Maybe it wasn't John Anderson, according to his anchor profile he was named captain of the Missouri Track and Field Team. In that case, I doubt he'd say it unless he was well=qualified to make a self-deprecating joke(very likely)
Maybe it wasn't John Anderson, according to his anchor profile he was named captain of the Missouri Track and Field Team. In that case, I doubt he'd say it unless he was well=qualified to make a self-deprecating joke(very likely)
Scott Van Pelt wrote us saying he wasn't the one who made the comment:
He was a track athlete! It must have been sarcasm. It is a shame because it is so rare that we get any coverage.
Below is his bio from ESPN:
John Anderson joined ESPN in June 1999 as an ESPNEWS anchor and now anchors SportsCenter. Prior to ESPN, Anderson was a weekend sports anchor/reporter in Phoenix, Ariz. and Tulsa, Okla. Anderson graduated from the University of Missouri's School of Journalism with a bachelor's degree in 1987. He was a four-year member of the men's track team, competing in high jump, and captained the squad his senior season. Anderson, a native of Green Bay, Wis., won the Outstanding Sports Feature Reporting Award in 1994 and 1995. In 1997, he received the Associated Press Television Award in Arizona for outstanding performance in broadcast journalism. In 2003, he co-wrote a book with golfer Chi Chi Rodriguez, "Chi Chi's Golf Games You Gotta Play."
I found this quote from a past interview with John Anderson
John, What is your fav. olympic event?
John Anderson (7:04 PM)
I love the Track and Field. despite one of my favorite sports quotes ever -- "the only thing more boring than track is field."High Jump will be the one I watch most. The 100 will also be dynamite
http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/21916
I think we should just drop this topic now and accept what he said as a casual joke.
Maybe it was a joke...but a guy who high jumped should know better than make fun of the sport?
He should be promoting the sport not making a joke about it!
Wow, you guys are pathetic. First, learn to take a joke and not always get your panties in a bunch. It makes life much more enjoyable. Second, not everyone has to share your opinions whether they have a bigger forum then you do or not. I love watching track and that line made me chuckle when I read it. I'm pretty glad all fo you were made to look like idiots twice, attacking the wrong guy and then trying to attack a guy who was making a self selfdeprecating joke.
John Anderson was a 6'10'' high jumper at Mizzou.
So obviously they read the feedback they get. So, to all those saying that it was a waste of time, in your face. It may have been misdirected but it proves that they respond to 'angry track runners.'
The worst part was that the rest of the top 10 plays were baseball... personally i would love to watch a track meet over a 3 hour baseball game ending in a score of 1-0
Yes! And, because of LR's puny rants, ESPN's t&f coverage will stay exactly the same. Well done.
I dont give a rat's ass if its boring to other people. I like it.
themanontherun wrote:
I hate to break it to you guys, but track and field is boring. Unless you know the backstories and the significance of certain times, it's pretty much all the same. But who cares? We don't love running because it's fun to watch, we love running because it's fun to do. It's one of the things that separates us from the 'game' sports.
All sports are boring if you are not interested in them. I like football (the one you actually play with your foot) but some of those 0-0 draws are not exactly thrilling. As with football, (ok soccer) if you don't have your own team, or athlete in the event with a chance of winning, the interest is not as high
Its a bit sad if you are obsessed with you own running - probably boring you friends to death with talking about it half the time, but don't find it interesting to watch the guys running at a level we can only dream about
As for that commentator, would he ever say 'well the hardest thing in golf is carrying the bag - but they get some other sucker to do that bit"!
Imagine it's Berlin; the 10,000m- with 4 laps to go Rupp is with a group of four and starts to put in a kick for home - even that b@st@rd commentator would get out of his seat!
ukathleticscoach wrote:
Imagine it\'s Berlin; the 10,000m- with 4 laps to go Rupp is with a group of four and starts to put in a kick for home - even that b@st@rd commentator would get out of his seat!
lol
he might be kicking for home in a group of four but not the first four.
PDubbs wrote:
Wow, you guys are pathetic. First, learn to take a joke and not always get your panties in a bunch. It makes life much more enjoyable. Second, not everyone has to share your opinions whether they have a bigger forum then you do or not. I love watching track and that line made me chuckle when I read it. I'm pretty glad all fo you were made to look like idiots twice, attacking the wrong guy and then trying to attack a guy who was making a self selfdeprecating joke.
I disagree that it's pathetic. It shows good spirit that t&fers won't let a golfer walk all over them. Pretty much everybody rich and famous golfs, but that doesn't mean we have to catch flak from them.
SvP showed good character in reading our comments and responding to the godfathers of track.
John Anderson made a joke that is kinda funny, but it makes a big difference that it was self-deprecating. It's kinda like that word that some people can say without anyone blinking an eye, but other people cannot say under any circumstances. I suspect you know the word I'm talking about.
As a former HJer, I know full well that you can fall in love, get married, raise a family, get promoted, cheat on your wife during a midlife crisis, find Jesus, reconcile with your kids, write a crappy novel, and finally retire to the seashore and paint watercolors all day in the time it takes for the bar to go up 4 freakin inches. Seriously.
I've said this before...
We need track teams. Not just focusing on individuals running events, but actual teams with scoring. That would be an ideal situation and one which the major sports, NBA, NFL, MLB, and NHL all follow. After that you have individual sports such as golf and tennis. To be honest, if Tiger or Federer weren't dominating would people be watching?
Track suffers from a personality disorder. Is it a team sport or an individual sport? Is it a sport for fast sprinters or long distance runners? You don't see gold and "speed golf" or the NFL with 8 man football games and 11 man. You don't see the NBA with 5v5 and 1one1.
The team dynamic can create drama in track and field. Many times the winner comes down to the last few events. This is the selling point from a competitive standpoint.
Now there's the problem of dead time. MLB has dead time. LOTS of dead time. They do well I think in part because they've been around for such a long time, cities identify with teams, and they provide food and entertainment on the concourse.
It would be pretty dumb to try and entertain folks in the middle of the field during a track and field meet, but what about entertainment between events in a common area like a concourse?
1. Get away from the international aspect of track and field. The NBA teams don't play the national teams. ESPN is not going to Rome or Helsinki to report on a damn track meet.
2. Develop city teams in big time cities.
3. Pay athletes to be on these teams, both US and international stars (ie: European players have started to dominate the NBA and MLB is run by players south of the border)
4. Put together a schedule that puts team vs team.
Alan
except the best case scenario you'd end up with is the MLS. the best "players" in the world, are not going to come compete in a US league, and in fact neither are the best US athletes. so you'd end up with a league of a bunch of 10.2, 1:50, 4:05, 14flat guys. it'd be cool if it could work out that way, but we're now smart enough to know that to run the fastest times, that team/league competition is probably not conducive.
John Anderson is the guy from Wipeout right?
They should have a world relay meet. 4x100, 4x200, 4x400, 4x800, 4xmile, DMR, Sprint Med, 5K Team time (3 runners times combined), Shuttle Hurdle Relay, Long Jump, Triple Jump High Jump, Shotput, Hammer Throw, Discus, Javelin Team Events (The combined distances for each event for three athletes), and finally my favorite the Weight Man Relay, a 4x100 run by the big guys in the Discus, Shot, or Hammer throw (this guys must have completed in an event that day).
Have qualifying times like Drake or Penn to make it into the meet. Top three teams get some kind of bonus, world records get a bonus, and top three overall team scores get a small bonus for the participants on the team.
I bet this would add much more excitement and drama then any other meet out there and would bring in the team aspect at the same time.
Tell me you would not watch this.
Ahhhh... Too many events. Oregon has it right. A track meet should not last longer than 2 hours. And I believe that the 2 hrs should include atleast 30 minutes devoted to PROMOTING ATHLETES IN THE RACE. Give the unintelligent viewer someone to root for. People like to have someone to root for (they love a good back story). Just look at horse racing (yes there is gambling in horse racing but the vast majority of television viewers are not gambling serious money on the races). Horse racing raises your interest so much by explaining who the favorites are and who has a shot for the upset. It's not rocket science (pun intended).
Seriously man... wrote:
If you think track and field is super exciting, then you're kidding yourself. Only a small percentage of the sporting world thinks that running is a "cool" or "exciting" sport. Just watch the coverage of the NCAAs or USA Championships. The announcers are a joke (every single one of them), they focus on all the wrong elements of the events (i.e. they skipped all the women races at NCAAs to watch the guys warmups), and 95% of the coverage is of a non-event (the warmups or false starts). I don't understand why the running community gets upset when other people say that track is boring. Just be honest with yourself and admit that the only reason that you think track is interesting is because you yourself participated in it at one time or another. On the grand scheme of things, track is between badminton and curling, several notches below competitive poker. Just being honest.
Hey, congrats on being quoted by the Brojos in their new article, but you're point is founded on an inconsistency. You first say that track and field is not that exciting, or at least that to most people it is not exciting. Then you say that it is not interesting because of the coverage (it is boring and not well done). You have to separate the coverage from the sport itself. I HATE watching American TV coverage of track and field. I absolutely hate it. I usually watch it for hours just so I can see a few races. Today though, I was watching the Golden League meet with no commercials, constant action, and great (British) commentators. Watching was very fun and exciting. It was very fun to even watch the long jump competition, something that could never be fun on an ESPN or NBC broadcast. The problem is not the sport, it's the coverage.
This is the layout of your argument:
-Argument: Track and field is not exciting (to most people)
-Evidence: Just watch the coverage.
-Conclusion: Track and field is not exciting.
I'm sorry but you can't tell me that track and field is not exciting because the coverage isn't good. You didn't give one good reason about the sport itself. I'm not gonna tell you I hate baseball because the announcers on FOX suck. I'll tell you I hate watching baseball on FOX. Simple as that.
Thanks, and I hope the Brojos don't act like this guy's quote is all that.