MIC CHECK

Houston broadcast icons sound off on grave media misstep

Image via: Fox Sports/Screenshot

Last week, one small, three-letter word may have ended Cincinnati Reds and NFL broadcaster Thom Brennaman's remarkably successful career.

Brennaman, believing his microphone was turned off in the seventh inning of the first game of a doubleheader between the Reds and Kansas City Royals, used a homophobic slur to describe a city. We don't know, and it doesn't matter, which city he was talking about. The comment was heard live and people instantly condemned Brennaman on social media.

Brennanman knew immediately that his slur went out over the air, but didn't get around to apologizing until the fifth inning of the second game. And that's when Brennaman made a bad situation much, much worse.

He began, "I made a comment earlier tonight that I guess went out over the air that I am deeply ashamed of."

No, you aren't guessing it was heard over the air, You know it did.

"If I have hurt anyone out there, I can't tell you how much I say from the bottom of my heart, I am very, very sorry."

No, it's not "if." You did. The word "if" doesn't belong in an apology.

And in the middle of his apology, he stopped to announce that a Cincinnati player hit a home run to give the Reds a four-run lead. He concluded, "I don't know if I'm going to be putting on this headset again."

That part he got right. No one knows where Brennaman goes from here. Can he recover his career? Possibly. We live in a country of forgiveness. In 1972, Jane Fonda visited North Vietnam and posed on an anti-aircraft gun pointed at U.S. military planes. She came back to the U.S., put out exercise videos and won an Academy Award. For many, especially in Hollywood and workout gyms, "Hanoi Jane" became America's sweetheart. Beatle John Lennon once said, "We're more popular than Jesus." In the '60s, that comment raised a ruckus and there were public burnings of Beatles records. Now Lennon is practically a saint.

Brennaman left the broadcast booth in the fifth inning of the second game and a different Reds announcer took his place. The next day, Brennanman issued a longer apology in a Cincinnati newspaper, in which he claimed, "I had no idea it (the homophobic slur) was so rooted in hate and violence."

Really, you thought that word was embraced by the gay community and American culture in 2020?

By the time that newspaper hit the street, Brennaman was placed on indefinite suspension by the Reds, their local broadcast partner and Fox Sports.

In the blink of one small word, a successful 33-year career broadcasting Major League Baseball and National Football League games, the highest echelon of his profession, may have ended.

GLAAD (Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) released a statement calling Brennaman's apology "incredibly weak" and demanding action from the Cincinnati Reds, MLB and Fox Sports.

I asked two Houston broadcasting legends, "What happens next for Thom Brennaman?

"Thom Brennaman is a good friend and a great broadcaster, but he broke the cardinal rule of broadcasting. Always assume you are talking on a live microphone. His audio guy left his microphone live when he used the gay slur. Everyone heard it," said Bill Worrell, who's announced Houston sports for nearly a half-century.

"I was shocked he would say that, even in private, but he did, so he is gone. We live in a world now with no second chances. But I think he can get back in, maybe in several years."

Bill Brown, who broadcast Cincinnati baseball games from 1976 to 1982 before being hired to do play-by-play for the Astros, added, "I like Thom Brennaman's broadcasting. I've said things thinking they were not on the air. In those situations, we just have to take responsibility and ask for forgiveness.

"Maybe 20 or 30 years ago a broadcaster could apologize and keep his job. Not these days. I hope he gets another chance, but that would be somewhat surprising in today's world."

Most Popular

SportsMap Emails
Are Awesome

Listen Live

Life after Correa may not be the worst thing. Composite image by Jack Brame.

Carlos Correa is having a damn good year. The Astros shortstop is hitting .285 with 24 homers, 87 RBI, 72 walks, .862 OPS, a 7.2 WAR, and a .981 fielding percentage. In any other year, those would be numbers worthy of being in the mix for AL MVP (if it weren't for that dastardly Shohei Otani). Correa is also in a contract year. He and the Astros were far enough apart that the season started and he's held true to not wanting to negotiate midseason.

The offers of six years for $120 million and five years for $125 million were both rejected by he and his camp. They're seeking something much longer and for more money on the annual average. With the team unwilling to meet those demands, it seems as if the team and the player are headed for a split.

Lots of Astros fans are not happy with the prospect of Correa leaving via free agency. Some think the team isn't doing enough and should pony up to bring him back. Some feel Correa should take what they're offering because it's a fair deal that'll allow the team to sign other players. Then, there's that small band of us that are totally okay with him leaving.

One of the main reasons I'm okay with him leaving is the players the team still has under control that are potential replacements. Aledmys Diaz and Pedro Leon are the first two guys that come to mind. Diaz is a 31-year-old vet who's stepped up when he's called upon. He can slide over to third and allow Alex Bregman to play shortstop. Leon is the team's 23-year-old hot prospect who signed as an outfielder that the team has been trying to turn into a shortstop. If Correa were to leave, he could instantly plug the hole Carlos would leave behind. Either of those options lead to my next point of being okay with Correa leaving which is to...

...allocate that money elsewhere. Whether it's signing a replacement (at short or third), or boosting the pitching staff, I'll be fine as long as it's money well spent. Signing a shortstop or third baseman would determine where Bregman would be playing. If said player takes significantly less than Correa and fills 70-80% of his offensive shoes, it'll be worth it. Others will have to step it up. If they find a deal on a top of the rotation starting pitcher, that would be ideal as well. As I stated a couple of weeks ago, this team has employed a six-man rotation, but doesn't have a true ace. Spending anywhere from $20-30 million a year on a top-notch pitcher to add to the staff would bolster this staff in more ways than one. It'll finally give them the ace they lack, plus it'll bump all the young talent (still under team control) down a peg creating depth and perhaps even creating bullpen depth.

The only way any of this works is if Correa isn't back. Zack Greinke and Justin Verlander's money comes off the books also. Freeing up that much payroll and not re-appropriating those resources to ensure this team stays in contention would be a first degree felony in sports court. I don't think Jim Crane wants that for this team. I for sure don't think James Click wants that as his legacy. Let's sit back and watch how the organization maneuvers this offseason and pray they get it right.


Editor's note: If you want to read the other side of the argument, check out Ken Hoffman's piece from Tuesday.

SportsMap Emails
Are Awesome