IntheBullseye.com  

Go Back   IntheBullseye.com > Hot Reads ...In the Bullseye > The Texans

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-30-2013, 10:42 PM
HPF Bob HPF Bob is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 4,149
Default

It's the "jockocracy" Howard Cosell used to rail about - sports color ananlyst is, he says, the one position in life where you can start at the very top of the profession with no qualifications and no training whatsoever other than to be a household name that has retired from the sport they are covering.

If Brett Favre wanted to be an NFL tv analyst, the four networks would be at his door in seconds vying to sign him and they'd put him on their top programs.

Then you toss in the female sideline reporters whose only qualification seems to be their looks and their ability to look firmly into the eyes of a head coach and ask them with a straight face about their feelings. The better ones can actually follow this up with a question about what the coach would like to see the team do better in the second half. I will say that at least the eye candy is better viewing than having Jim Gray or Tony Siragusa asking the same questions.

I still get a laugh out of Troy Aikman spending his first year in the booth with Moose Johnston as a second color analyst as if Aikman need to be protected from any blitzing questions from Joe Buck that might try to sack Troy for a loss.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-01-2013, 12:48 PM
Arky Arky is offline
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 9,291
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HPF Bob View Post
It's the "jockocracy" Howard Cosell used to rail about - sports color ananlyst is, he says, the one position in life where you can start at the very top of the profession with no qualifications and no training whatsoever other than to be a household name that has retired from the sport they are covering.

If Brett Favre wanted to be an NFL tv analyst, the four networks would be at his door in seconds vying to sign him and they'd put him on their top programs.

Then you toss in the female sideline reporters whose only qualification seems to be their looks and their ability to look firmly into the eyes of a head coach and ask them with a straight face about their feelings. The better ones can actually follow this up with a question about what the coach would like to see the team do better in the second half. I will say that at least the eye candy is better viewing than having Jim Gray or Tony Siragusa asking the same questions.

I still get a laugh out of Troy Aikman spending his first year in the booth with Moose Johnston as a second color analyst as if Aikman need to be protected from any blitzing questions from Joe Buck that might try to sack Troy for a loss.
I kinda remember this - the Cosell bit. Seemed like he was railing about the Dandy Don's, the OJ Simpson's and the Joe Namath's of the day getting the cushy announcer jobs. Ol' Howard would be rolling in his grave if he could see how prevalent it has become today.....

Aikman, IMO, has gotten pretty good over time. He still has his Captain Obvious moments, though. Not quite sure he deserves to be on the "A-team" for FOX but he is.

While some of the jocks are pretty good or at least have "personality", there are others who don't have much going for them - great athletes in their day but not the best announcers/analysts...
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-01-2013, 01:35 PM
Nconroe Nconroe is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Lake Conroe
Posts: 2,897
Default

So, just wondering, since most of discussion has been about Schaub,

If Kubiak went but Schaub stayed, would Schaub improve suffeciently, say he had a Fox for his coach?

or even other way around, if Schaub left, would Kubiak get better - for instance if he had a Wilson or Luck as his new QB?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-01-2013, 01:51 PM
HPF Bob HPF Bob is offline
All-Pro
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 4,149
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nconroe View Post
So, just wondering, since most of discussion has been about Schaub,

If Kubiak went but Schaub stayed, would Schaub improve suffeciently, say he had a Fox for his coach?

or even other way around, if Schaub left, would Kubiak get better - for instance if he had a Wilson or Luck as his new QB?
I don't think Kubiak adjusts his offense much based on who his QB is. He is a WCO disciple and doesn't really stray much from it. He might put in more bootleg runs if he had a "running QB" like he had with Jake Plummer. In some ways, it's a testament to the WCO that the system still gets results when everyone knows what's coming.

If Kubiak was fired and Schaub had another coach calling plays, it would probably break a lot of tendencies but I doubt Schaub improves in a different offensive system.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.