Maybe I should just stop listening to Mike & Mike In The Morning. I often find myself talking to my radio at some of the dumb things that Mike Greenberg says. And I've been talking to my radio a lot lately.
Yesterday, he went on a rant because of something a reporter (they said his name, but I am sorry to have to report that I do not remember what it was. I was in my car, and, really, it's immaterial for this article) said when talking to Manny Ramirez.
As you may have heard, Manny hit a pinch hit grand slam on Wednesday night.
Regarding Greenie's take though, please bear with me while I set the table. He was all tsk tsk before he told this story. He made it out to be this big, big deal. About how broadcasters have to be very careful with what they say, and how sometimes things will be said near an open mic that maybe would not have been said had said person known that mic was open. Regrettable things.
Then he told the story. And any of you who also listen to Mike & Mike can probably understand what I mean when I add that Greenie often blows things up to ridiculously extraordinary levels - like his station breaks. "Something happened in baseball yesterday that had never happened before. And I'll tell you about it after this..." Cut to commercial.
Then he'll come back and tell you that Yankees hat wearing Jack Nicholson was in the crowd in Chicago. Really riveting stuff comes after these station breaks, believe you me.
So back to the story. If you didn't hear it - and now I'm dragging it out - perhaps you're wondering what was said that shouldn't have been said? Like me, you probably think it's some insult or some snide remark about a colleague.
Ready? The interviewer proclaimed Manny's homer to be "one of the greatest moments in Dodgers history" or something very much along those lines.
Yes, that's it. I sure was expecting something else. But that's what it was. Hardly regrettable in a "job threatening" or "take out to the woodshed" way. Overstating things, perhaps, but hardly regrettable.
Then Greenberg and Mike Golic went into a mocking discussion of where this really ranks in Dodger lore, snidely putting it at number 600.
I agree that it wasn't one of the great moments in Dodger history. My objection here is the length of time Greenie dedicated to this non-story and the intensity he dispatched to poo poo the reporter.
As if Greenie himself is devoid of needless hyperbole. As if many many other reporters/interviewers are not given to the occasional hyperbolic nonsense.
And to top things off, I found a Bill Plaschke column from the LA Times that ranks this homer 3rd in Dodger history.
Behind Steve Finley's game-winning grand slam in 2004 that vauted the Dodgers to the postseason. It was a 9th inning blast, so that drama and the importance of the homer can't be missed.
Behind Kirk Gibson's overdone blast off Dennis Eckersley in the 1988 World Series. And before anyone flips out about this characterization, I say it's overdone, not overrated. Although I think it's overrated as well. I'm just tired of hearing about it. It gets so much press and I've heard the call so many times I think it's burned into my brain cells. I can believe that I saw it, why can't the guy who called the game??
So if Bill Plaschke, who is frequently cited (and fawned upon) by Mike Greenberg on his show, says that the homer is that important, who am I to question it?
I am far from innocent of blathering on with hyperbole dripping down my proverbial chin.
Who is Greenberg to question what an interviewer says on the field, in the moment, with fans screaming, after a game in which a fan favorite player hit a bomb in a noteworthy situation?
Does Greenberg know what he sounds like after he speaks with Peter Gammons, Buster Olney, Jayson Stark and Bill Curry? You'd think a proposal was forthcoming. Greenie fawns and deposits hyperbole about these men being "the best at what you do" with the best of them. It's pretty revolting most times.
Let he who is bereft of hyperbole cast the first critical stone.