Page 1 of 1

I'd like Smackie's take...

Posted: Sat Sep 28, 2024 3:45 am
by Softball Bat
on Tom Brady, FOX Sports lead NFL game analyst.
10 year contract, 375 million dollars.

He's gotten a lot of criticism and mockery for his early season performances.

First, I think there is an issue with his voice.
Tom's voice is slightly high pitched, at least for the pro football world, and when he gets excited, it gets even higher.
It sounds a little... funny, or gay.

He never worked games at all before, right?
All of a sudden he is the #1 analyst at FOX.

Tom Brady does not ooze personality or humor, and while he obviously has enthusiasm for the sport, it isn't coming across very well on TV so far.

Partly because of his own character, and partly because he was inside the NE Patriot culture for almost his entire career, Tom Brady has been *buttoned up* for the past 20+ years.
He spent his career trying to be as vanilla and unrevealing as possible.

Tom is supposed to be a color commentator, but he is a black & white character.

In his broadcasts, Tom has been the master of the obvious, and he actually sounds a bit like the white version of Marcus Allen.


Thoughts from Smackie and others?

Re: I'd like Smackie's take...

Posted: Sat Sep 28, 2024 3:48 am
by Screw_Michigan
Brady's voice is insufferable. Some Fox exec gave him that huge contract because he was afraid one of his ilk was going to beat him to it and his boss was going to scream at him about this. Period.

Greg Olsen is actually pretty darn good and relatable. I believe he also took a 75% pay cut for brady. Ouch.

Fuck Tom Brady.

Re: I'd like Smackie's take...

Posted: Sat Sep 28, 2024 2:17 pm
by Sudden Sam
Olsen does a great job. He was royally screwed.

Re: I'd like Smackie's take...

Posted: Sat Sep 28, 2024 4:36 pm
by Dr_Phibes
I haven't seen him yet, is he the colour man? Or as a 'game analyst', does he just pop in with a magic marker and tell you what's happening? The depth of stupidity John Madden or Chris Collinsworth achieved is a staggering benchmark.

Just being bland doesn't sound so bad. The NHL trains their players extensively to have as little character as possible, it's safe position to operate from.

Re: I'd like Smackie's take...

Posted: Sat Sep 28, 2024 4:48 pm
by Smackie Chan
Softball Bat wrote: Sat Sep 28, 2024 3:45 amI'd like Smackie's take
Um, ok...

1. I can't think of an example of a GOAT from any of the major sports having or even pursuing a career as an analyst for that sport on a national level. Brady's entrance into this role is unprecedented, and having it happen relatively soon after his retirement affords the opportunity to hear what are likely unique insights into not only how the game is currently played under recently implemented rules, but also first-hand accounts of "the good ol' days" since his career was so long.

2. Regular season NFL games are by far watched by more viewers than any other sports, so having Brady available and willing to assume the analyst's role is something for which Fox (and others) would overpay to get. He doesn't have to be the broadcasting GOAT coming out of the gate; he just has to be good enough, for now. Bill Belichick would probably provide a character reference vouching for his being coachable, so Fox figures he'll basically be getting OJT during his rookie year with a lot of grooming from seasoned vets.

3. An interesting comparison would be Tony Romo, who would certainly never be considered the NFL's GOAT. Not a lotta hoopla or fanfare when he stepped into the broadcast booth, and prolly not a lotta pay, relatively speaking, either. But during his first season with CBS, it seemed he was listening to both OCs during the games he was calling, since he'd end up correctly predicting what plays would be run often enough that spoiler alerts needed to be issued. His enthusiasm, knowledge of the game, ability to communicate the game to viewers who may not be as X & O savvy as others, and obvious insight into the minds of the players on the field yielded him a big payday. Brady just needed to be named Tom Brady to get his.

4. I think Brady will do well after a little seasoning. He'll have his share of missteps along the way that will all be put under a microscope, but he'll likely be considered a good investment by Fox.

PS: I seldom watch the Thur night Amazon Prime games, but caught part of the Giants/Cowboys game this week. Kirk Herbstreit is good analyst.

Re: I'd like Smackie's take...

Posted: Sat Sep 28, 2024 7:30 pm
by Softball Bat
Dr_Phibes wrote: Sat Sep 28, 2024 4:36 pm I haven't seen him yet, is he the colour man? Or as a 'game analyst', does he just pop in with a magic marker and tell you what's happening? The depth of stupidity John Madden or Chris Collinsworth achieved is a staggering benchmark.

Just being bland doesn't sound so bad. The NHL trains their players extensively to have as little character as possible, it's safe position to operate from.
I haven't seen any magic marker usage.

Brady is the "game analyst," or "color man," but he brings little color to the table.

I don't like when announcers try to BE the show, but at the same time, they are generally more interesting to listen to when some of their personality comes through in a broadcast.

Tom is not Mr. Personality.

Re: I'd like Smackie's take...

Posted: Sat Sep 28, 2024 9:12 pm
by Roux
Softball Bat wrote: Sat Sep 28, 2024 7:30 pm they are generally more interesting to listen to when some of their personality comes through in a broadcast.
John Madden enters the chat

Re: I'd like Smackie's take...

Posted: Sat Sep 28, 2024 10:50 pm
by Dr_Phibes
So it's like having Tom Cruise do colour on a game, they're so self managed there's nothing there. I think his potential business interests in football preclude him from saying anything negative about anyone.
All he needs is a style of delivery to pass as personality.

Re: I'd like Smackie's take...

Posted: Sat Sep 28, 2024 11:06 pm
by Softball Bat
Phibes wrote:So it's like having Tom Cruise do colour on a game, they're so self managed there's nothing there. I think his potential business interests in football preclude him from saying anything negative about anyone.
Yes.
Tom can be given the benefit of the doubt, as Smackie has done, because he is learning on the fly.

I get that, but Tom speaks in such generalities, and is speaking as if he is very conscious of not stepping on toes, such that any color he might bring to the telecast is neutered.

And his voice sounds as if he has been physically neutered.


Right now he is too careful and dull.
Cookie cutter.
Corporate.

Boring.

Re: I'd like Smackie's take...

Posted: Sun Sep 29, 2024 2:01 am
by dan's college room mate
I rarely watch any football these days, but I think Brady should go do some coaching first.

It would give him a different perspective.

He could still suck, but he’d at least have a chance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: I'd like Smackie's take...

Posted: Sun Sep 29, 2024 2:14 am
by Screw_Michigan
dan's college room mate wrote: Sun Sep 29, 2024 2:01 am I rarely watch any football these days, but I think Brady should go do some coaching first.

It would give him a different perspective.

He could still suck, but he’d at least have a chance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Why go coach when you can get paid an assload of money for half the work? Too bad for us fans.

You remain not very bright.