Bear Down Wildcats

The perimeter defense was pretty disappointing during this home series. Too many wide open looks. Going to get embarassed by UCLA doing that.

4 of UCLA's 5 starters are three point threats.

Why you can resist polluting this thread with off topic shit is beyond me. Stay in your thread.

rgdeuce wrote:The perimeter defense was pretty disappointing during this home series. Too many wide open looks. Going to get embarassed by UCLA doing that.

... and by Oregon.

rgdeuce wrote:The perimeter defense was pretty disappointing during this home series. Too many wide open looks. Going to get embarassed by UCLA doing that.

Looked good between about 1:40 and 0:20 on the game clock. When Trier comes back, this team will have to learn to defend with that intensity for the whole game, just as they had to learn to save their legs in December.

rgdeuce wrote:He's got to play his lane then. If he doesn't want to get criticized for not being sports geek, then don't play sports geek and put an analysis of what happens between the lines. If he wants to be the good writer who just delivers the news in an interesting manner, then don't interject opinions and let bias creep in, dont play devil's advocate or show off your boner for players or coaches whenever you can. You don't have to play one or the other, but if you play both you better know what you are talking about or use quotes from people who do to support what you are saying. I don't expect a deep analysis and PER numbers or Bird scores and I don't fault him for not doing all that. But he does throw elementary-level analyses in a lot of his articles which are often completely way off. Things he comes up with on his own because any player, coach, or expert would never tell him that. You are going to be wrong sometimes, that's a given, but it's one thing to say apple when it's an orange, and it's another to say apple when it's sushi. There are plenty of guys who have written for Tucson newspapers who may not be quite the writers that Hansen is, but they play their lane.

A lot of assumptions on your part of what I want. If I want a deep analysis, I watch the games and form my own conclusions; I know how to get to KenPom; I know who the best analysts are; I keep my eye out for or ask for the opinions of certain posters on message boards, etc. Most stat geeks annoy the hell out of me anyhow. Hansen is certainly capable of writing some very good articles and I have never hesitated to honestly give him his due props when he does.

Essentially, this is a critique of the sports columnist as it has been practiced for decades. Not your cup of tea. OK. But he is in his lane.

Onward.

EastCoastCat wrote:Rado's only chance is to shoot lights out from 3 so I expect our defense to guard the perimeter a little more tightly compared to the Utah game.

Nothing would be sweeter than a Crying Tad beatdown.

Good call. They shot a ton of threes, and Tad cried. Gotta say, the ref crew was horrid. Think it was the D team.

One game this week. Good, because the guys seemed tired in the that second half. And PJC can heal up some more. And ... uh ... that other thing.

That was one of the worst crews i've seen in a while in terms of sucking for both sides and being completely clueless. At best, it was a back and forth of extended make up calls. And it's been a while since I have seen a team get away with such blatant cheap shit like Rado was and the funny thing is, we were the ones getting whistled for it. Bunch of punks on that team. I'm still not mad at all for that Comanche tech, I just wish he would have gotten more of his money's worth.

rgdeuce wrote: I'm still not mad at all for that Comanche tech, I just wish he would have gotten more of his money's worth.

Exactly. That crew let the game get ridiculous, then tried to wade into the mess to break it up with their whistles. The inconsistency will always be what makes a ref crew bad, not calling tight or calling loose (within reason...this crew exceeded reason both ways). They came to brawl, it was their only chance, and we can't really respond with our limited roster and much more to lose. And they know that.

That was the type of game you need a "motherfucker" for. Gene Edgerson was our motherfucker for a while. Ricky Anderson was an amazingly effective motherfucker. Wayne Womack used to do some time in the motherfucker role, though he was also a valuable rebounder. You have to have a player that you can insert into a game when things are getting out of hand that can give it back and still play reasonably well enough while not being a total loss if they foul out or get ejected.

CU had nothing to lose, so they came in with the "UW at Home" gameplan...foul so much, then whine and cry so much, the refs get self-conscious and stop calling clear fouls on you/even up the other way. They executed it to perfection. We just are not in a position to properly respond other than playing tough.

gumby wrote: Essentially, this is a critique of the sports columnist as it has been practiced for decades. Not your cup of tea. OK. But he is in his lane.

Onward.

http://tucson.com/sports/greg-hansen-ai ... a9926.html" target="_blank

A non-U of A hoops article from 2009 to dissect. He's mad because a Tucson guy got canned and pens one of his patented inflammatory articles. He spins it like the Dbacks fired Hale as a 3rd Base Coach like they thought he was the problem, when the reality was, Hale was not an AJ Hinch guy and the Dbacks mistakenly thought Hinch was the future (but that's not his argument). Four other Dbacks coaches were fired or stepped down that same year, common with bad performance and/or managerial changes; new managers want their own guys. I believe Matt Williams was the man who filled Hale's vacancy. He then goes on to say the farm system has gone bust, victimized by two poor draft classes. The Dbacks farm system ranked #1 in 06 and #3 in 2007, but Hansen blames poor drafts when what really happened was at least 9 MLB promotions (Drew, Conor Jackson, Quinten, Upton, Chris Young, Owings, Reynolds, Tony Pena, Gerardo Parra in two seasons), 3 prospects to bring Randy Johnson back, and 5 prospects for Dan Haren (including Carlos Gonzalez, Chris Carter and Brett Anderson!). No farm system can withstand that. It is worth noting that in 2009 they snagged AJ Pollock, Chris Owings as a compensatory pick, PAUL GOLDSCHMIDT in the 8th round, Chase Anderson in the 9th, and a handful of other guys who got MLB time with other clubs, and the two preceding drafts, while average, still produced multiple MLB players in each. Oh yeah, Max Scherzer and Jarrod Parker (considered a god at the time) were still in that farm system at the time.

He also goes on to call Stephen Drew "inscrutable" and "on the edge of being labeled a journeyman" after his third full season at 26. I can see how a young SHORTSTOP with a good glove who is one year removed from a 291 with 21 HR season and had a 261 12 65 stat line in 09 is on the edge of being a journeyman... And he was pissed about the Dbacks giving Byrnes a 3 year/$30 million contract extension and called him a "journeyman with a bad haircut" and ignored the fact that Byrnes hit 26 and 21 HRs and stole 25 and 50 bases with the Dbacks in 06 and 07 (when the extension was given), respectively, finishing 11th in NL MVP voting in 07 as well. And all this concludes with a sneak-in backhanded comment at Colangelo, the guy who brought home the only professional championship to Arizona, because he snubbed a Tucson guy who wanted to buy controlling interest in the club. That isn't playing a lane, it is an extremely poor article and he completely misses the mark on a franchise that had a million other easy angles to rip apart.

rgdeuce wrote:

gumby wrote: Essentially, this is a critique of the sports columnist as it has been practiced for decades. Not your cup of tea. OK. But he is in his lane.

Onward.

http://tucson.com/sports/greg-hansen-ai ... a9926.html" target="_blank

A non-U of A hoops article from 2009 to dissect. He's mad because a Tucson guy got canned and pens one of his patented inflammatory articles. He spins it like the Dbacks fired Hale as a 3rd Base Coach like they thought he was the problem, when the reality was, Hale was not an AJ Hinch guy and the Dbacks mistakenly thought Hinch was the future (but that's not his argument). Four other Dbacks coaches were fired or stepped down that same year, common with bad performance and/or managerial changes; new managers want their own guys. I believe Matt Williams was the man who filled Hale's vacancy. He then goes on to say the farm system has gone bust, victimized by two poor draft classes. The Dbacks farm system ranked #1 in 06 and #3 in 2007, but Hansen blames poor drafts when what really happened was at least 9 MLB promotions (Drew, Conor Jackson, Quinten, Upton, Chris Young, Owings, Reynolds, Tony Pena, Gerardo Parra in two seasons), 3 prospects to bring Randy Johnson back, and 5 prospects for Dan Haren (including Carlos Gonzalez, Chris Carter and Brett Anderson!). No farm system can withstand that. It is worth noting that in 2009 they snagged AJ Pollock, Chris Owings as a compensatory pick, PAUL GOLDSCHMIDT in the 8th round, Chase Anderson in the 9th, and a handful of other guys who got MLB time with other clubs, and the two preceding drafts, while average, still produced multiple MLB players in each. Oh yeah, Max Scherzer and Jarrod Parker (considered a god at the time) were still in that farm system at the time.

He also goes on to call Stephen Drew "inscrutable" and "on the edge of being labeled a journeyman" after his third full season at 26. I can see how a young SHORTSTOP with a good glove who is one year removed from a 291 with 21 HR season and had a 261 12 65 stat line in 09 is on the edge of being a journeyman... And he was pissed about the Dbacks giving Byrnes a 3 year/$30 million contract extension and called him a "journeyman with a bad haircut" and ignored the fact that Byrnes hit 26 and 21 HRs and stole 25 and 50 bases with the Dbacks in 06 and 07 (when the extension was given), respectively, finishing 11th in NL MVP voting in 07 as well. And all this concludes with a sneak-in backhanded comment at Colangelo, the guy who brought home the only professional championship to Arizona, because he snubbed a Tucson guy who wanted to buy controlling interest in the club. That isn't playing a lane, it is an extremely poor article and he completely misses the mark on a franchise that had a million other easy angles to rip apart.

2009. Baseball. Gotta be a Hansen Sucks thread around here somewhere. If not, Current Events has a Venting thread.

I've got a 1989 Hansen story where he flat out told someone the truth did not matter, good copy that made Tucson readers respond did, when presented with a factual error that elevated one party over another.

But that was 1989. Because Hansen has changed...

Olsondogg wrote:Why you can resist polluting this thread with off topic shit is beyond me. Stay in your thread.

That's one reason I don't love the mega threads. You open some and would have no clue what they're actually about.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:Why you can resist polluting this thread with off topic shit is beyond me. Stay in your thread.

That's one reason I don't love the mega threads. You open some and would have no clue what they're actually about.

But that can happen in any thread. If this community is good for nothing else, it's going from talking about Allonzo Trier to Longhorned's nipples in four posts.

Chicat wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:Why you can resist polluting this thread with off topic shit is beyond me. Stay in your thread.

That's one reason I don't love the mega threads. You open some and would have no clue what they're actually about.

But that can happen in any thread. If this community is good for nothing else, it's going from talking about Allonzo Trier to Longhorned's nipples in four posts.

Imagine if we had a specific thread about the nipples of each poster. It's easy if you try. I would be able to prioritize which anonymous internet person's nipples were most interesting to me.

But Greg Hansen IS Arizona Basketball.

The players change, but he stays the same...

Chicat wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:Why you can resist polluting this thread with off topic shit is beyond me. Stay in your thread.

That's one reason I don't love the mega threads. You open some and would have no clue what they're actually about.

But that can happen in any thread. If this community is good for nothing else, it's going from talking about Allonzo Trier to Longhorned's nipples in four posts.

#honortheprocess

The tangents in our threads is one reason this place is so great. Sure beats the hell out of the 250 Josh Jackson threads you had to navigate at a certain pay site.

16 Arizona

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/rankings" target="_blank

Thumbs up!

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Chicat wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:Why you can resist polluting this thread with off topic shit is beyond me. Stay in your thread.

That's one reason I don't love the mega threads. You open some and would have no clue what they're actually about.

But that can happen in any thread. If this community is good for nothing else, it's going from talking about Allonzo Trier to Longhorned's nipples in four posts.

Imagine if we had a specific thread about the nipples of each poster. It's easy if you try. I would be able to prioritize which anonymous internet person's nipples were most interesting to me.

I don't think I want to get involved in this.

EVCat wrote:

rgdeuce wrote: I'm still not mad at all for that Comanche tech, I just wish he would have gotten more of his money's worth.

Exactly. That crew let the game get ridiculous, then tried to wade into the mess to break it up with their whistles. The inconsistency will always be what makes a ref crew bad, not calling tight or calling loose (within reason...this crew exceeded reason both ways). They came to brawl, it was their only chance, and we can't really respond with our limited roster and much more to lose. And they know that.

That was the type of game you need a "motherfucker" for. Gene Edgerson was our motherfucker for a while. Ricky Anderson was an amazingly effective motherfucker. Wayne Womack used to do some time in the motherfucker role, though he was also a valuable rebounder. You have to have a player that you can insert into a game when things are getting out of hand that can give it back and still play reasonably well enough while not being a total loss if they foul out or get ejected.

CU had nothing to lose, so they came in with the "UW at Home" gameplan...foul so much, then whine and cry so much, the refs get self-conscious and stop calling clear fouls on you/even up the other way. They executed it to perfection. We just are not in a position to properly respond other than playing tough.

I prefer John Cheney"s statement "Send in the goon".

Catintheheat wrote:

EVCat wrote:

rgdeuce wrote: I'm still not mad at all for that Comanche tech, I just wish he would have gotten more of his money's worth.

Exactly. That crew let the game get ridiculous, then tried to wade into the mess to break it up with their whistles. The inconsistency will always be what makes a ref crew bad, not calling tight or calling loose (within reason...this crew exceeded reason both ways). They came to brawl, it was their only chance, and we can't really respond with our limited roster and much more to lose. And they know that.

That was the type of game you need a "motherfucker" for. Gene Edgerson was our motherfucker for a while. Ricky Anderson was an amazingly effective motherfucker. Wayne Womack used to do some time in the motherfucker role, though he was also a valuable rebounder. You have to have a player that you can insert into a game when things are getting out of hand that can give it back and still play reasonably well enough while not being a total loss if they foul out or get ejected.

CU had nothing to lose, so they came in with the "UW at Home" gameplan...foul so much, then whine and cry so much, the refs get self-conscious and stop calling clear fouls on you/even up the other way. They executed it to perfection. We just are not in a position to properly respond other than playing tough.

I prefer John Cheney"s statement "Send in the goon".

Ha. I remember that. Not only was a verbal statement, but he actually did it. Chaney's designated goon broke the opposing kid's arm. Chaney suffered for that one.

Strength of schedule is ranked #32 in RPI (41 nonconference) and 63 in Kenpom. Havent hit the toughies in conference yet, not bad.

one week to prep for the toughest road trip of the season thus far. unfortunately, ucla will essentially have a week to prep since asu will pretty much be a warm-up game. hope our guys will be ready and that we'll finally get to see a certain wildcat back on the floor. that's right paulo cruz, we'll be looking for ya!

dirtbags wrote:one week to prep for the toughest road trip of the season thus far. unfortunately, ucla will essentially have a week to prep since asu will pretty much be a warm-up game. hope our guys will be ready and that we'll finally get to see a certain wildcat back on the floor. that's right paulo cruz, we'll be looking for ya!

I think AZ will compete for #2 in the Pac, but @Pauley is arguably the hardest game of the year this season in the Pac. Here's hoping that we can give the Bruins a good game and put a healthy fear in them for their trip to Tucson.

UCLA 86, AZ 72

Welp, there we have it. No reason to watch the game.

We're winning this game.

Book it.

CalStateTempe wrote:We're winning this game.

Book it.

No, we're totally not. But I appreciate the optimism.

The Sagarin model predicts UCLA by 5, but the Sagarin model forgot to include Beachcat's emotions into its formula.

Beachcat97 wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:We're winning this game.

Book it.

No, we're totally not. But I appreciate the optimism.

"Totally"?

I never knew you were on the board, Moon Unit. Give my best to Daddy Frank and Dweezil.

what's the sagarin prognosis for the sc game? though the trojans have come back down to earth a bit since conf play started, i think usc @ galen will test our guys. can still imagine metu giving chance & dusan a hard time down low while stewart chucks it up from distance asu-style. hoping kadeem will put a lid on jordan mac. i'm really looking forward to next week - should be quite a ride.

Beachcat97 wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:We're winning this game.

Book it.

No, we're totally not. But I appreciate the optimism.

If we win can you make us a promise to stop posting?

Beachcat97 wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:We're winning this game.

Book it.

No, we're totally not. But I appreciate the optimism.

Sorry BC but I'm starting (late to the game I suppose) to really understand why you aren't liked very much here. Are you really a fan? Or just needing attention?

Posting negative crap like that would be easier to take if you at least backed it up with a rationale argument and at least sound like losing would be a bad thing too......again, are you really a Wildcat? Starting to doubt it.

dirtbags wrote:what's the sagarin prognosis for the sc game? though the trojans have come back down to earth a bit since conf play started, i think usc @ galen will test our guys. can still imagine metu giving chance & dusan a hard time down low while stewart chucks it up from distance asu-style. hoping kadeem will put a lid on jordan mac. i'm really looking forward to next week - should be quite a ride.

Arizona by 5.

Alieberman wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:We're winning this game.

Book it.

No, we're totally not. But I appreciate the optimism.

If we win can you make us a promise to stop posting?

Done. If AZ beats UCLA at Pauley next week, I will disappear from this site and never reappear. Totally worth it to have AZ win that game and bitch slap Bryce in his backyard.

Isnt Bryce from New Mexico?

Beachcat97 wrote:

Alieberman wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:We're winning this game.

Book it.

No, we're totally not. But I appreciate the optimism.

If we win can you make us a promise to stop posting?

Done. If AZ beats UCLA at Pauley next week, I will disappear from this site and never reappear. Totally worth it to have AZ win that game and bitch slap Bryce in his backyard.

Or at the very least rename to Beachcat97v2 (that's version 2 for non-techies), stop posting purely negative crap, and improve your attitude.....would be enough for me.

You don't need to be a pure Homer but wtf is so bad about this team and year that you can't get fully behind this team??? Yes, we are definitely going to be underdogs at Pauley and probably at home to vs. UCLA this year BUT, especially in college hoops with teams less talented as ours, all things are possible.

At Pauley is going to be, by far, the toughest challenge for us to date this season IMO......but damn....look at the talent, team, and Coach we have....all things are possible....you can disagree but try not being so abrasive and 'Negative Nancy' about it.

Call me a Homer (I am) and a Pussy (I can be for sure....but it's also my favorite word too, lol) but I'm a little happy this game is at 4am my time and on CBS which I have absolutely no way to watch it....but I'll probably still wake up early and be stressing over the last minutes going crazy here.

Bear The F Down BC. Bangkok out!

Bangkok Wildcat wrote:
Or at the very least rename to Beachcat97v2 (that's version 2 for non-techies), stop posting purely negative crap, and improve your attitude.....would be enough for me.

You don't need to be a pure Homer but wtf is so bad about this team and year that you can't get fully behind this team??? Yes, we are definitely going to be underdogs at Pauley and probably at home to vs. UCLA this year BUT, especially in college hoops with teams less talented as ours, all things are possible.

At Pauley is going to be, by far, the toughest challenge for us to date this season IMO......but damn....look at the talent, team, and Coach we have....all things are possible....you can disagree but try not being so abrasive and 'Negative Nancy' about it.

Call me a Homer (I am) and a Pussy (I can be for sure....but it's also my favorite word too, lol) but I'm a little happy this game is at 4am my time and on CBS which I have absolutely no way to watch it....but I'll probably still wake up early and be stressing over the last minutes going crazy here.

Bear The F Down BC. Bangkok out!

Don't confuse my attempt at an objective (insofar that's possible) forecast with where my loyalties lie. I don't know how many more times I have to say I hate UCLA for it to register with some of you. As always, I'll be rooting for AZ as vigorously as ever, more so because it's UCLA.

I don't think predicting a UCLA win is the same as rooting for UCLA. Call me crazy.

But sure, why not. If AZ pulls off the Pac shocker of the young season, I will leave this site, change my user name, bring Chi's family pizza for a month...I don't care. The win matters most.

Beachcat97 wrote:

Bangkok Wildcat wrote:
Or at the very least rename to Beachcat97v2 (that's version 2 for non-techies), stop posting purely negative crap, and improve your attitude.....would be enough for me.

You don't need to be a pure Homer but wtf is so bad about this team and year that you can't get fully behind this team??? Yes, we are definitely going to be underdogs at Pauley and probably at home to vs. UCLA this year BUT, especially in college hoops with teams less talented as ours, all things are possible.

At Pauley is going to be, by far, the toughest challenge for us to date this season IMO......but damn....look at the talent, team, and Coach we have....all things are possible....you can disagree but try not being so abrasive and 'Negative Nancy' about it.

Call me a Homer (I am) and a Pussy (I can be for sure....but it's also my favorite word too, lol) but I'm a little happy this game is at 4am my time and on CBS which I have absolutely no way to watch it....but I'll probably still wake up early and be stressing over the last minutes going crazy here.

Bear The F Down BC. Bangkok out!

Don't confuse my attempt at an objective (insofar that's possible) forecast with where my loyalties lie. I don't know how many more times I have to say I hate UCLA for it to register with some of you. As always, I'll be rooting for AZ as vigorously as ever, more so because it's UCLA.

I don't think predicting a UCLA win is the same as rooting for UCLA. Call me crazy.

But sure, why not. If AZ pulls off the Pac shocker of the young season, I will leave this site, change my user name, bring Chi's family pizza for a month...I don't care. The win matters most.

Predicting a loss is one thing.

Declaring it as inevitable, when we have the #16 team in the country whose only losses came against teams ranked ahead of us - and were games we could have won - is a different animal entirely.

If I had to bet $$$ on the game I'd pick UCLA - they are the favorite. But we have a legitimate shot, and there is a reason they play the games.

Bangkok Wildcat wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:

Alieberman wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:We're winning this game.

Book it.

No, we're totally not. But I appreciate the optimism.

If we win can you make us a promise to stop posting?

Done. If AZ beats UCLA at Pauley next week, I will disappear from this site and never reappear. Totally worth it to have AZ win that game and bitch slap Bryce in his backyard.

Or at the very least rename to Beachcat97v2 (that's version 2 for non-techies), stop posting purely negative crap, and improve your attitude.....would be enough for me.

You don't need to be a pure Homer but wtf is so bad about this team and year that you can't get fully behind this team??? Yes, we are definitely going to be underdogs at Pauley and probably at home to vs. UCLA this year BUT, especially in college hoops with teams less talented as ours, all things are possible.

At Pauley is going to be, by far, the toughest challenge for us to date this season IMO......but damn....look at the talent, team, and Coach we have....all things are possible....you can disagree but try not being so abrasive and 'Negative Nancy' about it.

Call me a Homer (I am) and a Pussy (I can be for sure....but it's also my favorite word too, lol) but I'm a little happy this game is at 4am my time and on CBS which I have absolutely no way to watch it....but I'll probably still wake up early and be stressing over the last minutes going crazy here.

Bear The F Down BC. Bangkok out!

Dude man stop while you're ahead. I'll take that deal

A split in L.A. isn't a bad thing. Just win the ones we're supposed to, beat UCLA at McKale, and we should be fine.

Beachcat97 wrote:A split in L.A. isn't a bad thing. Just win the ones we're supposed to, beat UCLA at McKale, and we should be fine.

You already stated definitively that your Bruins were going to win in McKale. Remember?

Chicat wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:A split in L.A. isn't a bad thing. Just win the ones we're supposed to, beat UCLA at McKale, and we should be fine.

You already stated definitively that your Bruins were going to win in McKale. Remember?

Yeah, man. I remember. Hence the split in L.A.

Beachcat97 wrote:

Chicat wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:A split in L.A. isn't a bad thing. Just win the ones we're supposed to, beat UCLA at McKale, and we should be fine.

You already stated definitively that your Bruins were going to win in McKale. Remember?

Yeah, man. I remember. Hence the split in L.A.

McKale is in Tucson, Arizona.

This is so out of control.

Chicat wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:

Chicat wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:A split in L.A. isn't a bad thing. Just win the ones we're supposed to, beat UCLA at McKale, and we should be fine.

You already stated definitively that your Bruins were going to win in McKale. Remember?

Yeah, man. I remember. Hence the split in L.A.

McKale is in Tucson, Arizona.

Cool story, bro. I hope we win when we play UCLA at McKale Center in Tucson, Arizona. Game is on February 25, 2017.

Uhhh......what?

not to mention we got completely bent over in that Butler game. I was thinking to myself, "oh, so this is why there aren't many sporting events in Las Vegas."

UAEebs86 wrote:Uhhh......what?

Everybody should click on that guy's twitter. John. The newsman. Is he for real? That little piece on the investigative report on the costs of attending U of A: No, John, the problem isn't $100 lab fees.

And his face. For the background image, he does a close-up of his own newsman face. That's what everyone wants to see twice.