PDA

View Full Version : Joe's influence



OldRightHander
06-22-2007, 12:23 AM
Much has been made recently of Marty's bitterness in recent years in the broadcast booth and I must admit that I've noticed a lot of it myself. Marty has always been somewhat critical, but it seems that lately he's taken it to a whole new level. I was thinking about this the other day while listening to a game and I got to wondering about the causes for it, other than just the poor play of the team.

I mentioned my theory the other night to Redsland and thought I would bring it up here to see what you all think. I think that Joe was something of the "anti-Marty" when he was working full time. Marty was always the slick professional announcer and Joe was the laid back fan, kind of the one a lot of us could relate to. His pace was slower and he always made more mistakes, and maybe for all of his qualities he was the perfect complement to Marty.

The Reds have had bad teams in the past, and maybe my memory is faulty, but I don't remember the bitterness from the booth during those years. Maybe it was still there, but I don't think it was to the degree that is is today. I wonder what kind of a calming influence Joe had on Marty during all those years. Even when things were going bad, Joe would show his displeasure, but then he would always exhort the team to get 'em next time. He didn't seem to dwell on things so long or constantly berate a player who didn't play the way he liked. Marty and Joe would engage in conversation about any and every topic that had nothing to do with baseball. We heard about their tomatoes, their golf games, a bit too much about Elvis, and whatever other topic came to mind. They were the unlikliest of friends in the booth, so different from one another yet so pefect for one another. You never really thought of one without the other.

It's my theory that Joe kind of kept Marty in check. He brought out the best in his little buddy and the Marty we are hearing now is the one without that influence. If that is the case, then Marty might very well owe his place in the Hall of Fame to the years of working with Joe. He was a better announcer when they were together, and I don't think his decline is simply the natural grumpiness of age. Joe made him better and now we're hearing the absence of that influence. Does this make sense to anyone else?

pedro
06-22-2007, 12:41 AM
You're spot on IMO. I can remember Joe telling Marty more than once how hard a game baseball was to play.

Unassisted
06-22-2007, 01:27 AM
Joe was the cream and sugar in the coffee and Marty is the bitter part. Paired with similarly bitter Thom, they make espresso. Do many people in Cincinnati drink espresso? ;)

Wheelhouse
06-22-2007, 01:30 AM
When is someone going to tell me why Marty would be "bitter"? He's a local hero and nationally celebrated. I think he's just calling it as he sees it. You want bitter, I'M bitter from watching years of hideous, unprofessional Reds baseball.

BCubb2003
06-22-2007, 01:38 AM
It seems to me that in recent years, Marty and Joe almost never worked innings together, in the traditional terms of play-by-play and color. That makes a big difference in how Marty presented the game, in my opinion.

Ron Madden
06-22-2007, 05:28 AM
Marty hasn't been the same since he became "The Hall Of Famer".


Once upon a tme Marty was the Best PBP man in all baseball not anymore.

Marty has lost himself to his reputation of telling it like is. He no longer calls the game as well as he once did and "telling it like it is" has turned into a bitter and arrogant "The World According to Marty".

The sad thing is thousands of fans believe any and everything Marty says to be the gospel truth.

I'm sure all of the Reds announcers and beat writers are very well paid, yet
each and everyone of them seem to lack the ability to share any real knowledge or information about the game or the team they are paid to cover.

RedsBaron
06-22-2007, 07:28 AM
It's my theory that Joe kind of kept Marty in check. He brought out the best in his little buddy and the Marty we are hearing now is the one without that influence. If that is the case, then Marty might very well owe his place in the Hall of Fame to the years of working with Joe. He was a better announcer when they were together, and I don't think his decline is simply the natural grumpiness of age. Joe made him better and now we're hearing the absence of that influence. Does this make sense to anyone else?

It makes sense to me-good post.

MrCinatit
06-22-2007, 08:19 AM
Great observation, ORH - I've noticed it, as well.
They have been paired together for more than 30 years - when one becomes less active, the other does tend to lose some luster.

Highlifeman21
06-22-2007, 08:59 AM
When is someone going to tell me why Marty would be "bitter"? He's a local hero and nationally celebrated. I think he's just calling it as he sees it. You want bitter, I'M bitter from watching years of hideous, unprofessional Reds baseball.

While not being Marty, I can only venture a guess that if in fact he's not actually bitter, he sure as heck sounds like it on a game to game basis when covering our beloved Reds.

I think Marty's definitely gone past the "calling it as he sees it" juncture in his HOF career, and is now firmly in the personal vendetta stage. His manhate for Adam Dunn is unparalleled, and very much unwarranted, and IMO very unprofessional.

Perhaps the years since 1995 have really gotten to Marty, and he can't stand the product on the field year in and year out.

Bottomline, even if he's not actually bitter, wow does he talk the bitter talk.