Talk:Joe Buck

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Flag
Portal
Joe Buck is maintained by WikiProject Baseball, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of baseball and baseball-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, or contribute to the discussion
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Article Grading:
The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.


This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ]
(If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
This article is supported by the Sports and games work group.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Missouri, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Missouri. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
This article is supported by the Radio WikiProject.

This project provides a central approach to Radio-related subjects on Wikipedia.
Please participate by editing the article attached to this page and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards. Visit the wikiproject page for more details.

Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

I think the sentence should probably read: "Many considered this hypocritical because of Buck's commercials with the fictional Leon." But can we get a citation? Who is "many"? Bbpen 04:58, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I consider it relevant to mention that Leon and Randy Moss are very similar. I also added a link at the bottom of the article citing Woody Paige, an analyst at ESPN. -WikiTony

OK, so: "At least one sports columnist called this hypocritical because of Buck's commercials with the fictional Leon." And the link you added does not point to the relevant article. Can you fix? (I've removed the sentence pending a working citation.) Bbpen 16:53, 11 January 2006 (UTC)


Changed 'many' to some, added a citation detailing the entire incident in question. this is an important aspect of the subject and needs to be included in the article to prevent slant. WikiTony 02:45, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Is there citation and/or quotes out there for Buck's White Sox "bias"? I didn't watch all the games and don't remember the commentary, but I do know that the White Sox really were lucky in those games. Not in a "they didn't earn it" sense, but when you win a game on a last-chance play where a slider barely went into the dirt and the catcher didn't react to it, that's luck. --67.62.109.178 18:34, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I personally removed the comments concerning Joe Buck's alleged White Sox bias. Who ever added those comments doesn't have any actual quotes or links to back up this statement. Thus, I would regard that as a "point-of-view" addition rather than anything factual. TMC1982 May 15, 2006 (UTC)

Can we have just one Wikipedia article without a "Controversy" section? The guy has won 6 Emmys, which are only briefly mentioned, but a third of the article was about some stupid controversy, justified by comments at some forum?

I removed a sentence that wasn't doing any work in the article, and clearly showed a negative bias. Also, the content immediately after his mother's quote doesn't cite its sources. Jfarr11 04:08, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Quotes

Does the quote that's currently in the article now even remotely noteworthy? I mean, its not a legendary call by any means. Its just him saying that the Cards won the World Series. Its not even among his most famous quotes.--Seventy-one 20:37, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Needs source

Joe Buck is regularly voted as one of the worse, if not the worst, broadcaster for both MLB and NFL by both fans and the media. In fact, for the past three years, he has "won" the worst NFL announcer award from Sports Illustrated.

This needs a source. Christopher Parham (talk) 02:57, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

  • And yet he keeps his job and people continue to watch the games. Apparently Buck's presence isn't all that offensive (although I like Dick Stockton better). Wahkeenah 00:28, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Controveries??

First of all, there is no proof that Joe Buck even knew that said tradition even exists. In fact his comment suggests that he didn't know. You can't comment on a tradition you do not know about so unless you personally ask him (Joe), saying the he "did not tell the audiance" is unnecessary.

Secondly, making an off the cuff remark (about Tank Johnson) on a pregame show does not constitute a controversy. That paragraph is pointless and I'm removing it again. I need a very compelling reason to leave in the article. Lets discuss it.--BoyoJonesJr 15:39, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I was merely trying to show how when Buck makes an "off the cuff" remark it displays how much dislike there is for the man simply because he infuses his beliefs in each and every broadcast. There are many more examples then this of course (such as his dislike of Curb Your Enthusiasm)... if you simply google the man's name you will see much dislike for him within the first page of results... He is viewed as very smarmy by many viewers but I guess that is opinion. No big loss if it is not in.

I changed it to say he "appeared to be unaware of", its less pov and speculative--BoyoJonesJr 15:44, 16 January 2007 (UTC)