, his first hit, a groundball through the left side of the infield at the Kingdome, off Tim Belcher, was shown countless times, with Michael Kay’s commentary, “and Derek Jeter standing on first base next to his future teammate and good friend, Tino Martinez.” We got it after the fourth viewing. At that point, I was mouthing Kay’s description of the clip. Then there was the praise for his upbringing with the cutaways to his parents and how anyone associated with the Yankees who scouted him or saw him play in high school “was not surprised at what he’s accomplished.” That fed the discussion of his legend, starting with the first game in Cleveland in 1996 when he homered and made a great over-the-shoulder catch in shallow left field, a play that along with the jump throw from deep in the hole became “Jeterian” (by the way, this is a B.S. adjective that sounds incorrect compared to “Jeteresque.” Can we get a decision on that?), continuing to the Jeffrey Maier home run, the flip play, the Mr. November home run, the dive into the stands against the Red Sox five years ago, and the list goes on.
I know I sound like the guy on the front porch yelling at kids to get off my lawn, which could lead you to the conclusion that I’m a Jeter hater. While I’m not averse to reprimanding people for encroaching my property, nothing could be further from the truth on the Jeter hating. I gained a great appreciation for him while covering him from 2002-06. You have to see how he handles himself amid all the potential distractions on a daily basis to understand how difficult it is to do what he does. He’s a great player, but there was just nothing there beyond his being a baseball player — at least not that he displayed to the people holding pens, pads, recorders and cameras. Jeter was trained well. He doesn’t give too much away, speaks the company line and controls his emotions. Would we as beat writers and reporters try to bait him to give more and show some personality? Sure, but he would never comply. He was too smart. At least he was not phony about it.
The biggest question, based on the personality test above, was, “Would he enjoy the moment?” There was legitimate concern over this in the local media. The best answer came from Jeter himself. He tipped his helmet to the fans, but knew the Yankees were trailing 2-0 and he didn’t want to “disrespect Tampa,” as he told Kim Jones. Only when the Rays all moved to the top step of their bench clapped for Jeter’s achievement did he take a little extra time to bask in the moment. Class act all the way. He does not act bigger than the game, either on the micro or the macro level.
That’s the essence of Derek Jeter. If he doesn’t enjoy the moment himself, we’ll certainly enjoy it for him.
__________________________________________
There were some elements of the coverage that were done well. One instance in particular can be pointed to the MLB Network, specifically its MLB Tonight program, which I’ve officially become obsessed with.
Live look-ins are an element to the program, and when anchor Greg Amsinger set the scene prior to Jeter’s 7th-inning at-bat Wednesday, he promptly went silent and allowed the YES feed to take over. Sometimes, he and the rotating crew of analysts — Wednesday it was Barry Larkin, John Hart and Dave Valle for that two-hour block — provide DVD-type commentary over the action. Not this time. They let the feed run for about two minutes during the celebration, faded back to the studio, and then Amsinger introduced a brief roundtable to discuss the merits of the achievement before going to commercial.
It was simple, understated, and effective. And no one talked too much.
II. THE FUTURE
During the lovefest, there were many other questions asked about Jeter’s career. There was pretty much a consensus on his being a first-ballot Hall of Famer, and that somehow led to the following ridiculous premise being bandied about:
* Derek Jeter could break Pete Rose’s hits record.
So could Ichiro, if he plays until he’s 50. So could A-Rod, if he averages 250 hits a year until the end of his contract. I could dunk, too, if I had a 45-inch vertical leap.
When I first saw the aforementioned sentence on MLB Network promoting the associated MLB.com article, I said, “That’s it. I’m officially sick of this story and people have gone insane.” When Kay brought it up during Wednesday’s telecast, adding that the scout who suggested the Yankees draft Jeter agreed with the possibility, saying that he has life and his legs and that he wants to play for another 11 years, I had a Lewis Black-caliber apoplectic fit.
Can certain media members calm down a bit? Jeter is 1,535 hits away from Rose. Let’s see him get to 3,000 first. At this rate, assuming Jeter stays off the disabled list, that’ll happen in May of 2011, about six weeks before his 37th birthday, right in line with the projections that followed his 2,000th hit. Then, let’s see how long he a) wants to play, and b) can play, depending on how his body holds up. If he averages 154 hits a year for the next 10 years, yes, he can do it. But until he approaches 4,000, 1,279 hits from now, the words “Pete Rose,” “Derek Jeter” and “hits record,” should not appear in the same sentence unless that sentence is: Derek Jeter became the Yankees’ all-time hits leader with his 2,722nd hit, leaving him 1,534 away from Pete Rose’s Major League record.
III. EPILOGUE
Some humor, shall we? Listening to some sound bites on the radio Thursday morning, a few snippets from Dr. Charles Jeter were played, and it occurred to me that I had not heard him talk. Ever. Is it me, or does he sound just like Cleveland from “Family Guy”?
And with that, adieu until next week …
and if Jeter were to break the record on the anniversary of the terrorist attack .... oh I shudder to think how Sterling/Waldman/Kay might invoke "9/11" :-(
I can't imagine being offended by the coverage, unless we're using the term in the same way that I get "offended" every year when Brian Cashman tries to tell me that Sidney Ponson can really help this team.
I'm going to the game tonight, ironically enough thanks to raffle tickets I won at an ALS benefit. Things sort of come full circle.
I think the coverage is predictable but nausiating.
Will - I was hoping you'd pop in and post about this topic, 'cause I had a question for you, being formally a YES guy. I suggested the other day that the drawn out coverage this past week was due to YES scheduling their build up based on the expectation that Jeter would tie/break the record in Monday's double header. When he didn't, they were sort of stuck trotting out the same old junk day after day until he did, which we found annoying. Certainly the game he *did* break it would be telecast again (and again), so they'd want all those clips and interviews and commentary in there.
I do have to say that was the LONGEST oh-for-twelve I've seen in a long time. Wow. Excruciating. I'm wondering if the YES guys were as stuck as Jeter himself, hoping for those hits to come ASAP.
On Dr. Charles Jeter - I can't believe I didn't realize that before, but you're exactly right, Will!
[2] Have fun tonight - looking forward to a good tweet if Jeter breaks the record during the game.
[4] I'm glad there was some anticipation brewing for a Will Weiss post on this. I needed to let it bubble to a point where I couldn't take it anymore before writing. ... You pose a tremendous question. I thought about that, but didn't pose it to the production guys, many of whom I'm still in touch with. ... I think they were stuck, but the level of redundancy, and exact verbatim nature of the rehashing, was what really got me. I'll hit them up and ask and get back to you.
[2] You nailed it ... It offends me when I know I'm being bullshat but the people doing the BS-ing are covering it up.
Will, we discussed this at some length here yesterday. I appreciate your specific complaints about the Jeter coverage, but how might you have made the coverage less repetitive? Obviously, YES could have presented different highlights from Jeter's career, rather than showing his first hit over and over, and you would have altered your copy so as not to repeat yourself, but what else would you have done to improve the coverage?
Also, have you considered hitting your mute button? I trust you were exaggerating about the Lewis Black caliber fits, but this doesn't seem like the kind of thing that anyone should get too worked up over.
Offended? No. Found it tiresome? Yes. Good post, though the following is rather off base:
The odds of Jeter breaking Rose's record are indeed slim, but he stands and has stood the best chance of any player since Rose himself to do so: he came up young, piled up a bunch of hits, is a bit of a hack but a high BA guy, doesn't walk too much, has stayed very healthy, has built up enormous capital (i.e., will be able to "hang on" a long time, probably, if he so desires).
Yes, he still needs 1500+ hits to do. But it is worth remembering that Rose himself got something like 1600 hits after he turned 35.
Again, the chances are slim...but then the chances that ANY record falls are slim, unless there is a radical shift in the rules or the way the game is played. But Jeter's current situation at least gets him in the discussion.
Comparisons to Ichiro playing until he's fifty or A-Rod averaging 250 hits for several years (when he has only topped 200 three times in his career) are spurious.
===
FWIW, Ichiro is precisely the kind of player who could have challenged the record, if had not the misfortune of starting his MLB career so late. Jeter did not suffer this same happenstance.
I've been to Yankee Stadium twice this week and hope the rains allows me to attend tonight's game. Judging by the buzz that every Jeter AB has generated (heck, he got a standing ovation during pre-game warmups), I can't imagine anyone thinking the coverage has been overblown. I just don't see it. If YES was running a 3-hour pre-game or dedicated 24 hours to Jeter programming, I might agree, but they are simply shining the spotlight on a significant event during games that have been rendered alot less important by the Yankees great record. That sounds like a no-brainer to me.
Sometimes, I think being a contrarian becomes a kind of cliche.
[7] Appreciate the comment. It was more Lewis Black in terms of action and body language as opposed to expletive-ridden tirades. ... That being said, what I would have done as a producer is take into account that in Game 1, I actually thought Jorge Posada catching CC Sabathia was as big a story, considering that he'll be doing so in the postseason. ... It's not difficult to find different parts of the game to focus on. Using different highlight packages would have been the easiest thing to do. ... Kay could have even gone a different route with his verbiage over the same highlights. You have to know the same people are going to be watching day in and day out; it's not like a national broadcast where you're trying to also bring in the casual viewer.
[8] I still think it's ridiculous, even though Jeter is 80 hits ahead of Rose's pace at the same age. Jeter would have to become a DH or move to 1B like Rose did to take some of the physical toll off his body. I also don't see him playing much past 40. Even if he averages 200 hits a year and plays until he's 42, that's seven more seasons and 1,400 hits. I don't believe that individual accolade means as much to him. ... Regarding Ichiro, I absolutely agree with you. If he came to the U.S. at Age 21, he'd have about 3,500 hits by now. I did not believe it necessary to add that point, because I thought it was implied by my opening line in that paragraph.
This city COULD use a happy memory to be associated with 9/11. 2,722 hits won't ease the pain of the loss of 3,000 lives, but for one special night ....
[9] Thanks, William. I didn't say it was overblown. By "too much," I meant repetitive, unoriginal and predictable. I was not trying to be contrarian. As I said, I'm very much a fan of Derek Jeter and have great respect for his accomplishment here. I think that the local media has blown an opportunity to do a good job with this story by belaboring the same points over and over.
[10] I still think it’s ridiculous,
I just don't see how the notion is "ridiculous", nor do I see how simply raising the question should warrant such a strong reaction. Let's see, we have a player who is (as you note) *ahead* of the all time hits leader, and at age 35 (not age 25), who just reached some milestone (albeit an overblown one). It is soooo unreasonable to say, jeez, can Jeter break the all-time record?
I think not. No more so than those who speculated about McGwire doing it (he looked like a good bet until injuries did him in) or Bonds (who looked like a long-shot until he suddenly discovered how to hit 70 Hrs a year and played at possibly his highest level at like age 39).
You're correct: 1. Jeter would have to play until he was 45, and play at a high level. And you 2. speculate that personal accolades do not mean that much. And 3. you suggest--reasonably--that a position change would be necessary.
But NONE of these propositions are outlandish. 1. is a given in any case, and 2. is unprovable. 3. makes sense from a historical perspective, but Jeter has already beat history by playing at this level at his age at his position; and moreover, that he would not switch positions or play part-time is only supposition, based on 2.
Do I think Jeter will break the record. No, I think there is very little chance. I figure he ends up around 3500. But I do not think the premise is "ridiculous".
[9] Sometimes, I think being a contrarian becomes a kind of cliche.
Did you mean this ironically?
; )
[10 ] "the same people are going to be watching day in and day out; it’s not like a national broadcast where you’re trying to also bring in the casual viewer. "
excellent point, and even though the YES producers are obviously aware of this, they failed to freshen their coverage. But again, it didn't bother me that much. I don't hang on Kay's ever yword. Not that I dislike him, but I can't listen to anyone for an entire game.
I checked out sportsline today to see another article about Prince Fielder's celebration. I have come up with an easy way to prevent further celebrations:
Don't give up walk off home runs to Prince Fielder. Problem solved.
[16] That celebration, I thought was awesome. Hilarious and fun.
[13] We agree to disagree, then. I don't see Rose's record being broken because I don't believe any of them will be motivated to play well into their 40s. If I'm proven wrong, then so be it. We have this written and archived and I will cook my crow on a barbecue and lather it in ketchup.
[15] I understand the milder reaction. It strikes a nerve with me because I was in it and was a colleague, and I expect more from that group than what I was given. In a way, it's nice to look at this as a fan now, as opposed to having to suppress that side of me when I was an editor/reporter.
[16]
I [heart] you.
[16] I'm all about that celebration because a) it was hilarious, and things that are hilarious are good and b) the minute I saw it I knew it would manage to infuriate the vast majority of baseball writers over the age of 50 (and Bob Costas).
My only issue with it is, your team is in the midst of a massive collapse a year after making the playoffs and you're going nowhere fast...lets not get too pleased with ourselves here.
Is the coverage too much? Definitely. Should it be more understated and less hype? Absolutely. We must remember though that we are at the high end of Yankee fans as far as how much attention we payto them. We watch and folow every day every move. We read at least 4-5 blogs a day (several times a day) and yes even some Sox blogs (Soxaholix and Jose Melendez Keys to the Game are funny as hell). We follow the banter every game. Yet the average and low-end Yankee fan may not have thought the coverage was too much, they don't watch every day. Certainly the majority of baseball fans around the country who don't watch YES probably got the right amount of coverage. YES feels they need to hype this up as much as possible and it is only going to get worse as 3000 and other more significant achievements happen. It doesn't help that they are basically owned by the team. To them this is History, this is why they exist, and this is how they think they can get their ratings to spike, but we know this is not something important enough that they will teach it in school. It is all a matter of personal perception. Personally I fast forwarded after the 3rd time they showed all his major hits...thank God for the DVR. I agree that the coverage was over the top. I don't like it but I can see why they do it (You are right that they could be more original), but I certainly don't blame or hold it against Jeter.
[17] Will, I think perhaps that you do not see where we disagree.
I actually agree with you that Rose's record will not be broken by Jeter. I actually agree that Jeter is not likely to play into his forties, or to switch positions to do so, etc. We do not have to agree to disagree on this. We are in agreement.
Moreover, I agree with your general characterization of the coverage as overblown and tiresome.
I disagree with your characterization of the proposition---simply raising the question: can Jeter break the record--- as "ridiculous" (i.e., absurd, laughable, worthy of derision or ridicule). I also disagreed with the hypothetical comparisons (Ichiro playing until fifty or A-Rod averaging 250 hits for several consecutive years are in no way within the same realm of possibility as Jeter playing at a high level until he's 43) that you used to discredit the question. Finally, I disagree that raising this question at this particular moment (when Jeter had just achieved a hits milestone) constituted over-the-top coverage.
Finally, in no way do I wish for you to eat crow, because I would have to share in that meal, since (as noted) I agree with you that I do nopt think the record will fall.
Most hits after the age of 35:
http://bbref.com/pi/shareit/ESFnp
[22] Interesting!
Pete Rose, 1494 H, 1977-1986
Sam Rice, 1347 H, 1926-1934
So, historically only a couple of players have ever piled up enough hits after age 35 such that, if they started with around 2700+ hits, they would have a shot at the all-time hits record. And one of them was Pete Rose, the guy who broke the all-time hits record.
So, to break the hits record, you would need to have about as many hist as Rose at age 35 (poor Sam Rice was already 29 when his career got started for real), and then do about what Rose did after age 35.
Hm. I think there has only been about one player since Rose even to be in such a position at age 35.
[21] We disagree in the "ridiculous" premise. I recognize and accept your points as to why you don't believe that. ... Everything else, we're solid.
[22] I love any list that still manages to include Rabbit Maranville.
The coverage was tedious & repetitive, but not sure I could do any better.
[16] Brilliant.
I don't have a problem with Fielder's/Brewer's celebration. What I dislike is guys standing there at home admiring their home runs -- especially when, oops, it turns out to have stayed in the park and you at best wind up with a single.
Now if you'll excuse me, the damn kids are on the lawn again.
[25] If they stand there and watch a ball that doesn't leave, they're a fool. If a hitter his a ball a thousand miles, well, then, the pitcher should have thrown a better pitch, now shouldn't he?
[16] Awesome.
Fielder and the Brewers' celebration was both inspired and brilliant.
Someone ought to tell everyone who's wasted their time and energy writing about how "bad" it was should remove the broom stick and get on with their lives.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have a bunch of crabby writers waving broomsticks approaching me. I believe I'll tell those guttersnipes to get off the Internet.
My problem with HR celebrations such as Fielder's is that they cross into poor sportsmanship. I would like to think that pro athletes can also be good sportsmen. Otherwise, I guess I don't care all that much.
[26] I just want the hitter to run. And I hate pitchers who throw at the next guy because previously he threw a bad pitch to the first guy.
[28] Just wondering - why was the Brewers' celebration poor sportsmanship?
[16] So simple, isn't it? You should've seen Bill Ripken's (who? exactly) expression when they were first discussing the Fielder "incident" on the MLB Network.
[30] Supposedly it shows up the other team. FWIW, in little league, a batter does something like that (basically does anything else other than run the bases after a HR), they get called out for unsportsmanlike conduct. Now I don't agree with it, but that's just the way it is.
[31] well leave it to a Ripken to lead the league in smug
Oh, those silly fun lovin' Brewers with the wacky choreographed celebration (knee slap).
They should do a variety show, coz the baseball thing clearly isn't working.
Ah, whatever, why be a stick in the mud about it? Screw going about yer business like a professional. Bring on the dancing poodles!
[31] Gotcha. What it boils down to is: "you can't celebrate what you did, because the person who you beat might feel really, really bad as a result, and you should respect their feelings". When you're dealing with kids, I think that's a perfectly fine attitude to take. Kids are still learning about dealing with what it feels like to lose, in addition to just dealing with feelings in general. Why make it harder on them?
But the Giants are professionals. And (for the most part) adults (I guess we can call Bumgarner an adult even though he's not legally able to drink in the US yet). Adults are able (we hope) to deal with such things, whereas kids may not.
That's why I wanted to know why monkeypants thought it was poor sportsmanship. I'm betting he has a better reason than "the poor pitcher can't deal with it".
I just managed to snag a good seat (under face value) for tonight's game (Main Section 214B row 10). Go Jeter!
[30] [31] etc.
Such things as sportsmanship are relative to cultural (i.e. baseball culture in this case) norms, but yes, choreographed celebrations are construed as, possibly, showing up the other team. In most sports (though admittedly not baseball), after the game the opposing teams shake hands or some such, invoking the notion that you respect your opponent and win or lose you congratulate him on a hard fought affair, which him luck, etc. Most sports (admittedly not baseball) have penalties for and rules against unsportsmanlike behavior. This is probably for two reasons: 1] because sportsmanship is considered "good" and worth promoting, and 2] for practical reasons. That is, since sports are inherently competitive, and pro sports represent competition at the highest levels, one might suspect that unchecked poor sportsmanship could ratchet up emotions and tensions, leading to things like fights or fastballs in the ear or the like.
So, returning to the Brewers' choreographed celebration (vel sim.): it is not a stretch that such a celebration could be taken as a taunt or provocation or "dissing" of the opponent or "rubbing it in", that is to say, unsportsmanlike behavior.
Now, cultural norms can and do change. Maybe in the future every player will style after a HR, every pitcher will gesticulate wildly after a strike out, etc. Then the terms or parameters of what is considered good and bad sportsmanship will change.
[34] it's an old fashioned notion, and probably naive to think this, but shouldn't professional athletes conduct themselves like role models for kids?
If it's ok for the Brewers to celebrate like that, then aren't they showing kids that's the thing to do?
I don't want to judge the Brewers for doing what they did, but I certainly wouldn't want it done to my team, or to my son if he was the pitcher.
If my kids were involved in a celebration like that I'd try to make them see it from their opponents perspective, certainly from the pitcher's perspective. I think the Brewers crossed the line between having fun, and showing up their opponent. It was distastefully excessive in my opinion
[34] I hope my answer at [36] can be considered better than the "because the pitcher can't deal with it."
I do sometimes wonder, though--should we as a society be satisfied to promote the minimum? Shouldn't we desire to promote "good" things and to discourage "bad" things even without necessarily outlawing every bad behavior?
I would think that most of us consider showing respect to your opponent, even when you have defeated him, a good thing. If I teach my kids not to taunt their friends when they win at checkers or whatever, it's not solely because my kids little friends can't handle it. It's because I want my kids to internalize respect for their opponent as a value and to continue to behave in like manner as a result.
Thus, in pro sports, I don't necessarily want to see a player banned or otherwise punished severely because he posed after hitting a HR or some similar behavior. At the same time, I would hope that pro athletes would choose NOT to adopt such actions, and I do not mind that individuals (including stick-in-the-mud sportswriters) are sometimes put off by what they see as unsportsmanlike activities.
[37] You said it more succinctly.
I don't have a TV and haven't made it out to a bar for any recent games, but I read several paper's yankees coverage every day and read basically every post and comment on bronxbanter and I listen to most games on the radio and follow on gameday - so I wouldn't characterize myself as a casual fan. I know this is probably unusual (though I meet other people like me pretty often), but I've been pleased at the appropriate level of attention paid to Jeter, in my opinion, in these media.
I'm pretty sure 99% of the complaints on the banter about Jeter coverage have been on TV coverage, mostly YES.
As a consequence, the only thing I've actually gotten tired of are all the complaints about the coverage since it's really only segment of the media (though an important one) that has this problem.
It's just another reason that I am so grateful that professional blogs like the bronx banter and Lohud exist as compliments to the print media. Now can we stop talking about that old dinosaur: TV?
[22] Diane, very cool link. Enjoy the game!
[36] I should amend my statement. According to the MLB Rules 9.01 (d) Each umpire has authority to disqualify any player, coach, manager or substitute for objecting to decisions or for unsportsmanlike conduct or language, and to eject such disqualified person from the playing field. If an umpire disqualifies a player while a play is in progress, the disqualification shall not take effect until no further action is possible in that play.
So, baseball does have rules/penalties for unsportsmanlike behavior, though this of course refers to behavior during the game. Still, there is the notion that sportsmanship (however defined) is good, while unsportsmanlike behavior is bad and discouraged.
[39] I prefer the way you put it because you explained that it's about respect.
If a pitcher struck out Prince Fielder with the bases loaded, and the game on the line, and the opposing team suddenly broke into a Rockettes style kickline on the mound, would he feel disrespected? I think so. Would he like it? I think not.
GO JETER!!! GO ANDY!!! GO YANKS!!! (and Texas!)
Jeter SS
Swisher RF
Teixeira 1B
Rodriguez 3B
Matsui DH
Posada C
Cano 2B
Cabrera LF
Gardner CF
[36] [37] [38] Thank you both for your very-well reasoned responses. On the whole, I tend to agree with you, particularly about what I want my kids to learn and internalize, especially respect for their opponents.
Where I guess we differ is that, if I was the one who gave up that home run to Fielder, I would have laughed at the creativity of the Brewers' celebration. They beat me, good for them for celebrating it. If anything, I might consider that as flattering - what other pitcher can say he gave up a game-winning HR to Fielder and got that as a response? If they cared enough to celebrate it, they must have thought getting the HR off me was something pretty special. If it was my kid who did, I would hope that he or she would react in the same way.
I don't think we should encourage little leaguers to celebrate in that way, for the reasons I gave above - and because they may be more likely to turn and point and actually taunt the hitter or the pitcher - but I have no issues with big leaguers doing it. After all, there are certain things its OK for adults to do that its not OK for kids to do.
And sadly, no, I don't think we should hold professional athletes out as role models, for anyone. It would be nice, but to me, its just not practical I feel a role model should be someone you really know - and unless you know a pro athlete personally, there's no way to really know them. Maybe never has been.
I would say that they can be an excellent starting point for a discussion about the "right" kind of values to uphold.
I don't see why it's okay for a player to throw his helmet way in the air, jump onto the plate and then all his teammates are hopping around like four-year olds, but it's not okay to plan a more organized childish display. A celebration is a celebration - as long as they're not directing it at the opposing pitcher or team, pointing or something, it shouldn't be a problem.
Btw I am not appalled by the coverage of Jeter getting the team record, but a little annoyed at the (typical Yankees) pomp and circumstance and the repetition. Mainly, I'm surprised anyone who's not a Yankee fan cares. I barely care myself. Team records aren't typically that big of a deal, and since no-one on the Yankees has a particularly monstrous hits record, this one is even less of a big deal.
It's a nice thing for Yankee fans, and worth recognizing in that sense, I just don't see much historical significance outside of that.
[46] The main difference is in the perceived spontaneity. If a player reacts spontaneously with joy at a game winning hit (for example) he is usually given a pass. It is more believable that his reaction is uncontrolled, a response to the moment, and thus less likely to be directed at the opposing team.
If the celebration is choreographed, then one suspects that it is not spontaneous and thus more likely to aimed (in part) at embarrassing, taunting, or showing up the other team.
It is impossible to know what is written in the hearts of men, so we'll never know for sure if Fielder and friends (for example) wanted to "rub it in" the opposing team. But I can understand why observers might take exception to the choreography.
[45] Thanks for the response.
Where I guess we differ is that, if I was the one who gave up that home run to Fielder, I would have laughed at the creativity of the Brewers’ celebration.
To be honest, you are probably a much bigger man than me. I have a feeling I would be the guy who stuck a pitch in his ear hole the next time round, or at least I'd be tempted, Then a again, Prince is a pretty big dude, and I'm not sure I'd want to cross him.
; )
[50] And sadly, no, I don’t think we should hold professional athletes out as role models, for anyone.
But perhaps more importantly: while we shouldn't hold them out as role models, as public figures they are already role models, whether they (or we) like it or not.
[50] grrrr...that is in response to [45].
Now I'm a major loser for posting like 50 times in a row.
[48] Interesting theory but I don't buy it. A lack of spontaneity doesn't suggest that it's directed at the other team or pitcher. That's a bit of a leap, as would be the converse.
[45] I hear ya, Shaun, but re: the role model thing, I don't think athletes should be held up as role models for life (we know very little about how athletes live), but for how the game is played.
I wouldn't point to the Brewers celebration and say to my kids, that's how you play the game, quite the opposite.
[52] That is true, but...
Choreographed celebration implies and elaborate celebration, and the very elaborate nature of a celebration can be taken as a lack of consideration for the opponent (at best) or even an effort to humiliate him (at worst).
You are correct that a spontaneous celebration might be just as big or elaborate (good example of everyone piling on at home plate, as is usually the case), but the opponent is more likely to give the victors a pass if such a celebration appears unplanned--it will be taken as a visceral, emotional reaction, fundamentally un-thought-out and thus not likely to be tainted with directed malice ("they were just captured by the moment, they didn't know what they were doing").
The choreographed celebration is likely to evoke a different response ("they should KNOW better than to show up their opponents like that...even if they didn't mean anything by it, it's still inconsiderate/disrespectful/not right/etc").
==
Interestingly, I find the helmet-throw-home-plate-pile off-putting because it is clear that this has become a sort of choreographed deal. Surely it is not spontaneous when the runner prepares to toss his helmet at third base and everyone is gathered around the plate in anticipation.
[52] Interesting debate, but if you watch the footage carefully there is very little difference between what the Brewers did and what the Yankees do after every sayonara homer or hit. In fact, the Yankee celebrations are much more intense and self-indulgent. The Brewers had a big celebration at home plate. That's it. It did not even look very choreographed. You really have to use your imagination to get the bowling pin allusion. No big deal, and whoever is bitching about it has another problem. (i.e. they lost).
Anyone got a link to the video of the Fielder/Brewers celebration?
In all this Jeter-watching, don't forget about A-Rod! He has a chance for 30 HRs and a respectable year even by his standards. Whoo-hooo!
[56] I'm not up to snuff on pasting URLs with WordPress (sorry), but there's an article about it on CBS sports.com with a link in the text.
[54] the very elaborate nature of a celebration can be taken as a lack of consideration for the opponent
I agree with this part, but just cause it can be taken that way doesn't mean it should.
And again, there have been enough instances where people take spontaneous celebration personally, like Aubrey Huff, who countered with a choreographed celebration which undoubtedly targeted the opposing pitcher.
I'm really just saying those that think Fielder's antics are showing up the other team are incorrect. If he was deliberately showing them up then I could understand the criticism, but as I've mentioned, I personally don't see it as any worse as the "spontaneous" walk-off celebrations a la the Yankees' helmet throw, little kids dance, pie in the face.