Scot Pollard and Cheryl Miller absolutely going AT each other...no holds barred! did Vince McMahon set this up?! I had no idea Cheryl could be so scary.


Favorite quote: Said Pollard: "I'm very comfortable with what I accomplished both on and off the court. I knocked a lot of people down."

Labels: , ,

30 Comments:
Blogger Buck Nasty said...
From now on my catch phrase (and yours should be as well, I think) should be: "To all the ballaz around the world." Or something to that extent.

Blogger Soresu said...
God, that was soooo uncomfortable.

Also, I would love to see Cheryl drop 50+ on Scott's false security ring.

Blogger Wild Yams said...
You know, I too am comfortable with what Scot Pollard achieved both on and off the court. Speaking of that...

How come all the networks that broadcast NBA games keep hiring all these white guys who were total scrubs when they were in the league to do broadcasting and analysis? Why do we give a crap what guys like Tom Tolbert, Tim Legler, Scot Pollard and Jon Barry think when these guys were barely in the league? Thank God Todd MacCulloch went into playing pinball so we don't have to listen to his "expert analysis" as well. I mean, is it a bunch of xenophobic executives who are making these decisions, or do the powers that be figure these guys had plenty of years to analyze basketball because they just spent a decade firmly rooted on the bench watching season after season of NBA ball? I picture some old white exec screaming "get me some white broadcasters, dammit! I don't care how irrelevant they were when they were 'playing'!" Is it just a matter of time before we're subjected to a whole slew of Mark Madsen's takes on the game?

Blogger Will said...
CAPTCHA: syningle
As in: Scott Pollard couldn't score a syningle point on Cheryl Miller

Anonymous Anonymous said...
id much rather listen to tom tolbert or scot pollard than cheryl miller. yikes... all da balluhz know..

Blogger chris said...
Wild Yams: Imagine Voskuhl in the booth in 10 years. Yikes! I'm surprised Jud Buechler hasn't found himself a career of that sort yet.

Blogger Cortez said...
"How come all the networks that broadcast NBA games keep hiring all these white guys who were total scrubs when they were in the league to do broadcasting and analysis?"

I imagine it's primarily because most of the time they can put a full coherent sentence together.

Plus they actually do "know basketball" (sans Tom Tolbert!) much like Phil Jackson, the VanGundys, Pat Riley, Lawerence Frank etc. None of which lit the NBA on fire with their individual playing ability.

Anonymous Anonymous said...
Wild Yams-

I think you're overstating the "whiteness" factor. Maybe I'm crazy, but I would like to think that TV journalism guys try to hire engaging personalities, regardless of color.

Do you really think that they're hiring former white players simply because they're white? Maybe you'd like to qualify that statement with a fact or two..? Just because somebody was a good player, doesn't mean they are a good broadcaster, and vice versa. That's all I'm saying. Personally, I like Legs, but if you don't, that's cool, but don't say that he only got his job because he's white because really... you have no idea- right? OK.

Cheryl Miller was awesome and all, but Pollard would wipe the floor with her. She sounded pissy like she needs a hug or something... Do you think they slept together? That would explain the tension!

Blogger jacob said...
i'm a scott pollard fan now. it's obvious he doesn't take himself seriously, cheryl on the other hand... is defensive and bitter.

scott would crush her in tidily winks.

Blogger Wild Yams said...
Cortez, are you saying that generally black basketball players can't put a coherent sentence together? Look, I have no problem with the networks hiring white analysts or commenters, my problem is more with them hiring a bunch of guys who were scrubs in the league, yet you don't really see black guys who were career bench warmers with broadcasting jobs. Instead you see guys like Charles Barkley, Magic Johnson, Chris Webber, Gary Payton, Reggie Miller, etc. In other words, multiple All Stars and Hall of Famers.

Also, don't try to drag coaches into this argument, cause that's not at all what I'm talking about. If a guy is a good coach, then he's a good coach. I'm just curious why someone like Scot Pollard gets right on TV like that after having a hugely forgettable career. Jeff Van Gundy doing games makes sense, the guy has been a head coach for a number of years, and as such has something meaningful to contribute. But Scot Pollard? Why does anyone care what he has to say? The guy played about as much NBA ball as any of us did. Are we interested just because he was in lots of practices and got to watch a lot of basketball games from the bench?

Anonymous Vcfor3 said...
Good lord please tell me how the hell the Miller duo got jobs in broadcasting, Isn't there an interview process or something to see whether you're actually qualified for the job?

Blogger DDC said...
Yams, I don't know about you, but I'd love to hear Greg Ostertag provide NBA analysis.

Anonymous hellshocked said...
I think for whatever reason the guys picked seem to fit in better with whatever kind of program the network is running. I mean, Pollard was a pretty good interview when he played and as he showed in that incredibly awkward clip he's relatively fast on his feet and can improvise.

I don't think much of it has to do with whiteness, Yams, though I'm sure it plays a part. You don't see guys like Greg Ostertag (I hope) broadcasting much, after all. It´s typically the media savvy types who get by on their personality and the superstars who get by on their popularity who are given the jobs.

I can totally see Shane Battier doing it when he retires.

Anonymous Anonymous said...
"But Scot Pollard? Why does anyone care what he has to say?"

True, but at the same time, why does anyone care what Barkley has to say? The guy only "watches the good teams" and clearly doesn't give a damn or put any thought at all into his job. He's entertaining though so people put up with it.

There seem to be two types of 'former player' broadcasters- the stars (Barkley, Webber, Payton) who may or may not have something interesting to say but their name draws viewers in regardless (see Gary Payton, who has nothing intelligent to say whatsoever, from what I can tell).

The second type are those former players with good social and analytical skills. I don't get why you care that Scott Pollard was a scrub- either he has something of value to say, or he doesn't...but if he doesn't, why aren't you ripping Gary Payton too? Do you just want former stars up there?

Blogger Cortez said...
"Cortez, are you saying that generally black basketball players can't put a coherent sentence together?"

Yeah, I am. Well, not on television it would seem.

I wonder if that makes me racist against myself?

(!)

"Instead you see guys like Charles Barkley, Magic..."

You need to change your cable package or tune into another channel besides TNT. There are quite a few black "scrubs" (non star players) giving their insights on various networks throughout the country (typically they speak just fine also, at least a hell of a lot better the Magic Johnson).

"If a guy is a good coach, then he's a good coach."

Part of being a good coach is "knowing basketball" which every single person in that list obviously does which was the reason I brought it up.

Your comment would make more sense if you said Scot Pollard's insight is way of base but instead your complaint seems to be that he isn't headed to the hall of fame (plus he's white!).

In fact reverse those two items. Your primary complaint seems to be that he is white.

"Why does anyone care what he has to say?"

I don't, but he was in the NBA for years so he obviously knows something about high level basketball and the operations of a professional basketball team.

"The guy played about as much NBA ball as any of us did."

So? Neither did the VanGundys.

...which was kind of my point.

For some jobs knowing the subject matter is more important than actually being able to perform the subject matter yourself.

"Are we interested just because he was in lots of practices and got to watch a lot of basketball games from the bench?"

Personally I am not interrested at all but I assume the people who hired him did so because the N.B.A. is first and foremost an ENTERTAINMENT venue therfore Scot Pollard and his antics, plus his professional basketball knowledge and command of the english language made him a viable candidate.

The only commentators worth listening to in my opinion are Charles Barkley (despite his obvious speech pattern issues) and Hubie Brown.

Blogger Wild Yams said...
OK, this is my point: if you just want guys who are knowledgeable and have insight, and where playing time isn't a prerequisite, why get players at all? Why not just get journalists instead? Lord knows lots of them are out of jobs what with all the newspapers that have closed in recent years. I figure if you're going to specifically get a player to provide the kind of insight that a journalist presumably can't, then you should at least get a player who, you know, played in the games on a somewhat regular basis.

Getting former coaches like Hubie Brown or Jeff Van Gundy to do color commentary during games is great, because these are guys with great credentials and who clearly have spent a ton of time studying the game and can most likely provide some valuable insight. By the same token, players who were stars and who won championships and had the pressure on them to win in big games and in the playoffs can also give valuable insight into what may be going on with the guys on whom the team's success or failure mainly falls. What I don't understand, however, is why we need to get insight from guys who haven't shown they have extensive knowledge of the game and who could only really tell us what's going on in the heads of the guys who aren't going to play. And even more bizarrely, when you look at the former scrubs who are now analysts on the major networks, they tend to all be white, and I just find that curious.

Sure, every local team probably has some former player or players of questionable note who help with the local TV or radio broadcasts, and that's fine. You can't expect the local stations to be able to secure the biggest names to do post game for every team (especially since they'd probably get more money from ESPN or ABC or TNT or whomever). But do we really need "analysis" from guys who averaged 2.4 minutes/game for their career like Tom Tolbert? Or someone who got a grand total of 4 career starts in 10 seasons like Tim Legler?

Look, they don't have to get only Hall of Fame guys to comment on the games, but surely there were some regular rotation guys out there who can contribute more than guys who were perennially the 10th, 11th or 12th men on every team they ever played on, right? Like I said, I don't care that they're hiring white guys, I just don't get why they continue to hire scrubs. Can't they find some players out there who can put together a sentence AND who were actually part of the regular rotation for a handful of seasons? Or are such players really that sparse?

Anonymous DKH said...
Wow, if I saw that on TV, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have made it 15 seconds without changing the channel.

Never seen either before, but Miller comes off looking like a moron. Am I watching so she can tell me how great the "balluhz" think she is? Pollard seems pretty calm about the whole thing, except for the quoted comment, which he was insistent about. Odd.

Blogger Cortez said...
"if you just want guys who are knowledgeable and have insight"

That's not "just" what they want.

"and where playing time isn't a prerequisite"

It's not. That should be obvious.

"why get players at all?"

Every headlining broadcaster/analyst isn't a former player and/or coach.

Problem solved!

"But do we really need "analysis" from guys who averaged 2.4 minutes/game for their career like Tom Tolbert?"

"We" (You and I) dont need anything. I can't recall a single instance where an television analyst told me something that wasn't plainly obvious.

What other "general" fans need is someone who is entertaining (clowning around or otherwise), knowledgable, and somewhat telegenic.

Despite your dismay with some of these guys MPG average, they were in the NBA for years.

Jon Barry's ENTIRE FAMILY played professional basketball. Am I supposed to believe his knowledge of the game is lacking in some fashion?

Pshaw!

I'll grant you one thing, Tom Tolbert is an idiot.

"What I don't understand, however, is why we need to get insight from guys who haven't shown they have extensive knowledge of the game"

Sure they have. I assure you, Tim Legler and Scot Pollard know more about basketball and the thoughts and actions of high-level basketball players than 99.999% of the population.

Most viewers don't need a psuedo F.B.I. profiler giving them a psychological analysis of what the star player is thinking.

Scot Pollard playing in the NBA > Jeff VanGundy coaching in the NBA

"Can't they find some players out there who can put together a sentence AND who were actually part of the regular rotation for a handful of seasons?"

Apparently not. (Kenny Smith gets a pass)

...unless you think there is a conspiracy against former black mid-level players.

...which you don't, I guess.

Anonymous Dan said...
I tend to side with Cortez on this argument. I'm a little unclear as to this vague idea of 'credentials' that are required to be a capable analyst/color commentator. I would argue that most of the players who hold these 'credentials' are horrific announcers: Reggie Miller is irritating and rarely has anything insightful to say, Mark Jackson thinks he knows everything despite evidence to the contrary, and I seem to be in the minority of people who can't stand Charles Barkley. I think coaches generally work out better than stars: Hubie Brown, Van Gundy, Doug Collins, etc. generally have something insightful to say, even if they can be irritating. Coaching requires you to think and talk about the game, which is far more relevant than playing it in this case.

What I think Cortez is getting at is that having been a star or whatever else doesn't translate into any ability as a commentator, or even any 'special insight'. Do you really get any insight from Charles Barkley's rants? I don't. I see an egotistical d-bag blowing hot air at whatever irritates him and being allowed to do it because of his name. I'm not saying successful players are incapable of commentating either. I think Kenny Smith and Chris Webber are examples of good players who have been good commentators on a national stage, and there are others who do so locally.

I guess the point is that what is required of a good commentator is some amount of eloquence, and enough passion about the game to be able to contribute something meaningful. For that reason, I would suspect that there are probably legions of bloggers who would be great color commentators because of their passion for the NBA and their ability to express their opinions clearly, but they will never get a chance to do so because they don't have the ins to get started.

With regards to the race thing, I'm not really sure what to make of it. It might be that it's easier to find work as a commentator, coach or GM if you're white, simply because there are a greater number of black players. If you throw out play-by-play guys, who seem to all be white guys with big voices, I think that basketball is a sport that promotes diversity in those positions more than pretty much any sport. I don't think football or baseball have nearly as many non-white people outside of the players. Maybe it's just that with fewer great white players, some of the scrubs make it too.

As for Cheryl Miller and Scott Pollard, I just thought it was hilarious. Miller was trying to be all hard about him not making on time, and he pointed out that it was his flight and just laughed it off. She clearly takes herself way too seriously, and I thought Pollard was great because he didn't seem to care that much and kept his sense of humor.

Interesting discussion, though.

Anonymous Ruben said...
Wow, what a bitch. She doesn't have to wear the hardware, but she has to remind us she is in the hall of fame? Yeah, but that's the women's hall of fame, right?

Scott Pollard is awesome. And I found out today he was white! I always thought he was black like Jason Kidd. I learned something today (I thought dogs... laid eggs) and now I apparently can relate to him better.

But seriously, from that small clip Pollard seems good out there. He is funny, but he still lets other people talk (ahem Charleskennygarywebberahmed)

Anonymous Anonymous said...
cheryl would wipe the floor with that iron maiden-groupie pollard...
that said - wow, i´ve never seen a woman talking as ugly as reggies sistah

2 ALL DA BALLAZ

Anonymous Anonymous said...
Dude fuck scott pollard. the guy's a douche.
He thinks he's funny, but he's just making things awkward and ridiculous.

Anonymous eugene said...
I spent the last twenty minutes trying to come up with a suitable White All-Star/Hall of Fame player who could go into broadcasting.

Hell, even marginal roleplayers.

And I came up with nothing. Could you imagine Larry Bird coming back to broadcasting? He makes Barkley seem coherent by comparison.

Even current players who might have a chance in broadcasting--Szcerbiak, maybe... Korver, in a decade, maybe...

I think this has more to do with the fact that there's not many top-tier White players who might qualify for TV. It's not that Black players who want to go into TV had to have been an elite player, TV just wants elite players, when they have a choice. I mean, really, does anyone think Magic, Barkley, Payton, and Miller would be appropriate (in the traditional sense, anyway) for TV analysis?

On the other hand, who are the possible white players who've been that successful as players?

So, if you take the cynical perspective, and producers are actively searching for white players to appeal to the majority viewership (which still is White, I imagine), then they might have to go to the end of the bench to find that.

And I doubt that Scot Pollard can provide any more insight than Jeff Van Gundy. No way.

Blogger Preveen said...
Of course, you guys realize, you are having this convo on the blog of a white guy who hasn't played any NBA ball, but brings us all here to follow his analysis and insights into the worst of pro-ball :D Maybe the networks know what they are doing, I mean, this blog is pretty popular, right? :D

I mean, Pollard might not have played much, but he did manage to attract attention to himself and be known. I guess that thats what the networks are counting on.

Blogger Ignarus said...
That was hilarious - Either way, Pollard's not there for analysis, really. He's just there because he's probably got a funny take on the game to contrast with the other two views presented. He's unlikely to take anyone too seriously, which is helpful.

I guess I so rarely get any real input from a commentator that isn't a coach talking about the nuts and bolts of the game (heaven forbid anyone read up on stats) that I really value humor more than yet another pointless retreading of the obvious stuff.

Dunno about the race thing - you might be on to something there but I'm trying to put together a large set of terrible white guys who really have no accomplishments as players and it's tough. I like to think that Bill Walton paved the way for big goofy white guys, but he's a HOFer, so Tom Tolbert might be Pollard's true predecessor.

Blogger Cortez said...
"Of course, you guys realize, you are having this convo on the blog of a white guy who hasn't played any NBA ball, but brings us all here to follow his analysis and insights into the worst of pro-ball"

Someone get this man a cash reward. Best comment thus far!

Anonymous Anonymous said...
Man I cannot stand Gary Payton's over-acted, high-pitched nose voice... urk.

Anonymous Anonymous said...
Pollard just playing around and Cheryl getting hysterical and calling brother Reggie for help.

Anonymous senorglory said...
Magic Johnson is the absolute worst commentator in all of sports broadcasting history, despite having been one of the greatest winners on the court of all time.

Anonymous Anonymous said...
What is that garbage about ballers around the world? She played in the WNBA - the equivelent of Men’s Varsity High School Basketball. The fact that WNBA even exists is solely due to the fact that the NBA has bailed them out time and time again. The only reason the womens basketball in general even gets televised is due the the fact that ESPN bought the contractual rights to the NCAAW Tournament. ESPN is the biggest self promoter in the world. They make something like dominos on television a big deal - WHO CARES. Actually, now that I think about it, I would be willing to bet more people watched dominos than watch the WNBA. I wouldn’t attend a single game if someone gave me tickets and told me I would earn $400 an hour while I sat there. Scott Pollard played in the NBA - granted he was terrible - but I would rather watch a game filled with 10 Scott Pollards over 10 Cheryl Millers any day. Bottom line, Cheryl Miller - you are a nobody. Everyone knows you as Reggie Millers sister - you played women’s basketball - no one cares. Oh, and you don’t wear your “hardware” because the WNBA gives out necklaces.

Links to this post:
Create a Link