RIP Stuart Scott

[wadesworld]

Hard to believe Stuart Scott passed away at age 49 due to cancer.  Obviously everyone knew he was fighting that battle for 7 (maybe 8 now?) years and he let people behind the scenes of his fight with the feature on him at the ESPY's, but outside of that you would've never guessed the guy was sick.  It speaks a lot about a person who can go through that type of battle and never publicly complain about the cards he was dealt, and someone who continued to show up and do his job and what he loved through it all.  At times I personally thought he was over the top with his on air personality, but it speaks volume about the type of person he was that he faced this challenge yet never changed a thing about himself.  Class act.  Cancer sucks.

[JWags85]

Watching Eisen's relaying of the news and subsequent expression of his feelings was absolutely heartbreaking.  His schtick was too much for some people but he was a brilliant personality and a trailblazer, RIP

[MU82]

As a broadcaster, he was not my cup of tea. But I very much respect everything he accomplished and I am in awe of the way he battled cancer with such dignity for such a long period of time.

[Groin_pull]

Very sad news. But he helped make ESPN practically unwatchable. However, he helped me kick my SportsCenter addiction.

[wadesworld]

Very sad news. But he helped make ESPN practically unwatchable. However, he helped me kick my SpoertsCenter addiction.

Cool.

[jsglow]

Cancer sucks.  Win every day.

[keefe]

Very sad news. But he helped make ESPN practically unwatchable. However, he helped me kick my SportsCenter addiction.

Couldn't agree more. He was insufferable.

[MerrittsMustache]

Couldn't agree more. He was insufferable.

De mortuis nil nisi bonum.


Like him or not, Stuart was one of a kind and a groundbreaking news anchor. He helped make ESPN what it was in its hey-day and he'll be missed. RIP, Stu.
 

[ChicosBailBonds]

De mortuis nil nisi bonum.


Like him or not, Stuart was one of a kind and a groundbreaking news anchor. He helped make ESPN what it was in its hey-day and he'll be missed. RIP, Stu.
 

This.  Good man, better father.  Didn't care for some of the schtick, but many people loved it. 

[keefe]

De mortuis nil nisi bonum.


Like him or not, Stuart was one of a kind and a groundbreaking news anchor. He helped make ESPN what it was in its hey-day and he'll be missed. RIP, Stu.
 

My comment likely seemed a bit abrupt as the man passed away. But I was referencing his on-air personae which placed schtick before substance. ESPN likely needed schmaltz in the early days to generate buzz but I want content rather than Berman or Scott's act.

Were these guys groundbreaking? Perhaps, but hardly in a positive way.

I hope his family finds comfort in his goodness and fond remembrance.

[Golden Avalanche]

My comment likely seemed a bit abrupt as the man passed away. But I was referencing his on-air personae which placed schtick before substance. ESPN likely needed schmaltz in the early days to generate buzz but I want content rather than Berman or Scott's act.

Were these guys groundbreaking? Perhaps, but hardly in a positive way.

I hope his family finds comfort in his goodness and fond remembrance.

I don't understand everyone calling Scott "groundbreaking". To me, Patrick/Olbermann were the groundbreakers with regard to taking Sportscenter from a dull highlights show to must watch television. Those two blazed the path that many followed (some spectacularly failed on those coals) and Scott was one of the followers who took ESPN from a channel that relays the narrative to a channel that creates the narrative, thus making it unwatchable for a large percentage of intelligent human beings.

[GGGG]

I don't understand everyone calling Scott "groundbreaking". To me, Patrick/Olbermann were the groundbreakers with regard to taking Sportscenter from a dull highlights show to must watch television. Those two blazed the path that many followed (some spectacularly failed on those coals) and Scott was one of the followers who took ESPN from a channel that relays the narrative to a channel that creates the narrative, thus making it unwatchable for a large percentage of intelligent human beings.

+1000

[MerrittsMustache]

I don't understand everyone calling Scott "groundbreaking". To me, Patrick/Olbermann were the groundbreakers with regard to taking Sportscenter from a dull highlights show to must watch television. Those two blazed the path that many followed (some spectacularly failed on those coals) and Scott was one of the followers who took ESPN from a channel that relays the narrative to a channel that creates the narrative, thus making it unwatchable for a large percentage of intelligent human beings.

He was groundbreaking from the standpoint that he brought "urban vernacular," for lack of a better term, to the mainstream. He called highlights as himself - a strong, confident black man. That was something not seen on a national news program, even in the mid-1990s. Sure, he drove away some of the "old white guy" viewers but he also  brought in younger viewers and acted as a role model for many African Americans in the world of journalism. Much like Keith and Dan, a generation of sports fans grew up with Stu and Rich bringing them their highlights (before SC became the mindless cluster of hype and hyperbole that it is today). You may not have liked his style, but many, many viewers did.

[GGGG]

He was groundbreaking from the standpoint that he brought "urban vernacular," for lack of a better term, to the mainstream. He called highlights as himself - a strong, confident black man. That was something not seen on a national news program, even in the mid-1990s. Sure, he drove away some of the "old white guy" viewers but he also  brought in younger viewers and acted as a role model for many African Americans in the world of journalism. Much like Keith and Dan, a generation of sports fans grew up with Stu and Rich bringing them their highlights (before SC became the mindless cluster of hype and hyperbole that it is today). You may not have liked his style, but many, many viewers did.

There were plenty "strong, confident black men" in national news and sports prior to Stuart Scott.  Bryant Gumbel was hosting NBC's NFL pre-game in the 70s, and was host of the Today show for 15 years.  Fred Hickman was doing similar schtick for CNN's Sports Tonight a decade earlier.  (And Sports Tonight was about as popular as Sports Center was in the 1980s.)

Look, I understand he was popular.  I understand that a generation of sports viewers identify with him.  I understand he fought a courageous fight.  I just wish modern obituaries weren't full of such hyperbole.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I don't understand everyone calling Scott "groundbreaking". To me, Patrick/Olbermann were the groundbreakers with regard to taking Sportscenter from a dull highlights show to must watch television. Those two blazed the path that many followed (some spectacularly failed on those coals) and Scott was one of the followers who took ESPN from a channel that relays the narrative to a channel that creates the narrative, thus making it unwatchable for a large percentage of intelligent human beings.

I agree, but if you go deeper into this it is not hard to figure out why.  When is the last time you saw a moment of silence before games when an ESPN announcer died?  When Tom Mees died, did that happen at ESPN?  No.

Some of the "groundbreaking" stuff has to do with Scott being African American.  If you read Adonde or Whitlock from yesterday, that is where a lot of this is stemming from IMO.  Nothing wrong with that, but that is the added layer.  Patrick and Olbermann were the groundbreakers....hell, even Berman to a large extent (no pun intended) as he was the first to go off script and put personality into things.  Scott connected to different people, a different generation and a different segment of society, thus the "groundbreaking" label.

[MerrittsMustache]

There were plenty "strong, confident black men" in national news and sports prior to Stuart Scott.  Bryant Gumbel was hosting NBC's NFL pre-game in the 70s, and was host of the Today show for 15 years.  Fred Hickman was doing similar schtick for CNN's Sports Tonight a decade earlier.  (And Sports Tonight was about as popular as Sports Center was in the 1980s.)

Look, I understand he was popular.  I understand that a generation of sports viewers identify with him.  I understand he fought a courageous fight.  I just wish modern obituaries weren't full of such hyperbole.

True. I should have been clearer. Gumbel and Hickman were obviously "strong, confident black men" but Scott was the one of the first to, as I stated, bring an urban feel to highlights. Patrick, Olbermann and Berman all displayed their personalities on-air and so did Scott. However, Scott's heritage and personality were very different that those coming before him.

Just because you weren't a fan and didn't connect with him the way that many ESPN viewers did, that doesn't mean his obit is hyperbole. Admittedly, I was never the biggest fan of his schtick but I do recognize the impact that he made on the world of sports journalism.

[wadesworld]

I just turned 26 and Stuart Scott was on air for 21 years, so I can't really say I would know whether or not he was a trail blazer, was ground breaking, was the first of his kind, etc.  But I guess I would trust those that work in the profession and saw its transformation when they say all those things about him.  You don't have to say those things at all if they're not true.  They could talk about how he fought hard, how he was full of life, how he was a great father, friend, and co-worker, all of which were also said, and those would say everything you would need to know about him.  There would be no reason to say he was a trail blazer if he wasn't.

If, Heaven forbid, I pass away in my sleep tonight, I would not expect or hope that my coworkers would call me a trailblazer in the accounting profession.  I'm not, and I don't think anybody would argue I am.  But I would hope that they would think I was someone who worked hard and was a good co-worker.

[Golden Avalanche]

I agree, but if you go deeper into this it is not hard to figure out why.  When is the last time you saw a moment of silence before games when an ESPN announcer died?  When Tom Mees died, did that happen at ESPN?  No.

Some of the "groundbreaking" stuff has to do with Scott being African American.  If you read Adonde or Whitlock from yesterday, that is where a lot of this is stemming from IMO.  Nothing wrong with that, but that is the added layer.  Patrick and Olbermann were the groundbreakers....hell, even Berman to a large extent (no pun intended) as he was the first to go off script and put personality into things.  Scott connected to different people, a different generation and a different segment of society, thus the "groundbreaking" label.

On the first part, the moment of silence at some events was clearly a kiss to the hand of the Godfather. You know more than anyone that ESPN is the pimp that runs the street. They own nearly everyone with their power so I equate it to when your Granny says "thank your uncle for the two dollars he gave you for Christmas" and you do so even though your uncle is a nonce and two dollars is crap. What Granny says, goes. As for Mees, if ESPN was 1/10th what they are now when he tragically drowned I'd hope they'd do the same. Alas, when you're fledging and someone perishes it seems to matter less to the viewership numbers. Also, Mees lacked the all important cancer "angle" that ESPN has invested in so heavily over the last 15 years.

On the second part, certainly most of it is due to Scott being black. I fully grasp that Scott married the burgeoning early 90s hip hop culture to sports highlights and, directly or not, created the behemoth of "Hip Hop Sports" we see today where Jay-Z is running an agency and Little Wayne is making cash on riddles about his home city's colors, etc. To me, that was a niche that needed exploiting and Scott was on the vanguard of doing so and should rightly be remembered for it but when dealing with "groundbreaking" visionaries I don't see him on the Mt. Rushmore of Bristol.

In the end, all semantics and a fine case of it taking many to fill a world.

[ChicosBailBonds]

If anyone listened to Dan Patrick this morning, especially his interview with Steve Levy, I think he nailed it in terms of the racial component.  As Dan stated (I'm paraphrasing), "Stu's stuff was self serving at times, didn't connect with me (Dan), but it connected with a certain audience."  He then went to talk about how he was being him, not trying to be the white guy, and that connected with many people and turned off others, but he was true to himself.

RIP

[MerrittsMustache]

On the second part, certainly most of it is due to Scott being black. I fully grasp that Scott married the burgeoning early 90s hip hop culture to sports highlights and, directly or not, created the behemoth of "Hip Hop Sports" we see today where Jay-Z is running an agency and Little Wayne is making cash on riddles about his home city's colors, etc. To me, that was a niche that needed exploiting and Scott was on the vanguard of doing so and should rightly be remembered for it but when dealing with "groundbreaking" visionaries I don't see him on the Mt. Rushmore of Bristol.

In the end, all semantics and a fine case of it taking many to fill a world.

No one said anything about "the Mt. Rushmore of Bristol." I don't see how you can argue against the groundbreaking tag being applied to Scott while also stating: "Scott married the burgeoning early 90s hip hop culture to sports highlights and, directly or not, created the behemoth of "Hip Hop Sports" we see today."

[JWags85]

I just turned 26 and Stuart Scott was on air for 21 years, so I can't really say I would know whether or not he was a trail blazer, was ground breaking, was the first of his kind, etc.  But I guess I would trust those that work in the profession and saw its transformation when they say all those things about him.  You don't have to say those things at all if they're not true.  They could talk about how he fought hard, how he was full of life, how he was a great father, friend, and co-worker, all of which were also said, and those would say everything you would need to know about him.  There would be no reason to say he was a trail blazer if he wasn't.

Agreed.  It was meaningful heartfelt praise from very respected members of the community.  I was a fan, but could see how his style grated on some people, but he was true to himself and was like that from the start.  He never became Berman, who is just a caricature.  I think the most moving was the reactions of guys like Keyshawn Johnson and Cris Carter and their stories of how he helped them move into broadcasting cause they could relate to him and he made them realize they didn't have to censor or change themselves to make it on TV.  That was his profound impact.  He's worthy of respect and praise, but I don't think you'll see guys crying on national television over the impact that Bryant or Greg Gumbel had on their lives.

Also, seeing Scott Van Pelt cry is BRUTAL.

[brandx]

I agree, but if you go deeper into this it is not hard to figure out why.  When is the last time you saw a moment of silence before games when an ESPN announcer died?  When Tom Mees died, did that happen at ESPN?  No.

Mees was best known as a hockey announcer - he died during the baseball season. I don't think many MLB, NBA, or NFL players identified with him.

[Golden Avalanche]

No one said anything about "the Mt. Rushmore of Bristol." I don't see how you can argue against the groundbreaking tag being applied to Scott while also stating: "Scott married the burgeoning early 90s hip hop culture to sports highlights and, directly or not, created the behemoth of "Hip Hop Sports" we see today."

As I wrote, this is all semantics so this will be it for me.

I'm likely older than you. ESPN has been a part of my life both in their formative years and my formative years. We have history. What is has become, which is a direct result of the early 90s personalities that tried to "up the game" of Patrick/Olbermann/Berman, is not inherently impressive and thus the only person(s) I'd label with a "groundbreaker" tag since that time would be an executive like Bornstein and/or Bodenheimer(sp?). They truly changed the dynamic of sports television as it is today.

[Groin_pull]

I guess you could call Stu Scott a groundbreaker, but not in a positive way (at least for me). I used to be addicted to SportsCenter. I would watch replays over and over again. Scott was a huge reason that I stopped watching. Haven't seen SportsCenter in years. Now, I watch only games on ESPN...and that's if I have no other options. No interest in Skip Bayless, S.A.S, or any of their other "personalities" or programming. However, I do find many of their 30 for 30 documentaries to be quite good.

My condolences to Scott's family. I don't mean to be harsh. Simply stating that he helped drive me away from ESPN.

[wadesworld]

Stuart Scott and Steven A. Smith are not even remotely close to the same level if you ask me.  Stuart could definitely be over the top in my opinion, but I never changed the channel because of him.  I certainly change the channel all the time because of guys like Steven A. Smith, Mel Kiper, Todd McShay, Skip Bayless, etc.