Monday, June 22, 2020

Reliving Sports In a Different Time

Like most of you, in order to get my sports fix over the past three months, I've had to rely on the classic games that virtually every sports network has been airing on repeat in lieu of live programming.  I've gotta admit, some of them have been fun to watch, especially the events I'd never seen before!  (The fact that I already know who wins takes a little bit away from it, but not enough to prevent me from enjoying it.  After all, these classics were chosen for a reason!)

Anyway, the one thing that's most noticeable on those old games is how vastly different things were back then.  The production value, obviously, has improved significantly over time.  But it's more than the production value (which was still pretty good for those broadcasts to have been preserved as well as they are).  You can tell within five minutes exactly what era the game is from.  And, in my opinion, the older the better.

The most noticeable difference between watching a game from today and a game from any decade before the 2010s isn't the black bars on the side of the screen.  It's the graphics.  Or, I should say, lack thereof.

It's graphics overload on the broadcasts of sporting events today.  I'm not saying that's a bad thing.  But we've definitely taken for granted that the scoreboard will be up there permanently, along with any other pertinent details to that particular sport (clock, timeouts remaining, down & distance, shot clock, inning, base runners, outs, count, etc.).  The scoreboard is even color-coated to each team!

That stuff is so taken for granted that it feels like the broadcast is missing something without it.  ESPN provides graphics templates to every college who produces their own ESPN3 broadcasts, but even if you don't have all those bells and whistles, people expect to see a scoreboard at the very least.  And I'm just talking about college webcasts!  If you don't have all that and then some during a professionally-produced TV broadcast, don't even bother.

But, as you can see on these classic broadcasts, that wasn't always the case.  Not by a long shot.  In fact, the older the game is, the fewer and more infrequent the graphics.  And, you know what?  The games don't really lose that much!  In fact, it almost enhances them.  Which I guess proves that old adage: "Less is more."  Let the broadcaster do his job and describe the action.

Broadcasts these days are so packed with information that it's almost overwhelming.  I'm not just talking about the graphics, either.  You have all of the different camera angles, all of the different features, all of the sponsored elements.  And don't forget the mic'd up players and in-game interviews.  Again, I'm not saying any of these are bad things.  It's nice a nice change of pace to watch these simple productions with basic graphics.

Although, I have to admit, as much as I've been praising these older games, not having the scoreboard up there the whole time takes some getting used to at first.  On those World Series games from the 80s that have been so enjoyable, they flashed up the count after every pitch, but the score only when somebody scored or at the half-inning.  At least baseball doesn't have a clock to worry about!  The Lakers-Pistons NBA Finals games from the 80s had the score and quarter, but not the time or shot clock, so you really had no idea what time in the game it was.

Another thing that struck me is how effective those simple graphics were.  They were all basically the same.  White text and yellow numbers (both with a black outline) or vice versa.  As technology improved, the graphics obviously became more sophisticated and more colors were added.  But you can't tell me that those basic graphics from the 80s didn't get the point across just fine.  (The white graphics on the black-and-white broadcasts are a little hard to read, but they were limited in what they could do, so I'll give them a bit of a break.)

There's another way to tell these classic games are from a bygone era, too.  The time of day!  So many of these major events took place in the afternoon, which is simply unfathomable today.  Yet back then, a World Series game played in the sunshine was normal.  There also weren't 35 pitching changes and sponsor reads they had to get in, so the games were quicker.  They could actually complete the whole thing in under three hours.

Last week, MLB Network showed Games 6 & 7 of the 1971 World Series.  Game 7 was at 2:00 on a Sunday, followed by the NFL.  The 1:00 football games were preempted (I was also confused because the Jets and Giants were both playing on the same network at the same time, then I realized this was when the home team's games were still blacked out in their local markets).  All so that everything was over well before the network's shows started.

Nowadays, that would never happen.  Prime time shows get preempted by sports, not the other way around.  Beyond that, they meticulously make the broadcast schedules specifically so that events don't conflict.  (One of the reasons Rob Manfred is so determined to have the MLB season end on Sept. 27 is because the postseason TV schedule has been set with FOX and TBS for months.)

In this era where fans pay thousands of dollars to be as close to the action as possible, I was also struck by the stadiums.  Those multi-use cookie cutters all had Astroturf and all looked the same from the outside.  They all had character, though.  More than that, though, just looking at the overhead shots and seeing how much room there was in foul territory or how high the walls were or, because they were also football stadiums, how many fans they could cram in there really was impressive.

Again, I'm not comparing those classic broadcasts with the ones from today.  I'm not going to say which are "better."  They're from a different era, so they're different.  And it's been a refreshing change of pace.  (Which doesn't mean I can't wait for live sports to reenter my life soon!)

No comments:

Post a Comment