Open Letter to ESPN

[msf22b]

Gentlemen

I am a long time sports customer of ESPN and have been a fan and participant of various sports for 70+ years.
I am writing to you about the (mod) approach you employ in Basketball coverage. I actively follow woman's BB, especially the UConn woman.

Today's Tennessee / Texas A&M game was typical in that often the RUN OF play was subservient to irrelevant verbiage.

In the old days, a Marv Albert type announcer (radio or TV), would at a minimum, keep you informed of the score on a running basis, identify substitutions; who went in and out (often why) ...keep an eye on the clock (and later) the shot clock; identify the shooter and what type of shot was attempted and often identify the defender; describe what the offense is trying to do and what the defense is countering...Who the foul is on (who is shooting) and how many fouls that person has. And note the various coach's reactions.

The above are the crucial elements of the game...Anything else is or should be subservient to the flow of play
What I am suggesting is old fashion calling of the game...
I am perturbed by the current model, play regularly goes by that is not described, while irrelevant "Chit-chat" is going on.

I would be happy to consult with you, watch some games together and point out the deficiencies in the current approach by virtually your entIre staff.

I recognize that certain items on my list are covered better than others...but some of the most basic ones...the score (even if available as a visual), aspects of the score often provides a key to the game; substitutions and foul information are routinely ignored.

In my view it is a question of training and supervision. A check list could easily be put together with the "essentials" taking priority

I am posting this letter to the UConn "Boneyard" site in the hope that it promotes further discussion.

Many thanks for your consideration

Michael Feldman
St. Johnsbury VT.

 

[GoingPostal]

Amen brother. I couldn't have said it better.

 

[Cuango]

Gentlemen

I am a long time sports customer of ESPN and have been a fan and participant of various sports for 70+ years.
I am writing to you about the (mod) approach you employ in Basketball coverage. I actively follow woman's BB, especially the UConn woman.

Today's Tennessee / Texas A&M game was typical in that often the RUN OF play was subservient to irrelevant verbiage.

In the old days, a Marv Albert type announcer (radio or TV), would at a minimum, keep you informed of the score on a running basis, identify substitutions; who went in and out (often why) ...keep an eye on the clock (and later) the shot clock; identify the shooter and what type of shot was attempted and often identify the defender; describe what the offense is trying to do and what the defense is countering...Who the foul is on (who is shooting) and how many fouls that person has. And note the various coach's reactions.

The above are the crucial elements of the game...Anything else is or should be subservient to the flow of play
What I am suggesting is old fashion calling of the game...
I am perturbed by the current model, play regularly goes by that is not described, while irrelevant "Chit-chat" is going on.

I would be happy to consult with you, watch some games together and point out the deficiencies in the current approach by virtually your entIre staff.

I recognize that certain items on my list are covered better than others...but some of the most basic ones...the score (even if available as a visual), aspects of the score often provides a key to the game; substitutions and foul information are routinely ignored.

In my view it is a question of training and supervision. A check list could easily be put together with the "essentials" taking priority

I am posting this letter to the UConn "Boneyard" site in the hope that it promotes further discussion.

Many thanks for your consideration

Michael Feldman
St. Johnsbury VT.

Well said! I would rather have total silence than much of what I hear on today’s broadcasts! The announcers should be describing the play and adding relevant information about the game, players, coaches, and style of play. All this should be done without bias or partiality for or against one team or another. That’s all!

 

[VA Huskie]

COULD NOT AGREE WITH YOU MORE!

 

[Huskee11]

I agree with your comments and I hope they are given fair and hopefully strong consideration.

The current “style”, if you can even call it that, reflects a policy or a mindset that is clearly contrary to what you, I, or many others would prefer. Marc Albert for you, Mike Gorman for me, numerous other examples.

It doesn’t seem to be as much of an issue with the men’s game. Don’t the women deserve better? Seems disrespectful.

In defending the approach they have consciously decided to take, assuming they would candidly try to present a defense, query what they would say. Whatever they would say candidly would likely reflect a lack of respect for their audience (or possibly the women’s game itself) and would lay bare assumptions they have concerning the “casual fan” that are not particularly flattering. I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for such a candid response, though.

Maybe they would simply say we are old fashioned, and this is the new norm, get with the program. I strongly disagree with that notion and can only hope that with letters like this one they will begin to see things differently.

 

[PacoSwede]

where would we fellow BYer's send similar messages? a person, department, address so that we would have a collective impact and as easily dismissed, maybe.

 

[oldude]

In the words of Marv Albert, “YES!!!!!”

 

[Viet Vet]

COULD NOT AGREE WITH YOU MORE!

Me too. Would like to add to your directors, "Let us watch the action ON THE FLOOR. Dispense with the crowd/bench/family shots during play. Do them during stoppages".

 

[topogigio]

Hope that letter was also cc'd to FoxSports and CBSN. I have sent similar concerns to all. I believe the problem stems from hiring people with no/little training/experience in broadcasting, or poor communication skills. This can also be seen/heard with many of the recent hires in local TV news reporting.

 

[Sicilian]

I think this particular ship has sailed long ago. We live in a moment when everyone thinks they are the show so it’s no surprise when broadcasters deem it more important to talk about themselves than what they are being paid to do.

 

[Waquoit]

tl:dr

 

[JoePgh]

During the Tennessee - Texas A&M game, I was groaning near the beginning of the game when the announcers talked for a VERY long time (while the game was being played) about Kay Yow and her significance to women's basketball and to the struggle against breast cancer. During that time, I was unable to determine who had committed a foul or who was at the free throw line, and obviously the announcers weren't going to tell me.

HOWEVER, as the game proceeded, I noticed that they did a much better job of focusing on the game. I didn't notice any distracting chatter in the fourth quarter, perhaps not in the entire second half.

I guess they had to have a discussion about Kay Yow and her cause, since the game was meant to commemorate that. At least they got it out of the way early.

In many other cases, irrelevant chatter continues for the entire game. If the game is not competitive, that is somewhat understandable, but it should never happen as long as the game is close.

 

[Carnac]

Gentlemen

I am a long time sports customer of ESPN and have been a fan and participant of various sports for 70+ years.
I am writing to you about the (mod) approach you employ in Basketball coverage. I actively follow woman's BB, especially the UConn woman.

Today's Tennessee / Texas A&M game was typical in that often the RUN OF play was subservient to irrelevant verbiage.

In the old days, a Marv Albert type announcer (radio or TV), would at a minimum, keep you informed of the score on a running basis, identify substitutions; who went in and out (often why) ...keep an eye on the clock (and later) the shot clock; identify the shooter and what type of shot was attempted and often identify the defender; describe what the offense is trying to do and what the defense is countering...Who the foul is on (who is shooting) and how many fouls that person has. And note the various coach's reactions.

The above are the crucial elements of the game...Anything else is or should be subservient to the flow of play
What I am suggesting is old fashion calling of the game...
I am perturbed by the current model, play regularly goes by that is not described, while irrelevant "Chit-chat" is going on.

I would be happy to consult with you, watch some games together and point out the deficiencies in the current approach by virtually your entIre staff.

I recognize that certain items on my list are covered better than others...but some of the most basic ones...the score (even if available as a visual), aspects of the score often provides a key to the game; substitutions and foul information are routinely ignored.

In my view it is a question of training and supervision. A check list could easily be put together with the "essentials" taking priority

I am posting this letter to the UConn "Boneyard" site in the hope that it promotes further discussion.

Many thanks for your consideration

Michael Feldman
St. Johnsbury VT.

Excellent idea, and follow through. If there are facts, figures and sidebar stories they want to share with the audience, they can use the 3-4 minutes they go on the air to do that, or the 30-45 seconds coming out of commercials. Doing play by play on TV is much different than on radio.

There’s a fine line between excessive banter and calling game action. The iconic and hall of fame announcers knew/know to talk and when not to.

 

[CL82]

Gentlemen

I am a long time sports customer of ESPN and have been a fan and participant of various sports for 70+ years.
I am writing to you about the (mod) approach you employ in Basketball coverage. I actively follow woman's BB, especially the UConn woman.

Today's Tennessee / Texas A&M game was typical in that often the RUN OF play was subservient to irrelevant verbiage.

In the old days, a Marv Albert type announcer (radio or TV), would at a minimum, keep you informed of the score on a running basis, identify substitutions; who went in and out (often why) ...keep an eye on the clock (and later) the shot clock; identify the shooter and what type of shot was attempted and often identify the defender; describe what the offense is trying to do and what the defense is countering...Who the foul is on (who is shooting) and how many fouls that person has. And note the various coach's reactions.

The above are the crucial elements of the game...Anything else is or should be subservient to the flow of play
What I am suggesting is old fashion calling of the game...
I am perturbed by the current model, play regularly goes by that is not described, while irrelevant "Chit-chat" is going on.

I would be happy to consult with you, watch some games together and point out the deficiencies in the current approach by virtually your entIre staff.

I recognize that certain items on my list are covered better than others...but some of the most basic ones...the score (even if available as a visual), aspects of the score often provides a key to the game; substitutions and foul information are routinely ignored.

In my view it is a question of training and supervision. A check list could easily be put together with the "essentials" taking priority

I am posting this letter to the UConn "Boneyard" site in the hope that it promotes further discussion.

Many thanks for your consideration

Michael Feldman
St. Johnsbury VT.

Uh, I mean I concur.

 

[Dokey]

I find myself screaming at the set, “Call the damn game.”

 

[Gurleyman]

Bear in mind that while you raise good points in general, in the covid era things are more difficult. They typically aren’t in the arena, they’re home watching monitors, so they can’t always see substitutions and aren’t always sure about fouls without having eyes at the scorer‘s table. Even quickly recognizing players by sight can be a little harder in two dimensions - normally they would go to gameday shootaround just to get familiar with who’s who by sight before they get on air.

 

[huskyd]

It shouldn't be necessary, but I NEVER listen to the mods. I simply MUTE them because I feel that I know at least as much and often more than the mods about UConn's wcbb team. Perhaps if the mods read the BY religiously, they, too, would be current. Too lazy to do any homework? Seems so.
Stupidity or an unfamiliarity with the English language is tough to cure.

 

[PAHuskeyFan]

Nice Job @msf22b ... hope it gets some attention by ESPN. I am not optimistic though... I tried something similar the last couple years... I sent emails to ESPN (some sort of customer feedback link) begging them to get their announcers (play by play and those in the studio doing the pre game, halftime and post game shows) to properly pronounce players names. It's not a difficult thing to do, and it shows just a small amount of respect for the players. and NCAA WBB. I actually got a response from them once saying "we will pass it on". I haven't seen much change.

 

[hart2hart]

Great Post!
I’ll second what GoingPostal said:
“Amen brother. I couldn’t have said it better!”

 

[DefenseBB]

As most of these announcers have twitter handles could we not just simply inundate them with the same comments as above-hey Carolyn Peck and Deb Antonelli, announce the game you are watching and keep your opinions about the general game of basketball quiet until half-time or post game!

 

[GRIFFBIFF20]

I AM COURTNEY LYLE AND I AM "SPARTACUS"

 

[LoboDays]

Gentlemen

I am a long time sports customer of ESPN and have been a fan and participant of various sports for 70+ years.
I am writing to you about the (mod) approach you employ in Basketball coverage. I actively follow woman's BB, especially the UConn woman.

Today's Tennessee / Texas A&M game was typical in that often the RUN OF play was subservient to irrelevant verbiage.

In the old days, a Marv Albert type announcer (radio or TV), would at a minimum, keep you informed of the score on a running basis, identify substitutions; who went in and out (often why) ...keep an eye on the clock (and later) the shot clock; identify the shooter and what type of shot was attempted and often identify the defender; describe what the offense is trying to do and what the defense is countering...Who the foul is on (who is shooting) and how many fouls that person has. And note the various coach's reactions.

The above are the crucial elements of the game...Anything else is or should be subservient to the flow of play
What I am suggesting is old fashion calling of the game...
I am perturbed by the current model, play regularly goes by that is not described, while irrelevant "Chit-chat" is going on.

I would be happy to consult with you, watch some games together and point out the deficiencies in the current approach by virtually your entIre staff.

I recognize that certain items on my list are covered better than others...but some of the most basic ones...the score (even if available as a visual), aspects of the score often provides a key to the game; substitutions and foul information are routinely ignored.

In my view it is a question of training and supervision. A check list could easily be put together with the "essentials" taking priority

I am posting this letter to the UConn "Boneyard" site in the hope that it promotes further discussion.

Many thanks for your consideration

Michael Feldman
St. Johnsbury VT.

Well said. It’s been bugging me for a long time. Half the time, they don’t even notice when a substitution occurs. Sports like basketball and hockey need a focused play by play announcer who keeps up with the pace of the game. There is no time for for chit chat when the game is going on. Sadly, it seems to be getting worse.

 

[nwhoopfan]

It doesn’t seem to be as much of an issue with the men’s game.

That depends. Dick Vitale was guilty of wandering around non game related topics (mostly other teams that weren't on the floor, especially his beloved Dukies) a long, long time ago. Currently Bill Walton is absolutely the worst, he treats every game like it's a talk show he's hosting. Walton is far worse than any broadcaster I've heard doing women's games.