I agree with Mr. Neal's comments on this topic.  Since Frank and Tom are
broadcasting Gopher games on a regular basis they are more knowledgeable
on the gophers than other teams.  This will lead to more discussion about
the Gophers than about opponents.  Moreover, since their audience is
primarily Gopher fans, why shouldn't they.  They get paid to inform and
entertain the homer viewer.  I like Frank and Tom not because they are
pro-gopher but because they genuinely appear to have a good time doing
their broadcasts.
 
 
 
zac "ren" halter
proud unofficial sponser of the NMU fareill tour of the WCHA
 
 
On Tue, 26 Nov
1996, J. Michael Neal wrote:
 
> Eric Burton wrote:
>
> > yOn Tue, 26 Nov 1996, Lee Sveinson wrote:
> >
> >  > I want to pose a question hockey fans (UND, St. Cloud, UMD, ect) in the
> >  > MSC viewing area.  How many people in the MSC viewing area watch MSC
> with
> >  > the volume off and listen to a local radio station broadcasting the game
> >  > when your team in playing the Gophers, due to MSC's biased nature?
>  Please
> >  > email me privately.  Please, no flames wanted.
> >          Lee I think that MSC is a good channel for the Gophers but We can
> >  not listen to a game by the Announcers (nothing personell to Frank or
> >  Tom) when they are playing the Sioux because you will not get an objective
> >  game. The annoucers are good but the are so pro-gopher especially tom
> reid.
> >  If I watch the Gophs play someone else I will keep the Volume up. It is
> >  like listening to Ed Shultz we he was the announcer for the sioux vs the
> >  Bison. probably a really good announcer but he is not (was) objective.
> >  I would once like to here them question Doug Woog or a move he made from
> >  the bench.
>
> This subject comes out of North Dakota on a regular basis.  The best advice I
> can give you is: DON'T LISTEN TO A BROADCAST ON YOUR HATED RIVAL'S HOME
> NETWORK.  Trust me, Frank Mazzocco and Tom Reid are not as blatantly
> pro-Gopher as you guys indicate.  They do spend most of their time talking
> about Minnesota and they do seem to prefer a Minnesota victory.  But this
> does not stop them from criticizing Gopher play or pointing out when
> Minnesota got away with a penalty that should have been called (Reid in
> particular does this).  I do seem to remember them questioning Woog's
> decisions from time to time, though I can't remember any off the top of my
> head.
>
> In the wide world of sports broadcasting, they aren't really such big
> 'homers'.  Try watching either baseball team out of Chicago on WGN, or the
> guy who does the radio for Michigan hockey (or used to, I heard that he moved
> over to the Red Wings). The coverage of the Olympics here in the US, or the
> World Cup in Canada are other examples.  It's too bad you missed Bob Ufer
> doing Michigan football or Johnny Most doing the Boston Celtics.
>
> Part of the problem here is the listener.  Every comment they make supporting
> the team they broadcast is amplified; I know because I've done the same thing
> when the occasion has arisen.  If your a die-hard Sioux fan, go ahead and
> listen to your home radio broadcast with the TV muted.  It's what I'd do.
>  But don't pass it off on Mazzocco and Reid being hopelessly biased
> announcers.
>
> J. Michael Neal
>
> HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
> [log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.
>
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.