SPORTS
By Mitch Lehman

Thank goodness that’s over.
What is supposed to be some of the most watchable sports television of the entire year just came and went and believe me, I can wait another eleven months before experiencing the whole thing again.
I’m talking about ‘March Madness’ – the 65-team NCAA men’s basketball tournament - and the Masters, arguably the premier professional golf tournament in the world. Both just happen to be a part of the CBS broadcast stable and the two stalwart events are separated by a mere two day window - a fact that big-game host Jim Nantz rued in transit from Indianapolis to Augusta.
“I tried to get the NCAA to move the tournament to October, but that didn’t go over very well,” Nantz said on a conference call.
And Nantz, mind you, is by no means the target of the following criticism. As humble and likeable as any high-profile broadcaster ever to grace the airwaves, the guy-next-door Nantz seems as perplexed by his associates’ misgivings as the next guy. Mainly, the annoying habit of giving new terminology to actions and events that don’t need new ways to explain what is happening. If you were as unfortunate as I was to have born witness to such needless superfluity. March Madness and the Masters appeared to be breeding grounds for such jargon. While the games themselves have changed little over the years, some broadcasters apparently feel a need to needlessly update the lingo to appear, well, I don’t know what they are trying to do. Here are but a few examples;

Length. (March Madness) Example: “Florida simply has too much length for UCLA.”
Analyst Billy Packer seems to have coined the term which for decades was known merely as height. In a sad effort to inject this saying into his commentary, Packer would pick the only height mismatch on the floor – even though he knew it might only be temporary – and look for opportunities to overuse the term. Sadly, other more nameless broadcasters chose to parrot the unfortunate moniker to the extent that I cannot for the life of me remember hearing the word ‘height’ for the final two weeks of the tournament. Packer has an unfortunate history in the broadcast world, choosing for years to point out how a basketball player made a “great catch” of a pass, even though his hands are the size of outfielders’ mitts and it’s OK to drop the ball and dribble it to maintain possession.

Athletic. (March Madness) Example: “George Mason is very athletic, especially in the backcourt.”
Packer again is responsible for this one. Apparently, basketball players – who many argue to be the finest pure athletes in the sports world – have not been athletic enough for Packer until this spring. This term was so overused it was laughable, and again, Packer’s contemporaries were falling all over themselves to mimic the master. It may come as a surprise to someone who purports to make his living as an expert on the sport, but everyone in the tournament – nay, every player on every NCAA roster – is very athletic. Packer then frequently contradicted himself when praising a player’s hustle and desire. Besides, if being athletic were so important, why did J.J. Redick of Duke and Gonzaga’s Adam Morrison – two of the least athletic players in the entire sport – take home all the post-season awards?

Play. (Masters) Example: “The play here is to take the ball over the trees and try to hit the right side of the fairway.”
It seems as though Bobby Clampett came up with this one, and again, no bad idea is without an army of supporters. Maybe the word “shot” is politically incorrect since, when, the Reagan assassination attempt? Clampett pompously delivers the word as if he deciphered the cure for ALS and is delivering his findings to a meeting of the American Medical Association. I defy anyone to explain to me how “play” explains anything that “shot” can’t.

Put putter on it. (Masters) Example: “That ball has rolled off the green but he should still be able to put putter on it.”
I guess some people get bored with their job and feel the need to change the routine, but what part of this pompous statement necessitates the need to eclipse the dependable “I think he’ll be able to putt this” observation? Clampett seems to have picked this up from NBC’s Johnny Miller who is always looking to one-up the viewer. Hey, brain surgeons: every occupation has its own set of terminology. It’s presumptuous to speak in code. Responsible journalists explain terminology, they don’t perpetuate and hide behind it. These dopes wouldn’t last a day in the stockroom of a grocery store.

Second cut. (Masters) Example: “This ball has gone way to the right and has found the second cut.”
What makes this one so ridiculous is that several commentators have adopted the “second cut” phrase, yet it is used to describe different situations. Some say the “second cut” is the first cut of rough (the completely useful proper term that has been completely serviceable for the four hundred years the game has been in existence) while others reserve the description for the “second cut” of rough. If you’re going to be pompous, just don’t be pompous and stupid. If you feel you must keep using the reference, at least figure it out and be consistently bombastic.
Cut. (Masters) Example: “He’ll probably try to start this ball left and cut it into the right-hand pin placement.”
“Draw” hasn’t gone anywhere, but why did “fade” suddenly fade away? Does the possible “former greatness” definition ring a little too true to the broadcasters or the athletes they cover? Or is there an implication of lack of control over a fade shot that has brought it an early demise? Either way, this was an idea seeking justification, not a problem in need of a solution.

The estimable Nantz is far too nice a guy to point out the obvious foibles of his compatriots, so the situation to get worse before it gets better. At least he has football to look forward to.
Oops.
Bad example.
We’ll tackle that one in the fall.