Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: dcsportsbog and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS

GQ doesn't approve of Dibble/Carpenter

Nats fans continue to be split on MASN's broadcast team of Bob Carpenter and Rob Dibble, as evidenced by the rollicking good times in the comments section any time I mention Dibble's name. SB Nation DC ran a Dibble approval poll last week: 52 percent of respondents said they disapproved of Dibble, 37 percent approved, and nine percent said they didn't care. (He fared far better in the similar Federal Baseball poll, although there were far fewer respondents.)

This week, GQ checks in. Carpenter and Dibble are judged the fifth-worst broadcasting team in MLB. The magazine describes them as "unrepentant homers," says Dibble occasionally growls "like he's looking for a fight," and claims the duo is "incapable of penetrating the game's action in any meaningful way, which perhaps explains the hometown cheerleading, as they try to make up for their vacuousness."

So I'm guessing the GQ staff might have voted "disapprove" in the approval poll.

(If you're curious, the four broadcast teams ranked behind Carpenter and Dibble were Matt Underwood and Rick Manning from the Indians, Dewayne Staats and Kevin Kennedy from the Rays, Thom Brennaman and Jeff Brantley from the Reds and Hawk Harrelson and Steve Stone from the White Sox.)

By Dan Steinberg  |  July 12, 2010; 11:28 AM ET
Categories:  Media , Nats  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Strasburg has MLB's top selling jersey
Next: Redskins' new marketing video

Comments

they aren't that bad. wow!

Posted by: dpierce4g63 | July 12, 2010 11:34 AM | Report abuse

they're certainly no joe b. and locker though... that's for sure.

Posted by: dpierce4g63 | July 12, 2010 11:35 AM | Report abuse

GQ thought there were four broadcasting teams worse? Wow. I'd actually say that's pretty positive spin on Dibble.

I'm kinda curious to hear some of the four broadcasters whom they thought were worse. What could possibly be more of a trainwreck then grunting over any good play the Nats happen to make?

Posted by: cassander | July 12, 2010 11:45 AM | Report abuse

I like them /shrug

Posted by: tgerbracht | July 12, 2010 11:50 AM | Report abuse

I generally tune into the Nationals broadcast to watch the Nationals. I really don't need to hear about how lucky Livan Hernandez has been or how great the other teams pitcher is. I want to hear a Natscentric broadcast. I don't get the arguement that OUR broadcasters are positive about OUR team. I would stop listening if all they did was talk about how terrible or players are and how stupid the management of the team was, and how great all the teams we play are compared to us.

Posted by: david_amazing | July 12, 2010 12:02 PM | Report abuse

wonder how often the GQ staff watches Nats games.

Will Dibble be critiquing the fall fashions?

Posted by: boywaja | July 12, 2010 12:04 PM | Report abuse

Although Dibble is very much prone to use the we, I don't really detect much homerism in his analysis. He does talk about the things that, say, Strasburg is doing wrong with "too many strikes" and the like. As such, both Bob and Rob are quite tolerable.

Posted by: BookGuy | July 12, 2010 12:08 PM | Report abuse

I didn't read the piece, but I wasn't aware that GQ was considered to be an authority on sports broadcasters, unless it was perhaps weighing in on their sartorial selections?

As for the poll, it represents the opinion of SB Nation DC denizens, or at least, of those denizens who chose to vote. I'm not part of SB Nation, but I am a citizen of NatsTown, and I endorse Dibble as a Nats broadcaster. (I'm natsfan1a and I approve of this message.) :-)

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | July 12, 2010 12:09 PM | Report abuse

GQ's comments sum up what many Nats fans have been complaining about for a long time.

I'm frankly surprised by the commenters reactions above though. Dibble has got to be the worst sports broadcaster out there. How can citizens of NatsTown stand to listen to him when he talks over plays and uses "we" and "our" all the time? Aren't you tired of him always comparing himself and his playing days to each and every inning of the current game?

Maybe some of you like to listen to Dibble because it would be like watching the game with a buddy - he says stuff that your buddies might say. Dibble is paid to be a professional broadcaster and there is a big difference. I tune in to hear professionals and find myself muting the TV and listening to Charlie and Dave instead.

Posted by: ilovethenats | July 12, 2010 12:20 PM | Report abuse

That's a matter of opinion, ilovethenats, and, as we know, everybody has one. :-)

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | July 12, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

It's a harsh assessment, but it does summarize the duo's inadequacies well. Maybe they could've left it with the statement that they're "incapable of penetrating the game's action in any meaningful way," and avoided the allegation of "vacuousness."

I have Extra Innings, so I'm usually forced to watch the home broadcast of a given game. Over the past few years, the Nats broadcast due has been, in general, one of the worst in the NL (I don't watch a lot of AL ball).

Posted by: JohninMpls | July 12, 2010 12:29 PM | Report abuse

I by no means am an expert on MLB announcers but:

I've never had a problem with Bob Carpenter. Do you think that's an indictment on Dibble's polarizing style?

Also surprised that Thom Brennaman is on the list. Doesn't he do national games? He might not be amazing, but he doesn't stink either.

A bit harsh if you ask me.....

Posted by: CF11555 | July 12, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

I generally like Dibble. He's a former player, and considers himself and Carpenter as part of the team. That's his opinion and his angle, and given the audience and his job description I think he's right.

Now if we want to start bashing Larry Michael, I'm all in!

Posted by: WaPoLiveFan16 | July 12, 2010 12:49 PM | Report abuse

they're certainly no joe b. and locker though... that's for sure.

Posted by: dpierce4g63

+1

Posted by: rademaar | July 12, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

You know those guys who sit behind you at a game, and won't shut up for THREE AND A HALF HOURS as they dissects every single nanosecond of every at-bat? Those are the people who hate Dibble.

You know those guy who just love going to a game, drinking a beer, sitting in the sun, and high-fiving everyone in their section when Dunn goes yard or Strasburg punches someone out? Those are the people who love Dibble.

Choose wisely.

Posted by: bryc3 | July 12, 2010 1:01 PM | Report abuse

GQ should stick to fashion, not ranking sports. Although they were accurate with Dewayne Staats and Kevin Kennedy from the Rays, they are terrible. And what about the YES announcers? Michael Kay's "SEE YAAAAAAA" is awful. He says it for both the NYY AND the visitors!!

Posted by: bzerante1 | July 12, 2010 1:08 PM | Report abuse

What kind of "in-depth" commentary is GC expecting? These guys are baseball players and commentators for Chrissakes. All I want from them is to get an accurate play-by-play and an occassional laugh from something Dibble says. In between, I can run to the fridge for another beer.

And I want them to be homers - I'm a homer - aren't all fans?

Leave the disection of a DP or hit-and-run to the Baseball Tonight crowd.

Posted by: themarks1 | July 12, 2010 1:11 PM | Report abuse

True, the team tends at times to become Rob Drivel and Boob Carpenter... but so what?

Show me any other baseball club announcing team that wouldn't be considered "homers." Goes with the territory.

Besides, these guys are not working for the major networks, but rather, the local franchises.

And they've got to do something to keep us entertained while the team continues to rack up one lost season after another.

Posted by: Vic1 | July 12, 2010 1:25 PM | Report abuse

There are 2 types of homers, and we have both in DC 1 with the skins, 1 with the nats.

1. There is Dibble, he is a homer, but he does criticize the team, he may be slapping them around with kids gloves at times but he is slapping em.

2. Larry Michael, a homer who sees no fault, no shortcoming. He thinks the team is going to go 16-0 each year, and that Jim Zorn was a genius.

Posted by: alex35332 | July 12, 2010 1:27 PM | Report abuse

You know those guys who make broad generalizations with little or no substantiating data? Choose wisely. I'm just saying.

fwiw, I like Dibble but I'm not a guy, I don't drink, and I prefer to sit in the shade. However, I have been known to high-five people.

As as for fans being homers, yeah, I believe it's in the job description (See "root root root for the home team"). ;-)

---

You know those guy who just love going to a game, drinking a beer, sitting in the sun, and high-fiving everyone in their section when Dunn goes yard or Strasburg punches someone out? Those are the people who love Dibble.

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | July 12, 2010 1:33 PM | Report abuse

GQ. Right. I'm gonna get all my baseball shoulds and how-tos from Metrosexuals Nationwide.

Look, the Nats are radio. There is not - there has never been - a better announcing team than Charlie and Dave.

But I think Carpenter and Dibble are fun, when I hear them; I don't want anyone else to call home runs for me (other than C and D); homers are what you want when you are rooting for the, hello, home team; GQ? Baseball???? HUH?????

....and, finally, it was supposed to be FUN (new term, I know) last I heard.

bryc3: right on. Seamheads. Yeeeeugh. As Dibble might say: SMACKUM YACKUM! As I'd like to see BIG BAD DUNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!! do to the next seamhead who gets within bat range.

WAR this!

Posted by: poorskins | July 12, 2010 1:53 PM | Report abuse

I like them. I want a homer when listening to a Nats broadcast. Further, when out of town I watch the game on MLB, and have therefore listened to other broadcasters and have definitely heard FAR worse.

Posted by: NatsFly | July 12, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse

I thought the announcers were, literally, on the Nats payroll as team employees. In which case the 'we' and 'our' thing is as factual as it is emotional.

No?

Posted by: Godfather_of_Goals | July 12, 2010 2:06 PM | Report abuse

You know those guys who sit behind you at a game, and won't shut up for THREE AND A HALF HOURS as they dissects every single nanosecond of every at-bat? Those are the people who hate Dibble.

You know those guy who just love going to a game, drinking a beer, sitting in the sun, and high-fiving everyone in their section when Dunn goes yard or Strasburg punches someone out? Those are the people who love Dibble.

Choose wisely.

Posted by: bryc3 | July 12, 2010 1:01 PM

Totally agree, and I'm in that second group. It's a lot more fun.

Posted by: smoke26 | July 12, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

"unrepentant homers,"
______________________

And that is why I love 'em!
Rock on Dibs and Carpenter!

BTW-Dan you need to replace McNabb's jersey # at the top and put the Savior's 37 up there!

Posted by: dorseylaw | July 12, 2010 2:15 PM | Report abuse

im ok with any list mentioning the nats broadcasters on the same list as hawk harrelson...hes the definition of a homer, but man he is fun to listen to

Posted by: formerlylove1 | July 12, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

You know those guys who make broad generalizations with little or no substantiating data? Choose wisely. I'm just saying.

fwiw, I like Dibble but I'm not a guy, I don't drink, and I prefer to sit in the shade. However, I have been known to high-five people.

As as for fans being homers, yeah, I believe it's in the job description (See "root root root for the home team"). ;-)

Oh natsfan1a1, you had me at not a guy.

Posted by: briffy | July 12, 2010 2:30 PM | Report abuse

lol, poorskins. That post was awesome. :-)

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | July 12, 2010 2:35 PM | Report abuse

And thanks, briffy. ;-)

Posted by: natsfan1a1 | July 12, 2010 2:37 PM | Report abuse

i'm actually a fan of announcers on local networks being unrepentant homers...it's the main reason why i turn off the volume on the tv and listen to sonny and sam when i watch the 'skins...

Posted by: bacaje | July 12, 2010 3:26 PM | Report abuse

Dibble is not the problem and neither was his predecessor. The problem is the play-by-play guy (Montgomery). There seems to be a need to always have the last word, to 'one up' the broadcast partner. Note that doesn't seem to be a problem when Jim Palmer is commenting in the booth. Palmer seems to intimidate the Montgomery. To this observer, there seems to be an ego issue which interferres with broadcast partner cooperation and mutual support.

TV is a visual medium unlike radio. Dibble gets it, but the play-by-play guy doesn't seem to get it.

"Homer", as applied to broadcasters, is a term which has multiple meanings to the listener. In my view, the broadcaster should be making intelligent, factual observations of both teams. But, supporting the team which employs you and whose viewers are primarily local fans seems reasonable.

Posted by: Watching41 | July 12, 2010 3:29 PM | Report abuse

Not a fan of Carpenter (seems like too much of a nerd, and not the cool kind of nerd either). Am a huge fan of Dibble though. I would be pretty p***ed if they ever got rid of him.

Posted by: Barno1 | July 12, 2010 3:44 PM | Report abuse

If Dibble/Carpenter routinely annoy you in any way, just try watching any White Sox broadcast...SO PAINFUL.

Posted by: JohnnyBlades | July 12, 2010 8:28 PM | Report abuse

Carpenter is kind of annoying at times, but i generally like Dibble. At least he's entertaining, especially when he goes off on one of his rants.

Posted by: enstage | July 12, 2010 10:44 PM | Report abuse

Hey Steinberg,

Reading GQ for fashion advice again. When are you and Wise hitting the Nordstrom's sale since i want to avoid Tyson's when you two metrosexuals are there. Gawd you can smell your cologne from a 1/4 mile away boy.

Now make sure you follow GQ's advice on getting your bikini area waxed or you give the missus or Wise stubble burn.

So I guess we never seeing article from you about herding trials huh punk? We have the pixs proving you were at the Memorial Day weekend trial.

Posted by: sheepherder | July 13, 2010 7:51 AM | Report abuse

"incapable of penetrating the game's action in any meaningful way, which perhaps explains the hometown cheerleading, as they try to make up for their vacuousness."

Nailed it.

Dibble's "analysis" very often does not amount to more than pointing out the very obvious.
Listen to many other broadcasts and you might actually sometimes learn a thing or two about the game and certain situations. With Dibble, hardly ever.

Posted by: amo36 | July 13, 2010 4:24 PM | Report abuse

I generally don't turn to GQ when I want to know who the best baseball announcers are. Or for anything else, for that matter. I'm all for the fact that Dibble and Carpenter pull for the home team -- it makes me more excited to watch the games, to be honest. And it's not like their comments are devoid of analysis; after every game, I can say I've learned something about players' tendencies and/or managers' strategies. I think they're a solid crew ... and yeah, Michael Kay makes me nauseous, too.

Posted by: sparky0488 | July 13, 2010 11:33 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company