Billy Packer out at CBS?

[BCGroup]

According to the Miami Herald, yes:

"College basketball commentator Billy Packer, who has announced 34 consecutive Final Fours on network television and created a few controversies along the way, will not be returning to CBS for a 28th season, The Miami Herald has learned.CBS has decided to replace Packer, 68, with studio analyst Clark Kellogg on its lead announcing team."

http://www.miamiherald.com/626/story/603901.html

[Bob Green]

That is great news! Now if we can just get ESPN/ABC to ditch Vitale.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

That is great news! Now if we can just get ESPN/ABC to ditch Vitale.

Did you see the Sports Center "highlight" of Vitale sitting next to the Red Sox dougout and being dissed by a player as he walked by? The snide comment by the "reader" said "He (the player) must not be a Duke fan".

[gw67]

I'm definitely a contrarian regarding Packer. I've liked him from the old days when he just did ACC games. He is getting up in age and is, perhaps, a little too scerbic for many but to replace him with a lightweight like Kellogg is pathetic in my view. A few years ago when Kellogg did some color I suggested to my wife to listen to him because he always had a saying or two that he would try to get in to the game whether the timing was right or not. As I recall, her view was the he added little or nothing to the telecast, his grammar was poor and his little sayings were inane. She, of course, feels the same way about that one-eyed guy who shouts (Vitale). For all those who wanted Packer gone, this is a case of getting what you wished for and, IMO, it is definitely not an improvement.

gw67

[Olympic Fan]

I also liked Packer in the old days ... back when he enjoyed what he was doing. He brought real insight to his job and unlike 90 percent of the color analysts out there, he wasn't afraid to be negative when it was called for.

Over the last 10 years, I've come to dislike him intensely because it seems to be that he's come to hate his job and college basketball. He's gone from being an honest, sometimes critical analyst to being a negative curmudgeon.

I happen to love Dick Vitale ... because of his enthusiasm for the game, which has never wavered. I understand that it can get on some people's nerves and I also admit that he's reluctant to ever say anything negative, even when called for.

But give me a choice between a commentator who is always too negative and one who is always too positive and I'll go with the latter all the time.

PS I also agree about Kellog, he's an ill-informed lightweight. He was worse as a game analyst than he is in the studio. I can recall watching him do the UNC-Michigan game from Hawaii early in the 1992-93 season and after one particularly impressive Chris Webber rebound, he said, "He looked like a monkey climbing a tree to get a cocoanut!"

My friends and I spent the rest of the game debating the reaction if Packer or Vitale had used those words.

[GopherBlue]

If this is true, I am not disappointed.

I have always found Packer to be a distraction from the game - similar to Vitale, but in more of a baneful way. True, he is a grumpy old man, and he very rarely finds something positive or constructive to say. But more annoying for me is the fact that Packer is always right - whether he is correct or not. That is to say, Packer sees an occurrence and makes a judgment. He then stops at nothing to convince the viewer that he is correct - even when replay clearly shows ambiguous or contrary viewpoint. I don't want an announcer to tell me what I see and what I should think about it.

[quickgtp]

Thank you CBS! Now if ESPN would rid of Mike Patrick. You have to feel bad for Len Elmore because he constantly has to correct Patrick!

[Bluedog]

Thank you CBS! Now if ESPN would rid of Mike Patrick. You have to feel bad for Len Elmore because he constantly has to correct Patrick!

Except when Patrick had to correct Elmore on the over and back rule! That petty argument went far too long...

[hurleyfor3]

Yeah, I'm contrarian on Packer too -- I kinda like him. I'm not the first person to notice this, but every fanbase hates him equally, and he doesn't seem to favor any specific program or coach, except perhaps the ACC as a whole due to his experience. Also, never forget that he and Nantz stopped just short of outright rooting for us in the 1991 UNLV game.

[BenDuke03]

I've hated Packer for so long. I was a student when he had that incident with a female student at Cameron and that didn't help my opinion of him. But Clark Kellogg? Get Gus Johnson on the Final Four already!

Now if we can just do something about Jim Nantz...

[roywhite]

One good thing about Packer being off CBS---we won't have to listen to his annual (at least) mentions of the 8-points-17 seconds-UNC-lucky bank shot-win over Duke in 1974.

One of my goals in life is to outlive common memory of that game.

[lmb]

I'm glad he's gone but I wouldn't be surprised to see him resurface at ESPN. That kind of trading happens all the time in broadcast sports. It isn't like he retired. CBS didn't renew his contract.

[BlueintheFace]

YEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh my God, there are just so many people to thank. Umm, of course CBS. Thank you, Thank you, Thank you. You guys may have taken your time but the important thing is that you finally got there. Seth Davis, Clark Kellogg, Jimmy Dykes, ...oh god, the music is starting... umm, of course Jim Nantz for surreptitiously making Packer look like a fool on national television the last few years... okay, okay Im going. Finally, I have to Thank Billy Packer. Billy, you dug yourself this beautiful beautiful grave with your constant antagonism and negative color commentary. From the time when you called Allen Iverson a tough monkey, to the sexist comments at Duke, to your constant belittlement of mid-majors... THANK YOU BILLY. You Deserve this more than any other announcer. This is the best day of my life. Wooo!!

[Indoor66]

This is the best day of my life. Wooo!!

Goodness, you are easy to please!

[sagegrouse]

You know, I wonder if the deciding factor for the suits at CBS was Packer's announcement that "this game is over," when KU went up 40-12 over UNC in the FF. I mean, that's as close to unforgivable as it gets in the TV business.

sagegrouse

[BlueintheFace]

Goodness, you are easy to please!

Well, you know... it's the summer and that was a bit of a joke. The actual happiest day in my life was probably April 6, 1992.

[barjwr]

I guess Billy finally fagged out, as he famously put it.

I hope for someone other than Kellogg as well, and I think the best possibility from within the roster that routinely gets checks from the CBS coffers would be Bill Raftery. As someone posted earlier, I'd rather have someone who is more generally positive (check) and someone who can actually contribute analysis from time to time (check). I've always thought of him as a saner, more analytical Vitale.

[tecumseh]

If this is true, I am not disappointed.

I have always found Packer to be a distraction from the game - similar to Vitale, but in more of a baneful way. True, he is a grumpy old man, and he very rarely finds something positive or constructive to say. But more annoying for me is the fact that Packer is always right - whether he is correct or not. That is to say, Packer sees an occurrence and makes a judgment. He then stops at nothing to convince the viewer that he is correct - even when replay clearly shows ambiguous or contrary viewpoint. I don't want an announcer to tell me what I see and what I should think about it.

My sentiments exactly, well said. If you watched the game again on Tivo or happened to know one of the teams real well you knew much of what he insisted upon was wrong.

[Classof06]

I also liked Packer in the old days ... back when he enjoyed what he was doing. He brought real insight to his job and unlike 90 percent of the color analysts out there, he wasn't afraid to be negative when it was called for.

Over the last 10 years, I've come to dislike him intensely because it seems to be that he's come to hate his job and college basketball. He's gone from being an honest, sometimes critical analyst to being a negative curmudgeon.

I happen to love Dick Vitale ... because of his enthusiasm for the game, which has never wavered. I understand that it can get on some people's nerves and I also admit that he's reluctant to ever say anything negative, even when called for.

But give me a choice between a commentator who is always too negative and one who is always too positive and I'll go with the latter all the time.

PS I also agree about Kellog, he's an ill-informed lightweight. He was worse as a game analyst than he is in the studio. I can recall watching him do the UNC-Michigan game from Hawaii early in the 1992-93 season and after one particularly impressive Chris Webber rebound, he said, "He looked like a monkey climbing a tree to get a cocoanut!"

My friends and I spent the rest of the game debating the reaction if Packer or Vitale had used those words.

Packer has infact used that language:

"In 2000, Packer bristled when asked to identify himself by two female students checking credentials before a game at Duke. One of the students, Jen Feinberg, quoted Packer as saying: 'You need to get a life. Since when do we let women control who gets into a men's basketball game? Why don't you go find a women's game to let people into?'

Packer later e-mailed an apology to the women.

Four years earlier, he apologized on the air after he was criticized for referring to then-Georgetown guard Allen Iverson as a 'tough little monkey.'"


I think Clark Kellogg will be an excellent analyst. However he called a game in 1992 (16 years ago!) shouldn't be the basis of how we judge him for the rest of his career. Kellogg clearly knows the game inside-out and I'm looking forward to seeing him replace Packer, I think he'll be great. And he's a native Clevelander

[bradjenk]

I also was a Packer fan of sorts. I think it's a compliment when fans from all schools think a guy hates their team. Aren't those always the best refs? Also I don't think it's valid to judge an analyst based on how positive/negative they are. As Lt. Caffey (Tom Cruise) said "I want the truth." If an official blew a call I want to know it. If a player on my team made a dumb play I want to know it. That's not negative, it's honest. Brad Daugherty sure seemed like a great guy when he was a commentator but I never learned a single thing about the game he was announcing.
With that said I think there are some very legit criticisms of Packer. For one, off the air particularly he seems to be pretty much of a cocky egotistical jerk. Also, he has the habit of making an observation early in a game and then spends most of the rest of the game blurting out supporting evidence even if it's questionable. Finally, there's no question that he let the "Duke gets the calls" stuff fester at the 2001 FF and though he didn't say it was true, he sure didn't say it wasn't.
In the Packer vs. Vitale contest I see it this way. Off the court is no contest. Vitale has incredible enthusiasm for the game and life itself with all the charity work he does. Packer is a notorious reclusive tightwad. However, I would much rather watch Packer broadcast a game. Aside from the honesty (even if it's his version of it), Packer calls the game he's watching, he only drifts to other subjects occasionally. Vitale misses half of every game giving us some irrelevant list like his top 5 left handed hitting outfielders. Even when Packer is calling an ACC game between 2 lower league teams, he still gives the same effort as if it were Duke-UNC. I respect that even if I think he's a jerk.