PDA

View Full Version : Sporstcenter's Top Plays



killuminati35
08-09-2006, 03:04 AM
Tonight on Sportcenter, Ryan Freel's catch was number 2. The number 1 play was Richie Sexson's walk off grandslam.

I think that Freel's play should have been number 1, not Sexson's walk off.

My question is does anybody remember if Dunn's walk off grandslam was the number one play when he hit his? His grandlam was an actual walk grandslam, we were down three runs. Sexon's wasn't quite as important because they were down only 1. Just curious.

cincrazy
08-09-2006, 03:06 AM
I was wondering the same thing about Dunn's blast, because I couldn't remember either. Freel's catch being #2 is ridiculous. If those guys compiling that top 10 list would have been in the ballpark tonight, I can assure you Freel would have been #1.

guttle11
08-09-2006, 03:06 AM
Dunn's was #1.

redssouth
08-09-2006, 03:47 AM
Cant complain about missing out on a meaningless top spot of a worthless top ten list to a walk off grand slam. Here is the bigger question, which catch was better Mattews robbing of the home run earlier in the year, or Freel extended on the warning track???

I think Matthews by a hair... but wow, what a catch tonight by Freel, lets see if the Reds can build some momo off of this game, if so, that may be the catch that saves the season.

Wheelhouse
08-09-2006, 04:16 AM
I'd say Freel by a hair because of the physical peril he put himself in---to lay yourself out on the warning track gravel is pretty scrappy.

buckeyenut
08-09-2006, 07:34 AM
I'd say Freel by a hair because of the physical peril he put himself in---to lay yourself out on the warning track gravel is pretty scrappy.

I haven't seen the Freel clip yet, but I have not seen a better catch than the Matthews catch in my 30 years of watching baseball. If it is talked about in the same breath, wow.

RedsBaron
08-09-2006, 08:21 AM
Tonight on Sportcenter, Ryan Freel's catch was number 2. The number 1 play was Richie Sexson's walk off grandslam.

I think that Freel's play should have been number 1, not Sexson's walk off.


If the catch had been made by Jim Edmonds rather than Freel, would ESPN had it as number 1?;)
(Of course, if Edmonds had caught a ball hit by Pujols, I guess that would have made it more noteworthy, since they are teammates)

MrCinatit
08-09-2006, 09:15 AM
If the catch had been made by Jim Edmonds rather than Freel, would ESPN had it as number 1?;)
(Of course, if Edmonds had caught a ball hit by Pujols, I guess that would have made it more noteworthy, since they are teammates)

George would have eaten the microphone in excitement.

redsmetz
08-09-2006, 09:18 AM
I haven't seen the Freel clip yet, but I have not seen a better catch than the Matthews catch in my 30 years of watching baseball. If it is talked about in the same breath, wow.

See "The Catch" thread at

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1111815&postcount=8

ChatterRed
08-09-2006, 09:26 AM
I saw Matthews catch on ESPN. Yes, great catch..........but I've seen many like it over the years to snag a home run from a batter.

Freel's catch is far superior because he completely laid out for it and it was like a backhanded catch, which is very difficult.

EddieMilner
08-09-2006, 09:42 AM
i just watched that thread(seeing the catch for the first time) and I'm absolutely amazed. That was incredible. And against Pujols. I like the cut of his jib.

justincredible
08-09-2006, 09:55 AM
Wow. I just watched the clip for the first time. That was one hell of a catch and I would put it just above Matthews Jr's catch.

Dunner44
08-09-2006, 10:10 AM
my mom came downstairs raving about the catch, saying she had already seen it 4 times. My mother, who knows absolutely nothing about baseball, and even she was psyched.

2001MUgrad
08-09-2006, 10:22 AM
Freels catch was hands down the play of the game. You see Home Run every night. When was the last time you saw a catch like Freel's?

Chainer
08-09-2006, 11:01 AM
ESPN put him at #2 because he is a Red. If he was not in a Reds uniform, you can bet your sweet buns he would be at #1 with that catch.

The ESPN cronies have something against Reds players. I don't know what it is, but they have never been very high on the Reds. And partially it's because they have ex-players doing the broadcasts.

jmac
08-09-2006, 11:14 AM
ESPN put him at #2 because he is a Red. If he was not in a Reds uniform, you can bet your sweet buns he would be at #1 with that catch.

The ESPN cronies have something against Reds players. I don't know what it is, but they have never been very high on the Reds. And partially it's because they have ex-players doing the broadcasts.
dunn's walkoff GS was #1 and he's a red.they even put marty's call with it.
what i didnt like about the catch last nite was baseball tonite didnt do it justice.kruk said "oh man " but they basically gave it the same treatmant as rolens over the shoulder catch.

Newman4
08-09-2006, 11:18 AM
George would have eaten the microphone in excitement.

You wouldn't have heard from Chris for a while because he would have to get some paper towels to clean up after GG peed himself. :D

11larkin11
08-09-2006, 11:21 AM
Freel's catch was eerily similar to the one Coco Crisp made earlier in the year for Boston. But Freel's catch was on the warning track, so his wins :) I think the Matthews play was better, though *ducks*

Chainer
08-09-2006, 11:24 AM
You wouldn't have heard from Chris for a while because he would have to get some paper towels to clean up after GG peed himself. :D

Yeah, George was going nuts after the play, but Chris was in a close second. They both were eating that play up. Can't blame them, it was pretty awesome to say the least.

osuceltic
08-09-2006, 11:29 AM
ESPN put him at #2 because he is a Red. If he was not in a Reds uniform, you can bet your sweet buns he would be at #1 with that catch.

The ESPN cronies have something against Reds players. I don't know what it is, but they have never been very high on the Reds. And partially it's because they have ex-players doing the broadcasts.
Freel's catch was No. 1 on the 11 p.m. SportsCenter.

solo-baric
08-09-2006, 11:52 AM
Freel's catch was No. 1 on the 11 p.m. SportsCenter.

that's because the other game wasn't finished!

vaticanplum
08-09-2006, 12:53 PM
A walk-off grand slam is pretty extraordinary. I can't believe we've seen two in just a little over a month, actually.

I'm sure this was a tough decision for the folks at ESPN, and it's kind of ridiculous to say they have an anti-Reds bias, particularly when Freel was dropped a spot in favor of a Mariner. If our biggest concern is whether Freel's spectacular catch is the #1 or #2 play on Sportscenter, I'd say we're in good shape.

Chainer
08-09-2006, 01:31 PM
Freel's catch was No. 1 on the 11 p.m. SportsCenter.

Yes, I saw that.


and it's kind of ridiculous to say they have an anti-Reds bias

How so? There have been many instances this year where they have not covered Reds games on recaps and just gave the final scores, but covered basically every other game in the MLB on that given night.

And how many great plays has Brandon Phillips made this year to be ranked in the lower half of the top 10 normally? Quite a bit.

vaticanplum
08-09-2006, 01:44 PM
How so? There have been many instances this year where they have not covered Reds games on recaps and just gave the final scores, but covered basically every other game in the MLB on that given night.

Can you give me these instances?


And how many great plays has Brandon Phillips made this year to be ranked in the lower half of the top 10 normally? Quite a bit.

Can you back this up? Do you have the ESPN guideline sheets which dictate what plays are "normally" allowed to be in the lower half of the top ten?

TeamBoone
08-09-2006, 01:47 PM
Freel's catch was #1 on baseball tonight.

They even went so far as to wonder if it would make the top three in the history of the Reds which we can find out Thursday evening at 7 PM when they air the top three web gems in the history of each franchise. Though that's what they said, it'll be pretty hard to track down any vintage footage from early franchise history.

Chainer
08-09-2006, 02:08 PM
Can you give me these instances?



Can you back this up? Do you have the ESPN guideline sheets which dictate what plays are "normally" allowed to be in the lower half of the top ten?

Watch BBTN and SportsCenter.

Sorry. I don't have access to ESPN's archives, so what you're asking for is pretty impossible for me to prove.

Opinion vs. opinion. If you haven't experienced it, I am truly sorry, because it's happened on numerous occassions this year, and years past.

dabvu2498
08-09-2006, 02:09 PM
The question is: Why do we care???

Chainer
08-09-2006, 02:14 PM
The question is: Why do we care???

Why is grass green? Why are there clouds in the sky?

Does a tree make a noise when it falls in the forest if no one is around? ;)

Handofdeath
08-09-2006, 02:35 PM
I haven't seen the Freel clip yet, but I have not seen a better catch than the Matthews catch in my 30 years of watching baseball. If it is talked about in the same breath, wow.

I saw Otis Nixon make a catch in center one time for the Braves that I still have trouble believing. It looked like he jumped 6 feet in the air and caught it right before it went over the wall. But Freel's was pretty damn good.

vaticanplum
08-09-2006, 02:44 PM
Watch BBTN and SportsCenter.

Sorry. I don't have access to ESPN's archives, so what you're asking for is pretty impossible for me to prove.

Opinion vs. opinion. If you haven't experienced it, I am truly sorry, because it's happened on numerous occassions this year, and years past.

You stated it as fact, so it's better if it's backed up. If you're stating it as opinion, then that's fine, and you have no need to back it up, though it helps. But to state it as fact, then say that evidence is "impossible to prove" is a pretty weak argument.

I just never get over the irony of a fan on his team's message board calling out a TV network for bias :) In my opinion the Reds have gotten plenty of coverage as they've begun to win, which is how it is for most teams, and, dare I say, how it should be.

Chainer
08-09-2006, 02:48 PM
You stated it as fact, so it's better if it's backed up. If you're stating it as opinion, then that's fine, and you have no need to back it up, though it helps. But to state it as fact, then say that evidence is "impossible to prove" is a pretty weak argument.

I just never get over the irony of a fan on his team's message board calling out a TV network for bias :) In my opinion the Reds have gotten plenty of coverage as they've begun to win, which is how it is for most teams, and, dare I say, how it should be.

I never stated it as a fact. Read back.

The Reds get plenty of coverage on their own broadcasts, but they are left out of the loop on SportsCenter and BBTN. Whether the Yankees, Mets, or Cubs are doing good or not....they still cover them a helluva lot more than the Reds.

reds1869
08-09-2006, 03:43 PM
Can you give me these instances?

I can tell you for certain that the online and ESPN Mobile highlights didn't even include The Catch. They looked like a Cards victory until you saw the score, quite frankly. ESPN is all about entertainment, not real sports news. They are very good at it, which is why I watch FSN almost exclusively now. At least they make a seperate show for that nonsense with the BDSSP.

killuminati35
08-09-2006, 05:30 PM
ESPN put him at #2 because he is a Red. If he was not in a Reds uniform, you can bet your sweet buns he would be at #1 with that catch.

The ESPN cronies have something against Reds players. I don't know what it is, but they have never been very high on the Reds. And partially it's because they have ex-players doing the broadcasts.



That's the reason why I posted this thread.

Chainer
08-09-2006, 05:36 PM
I can tell you for certain that the online and ESPN Mobile highlights didn't even include The Catch. They looked like a Cards victory until you saw the score, quite frankly. ESPN is all about entertainment, not real sports news. They are very good at it, which is why I watch FSN almost exclusively now. At least they make a seperate show for that nonsense with the BDSSP.

I'm glad I'm not the only one that sees that! :thumbup:

vaticanplum
08-09-2006, 05:38 PM
Whether the Yankees, Mets, or Cubs are doing good or not....they still cover them a helluva lot more than the Reds.

Throw in the Red Sox, who also get a lot of coverage, and that's essentially the whole Eastern seaboard and the Midwest's only truly large city you're talking about there. They are much bigger markets, many more cable subscribers in sheer numbers. Essentially, they're paying for it. ESPN loses viewers and money if they don't give a nod to their biggest markets.

If the Reds win consistently, they'll get more fans. If they get more fans, there's more money in it for ESPN, and we will see more of them. That's the way it works. I still maintain that having Freel as the #2 play was completely acceptable and doesn't smack of any bias whatsoever.

Like Herd Fan says, this is why FSN exists. No reason to watch ESPN if you don't want to.

Gizmo
08-09-2006, 05:44 PM
Throw in the Red Sox, who also get a lot of coverage, and that's essentially the whole Eastern seaboard and the Midwest's only truly large city you're talking about there. They are much bigger markets, many more cable subscribers in sheer numbers. Essentially, they're paying for it. ESPN loses viewers and money if they don't give a nod to their biggest markets.

If the Reds win consistently, they'll get more fans. If they get more fans, there's more money in it for ESPN, and we will see more of them. That's the way it works. I still maintain that having Freel as the #2 play was completely acceptable and doesn't smack of any bias whatsoever.

Like Herd Fan says, this is why FSN exists. No reason to watch ESPN if you don't want to.

I agree, because we all know only walkoff HRs and Slam Dunks are truly #1 spot worthy.

Chainer
08-09-2006, 05:45 PM
Throw in the Red Sox, who also get a lot of coverage, and that's essentially the whole Eastern seaboard and the Midwest's only truly large city you're talking about there. They are much bigger markets, many more cable subscribers in sheer numbers. Essentially, they're paying for it. ESPN loses viewers and money if they don't give a nod to their biggest markets.

If the Reds win consistently, they'll get more fans. If they get more fans, there's more money in it for ESPN, and we will see more of them. That's the way it works. I still maintain that having Freel as the #2 play was completely acceptable and doesn't smack of any bias whatsoever.

Like Herd Fan says, this is why FSN exists. No reason to watch ESPN if you don't want to.

Okay....so let me get this right....

First you tell me that I'm wrong for not showing proof that ESPN doesn't cover Reds games at times....then you explain to me why they don't cover them?

Wow.

vaticanplum
08-09-2006, 05:55 PM
Okay....so let me get this right....

First you tell me that I'm wrong for not showing proof that ESPN doesn't cover Reds games at times....then you explain to me why they don't cover them?

Wow.

I didn't say you were wrong for saying ESPN doesn't cover Reds games. Never once. I asked for proof, which you refused to give me. You did initially state this as a fact. There was no "I think" or "in my opinion" in your assertion. I dropped this in my last response because I didn't want to keep dragging it on, but if you insist, I will.


There have been many instances this year where they have not covered Reds games on recaps and just gave the final scores, but covered basically every other game in the MLB on that given night.

And how many great plays has Brandon Phillips made this year to be ranked in the lower half of the top 10 normally? Quite a bit.

In no way do those two statements read as opinions. they have no evidence to back them up, but they do not sound like opinions.

If ESPN does in fact cover Reds games less than other teams, I maintain that it is not because of a simple bias outside of their own business concerns as far as the big markets go -- which they must consider as they are, after all, a money-making enterprise. It is also because the Reds have not yet proven that they are a consistently good team, and thus do not have a huge fanbase at this time. Again, as the Reds win more, they will get covered more, leading to a bigger fanbase and vice versa. And they have been getting more coverage when they've been winning as far as I can tell.

Chainer
08-09-2006, 06:02 PM
I didn't say you were wrong for saying ESPN doesn't cover Reds games. Never once. I asked for proof, which you refused to give me. You did initially state this as a fact. There was no "I think" or "in my opinion" in your assertion. I dropped this in my last response because I didn't want to keep dragging it on, but if you insist, I will.



In no way do those two statements read as opinions. they have no evidence to back them up, but they do not sound like opinions.

If ESPN does in fact cover Reds games less than other teams, I maintain that it is not because of a simple bias outside of their own business concerns as far as the big markets go -- which they must consider as they are, after all, a money-making enterprise. It is also because the Reds have not yet proven that they are a consistently good team, and thus do not have a huge fanbase at this time. Again, as the Reds win more, they will get covered more, leading to a bigger fanbase and vice versa. And they have been getting more coverage when they've been winning as far as I can tell.

That's the whole point. If a person doesn't have evidence to back themselves up, it IS an opinion!

The whole point of this is really moot. Let's get back on topic, shall we?

Jr's Boy
08-09-2006, 07:30 PM
I believe Edmonds is a FA at the end of the season.Imagine what George Grande would do if Edmonds was a Red.:D

HumnHilghtFreel
08-09-2006, 11:02 PM
Freel made the Reds' #1 Webgem in franchise history tonight on BBTN, but not for "The Catch." It was an older one where he made a diving catch at the warning track near the camera well on the third base side from an older game.

Dunner44
08-09-2006, 11:16 PM
what were the other 2? and what day was that, i'm gonna go watch it?

HumnHilghtFreel
08-09-2006, 11:19 PM
what were the other 2? and what day was that, i'm gonna go watch it?


nevermind on the link I posted, it wasn't what I though, sorry.

One was Joe Morgan in the WS and the other, I'm blanking on the name, but it was a bobbling diving catch that ended up being barehanded.

RedRoser
08-09-2006, 11:21 PM
Hopefully, David Ross's MAMMOTH walk off shot will be number one tonight!

Dunner44
08-09-2006, 11:24 PM
i found the 3rd base catch elsewhere:

Freel's sliding catch (http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/multimedia/tp_archive.jsp?c_id=cin&ym=200404)

scroll down to april 16th, click the "wrong URL" link, its bigger

Dunner44
08-09-2006, 11:32 PM
as an aside, while searching for the freel throw, i went and wathced Griff's #500, and boy is Grande's call horrible: "Heeeeyyyy!" What a mook.

I wish i'd found this top plays archive sooner. I'm now reliving my favorite Reds game I ever went to, Wily Mo Bobblehead night. ---->hey, Todd Holandsworth was in that highlight. Hehehehe

ryanparkersongs
08-09-2006, 11:46 PM
Freel's catch was the best catch I have ever seen...at least through my Reds tinted glasses! :-) He is an awesome player with his hustle. Hopefully, his all out effort rubs off on everyone else. BTW...does anyone have a link to the video footage of Freel diving headfirst into the right field line stands at Dodger Stadium a few years ago (I think)? I can't remember if he caught the ball or not on that one, but that play was one of the best efforts I have ever seen.

Dunner44
08-09-2006, 11:55 PM
Freel's catch was the best catch I have ever seen...at least through my Reds tinted glasses! :-) He is an awesome player with his hustle. Hopefully, his all out effort rubs off on everyone else. BTW...does anyone have a link to the video footage of Freel diving headfirst into the right field line stands at Dodger Stadium a few years ago (I think)? I can't remember if he caught the ball or not on that one, but that play was one of the best efforts I have ever seen.

It was May 15, 2004, but the top plays archive doesn't have it

Cigar2
08-10-2006, 12:32 AM
I believe Edmonds is a FA at the end of the season.Imagine what George Grande would do if Edmonds was a Red.:D


Can you restraining order? I Know You Can.:runaway:

ThatPitchIsDunn
08-10-2006, 12:33 AM
Top play or no (I'm at work right now; I'll go yell at and lobby the late night SC producer), we actually led the 11pm Sportscenter tonight :eek: :thumbup:

lucky bugle boy
08-10-2006, 12:49 AM
I saw Otis Nixon make a catch in center one time for the Braves that I still have trouble believing. It looked like he jumped 6 feet in the air and caught it right before it went over the wall. But Freel's was pretty damn good.

An Otis Nixon play was one of the top three Braves plays in ESPN's 'every team's top plays' segment. It looked like the play you are describing. Was an incredible play! I'd love to see some old Eric Davis plays when they do the Reds' top plays. The Freel play should probably be up there too. Along with one he made at third base last year!

lucky bugle boy
08-10-2006, 12:56 AM
Sorry, I see that others beat me to the Freel play at third. Thought I'd made it all the way through the thread before posting, but evidently not!

Razor Shines
08-10-2006, 01:40 AM
nevermind on the link I posted, it wasn't what I though, sorry.

One was Joe Morgan in the WS and the other, I'm blanking on the name, but it was a bobbling diving catch that ended up being barehanded.
It was Glenn "Broken bat over shoulder" Braggs.