So I had the Dallas-Philly game on the radio last night…
…yes, I listen on the radio – ESPN isn’t part of our cable package.
Anyway, Michael Irvin – former Cowboys wide receiver and off-the-field distraction – was the commentator.
And he was really good. He handled things just the way a commentator should: he gave us extra details about the play that just happened; he concentrated on the play that just happened instead of second-guessing every little thing; his comments were on-topic and interesting.
Contrast that with your typical TV commentator (no more annoying form of life on Earth, if you ask me), who constantly second-guesses decisions, ignores interesting things that just happened on the field, and obsesses well into the second half over things that happened in the first quarter.
It makes me wonder whether there's something about being on TV that makes people idiots. If, for example, Larry McCarren moved from radio to TV, would he suddenly become a slightly more mature Boomer Esiason?
Anyway, Michael Irvin – former Cowboys wide receiver and off-the-field distraction – was the commentator.
And he was really good. He handled things just the way a commentator should: he gave us extra details about the play that just happened; he concentrated on the play that just happened instead of second-guessing every little thing; his comments were on-topic and interesting.
Contrast that with your typical TV commentator (no more annoying form of life on Earth, if you ask me), who constantly second-guesses decisions, ignores interesting things that just happened on the field, and obsesses well into the second half over things that happened in the first quarter.
It makes me wonder whether there's something about being on TV that makes people idiots. If, for example, Larry McCarren moved from radio to TV, would he suddenly become a slightly more mature Boomer Esiason?
posted by Lance Burri @ 6:32 PM
<< Home