2017 USDGC

[esdubya]

Love the Big Sexy commentary. Great job guys hope to hear them much more in the future. Also - really fortunate that they were both on the lead card for the round they were commenting on. One won and one bombed and that also made for an interesting dynamic. Lot's going on there and overall I felt they pulled it off pretty well.

 

[robdeforge]

Disagree. It's video, why does he need to describe a shot YOU CAN SEE? The personal insight is what makes the "Big Sexy" commentary good. Otherwise, we could be stuck with the disc golf guy and his lame attempts at humor.

Quick question - do you watch other sports to? Not sure if you noticed, but commentators generally, you know.... comment on what's going on.

I know what you're saying and I agree to a certain extent - I don't need Jerm to tell me that Nikko just tapped in from 1 foot away. But I also don't need Jerm to tell me about how AWESOME the gift baskets were at the Nantucket Open, on hole 1, as he ignores throw after throw after throw.

I just feel there's a middle ground that Jerm needs to find and until then I'll think he's wildly overrated

 

[_MTL_]

Disc Golf Commentary is entirely too soft. Always has been.

You never hear anyone ever question why someone chose a certain shot or point out when someone throws a poor shot as to why or what they did wrong.

It's always extremely positive or "unfortunate"

I don't watch post-coverage disc golf b/c it's too cheesy and too positive.

 

[JTacoma03]

2 commentary thoughts:

- Totally agree with those who are confused as to why "talking about the shot we're watching" is a criticism. Every sport does it. I think it's more to do with the delivery, but the criticism is misplaced towards what is said instead of how it's said. If you really listen for it, every commentator in disc golf describes the shot to some degree, we just all do it differently. It's the style that's being reacted to, not the content. Just IMO.

- My favorite setup is to have 2 commentators. One person doing hosting/play-by-play and the other doing color. I'm not as much of a fan of 2 pro players on the same track. Many of the reasons why have been highlighted already by others, but in general it's just a more narrow scope of discussion. I appreciate hearing what goes on in their heads, and gleaning knowledge from their experience, but that's not all I want to hear about. I need to feel more connected to the event. If I was listening to a BigSexy podcast on the other hand...pure gold.

...and that's not really a criticism of the players themselves, they're doing a pretty good job all things considered (between rounds giving up their time, etc.). I always appreciate those guys and gals for working with us, I just think the production misses a key ingredient to the sauce when you don't balance the color with the host/play-by-play.

 

[discgolfer25]

I think the Big Sexy commentary is enjoyable but I definitely prefer a mixed bag. I actually liked the anticipation of not knowing who was going to the be the guest commentators as it was usually a pleasant surprise. I firmly believe the Sexy Beast is the best team and wish McBeth would do more commentary, but I like to hear different players POV, even if there aren't the most articulate.

I also love Sexy Beast commentary. Nothing like hearing Paul talk about course strategy.

 

[sjberry2017]

I know what you're saying and I agree to a certain extent - I don't need Jerm to tell me that Nikko just tapped in from 1 foot away. But I also don't need Jerm to tell me about how AWESOME the gift baskets were at the Nantucket Open, on hole 1, as he ignores throw after throw after throw.

Yeah, and then on hole...5...the first par 5, Brinster had a ridiculous cut roller out of the rough but Jerm was rambling on and on about Austin Turner hitting trees on 4 straight throws; like, dude, did you not just see Brinster with that incredible play?? Talk about that. I'm sure he will find his medium though, and I won't boycott coverage for it, but, yeah, given the choice I'll take other teams.

Damn are we spoiled

 

[Zanguini]

Disc Golf Commentary is entirely too soft. Always has been.

You never hear anyone ever question why someone chose a certain shot or point out when someone throws a poor shot as to why or what they did wrong.

It's always extremely positive or "unfortunate"

I don't watch post-coverage disc golf b/c it's too cheesy and too positive.

Your not going to have this as long as you have two touring pros doing the commentary. That is just bad form criticizing people they play with on a weekly basis harshly. You can have harsher treatment in other sports because generally your team is normally a Journalist and a former pro or coach. You can see this in the NFL around playoff time you will rarely see a pro or coach who's season is done bash another team or player for making obvious mistakes.

 

[discgolfer25]

2 commentary thoughts:

- Totally agree with those who are confused as to why "talking about the shot we're watching" is a criticism. Every sport does it. I think it's more to do with the delivery, but the criticism is misplaced towards what is said instead of how it's said. If you really listen for it, every commentator in disc golf describes the shot to some degree, we just all do it differently. It's the style that's being reacted to, not the content. Just IMO.

- My favorite setup is to have 2 commentators. One person doing hosting/play-by-play and the other doing color. I'm not as much of a fan of 2 pro players on the same track. Many of the reasons why have been highlighted already by others, but in general it's just a more narrow scope of discussion. I appreciate hearing what goes on in their heads, and gleaning knowledge from their experience, but that's not all I want to hear about. I need to feel more connected to the event. If I was listening to a BigSexy podcast on the other hand...pure gold.

...and that's not really a criticism of the players themselves, they're doing a pretty good job all things considered (between rounds giving up their time, etc.). I always appreciate those guys and gals for working with us, I just think the production misses a key ingredient to the sauce when you don't balance the color with the host/play-by-play.

Going with this thought, what would be your ideal set up? You and Nate? You and Avery? You and Jerm? You and someone else?

 

[Thavoc]

I also would personally like to see a more realistic commentator. Someone who will say stuff like"I have no clue what eagle was doing there, needs to learn his discs a little more". That was just the first thing I thought of but you get the point. Like said previously every bad shot seems to be met with "Bad break there for blank, must've slipped or something". Instead of stating the obvious "He thought that disc would flip more, clearly the wrong shot.". Or "Bad luck to go ob there" instead of " That was a clear forehand with the way the green slopes right to left down towards ob, especially when throwing a driver." Now these are all random examples, but we see stuff like this happen all the time.

 

[brutalbrutus]

Yeah, and then on hole...5...the first par 5, Brinster had a ridiculous cut roller out of the rough but Jerm was rambling on and on about Austin Turner hitting trees on 4 straight throws; like, dude, did you not just see Brinster with that incredible play?? Talk about that. I'm sure he will find his medium though, and I won't boycott coverage for it, but, yeah, given the choice I'll take other teams.

Damn are we spoiled

I think this is a problem more because they are commenting on edited footage. There is no "dead time" to elaborate on anything without overlapping the next shot.

 

[JC17393]

You know why it stands out in these post-produced videos that guys "ramble" and miss throws? Because of the pacing due to it being an edited round. Tough to expound too much on one throw if the next is right after it.

We're used to watching a live sports broadcast (any sport...football, baseball, basketball, golf) where the announcers are commenting in real time. If Troy Aikman or Tony Romo have a comment on the most recent play, he's got 30 of otherwise dead air to fill before the next play starts. Jerm or Nate or Paul or whoever get, like, two seconds before the next throw pops up on the screen. Either they have to talk fast to comment on every single throw, or they have to pick and choose which ones they comment on and miss out on others. It's probably worse for guys commenting on groups they weren't in since at least if they were there live, they know what is going to happen next.

I think commentary on these edited rounds has to be more viewed as a DVD commentary track from a movie rather than expecting it to be like either a live broadcast or a Sportscenter-like highlight package. Because that's essentially what they're doing. DVD commentaries are people watching the movie and talking about it as they watch. There's no pause to go in depth on one scene so as to not talk over the next. These guys are just watching a video and talking about what they're seeing...maybe adding behind the scenes, "I was there" type insight. Play by play shouldn't be their priority, IMO. Save that for live stuff.

 

[slowplastic]

With the commentary, I was impressed that Nate wasn't going nuts from the beginning. With how round 4 started and how calm he was, I thought that he was going to lose and was concerned. But he stayed calm about it the entire time and didn't give anything away about his own play, I was really impressed.

I also like that the "stats" were reduced a bit. What frustrated me on some of the tourneys was "this is the 9th hardest hole"...so right in the middle of the pack? At a certain point 7-12 are basically the same, they're in the middle. Then there are easier or harder holes, and then there are a few that really stand out as being super tough or gimmies. I just don't see a difference between 8th hardest and 8th easiest, it's nearly the same thing unless there's a surprise about that particular hole being in the middle of the pack/average difficulty. Basically my point is that some "stats" aren't worth mentioning just to say you have the info, there should be some relevant reason for bringing it up. If one of those guys is reading this thread somehow, don't read that negatively, it's meant to be constructive criticism.

 

[TimSyl]

Quick question - do you watch other sports to? Not sure if you noticed, but commentators generally, you know.... comment on what's going on.

I know what you're saying and I agree to a certain extent - I don't need Jerm to tell me that Nikko just tapped in from 1 foot away. But I also don't need Jerm to tell me about how AWESOME the gift baskets were at the Nantucket Open, on hole 1, as he ignores throw after throw after throw.

I just feel there's a middle ground that Jerm needs to find and until then I'll think he's wildly overrated

Um, yeah. Broadcast/Journalism degree, over 25 years experience doing radio play-by-play...mainly football and basketball, other sports as well. I know of which I speak.

 

[lyleoross]

Disc Golf Commentary is entirely too soft. Always has been.

You never hear anyone ever question why someone chose a certain shot or point out when someone throws a poor shot as to why or what they did wrong.

It's always extremely positive or "unfortunate"

I don't watch post-coverage disc golf b/c it's too cheesy and too positive.

That's gonna be tough to do with guys you play with, but in general I agree. It's the same reason I don't like commentators covering their own round. That said, you do get some. There were a couple of comments on how Ricky played and routes.

Add in that there is often a discussion of routes and avenues available. You're gonna get less of that here since the course is designed to push shot selection.

This is why I prefer Ian and Terry. They're a little more frank about what happens.

 

[lyleoross]

Um, yeah. Broadcast/Journalism degree, over 25 years experience doing radio play-by-play...mainly football and basketball, other sports as well. I know of which I speak.

If you're gonna stick your neck out the least you could do is give us a bullet point on the things that should be covered and why. Please? The eduction would be good for all of us.

 

[uncle pennybags]

One thing I'd like to see a better job done of is saying exactly which discs are being used instead of the "I think that's a ...." line. I kind of thing that the guessing is worse than not saying anything at all.

But that might just be me.

 

[lyleoross]

One thing I'd like to see a better job done of is saying exactly which discs are being used instead of the "I think that's a ...." line. I kind of thing that the guessing is worse than not saying anything at all.

But that might just be me.

Go look at Ian's coverage when he's onsite. He's still the best in the area. He knows the discs and he knows the course and how it's played. He hosts perfectly and frankly should be on all these commentaries.

He has two shortcomings. Some complain he mumbles (I'm old and deaf ask my wife) and I hear him fine. He does a bit too much duding. "Hey dude!". I've grown used to it and his hosting is so good I don't mind.

 

[Lynn LeFey]

First, I LOVE the Big Sexy commentary. Yes, they occasionally miss shots to describe stuff outside the game, and that's fine. I like the 'peak behind the curtain'.

On being too soft... This is about the single most chill sport I've seen, all the way into the commentary. And honestly, I like that. In a world of puffed chests, it's cool to see people being mellow. And, on the other side of it, it's sometimes cool to see a player get a little emotional (I'm looking at YOU, Nikko), as to the sometimes nearly robotic stoicism of Wysocki/McBeth.

Often, I've actually seen the players themselves calling a shot bad on the video's audio. I think I just saw Hokom do it on a round we watched last night (Maybe the CCDG coverage of the BC tourney?), shanking a little upshot into a clump of foliage.

I like hearing commentary describing route selection, odds, and then seeing the shot executed. I like knowing the disc thrown.

I'd like to see some chase card coverage come out on this event now. I'd like to see McBeth dig himself out of that 15th place second round finish to third place at the end. Wow.

 

[sjberry2017]

Apparently there was a video team on chase card; really looking forward to that event. Jamie, any word on who will be commentating, or did you say that would be a surprise?

 

[NOStheBOSS]

As much as I like Ian, hearing from the top pros like Nate is infinitely more interesting, especially if you're hearing from guys who are actually on the card. you don't need play by play, you're already watching every shot. You want to hear about the discs they're throwing, and some of their strategies and thought processes throughout the round. For example, "yeah I threw roller here the first 3 rounds but the rain made me question that decision so I threw a forehand. Didn't quite get the turn I wanted so I'm a little out of position on my upshot." Sure that is a little long winded and may bleed over the next shot, but like I said, you really don't need play by play. that's what Avery does and it is god awful