And Some Of You Actually Complained About Van Gundy?

[DaddyChoc]

They are good.

seriously calling the game...

small stories here and there (Orlander brothers) but actually calling the game.

Only thing that annoys me is the "this is 81 win against an unranked team from South Canada in the month of December since 1968"

 

[Icebear]

I could. But I just want to get across to you guys how whiny and complaining you are. Consider it a public service to the rest of us on here.

Personally, you come across whinier because you can't point to anything concrete while those frustrated with the game call are able to point to concrete means of improvement.

 

[earl the pearl]

Eamon McAnaney & Kara Lawson are doing a GREAT job calling the men's game right now on SNY.

I really enjoy Lawson. She has really developed into a solid analyst. And I have almost forgotten where she went to college.

 

[mauconnfan]

Not NBA fans, you mean. He should stay in the area he knows a little about. H knows nothing about WCBB!

"wcbb" ?? If he knows basketball then it's pretty easy to do the womens games. Maybe the names aren't cliche to him but he knows the game better than any of the commentary on any womens game EVER, I mean it is "basketball" after all isn't it? Or are you still stuck in the "10 second" line game? Van Gundy is excellent and was refreshing compared to most!!!!

 

[tomcat]

You have no idea.

Well, let's see. A few of us whined, to use your phrase, and the rest of the Boneyard filled three pages with comments of various kinds. Gee, it must have been because, maybe, people are interested in it.

As I think about it, this is an interesting concept for a board such as this: People find a topic that interests them, and they write about it. A few others deny that the topic is valid, and rather than move on to topics they might find more valid, try to persuade everyone else that they should stop the discussion.
Maybe it's a long-distance thing. A number of complainers are those who cannot get to many or any games in person, so we are very aware of our dependence on the media and are perhaps more sensitive to the way the games are brought to us than are some of the locally-based folks. This is just a theory, of course.

 

[phil sampieri]

O'K. O'K' I give up, uncle I promise not ever to read a comment about how bad the broadcasters are.Give it a break !!!

 

[tomcat]

"wcbb" ?? If he knows basketball then it's pretty easy to do the womens games. Maybe the names aren't cliche to him but he knows the game better than any of the commentary on any womens game EVER, I mean it is "basketball" after all isn't it? Or are you still stuck in the "10 second" line game? Van Gundy is excellent and was refreshing compared to most!!!!

Van Gundy was fine, IMHO, until he expressed what believe was a political opinion about top teams being forced to play each other twice a season, which is unrealistic and probably motivated by the desires of his employer.

But I do object to the concept that basketball is basketball. People with aman' basketball mindset are likely to think that the women's game should become more like the men's. There are an awful lot of us followers of women's basketball who believe the game shoudl remain above the shoulders and below the rim, unlike the men' game. The very things that attract people to the men's game are the things that turn us away from it and toward the women's game. So I'm always a bit suspicious of those who, like Van Gundy, are asked to cross over from the dark side and offer their opinions on various aspects of the women's game. He's fine on the technical aspects of the game, but his perspective may be just a little bit off. And in terms of knowing the women's game, I'd put Kara Lawson way ahead of Van Gundy and any other newcomer, no matter his pedigree.

 

[DaddyChoc]

Lawson called the mens game tonight and did well, she called a "above the rim" game.... so Im sure a mens side color-person can call a "below the shoulders" game

 

[Husky68]

My issue with them is the lack of making calls about the game and specific plays/players. When Megan does actually comment about a play I often find her analysis flawed and her conclusion incorrect. Bob is much better when I hear him on other games. I'd like Megan to be a little more like Bobby Knight and a little less like Mr. Magoo.
I suggest that posters that do not like this topic being discussed keep their keystrokes to themselves and stop all their whinning.

 

[Buckaroobanzai]

It's television. A visual media. I don't need a play by play description of things that I can see with my own eyes. I know who the UConn players are and at least in the case of teams like C of C, I don't care who the players on the other team are. Games like the one last night should never be played. Is it any wonder that the announcers drifted off - just like me?

Criticizing Picozzi for mispeaking is petty and making fun of Cuolmo's laugh is childish (churlish?). If you don't care for them, zone them out. If you need play by play to understand what's happening, sit closer to the screen and do your own.

Bravo! Bob Picozzi is a pro who does many other games on other networks. Criticizing him and Meghan for their inability to describe the "action" during the C of C travesty is simply unfair. What was Geno thinking when he scheduled what could well be the worst Division I women's basketball team? And those critics who sit in front of their HD mega-screen TVs watching EVERY Uconn game should also keep in mind that fans of other schools would kill to have their teams televised with the frequency to which we have come to enjoy. Still unhappy? I suggest that you learn to use the "power off" switch and then listen to Bob Joyce and Kara. They have brought a a new elegance to the term "homer."

 

[mauconnfan]

Lawson called the mens game tonight and did well, she called a "above the rim" game.... so Im sure a mens side color-person can call a "below the shoulders" game

Thank you Daddy..........amazing what people think? Kara does her homework and is well prepared for the UConn men's game she does and is obviously a basketball junkie. She does a very good job and understands the game despite it beimg "above the rim." Quite honestly I give her a lot more credit than Van Gundy because it is much tougher to learn the mans game since it so much faster and athletic - Van Gundy just needs to understand the different rules and then talk about pick and roles, back doors and bad refereeing!! His thoughts on Kelly Faris and Geno's practices were enlightening from an "above the rim" type of guy!!

 

[barbrox]

I'm with Oldecoach on this one. There are times when ESPN is broadcasting that I yearn for Bob and Meghan. They at least stay with the game that is being played and do not wander off in totally unrelated topics.

 

[meyers7]

Personally, you come across whinier because you can't point to anything concrete while those frustrated with the game call are able to point to concrete means of improvement.

Point to something concrete? What?
You been getting into the Christmas Communion wine?

 

[Icebear]

Point to something concrete? What?
You been getting into the Christmas Communion wine?

The improvement in the broadcasts when Eric Frede works with Meghan, including Meghan less chatiness with Eric and better focus on the game, the value of improved play by play call with Eric identifying all subs in and out and regularly noting who is now on the court, never misses a foul call for a story. Bob can improve his call by getting players names and nicknames right. Ask Meghan to focus more on the offenses and defenses being used. Limit stories to breaks. All those things and more are constructive criticism. Unlike cheap shots about communion wine.

 

[meyers7]

Well, let's see. A few of us whined, to use your phrase, and the rest of the Boneyard filled three pages with comments of various kinds. Gee, it must have been because, maybe, people are interested in it.

I'm sure.

As I think about it, this is an interesting concept for a board such as this: People find a topic that interests them, and they write about it. A few others deny that the topic is valid, and rather than move on to topics they might find more valid, try to persuade everyone else that they should stop the discussion.

Well I don't really fall into any of those categories. I agree Bob and Meghan aren't very good. But I just don't come on here after every game (and I realize it's not EVERY game), and whine and complain. I am just pointing out certain posters are whining and complaining. If they enjoy doing that, have at it. It would seem though that there are some very simple things they could do so they would not be so inconvenienced by listening to the CPTV broadcast.

Just trying to be helpful. Consider it a public service, giving at this time of year.

 

[meyers7]

The improvement in the broadcasts when Eric Frede works with Meghan, including Meghan less chatiness with Eric and better focus on the game, the value of improved play by play call with Eric identifying all subs in and out and regularly noting who is now on the court, never misses a foul call for a story. Bob can improve his call by getting players names and nicknames right. Ask Meghan to focus more on the offenses and defenses being used. Limit stories to breaks. All those things and more are constructive criticism. Unlike cheap shots about communion wine.

No, what do you mean by me pointing to something concrete?????

And what do you have against communion wine?

 

[gogiants1714]

My problem with Meghan is more the way she ruins The Geno Show. This is one of the few times we get to hear Geno talk and she spends half the show rustling thru papers, drinking coffee, coughing, and asking questions he has recently answered in local newspaper articles. Seems like no show-prep at all.

 

[DaddyChoc]

Point to something concrete? What?
You been getting into the Christmas Communion wine?

hahahaha thats a funny

 

[DaddyChoc]

My problem with Meghan is more the way she ruins The Geno Show. This is one of the few times we get to hear Geno talk and she spends half the show rustling thru papers, drinking coffee, coughing, and asking questions he has recently answered in local newspaper articles. Seems like no show-prep at all.

but that is a forum to giggle, bring up old crap, talk about historic stats etc.

I actually like how she does on the Geno Show

 

[tomcat]

She's a major reason I don't watch the Geno Show. With a decent interviewer, you'd get twice as much information out of him.

 

[Husky68]

Bravo! Bob Picozzi is a pro who does many other games on other networks. Criticizing him and Meghan for their inability to describe the "action" during the C of C travesty is simply unfair. What was Geno thinking when he scheduled what could well be the worst Division I women's basketball team? And those critics who sit in front of their HD mega-screen TVs watching EVERY Uconn game should also keep in mind that fans of other schools would kill to have their teams televised with the frequency to which we have come to enjoy. Still unhappy? I suggest that you learn to use the "power off" switch and then listen to Bob Joyce and Kara. They have brought a a new elegance to the term "homer."

What is unfair about it? Really. They are getting paid aren't they? How about do some homework, answer some questions about why Uconn could not perform with the starting unit, maybe state "in the two games against top competition Stanford and Baylor at the start of the game and start of the 2nd half the Uconn team was out scored by 8 points up to the point where the 1st sub came in (Lewis), I wonder if there is something wrong with the starting line up if they can't even get a score against C Of C either" - then give insight into how/why/if starting lineup isn't working. What is the expectations on Stef re her positioning on the court, why can't she score or get the ball - tell us where the execution issues are or what C of C is doing so well to stop the 2nd best center in WCBB. Explain how well Uconn players are positioning for offensive rebounds (or not), how subtle moves my Tiff are getting defensive players out of position, why no dribble penetration and Stef cutting to basket for layups. Why does Stokes get 5 defensive rebounds in 16 minutes and Stef get 1 in 21 minutes, call the game. If it's a joke, then get someone to announce who doesn't think it is a joke.
Who cares what other fans would kill for, I don't want to switch the "power off", get someone better than Megan.

 

[blackbird]

I really like Megan and Bob.

I don't know why people are upset that they aren't describing every part of the game. It's typically a thirty point blow out, within ten minutes. I like the "inside information" that Megan brings, and I like the sort of "at home" feel the two have. You may not learn stuff about the game, but often, because Geno talks to Megan, you'll learn stuff about the team. Which is better in the game situation.

 

[Tufkas]

I think what makes this discussion particularly interesting - certainly justified - is that in this unique instance, most of us are actually in some small way responsible for these broadcasts, via our $ contributions. I would think anyone who has pledged not only has the right to voice an opinion on the broadcasters, the quality of the telecast, and anything related to CPTV's coverage of these games, but to have it considered by TPTB as well.

Sort of like metaphorical stockholders voting an annual meetings...

 

[Husky68]

but that is a forum to giggle, bring up old crap, talk about historic stats etc.

I actually like how she does on the Geno Show

Megan does an extremely poor job in the Geno show, does no homework and asks no solid questions.

 

[DaddyChoc]

Geno talks to Megan, you'll learn stuff about the team. Which is better in the game situation.

exactly... I prefer her on the show than in the same situation and Geno does give us good info