I Saw It On TV

Do you remember the sound of one hand clapping when the USGA awarded its television package to Fox?  Turns out that it was Martin Kaufman's hand flapping in the breeze, and he's struggling with a case of buyer's remorse:

It’s been 21 months since the U.S. Golf Association announced that it had awarded its

television rights to Fox Sports. I was one of the few (only?) people who regarded the move as a masterstroke. The USGA got a television partner dedicated solely to its championships, and, more importantly, the golf world would get a fresh perspective on how to present the game. Everyone would benefit. 

I still believe all of that. But I’ll admit, my faith was tested by Fox’s coverage of the recent men’s and women’s U.S. Amateur Four-Ball Championships. Because of travel, I had to watch recordings of the matches, but what I saw left me wondering: What has Fox has been doing these past 21 months? The network promised so much and, so far, has delivered so little.

Masterstroke?  Egads, our Marty is a tad excitable, isn't he?  What, pray tell, is the value of a network devoted exclusively to USGA events, especially when only one of their events is, you know, profitable?  On the flip side, the problems of amassing the necessary personnel and infrastructure to cover a mere eight events are obvious...

The irony, it's burning Marty right now..

The evidence suggests otherwise. I don’t recall seeing any gauges showing wind speed and direction, an obvious omission on a seaside links such as Pacific Dunes or during the windy final at The Olympic Club. The graphic showing yardages was good, but rarely used. There were few interesting camera angles, no graphics to illustrate green contours and, despite the intimate nature of amateur golf, we heard no conversations among teammates or between players and caddies – something Loomis has said would be a point of emphasis. And there was little or no background on the players. You can do that when you’re showing Tiger Woods and Michelle Wie. But when you’re showing anonymous amateurs, you need to introduce them to viewers and share their personal stories. We didn’t get any of that during the Four-Balls. 

The one innovation Fox tried at the Four-Balls seemingly backfired. The network has placed an emphasis on enhancing ambient sounds to bring viewers closer to the action. That seems like a good idea, but at Pacific Dunes, in particular, the sound of crashing waves became a distraction at seaside holes such as the par-3 11th. At The Olympic Club, a helicopter provided the background accompaniment for much of the final match.

I really don't know what Marty expected, but he seems a bit untethered from reality.  Hold that though and allow me to intersperse a related thought:

Good news for Fox Sports 1, as it appears that the one Nielsen home watching the inaugural USGA Women's Four-Ball was joined by another Nielsen family tuning in for Fox analyst Pete Rose's second historic appearance, only to find the four-ball going extra holes. 

According to Nielsen, Tuesday, May 12th's day one USGA Women's Four-Ball coverage from 7:00-10:22 p.m. on Fox Sports 1 drew a .05 (50,000 average viewers).

Given the prospective audiences tuning in to the two fourball events, there had to be real constraints as to how much could be invested in the broadcast of those two events.  Now there is an argument to be made that it should have been done regardless of the losses incurred in order to prepare for Chambers Bay, but it isn't our money to spend.  

Now here's his rant on the on-air talent:

I also have to question some talent choices; there were some real issues, particularly on the B team that worked the Women’s Four-Ball. 

I think lead anchor Joe Buck will be fine. He’s a proven commodity, and he knows golf. I do wish he hadn’t dwelled repeatedly on the favorite baseball and football teams of competitors in the Men’s Four-Ball. Once is fine; when it’s done repeatedly, some might question whether he’s more interested in talking about baseball or golf. But I’m not worried about Buck, and I’ll reserve judgment on lead analyst Greg Norman until the U.S. Open, the first time we’ll see him in a setting where he’s talking about players he actually knows.

Buck is a proven talent on football and baseball, I'd consider it more of an open issue whether those skills translate to golf.  Golf is the only game where the action is spread over 200 acres, and the lead tower announcer is more of a facilitator than dominant voice.

See what you think of this rant as well:

I’m so weary of producers continually trotting out former players to do godawful post-round interviews. I’ve made this point repeatedly for years. Week after week, we have to listen to Roger Maltbie, David Feherty and Peter Kostis do dreadful post-round interviews. And now we can add Gulbis and Pavin to the mix. I suppose Fox could argue that Gulbis and Pavin are new to TV and their interviewing skills will improve with time. But that’s probably not true, if our experience with Maltbie, Feherty and others is any indication. And so we go through this exercise every week – former players suddenly thrust into the role of interviewer rather than interviewee. Enough! Is Steve Sands the only TV personality capable of asking a couple of coherent, concise questions? Isn't that why Fox hired Holly Sonders? Why was she sitting on the sidelines when she should have been doing all of those interviews?

Did he not see Holly's dreadfully painful interviews from the men's fourballs?  And it's not like Steve Sands blows me away either...those rushed post-round interviews are about the least important parts of the telecast, and Maltbie, Feherty and Kostis aren't that terrible at it.  Gulbis and Pavin were that terrible, but it was the first time they had live microphones in their hands and maybe they'll improve.  It's just gonna take a while at best... At worst, well let's not go there...

This is his rousing coda:

Rightly or wrongly, Fox is under the microscope. There are those who view Fox as

nothing more than a monied interloper who crashed golf’s cozy little party at the country club, flashed enough Benjamins to make Al Czervik blush, and walked away with the USGA’s TV rights. Then there are those who believe that all knowledge of how to televise golf resides in the mind of NBC producer Tommy Roy. (News flash: It doesn't.) And then there are the simpletons who invariably freak out at the mere mention of the brand name “Fox.”

Oh Marty, it's a shame that they no longer have editors in journalism, because you are in desperate need of some tough love.

Shack almost spit out his drink when he read that last excerpt, because guess who Fox tried to hire within hours of the award of the USGA contract... Anyone?  Bueller?  That's right, one and the same Tommy Roy.

So consider me a mere simpleton, though I don't think that my opinions were in any sense a "Freak out."  I'm not familiar with Kaufman's work, but this piece doesn't increase the probability that I'd seek out more of it.  He pats himself on the back for being sufficiently enlightened to see the masterstroke behind the Fox contract, then throws them under the bus as he confirms all of the critics' concerns.  Then he circles back and tells us it will all be great, because they figured out football or something...