Bob Picozzi

[ucbart]

Bob Picozzi is doing the PBP for the Tulane game this Saturday. I for one, am very excited. I loved him and Megan on the call for CPTV. He will be working with Debbie Antonelli.

 

[rford53]

Bob Picozzi is doing the PBP for the Tulane game this Saturday. I for one, am very excited. I loved him and Megan on the call for CPTV. He will be working with Debbie Antonelli.

I believe you mean to say Sunday. UConn/Tulane game is on Sunday.

 

[ucbart]

I believe you mean to say Sunday. UConn/Tulane game is on Sunday.

Yup, Sunday!

 

[DefenseBB]

Bob Picozzi is doing the PBP for the Tulane game this Saturday. I for one, am very excited. I loved him and Megan on the call for CPTV. He will be working with Debbie Antonelli.

Well that's both good and bad news. Bob has been a great CT personality all these yrs but the second half of the pairing, not so much...

 

[Fairfield Fan]

Bob Picozzi is doing the PBP for the Tulane game this Saturday. I for one, am very excited. I loved him and Megan on the call for CPTV. He will be working with Debbie Antonelli.

He and Megan were amazing together! One of the best announcing teams in all of sports. Really enjoyed the games when they were doing them.

 

[Zanzman]

To baby stats not enough game talk for me

 

[Zanzman]

Many* not baby fast fat fingers

 

[BroadwayVa]

Bob Picozzi is doing the PBP for the Tulane game this Saturday. I for one, am very excited. I loved him and Megan on the call for CPTV. He will be working with Debbie Antonelli.

I listened to the TIC greats do a superb pbp for Uconn Men's fans--then Bob Joyce came along excellent-
Then I saw Bob Picozzi on CPTV--I was hooked. Simply the best--no un-necessary chit chat--when the game
is stopped--he and his Analyst chit chat--but during the game it is all business. Speaks the understandable American
tongue--distinct, and proper. Did I say I more than like Bob P==If I spoke the truth my wife would leave me..

 

[dbmill]

At first I didn't care for Picozzi when he started doing the women's games on CPTV. But he grew on me, to the point where I was greatly disappointed that he was no longer doing the UConn women's games when the games were shifted over to SNY. He shares a trait with Chris Jones doing UConn baseball games on WHUS in that they are both low key, easy going, and knowledgable about the sport they are broadcasting. Those traits make a sportscaster easy to take over the long haul of many a season.

 

[HoopsFan21]

At first I didn't care for Picozzi when he started doing the women's games on CPTV. But he grew on me, to the point where I was greatly disappointed that he was no longer doing the UConn women's games when the games were shifted over to SNY. He shares a trait with Chris Jones doing UConn baseball games on WHUS in that they are both low key, easy going, and knowledgable about the sport they are broadcasting. Those traits make a sportscaster easy to take over the long haul of many a season.

I don't know if moving to SNY was the cause for him to stop doing UConn games. If you remember the last years of broadcasts on CPTV, Eric Friede was already doing a lot of the games. Initially as a fill-in, but it seemed with each passing year he was doing more of them.

 

[dbmill]

I don't know if moving to SNY was the cause for him to stop doing UConn games. If you remember the last years of broadcasts on CPTV, Eric Friede was already doing a lot of the games. Initially as a fill-in, but it seemed with each passing year he was doing more of them.

That's true, I had kind of forgotten. At the time Picozzi was getting more and more additional work with ESPN affiliated broadcasts.

 

[JavaMan]

I don't know if moving to SNY was the cause for him to stop doing UConn games. If you remember the last years of broadcasts on CPTV, Eric Friede was already doing a lot of the games. Initially as a fill-in, but it seemed with each passing year he was doing more of them.

CPTV On Air Talent: Megan Culmo and Bob Picozzi
​

 

[tomcat]

As an announcer, Picozzi is very good. Start with a great set of pipes. His voice is really good. And he knows the players. But there was something about working with Meg at the end that was really grating. They would get off on chats about this and that factoid -- none relevant to the game at hand -- and especially in blowouts, the second half lacked play-by-play. Personally, I think they covered the same team together for too long. Working for ESPN, none of this surfaces and he really does a fine job.

 

[DaddyChoc]

As an announcer, Picozzi is very good. Start with a great set of pipes. His voice is really good. And he knows the players. But there was something about working with Meg at the end that was really grating. They would get off on chats about this and that factoid -- none relevant to the game at hand -- and especially in blowouts, the second half lacked play-by-play. Personally, I think they covered the same team together for too long. Working for ESPN, none of this surfaces and he really does a fine job.

I can take him for a game or 2 but him and Culmo for a whole season... NO THANKS

 

[slug25]

I can take him for a game or 2 but him and Culmo for a whole season... NO THANKS

Picozzi does not do play-by-play. When he does a game, we get two color commentators and we are left to figure out which players did what. Those of us who follow UCONN closely can handle it, but it must be frustrating for occasional viewers.

If you want to see a great play-by-play artist at work, catch Doc Emrick on a hockey game.

 

[HuskyBandDad]

Picozzi does not do play-by-play. When he does a game, we get two color commentators and we are left to figure out which players did what. Those of us who follow UCONN closely can handle it, but it must be frustrating for occasional viewers.

If you want to see a great play-by-play artist at work, catch Doc Emrick on a hockey game.

No one better than Doc. Even when watching him call my Rangers loss to Flyers last night

 

[OldAlum]

Yeah, I thought in the last game nobody really followed the game for the viewer. Appreciated that most of the chatter was at least UConn related, but still found it distracting, especially early on. Even using Lobo and shrinking the screen when it was still a 5 point game was annoying (takes a lot for me to be annoyed by Rebecca!)
I wish ESPN would realize that promoting the game now playing is the best way to promote WCBB and their ratings. When the game is out of hand, I would still appreciate more comments on how particular plays were run, showing screens etc. Some stories are fine and provide background, but not to the exclusion of game action! To me, when the commentators are telling stories and ignoring the action, it is like telling the viewers "Don't bother watching - we are not really interested either!"

 

[tomcat]

I agree. I said earlier that he does a fine job for ESPN, and I based that on a couple of games that I watched. I guess that when he calls a UConn game, all bets are off. His call of the recent UConn game was dreadful. As others mentioned, there was no play by play. The chit-chat with the other color commentator was distracting. That overly long interview with Rebecca -- which important action was happening during the game -- was just awful. There were at least a couple of amazing plays that happened during that stretch. It would have been great -- and certainly appropriate -- to have comments about them or evn replays at appropriate times -- but the Lobo distraction made that impossible.

 

[JimGunther]

Always liked Bob P. Thought Channel 8 laid an egg when they got rid of him for Noah Finz (and Noah's lazy performance in subsequent years never did anything to dissuade me). How did that guy last so many years?

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

I agree. I said earlier that he does a fine job for ESPN, and I based that on a couple of games that I watched. I guess that when he calls a UConn game, all bets are off. His call of the recent UConn game was dreadful. As others mentioned, there was no play by play. The chit-chat with the other color commentator was distracting. That overly long interview with Rebecca -- which important action was happening during the game -- was just awful. There were at least a couple of amazing plays that happened during that stretch. It would have been great -- and certainly appropriate -- to have comments about them or evn replays at appropriate times -- but the Lobo distraction made that impossible.

I've never seen him do a UConn game, but on other team's broadcasts, I agree with the initial statements that he is an excellent play by play man. He tells you what is happening.

Based on his history, I can (sort of) see why he might be different when calling UConn.

 

[Adesmar123]

Bob Picozzi is doing the PBP for the Tulane game this Saturday. I for one, am very excited. I loved him and Megan on the call for CPTV. He will be working with Debbie Antonelli.

Just like painful surgery, the pain and suffering of a Picozzi/ Megan broadcast disappears over time.

 

[JFC613]

I think Picozzi does a fine job as compared to many on ESPN. But Culmo, OMG, that laugh of hers is just so annoying. It's like listening to finger nails on a chalk board (if they have those anymore?). I wish they'd work with her to stop it. If I'm able, I mute the TV and tune in TIC on the radio........much, much better description of the action. Bob Joyce isn't it?

 

[JoePgh]

Let me use this thread to air my biggest gripe about many WCBB announcers, certainly including Picozzi/Culmo: I think the play-by-play person should ALWAYS and IMMEDIATELY announce two facts: (a) who committed the foul; and (b) who entered and left the floor. This is OFTEN not done, even when the foul was committed by an important player who is approaching or is in foul trouble. And frequently the first time we will hear a player's name is when she is involved in a play, even though she has been on the floor for a minute or more. And then we have to figure out whom she replaced.

These are not things that a TV viewer can necessarily observe on his/her own, since the camera is typically not on the official calling the foul or on the substitution table. The viewer won't know these things unless the announcer tells him.

 

[winlots]

Let me use this thread to air my biggest gripe about many WCBB announcers, certainly including Picozzi/Culmo: I think the play-by-play person should ALWAYS and IMMEDIATELY announce two facts: (a) who committed the foul; and (b) who entered and left the floor. This is OFTEN not done, even when the foul was committed by an important player who is approaching or is in foul trouble. And frequently the first time we will hear a player's name is when she is involved in a play, even though she has been on the floor for a minute or more. And then we have to figure out whom she replaced.

These are not things that a TV viewer can necessarily observe on his/her own, since the camera is typically not on the official calling the foul or on the substitution table. The viewer won't know these things unless the announcer tells him.

JOE P: So very well said......exactly.....precisely......nail on the head.....couldn't have said it better.....perfect. Am sure you'll get the point. I'll just ad, in support of your CAPS above: these omissions are a big pain in the ass!

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

Let me use this thread to air my biggest gripe about many WCBB announcers, certainly including Picozzi/Culmo: I think the play-by-play person should ALWAYS and IMMEDIATELY announce two facts: (a) who committed the foul; and (b) who entered and left the floor. This is OFTEN not done, even when the foul was committed by an important player who is approaching or is in foul trouble. And frequently the first time we will hear a player's name is when she is involved in a play, even though she has been on the floor for a minute or more. And then we have to figure out whom she replaced.

These are not things that a TV viewer can necessarily observe on his/her own, since the camera is typically not on the official calling the foul or on the substitution table. The viewer won't know these things unless the announcer tells him.

I don't disagree, but my related complaint is - reporting violations (travel, kick ball, 3 / 5 seconds) as a foul. Don't the announcers look at either the action or the TV? It happens on average I think once a game (maybe not at all one game but more than once in another). You see ref signal 3 seconds in the lane and hold up someones number and the commentators start talking about a foul.

And the related complaint - which happened in the game last night, FWIW - which team the foul (or non-foul) is on. Commentators say its someones 3rd foul, then correct themselves it is on the other team. Or say its so and so's ball - when the ref clearly signaled the opposite. And I'm not talking about the (relatively) few times that the ref changes or misses the call. I'm talking about when the TV person misses the call!!

 

[Dabber]

Let me use this thread to air my biggest gripe about many WCBB announcers, certainly including Picozzi/Culmo: I think the play-by-play person should ALWAYS and IMMEDIATELY announce two facts: (a) who committed the foul; and (b) who entered and left the floor. This is OFTEN not done, even when the foul was committed by an important player who is approaching or is in foul trouble. And frequently the first time we will hear a player's name is when she is involved in a play, even though she has been on the floor for a minute or more. And then we have to figure out whom she replaced.

These are not things that a TV viewer can necessarily observe on his/her own, since the camera is typically not on the official calling the foul or on the substitution table. The viewer won't know these things unless the announcer tells him.

Totally agree with your post about the way important parts of the game are just plain neglected and that is why I always mute the TV and listen to TIC and Bob Joyce/Debbie Fiske. They are excellent in relating exactly what is happening WHEN it happens and their feedback is also meaningful - - none of the off-the-cuff chit chat you get with most of the TV crews.

 

[tomcat]

I don't disagree, but my related complaint is - reporting violations (travel, kick ball, 3 / 5 seconds) as a foul. Don't the announcers look at either the action or the TV? It happens on average I think once a game (maybe not at all one game but more than once in another). You see ref signal 3 seconds in the lane and hold up someones number and the commentators start talking about a foul.

And the related complaint - which happened in the game last night, FWIW - which team the foul (or non-foul) is on. Commentators say its someones 3rd foul, then correct themselves it is on the other team. Or say its so and so's ball - when the ref clearly signaled the opposite. And I'm not talking about the (relatively) few times that the ref changes or misses the call. I'm talking about when the TV person misses the call!!

I have noticed this, too, and have been annoyed by it. My theory -- and that's all it is -- is that on plays where the action turns around (many of these situations -- 3-second call, for example, or traveling, or too much time), the announcers have trained themselves to automatically move down the court to be ready to call the next series of plays. I have a feeling they want to be ready for the next plays, so their eyes dart away from the cause of the turnover and they reflexively call it a foul because their brain didn't have a chance to focus on what actually happened. Just a guess.

 

[lanieer]

Totally agree with your post about the way important parts of the game are just plain neglected and that is why I always mute the TV and listen to TIC and Bob Joyce/Debbie Fiske. They are excellent in relating exactly what is happening WHEN it happens and their feedback is also meaningful - - none of the off-the-cuff chit chat you get with most of the TV crews.

Radio is a whole different animal. While I'm not a culmo/ picozzi fan, you can not compare the reporting of audio only to tv.

 

[Dabber]

Radio is a whole different animal. While I'm not a culmo/ picozzi fan, you can not compare the reporting of audio only to tv.

Radio is a whole different animal. While I'm not a culmo/ picozzi fan, you can not compare the reporting of audio only to tv.

Yes, no argument that radio is a "whole different animal" but quite honestly, Culmo et al tend to forget there is an actual game going on and more often than not, there is no explanation about action on the floor, especially with respect to fouls, etc.,, etc., etc.