The Weird, Wacky and Awesome World of the NFL - General Banter thread V2

JaMarcusHustle · 15-01-2017 03:01PM

Its only human to have bias, but for the most part the main broadcast teams remain pretty neutral. You'll notice some bias creeping through but never to the extent of Niall Quinn, Alan Smith, Steve McManaman etc. in soccer.

The pregame, halftime and postgame shows on the other hand are virtually unwatchable due to the bias, ignorance and just poor television skills in general. Too many players get offered cushy gigs on these shows due to their name alone. Ever see Ray Lewis? Possibly the worst pundit I've ever seen for any sport. Can't understand a word that comes out of his mouth.

Hazys · 15-01-2017 03:05PM

They have no real bias towards teams generally as they say they can't even give a prediction on a game they are covering in pre game shows. Sometimes you'll see a small bias come through but nothing major.

But they have a massive bias towards the NFL. The NFL has them in their back pocket. Rarely would you see them criticize the refs or the quality of the game or even a player who could have committed triple murder the night before. Often you'll see the refs make a terrible call and cost one team the game and the commentators will either completely ignore the incident or just say "Team A got a little lucky there haha" while if your a fan of Team B you are just about suicidal

Leroy42 · 15-01-2017 03:13PM

Great guys, thanks. I wasn't seeing the bias but that could easily have been cause wouldn't spot it.

Now that you say it about the NFL in general though, yeah I see what you mean. The footy goes mad of ref decisions and in NFL they say nothing much.

Thanks again, very helpful

Billy86 · 15-01-2017 03:14PM

Hazys wrote: »

They have no real bias towards teams generally as they say they can't even give a prediction on a game they are covering in pre game shows. Sometimes you'll see a small bias come through but nothing major.

But they have a massive bias towards the NFL. The NFL has them in their back pocket. Rarely would you see them criticize the refs or the quality of the game or even a player who could have committed triple murder the night before. Often you'll see the refs make a terrible call and cost one team the game and the commentators will either completely ignore the incident or just say "Team A got a little lucky there haha" while if your a fan of Team B you are just about suicidal

There is also some of that with regards to play calls of well respected coaches too. When the Seahawks were down by 16 and kicked a FG on 4th-and-goal around the 5 yard line yesterday, I really think they needed to go for it with how the Falcons offense was playing. It was an odd one, and Pete Carroll is possibly the most likely coach to go for it on 4th down in that situation in the league, it almost sent a kind of a message that they were scared, or just overly cautious to me. I think it was RDS who posted seconds before me in the thread that he was surprised at it too.

But here's the thing, on 3rd down the comm's were talking about the situation. Third down was clearly only ever going to be a pass into the endzone unless the play broke down and Wilson had to scramble or improvise. So 4th down was only ever going to be 4th-and-5/6 yards. Can't remember who was on commentary, but one of them clearly said "yeah it's definitely four down territory in this situation"... yet when Carroll went for the FG, immediately he switched to "oh, well I was assuming they'd look to pick up some yards in the previous play" - which was clearly bullsh** given the situation. What, run it on 3rd and 6 to set up 4th down? Feck off.

Now what irritates me most about that is that with a different coach, there's a completely different line of commentary there. McCarthy, Belichick, Payton, etc -- these guys would all get similar treatment to Carroll in that situation. On the flip side, and I think he is far too cautious, but had that been Jim Caldwell who made the play the exact same commentators would immediately be criticising him and making statements like "on fourth and goal in the playoffs against this Falcons offense, you've just got to go for it" and such.

Just rankles me a bit, is all.

Bateman · 15-01-2017 11:31PM

Rather than a reluctance to slag the coach, it's probably the pundit putting himself in agreement with that coach so as not to step outside the groupthink. Groupthink is never a good thing, no less in NFL than any other area.

JaMarcusHustle · 16-01-2017 12:58PM

In his postgame speech to his team, Mike Tomlin stressed the importance of keeping their head down and keeping a low profile.

...while Antonio Brown streamed the whole thing live on Facebook.

mcgratheoin · 16-01-2017 02:34PM

helimachoptor wrote: »

It shouldn't be so black and white. You need to look at the income a new stadium will generate for the state or city council.

There are 53 players + coaches + staff paying tax obviously players paying a lot. Then there's the game day tad revenue . That generates a lot of cash I'd imagine

Yeah, but you can't just compare a school/hospital etc with a stadium. If you're sinking $600m (like Atlanta) into a stadium, the real question is could the economy be boosted in a better and more sustainable way for everyone by spending that money in another fashion. I would say that Vegas is probably the only place that a public subsidy might make sense given the economy's huge reliance on out of state visitors.

Couple of links, one is old but it has this great summation.

Building a stadium is good for the local economy only if a stadium is the most productive way to make capital investments and use its workers.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/public-money-used-build-sports-stadiums/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2015/01/31/publicly-financed-sports-stadiums-are-a-game-that-taxpayers-lose/#6d01a8f96183
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/sports-jobs-taxes-are-new-stadiums-worth-the-cost/

mcgratheoin · 16-01-2017 02:42PM

jack presley wrote: »

Atlanta residents also paying towards the Braves new baseball team too so I hope the standard of their public services is up to scratch.

No they're not - they spent all their money on the Falcons so the Braves are moving to another jurisdiction (that spent all their parks money on the new stadium). This shows one of the problems of public funding as well - often an area's competition is actually pretty close so you can move the team into a different administration but essentially stay within the same metropolitan area or be pretty close - Santa Clara, Arlingto etc.. So owners can play off "cities" against each other and still remain within the same market - it'd be like the Dubs playing SDCC and Fingal off against each other to build a GAA stadium for them.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/houston-barber/the-fall-of-turner-field-_b_9612302.html

NufcNavan · 16-01-2017 02:46PM

I don't like Pitt, but I'm glad they won yesterday. I would have given KC no chance in NE. It will be tough for Pitt, but I think they at least have a tiny chance. NE will win though.

It gets old always having to root against these two teams. What's weird is that even though both are always good, they haven't faced each other in the playoffs since 2004.

Obviously I'll root for whoever comes out of the NFC. I like both of those teams. Should be a great game. It would be soul crushing for Atlanta to lose another NFC Title game at home, but I'm expecting GB to mirror what SF did there four years ago.

Shedite27 · 16-01-2017 04:28PM

mcgratheoin wrote: »

Yeah, but you can't just compare a school/hospital etc with a stadium. If you're sinking $600m (like Atlanta) into a stadium, the real question is could the economy be boosted in a better and more sustainable way for everyone by spending that money in another fashion. I would say that Vegas is probably the only place that a public subsidy might make sense given the economy's huge reliance on out of state visitors.

Atlanta takes the biscuit in my opinion.

Georgia Dome was built in 1992, closed down this year (25 years later).
Atlanta Olympics Stadium was built in 1996, converted to a baseball stadium in 1997, and now 20 years later it's been closed down to move to another new stadium.

Beefy78 · 17-01-2017 12:51PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

Small question for you guys. When watching NFL (and although not a noob I wouldn't be too aware of tactics etc) do the commentators and pundits used have the same sort of bias than say, the ones on Sky for English football?

Its just so I would take that into account when listening to their opinions? My feeling is that team loyalty is less in the NFL than say in English football but I could simply be wrong on that.

I heard Cris Collingsworth (I think) the other day say something along the lines that every single set of fans in the NFL think that he's massively biased against them. I suspect they'd have the same level of perceived bias that pundits in the UK would get.

Billy86 · 17-01-2017 12:59PM

Beefy78 wrote: »

I heard Cris Collingsworth (I think) the other day say something along the lines that every single set of fans in the NFL think that he's massively biased against them. I suspect they'd have the same level of perceived bias that pundits in the UK would get.

Was it Joe Buck on Bill Simmons? Very interesting interview, was half asleep but felt Buck came over as both a bit of a jackass and fairly likable.

jack presley · 17-01-2017 01:43PM

If you think NFL broadcasters are biased, you should listen to MLB/NHL ones (don't watch NBA so can't comment on that).

At least the NFL are national broadcasts whereas in baseball and ice hockey, as the majority of games are local broadcasts and each team has their own commentators working the games so some of the bias is incredible.

Some are better and less obvious than others but some are such homers it's ridiculous. There's a guy who commentates for the Capitals ice hockey team who I've heard say "1-0 to the good guys" after a goal.

Billy86 · 17-01-2017 01:46PM

jack presley wrote: »

At least the NFL are national broadcasts whereas in baseball and ice hockey, as the majority of games are local broadcasts and each team has their own commentators working the games so some of the bias is incredible.

That's EXACTLY what Joe Buck said!

GoldFour4 · 17-01-2017 02:03PM

Billy86 wrote: »

Was it Joe Buck on Bill Simmons? Very interesting interview, was half asleep but felt Buck came over as both a bit of a jackass and fairly likable.

Yeah I read an interview with him before and had the same reaction - liked when he was talking about his father and the influence he had on him but he can definitely come across badly some times.

Beefy78 · 17-01-2017 02:40PM

jack presley wrote: »

If you think NFL broadcasters are biased,.

I don't. I just think it is interesting that commentators and pundits Worldwide in every sport are accused by every set of fans as being biased against them. I think the truth is that the best colour commentators and pundits are employed because of their ability to provide an opinion and that we all get very sensitive and protective about our sports teams and what we perceive to be slights against them.

eagle eye · 17-01-2017 02:46PM

I don't rate Joe Buck at all, one of the worst commentators imo.

Knex* · 17-01-2017 03:03PM

Yeah, hate Buck and Aikman. They're tedious to listen to. Simms is probably worse though, if only for that accent.

Collinsworth is my favourite, by far. Gruden probably second.

JaMarcusHustle · 17-01-2017 03:15PM

Collinsworth had a great interview on Bill Simmons' podcast a while back after the squashed their whole "feud".

He told a great story about how he always gets asked by fans of every team why he hates their team, and he usually tries to explain that he doesn't. He was at dinner one night with his family at a restaurant and was just walking out the door when he heard some guy call "Hey Collinsworth...." and when he turned around, the guy asked him "Why do you hate the Giants so much?"

Collinsworth wasn't in the mood to argue, so his response was brilliant.

"I don't know..... I just do."

And kept walking.

thomond2006 · 17-01-2017 05:13PM

I find the NBC commentary and production far better than anyone else. I suppose given they have the prime TV slot and only broadcast one game a week (aside from a few TNF games) they can really put a lot of effort in. Buck and Aikman aren't too bad. Nantz and Simms are boring.

the baby bull elephant · 17-01-2017 05:24PM

I quite liked when Chris Spielman did a few of the Lions games he gets more technical than most of the other commentators but still keeps it accessible. He also just seems like a really great guy.

OldMrBrennan83 · 17-01-2017 06:10PM

This post has been deleted.

JaMarcusHustle · 17-01-2017 06:29PM

In an ideal world, Kirk Herbstreit would start covering the NFL. He's one of my favourite commentators of any sport.

vetinari · 17-01-2017 07:49PM

I see Tomlin isn't going to take game time away from Antonio Brown as a punishment. Ron Rivera could learn a thing or two.

Realt Dearg Sec · 17-01-2017 08:12PM

vetinari wrote: »

I see Tomlin isn't going to take game time away from Antonio Brown as a punishment. Ron Rivera could learn a thing or two.

I'm being pedantic, but by my count the most he can learn is one thing.

PhilipsR · 17-01-2017 09:50PM

vetinari wrote: »

I see Tomlin isn't going to take game time away from Antonio Brown as a punishment. Ron Rivera could learn a thing or two.

Two completely different situations.

JaMarcusHustle · 18-01-2017 08:29AM

An encouraging start for Anthony Lynn as Chargers head coach.

https://twitter.com/katdoc12/status/821447479602376704

Knex* · 18-01-2017 09:26AM

Is that Rich Eisen saying "oh my gosh"?

TOss Sweep · 19-01-2017 04:29AM

Apprently at the Chargers pep rally they hired fans to be there

http://dailysnark.com/la-chargers-reportedly-casted-fake-fans-come-teams-introductory-pep-rally/

https://twitter.com/FauxPhilipRiver/status/821882497038483456

Billy86 · 19-01-2017 09:39AM

There have clearly been worse run teams on the field and while a very hit-and-miss roster they're not actually all that bad for talent (especially having Rivers there), but despite the 49ers and Browns best efforts, there really hasn't been a worse run franchise the last few years has there? It's like a clown car of f*** ups and foot in the mouth moments.

The Weird, Wacky and Awesome World of the NFL - General Banter thread V2

Comments