The State of American Sports Broadcasting

rarej · January 2nd, 2019, 08:25 PM

It's a new year and I figured it would best be served by posting a new thread to the forum where I lurk so heavily.

Since graduating college, I've had plenty of time to sit down and watch sports for longer than I ever have before. Maybe It's because I've been away from tv for four years, but modern day sports broadcasts seem so stunted. It was definitely noticeable to me during this year's egregious football college bowl and (half) championship season. I also noticed it during the botched indycar finale at sonoma where the race was held back for roughly 10-20 minutes by NBC while waiting for a nascar race to conclude. Then we didn't even get to see the beginning of the race as their scheduling was so out of whack. Additionally, I find anything fox sports decides to broadcast always falls flat in some way or another (poor replay timing, camera angles, weird narratives, commentating).

Anyway, just curious what other people think about the situation. I'm looking at this all subjectively of course.

**FrankDobe** · January 2nd, 2019, 08:36 PM

could not agree more and it is across ALL American sports and not just NASCAR. it was once said that good TV/radio announcer is like a good referee/umpire in a game; you don't notice them if they are doing a good job. if a TV announcer is horrible, Jason Witten Monday Night Football, then you notice right away.

too many of these guys ( smaller percentage of women ) feel they have to describe EVERY action taking place at every moment. if they are on radio fine but the most egregious are on TV. even larger market teams who have their own TV stations often assign "homers" to do the telecasts. instead of the old Howard Cosell adage "just tellin it like it is" they feel the need ( probably pressured from team ownership who after all is signing their paychecks) to make excuses or cover up their teams' poor play.

as far as missing action shots, cut ins from other games or missing something coming back from commercials. the director in the TV truck parked outside the venue is partially to blame though more often than not the action is at the mercy of ESPN or some other major network. The Cardinals vs Cubs game scheduled for a 7:05 Pm EST start time starts ONLY when ESPN tells the umpires its time go.

still, there is more access than ever to sporting events as far as camera angles, interviews, sideline reporters, etc. some cable TV packages allow users to select camera angles and give you the option to pause action while fetching another cold beverage.

its too bad we cannot resurrect the GREAT old broadcasters from yesteryear and let them do the modern games. then again, Red Barber, Mel Allen, and other greats might complain that they do not recognize the modern athletes as being worthy of their words.

**seany65** · January 2nd, 2019, 08:39 PM

I don't watch US sports broadcasts as we don't get them for free in the UK, (plus I don't really like yank sports), but it doesn't surprise me that you've been able to notice a difference after four years away from it. 'Tim'e does have a habit of allowing us to notice changes.

A Brit who last saw football in the 1960's would see a huge number of differences when confronted with it today, not least the ridiculous "diving" and money, but also the speed and how light the ball is, and how heading a wet ball into the net would not cause brain damage these days, lol!

Gordon3 · January 2nd, 2019, 08:58 PM

Well, it's probably all downhill from here. With cable cutting and networks like ESPN and Fox slashing budgets, sports broadcasting will become even more of an amateur hour than it is now.

Having worked in terrestrial radio back in the day, I can say that there's so much skill lost among commentators:

ability to "tell the story" of a game, i.e., summarize it in a meaningful narrative, rather than just reciting stats,
ability to tell a story about a past event in any way whatsoever,
have a thorough knowledge of the strategy and rules of the given sport, and be able to effectively relate that knowledge,
have a working English vocabulary of any significance,
be able to announce using complete sentences more than 25% of the time (an unfortunate side-effect of the influence of British & Latin American-style soccer shoutcasting),
report on the game in a no-nonsense manner, in general, as though it were a news event, rather than a cultural or entertainment event (I know sports in the US is considered an entertainment commodity, but in certain contexts, a good explanation of what's going on is appropriate).

Sports has been declining in ratings & attendance for years (have you seen the crowd sizes at baseball games recently???!!!

), and broadcast quality isn't exactly bringing new viewers to the party, especially when young people are watching e-sports, whose broadcasts, ironically, tend to be more professional-looking than any broadcast or cable network offering.

**FrankDobe** · January 2nd, 2019, 09:05 PM

I haven't been away from it as you have but the truly insipid sportscaster has not only taken over but has multiplied ! back in the day, you had one announcer describing the action. then someone decided HEY we need an EXPERT ( former player ) do do the "color" analysis and not the play by play. multi person broadcast booths HAVE worked, especially where European football is concerned. even the Yank version of soccer, the MLS, has managed to get competent British/Irish/Scottish broadcasters to do the games here.

ESPN does show quite a bit of the Premier League here and while I am not sure if the audio/video feeds are made in Britain, I can usually enjoy those games more than our Major League Baseball and National Football League. lol do not even MENTION the National Basketball Association.

what might be fun is to take two injured players and let THEM call the GAME ! let's say a friendly between England and Sweden; can you IMAGINE Rooney and Zlatan in the SAME BOOTH !

**FrankDobe** · January 2nd, 2019, 09:13 PM

GORDON3 said: ability to "tell the story" of a game, i.e., summarize it in a meaningful narrative, rather than just reciting stats,
ability to tell a story about a past event in any way whatsoever,
have a thorough knowledge of the strategy and rules of the given sport, and be able to effectively relate that knowledge,
have a working English vocabulary of any significance,
be able to announce using complete sentences more than 25% of the time (an unfortunate side-effect of the influence of British & Latin American-style soccer shoutcasting),
report on the game in a no-nonsense manner, in general, as though it were a news event, rather than a cultural or entertainment event (I know sports in the US is considered an entertainment commodity, but in certain contexts, a good explanation of what's going on is appropriate).

[B]agree 100% Gordon3. here in the USA major sports ARE a huge entertainment industry. the E in ESPN stands for Entertainment after all. younger folk have many more options and many more platforms to view the action. maybe they will be the driving force to get better radio/TV/internet announcing than what we currently have.

OldSchool47 · January 2nd, 2019, 09:22 PM

Sports on TV have become a circus where the broadcasters are performers who do and say whatever to capture the attention of the viewers. The sporting event is of secondary importance behind the comedy routine and melodramatics of the broadcasters. The athletes and teams have joined the circus. Embarrassing. Pathetic. Devolution.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C58aed4os_4

Female broadcasters for male sporting events? That's a joke. Here's one for ya: snow-ski racing. The androgyny gang has taken over and it's impossible to determine if the racer is male or female.

http://thesportdigest.com/wp-content...ndsey-vonn.jpg

http://www1.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/D...499gq560rl.jpg

Ray Davies' message to the androgyny gang: https://youtu.be/z3wrCdCSJtc.

rarej · January 2nd, 2019, 10:33 PM

I'm definitely more of a motorsports enthusiast (with a hard lean to the indycar side of things), agree with Frankdobe here. There are still some good duos out there, I actually didn't mind David Hobbs too terribly when he was commenting on US F1 broadcasts and Paul Tracy (regardless of his stance on race) has a couple quips here and there. The saturation of content doesn't help either. There are so many pundits and booth sitters that quality just can't be achieved.

A couple of missed shots here and there are to be expected and is more so these larger networks calling the shots. I recall the purdue vs. osu football game where there was a bizarre narrative with some kid and cancer. I feel for the kid, it's terrible to live with whatever condition he had but the cameras cut to him several times over the game, often impeding the overall quality. They couldn't even let the kid leave the stadium early, as he was on his way out they stopped him for another interview. It was incredible how much they apparently needed this kid to do something. If someone could correct me on this, it would be nice. The details are foggy now.

Oldschool47: I will say most female broadcasters don't really have much to add. They always seem to be the ones pushed out to the field for a worthless conversation with the coaches who are just trying to make it back to the locker room. Probably because they are almost never on the board and are used primarily as field reporters. Generally, there is an expendable air about them. Could you expound a bit more on the androgyny gang? Snow-ski racing has been like that since at least the late-90s.

**FrankDobe** · January 3rd, 2019, 10:06 AM

CBS was the first network to have a female "reporting" on sports. She was Phyllis George a former Miss USA if I am not mistaken so she was easy on the eyes. She was also on their pre-game/halftime show with other personalities like "bookie" Jimmy the Greek which, let's face it, is a big reason why some folks follow sports-the betting angle.
As time went on, female reporters essentially worked sidelines the most famous being Erin Andrews. There ARE some female sports reporters who are competent such as Doris Burke who covers the NBA and college basketball.

**otokonomidori** · January 4th, 2019, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rarej

I'm definitely more of a motorsports enthusiast (with a hard lean to the indycar side of things),

Paul Page , Bobby Unser and Sam Posey were a brilliant combination.

January 2nd, 2019, 08:25 PM	#1
rarej Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2016 Posts: 6 Thanks: 688 Thanked 61 Times in 6 Posts	The State of American Sports Broadcasting It's a new year and I figured it would best be served by posting a new thread to the forum where I lurk so heavily. Since graduating college, I've had plenty of time to sit down and watch sports for longer than I ever have before. Maybe It's because I've been away from tv for four years, but modern day sports broadcasts seem so stunted. It was definitely noticeable to me during this year's egregious football college bowl and (half) championship season. I also noticed it during the botched indycar finale at sonoma where the race was held back for roughly 10-20 minutes by NBC while waiting for a nascar race to conclude. Then we didn't even get to see the beginning of the race as their scheduling was so out of whack. Additionally, I find anything fox sports decides to broadcast always falls flat in some way or another (poor replay timing, camera angles, weird narratives, commentating). Anyway, just curious what other people think about the situation. I'm looking at this all subjectively of course.

January 2nd, 2019, 08:39 PM	#3
seany65 Vintage Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 3,651 Thanks: 80,415 Thanked 32,728 Times in 3,527 Posts	I don't watch US sports broadcasts as we don't get them for free in the UK, (plus I don't really like yank sports), but it doesn't surprise me that you've been able to notice a difference after four years away from it. 'Tim'e does have a habit of allowing us to notice changes. A Brit who last saw football in the 1960's would see a huge number of differences when confronted with it today, not least the ridiculous "diving" and money, but also the speed and how light the ball is, and how heading a wet ball into the net would not cause brain damage these days, lol! __________________ <-- That's Emer Kenny and I want to be stuck in her front bottom. Quote from electrofreak : I'd rather have questions that can't be answered, than answers that can't be questioned.

January 2nd, 2019, 08:58 PM	#4
Gordon3 Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2015 Posts: 458 Thanks: 2,479 Thanked 5,237 Times in 446 Posts	Well, it's probably all downhill from here. With cable cutting and networks like ESPN and Fox slashing budgets, sports broadcasting will become even more of an amateur hour than it is now. Having worked in terrestrial radio back in the day, I can say that there's so much skill lost among commentators: ability to "tell the story" of a game, i.e., summarize it in a meaningful narrative, rather than just reciting stats, ability to tell a story about a past event in any way whatsoever, have a thorough knowledge of the strategy and rules of the given sport, and be able to effectively relate that knowledge, have a working English vocabulary of any significance, be able to announce using complete sentences more than 25% of the time (an unfortunate side-effect of the influence of British & Latin American-style soccer shoutcasting), report on the game in a no-nonsense manner, in general, as though it were a news event, rather than a cultural or entertainment event (I know sports in the US is considered an entertainment commodity, but in certain contexts, a good explanation of what's going on is appropriate). Sports has been declining in ratings & attendance for years (have you seen the crowd sizes at baseball games recently???!!! ), and broadcast quality isn't exactly bringing new viewers to the party, especially when young people are watching e-sports, whose broadcasts, ironically, tend to be more professional-looking than any broadcast or cable network offering.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

January 2nd, 2019, 08:36 PM	#2
FrankDobe Vintage Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: last thing I remember was falling down somewhere Posts: 13,147 Thanks: 112,354 Thanked 104,700 Times in 13,097 Posts	could not agree more and it is across ALL American sports and not just NASCAR. it was once said that good TV/radio announcer is like a good referee/umpire in a game; you don't notice them if they are doing a good job. if a TV announcer is horrible, Jason Witten Monday Night Football, then you notice right away. too many of these guys ( smaller percentage of women ) feel they have to describe EVERY action taking place at every moment. if they are on radio fine but the most egregious are on TV. even larger market teams who have their own TV stations often assign "homers" to do the telecasts. instead of the old Howard Cosell adage "just tellin it like it is" they feel the need ( probably pressured from team ownership who after all is signing their paychecks) to make excuses or cover up their teams' poor play. as far as missing action shots, cut ins from other games or missing something coming back from commercials. the director in the TV truck parked outside the venue is partially to blame though more often than not the action is at the mercy of ESPN or some other major network. The Cardinals vs Cubs game scheduled for a 7:05 Pm EST start time starts ONLY when ESPN tells the umpires its time go. still, there is more access than ever to sporting events as far as camera angles, interviews, sideline reporters, etc. some cable TV packages allow users to select camera angles and give you the option to pause action while fetching another cold beverage. its too bad we cannot resurrect the GREAT old broadcasters from yesteryear and let them do the modern games. then again, Red Barber, Mel Allen, and other greats might complain that they do not recognize the modern athletes as being worthy of their words.

January 2nd, 2019, 09:05 PM	#5
FrankDobe Vintage Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: last thing I remember was falling down somewhere Posts: 13,147 Thanks: 112,354 Thanked 104,700 Times in 13,097 Posts	I haven't been away from it as you have but the truly insipid sportscaster has not only taken over but has multiplied ! back in the day, you had one announcer describing the action. then someone decided HEY we need an EXPERT ( former player ) do do the "color" analysis and not the play by play. multi person broadcast booths HAVE worked, especially where European football is concerned. even the Yank version of soccer, the MLS, has managed to get competent British/Irish/Scottish broadcasters to do the games here. ESPN does show quite a bit of the Premier League here and while I am not sure if the audio/video feeds are made in Britain, I can usually enjoy those games more than our Major League Baseball and National Football League. lol do not even MENTION the National Basketball Association. what might be fun is to take two injured players and let THEM call the GAME ! let's say a friendly between England and Sweden; can you IMAGINE Rooney and Zlatan in the SAME BOOTH !

January 2nd, 2019, 09:13 PM	#6
FrankDobe Vintage Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: last thing I remember was falling down somewhere Posts: 13,147 Thanks: 112,354 Thanked 104,700 Times in 13,097 Posts	GORDON3 said: ability to "tell the story" of a game, i.e., summarize it in a meaningful narrative, rather than just reciting stats, ability to tell a story about a past event in any way whatsoever, have a thorough knowledge of the strategy and rules of the given sport, and be able to effectively relate that knowledge, have a working English vocabulary of any significance, be able to announce using complete sentences more than 25% of the time (an unfortunate side-effect of the influence of British & Latin American-style soccer shoutcasting), report on the game in a no-nonsense manner, in general, as though it were a news event, rather than a cultural or entertainment event (I know sports in the US is considered an entertainment commodity, but in certain contexts, a good explanation of what's going on is appropriate). [B]agree 100% Gordon3. here in the USA major sports ARE a huge entertainment industry. the E in ESPN stands for Entertainment after all. younger folk have many more options and many more platforms to view the action. maybe they will be the driving force to get better radio/TV/internet announcing than what we currently have.

January 2nd, 2019, 09:22 PM	#7
OldSchool47 Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2016 Posts: 306 Thanks: 129 Thanked 3,045 Times in 299 Posts	Sports on TV have become a circus where the broadcasters are performers who do and say whatever to capture the attention of the viewers. The sporting event is of secondary importance behind the comedy routine and melodramatics of the broadcasters. The athletes and teams have joined the circus. Embarrassing. Pathetic. Devolution. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C58aed4os_4 Female broadcasters for male sporting events? That's a joke. Here's one for ya: snow-ski racing. The androgyny gang has taken over and it's impossible to determine if the racer is male or female. http://thesportdigest.com/wp-content...ndsey-vonn.jpg http://www1.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/D...499gq560rl.jpg Ray Davies' message to the androgyny gang: https://youtu.be/z3wrCdCSJtc.

January 2nd, 2019, 10:33 PM	#8
rarej Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2016 Posts: 6 Thanks: 688 Thanked 61 Times in 6 Posts	I'm definitely more of a motorsports enthusiast (with a hard lean to the indycar side of things), agree with Frankdobe here. There are still some good duos out there, I actually didn't mind David Hobbs too terribly when he was commenting on US F1 broadcasts and Paul Tracy (regardless of his stance on race) has a couple quips here and there. The saturation of content doesn't help either. There are so many pundits and booth sitters that quality just can't be achieved. A couple of missed shots here and there are to be expected and is more so these larger networks calling the shots. I recall the purdue vs. osu football game where there was a bizarre narrative with some kid and cancer. I feel for the kid, it's terrible to live with whatever condition he had but the cameras cut to him several times over the game, often impeding the overall quality. They couldn't even let the kid leave the stadium early, as he was on his way out they stopped him for another interview. It was incredible how much they apparently needed this kid to do something. If someone could correct me on this, it would be nice. The details are foggy now. Oldschool47: I will say most female broadcasters don't really have much to add. They always seem to be the ones pushed out to the field for a worthless conversation with the coaches who are just trying to make it back to the locker room. Probably because they are almost never on the board and are used primarily as field reporters. Generally, there is an expendable air about them. Could you expound a bit more on the androgyny gang? Snow-ski racing has been like that since at least the late-90s.

January 3rd, 2019, 10:06 AM	#9
FrankDobe Vintage Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: last thing I remember was falling down somewhere Posts: 13,147 Thanks: 112,354 Thanked 104,700 Times in 13,097 Posts	CBS was the first network to have a female "reporting" on sports. She was Phyllis George a former Miss USA if I am not mistaken so she was easy on the eyes. She was also on their pre-game/halftime show with other personalities like "bookie" Jimmy the Greek which, let's face it, is a big reason why some folks follow sports-the betting angle. As time went on, female reporters essentially worked sidelines the most famous being Erin Andrews. There ARE some female sports reporters who are competent such as Doris Burke who covers the NBA and college basketball.