-
New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.
LGHL You’re Nuts If I Were in Charge Week: What would change in college athletics?
- News
- 0 Replies
You’re Nuts If I Were in Charge Week: What would change in college athletics?
Brett Ludwiczak via our friends at Land-Grant Holy Land
Visit their fantastic blog and read the full article (and so much more) here
Your (almost) daily dose of good-natured, Ohio State banter.
From now until preseason camp starts in August, Land-Grant Holy Land will be writing articles around a different theme every week. This week is all about what we would do if we were in charge of our favorite position group, team, conference, or sport. You can catch up on all of the Theme Week content here and all of our ”If I Was in Charge” articles here.
Since it is “If I Was in Charge” Week here at Land-Grant Holy Land, today feels like a perfect time to put our own spin on college athletics. Despite its popularity, college football has plenty of areas that can be improved upon both on and off the field. Even more in need of change is college basketball. Even though the NCAA Tournament is one of the most popular events in sports, the ratings are declining and interest in the sport outside of March Madness feels like it is at an all-time low. Maybe your gripe with college athletics is with conference realignment or the media contracts and increased reliance on streaming services.
While it’s easy to complain about something, we want to know what solutions you have for an issue you have with college athletics. Pretend you are in a position of power that is able to make some changes to the current landscape of college athletics. Maybe the president of the NCAA, a conference commissioner, or a television executive might be reading and take any suggestions under consideration. Then again, judging by the history of the NCAA and how slowly they choose to enact any changes, don’t expect them to reinvent the wheel anytime soon.
Even with a four-team playoff, the college football season was already in need of change. Now that the CFP has been expanded to 12 teams, it has become even more evident there needs to be some adjustments. With the possibility of a couple of extra games because of the expanded playoff, there is way too much on the plate of programs and coaches in December and January. Not only will the coaching carousel be spinning at full speed, but National Signing Day will take place in December and the transfer portal will be open. As if coaches didn’t have enough to deal with now, they might have a number of games to have to plan for.
There is no easy fix to this problem. In my personal opinion, I thought National Signing Day in early February was fine. I understand recruits are arriving on campus earlier and earlier these days so they can get acclimated to campus and college life as quickly as possible, as well as be a part of spring practices. Having said that, it didn’t feel like there were any problems when NSD was in February. In a way, it felt like there was a little more shine on National Signing Day when it was in February, Now it almost feels like a December NSD gets lost in the shuffle of bowl game preparation and the holidays.
The transfer portal being so new to college athletics makes it an even tougher issue to address. Since the introduction of the portal, we have seen it deal a big blow to bowl games. While there hasn’t been much movement of players involved in the CFP, plenty of players in the rest of the New Year's Six and lesser bowl games sit out and enter the transfer portal. What makes this tricky is how to line up the transfer portal with the start of winter classes at schools. It feels like the transfer portal will have to stay where it currently is, but what might help coaches keep some of their sanity is moving up the start of the college football season.
I get that Labor Day weekend is the unofficial start of the college football season. Recently there has been a little more activity in “Week 0”. I see no reason why we can’t have more Week 0 games. If it were up to me, I would start the season even a week or two before the current Week 0. Players and fans in some southern schools might like the idea just because of how miserably hot it is at that time of year, but something has to be done, especially if conferences are going to continue to play championship games before the CFP starts.
If you start the season earlier, then you can wrap up the regular season earlier, which might help to spread out the crush of activity that coaches have to navigate in December and January. Plus, there isn’t much else going on in the sports world in the middle of August, so some college football would definitely be embraced by viewers. We have already seen the popularity of Week 0, which is why we are getting more games being played before Labor Day weekend. Even though college football coaches are paid well for their services, even the huge paychecks aren’t worth losing their sanity over because they have to juggle even more than normal in December because of an expanded playoff.
Anybody who pays attention to college sports knows that the administration of said sports — at the institutional and national levels — is a bit of a shitshow right now. So, there are a wide variety of things that could and should be addressed; from the increasingly idiotic calendar that Brett referenced to the lack of coherent guidelines around NIL and player payment to the insufferable asshat coaches who would rather blame players for simply wanting to be fairly compensated for their talent and work instead of adjusting and adapting to the new reality at their jobs.
But I am going to go in a much different direction. As college football — led by the Big Ten — continues its expansion across every single broadcast network, cable channel, and streaming service, I am just asking for one broadcaster to please, for the love of all things good and holy, find some more competent announce teams that are not boring, egocentric, or complete blithering idiots.
I know that there are diehard fans of many of the top broadcast duos, but I nearly uniformly hate them all. Gus and Joel can be fun — especially since they both seem to really love Ohio State — but man, those two guys do sure seem to make the broadcasts more about themselves than necessary. Fowler and Herbstreit are in many ways the college football voices of a generation, and I know that there are a number of vocal Buckeye fans who don’t like Herbie for whatever perceived reason. Personally, I don’t have anything against Kirk as a person, I just think that the pairing has gotten really stale and neither he nor Chris brings much to the broadcasts anymore besides describing what is happening.
I do like a good dose of Brad Nesler over on CBS, but if that means having to listen to Gary Danielson for more than 2.5 seconds, I would rather systematically stand next to giant, outdoor concert-level speakers around the clock for an entire football season in hopes of expediting dramatic hearing loss. Oh, and don’t get me started on the nepotistic clown show going on at NBC and Peacock.
Then, the more games you watch from the lower levels of the Power5 4 and Group of 5, you realize that a large portion of ESPN’s “talent” roster is made up of people who could not provide a description of, or context to, a cat playing with a ball of yarn, let alone a football game.
Now, I understand that the job is undoubtedly more difficult than we at home realize, but are really so few capable people alive and working in sports broadcasting that we are subjected to Jac Collinsworth and Jason Garrett? Oh, and then people are still trying to make the easily confused and often bumfuzzled Tim Brando happen? The literal worst.
Now, I must say that there are a few teams that I enjoy. I think that Fox’s Jason Benetti and Brock Huard are the best in the business currently. Benetti is a quick, insightful, and accurate play-by-play man, while Huard provides interesting nuance that I don’t think that we often get from most teams. And they do it without trying to center themselves in every discussion.
Similarly, I also like ESPN’s Mark Jones and Louis Riddick. Jones brings a steadiness and unflappability that you can only get from a veteran of his caliber. Now, this is a new pairing, so I think that there is likely more good to come from them, but Riddick’s depth of experience and usual NFL-focused worked also allows him to provide analysis that isn’t the same canned stuff most commentators trot out.
I also enjoy ESPN’s team of Joe Tessitore and Jesse Palmer. I think Joe Tess might be ESPN’s best play-by-play man, and even though I also regularly watch Jesse providing color commentary on Food Network baking shows, he’s still a solid college football guy as well.
The thing with all of those teams, as much as I like them, they are all pretty straightforward. They don’t bring much humor or entertainment; they are old-school commentary teams. Obviously, I would prefer that to a dreadfully boring crew that misses calls, can’t accurately describe what’s going on, and relies on the same four or five cliches regardless of game and situation. But, honestly, with the cavalcade of channels covering college football, you’re telling me that no one has been able to find a team that brings even a hint of the “Inside the NBA” joy and whimsy to an expert-level play-by-play approach of Bob Costas?
If we are going to have to pay for a half dozen streaming services to watch games while conferences pull in literal billions of dollars every year, the least that these networks can do is give us a product that wouldn’t be better to watch on mute.
Continue reading...
Brett Ludwiczak via our friends at Land-Grant Holy Land
Visit their fantastic blog and read the full article (and so much more) here
Your (almost) daily dose of good-natured, Ohio State banter.
From now until preseason camp starts in August, Land-Grant Holy Land will be writing articles around a different theme every week. This week is all about what we would do if we were in charge of our favorite position group, team, conference, or sport. You can catch up on all of the Theme Week content here and all of our ”If I Was in Charge” articles here.
Since it is “If I Was in Charge” Week here at Land-Grant Holy Land, today feels like a perfect time to put our own spin on college athletics. Despite its popularity, college football has plenty of areas that can be improved upon both on and off the field. Even more in need of change is college basketball. Even though the NCAA Tournament is one of the most popular events in sports, the ratings are declining and interest in the sport outside of March Madness feels like it is at an all-time low. Maybe your gripe with college athletics is with conference realignment or the media contracts and increased reliance on streaming services.
While it’s easy to complain about something, we want to know what solutions you have for an issue you have with college athletics. Pretend you are in a position of power that is able to make some changes to the current landscape of college athletics. Maybe the president of the NCAA, a conference commissioner, or a television executive might be reading and take any suggestions under consideration. Then again, judging by the history of the NCAA and how slowly they choose to enact any changes, don’t expect them to reinvent the wheel anytime soon.
Today’s question: What is a change you would make to college athletics?
We’d love to hear your choices. Either respond to us on Twitter at @Landgrant33 or leave your choice in the comments.
Brett’s answer: An adjustment to the college football schedule
Even with a four-team playoff, the college football season was already in need of change. Now that the CFP has been expanded to 12 teams, it has become even more evident there needs to be some adjustments. With the possibility of a couple of extra games because of the expanded playoff, there is way too much on the plate of programs and coaches in December and January. Not only will the coaching carousel be spinning at full speed, but National Signing Day will take place in December and the transfer portal will be open. As if coaches didn’t have enough to deal with now, they might have a number of games to have to plan for.
There is no easy fix to this problem. In my personal opinion, I thought National Signing Day in early February was fine. I understand recruits are arriving on campus earlier and earlier these days so they can get acclimated to campus and college life as quickly as possible, as well as be a part of spring practices. Having said that, it didn’t feel like there were any problems when NSD was in February. In a way, it felt like there was a little more shine on National Signing Day when it was in February, Now it almost feels like a December NSD gets lost in the shuffle of bowl game preparation and the holidays.
The transfer portal being so new to college athletics makes it an even tougher issue to address. Since the introduction of the portal, we have seen it deal a big blow to bowl games. While there hasn’t been much movement of players involved in the CFP, plenty of players in the rest of the New Year's Six and lesser bowl games sit out and enter the transfer portal. What makes this tricky is how to line up the transfer portal with the start of winter classes at schools. It feels like the transfer portal will have to stay where it currently is, but what might help coaches keep some of their sanity is moving up the start of the college football season.
I get that Labor Day weekend is the unofficial start of the college football season. Recently there has been a little more activity in “Week 0”. I see no reason why we can’t have more Week 0 games. If it were up to me, I would start the season even a week or two before the current Week 0. Players and fans in some southern schools might like the idea just because of how miserably hot it is at that time of year, but something has to be done, especially if conferences are going to continue to play championship games before the CFP starts.
If you start the season earlier, then you can wrap up the regular season earlier, which might help to spread out the crush of activity that coaches have to navigate in December and January. Plus, there isn’t much else going on in the sports world in the middle of August, so some college football would definitely be embraced by viewers. We have already seen the popularity of Week 0, which is why we are getting more games being played before Labor Day weekend. Even though college football coaches are paid well for their services, even the huge paychecks aren’t worth losing their sanity over because they have to juggle even more than normal in December because of an expanded playoff.
Matt’s answer: Find some competent CFB announce teams
Anybody who pays attention to college sports knows that the administration of said sports — at the institutional and national levels — is a bit of a shitshow right now. So, there are a wide variety of things that could and should be addressed; from the increasingly idiotic calendar that Brett referenced to the lack of coherent guidelines around NIL and player payment to the insufferable asshat coaches who would rather blame players for simply wanting to be fairly compensated for their talent and work instead of adjusting and adapting to the new reality at their jobs.
But I am going to go in a much different direction. As college football — led by the Big Ten — continues its expansion across every single broadcast network, cable channel, and streaming service, I am just asking for one broadcaster to please, for the love of all things good and holy, find some more competent announce teams that are not boring, egocentric, or complete blithering idiots.
I know that there are diehard fans of many of the top broadcast duos, but I nearly uniformly hate them all. Gus and Joel can be fun — especially since they both seem to really love Ohio State — but man, those two guys do sure seem to make the broadcasts more about themselves than necessary. Fowler and Herbstreit are in many ways the college football voices of a generation, and I know that there are a number of vocal Buckeye fans who don’t like Herbie for whatever perceived reason. Personally, I don’t have anything against Kirk as a person, I just think that the pairing has gotten really stale and neither he nor Chris brings much to the broadcasts anymore besides describing what is happening.
I do like a good dose of Brad Nesler over on CBS, but if that means having to listen to Gary Danielson for more than 2.5 seconds, I would rather systematically stand next to giant, outdoor concert-level speakers around the clock for an entire football season in hopes of expediting dramatic hearing loss. Oh, and don’t get me started on the nepotistic clown show going on at NBC and Peacock.
Then, the more games you watch from the lower levels of the Power
Now, I understand that the job is undoubtedly more difficult than we at home realize, but are really so few capable people alive and working in sports broadcasting that we are subjected to Jac Collinsworth and Jason Garrett? Oh, and then people are still trying to make the easily confused and often bumfuzzled Tim Brando happen? The literal worst.
Now, I must say that there are a few teams that I enjoy. I think that Fox’s Jason Benetti and Brock Huard are the best in the business currently. Benetti is a quick, insightful, and accurate play-by-play man, while Huard provides interesting nuance that I don’t think that we often get from most teams. And they do it without trying to center themselves in every discussion.
Similarly, I also like ESPN’s Mark Jones and Louis Riddick. Jones brings a steadiness and unflappability that you can only get from a veteran of his caliber. Now, this is a new pairing, so I think that there is likely more good to come from them, but Riddick’s depth of experience and usual NFL-focused worked also allows him to provide analysis that isn’t the same canned stuff most commentators trot out.
I also enjoy ESPN’s team of Joe Tessitore and Jesse Palmer. I think Joe Tess might be ESPN’s best play-by-play man, and even though I also regularly watch Jesse providing color commentary on Food Network baking shows, he’s still a solid college football guy as well.
The thing with all of those teams, as much as I like them, they are all pretty straightforward. They don’t bring much humor or entertainment; they are old-school commentary teams. Obviously, I would prefer that to a dreadfully boring crew that misses calls, can’t accurately describe what’s going on, and relies on the same four or five cliches regardless of game and situation. But, honestly, with the cavalcade of channels covering college football, you’re telling me that no one has been able to find a team that brings even a hint of the “Inside the NBA” joy and whimsy to an expert-level play-by-play approach of Bob Costas?
If we are going to have to pay for a half dozen streaming services to watch games while conferences pull in literal billions of dollars every year, the least that these networks can do is give us a product that wouldn’t be better to watch on mute.
Continue reading...
