If this is your first time here, please visit the "about" page. If you've been here before, thanks for stopping back in.

The comments are open, and your voice is welcome.

Baltimore Sports Media Approval Ratings: Peter Schmuck

Peter SchmuckIn a most impressive showing indeed, Roch Kubatko earned a 97% “yea” rating in last week’s poll. He garnered the most overall votes of anybody so far, and only two voters dissented — something I doubt we’re likely to see again. It’s a testament to the goodwill he’s built up, and I’m sure his post-Sun endeavors will be met with great success.

With that we move across the Sun newsroom (figuratively) to a man who, as far as I know, is not leaving anytime soon: Peter Schmuck.

Schmuck has been with the local paper since 1990, and in that time he has been named Maryland Sportswriter of the Year four times. He can also be heard periodically on WBAL, doing both sports and (now and then) current events.

According to Wikipedia, he’s been president of the Baseball Writers Association of America since 2005. I find that strange and hard to believe, but apparently it’s true.

All the awards and recognition in the world won’t get you very far, however, if the Loss Column community doesn’t have your back.

So, what do we say?

    • [poll id=”9″]

  • 12 comments to Baltimore Sports Media Approval Ratings: Peter Schmuck

    • N

      I big time ‘yea’. Schmucker is probably one of the funniest and most insightful writer I have come across, and the fact that his beat is sports makes it that much better. His work on WBAL shows that he is not limited to the paper and pen, particularly on the ‘Week in Review’ Rundown segment with C4 Fridays at 1:00.

    • Big Ben's Motorcycle

      i’d enjoy this feature more if everyone who voted had to give one good reason why they voted that way. you know, to root out people who just hate on baltimore, wbal, the sun, etc.

      it’s really hard for me to imagine how anyone could think peter schmuck is bad enough to vote nay.

    • neal s

      It would be ideal if everyone explained themselves, but there’s no way to enforce that. Besides, I don’t want to discourage people from participating just because they don’t have a lot to say.

      I haven’t voted yet but I’m actually inclined towards a “nay.” Schmuck is clearly a talented veteran but I’ve got two big problems with him: his complete lack of humility (except for that which he displays when he wants to play the “regular guy”) and his oft-expressed (I’ve heard it more than a few times) disdain for new media. He’s very much a “columnist”, with all the trappings that come with the title. I find that kind of annoying.

      That said, it’s a little hard to vote “nay” simply because he has accomplished so much. It’s not like he completely sucks, so I’m a little torn.

    • dan the man

      I voted nay, and it’s mostly for the reasons Neal just pointed out. Recently, I don’t have much of a problem reading his stuff. But it’s kind of just re-hashed common knowledge with an edge. Or something. I feel like most dudes writing sports columns in a newspaper aren’t really worth reading anyway, because how original can you really be? Or maybe I’m wrong and I’ve just been reading mediocre sports columns from the Sun all my life.

      Another problem I have with Schmuck is (was?) his constant harping on Peter Angelos. It’s died down some now with MacPhail being in control and whatnot, but I mean, at some point, critisizing big, bad PA just gets old. And it starts to seem like a crutch and an easy shortcut to get people to read you.

      Maybe I don’t know what I’m talking about, but that’s just my opinion. He seems like a self-centered blowhard, and he’s not very good on the radio, either, based on the extremely small sample size of the one time I’ve stumbled upon him on WBAL.

    • Big Ben's Motorcycle

      give the guy a break. he grew up with the last name SCHMUCK for christsakes!

    • neal s

      Well, you do have a point there.

    • Andrew out of Rochester

      I really like Schmuck. I’ve definitely read him make some of the more old and tired arguments attempting to save the dying generation of newspaper sports journalism, but I’ve usually found him to be entertaining and totally unafraid to take the Orioles to task. Isn’t that the most common criticism you can make for any of these Balmer sports media members?

      Anyway, I make a point to read his articles as soon as they come up, and I can’t say that about any other Sun reporter. His writing definitely has a lot more thought (for lack of a better term) than a guy like Roch’s does.

    • df1570

      I voted “yea” simply because Peter is the only guy at The Sun who holds the Orioles feet to the fire for the shameful way they’ve run the organization into the ground over the last decade. There are lots of other reasons to vote “yea” for him, but that one is the 5-star reason.

      To add insult to injury, it drives the O’s nuts that they haven’t been able to get him fired or, like they’ve done with others (ahem), restrict his access to the club.

      I might run to another computer here at the station and give him another “yea” just for that.

    • steve h.

      drew forrester is to thoughtful sports comentary as Barney Fife is to law enforcement.

      His only “friend” in the media is Nestor. period.

    • Andrew out of Rochester

      Nah, Drew’s ok. He’s extremely predictable, but he’d probably say something like “Well, of course I am because I keep reacting the same way when they do the same shit”. Boy he sure does have a lot of enemies in the Warehouse, though.

    • steve h.

      I woulnd’t say “enemies” as much as everyone just thinks he’s a flat out A**hole.

      What did Earl W. once say” It’s what you learn AFTER you know it all that counts…forrerster is a rockhead.

    • random dude

      I voted yeah. I agree with AooR. I find him entertaining, and I like watching him take the O’s to task.

      There are times and places to be optimistic (here talking about the great work Andy Mac has done and watching Jones develop for example). But I think its good that Schmuck and even Drew (who I read all his blogs) take the O’s front office to task. The front office has been really REALLY bad for a long time, and even though they’re improving now, they still have quite a ways to go. I don’t think you can credit any one thing in particular for (hopefully) turning the franchise around, but I think you have to at least acknowledge that the O’s critics probably had at least a little to do with the franchise heading in the right direction right now.