Sun Times says it’s time for the Schrif to move on

[southsider2k5]

21 minutes ago, Snopek said:

Being positive is fine, but there's a way to do it that feels authentic and not like you're being sold a defective product.

He's improved since last season, but until he can do this effectively it'll remain a rough broadcast.

Yeah, look no further than the difference between Hawk and Schiff in how the promote/d the team.  Hawk was positive AF, yet wasn't going to lie to you.

[Kyyle23]

12 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Yeah, look no further than the difference between Hawk and Schiff in how the promote/d the team.  Hawk was positive AF, yet wasn't going to lie to you.

lol, hawk wouldn’t lie.  He would just not say a goddamn word for an inning 😂

[southsider2k5]

1 minute ago, Kyyle23 said:

lol, hawk wouldn’t lie.  He would just not say a goddamn word for an inning 😂

Exactly. 

[T R U]

12 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Yeah, look no further than the difference between Hawk and Schiff in how the promote/d the team.  Hawk was positive AF, yet wasn't going to lie to you.

This post along with WestEddys about Schriffen bragging over a solo home run that brings a score to 7-1 are both excellent points on why this guy is so annoying.

You put off a lot of people when you are broadcasting to the fanbase like they are a bunch of idiots. 

[southsider2k5]

32 minutes ago, T R U said:

This post along with WestEddys about Schriffen bragging over a solo home run that brings a score to 7-1 are both excellent points on why this guy is so annoying.

You put off a lot of people when you are broadcasting to the fanbase like they are a bunch of idiots. 

Exactly.  I know you have a job to do, but don't insult my intelligence either.

[wegner]

39 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

lol, hawk wouldn’t lie.  He would just not say a goddamn word for an inning 😂

It would save my mute button alot of work if Beckham would follow this same rule.

[chitownsportsfan]

10 hours ago, nrockway said:

Amin is much worse than Schriff tbh... which hasn't really been a topic of discussion (why would the bulls be I guess). I can't stand the dude. He's OK at football. But imagine missing Neil Funk, which I do. His s%*# talk homerism was actually funny. That bit about Kwame Brown's tiny hands is pure gold. So what if he couldn't tell the difference between Carlos Boozer and Taj Gibson...it was endearing. Neil mediated a lot of Stacey King's absurdity now he has free reign to say whatever bozo nonsense. It's like if Steve Stone suddenly became a grifter. Adam is just like "yeah dude, promote your kyle korver hot sauce brand and podcast, i love that, i also don't know anything about the sport i'm commentating on".

IDK why they hired either one of these dudes. Benetti filling in for Bulls game was actually awesome. I didn't love his Sox tenure, but the guy is just a good announcer. I thought he was better with the Bulls. I think he's not so good at baseball because he has too much free time to tell his bad jokes.

Off topic but Sox season is over and boring anyways. I can't stand King and Amin belittling other teams and players and doing their giggle routine as the Bulls lose again on the way to another 38 win season. It is not professional or endearing. 

[reiks12]

Until those who kicked Benetti out are gone, this is what this organization deserves

[Kyyle23]

1 hour ago, T R U said:

This post along with WestEddys about Schriffen bragging over a solo home run that brings a score to 7-1 are both excellent points on why this guy is so annoying.

You put off a lot of people when you are broadcasting to the fanbase like they are a bunch of idiots. 

 

[T R U]

10 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

 

lol yes

[WestEddy]

3 hours ago, tray said:

What difference does it make to anyone who the play-by-play announcer is as long as he/she has a baseline of competence, which Schriff has?  Agrest nit picking  that Schriff is too positive?  That's a joke. Come on, being positive and entertaining viewers with more than just the call and stats is a major part of his job. Otherwise, the daily play-by-play grind with baseball talk and stats can get boring to viewers. Some viewers prefer a light hearted announcing style . Maybe a certain demographic group relates with an announcer like Schriff where others  don't. That's OK but so what?

Beckham in one broadcast tried to mock Schriff and hang him out to dry not knowing Gordo's walkup song, while Schriff continued on, unaware. After that went on for too long Schriff asked Gordon why he did that and Gordo had nothing to say and no apology. Gordon showed himself to be a jerk and I suspect doesn't like the guy. 

Tolerance of others who are different is something that is in short supply in our country. Maybe that pertains to some extent here. 

Being boring and going back to the well for the same tidbit about a player in every at-bat isn't a difference to be celebrated. The White Sox diverse employee pool is something I am very proud of my team for. That's one area I feel would be adequately considered if they were to move on from Schrif. 

[southsider2k5]

4 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

Being boring and going back to the well for the same tidbit about a player in every at-bat isn't a difference to be celebrated. The White Sox diverse employee pool is something I am very proud of my team for. That's one area I feel would be adequately considered if they were to move on from Schrif. 

Plenty of baseball announcers are boring.  That in itself isn't a bad thing.  Baseball is kind of a boring sport that requires a lot of time to fill.  I have called football and basketball games going back to the early 90s, and get what it takes to fill dead time better than most, fully realizing that almost all of a baseball game is dead time. It isn't easy to figure out compelling stories to fill the time between downs on during a high school football game, let alone between every pitch of every MLB game for an entire baseball season.

But I also realize that if you don't have the trust of your audience, you don't have an audience.  There is a trust factor you establish with each listener to where they are giving up their time and looking to you to provide not only the details of a sporting event, but also a compelling reason to stay with you specifically for it, and not any of the other choices they might have.

Hawk was who he was, but he was always honest.  Jason was also who he was, but was a damned hard worker who also had a unique sense of humor.  Neither one of them were willing to insult their audiences by telling them something that was obviously not true.  Hell go back through the history of Sox announcers and there are some doozies, but all were fair.  Could John figure this out?  I am sure he could, but he also seems to realize that being real is probably what got the guy before him "fired" he might not be willing to try, and that's a shame.

[Tnetennba]

3 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

And I would argue that the initial premise that he knows what he is doing, is wrong.

Yup. Lost me at baseline competence. 

[chitownsportsfan]

What's really crazy is that John's story about being a D1 pitche before blowing out his arm is almost surely, 100% made up. Nobody that would have been at that level would be so ignorant about basic baseball. Nobody has ever really pressed him on it. 

[WestEddy]

4 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Plenty of baseball announcers are boring.  That in itself isn't a bad thing.  Baseball is kind of a boring sport that requires a lot of time to fill.  I have called football and basketball games going back to the early 90s, and get what it takes to fill dead time better than most, fully realizing that almost all of a baseball game is dead time. It isn't easy to figure out compelling stories to fill the time between downs on during a high school football game, let alone between every pitch of every MLB game for an entire baseball season.

But I also realize that if you don't have the trust of your audience, you don't have an audience.  There is a trust factor you establish with each listener to where they are giving up their time and looking to you to provide not only the details of a sporting event, but also a compelling reason to stay with you specifically for it, and not any of the other choices they might have.

Hawk was who he was, but he was always honest.  Jason was also who he was, but was a damned hard worker who also had a unique sense of humor.  Neither one of them were willing to insult their audiences by telling them something that was obviously not true.  Hell go back through the history of Sox announcers and there are some doozies, but all were fair.  Could John figure this out?  I am sure he could, but he also seems to realize that being real is probably what got the guy before him "fired" he might not be willing to try, and that's a shame.

Benetti is special. He engaged Stone in ways that Hawk wouldn't, and Schrif doesn't seem to be able to. Stone is phoning it in, and maybe Schriffen has something to do with that. 

As you all know, I'll dig in and argue for the Sox employee I feel is being unfairly dragged, just because. And I kind of did that last year. I subscribed for this last full month, and while calling games for a god-awful, losing team in September must be the heaviest of lifts in the profession, Hawk & Wimpy had a banter that made the last weeks listenable. Schrif & Stone is like being driven to prison. 

I've tagged some commenters here, just because their insight is interesting. Stone is interesting, but I feel he needs to be prodded to a place where he's digging down and talking about the intricacies of the game. Benetti could do that. Schrif seems to be mostly limited to "two strikes, do you send the runner here?"

[WhiteSox2023]

11 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

Benetti is special. He engaged Stone in ways that Hawk wouldn't, and Schrif doesn't seem to be able to. Stone is phoning it in, and maybe Schriffen has something to do with that. 

As you all know, I'll dig in and argue for the Sox employee I feel is being unfairly dragged, just because. And I kind of did that last year. I subscribed for this last full month, and while calling games for a god-awful, losing team in September must be the heaviest of lifts in the profession, Hawk & Wimpy had a banter that made the last weeks listenable. Schrif & Stone is like being driven to prison. 

I've tagged some commenters here, just because their insight is interesting. Stone is interesting, but I feel he needs to be prodded to a place where he's digging down and talking about the intricacies of the game. Benetti could do that. Schrif seems to be mostly limited to "two strikes, do you send the runner here?"

Sox down by 5 runs.  Schriffen:  “Do you give him the 3-0 green light here?”

🤣

So true about Stone needing to be engaged and pushed to do his job by a good partner.  Otherwise, he will just coast.  Seems like Jerry has given him a job for life and he knows it.

Edited September 19 by WhiteSox2023

[T R U]

11 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

Benetti is special. He engaged Stone in ways that Hawk wouldn't, and Schrif doesn't seem to be able to. Stone is phoning it in, and maybe Schriffen has something to do with that. 

As you all know, I'll dig in and argue for the Sox employee I feel is being unfairly dragged, just because. And I kind of did that last year. I subscribed for this last full month, and while calling games for a god-awful, losing team in September must be the heaviest of lifts in the profession, Hawk & Wimpy had a banter that made the last weeks listenable. Schrif & Stone is like being driven to prison. 

I've tagged some commenters here, just because their insight is interesting. Stone is interesting, but I feel he needs to be prodded to a place where he's digging down and talking about the intricacies of the game. Benetti could do that. Schrif seems to be mostly limited to "two strikes, do you send the runner here?"

I like Stone, I think he has a wealth of baseball knowledge and I enjoy listening to him talk about baseball. He's definitely a grumpy old man at this point. I don't know what the point of the food in the booth spotlight is, but anytime that happens Steve pretty much says it looks like the worst thing ever and refuses to try it, quite the advertising if that's what they are going for.

I never liked Benetti, mainly because of how corny he was, but Schriffen just takes it to another level. Whether that be referencing Vargas' hand placement for months on end even after his streak cooled way off and he wasn't producing, calling plays like they are clutch moments in the playoffs during a game where the Sox were totally non competitive, the whole lady and the tramp bit (cringe), or when they were in Seattle talking about that space needle walk and Schriffen literally says "No chance, you couldn't get me to do that." and then about 10 seconds later "Alright guys, if you pay for me ill do it."

[WestEddy]

9 minutes ago, T R U said:

I like Stone, I think he has a wealth of baseball knowledge and I enjoy listening to him talk about baseball. He's definitely a grumpy old man at this point. I don't know what the point of the food in the booth spotlight is, but anytime that happens Steve pretty much says it looks like the worst thing ever and refuses to try it, quite the advertising if that's what they are going for.

I never liked Benetti, mainly because of how corny he was, but Schriffen just takes it to another level. Whether that be referencing Vargas' hand placement for months on end even after his streak cooled way off and he wasn't producing, calling plays like they are clutch moments in the playoffs during a game where the Sox were totally non competitive, the whole lady and the tramp bit (cringe), or when they were in Seattle talking about that space needle walk and Schriffen literally says "No chance, you couldn't get me to do that." and then about 10 seconds later "Alright guys, if you pay for me ill do it."

Just that example. Tell me how the hand-placement works. Show video, explain it, make me understand, then leave it alone for the rest of the week. because I now know. Maybe once every couple of weeks bring it up when Vargas is having a game? But mentioning it every game became a meme. 

They do these quickie at-bat recaps after a seven-pitch strikeout or whatnot, and Stone's voiceover is, "first pitch strike, then misses high, fouls off that high fastball..." It would be more helpful if Stone walked us through the pitch sequence and why they called a curveball on 3-1 because another pitch wasn't working, or whatnot. I would learn so much about the game from early Hawk & Wimpy, and it continued even through the late innings of a blowout. In a lost season. Does Schriff even do that? Once they killed the pirate link mid-season, I only followed on GameDay until September. Explaining why a pickoff move works or pointing out the positioning of an infielder and why. That's why I keep watching when the team sucks. 

[DoUEvenShift]

38 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

As you all know, I'll dig in and argue for the Sox employee I feel is being unfairly dragged, just because.

You? Never.

[chitownsportsfan]

19 minutes ago, T R U said:

I like Stone, I think he has a wealth of baseball knowledge and I enjoy listening to him talk about baseball. He's definitely a grumpy old man at this point. I don't know what the point of the food in the booth spotlight is, but anytime that happens Steve pretty much says it looks like the worst thing ever and refuses to try it, quite the advertising if that's what they are going for.

I never liked Benetti, mainly because of how corny he was, but Schriffen just takes it to another level. Whether that be referencing Vargas' hand placement for months on end even after his streak cooled way off and he wasn't producing, calling plays like they are clutch moments in the playoffs during a game where the Sox were totally non competitive, the whole lady and the tramp bit (cringe), or when they were in Seattle talking about that space needle walk and Schriffen literally says "No chance, you couldn't get me to do that." and then about 10 seconds later "Alright guys, if you pay for me ill do it."

Here's another wild one: he referenced that Noel dude's nickname as "christmas" TWO DIFFERENT TIMES AND BOTH TIMES SAID IT'S BECAUSE HE SMILES A LOT.

Bro. 

[southsider2k5]

8 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

Just that example. Tell me how the hand-placement works. Show video, explain it, make me understand, then leave it alone for the rest of the week. because I now know. Maybe once every couple of weeks bring it up when Vargas is having a game? But mentioning it every game became a meme. 

They do these quickie at-bat recaps after a seven-pitch strikeout or whatnot, and Stone's voiceover is, "first pitch strike, then misses high, fouls off that high fastball..." It would be more helpful if Stone walked us through the pitch sequence and why they called a curveball on 3-1 because another pitch wasn't working, or whatnot. I would learn so much about the game from early Hawk & Wimpy, and it continued even through the late innings of a blowout. In a lost season. Does Schriff even do that? Once they killed the pirate link mid-season, I only followed on GameDay until September. Explaining why a pickoff move works or pointing out the positioning of an infielder and why. That's why I keep watching when the team sucks. 

Stone used to be that guy, but he hasn't been for a while now.  Even Jason could bring it out of him at times.  Jason was the best we had at engaging Steve, and it was still hit or miss.  Honestly, I don't think Steve respects John at all.  He treats him like crap.

[Tony]

4 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

Just that example. Tell me how the hand-placement works. Show video, explain it, make me understand, then leave it alone for the rest of the week. because I now know. Maybe once every couple of weeks bring it up when Vargas is having a game? But mentioning it every game became a meme. 

They do these quickie at-bat recaps after a seven-pitch strikeout or whatnot, and Stone's voiceover is, "first pitch strike, then misses high, fouls off that high fastball..." It would be more helpful if Stone walked us through the pitch sequence and why they called a curveball on 3-1 because another pitch wasn't working, or whatnot. I would learn so much about the game from early Hawk & Wimpy, and it continued even through the late innings of a blowout. In a lost season. Does Schriff even do that? Once they killed the pirate link mid-season, I only followed on GameDay until September. Explaining why a pickoff move works or pointing out the positioning of an infielder and why. That's why I keep watching when the team sucks. 

I've watched like six innings of White Sox Baseball this year, so I really have no information on the actual broadcast, but this is especially true when this team is really bad. What value are you offering the viewer? The product on the field isn't, aside from sycophants. The viewer has been witness to A LOT of bad baseball over the last few years, so it can't just be a traditional broadcast that someone like the Brewers, Phillies, Dodgers can get away with. 

I'd run with it even more during this awful stretch of Sox baseball. I'd try and turn my broadcast into something pretty different, throw s%*# against the wall for a while to see what sticks. Especially when we live in the social age, something new and fresh on a broadcast will go viral, just as much as a HR call will. Huge missed opportunity there 

[southsider2k5]

2 minutes ago, Tony said:

I've watched like six innings of White Sox Baseball this year, so I really have no information on the actual broadcast, but this is especially true when this team is really bad. What value are you offering the viewer? The product on the field isn't, aside from sycophants. The viewer has been witness to A LOT of bad baseball over the last few years, so it can't just be a traditional broadcast that someone like the Brewers, Phillies, Dodgers can get away with. 

I'd run with it even more during this awful stretch of Sox baseball. I'd try and turn my broadcast into something pretty different, throw s%*# against the wall for a while to see what sticks. Especially when we live in the social age, something new and fresh on a broadcast will go viral, just as much as a HR call will. Huge missed opportunity there 

And some of the most memorable moments of both Hawk and Jason were exactly that.  It wasn't a game call, it was a gimic or reaction or stunt that got attention.  The singing Nationwide stuff, the Campfire Milkshake, Hawks pick to click, etc.  All non-game play stuff.

[WhiteSox2023]

9 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Stone used to be that guy, but he hasn't been for a while now.  Even Jason could bring it out of him at times.  Jason was the best we had at engaging Steve, and it was still hit or miss.  Honestly, I don't think Steve respects John at all.  He treats him like crap.

Stone is the old man that sits on his front porch and yells at anyone who accidentally steps on his grass.  Except he does it via trolling his co-worker and random people online via his Twitter.

[T R U]

He's just taken the complete wrong approach to this season. It's like some mandate that you need to push "Were so much better than last year." There were several times over this season where if you only listened to the broadcast and had no knowledge of last season or current standings, you would think this team was a contender.

I am already prepared for these final 9 games to be hammered with "The Sox need to go X - X to avoid 100 losses" right down to the wire. If they get swept by San Diego, it'll be "Alright Steve, the Sox need to finish 6-0 to avoid 100 losses a tall task but this isn't last years team!"

Like who cares, 95 losses, 100 losses, it's a miserable season no matter what. Push something else.