MLB's The Baseball Network

[TussAgee11]

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

Nit-picky? Hardly.

Burns is a filmmaker, not a baseball man of any kind. It shows throughout every minute of that bloated 18-hour sanctimonious offering. I'm glad you enjoyed it. As a baseball film archive exploration exercise, it was an accomplishment. As a factual documentary, it was a failure. When I watch a "documentary" I am interested in facts. If you have 18 hours to document something, it is likely that a reasonably complete historical picture can be painted. A great many more facts should be presented and a balanced view of the game as seen through the eyes of its participants was what was in order. Not the personal remembrances of Burns's high-brow friends.

Ken Burns has almost zero respect for true baseball followers. He dismissed us completely when all of the errors and butchery and glossing was originally addressed when this thing came out in the mid-90s. I am not a Civil War expert, so I don't know how inaccurate that was. I am a baseball expert. Ken Burns tried to pass off his self indulgence as a historical baseball documentary. It is not. Because he is not a baseball man.

OK, now we are way OT, but hey, its the off season. The History major in me is about to shine - but on an officiating board. Oh well, gotta gloat somewhere

In history circles, Ken Burns' "The Civil War" was acclaimed for its all encompassing look at many aspects of the war. At the time, it was considered the "final" history, something that never needed fixing because it was perfect.

Since its release, it has become clear that he paid attention too much to the common story of sectionalism (Industrial North vs. Agraian South) instead of the complexities and schisms in each region. Also, Burns has failed to discuss the ways in which African Americans pursued and won their own freedom, and instead focuses narrowly on the North's supposed position of morality and Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation.

All in all, the transcripts revealed throughout the documentary are splendid, and it is a great piece if you want to learn mainly about how the Civil War played out in the political, military, and white society arenas.

I'm done. If you got this far, props. Sorry mods, couldn't let it pass.

[Kevin Finnerty]

Great stuff! Thanks for it.

BASEBALL was picked apart a lot earlier, because, frankly, baseball experts overwhelmed the guy with how many of us there are. He thought he could slip 18 hours of that by us and call it "a history." And the way he reacted to the torrent of criticism was a delight to see at the time and remains a delight to recall.

[JRutledge]

Well if you feel the documentary was not a good source of history, then someone should create a better depiction of the history of baseball. There are a million books of the Kennedy Assassination or the Vietnam War; all do not have the same point of view. You make it sound like there is only one point of view about the history of baseball. It has been said that the real truth of history comes from the person that writes it.

Peace

[Kevin Finnerty]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Well if you feel the documentary was not a good source of history, then someone should create a better depiction of the history of baseball. There are a million books of the Kennedy Assassination or the Vietnam War; all do not have the same point of view. You make it sound like there is only one point of view about the history of baseball. It has been said that the real truth of history comes from the person that writes it.

Peace

I'm one of the people who felt that the grand old game should have its history written and recorded by baseball people. Burns is a fraud.

I'm not hard to please. An honest filmmaker making an honest effort would have yielded an acceptable work. And it would have probably been profitable--a Burns priority (before accuracy). I will never be among those who want to see it recorded by a guy who has author George Plimpton describe Bobby Thomson's Shot Heard 'Round The World rather than Bobby Thomson and Ralph Branca themselves. (They each told me shortly after that time that they weren't even contacted.) And there are dozens of events that we have to endure a bunch of other accomplished intellectuals who happen to know a baseball when they see it. Make a film about evolution and hear them wax about that---this is baseball! I don't care what Doris Kearns Goodwin has to say about baseball, I care what she has to say about American history. I care what baseball people have to say about baseball. And you make an 18-hour film about anything, and it should be complete. I'm still waiting for the history after the Dodgers and Giants moved West. There was some interesting stuff then, also.

Some enjoyable old films, though ... even if some of the films shown are of different events than they are claiming to be.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

I'm one of the people who felt that the grand old game should have its history written and recorded by baseball people. Burns is a fraud.

I'm not hard to please. An honest filmmaker making an honest effort would have yielded an acceptable work. And it would have probably been profitable--a Burns priority (before accuracy). I will never be among those who want to see it recorded by a guy who has author George Plimpton describe Bobby Thomson's Shot Heard 'Round The World rather than Bobby Thomson and Ralph Branca themselves. (They each told me shortly after that time that they weren't even contacted.) And there are dozens of events that we have to endure a bunch of other accomplished intellectuals who happen to know a baseball when they see it. Make a film about evolution and hear them wax about that---this is baseball! I don't care what Doris Kearns Goodwin has to say about baseball, I care what she has to say about American history. I care what baseball people have to say about baseball. And you make an 18-hour film about anything, and it should be complete. I'm still waiting for the history after the Dodgers and Giants moved West. There was some interesting stuff then, also.

Some enjoyable old films, though ... even if some of the films shown are of different events than they are claiming to be.

I remember enjoying Burns's Baseball when it came out until Keith Olbermann put in a lot of research detailing all the inaccuracies. Still some great footage, but it reminds me of most nostalgia - not exactly factually accurate.

[Kevin Finnerty]

We ripped it apart at the outset.

I even attended a Q & A with Burns after viewing a pre-release copy and reading part of the companion book. You know how non-baseball people are when you expose their total lack of knowledge or feel for the game? He was one of the worst, because he thought he knew the game and was intent on keeping up that front despite being exposed by a roomful of baseball experts. He did everything but cry and take his toys home.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

I remember enjoying Burns's Baseball when it came out until Keith Olbermann put in a lot of research detailing all the inaccuracies.

Yes, tearing people down and spouting off at the mouth are two things Keith Olbermann is very adept at.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Yes, tearing people down and spouting off at the mouth are two things Keith Olbermann is very adept at.

I guess the truth hurts.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

I'm one of the people who felt that the grand old game should have its history written and recorded by baseball people. Burns is a fraud.

I'm not hard to please. An honest filmmaker making an honest effort would have yielded an acceptable work. And it would have probably been profitable--a Burns priority (before accuracy). I will never be among those who want to see it recorded by a guy who has author George Plimpton describe Bobby Thomson's Shot Heard 'Round The World rather than Bobby Thomson and Ralph Branca themselves. (They each told me shortly after that time that they weren't even contacted.) And there are dozens of events that we have to endure a bunch of other accomplished intellectuals who happen to know a baseball when they see it. Make a film about evolution and hear them wax about that---this is baseball! I don't care what Doris Kearns Goodwin has to say about baseball, I care what she has to say about American history. I care what baseball people have to say about baseball. And you make an 18-hour film about anything, and it should be complete. I'm still waiting for the history after the Dodgers and Giants moved West. There was some interesting stuff then, also.

Some enjoyable old films, though ... even if some of the films shown are of different events than they are claiming to be.

Are you saying that Burns is much different than people that believe a fat, out of shape player could not be surpassed by players of today that make millions and work out all the time, but only do so with drugs?

OK....whatever you say.

[Kevin Finnerty]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Are you saying that Burns is much different than people that believe a fat, out of shape player could not be surpassed by players of today that make millions and work out all the time, but only do so with drugs?

OK....whatever you say.

Babe Ruth won 18, 23 and 24 games as the game's best left-hander and third-best pitcher overall behind Walter Johnson and Grover Cleveland Alexander. His World Series record for consecutive scoreless innings once held by Christy Mathewson stood until 1961 when Whitey Ford broke it. He won an AL ERA title and still shares the AL single-season record for shutouts by a lefty. Then, at age 25, at the dawn of the lively ball era that he ushered in, he slugged 54 homers in 142 games. By the time he was 26, he was the game's all-time home run king with two 50-homer seasons, two 20-win seasons, four home run crowns and an ERA title under his belt.

Never has another man been a league-leading pitcher and league-leading slugger. Combined, he led the league in 78 pitching and batting categories. And until someone does come along and master pitching and slugging, the two most sought-after skills in the game, Babe Ruth will remain the greatest player who ever lived.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

Babe Ruth won 18, 23 and 24 games as the game's best left-hander and third-best pitcher overall behind Walter Johnson and Grover Cleveland Alexander. His World Series record for consecutive scoreless innings once held by Christy Mathewson stood until 1961 when Whitey Ford broke it. He won an AL ERA title and still shares the AL single-season record for shutouts by a lefty. Then, at age 25, at the dawn of the lively ball era that he ushered in, he slugged 54 homers in 142 games. By the time he was 26, he was the game's all-time home run king with two 50-homer seasons, two 20-win seasons, four home run crowns and an ERA title under his belt.

Never has another man been a league-leading pitcher and league-leading slugger. Combined, he led the league in 78 pitching and batting categories. And until someone does come along and master pitching and slugging, the two most sought-after skills in the game, Babe Ruth will remain the greatest player who ever lived.

There has never been another man, because they will not let them, not because he was a much better athlete in the history of the game. Just look at Rick Ankiel of the St. Louis Cardinals. Now I would never compare the accomplishments of Ruth to Ankiel, but I am sure if given a chance there are many players that can hit and pitch, but they are often want people to focus on one or the other. And even if you can hit, people want certain kind of players for specific position.

And my ultimate point is there was an explosion of 500 Home Run hitters and let the "experts" tell it, that only happen because of drugs. Not that athletes in all sports lift more weights, train at an earlier age, played organized ball at earlier age, play more games long before they get to the pros and these "experts" want you to believe he could not be surpassed. Oh, I almost forgot, Babe Ruth did not play against Blacks or Latinos either, which some historians have shown that many of those players were better than the average player of that time. And even if they were not as good, we have no way of knowing for sure what many of those players would have done before 1947.

I honestly do not know what is so special about what the "experts" have to say other than Burns or some fantasy of what used to be.

Peace