Re-thinking the hiring of color commentators

[MJS]

I like some of them, but I've realized that I am pretty picky when it comes to announcers and color commentators.

 

I'm not sure what the best formula is. I think it is kind of a shot in the dark to see which ones catch on and which don't. I think it is a very hard job.

 

I liked Greg Olsen a lot when he did our game. I actually didn't know it was him at first. I looked it up and was really impressed. He has a bright future.

 

I'm getting sick of Tony Romo, but he is still good. I actually don't mind Aikman that much. He is like a neutral for me. I don't like him at all, but I also don't dislike him. He is the bare minimum for competency.

 

I loath Collinsworth. I hate both guys on Monday night.

[hondo in seattle]

About 99% of my enjoyment of the game comes from the game itself.  The other 1% comes from the broadcast crew.  But I'll add my two cents anyway...   

 

Yep, there are some youtubers who have gotten pretty smart about Xs and Os.  But the color commentator is far more than an X and O guy.  As ex-players, they know the game from an insider's perspective.  Sometimes they'll talk Xs and Os.  Sometimes it's inside-the-huddle or inside-the-locker-room stuff.  Sometimes it's about game planning, or teamwork, or mindset.   Being a part of the fraternity, sometimes they have access to players and coaches and can provide us insight into what someone is thinking and doing.  

 

Former football players and coaches know the game in a way that the X and O youtubers don't.    

[Son of a K-Gun]

Are we expecting better results with an entertainer than we saw from this guy?

[Rochesterfan]

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? 

 

There are a lot content creators, but many times they would not be good live.  They are good with the plays they choose, but in the moment - most of these would not be able to diagnose or add anything.

 

I think they choose former players and coaches- not because people will watch them that liked them as players, but because they have some insight into when they played.

 

Plus a lot of them do not speak well and I doubt they would be excellent commentators in real time trying to diagnose something with limited knowledge of all 32 teams.

 

I think there could be a spot of 1 or 2 on a local team, but on the national stage - I think it would make you long for the former players.

 

 

[LeGOATski]

35 minutes ago, Mojo44 said:

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. 

Just "switch to another broadcast?"

 

Oh yeah, there are so many Sunday night games to choose from!

 

[Rochesterfan]

1 hour 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.

 

I think the Manning cast goes to show - you don’t even need guys talking directly about the game - they add little snippets here and there and when they do it is great.

 

Then there are large parts with chatter with guests - that I find funny and has nothing to do with the game.  I am following the game and hearing stories - it is enjoyable to me.

 

 

[Mojo44]

10 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

Just "switch to another broadcast?"

 

Oh yeah, there are so many Sunday night games to choose from!

 

I think you know what I meant. Turn the volume down on the TV and go find a radio broadcast. They’re pretty much always available for Sunday night games. I don’t know what you’re talking about regarding Saturday night. That’s not Collingsworth time. You have options if you can’t stand him that much.

 

I don’t usually even get involved in these discussions because they’re not that important to me. But I do have a deeply ingrained pet peeve about people who whine about something they have total control over to change.

 

 

[Rochesterfan]

1 hour 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. 

 

The reason I would dislike this is then you will get a slanted view of the game - you get some hometown guy that can add insight to one small part of one team and then that would cause the color and the others to focus on the home team.

 

Can you imagine listening to a broadcast and having one of the NE reporters like Zolock - on a national feed giving all kinds of praise to NE.  I would have to puke and shut it off.

 

Give me the mostly balanced neutral guys.  If I want the Buffalo only take - listen to the local radio broadcast.

 

 

[cwater10]

1 hour 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.

 

I just had a horrible flashback to the great "Dennis Miller Monday Night Football" experiment.  Be careful what you ask for...

40 minutes ago, Son of a K-Gun said:

Are we expecting better results with an entertainer than we saw from this guy?

Just saw this after posting a similar thought.  The picture evaded my Dennis Miller search!  Yikes! He was bad.

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

32 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

There are a lot content creators, but many times they would not be good live.  They are good with the plays they choose, but in the moment - most of these would not be able to diagnose or add anything.

 

I think they choose former players and coaches- not because people will watch them that liked them as players, but because they have some insight into when they played.

 

Plus a lot of them do not speak well and I doubt they would be excellent commentators in real time trying to diagnose something with limited knowledge of all 32 teams.

 

I think there could be a spot of 1 or 2 on a local team, but on the national stage - I think it would make you long for the former players.

 

 

i guess my point is that the interview pool universe needs to be expanded.  There are some content creators that may not be dynamic speakers, but I know for sure there are others that are— because I listen to them. And there are lots and lots of former players that don’t provide any insight and/or are terrible speakers. 
 

it would be nice if the networks at least opened up the pool to some of these film guys. It might be a nice of change if each network had a guy like this on their roster of otherwise former player types. 

[Ethan in Cleveland]

My beef with color analysis is they dumb it down for the average fan. I understand it's entertainment and not a class. But just a few times a game I would like to see them really dissect a play. I though Madden was great at this. He gave you all the excitement but he could describe line play and defensive fronts to us.

[Nextmanup]

2 hours 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 totally agree with the idea, but disagree with the NFL model.

 

I don't think they are hiring these guys based on popularity as a player at all..some of them are pretty obscure or didn't have much of a playing career.

 

The outdated model that needs changing is the notion that you must be an ex-NFL player to comment on what's happening in an NFL football game.

 

And that's where I totally agree with you: comb Youtube content providers (among other places) and find people (probably younger than older) with personality who understand the game as its played today, and get them on there.

 

There have been attempts at other models in the past.  Who can forget Monday Night Football with comedian Dennis Miller as a "co-color guy".  That didn't work, or last long.

 

 

50 minutes ago, hondo in seattle said:

About 99% of my enjoyment of the game comes from the game itself.  The other 1% comes from the broadcast crew.  But I'll add my two cents anyway...   

 

Yep, there are some youtubers who have gotten pretty smart about Xs and Os.  But the color commentator is far more than an X and O guy.  As ex-players, they know the game from an insider's perspective.  Sometimes they'll talk Xs and Os.  Sometimes it's inside-the-huddle or inside-the-locker-room stuff.  Sometimes it's about game planning, or teamwork, or mindset.   Being a part of the fraternity, sometimes they have access to players and coaches and can provide us insight into what someone is thinking and doing.  

 

Former football players and coaches know the game in a way that the X and O youtubers don't.    

I understand your take here, but I would argue a really good broadcasting crew is MUCH more valuable than you suggest--particularly in a game that is not that great or which I don't have a lot of interest in to begin with.

 

If I'm watching Chicago vs. Minnesota and it's 17-3 in the 3rd quarter, a really good broadcasting crew that I like is the difference between me continuing to watch for the fun of it and turning the game off.

 

If we are talking a Bills game: I don't care whatsoever who the broadcasters are, though better people make the experience better.

 

 

53 minutes ago, Son of a K-Gun said:

Are we expecting better results with an entertainer than we saw from this guy?

I give them a TON of credit for trying something out of the box, though it didn't work! 

 

That is such a conservative, cautious, scared industry--it's a miracle anyone ever signed off on the Miller Experiment.

 

 

[fasteddie]

I think the most important aspect of the game is the director. TV has the incessant tv show promos mid-play that makes any color persons' job difficult. A play occurs which has you scratching your head, and often a replay is shown on the next series, instead of immediately following the play. 

It could be worse. I was watching a Syracuse basketball game and there were 2 color commentators without a play by play man. What a cluster!

[RunTheBall]

I never know who is calling the games and couldn’t care less. 

 

I get so much more timely, relevant info from following the twitter feeds of the game than anything on TV. Injuries, replays, flags, personnel changes etc all come across so much faster and accurately than the idiots in the booth Buffalo usually gets.

 

 

[Dukestreetking]

Just give me Gus Johnson and xyz... I'll be pretty happy, regardless of the game I'm watching.

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

23 minutes ago, fasteddie said:

I think the most important aspect of the game is the director. TV has the incessant tv show promos mid-play that makes any color persons' job difficult. A play occurs which has you scratching your head, and often a replay is shown on the next series, instead of immediately following the play. 

It could be worse. I was watching a Syracuse basketball game and there were 2 color commentators without a play by play man. What a cluster!

was that the last cuse game against Miami? Whoever was announcing was horrendous. I think they may have both been doing it remotely too.

[LeGOATski]

1 hour ago, Mojo44 said:

I think you know what I meant. Turn the volume down on the TV and go find a radio broadcast. They’re pretty much always available for Sunday night games. I don’t know what you’re talking about regarding Saturday night. That’s not Collingsworth time. You have options if you can’t stand him that much.

 

I don’t usually even get involved in these discussions because they’re not that important to me. But I do have a deeply ingrained pet peeve about people who whine about something they have total control over to change.

 

 

None of us can change the fact that Collingsworth does Sunday Night Football and NBC is the only network that shows the game. My pet peeve is people who take a ridiculous stance in order to mount themselves onto an obnoxious high horse. You do you, man. Don't criticize others for wanting something better.

 

[fasteddie]

1 minute ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

was that the last cuse game against Miami? Whoever was announcing was horrendous. I think they may have both been doing it remotely too.

Yes, and I agree.

[Rochesterfan]

52 minutes ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

i guess my point is that the interview pool universe needs to be expanded.  There are some content creators that may not be dynamic speakers, but I know for sure there are others that are— because I listen to them. And there are lots and lots of former players that don’t provide any insight and/or are terrible speakers. 
 

it would be nice if the networks at least opened up the pool to some of these film guys. It might be a nice of change if each network had a guy like this on their roster of otherwise former player types. 

 

It would be fine, but do you think in the 10 seconds they have to speak between plays these guys would provide more.  My guess is you could replace maybe 2 color guys - guys like Sanchez and Talib, but in reality there are probably 50-60 former players that would do a better job waiting in the wings.

 

They could hold open auditions and maybe find some fresh blood - but I think if they were open up auditions there would be more and more guys that would show up from the college ranks - mostly former players that do it at a different level.  A guy like Eric Wood that does it on college and radio level just moving into national jobs and then a fraction of people hating on them.

 

I think they could definitely do a better job of hiring - I just think they are going to work hard to maintain their own and the game is only a small part of it.  I think the former players have a higher level of trust when getting access to pre game info, plays, and background info.  They know what it was like and what they can say.  I would guess if you brought in a straight outsider, that created content for a living - guys are not opening up and talking to him in the same way.

 

I definitely think there are improvements to be made - I just think that sometimes (aka Romo) they find out that they have to really scale back and limit what they share.

 

 

Edited January 8, 2022 by Rochesterfan

[LeGOATski]

26 minutes ago, fasteddie said:

I think the most important aspect of the game is the director. TV has the incessant tv show promos mid-play that makes any color persons' job difficult. A play occurs which has you scratching your head, and often a replay is shown on the next series, instead of immediately following the play. 

It could be worse. I was watching a Syracuse basketball game and there were 2 color commentators without a play by play man. What a cluster!

This is where I feel like despite Collinsworth, the NBC presentation is top notch.

[benderbender]

Personally, I'd rather have 2 color commentators and one play by play guy. That way the conversation is always going and you're not relying on a Pat Summerall for anything other than down and distance. 

[Scott7975]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

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.

 

Yes, bring year 1 Romo back!  

[Nextmanup]

PS:  I don't remember where I heard it, but someone recently suggested it is time for all NFL game broadcasts to include the "analytics guy" similar to how they have the "officiating guy" ready to jump in and explain complicated rulings.

 

The job of the analytics guy would be to pop in and comment on key decisions as they unfold during the game.

 

Like a HC decides to punt from his opponents 46 yard line and the analytics guy would chime in with the relevant probabilities and clarify that, according to the math, the decision to punt is wrong.  Then he would disappear again.

 

I think that would add a TON to broadcasts, though coaches around the league wouldn't like it.

Which makes me like it more.

 

 

[Mojo44]

6 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

None of us can change the fact that Collingsworth does Sunday Night Football and NBC is the only network that shows the game. My pet peeve is people who take a ridiculous stance in order to mount themselves onto an obnoxious high horse. You do you, man. Don't criticize others for wanting something better.

 

First of all it is your opinion that there is “something better“. Secondly, and again I believe you know this, if you don’t like Collingsworth turn on the radio broadcast. I’m pretty certain that all ESPN radio stations do a radio broadcast of Sunday night football. 
 

I really don’t care what you do. And I’m not even trying to be snarky. I’m expressing my opinion. And to repeat, you do have options to view the game and not listen to Collinsworth, use them or don’t use them again I really don’t care. just commenting on what I see as incessant whining about him when most of these posters do not have to listen to him. 
 

Enjoy the games this weekend. 
 

by the way, I don’t get the point of your video. Seems quite irrelevant to what we’re talking about if not a little bit immature. Again, enjoy the games this weekend. 

[LeGOATski]

3 minutes ago, Mojo44 said:

First of all it is your opinion that there is “something better“. Secondly, and again I believe you know this, if you don’t like Collingsworth turn on the radio broadcast. I’m pretty certain that all ESPN radio stations do a radio broadcast of Sunday night football. 
 

I really don’t care what you do. And I’m not even trying to be snarky. I’m expressing my opinion. And to repeat, you do have options to view the game and not listen to Collinsworth, use them or don’t use them again I really don’t care. just commenting on what I see as incessant whining about him when most of these posters do not have to listen to him. 
 

Enjoy the games this weekend. 
 

by the way, I don’t get the point of your video. Seems quite irrelevant to what we’re talking about if not a little bit immature. Again, enjoy the games this weekend. 

It's you mounting your high horse and getting kicked in the gut.

 

I thought that was pretty clear. Oh well. Enjoy playing with your radio this weekend!

[Mojo44]

3 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

It's you mounting your high horse and getting kicked in the gut.

 

I thought that was pretty clear. Oh well. Enjoy playing with your radio this weekend!

It’s not a

 

high horse and I think you know that. It’s my opinion. My “gut” remains unassailed. And I am fine with Collingsworth. I don’t need the radio. It seems like you do. I will enjoy my weekend watching the broadcast. Enjoy your incessant whining!

 

i’ll let you have the last word on this discussion.

[Punching Bag]

2 hours ago, K-9 said:

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. 

 

Sometimes they talk so much BECAUSE the game is not interesting.   One team is blowing out another and announcers are trying to get viewers to not leave like the fans in the stands.

[Mr. WEO]

Still more evidence that a lot of posters are way too hung up on the audio part of the network broadcast.

 

Even so:

 

Players are fine, they occasionally add expert interpretation.

 

There probably are not 16 competent "film nerds" for TV broadcasting....

[Steptide]

When I watch football, the commentators are more or less just background noise. I enjoy Romo and a few others, but generally speaking I don't pay much attention and have learned to drowned them out. Sometimes though you get a guy who's so bad (Aquib Talib) that it's un listenable 

[Whites Bay]

I'm going to head down a tangential path.  I recognize it, but I'll throw it out there anyway.

 

I know we're talking about the in-booth broadcasters, but the in-studio hosts can drive me out of my brain.  And the one who stands out (in my mind) as the one who HAS to head to pasture is Terry Bradshaw.  I am SO done with his hee-yuk shtick, his "analysis" is three decades out of date, and - for the life of me - I can't see how Fox or the NFL thinks he's going to be relevant to anyone under 60 years old (that's me, by the way - and I can't stand him).  Those of you with children coming into the NFL viewing experience can flame me if you wish.  It escapes me why he's drawing a paycheck, but maybe Fox just wants a clown around as an eyeball magnet.  Personally, I wish they'd just go back to the experiment they had a few years back with the ultra-hot weather chick.  A much better use of 5 minutes of my life.

[Utah John]

On a related topic, this year I've noticed several games where the mix of the crowd noise along with the announcers is adjusted so the announcers are hard to hear, while the crowd noise is dominant. This has happened enough that I think it might be a deliberate choice, not to downplay the announcers, but to give viewers at home a better sense of the game experience.  Has anyone noticed this?

[RobbRiddick]

I think Miyagi would have made a great commentator.

 

Al Michaels: great play by the Bills! They might win this one!

 

Miyagi: Win, lose, not matter. They prove point

[Utah John]

Does anyone else remember reading that Cynthia Frelund, the analytics guru, was going to be at Bills games this year?  I thought that was odd, and then it doesn't seem to have materialized.

[LeGOATski]

4 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

Still more evidence that a lot of posters are way too hung up on the audio part of the network broadcast.

 

Even so:

 

Players are fine, they occasionally add expert interpretation.

 

There probably are not 16 competent "film nerds" for TV broadcasting....

I don't think so, either. I highly doubt many of these "film nerds" can immediately diagnose what happened and spit out a coherent summary 10 seconds after the play occurs, along with visuals. Experience playing the game helps a lot with that. Not to say that I don't appreciate their contributions to the football fan world, but most just don't have the necessary experience or personality to be on a broadcast duo. It's a whole different thing. 

 

There are some commentators that need to be replaced, but I agree with the notion that the talent is currently in the ranks of minor league and radio broadcasts. 

 

An this is where I get all homerish and say that Eric Wood needs to be called up!

[RobbRiddick]

3 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

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.

 

Millen was pure nuts this year. I loved him. An elderly uncle who turns up for a family reunion, slightly drunk and offending 90% of the people there. More of this please

[Mr. WEO]

1 minute ago, LeGOATski said:

I don't think so, either. I highly doubt many of these "film nerds" can immediately diagnose what happened and spit out a coherent summary 10 seconds after the play occurs, along with visuals. Experience playing the game helps a lot with that. Not to say that I don't appreciate their contributions to the football fan world, but most just don't have the necessary experience or personality to be on a broadcast duo. It's a whole different thing. 

 

There are some commentators that need to be replaced, but I agree with the notion that the talent is currently in the ranks of minor league and radio broadcasts. 

 

An this is where I get all homerish and say that Eric Wood needs to be called up!

 

I agree--these film guy sonly comment a day or two later after they have rewinded/pressed play a million times on each game.  They would be useless in the booth.

 

Radio call is always an alternative if a viewer simply cannot function properly while watching a game.

[Florida Bills Fanatic]

With color commentators, less is more.  Some of them talk too much and wander off into minutia and are actually a distraction when watching the game.  Having lived in different parts of the country, I've listened to a number of local radio color commentators who were beyond terrible.  A couple of them were Ron Wolfley (Cards) and Wil Wolford (Colts).  After listening to them, I appreciated the national media guys a little more.  Many of them are trying to find the right balance of contribution to keep new/less knowledgeable fans engaged without annoying knowledgeable fans.  Sadly, most of them provide too much distraction.

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

5 minutes ago, RobbRiddick said:

I think Miyagi would have made a great commentator.

 

Al Michaels: great play by the Bills! They might win this one!

 

Miyagi: Win, lose, not matter. They prove point

[LeGOATski]

7 minutes ago, Utah John said:

Does anyone else remember reading that Cynthia Frelund, the analytics guru, was going to be at Bills games this year?  I thought that was odd, and then it doesn't seem to have materialized.

That was just a "partnership" with Frelund under the NFL's Next Gen Stats umbrella. She was only on the sideline for preseason games and has continued to do Next Gen Stats videos for the Bills.

[fasteddie]

7 minutes ago, Florida Bills Fanatic said:

With color commentators, less is more.  Some of them talk too much and wander off into minutia and are actually a distraction when watching the game.  Having lived in different parts of the country, I've listened to a number of local radio color commentators who were beyond terrible.  A couple of them were Ron Wolfley (Cards) and Wil Wolford (Colts).  After listening to them, I appreciated the national media guys a little more.  Many of them are trying to find the right balance of contribution to keep new/less knowledgeable fans engaged without annoying knowledgeable fans.  Sadly, most of them provide too much distraction.

Driving home from the game, I often listen to Sirius radio broadcasts of NFL games. And I agree, many are terrible at best, and homers all the time. (We gotta do this, that, other things). About the best of the bunch was the Raiders crew.