Tekneek
Registered User
- Nov 28, 2004
- 4,395
- 39
Tawnos said:Which means exactly what? If you don't know what I'm talking about, then why comment on how you "don't care"? Politely say "I've never seen those guys" and move on.
You asked what the difference was, and I answered. The difference is that I don't watch them. I HAVE seen Deion on NFL Today, and I HAVE seen Kruk on Baseball Tonight. I have not seen enough to care that much, though. I think Deion was dropped by CBS for good reasons. He brought almost nothing to the table. From the few times I have seen Kruk on Baseball Tonight, he has more to offer it than Deion was bringing to his show. Roenick added nothing to the World Cup coverage. I'm not opposed to players being involved, but you need to get a smart guy who has some insight instead of someone like JR.
And the point is that the NHL could learn a couple of things from other sports. All the other sports have learned that having a controversial, entertaining figure on your broadcast is a good thing, despite how ridiculous it may seem. It makes people pay attention, then you hit them with some real and useful knowledge. Sorry to say it, but no game grows itself. All sports have to be packaged and packaged right. Having a figure such as Jeremy Roenick on your broadcast is akin to putting lights on the sign for your store that's out on the road.
Most hockey fans happen to think that the CBC has the best broadcast, with the rest of the Canadian-based broadcasts running a very close second (from what I have heard and read). ESPN would do better to follow those before taking another step toward a circus atmosphere. They always want to say how people in the US don't understand the game, so why do they spend so little time on the real details? You can learn more about the game on one Hockey Night In Canada broadcast than a season's worth of ESPN games.