Re-thinking the hiring of color commentators

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

I think we can all agree that there are a lot of terrible football (and really sports) color commentators out there. I believe the NFL needs to change its hiring model. 
 

i think there was this belief that hiring former players and coaches as commentators would cause fans to like them or watch them more because of their popularity. I don’t think that assumption is right. I don’t know anyone who likes a commentator or his work just because he was liked or known as a player. 
 

There are now so many really brilliant content creators out there (media, podcasts, YouTube) who dissect film endlessly and would provide so much better and more astute analysis than the likes of Tiki Barber or Adam
Archuletta Or Troy Ailman, or Brian Griese, or Mark Sanchez, etc. 

 

I would like to see the NFL shift away from the hiring of recently retired players and instead look at some of these “film nerds” as possible hires. As average football fans are getting smarter and more into the X’s and O’s, the current model of having former players trot out a bunch of vapid talking points is not working. 
 

Any thoughts? 

[maddenboy]

Agree.

 

but we do want to be entertained by the color guy.   usually the play-by-play guy is dry, which is fine. 

 

Or, maybe the better play is to get rid of the play-by-play guy.  The color guy can give me down, distance, penalty called, etc. 

 

So maybe go with 2 color guys.  An entertainer and a football geek. 

 

To keep football alive, cater to the new generation of fans and potential fans.  They have short attention and want to be entertained, as they multi-multi-task while they watch.

 

Edited January 8, 2022 by maddenboy

[AlCowlingsTaxiService]

Meh … I garner my enjoyment from the game itself.  I don’t give much attention to who is calling the game, unlike many on these boards who get all worked up over every comment or perceived slight to their team

[MiltonWaddams]

Listened to Aqib Talib call a game for the first time last week. That was a….unique experience…

2 minutes ago, maddenboy said:

Agree.

 

but we do want to be entertained by the color guy.   Its usually where the play-by-play guy is dry, which is fine. 

 

Or, maybe the better play is to get rid of the play-by-play guy.  The color guy can give me down, distance, penalty called, etc. 

 

So maybe go with 2 color guys.  An entertainer and a football geek. 

Nah. Think of Harlan, Buck and Michaels. They carry reasonable to abysmal color commentators. They are not the replaceable ones.

[Ya Digg?]

So I see a couple of problems with this-first thing (for me at least) is when you listen to many of these guys who have their own podcasts or YouTube channels is they are BORING! No inflection in their voice, incredibly monotone-I find it very difficult to listen to them.

 

the second thing that seems to happen to anyone who goes “mainstream” people seem to turn on them almost immediately. 

 

I think too many people think they can do these jobs easily/better than the people currently doing it and it leads to a lot of negativity. Not saying there aren’t bad analysts out there, but I think it’s a bit overblown 

[maddenboy]

I'm not saying "dont replace or upgrade the current color guys."

 

OP was talking about bringing in some new blood at the position. 

[Buftex]

I think the world we live in today, everyone would hate whoever they have doing the telecasts. 

[Inigo Montoya]

Collinsworth and Butt Fumble were terrible.

 

I'm for expanding the universe of commentators beyond former NFL players if someone is knowledgeable and articulate.

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

3 minutes ago, maddenboy said:

I'm not saying "dont replace or upgrade the current color guys."

 

OP was talking about bringing in some new blood at the position. 

The other idea I had floated for a while

is that for every game, the booth adds a local beat writer of the home team as the third person on the broadcast.  That would Add somebody who actually had some substantive knowledge of the home team. 

[HamptonBillsfan]

13 minutes ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

I think we can all agree that there are a lot of terrible football (and really sports) color commentators out there. I believe the NFL needs to change its hiring model. 
 

i think there was this belief that hiring former players and coaches as commentators would cause fans to like them or watch them more because of their popularity. I don’t think that assumption is right. I don’t know anyone who likes a commentator or his work just because he was liked or known as a player. 
 

There are now so many really brilliant content creators out there (media, podcasts, YouTube) who dissect film endlessly and would provide so much better and more astute analysis than the likes of Tiki Barber or Adam
Archuletta Or Troy Ailman, or Brian Griese, or Mark Sanchez, etc. 

 

I would like to see the NFL shift away from the hiring of recently retired players and instead look at some of these “film nerds” as possible hires. As average football fans are getting smarter and more into the X’s and O’s, the current model of having former players trot out a bunch of vapid talking points is not working. 
 

Any thoughts? 

Football's ratings are through the roof. They dwarf any other sport or entertainment content. The color guys are former players and coaches for a good reason. They provide on field experience that viewers enjoy. The networks, who pay a fortune for the rights, have a time tested formula for picking analysts. Don't try to reinvent the wheel. 

[BuffaloBillies]

As long as they are articulate enough (and not super annoying with stupid takes during the game), a former player can really take you "inside the huddle" since he's been there. I kind of like that aspect. Especially QBs. And the more recent the player, the more likely they are to still know what schemes/plays the team is trying to do. 

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

Just now, HamptonBillsfan said:

Football's ratings are through the roof. They dwarf any other sport or entertainment content. The color guys are former players and coaches for a good reason. They provide on field experience that viewers enjoy. The networks, who pay a fortune for the rights, have a time tested formula for picking analysts. Don't try to reinvent the wheel. 

Interesting take. Not saying I disagree with you, but I wonder if football ratings are through the roof in spite of the low quality of the analysis. 
 

I think it is rare when I have heard anyone think highly of a color commentator (Romo? Anyone else?).

[Peace Frog]

I may get fragged for this, but am I the only one who doesn't care for the color commentary of one James Lofton?

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

1 minute ago, BuffaloBillies said:

As long as they are articulate enough (and not super annoying with stupid takes during the game), a former player can really take you "inside the huddle" since he's been there. I kind of like that aspect. Especially QBs. And the more recent the player, the more likely they are to still know what schemes/plays the team is trying to do. 

It is true that they can take you “inside the huddle,” but they don’t. They have 3-5 basic talking points usually.
 

Go back and listen to Sanchez from last Sunday. He added literally nothing to the broadcast by way of content. For example, did he ever once explain the coverages that were being run by either team? 

[Inigo Montoya]

1 minute ago, HamptonBillsfan said:

Football's ratings are through the roof. They dwarf any other sport or entertainment content. The color guys are former players and coaches for a good reason. They provide on field experience that viewers enjoy. The networks, who pay a fortune for the rights, have a time tested formula for picking analysts. Don't try to reinvent the wheel. 

 

Fair points all Hampton.

 

The most famous color commentator of all time, Howard Cosell, wrote an autobiography entitled, "I never played the game".  There can be some exceptions to the rule about ex-NFL types in the booth.  I'd take Aunt Edna from National Lampoon's Vacation over Collinsworth again.

[MiltonWaddams]

Just now, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

It is true that they can take you “inside the huddle,” but they don’t. They have 3-5 basic talking points usually.
 

Go back and listen to Sanchez from last Sunday. He added literally nothing to the broadcast by way of content. For example, did he ever once explain the coverages that were being run by either team? 

Sanchez can definitely go. He’s collecting a paycheque and it’s completely undeserved. He is terrible. 
 

on a side note, I look forward to Brees getting the full time SNF gig. He was great on the Saints Thanksgiving game.

[maddenboy]

7 minutes ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

The other idea I had floated for a while

is that for every game, the booth adds a local beat writer of the home team as the third person on the broadcast.  That would Add somebody who actually had some substantive knowledge of the home team. 

Here, I think of Charles Davis.  As a color guy he gives me all I could ever want about the player.  Not really much at all about the game.  Not his wheelhouse.

 

So if.  If.  We like the charles davis stuff, then a local beat writer would be great. 

 

Or, maybe this is another reason to have 3 in the booth.    Play, color, player-knowledge

[MiltonWaddams]

1 minute ago, maddenboy said:

Here, I think of Charles Davis.  As a color guy he gives me all I could ever want about the player.  Not really much at all about the game.  Not his wheelhouse.

 

So if.  If.  We like the charles davis stuff, then a local beat writer would be great. 

 

Or, maybe this is another reason to have 3 in the booth.    Play, color, player-knowledge

MNF triple crew comes to mind…except I am not sure any of them truly add anything…

[FireChans]

I'm sorry but no.

 

Collinsworth isn't the best, but his voice just screams big NFL game.

 

Romo has been pretty good.

 

I don't want to hear from some nerd about what football is like if he's never played. Stay on Youtube and stay out of the booth. Give me guys who have played on the field.

[GunnerBill]

This is another thead for misplaced Collinsworth hate. What I want from a colour guy is the ability to break down a play immediately after it has happened to further my understanding of how or why it worked or failed. He does that better than any of his peers. 

 

Failing that give me pure entertainment and Matt Millen who was terrific week 2. 

 

If I never heard Troy Aikman's inane football for dummies analysis again it would not concern me and I want year 1 Tony Romo back. Not a bloke who just speaks really quickly and reeeeeeeaaaaalllllly high Jim!!! Romo was the best pre-snap and CBS clearly reigned him in. Take that away from him and he is an average announcer with an annoying voice. He is actually pretty average after the play and often says things then has to correct himself when he sees the replay. Doesn't have Collinsworth's eye.

[eball]

25 minutes ago, AlCowlingsTaxiService said:

Meh … I garner my enjoyment from the game itself.  I don’t give much attention to who is calling the game, unlike many on these boards who get all worked up over every comment or perceived slight to their team

 

I think I fall more into this category as well.  I only notice them when they are really bad.

 

But I do admit, an analyst who can break down a play afterwards and show me the intricacies of what was happening is appreciated.

 

[BuffaloBillies]

9 minutes ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

It is true that they can take you “inside the huddle,” but they don’t. They have 3-5 basic talking points usually.
 

Go back and listen to Sanchez from last Sunday. He added literally nothing to the broadcast by way of content. For example, did he ever once explain the coverages that were being run by either team? 

 

Oh yeah, he blows. He would fit in the "super annoying with stupid takes during the game" category.

Give me Romo or similar though.

 

[K-9]

10 minutes ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

It is true that they can take you “inside the huddle,” but they don’t. They have 3-5 basic talking points usually.
 

Go back and listen to Sanchez from last Sunday. He added literally nothing to the broadcast by way of content. For example, did he ever once explain the coverages that were being run by either team? 

He had trouble understanding them when he played so it stands to reason he wouldn’t be able to explain them now. 

[HamptonBillsfan]

8 minutes ago, Inigo Montoya said:

 

Fair points all Hampton.

 

The most famous color commentator of all time, Howard Cosell, wrote an autobiography entitled, "I never played the game".  There can be some exceptions to the rule about ex-NFL types in the booth.  I'd take Aunt Edna from National Lampoon's Vacation over Collinsworth again.

Not saying these color guys appeal to everybody,but the game is such an incredible TV friendly product, coupled with a conduit for gambling activities, that it just doesn't matter unless someone alienates a portion of the market with some inflammatory comments. 

[klos63]

I love listening to Peyton Manning break down a play, a drive, a gameplan. Even though his broadcasts are spending too much time with guests, when the Mannings breakdown the game, it's very informative. Almost everything the usual commentators talk about is stuff I already know or can see myself. Former QB's are usually the best, just like catchers in baseball, they need to know all elements of offense and defense when they play the game. Brian Griese often has useful comments, same with Romo. But most of them are useless.

[HOUSE]

I left my microphone in the car

[K-9]

My biggest issue with color commentary guys is that they feel compelled to talk too much; like they get paid per word. And when you have two of them like ESPN does on Monday nights, it becomes a competition and the chatter becomes non stop. The game is interesting, but it ain’t that interesting. Sometimes less is more and ya gotta let the picture speak for you. 

[nucci]

with all the info on the screen and refs with microphones...there's no need for play by play or analysts in the booth. They just tell me what I just saw. No announcers with crowd noise is all I need...they just use same cliches every game.  

[LeGOATski]

35 minutes ago, maddenboy said:

Agree.

 

but we do want to be entertained by the color guy.   usually the play-by-play guy is dry, which is fine. 

 

Or, maybe the better play is to get rid of the play-by-play guy.  The color guy can give me down, distance, penalty called, etc. 

 

So maybe go with 2 color guys.  An entertainer and a football geek. 

 

To keep football alive, cater to the new generation of fans and potential fans.  They have short attention and want to be entertained, as they multi-multi-task while they watch.

 

Or better yet, just give me a picture to color while I watch the game!

 

[dpberr]

I agree that most retired NFLers are terrible at this job. A lot of them lack charisma. 

 

Too many YouTube podcasters try to emulate Florio. That's not a positive.

 

Most, not all, of the great sportscasters started in radio and doing minor league baseball, and I believe if you wanted to find promising talent, that's where it still lies.

[Beast]

I rarely pay attention to what is being said by the pbp guy or cc during the game.

[Mojo44]

To me this is much ado about nothing. My bar is set low in terms of my expectations for a color commentator. I think many posters here have unreasonably high expectations of a color commentator. I am certainly not on the Collingsworth is the antichrist bandwagon. He’s OK. In fact, and with respect, it’s the endless comments about him during a game thread that become tiresome and annoying. If you really hate him that much, switch to another broadcast. And he does add some good insight into the game. Aikman  is boring but has his moments. Romo, on the other hand, is a big disappointment to me. He started out fresh and interesting and for the past two years has become a caricature of himself. He has a shtick that has become old and tiresome. My favorite is probably Moose Johnston but I don’t usually watch Fox.  But it’s the game itself that’s important, not the commentators. 

[NewEra]

Sanchez is a prime example of both, ex player, while also being a podcast guy.  I enjoyed his podcast. He’s pretty sharp in that regard.  As a color guy, he’s god awful. Some of his takes in the Atlanta game were 💯 wrong.  

[In Summary]

Don't care about the personal interest stories and who said what in the off week on Twitter. Sideline reporters are generally cringe. Give me someone who knows the game and can explain plays. 

[Matt_In_NH]

Agree there are some bad one....disagree hiring film nerds is the right answer.  To some degree, this partly depends on what you want....if you want X's and O's all the time then your suggestion could work.  But its one size fits all thing, people want to be entertained, there is a huge part of the viewing audience that does not want to know about minutia.   Maybe the right answer is multiple crews...a la Manning Cast, or the Nickelodeon thing.

[Niagara Bill]

Please please please, not one tik tok, selfey taking, self absorbed, YouTuber where the focus is on the broadcaster not the game.

[transient]

42 minutes ago, AlCowlingsTaxiService said:

Meh … I garner my enjoyment from the game itself.  I don’t give much attention to who is calling the game, unlike many on these boards who get all worked up over every comment or perceived slight to their team

 

15 minutes ago, eball said:

 

I think I fall more into this category as well.  I only notice them when they are really bad.

 

But I do admit, an analyst who can break down a play afterwards and show me the intricacies of what was happening is appreciated.

 

 

7 minutes ago, klos63 said:

I love listening to Peyton Manning break down a play, a drive, a gameplan. Even though his broadcasts are spending too much time with guests, when the Mannings breakdown the game, it's very informative. Almost everything the usual commentators talk about is stuff I already know or can see myself. Former QB's are usually the best, just like catchers in baseball, they need to know all elements of offense and defense when they play the game. Brian Griese often has useful comments, same with Romo. But most of them are useless.

 

If it's a good game, I think the color guy is superfluous. While there is the occasional salient point to be made, if they're good, at the end of the game my enjoyment would be no more or less with or without them. A bad color guy, however, can make a good game annoying to watch and can make a bad game almost unwatchable.

 

I enjoy the Manning-cast, but only if I'm not really interested in the game. They're entertaining, but it's like a football talk show with a football game as the backdrop. If it's a bad game or one I'm not that invested in, their broadcast is what I'm watching. If it's a good game that I'm really interested in I have to switch to the regular broadcast. For me it's akin to trying to watch a Bills game with friends at a football party. My limited attention span keeps me getting distracted by all of the conversations going on around me and I miss a bunch of the action. 

[bigK14094]

We need commentators to tell us who is hurt, who went in, etc etc.  Most of these broadcast teams don't bother with that detail, and it detracts from the game.  Especially the old playuers, to busy giving us their opinion, and not enough about what is going on in the game.   When the left guard goes down, its a big deal to Bills fans, who went in is of concern.  We don't need a rant about QB play at that point. The play by play guys not doing their job well these days imho.

Edited January 8, 2022 by bigK14094

[Joe Mama]

1 hour ago, maddenboy said:

 

 

So maybe go with 2 color guys.  An entertainer and a football geek. 

 

 

Or you could have both in one--"Dandy" Don Meredith

[Bruce Smith]

1 hour ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

I think we can all agree that there are a lot of terrible football (and really sports) color commentators out there. I believe the NFL needs to change its hiring model. 
 

i think there was this belief that hiring former players and coaches as commentators would cause fans to like them or watch them more because of their popularity. I don’t think that assumption is right. I don’t know anyone who likes a commentator or his work just because he was liked or known as a player. 
 

There are now so many really brilliant content creators out there (media, podcasts, YouTube) who dissect film endlessly and would provide so much better and more astute analysis than the likes of Tiki Barber or Adam
Archuletta Or Troy Ailman, or Brian Griese, or Mark Sanchez, etc. 

 

I would like to see the NFL shift away from the hiring of recently retired players and instead look at some of these “film nerds” as possible hires. As average football fans are getting smarter and more into the X’s and O’s, the current model of having former players trot out a bunch of vapid talking points is not working. 
 

Any thoughts? 

I mute the announcers so i could care less.