Is it time for Ron Santo to go?

I had planned on questioning Ron Santo's intelligence on this page after reading that he said "rock scientist" instead of rocket scientist and "slime flu" instead of swine flu. If he really isn't familiar with the common American phrase "rocket scientist" and didn't peruse 2009's top news stories to learn what swine flu is, maybe he shouldn't be broadcasting Cubs games. On the other hand, this has been his job for 20 years. He turned 70 years old this year.

In a June 21 story, Chicago Tribune Sports reporter Dave Van Dyck wrote that Ron Santo will be cutting back on his travel schedule in 2011. He will most likely keep to a 300-mile travel radius, working Cubs games in Milwaukee, Cincinnati and St. Louis in addition to home games. The Tribune also printed two online postings from readers urging Santo to retire. Whether to keep him on or push him out was a topic on at least two different sports radio shows on June 21.

What is the issue? I was about to say that due to poor health, old age or low intelligence, Santo's contributions to the radio broadcast rarely rise above simple cheering good news for the Cubs or loudly lamenting the Cubs' woes. Apparently his delivery hasn't changed much in 20 years, so I'm afraid it's the latter. Most announcers, play-by-play and color, prepare for each game (or at least each series) by studying the opponent. There is no evidence Santo takes the time to do this. Most color commentators provide intelligence and wisdom to the game and valuable insight from their on-field experiences. Santo played Major League Baseball for about 15 years, but it's difficult to tell from listening to him during Cubs games.

I would suggest the Cubs move Santo to a weekly radio show in which he talks about the Cubs. But that would require intelligent thought and discussion on his part. So such a show is most likely over his head.

Ron Santo and the Incredible Hall of Fame Snub

Ron Santo and the Incredible Hall of Fame Snub
This saga has become tiresome for any number of reasons. Santo himself said he’s tired of dealing with this every two years (when the Veterans Committee meets to select players not selected by the voting baseball writers). I can’t stand the sentimental crap that goes hand-in-hand with anything having to do with Ron Santo: diabetes took his legs; clicking his heels in midair at Wrigley Field; the Cubs retired #10 (after Leon Durham wore it—HA!); and he’s almost as popular with fans as Harry Caray was, despite the fact his color commentary skills seem to be limited to yelling “Yes!” and “Oh, no!”
The Baseball Hall of Fame has lost its validity. A huge percentage of baseball fans, who are terribly wrong, believe Pete Rose should be in the Hall of Fame. A huge percentage of Cubs fans believe Ron Santo should be in the Hall of Fame. There are plenty of players on the outside looking in and constant controversy about their statistics and qualifications for enshrinement. Many of the players who are in the Hall, including Mike Schmidt and Joe Morgan, take offense at the thought of anyone else being allowed in. It’s become a classic restricted club, even though many members are African-American, and at least two are Jewish (Greenberg and Lefty). Enshrinement is entirely arbitrary. For some players, it’s first ballot. For the rest, it’s a waiting game. Why bother? Being excluded from the Hall doesn’t change Santo’s statistics, what he meant to the Cubs when he was playing, or what he means to those of us who have no memory of him at third base.
I may have read my favorite Santo story in the long-suffering Cubs fans’ classic Stuck on the Cubs, a chronicle of the Cubs of the 1970’s. In the story, Santo stepped to the plate with the bases loaded as he was suffering the effects of low blood sugar. He watched the pitch come at him and saw three baseballs. He picked the middle one and swung, hitting a grand slam. Might be apocryphal but a pretty good story.