Lobo: Step Right Up | The Boneyard

Lobo: Step Right Up

Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
3,054
Reaction Score
17,004
Did anyone else notice that Lobo's commentary sounded very harsh, audio-wise? I thought she sounded like a carnival barker. That combined with the other halftime audio glitches made me think they were having technical problems. I hope it was that and not a new style of speaking for Lobo.
 
Did anyone else notice that Lobo's commentary sounded very harsh, audio-wise? I thought she sounded like a carnival barker. That combined with the other halftime audio glitches made me think they were having technical problems. I hope it was that and not a new style of speaking for Lobo.
I didn’t recognize Rebecca’s voice at first- I had to look twice. I also noted that her commentary had more depth a few times.
 
My wife was complaining about it from the beginning. She has a fine tuned ear.
sexy skull GIF
 
.-.
What I noticed is that they weren't telling us what was happening in the game. Ugh. SNY does a much better job.
I agree. They even went to studio at halftime and nobody knew, myself included, that Christyn had 2 fouls.
Other stuff too. Did they mention Geno going zone? Could Rebecca have interjected how UConn could have dealt with Tennessee's bigs laying off Liv and Aubrey on top? Couple of thoughts.
Note to self: an offense does not have to have high posts. As a player myself, I grew up with "double low post". With Paige, E, and CW, you have 2 wings and a point. The posts can work together low, flash high some, come out for pick and rolls and back screens. Everybody is screaming about Liv and Aubrey taking those shots. Geno has other cards to play. That's MS strategy by Harper. We've got a hundred ways to beat that strategy.
 
Just like I have done in the past, I send them my displeasure in an email. Their address is: support@espncustomercare.com Maybe someday they'll 'get it' that fans can't see what transpires every time.
Agreed. It's amazing the things you see in person that you don't see on TV. You can only see so much through a narrow camera lens that you have no control over. :confused:
 
.-.
Agree about Ruocco - a most disagreeable tone.
So you would rather have a play by play man who sounds bored to death! With little or no crowd noise that's the only excitement on the broadcast. The audio was awful last night but picking on Ryan for being excited by a tense and exciting (though sloppy) game seems over-the-top to me.
 
Agreed. It's amazing the things you see in person that you don't see on TV. You can only see so much through a narrow camera lens that you have no control over. :confused:
While they have more TV's, and maybe more angles, remember that they are watching and calling it off of a TV as well. I don't remember which game we were watching last night that the announcers were lost and confused at one point because they couldn't hear the announcer, had no contact with the referees, and were trying to guess what foul may have been called (and on whom). It is a byproduct of not being at the game. Often announcers are also very confused over refs checking the monitor, whereas in a regular game, often, the referees advise them.
 
Lobo sounded the same to me, but Ruocco..., I came away feeling aurally assaulted having been yelled at the entire game!
Yes the man was maddeningly loud and monotone. Like a bad audition.
 
While they have more TV's, and maybe more angles, remember that they are watching and calling it off of a TV as well. I don't remember which game we were watching last night that the announcers were lost and confused at one point because they couldn't hear the announcer, had no contact with the referees, and were trying to guess what foul may have been called (and on whom). It is a byproduct of not being at the game. Often announcers are also very confused over refs checking the monitor, whereas in a regular game, often, the referees advise them.
Your point would be valid except that this has been the norm in years past, announcers from ESPN recalling other games, sports, etc.... while something on the game at hand has happened. If it were occasional it wouldn't be a problem, but this has been something of a 'pet peeve' of mine throughout the years with ESPN. Not only is it during the game, but many times they 'digress' during the halftime report as well. I'll take SNY anyday and am thankful ESPN's coverage is all but gone. So in short, that's the best way I can convey my displeasure with them.....write an email.
 
Last edited:
.-.
I only noticed the weird sound issues during the halftime report though I was more focused on watching the close game than listening to Lobo and Ruocco I guess lol.

I miss Kara Lawson on ESPN. Her insights were excellent and she was good at keeping with the play going on (obviously with a few tangents here and there, but mostly focused on the game).
 
I only noticed the weird sound issues during the halftime report though I was more focused on watching the close game than listening to Lobo and Ruocco I guess lol.

I miss Kara Lawson on ESPN. Her insights were excellent and she was good at keeping with the play going on (obviously with a few tangents here and there, but mostly focused on the game).

Would not be surprised if Kara shows up on some ESPN's broadcasts for rest of season and into tourney, her season is over.
 
So you would rather have a play by play man who sounds bored to death! With little or no crowd noise that's the only excitement on the broadcast. The audio was awful last night but picking on Ryan for being excited by a tense and exciting (though sloppy) game seems over-the-top to me.
I made no mention about his excitement. I welcome that. It was the tone or quality of his voice that was grating (perhaps bad audio). Also, that does not mean I welcome "boring". I find announcers of the Joe Buck ilk do not complement an exciting game on the field/court.
Lastly, I don't see how that simple comment of mine was over-the-top.
 
So you would rather have a play by play man who sounds bored to death! With little or no crowd noise that's the only excitement on the broadcast. The audio was awful last night but picking on Ryan for being excited by a tense and exciting (though sloppy) game seems over-the-top to me.
I'd rather have a play by play man, (or woman),..., period! I garner my excitement from the action, not the oratory. Ruocco spends the bulk of his time asking his partner inane questions which they then discuss over multiple possessions, then eventually shouts something regarding the culminating action in a vein popping pitch. Hardly play by play, more spiel and shout. Give me the details, I don't need all the drivel and frenzy.
 
I usually don’t get bothered much by announcers. But Ruocco was over the top annoying trying to make every play sound dramatic and exciting.
 
.-.
Your point would be valid except that this has been the norm in years past, announcers from ESPN recalling other games, sports, etc.... while something on the game at hand has happened. If it were occasional it wouldn't be a problem, but this has been something of a 'pet peeve' of mine throughout the years with ESPN. Not only is it during the game, but many times they 'digress' during the halftime report as well. I'll take SNY anyday and am thankful ESPN's coverage is all but gone. So in short, that's the best way I can convey my displeasure with them.....write an email.
I don't disagree with your point. Although, if you think it is limited exclusively to ESPN - or even WBB - or even only sports - you don't watch as much live stuff as I do. They do it on NFL football, WBB on Fox sports, and yes, even on the channel we watched the Presidential Inauguration on.

I don't know where you think ESPN is going - I agree someday they may go somewhere, but for now, they are broadcasting - themselves and their affiliates - up to 10 WBB or more on some days. And they have a huge football "plate", as well. Yes, like every TV based company they are struggling with folks cutting the cord - but of course they are expanding their on-line presence as well.

My comment related strictly to someone's remark about how much more you can see in person, as it didn't apply in this case. Actually, a lot of announcers don't seem to pay attention when they are there in person - or I wouldn't know what the call was (out-of-bounds vs. foul vs. held ball) while they are babbling on the TV. Um, watch the ref for the signal.
 
I don't disagree with your point. Although, if you think it is limited exclusively to ESPN - or even WBB - or even only sports - you don't watch as much live stuff as I do. They do it on NFL football, WBB on Fox sports, and yes, even on the channel we watched the Presidential Inauguration on.

I don't know where you think ESPN is going - I agree someday they may go somewhere, but for now, they are broadcasting - themselves and their affiliates - up to 10 WBB or more on some days. And they have a huge football "plate", as well. Yes, like every TV based company they are struggling with folks cutting the cord - but of course they are expanding their on-line presence as well.

My comment related strictly to someone's remark about how much more you can see in person, as it didn't apply in this case. Actually, a lot of announcers don't seem to pay attention when they are there in person - or I wouldn't know what the call was (out-of-bounds vs. foul vs. held ball) while they are babbling on the TV. Um, watch the ref for the signal.
I'm saying not all stations / announcers are the same. I have found that ESPN's announcing isn't AS good as SNY's has been. We have had the privilege here to see both broadcasters. Also, IMO, SNY's half time report is also better. Maybe you don't mind putting up with lousy announcing of a game, but I do. That's why I voice my displeasure / or give accolades in an email. To me, ESPN gets a 'thumbs down'.
 
I'm saying not all stations / announcers are the same. I have found that ESPN's announcing isn't AS good as SNY's has been. We have had the privilege here to see both broadcasters. Also, IMO, SNY's half time report is also better. Maybe you don't mind putting up with lousy announcing of a game, but I do. That's why I voice my displeasure / or give accolades in an email. To me, ESPN gets a 'thumbs down'.
Like to interject a point. 100% right all the way around but I think it's an apples and oranges thing.
The local broadcast in general is going to be more knowledgeable regarding the home team. That's their beat and they know the inside scoop. The network (ESPN) is going to be more macro/global/bigger picture. It's most likely going to be more glitzy, better camera angles, graphics, sideline reporters. So, maybe we can appreciate both for what they bring to the table. If not, there's always volume control.
I remember when I was a 7th grader and the Yankees started to get better when Bobby Murcer and Thurman Munson came up around 1970 and they would get to play on the Game of the Week. I was on the edge of my seat waiting to hear what Curt Gowdy had to say about the team. I already knew all the stuff, I just wanted to hear them say it.
 
IN the digital age, sound quality has dramatically declined in general. However, R. Lobo is one of my 3 favorite announcers of all time even if she had laryngitis. She is always smart, elegant and insightful.
 
IN the digital age, sound quality has dramatically declined in general. However, R. Lobo is one of my 3 favorite announcers of all time even if she had laryngitis. She is always smart, elegant and insightful.
I agree. I wish we could put together the announcers we like to hear. For me it would be Rebecca, Meghan Culmo, Kara Lawson.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,937
Messages
4,545,680
Members
10,427
Latest member
CarloPFF


Top Bottom