Media: NCAA Announcers: Love 'em or Hate 'em, or not

[devildownunder]

Separate thread for this.

The complaints about Kellogg over on the in-game thread get under my skin because he's a guy who spends A LOT of time praising Duke and Coach K. Accusing every announcer who ever says anything not complimentary about Duke of being a hater feeds into the "spoiled, whiny" stereotype of the Duke fanbase and, frankly, makes this board a very unpleasant place to be if, like me, you have a love of all college basketball that comprises your affection for duke.

Kellogg has done several Duke games this year. In most of them, Ryan Kelly has made a brief appearance. And during those brief appearances (tonight excepted) Kellogg has actually made a point of talking up Ryan's skills and mentioning how much of a contributor he's going to be at some point -- this for a guy who averages less than 7 minutes a game. Does that sound like a hater? CK has praised Duke's size, he has praised Duke's versatility as well. He has all kinds of positive thoughts about the team and in tonight's game he was even going on about Scheyer's skills with the ball in his hand.

Tonight, the complaints re: Kellogg seemed to centre on 1) a belief that he is a Big Ten homer and 2) a notion that he's feeding a "Duke gets all the calls" meme. We can pick apart every line he said to try to prove or debunk those ideas but I'll just say that I never get the feeling listening to him that he loves or hates Duke, only that he is a guy who appreciates good play when he sees it, on either side of a game, and says so -- but also that he is a guy doing a national broadcast.

One of the things passionate fans tend to do is see everything their team's way. They are used to hearing their local announcers do the same thing. So when they hear a national team calling it from a balanced perspective, to them that sounds anti-their team because they're not used to hearing that. During my years in Cleveland, I would see this every season during the Indians' playoff run as non-baseball fans who were just desperate to see Cleveland win anything continuously slammed the national announcers, finding an anti-cleveland bias in nearly every word they spoke. The real problem was that those guys, unlike local announcer Tom Hamilton, weren't paid by the Cleveland Indians, so didn't always see everything Cleveland's way. That takes some time to get used to if you're new to it.

I don't blame the win-starved fans of Cleveland for behaving that way. The Indians hadn't been winners in 40 years and neither has anyone else in that town. They needed some time to figure out that when you're on the national stage, the announcer isn't there to prop up your team. As a fanbase, we Duke followers don't have that excuse. Duke is a blue blood. The Blue Devils are contenders every single year and our team spends more time in the national spotlight than anybody's. So I would expect any of us to realize that when Kellogg says JaJuan Johnson does a great job running the floor, that's not code for "and those sorry bums at Duke could never possibly stay with him if it weren't for the refs handicapping Purdue".

Let's act like we've been there before. Because we have. This forum will be a better, more enjoyable, more respectable place if we do.

[borodevil16]

Kelloggs terrible

[Tappan Zee Devil]

Kelloggs terrible

Care to elaborate?

[Huh?]

Separate thread for this.

The complaints about Kellogg over on the in-game thread get under my skin because he's a guy who spends A LOT of time praising Duke and Coach K. Accusing every announcer who ever says anything not complimentary about Duke of being a hater feeds into the "spoiled, whiny" stereotype of the Duke fanbase and, frankly, makes this board a very unpleasant place to be if, like me, you have a love of all college basketball that comprises your affection for duke.

Kellogg has done several Duke games this year. In most of them, Ryan Kelly has made a brief appearance. And during those brief appearances (tonight excepted) Kellogg has actually made a point of talking up Ryan's skills and mentioning how much of a contributor he's going to be at some point -- this for a guy who averages less than 7 minutes a game. Does that sound like a hater? CK has praised Duke's size, he has praised Duke's versatility as well. He has all kinds of positive thoughts about the team and in tonight's game he was even going on about Scheyer's skills with the ball in his hand.

Tonight, the complaints re: Kellogg seemed to centre on 1) a belief that he is a Big Ten homer and 2) a notion that he's feeding a "Duke gets all the calls" meme. We can pick apart every line he said to try to prove or debunk those ideas but I'll just say that I never get the feeling listening to him that he loves or hates Duke, only that he is a guy who appreciates good play when he sees it, on either side of a game, and says so -- but also that he is a guy doing a national broadcast.

One of the things passionate fans tend to do is see everything their team's way. They are used to hearing their local announcers do the same thing. So when they hear a national team calling it from a balanced perspective, to them that sounds anti-their team because they're not used to hearing that. During my years in Cleveland, I would see this every season during the Indians' playoff run as non-baseball fans who were just desperate to see Cleveland win anything continuously slammed the national announcers, finding an anti-cleveland bias in nearly every word they spoke. The real problem was that those guys, unlike local announcer Tom Hamilton, weren't paid by the Cleveland Indians, so didn't always see everything Cleveland's way. That takes some time to get used to if you're new to it.

I don't blame the win-starved fans of Cleveland for behaving that way. The Indians hadn't been winners in 40 years and neither has anyone else in that town. They needed some time to figure out that when you're on the national stage, the announcer isn't there to prop up your team. As a fanbase, we Duke followers don't have that excuse. Duke is a blue blood. The Blue Devils are contenders every single year and our team spends more time in the national spotlight than anybody's. So I would expect any of us to realize that when Kellogg says JaJuan Johnson does a great job running the floor, that's not code for "and those sorry bums at Duke could never possibly stay with him if it weren't for the refs handicapping Purdue".

Let's act like we've been there before. Because we have. This forum will be a better, more enjoyable, more respectable place if we do.

Agreed, I like Kellogg. He is a Big 10 homer, but he always mentions fouls when he is calling a game, no matter what team(great pick Z).
The only thing I know about the Indians is that Charlie Sheen played for them so I'll take you're word for it...let's just be glad Hubert Davis wasn't calling the game.

[GoingFor#5]

I don't particularly like him, but I didn't notice the bias a lot of the forum posters were harping on today. I usually notice an anti-Duke bias when its Jay Bilas talking.

[Vincetaylor]

Clark Kellogg is not terrible. That's ridiculous. I didn't catch any anti-Duke sentiment from him at all tonight. If Len Elmore was doing the game, it would be a different story.

[bulldog44]

Funny, I was going to start a thread regarding Clark as well however for pretty much exact opposite reasons to yours. I tell you what, if you recorded the game, I would like for you to go back and do a comparison on the thing that REALLY irked me about him. Check the amount of times he said anything regarding Purdue getting away with a call/foul/travel/carry/etc... and the amount of times he did so with Duke. Granted the Zoubek pick and the goaltend by Miles should have/could have been made, but from the get go, the Smith charge should not have been a charge and many other "missed" calls from the fault of Purdue, were not made. The reason this incenses me so is , yes we did get away with a few, but if only the Duke side is pointed out, it gives ammo to the "Duke gets all the calls" crowd. I hate to see us get away with blatant things, I really do, but I hate just as much for a Hawkeye to be placed on us, and Helen Keller on the opposing team. 9f 9f 9f

[roywhite]

My take on Kellogg is that he's okay, but really not up to the job of being the lead analyst on the #1 announcing team. Doesn't give the average fan much additional insight.

[borodevil16]

Just seemed tonight he was a lot more one sided with bringing all the "missed" calls to the viewers attention. I cant even imagine how many fouls could have been called on Purdue especially johnson but these were never mentioned. Always a Duke player doing something wrong or dirty

[CoachJ10]

I am not sure why you are defending Mr. Kellogg. Clark is a poor announcer, plain and simple. He is as biased as they come. Any game you listen to...you can tell who he is cheering for (generally a Big 10 team). He really brings nothing to the table in terms of educating or enlightening the viewer.

[mgtr]

I think Kellogg is OK, and I will take 50 Kelloggs over one Elmore any day of the week!

[Huh?]

I really just want to listen to Gus Johnson for every game, forever.

[diveonthefloor]

I don't think Kellogg is untalented...

I just can't listen to him so I mute the sound on any game he is announcing.

It's his "always in your face" tone of voice that drives me nuts. Sorta like Dickie V except with an anxious tone rather than a jubilant tone. Just grates on my nerves so I mute it.

[Highlander]

I don't think I heard Kellog say a single time that Purdue "got away with one there." However, every Duke play that was questionable was a miss by the referees. Case in point:

In the first half Nolan gets called for a charge that was a close call. Instead of a replay, we get to see Purdue's breakaway dunk 3 times. Miles fouls a 3 point shooter. Again, no replay. But when Zoubs moves on a screen, Thomas draws a questionable charge, or Plumlee touches the net on a shot, you can bet there will be a replay (and there was each time). On the replay, Kellog made a point to show how Duke either acted (Thomas) or got away with one (Zoubs, Plumlee). That annoyed me.

I didn't think the officiating was all that biased personally, but I did get tired of every questionable play that Duke got getting dissected by Kellog while Purdue's banging and hand checking went unnoticed.

[Kfan4Life]

Gus is the man.

[gumbomoop]

Due to rather frustrating circumstances, I was unable to see the first half of the Purdue game. [Apparently I was lucky....]

But on the 2 second-half calls that I recall CK saying the refs blew it - and in those 2 cases in Duke's favor - I thought he was correct: (1) the Z screen on the great KS drive - I thought it was clearly a moving pick, and Z still is prone to this [as are the MPs, and LT a bit]. Now, maybe CK should have said, every time he repeated this missed call, "But the refs are letting 'em play, and it's really rough out there, and Purdue sure seems to be getting away with an amazing number of hand-checks and body-bumps." He should have said that, yes. But Z set a moving screen. (2) the MP1 hand-in-net that - if that's the rule - should have been called interference.

[camion]

Was that Kellog? I tuned late and assumed it was Elmore.

[DevilHorns]

I usually don't travel down to the ESPN "conversation" portion of the post-game boxscore, but I did tonight just to see what the fans were saying. Many people on there were talking about how Duke won because of the calls. Not only Purdue fans but basketball fans in general. Did they just watch the same game I did?

Because Kellogg, CBS, whoever almost always make it a point to show a missed call or bad call that favors Duke we always get the perception of a team that gets all the calls. There were an incredible amount of missed calls, reach in defense throughout the whole game. I remember that key cut to the basket by Jon in the 2nd half that got us going. He got fouled at least 2 times on that drive. Sure the refs werent calling the tough D in general, and I understand that theres an expected amount of missed calls. But please, why not show a slow motion of that play, singling out how he's getting hacked? But instead, we get a slow motion highlight of shot interference with a grab of the net, and then 20 seconds dwelling on it instead of talking about the continuing game. Please. I realize by rule thats a bucket. But dont dwell on it. Think about this. Can you name me one play that the announcers dwelled on that was in favor of Duke? Exactly. You cant.

[moonpie23]

kellog is not "terrible", however, he DOES look for the crease to dig at duke...len elmore is just pathetic...

[_Gary]

Funny, I was going to start a thread regarding Clark as well however for pretty much exact opposite reasons to yours. I tell you what, if you recorded the game, I would like for you to go back and do a comparison on the thing that REALLY irked me about him. Check the amount of times he said anything regarding Purdue getting away with a call/foul/travel/carry/etc... and the amount of times he did so with Duke.

Bingo! Give this person a kewpie doll. That's where I'm at with Kellogg tonight. Yes, I think he basically called the game pretty well - BUT - he definitely overemphasized some of the calls where he thought Duke got the benefit and completely underemphasized the opposite situation when Purdue benefited. That's what ticked me off tonight, and Clark was guilty of it several times in both halves. Just a fact, my friend. Just a stone cold hard fact.