Bad choice. He's either truly that dumb, or trolling for replies. Neither is a good option.
This is what "sports" commentating has come to
- Thread starter 18IsTheMan
- Start date
Bad choice. He's either truly that dumb, or trolling for replies. Neither is a good option.
Todd and Tommy - back when not every game was televised I never missed a game on the radio, and never had an issue following what was going on. To the contrary, they put you on the field which as a former player is what I like. If Ellis getting excited and saying the 55 throws you, you probably aren't understanding half of whats being said as it is. Compared to other announcers I've heard they're fine; I usually turn the sound down on tv broadcasts to avoid having to hear the babble anyway.
LOL, I know what you mean. They do the same thing when we have the ball.
Gamecock qb finds receiver all alone across the middle and hits him for a completion on third and 8. That brings up 4th and 4 and the punting team comes on the field. Suggs is breathless while making the call like the receiver is running wild down the field.
There's a word which means miserly, and sounds close to the "n" word..............
Well aware of that. I saw Suggs play in person a few times. Still, I think using "we" sounds unprofessional.
Saskatchewan Roughriders. The CFL's 2025 season is already on week 5.Well when a runner crosses the 55 yard line, most broadcast teams would be thrown for a loop but Todd never skipped a beat.
I don't want to trash them too much, but it is more like hearing a game called by a couple of your longtime Gamecock friends than a professional broadcast crew. I guess that's why, for all their faults, it feels like radio "home" when I hear them.
We have very different opinions on professionalism then. Todd and Tommy don't come across as professional broadcasters, but that's because they're not professional broadcasters. They're not unprofessional because they have a rooting interest in the outcome of the contest. Some of the best calls in sports history are because the broadcasters had such a rooting interest.
The last thing I want to hear when I turn on a Gamecock radio broadcast is a call that could be mistaken for ESPN or any other random duo calling a game.
I want objective homerism. I want the broadcasters to give us exactly what happens on the field objectively with that rooting interest behind it. I feel like Derek Scott does a great job with this on Gamecock basketball broadcasts.
Most ESPN announcers are incompetent.
To me, Bob Fulton will always be the gold standard.
I too grew up with Bob Fulton; I became a gamecock fan listening to him call the game winning field goal against VPI in 68 or 69 while parking at the Orangeburg County fair. However, I thought he was a much better
basketball announcer than football; I used to sit in the stands at W-B and before it became W-B listening to the game on headphones while watching, and the game Fulton called, while baritone and engaging, bore little resemblance to what was actually happening on the field. Which is exactly why I like Suggs and Ellis.
basketball announcer than football; I used to sit in the stands at W-B and before it became W-B listening to the game on headphones while watching, and the game Fulton called, while baritone and engaging, bore little resemblance to what was actually happening on the field. Which is exactly why I like Suggs and Ellis.
Reminder. We had a professional announcer A lot of posters screamed we hate him. We want a homer. One of us, they said. Be careful what you ask for. Post not at you personally but to many who know who they are.
I appreciate a bit of homerism. It's us calling our own games.
I just want to be able to listen to a game and understand what is going on.
I Loved hearing, “The Fighting Gamecocks are on the air”. Voice thru the night from so many magical sports places.