EersSkins05 Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 Please, for the love of all that his holy, don't let Joe Buck and Troy Aikman be broadcasting the game this weekend against the Giants. I know it's the game of the day for Fox, so I'm afraid that Buck will be present and I'll have to turn on the radio even though it's a split second ahead of the TV in the game. If you could spare me from Joe Buck running his annoying and pompous ballwasher, well then much love to you, JC. :point2sky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nighthawk Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 I thought I heard Kenny Albert say on last weeks broadcast that he was doing this weeks game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 I like Dick Stockton, Daryl Johnston and Tony Siragusa. It's a shame Aikman is stuck with Buck, because he isn't a half bad announcer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 I don't get the animus towards Buck. There aren't many play-by-play men I'd take over him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DB44 Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 I like Dick Stockton, Daryl Johnston and Tony Siragusa. It's a shame Aikman is stuck with Buck, because he isn't a half bad announcer. Thats what the press release on redskins.com says: Stockton, Johnston, Goose. I completely agree. Johnston still disses us or goes on about how great the other team is, and I wish they switched him and Aikman. Aikman, I think does a pretty good job. :logo: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iheartskins Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 I don't get the animus towards Buck. There aren't many play-by-play men I'd take over him. Really redman? Don't you find his tone condescending and obnoxious? I half-loathe the guy because nearly every time he opens his mouth he comes accross as incredibly arrogant. Anyway, who are the few that you would take over him? I agree with Des, Aikman's a pretty good announcer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackdaddydean Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 I like Dick Stockton, Daryl Johnston and Tony Siragusa. It's a shame Aikman is stuck with Buck, because he isn't a half bad announcer. Daryl is a great color commentator and Siragusa is pretty funny, but you LIKE Dick Stockton???? Other people have metioned this before and maybe you just haven't noticed but he makes 376 mistakes a game. Scott Brunell?? At least Joe Buck doesnt make stupid mistakes. In fact, Joe Buck is a pretty damn good announcer like his father was. Whether you think he's pompus or talks to much is another issue. But the guy knows his ****. Unlike Mr. Stockton. Aikman is a good color commentator too. FIRE DICK! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
36HAMMER Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 i think regarles off who announses the game i will listen to ol SONNY and SAM.SMELLS LIKE FOOOOTBALLLL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freakinandpeakin Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 Buck = Costas = self-righteous doof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stwasm Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 Well, if all else fails, turn down the sound and listen to Sonny, Sam and Frank, while watching the game... I mean Larry! :doh: That just doesn't roll off the tongue, like Sonny, Sam and Frank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andavy Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 I thought I heard Kenny Albert say on last weeks broadcast that he was doing this weeks game. I heard that as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzmuda Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 It's in this week's game release: Kenny Albert, Daryl Johnston, and Tony Siragusa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radagast5 Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 I don't get the animus towards Buck. There aren't many play-by-play men I'd take over him. You don't get the animus because you're sensible and you recognize good broadcasting. Buck is talented, obviously has impeccable pedigree, and does an excellent job of not stepping on the action with unnecessary clutter/commentary. I think some people, for whatever reason, confuse intellect, knowledge of the craft, and the ability to articulate one's ideas with being pompous. I'm stunned by the number of people "offended" by both Buck and Bob Costas, two of the best broadcasters of their generation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 Daryl is a great color commentator and Siragusa is pretty funny, but you LIKE Dick Stockton???? Other people have metioned this before and maybe you just haven't noticed but he makes 376 mistakes a game. Scott Brunell?? At least Joe Buck doesnt make stupid mistakes. In fact, Joe Buck is a pretty damn good announcer like his father was. Whether you think he's pompus or talks to much is another issue. But the guy knows his ****. Unlike Mr. Stockton. Aikman is a good color commentator too.FIRE DICK! I really only listed Stockton becuase he's a member of my favorite announcer group at the moment. However I have to say I don't really mind the little mistakes. Honest mistakes I can forgive and in truth they become fun when we ge to correct them or laugh about them.....Joe Buck's holier then thou attitude bugs me a lot more, wasn't he the guy that made a big deal out of Randy Moss giving the Packer fans a little well deserved pay back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iheartskins Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 You don't get the animus because you're sensible and you recognize good broadcasting. No room for different opinions in your book, eh? Buck is talented, obviously has impeccable pedigree, and does an excellent job of not stepping on the action with unnecessary clutter/commentary. What about the freak out after Moss did his pretend mooning of the crowd last year? Or was that not "unneccessary clutter/commentary"? I think some people, for whatever reason, confuse intellect, knowledge of the craft, and the ability to articulate one's ideas with being pompous. I'm stunned by the number of people "offended" by both Buck and Bob Costas, two of the best broadcasters of their generation. By no means am I offended by either of the two of them. I just find Buck to come across as a jerk and I can't stand how he announces baseball games. His intellect, or lack thereof, has nothing to do with my opinion of him. Jon Miller is an example of a phenomenon baseball announcer who has none of the arrogance of Joe Buck. As for Costas, I actually really like the guy and he's done some excellent coverage of sports storties that are out of the mainstream including a really provocative look at Jackie Robinson's son who lives in Africa. His show on HBO is usually fascinating stuff that's really well done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radagast5 Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 Buck = Costas = self-righteous doof. Since when does insight, knowledge of the craft, and the ability to articulate one's ideas equal self-righteousness? Why don't you expand upon why Bob Costas, for instance, is a poor broadcaster and perhaps you can compare and contrast that doof's work with someone who you feel does exemplary work in the field. I'll eagerly await, but certainly not expect, a response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaVar=BEAST Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 Am I the only one that can't stand Tony Siragusa? He tries to be funny and tries to be insightful but only hits on either one 5% of his comments. Most the time it sounds like they go to him and he has nothing prepared to say and just blabs about something off the top of his head. Also, Joe Buck is annoying...I haven't liked him since he was so disgusted by Randy Moss's fake moon in Green Bay...it wasnt as big of a deal as he made it out to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaVar=BEAST Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 Since when does insight, knowledge of the craft, and the ability to articulate one's ideas equal self-righteousness?Why don't you expand upon why Bob Costas, for instance, is a poor broadcaster and perhaps you can compare and contrast that doof's work with someone who you feel does exemplary work in the field. I'll eagerly await, but certainly not expect, a response. Not to butt in, but I am getting started working in Sports Broadcast and I've been lucky enough to see some of these guys behaving off-air...Bob Costas being one. I hate to judge a guy from just a couple incidents but seriously this guy acted like he was something holy when he was off the air. He just came off as a prick who thought he was better than everyone around him. That being said, he's good at what he does on the air. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softballs Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 Siragusa is getting better, but agree he's pretty bad most of the time. I can't be a fair judge of Moose since I hate all Cowboys. Kenny Albert - well the jury is still out. I'm tired of hearing them say that Brunell doesn't like this offense though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvan1 Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 I like Dick Stockton, Daryl Johnston and Tony Siragusa. It's a shame Aikman is stuck with Buck, because he isn't a half bad announcer. good call. i wish al michaels could do every game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EersSkins05 Posted October 27, 2005 Author Share Posted October 27, 2005 I actually prefer the Dick Stockton/ Darryl Johnston (which I heard a few weeks ago, don't know why they switched up Kenny Albert last week) broadcasting combo to any other pairing in the league short of Michaels/Madden on MNF. Stockton has slipups in old-man/dyslexic ways, not as in not knowing what he's talking about ways. He's one of the best broadcasters of the last 25 years, although he slips under the radar a bit. (His broadcasts w/ Hubie Brown on TNT shaped me as the basketball fan that I am.) And Bob Costas is the best on-air play-by-play man this side of Al Michaels. Most ppl these days haven't actually heard Costas broadcast a game in a while- they've only seen him on Inside the NFL, his other HBO show, and as a fill-in for Larry King on CNN. Joe Buck, on the other hand, is a pompous, holier-than-thou horse's *ss that interjects himself into the broadcast far too often. The most notable example of this, as has already been mentioned, was last year when Randy Moss fake-mooned the Green Bay crowd, and Joe Buck acted as if Moss had just pulled his pants down and took a dump on the 50-yard line. I really don't think the man gets excited during a broadcast. Seriously, can you think of a memorable moment in broadcasting for him? He's been on the air for national broadcasts in baseball and football for about 5 years now. Anything? Even after two straight world series where teams won it all for the first time in 90 years? Anything? And don't even begin to get me started on how blatantly biased he is when broadcasting games of teams located in St. Louis. Last year's world series was like having the president of the Cardinals' Fan Club in the booth... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posse81 Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 You don't get the animus because you're sensible and you recognize good broadcasting.Buck is talented, obviously has impeccable pedigree, and does an excellent job of not stepping on the action with unnecessary clutter/commentary. I think some people, for whatever reason, confuse intellect, knowledge of the craft, and the ability to articulate one's ideas with being pompous. I'm stunned by the number of people "offended" by both Buck and Bob Costas, two of the best broadcasters of their generation. I really do miss Costas doing baseball. On another note, I am getting a little annoyed with Mike Patrick the past few years. I used to really like him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radagast5 Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 Really redman? Don't you find his tone condescending and obnoxious? I half-loathe the guy because nearly every time he opens his mouth he comes accross as incredibly arrogant. Anyway, who are the few that you would take over him?I agree with Des, Aikman's a pretty good announcer. I'm beginning to realize that being bright, well-informed, and confident seems to equal arrogance in many people's books. To me, those qualities are refreshing given the Terry Bradshaws of the world. Sure, people like George Will come across as a little superior, but rather than feel put-off by it, I sort of enjoy the challenge, I'm intellectually engaged instead of feeling depressed or having a sense of pity at some slug (Randy Cross, cough cough) who can't express himself. It's amazing to me that the instant a broadcaster is clearly verbose and eloquent (and in the case of both Buck and Costas, equally clearly knows the craft better than 99% of the people in the business), a significant portion of the audience reacts to it as a sign of self-importance or pretentiousness. Why is this? I ask this in general, not to you directly, but is it because that portion of the audience feels like the quicksilver delivery and the ease with which they use the English language (compared to say, Bill Maas), makes them feel intellectually inferior to these broadcasters and because of this some form of contempt is born? It's almost as if the reaction is saying: "Man, this guy is making me feel like he knows he's way smarter than me. I hate that." Maybe, conversely, this is why so many people like Howard Stern. His abject stupidity and giddy willingness to wallow in the same bland, sophmoric stunts makes them feel superior. Maybe not; just thinking out loud here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 I'm beginning to realize that being bright, well-informed, and confident seems to equal arrogance in many people's books. To me, those qualities are refreshing given the Terry Bradshaws of the world. Sure, people like George Will come across as a little superior, but rather than feel put-off by it, I sort of enjoy the challenge, I'm intellectually engaged instead of feeling depressed or having a sense of pity at some slug (Randy Cross, cough cough) who can't express himself.It's amazing to me that the instant a broadcaster is clearly verbose and eloquent (and in the case of both Buck and Costas, equally clearly knows the craft better than 99% of the people in the business), a significant portion of the audience reacts to it as a sign of self-importance or pretentiousness. Why is this? I ask this in general, not to you directly, but is it because that portion of the audience feels like the quicksilver delivery and the ease with which they use the English language (compared to say, Bill Maas), makes them feel intellectually inferior to these broadcasters and because of this some form of contempt is born? It's almost as if the reaction is saying: "Man, this guy is making me feel like he knows he's way smarter than me. I hate that." Maybe, conversely, this is why so many people like Howard Stern. His abject stupidity and giddy willingness to wallow in the same bland, sophmoric stunts makes them feel superior. Maybe not; just thinking out loud here. You seem to be forgetting the human factor that has to be considered for any position in which you are engaging an audience. Talent alone is never enough, you have to be able to get your audience to like you. Guys with lesser talent can prove to be far more effective in broadcasting if they come across as friendly and fair. John Madden is a perfect example of this. The guy is a walking talking parody of himself who never fails to deliver some of the most bewildering lines in all of sports. But people like him and his name shines brighter then broadcasters that have far superior communication abilities. It’s not that some people make me feel less intelligent, truth be told when I want intellectuals I don’t go looking for it in broadcasting booths. It’s that the way they choose to deliver the action comes across more as judgment then descriptive commentary. Joe Buck’s freak out over Randy Moss’s antics was a great example of this. He eagerly climbed atop his soap box and bombarded us with sanctimonious exaggerations. Had one listened to that without having seen it, one would think Randy had exposed his rear (like the packer fans do) and defecated in the end zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radagast5 Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 And Bob Costas is the best on-air play-by-play man this side of Al Michaels. Most ppl these days haven't actually heard Costas broadcast a game in a while- they've only seen him on Inside the NFL, his other HBO show, and as a fill-in for Larry King on CNN. ... I agree. Costas does far too few baseball broadcasts. He may be the most knowledgable baseball guy in the biz. Several people have suggested that he become the next commissioner of baseball, and if it wasn't for the fact that it would take him wholly out of the broadcast booth, I couldn't think of a better guy for the job. Another announcer who is vastly underrated is Gary Thorne who does excellent work both with baseball and especially hockey. Joe Buck, on the other hand, is a pompous, holier-than-thou horse's *ss that interjects himself into the broadcast far too often. The most notable example of this, as has already been mentioned, was last year when Randy Moss fake-mooned the Green Bay crowd, and Joe Buck acted as if Moss had just pulled his pants down and took a dump on the 50-yard line. This is the one legitimate "Buck is self-righteous" gripe that people have. Moss was acting like an ass, and the fact that he got called out on it didn't bother me, but Buck *way* oversold his comment. I don't argue that point. But I don't think this one instance pegs the guy as self-righteous overall. I really don't think the man gets excited during a broadcast. Seriously, can you think of a memorable moment in broadcasting for him? This has lost some luster in the glut of "let's convict the guy on pure circumstantial evidence", but here's one: "The pitch to McGwire. Down the line in left! Is it enough?! YES! 62! Touch 'em all Mark, you are the new single season home run king." And don't even begin to get me started on how blatantly biased he is when broadcasting games of teams located in St. Louis. Last year's world series was like having the president of the Cardinals' Fan Club in the booth... His knowledge of the Cardinals is obviously expansive (gee, wonder why? LOL) and I think his ability to speak intelligently about them comes across as fawning, when it's really not. Then again, I grew up in St. Louis, so I don't mind that so much. <g> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.