 |
| Jim Nantz tells prospective broadcasters to stop memorizing lists and numbers and learn how to capture the attention of listeners. “I really despise statistics,” he says, “but there are times you have to use them to emphasize a point.” |
As the lead play-by-play announcer at CBS for its telecasts of the NFL and NCAA basketball and as anchor of the network’s golf coverage, which includes the Masters and the PGA Championship, Jim Nantz has shown that sports can be delivered in a gentlemanly manner, without shouting or overstatement, that you do not have to be bombastic or shrill or have a shtick to be successful.
Over the course of 20 years at CBS, Nantz has handled play-by-play for the NBA and the U.S. Open Tennis Championships, covered NCAA track and field, skiing, speed skating, baseball, swimming, diving and gymnastics, and co-hosted the Olympics. He was inducted into the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame in 2002 as the youngest recipient of the Curt Gowdy Media Award.
On the eve of the NFL season opener, Nantz spoke with SportsBusiness Journal New York bureau chief Jerry Kavanagh.
Favorite author: Dan Jenkins. I know I sound a little myopic because he’s a sports author, although Dan writes about things that are certainly a lot more interesting than just golf, for example. He makes me laugh out loud.
Last book read: “Roone: A Memoir”
Favorite piece of music: I’m pretty eclectic. I go from Bruce Springsteen to Yanni and everything in between.
Favorite movies: “The Deer Hunter” and “Dances With Wolves”
Favorite sports movie: “Raging Bull”
Favorite vacation spot: Maui and Bermuda
Greatest competitor: Tiger Woods. He never gives less than 100 percent on any one shot. He never stops grinding. And what makes it even more impressive, he’s the highest-paid player on the planet.
Smartest players: Tiger Woods and Peyton Manning. But the smartest person I’ve ever met in athletics would have to be Mike Krzyzewski. He’s a brilliant man who espouses so many wonderful qualities. You can’t help but learn things that extend far beyond the parameters of basketball when you have the chance to be in the company of Mike Krzyzewski.
How would you describe your broadcasting style?
Nantz: My style is a tribute to the broadcasters I grew up watching and idolizing. I’m a composite of all of those men who inspired me to want to pursue this as a career. They were erudite about so many things. There was a worldliness about them. I wanted to be just like them. They never attempted to make themselves bigger than the event they were covering. They were storytellers and they were gentlemen. They knew when to step out of the way and let this visual medium that is so powerful take over.
 |
| Nantz, with NFL analyst Phil Simms, also handles golf and NCAA basketball. |
Who were some of those men?
Nantz: It’s a long list, and if I leave one out I’m going to feel really bad. It starts with men like Jim McKay, Jack Whitaker, Chris Schenkel, Dick Enberg, Keith Jackson, Ray Scott, Winn Elliot, Frank Glieber, Curt Gowdy, Lindsey Nelson and Jack Buck.
Is there a philosophy or objective that you bring to the broadcast booth?
Nantz: I think that, above all, the play-by-play voice is responsible for taking care of the nuts and bolts, making sure that the story lines are kept honest and that new stories are brought to the presentation. You have your essentials — the down and distance, who scored, who got the rebound and so forth. But I think my primary responsibility when you get beyond all those required elements is to be a storyteller.
What is your biggest challenge?
Nantz: Finding fresh stories. That all comes with preparation and research. It’s amazing how often I hear from people about pursuing this as a career. The parents of young kids always indicate how their son is a brilliant statistician and follower of sports who can wake up in the morning and recite box scores and batting averages and has all this committed to memory. “They want to do what you do,” they say. “What should be their next step?”
I tell them all the same thing: Get rid of all the emphasis on stats. To think that’s what makes you a solid broadcaster is such a falsehood. I really despise statistics, but there are times you have to use them to emphasize a point. But I always tell them the key thing is to emphasize the ability to tell a story. I suggest a heavy emphasis on English studies. Listen to the people who can capture your attention with the way they weave a story. Learn to appreciate the language. That is so far more important than worrying about statistics.
Dick Ebersol said the most valuable lesson he learned from Roone Arledge was to tell stories.
Nantz: How about that! I didn’t know that. Well, he’s a giant. It’s interesting. See, he’s looking at it from the overall perspective of a broadcast, as a producer of the entire look of the Olympics, for example. It doesn’t matter whether you have a voice or you’re behind the scenes as a producer. We all should be going after that same objective: to tell a story.
 |
| Nantz calls Super Bowl halftime over the top, but McCartney was “as big as you can get.” |
Are you a fantasy football player?
Nantz: I am. I wasn’t really aware of the whole fantasy culture until about four or five years ago. But now, with the fantasy leagues interfacing so well with all these Web sites, like CBS SportsLine [which the NFL uses as the official administrator of its fantasy leagues], it’s so easy and fun to be involved. And, in an odd way, it’s even ratcheted up my awareness of what’s going on in the league, if that’s possible, because I’ve always prided myself on being the most researched guy. The fantasy environment does nothing but keep you in the mix on an hourly basis as players are being waived and traded.
It seems almost as much attention is paid to the commercial side of the Super Bowl as to the game itself. Have the games sometimes become ancillary to the business of the sport?
Nantz: The people who are buying in for a 30-second spot are getting more bang for the buck than just the airing of the commercial before 140 million viewers. They’re getting all the reviews and the critiques. So there’s a lot that goes with coming on board for the Super Bowl.
The part that’s troublesome to me is the attention given to the halftime act. I think that is so over the top, so overplayed by those of us in the media. It’s a total non-factor. But we spend so much time concerning ourselves with who’s going to be singing two songs at halftime. Who cares? They had Paul McCartney last year. That’s as big as you can get. If you review how much time and space are devoted to what’s going to happen at halftime, it blows my mind.
During a broadcast, we get multiple camera angles, replays, graphics and statistics, promotions, and interactive and commercial elements. With all of the distractions, is there a danger of the sideshows overshadowing the main event?
Nantz: I’m concerned with that. First off, it’s a copycat business. One person goes to some sort of graphic look, and the other networks fall in line. Sometimes I think our screens look like Bloomberg Network, and somewhere in there, there’s a football game going on. But so many people love [the updated in-game stats]. There’s a whole subculture of fantasy football players out there who are demanding that, and I find that information to not be obtrusive to the broadcast. But no matter what the event is, the viewer is being bombarded and the screen is shrinking to bring you another reminder of what’s coming up next. There’s never been a real study that shows that any of this stuff makes people stick around, that any of this information actually works.
Look for more of this conversation in our sister publication, SportsBusiness Daily, located at www.sportsbusinessdaily.com.
