No play-by-play announcer experiment

No play-by-play announcer experiment

Post by Bob » Mon, 17 Aug 2009 05:53:39


How many of you watched the Nationwide race from Michigan this
afternoon?

If you missed it, there was no traditional play-by-play announcer.
Bestwick was the "host", but the booth team was DJ, Rusty, Andy Petree
and Ray Evernham.  Tim Brewer contributed from the tech center.

Four in the booth seems a bit much at first glance, but I thought they
pulled it off pretty well.  My cable failed about halfway thru so I
didn't get to watch it all, but based on what I saw, I'd have to give
this experiment a thumbs up.

Thoughts?

 
 
 

No play-by-play announcer experiment

Post by Tom Duw » Mon, 17 Aug 2009 18:27:41


Quote:
> How many of you watched the Nationwide race from Michigan this
> afternoon?

> If you missed it, there was no traditional play-by-play announcer.
> Bestwick was the "host", but the booth team was DJ, Rusty, Andy Petree
> and Ray Evernham.  Tim Brewer contributed from the tech center.

> Four in the booth seems a bit much at first glance, but I thought they
> pulled it off pretty well.  My cable failed about halfway thru so I
> didn't get to watch it all, but based on what I saw, I'd have to give
> this experiment a thumbs up.

> Thoughts?

They shouldda never invited Steven's daddy.

--
Tom in Bristol

 
 
 

No play-by-play announcer experiment

Post by John McCo » Mon, 17 Aug 2009 18:37:25



Quote:
> How many of you watched the Nationwide race from Michigan this
> afternoon?

> If you missed it, there was no traditional play-by-play announcer.
> Bestwick was the "host", but the booth team was DJ, Rusty, Andy Petree
> and Ray Evernham.  Tim Brewer contributed from the tech center.

> Four in the booth seems a bit much at first glance, but I thought they
> pulled it off pretty well.  My cable failed about halfway thru so I
> didn't get to watch it all, but based on what I saw, I'd have to give
> this experiment a thumbs up.

> Thoughts?

Didn't see it (well, I saw part of the race with the sound off
at the sports bar).  But really, ESPN has been experimenting
with no play-by-play announcer ever since they brought Dr Punch
into the booth, so I can't see where it would be much different.
Punch has never really "called" a race, his commentary is more
like a 3rd color guy.

Unlike the Fox crew, who talk far too much, both the Jarrett/
Petree and Wallace/Evernham pairings sometimes seem to get stuck
for something to say.  So having all 4 of them was probably a
good idea.

John

 
 
 

No play-by-play announcer experiment

Post by pe2 » Tue, 18 Aug 2009 03:54:22

Kinda reminds me of what NFL did many years ago, when there were no
commentators for a game. They let the stadium announcer take full control,
and it was just like you were at the game.

I found it rather boring, of course-I could do without Rusty Wallace as a
commentator.

pe2

 
 
 

No play-by-play announcer experiment

Post by Nancy » Tue, 18 Aug 2009 19:40:29


Quote:


> > How many of you watched the Nationwide race from Michigan this
> > afternoon?

> > If you missed it, there was no traditional play-by-play announcer.
> > Bestwick was the "host", but the booth team was DJ, Rusty, Andy Petree
> > and Ray Evernham. Tim Brewer contributed from the tech center.

> > Four in the booth seems a bit much at first glance, but I thought they
> > pulled it off pretty well. My cable failed about halfway thru so I
> > didn't get to watch it all, but based on what I saw, I'd have to give
> > this experiment a thumbs up.

> > Thoughts?

> Didn't see it (well, I saw part of the race with the sound off
> at the sports bar). But really, ESPN has been experimenting
> with no play-by-play announcer ever since they brought Dr Punch
> into the booth, so I can't see where it would be much different.
> Punch has never really "called" a race, his commentary is more
> like a 3rd color guy.

> Unlike the Fox crew, who talk far too much, both the Jarrett/
> Petree and Wallace/Evernham pairings sometimes seem to get stuck
> for something to say. So having all 4 of them was probably a
> good idea.

> John

I think if you pay attention, you'll find Jarrett is absolutely the
most likely to fill every single "empty" second with verbiage.  Rusty
at his worst cannot compete, and this year, Rusty has been exemplary
in his attempt to keep his mouth shut.

Get rid of Jarrett, and don't use Punch very much = winning
commentary.

N.

 
 
 

No play-by-play announcer experiment

Post by John McCo » Tue, 18 Aug 2009 20:16:19



Quote:

>> Unlike the Fox crew, who talk far too much, both the Jarrett/
>> Petree and Wallace/Evernham pairings sometimes seem to get stuck
>> for something to say.
> I think if you pay attention, you'll find Jarrett is absolutely the
> most likely to fill every single "empty" second with verbiage.  Rusty
> at his worst cannot compete, and this year, Rusty has been exemplary
> in his attempt to keep his mouth shut.

I didn't say they were silent, just that they were stuck for
something to say :-)

Jarrett tends to fill those moments with ums, ers, and false
starts.  Wallace tends to just say something random.

John

 
 
 

No play-by-play announcer experiment

Post by ben9193 » Wed, 19 Aug 2009 21:18:29

Quote:
> > How many of you watched the Nationwide race from Michigan this
> > afternoon?

Hi all, I'm new here..
I liked it! I thought it was much improved over the week before. I
guess I like a bit more 'conversation' and a bit less 'commentary'.

Quote:
> They shouldda never invited Steven's daddy.

I'm still not sold on Rusty.
Am I mistaken or wasnt he one of the worst 'team players' in the
history of the sport?
I thought I heard that he and Newman didnt talk or share info or
anything... and if thats true to hear him keep talking about the
wonders of team chemistry and communication seems a bit***eyed... Am
I wrong about this?
Thanks,
Ben
 
 
 

No play-by-play announcer experiment

Post by Chuck Ste » Wed, 19 Aug 2009 21:26:59


Quote:
>I'm still not sold on Rusty.
>Am I mistaken or wasnt he one of the worst 'team players' in the
>history of the sport?

You aren't mistaken.
He finally admitted to such recently.
Not a really well liked guy while racing.
 
 
 

No play-by-play announcer experiment

Post by Martin X. Moleski, S » Wed, 19 Aug 2009 22:34:22



Quote:
>Hi all, I'm new here..

Hi, Ben!

Welcome to the group.

Thanks for contributing ...

Quote:
>I'm still not sold on Rusty.
>Am I mistaken or wasnt he one of the worst 'team players' in the
>history of the sport?
>I thought I heard that he and Newman didnt talk or share info or
>anything... and if that's true to hear him keep talking about the
>wonders of team chemistry and communication seems a bit***eyed... Am
>I wrong about this?

Maybe he's learned from his mistakes?

In any case, it does seem to be true that communications is a huge
part of the sport: driver to crew chief, team to team.

Let the one among us who has never said, "The good I want to
do I do not do; the evil I want to avoid I do not avoid" cast
the first stone.  ;o)

                                        Marty
--
Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://SportToday.org/ for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.

 
 
 

No play-by-play announcer experiment

Post by John McCo » Thu, 20 Aug 2009 01:56:24



Quote:
> Am I mistaken or wasnt he one of the worst 'team players' in the
> history of the sport?

He had that reputation.  OTOH, he came from the era of single car
teams, albeit right at the end of that era, and I'd guess a lot of
the other guys from that time probably weren't too comfortable
with working with other drivers.

Quote:
> I thought I heard that he and Newman didnt talk or share info or
> anything... and if thats true to hear him keep talking about the
> wonders of team chemistry and communication seems a bit***eyed... Am
> I wrong about this?

He may have been speaking more in terms of the chemistry between
the driver and his crew chief/mechanics, rather than that between
drivers who are teammates.

John

 
 
 

No play-by-play announcer experiment

Post by Martin X. Moleski, S » Thu, 20 Aug 2009 02:51:43


Quote:
>[Rusty] may have been speaking more in terms of the chemistry between
>the driver and his crew chief/mechanics, rather than that between
>drivers who are teammates.

I'm not sure had very good chemistry there, either.  Didn't
he make a lot of the adjustment calls himself?

                                Marty
--
Big-8 newsgroups: humanities.*, misc.*, news.*, rec.*, sci.*, soc.*, talk.*
See http://www.big-8.org for info on how to add or remove newsgroups.

 
 
 

No play-by-play announcer experiment

Post by Chuck Ste » Thu, 20 Aug 2009 03:46:16

Quote:

>I'm not sure had very good chemistry there, either.  Didn't
>he make a lot of the adjustment calls himself?

>                                Marty

He was famous for dialing himself right out of the race..
John is right, he was from an era of single car teams,
but the concept of trusting your crew chief was the same then
as it is now.
He just didn't.
 
 
 

No play-by-play announcer experiment

Post by John McCo » Thu, 20 Aug 2009 03:56:39



Quote:


>>[Rusty] may have been speaking more in terms of the chemistry between
>>the driver and his crew chief/mechanics, rather than that between
>>drivers who are teammates.

> I'm not sure had very good chemistry there, either.  Didn't
> he make a lot of the adjustment calls himself?

He won 10 of 30 one year.  He was points champion once, and
came in second twice.  I'd say that there were some years where
he and his crew chief definately had the chemistry.

He also had some bad years.  So it would seem he's seen it from
both sides.

John

 
 
 

No play-by-play announcer experiment

Post by Curiou » Thu, 20 Aug 2009 23:28:37

I've never thought of automobile racing as a team sport.

IMO, its one of the problems with CUP

wonders of team chemistry <<<


Quote:
>> > How many of you watched the Nationwide race from Michigan this
>> > afternoon?

> Hi all, I'm new here..
> I liked it! I thought it was much improved over the week before. I
> guess I like a bit more 'conversation' and a bit less 'commentary'.

>> They shouldda never invited Steven's daddy.

> I'm still not sold on Rusty.
> Am I mistaken or wasnt he one of the worst 'team players' in the
> history of the sport?
> I thought I heard that he and Neif thats true to hear him keep talking
> about the
> wonders of team chemistry and communication seems a bit***eyedwman didnt
> talk or share info or
> anything... and ... Am
> I wrong about this?
> Thanks,
> Ben

 
 
 

No play-by-play announcer experiment

Post by Listpi » Fri, 21 Aug 2009 00:47:46


Quote:

> I've never thought of automobile racing as a team sport.

> IMO, its one of the problems with CUP

Mark Martin said something about that a year or two ago.  I don't remember
the exact wording, so I'll paraphrase it to match his current "team", not
the one he had when he said it.

"Far as I'm concerned, this is not a "team."  When the green flag waves, not
one of those guys---not Jeff Gordon, not Steve Letarte, not Jimmie Johnson,
not Chad Knaus---none of them is working for a Mark Martin win.  Not one.
And as long as that's true, this is not a "team sport"."

That said, I think it's more like a bunch of different car dealerships owned
by the same company: if you work for a Wombat dealership, at the end of the
day, you want the best sales/best service awards, the greatest profits, to
land somewhere in the Wombat network, and each Wombat dealership to be the
top dealership of its marque in the city.  But that doesn't change the fact
that you will bust your ***to ensure that it's YOUR dealership---Wombat
Chevy---that kicks the ***of Wombat Cadillac, Wombat Subaru, Wombat
Kia.......

--pig