I'd just point out a different angle on this that I've see discussed. When watching a game on TV, the perspective is very different from being in the stadium. Traditional camera angles (including those used before each play) reveal very little about the formations and personnel around the field. Because of this, the upcoming play remains largely a mystery until it unfolds. When you are seated in the stadium, it's a different story entirely. Simply observing where the players are located reveals quite a bit and eliminates a large chunk of the types of available plays. Knowing something about the personnel narrows it further, as does an understanding of the situation. Romo's familiarity with specific players, coaches and tendencies takes this even further. So this begs the question, why haven't other announcers gotten into the business of play prediction? Romo was a good quarterback but there's not reason to believe that he has a greater ability to predict plays than any of the other announcers with experience as players or coaches. My hunch is that, beyond the novelty of it, play prediction doesn't make for particularly great television. The NFL has always been a fantastic product on TV (better than in-person for many fans) and maybe some of that has to do with the drama of watching a play unfold. Being told what play is coming adds a different type of drama (will Romo be right this time?) but may detract from the drama inherent in the game.
1
Brent Musburger was a sports announcer who always said the most obvious things.(And may still) Funny that he butts in to criticize that Tony says too much, since he never said anything except what everyone had already seen. I have not heard Tony yet but look forward to it.
5
HUGE improvement over Simms!!!
9
Romo is quite good. To be excellent, he just needs to talk 30% less and stay in his own lane, mostly by resisting the urge to do play by play.
It won't last forever, but one of the things that makes his insight so interesting is that he just played and game planned against almost all of the players in the game, and the teams in general...so he really understands specific tendencies and points out little details that most other guys miss.
5
Well, he is following in the footsteps of Phil Simms, aka Captain Obvious. So let's not get carried away. He could be broadcasting in German and be better than Simms.
3
After reading this article, I tuned into Tony's broadcast today, and he performed just as described. He's excellent! As for Brent Musburger's comments, he and I have reached the age where it is requisite that we gripe about new things as they come along. If Tony Romo is the sport media darling du jour, why would most fans care about Jim Nantz's space? No matter, as Nantz in a real pro, and he will work through this adjustment period with his usual grace. My only suggestion to Tony is that he try harder to finish his sentences, although that this may be hard for a newcomer to do while watching plays develop.
4
Romo is excellent, a breath of fresh air. His enthusiasm is contagious, his analysis accurate , insightful and generally understandable. The article mentioned his four playoff appearances, but not his remarkable lack of success there. Only two playoff wins in 14 years, but maybe that helps him as an announcer, because he seems genuinely humble. I always liked him as a person. Class act, never bitter, despite some really tough losses. That's from an Eagles fan, so all you haters, stop stereotyping us. Every team has its rockheads. Eagles fans are just more extreme, good and bad. Passion and knowledge above average, frustration level high because of no superbowl wins. And try to remember. YOU didn't win anything. Your team did.
10
There is, in the large world, lots of room for different styles. Lots of room for lots of different broadcasting styles. Brent's a great broadcaster, and it looks like Romo will be too. He's both capable and unique, and sounds, shockingly intelligent. The only other announcer who surprised, delighted, and informed in such a unique way was the great John Madden.
3
I don't have cable so rarely see a live game. I watched the Thursday game on Amazon Prime (thanks Amazon!) and had no idea who the broadcasters were. Within one quarter I could tell this was a different kind of analysis.
Romo was genuinely interested in the game, articulate, and spot on. I didn't notice any friction between him and Jim Nantz; on the contrary I thought Jim was just as intrigued by his insights as I was.
A definite improvement on other broadcasters, many of whom are interested mainly in developing their own "brand" of quirky downhome or macho style - I'm looking at you Jon Gruden!
16
Another grandma checking in here. I love Tony Romo! Finally an analyst who TEACHES AND THINKS along with us. It feels like we're all on the field with the players. Tony will be around long after Brent M is drinking his soup and muttering in his beer. If the NFL can find them, a couple of more like Tony would be very welcome. Go, Tony! Love, Grandma!
31
How come Tony Romo didn't know Trevor Siemian's knee was down just now? I knew and I'm watching the same video as he is. Nobody's perfect, especially Brent Mussberger.
I'm of those Grandma's described in the article. I thoroughly enjoy listening to Tomy Romo. He brings a level of excitement and knowledge to the broadcast. I never could stand Brent.
8
I never root for the Cowboys, but Romo is the best analyst I have ever watched. Romo's enthusiasm is truly infectious and he teaches viewers a lot about what to look for--plus, after so many stiff announcers, it is refreshing to hear "I'll bet you $5 this is a run to the left."
Brent Musberger is a jealous, bitter has been, whose judgement about Romo is as flawed as his judgement that making sexist comments was ok.
14
If you watch college football, Todd Blackledge is also really good. Refreshing to hear someone in the booth who knows what they're doing and isn't just there to where nice cufflinks.
2
Hank Stram used to do the same thing. He was almost always right. No doubt he put this skill to good use as head coach of the chiefs, when they upset the Vikings in Superbowl IV.
3
If I'm the Grandma referred to in the article, it worked. By about halftime of the Packer game I said to my husband "Now this is football I can watch and understand....This guy, Romo, is really good !"
11
Romo's experience permits him to offer that unique blend of gut feel and an "I've seen this situation many times before" built-in analytics engine to offer fans some novel insights - Thank you Tony!
6
I thought Musberger was retired.
Hint, that means shut up and go away, Brent. Go ogle a cheerleader. Or place another bet. But please do it quietly.
4
He tries to predict every other play and gets half of them right. I find him insufferable.
2
My big complaint with all color analysts is they talk too much. Most of them simply won't shut up. They literally can't allow even two seconds to go by before jumping in seamlessly right after the play by play and begin bloviating, many times with some ridiculous cliche or meaningless anecdote. That blows the cover on Collinsworth's claim about the commentary being for grandma. I bet grandma doesn't like it any more than I do. Maybe they're told to be relentless chatterboxes. At any rate, I don't need the endless technical details. Just shut up and let me watch the game.
1
It can be very pleasant to watch a game with the sound off. I can follow the 90% of game perfectly well while listening to my favorite music instead of the TV. If something happens that requires audio to understand, I just click on the audio then click it back off in a minute. Problem solved!
4
Thanks. I've done that with some success. But the truth is, I like some information, even a good deal of it on occasion, just not the incessant, overly-technical variety provided by most color commentators. Does literally every nano-second have to be filled with breathless analysis by shrill ex-players and coaches turned expert witnesses hellbent on taking their 15 minutes of renewed fame into overtime? It's a matter of proportion and good taste, and in my opinion, most color analysts fail in those areas.
Criticism coming from Brent Musberger is a joke. Both he and Nantz talk too much, and high-spot their coverage because they lack in-depth knowledge of the sports they cover. They are generalists. Nantz blabs through every moment of every sport he covers, as though he feels compelled to fill every quiet spot with sound. I, for one, could care less whose grandfather played the tuba. His "facts" are tangential to the action and mostly boring. Romo adds a dimention that's energetic and informed. It's fresh, authentic and enthusiastic. As far as your opinions go, Brent, you never could do it, made inappropriate comments about women, and lacked real ability. Put your claws away.
19
Gimme a break! Millions of viewers, including me, do this every week. Tony just gets paid for it.
And, broadcasting a "thankless"job? Gimme another one. My son's a baseball, football and basketball radio play by play guy. When people find out what he does for a living they think he's "Livin' the dream".... and he is!
2
If he stays true to form, he'll continue to show promise until developing chronic laryngitis 3 weeks before the playoffs.
4
Calling Buck and Aikman "top announcers" is laughable. Aikman is a monotonous, repetitive bore. He adds no insight at all but merely endlessly repeats the obvious and appears to think the audience tunes in to listen to him, since he drones on and on after every single play. Buck is pompous, holier-than-thou, and quick to jump to wrong conclusions. Whoever at Fox thinks these two deserve the top slot is oblivious.
9
. . . and I hear he likes to tour the links with DeeJay, our Golfer in Chief.
Yes, he is Brock Huard all over again. I like them both.
1
Very surprised at the positive comments in the article and in response to the article. I find Romo exceptionally annoying, particularly in his constant use of initials/acronyms. I wish they would replace him.
2
I haven't heard Romo in the booth. But the last time I watched an NFL game, the announcers were offering keen insights along the lines of: "What does Team X need to do to win today?" "They need to get the ball into the end zone." The bar for Romo's performance was not set all that high.
1
Some time ago, I started recording games. I would start watching after about an hour, so I could fast forward between plays just to avoid the annoying commentary. With Tony Romo's relevant broadcasting, I don't have to do that. Finally, a sportscaster I can listen to and enjoy!
5
So we have a qb who reads defenses from the broadcast booth. I love it. I hope it makes the Bears' coaches better................
3
I realized I was enjoying the overage and insights before I realized who the speaker was--missed the early game. I think he's doing a great job!
Mussberger, meh.
2
You could have the best announcer ever, and the broadcasts are still dull, slow-paced, and have three times too many commercials. Its totally unwatchable. That remains true even if a NFL QB from last year can [gasp] anticipate play calls on 2nd and short.
1
For someone who never worked in broadcasting, I think Romo did a better than average job. Musberger sounds like he has "sour grapes."
3
Let's not forget the late head coach and analyst Hank Stram. He was also excellent at analyzing tendencies and predicting plays.
1
I am a Giant fan. I predict, with near 100% accuracy, not only that a really stupid run play will be called when a pass should be called, but also correctly predict that it will lose yardage. I predict, as the play finishes up, that a Giants touchdown bringing them back within one score will be penalized for excessive celebration, and lead to them going back down by two scorses. I have never once failed to predict that the Giants defense in key third and long situations in the fourth quarter will allow a pass that gives the first down by one inch. And I predicted, two plays before it happened last week, that the Eagles would destroy my weekend and the Giants' season with a game winning field goal of over 55 yards.
Tony Romo has nothing on me.
11
So that's who 'Tony Romo' is. All this time I thought he was a restaurateur known for his famous (pork) ribs at Costco.
Okay, an empty chair would have been an improvement over Phil Simms.
While never a Cowboys fan, I must say, I enjoy Romo in the booth.
7
Thoughts:
I haven't enjoyed a QB commentator as much as I do Romo since Dan Fouts was at his best.
Brent who?
But, as QB play, in general, continues to decline, so does my interest in the NFL.
I wish the networks would also give us the option of watching the whole field during each play rather than following the ball as the camera does. So much of the game takes place away from the ball and that gets lost in the usual coverage. Romo needs to gain more polish, but I have been enjoying him so far.
2
when Chris collingworth replaced Madden, for he first tome I noticed his skill at explaining the game. At which Chris does it. I saw Tony do it last Thursday, frankly the level of detail he goes through is not of that mch interest to me. But I like Tony none the less. He has eaten humble pie so many times after losing a game because his own mistake. The most dramatic one was here with Seahawks where he mis handled a ball holding for an easy filed goal to win the game. That in m mind humanizes him a lot.
Another example of former playing a good job in the announcing booth is A rod. By all accounts he is a success.
Hank Stram used to be able to predict plays as well, when he was a radio announcer.
1
Romo, after only four games is clearly the best color commentator in sports broadcasting. His strategic knowledge of the game has never been seen in a broadcast booth. Appreciate him more now than when he played the game. Or should I say I had no idea how brilliant his football knowledge was.. Any criticism pulling Phil Simms for Romo is now laughable..
1
Not pulling for a resuscitation of tasteless oatmeal commentator, Phil Simms, but to say Tony Romo is the best commentator in sports, let alone football, is a huge stretch. There is certainly potential there, but listening to last week's telecast, Tony jabbers way too much. Yes, he offers insight at times, but he seriously needs to tone-down his commentary and learn to edit his thoughts. Moreover, he needs to better understand the value of brevity (less is more!) in his game analysis. I'm sure this will come in time.
I meant football sports broadcasting.. My bad.. I didn't feel like he talked too much. His insights were excellent, IMO..
First off, let me say, Tony, you're terrific on Thursday Night Football! Your game analysis is fresh and insightful and you have a very natural, appealing style in the broadcast booth. That said, take this bit of advice for what it's worth: don't fall in love with your commentary no matter how many rave reviews (like this one) you receive. Your words and insights are interesting to a point. It would be wise for you to talk less and listen more. Remember, the game's the thing, do not let it become "The Tony Romo Show." We pro-football fans tune in to watch a game unfold on its own terms. We don't need to be continuously advised on what the next play-call will be. Play-call predictions by football commentators (even if correct) become annoying very fast. They serve to gratify the commentator's ego but add nothing to the viewing enjoyment of the game.
That's it, good luck to you in your new analyst seat!
1
If Musberger says it's bad, then it has to be a good thing. I watched the Saints game that Romo called and I was never more in tune with the game.
1
If you are familiar with the game of football then the announcers are unnecessary most of the time.
Personally, I turn the sound down and listen to music. As for the Romo play predictions, when you are as knowledgeable about formations and viewing the field from above, it is not that difficult to guess and be right most of the time. The late Al Davis did this more than once when he would come on the air during broadcasts of Raiders games back in the 80's.
As a lifelong Philadelphia Eagles fan, I'm required by law to hate everything and everyone connected to the Dallas Cowboys. With that being said, I've always loved Tony Romo just because ... he seems like an ordinary guy who just got shoved into being the quarterback for one of the biggest NFL teams. He enjoyed the perks, dating a hot young Jessica Simpson and providing her with one of the great nicknames of all time, Yoko Romo, but endured some of the most embarrassing football moments ever as well. Luck was notoriously never on his side, which kept him out of the elites. While I won't say that he's the GOAT of NFL broadcasting, watching the games that he analyzes is a lot of fun.
1
All true. Collingsworth is useless, cheering or touting whichever player or side was just hot. He's continually wrong-footed when the tide changes, as it often does. That's what happens with very superficial knowledge. I've loved Tony's comments. Half of him is still on the field, which makes him great.
1
On balance Romo has been enjoyable so far. It is fun when he makes a correct prediction. But, obviously, by making predictions he risks being wrong and he has already been wrong plenty of times. The author claims fans love to hate the broadcasters. That was true years ago, but right now the A-teams on CBS and FOX are doing a great job. Romo replaced Phil Simms, who was a very good analyst. Troy Aikman is a great analyst. Play by play guys Joe Buck and Jim Nance are also excellent. On the other hand, Chris Collinsworth is insufferable and the once-great Al Michaels is past his sell-by date. And the teams sitting in a remote studio are a different kettle of fish. Their contributions devolve into blather quite often. Jimmy Johnson ought to be at home mowing his lawn.
1
I grew up listening to Phil Rizzuto doing the Yankee games. Phil had a propensity for getting it wrong. "Holy cow!" he'd exclaim. Everything surprised him. What did he expect?
Then, on the other side of the dial, along came Tim McCarver. "Timmie" was a Roger Angell type: he looked & thought & articulated. The game he saw was more complicated and more powerful. And he was lucky to work the booth with Ralph Kiner, a smart, gentle-hearted soul of the old-school. Unlike Brent Mussburger, Kiner seemed to love the nuances Timmie brought out. I did, too. But some old-timers didn't. I wrote them off as dullards, but it now seems clearer to me: there will always be fans that want Rizzuto: "Holy cow! I didn't see that coming White!" That element of surprise is the joy of baseball for them. And there are fans who will want to watch the game, in all of its moving parts. They are HD fans as opposed to SD. And HD fans will be glad to have someone like Timmie on air, who shares their fascination and can illuminate the inside game that doesn't come through the telecast.
I imagine now the same choices hold true for football fans--only since football destroys human beings I cannot countenance it by being a fan. However, I am curious to know if Tony Romo will be able to spot the fine moral issues as nimbly as he can the spot the linebacker blitz.
I expect he will and I look forward to reading about that!
Romo could predict which players will have CTE and which will take a knee. Oh, and does he golf with Trump?
8
I listened last Monday, I think he talks a bit too much, tiresome after awhile. A
Grandma.
,
3
Love the enthusiasm and detail Romo brings to the booth. During his playing years I honestly never thought of him as much of a mental giant, but he's proven to be a lot smarter than I gave him credit for. Keep ot up Tony!
13
I do what romo does game after game, year after year. My son thinks I'm a genius. I'm just showing him how to 'think football.' The difference between Romo and me? He's right way more often. Still, his commentary brings the brain to the game, and that's often where it is won.
way to go, Romo! Keep it up. Sooner or later, even Mussberger will have to applaud someone beside his ingratiating self.
19
Hats off not only to Mr. Romo but also to Mr. Collinsworth and their production teams, for calling out good line play. Paul "Dr. Z" Zimmerman would be proud.
1
Overrated as a quarterback and overrated as an announcer. I am not impressed.
3
You can count me as one of the non-universal rave reviews. Insight, knowledge, all good from Romo. The swagger bordering on arrogance was just plain awful.
2
Predictably, the old school boys don't like it. They should retire...I can't even listen to Brent Musberger--he's a walking-talking cliche with no game smarts at all.
21
I'm so tired of announcers dumbing down the game for a demographic. I hope the NFL and CBS continue to let Romo talk. He makes watching the games fun and interesting.
13
Musberger is just a jerk, plain and simple. I attended college at MSU. At the time, CBS Sports handled most of the football coverage. Musberger was often the TV guy. I earned money as a student by working the football games for CBS. Sometimes I was assigned to help "Mr. Musberger." He arrived in a limo, I was required to hold his umbrella when it was raining, even if he was empty-handed. Had to go pick up special food, even though MSU's press box meals were considered the best in the B10, maybe the country. Never a please or thank you. It was a humiliating position. If you didn't adequately kiss up, you might not get paid. Plenty of times I would rather have been working a field mic on a cold, windy, rainy day. He was an overrated prima donna. When I read or hear him complain, I sometimes fantasize about having dumped my 16 oz Coke over his head 10 seconds before air and walking away.
53
I love watching and listening to Jon Gruden, learn more from this guy than all the others combined, it's nice to have Romo getting into the details. Many like myself played in High School and not since so the game is much more complicated and rules ever changing. Makes it worth watching again.
4
The best live analyst in sports history was Al McGuire of basketball fame. He would see trends and developments well in advance. Haven't heard Romo yet, but he's on to something.
2
I grew up listening to the Giants on the radio. TV games were blacked out. No one was better at accurately predicting plays than Al DeRogatis. I like Romo calling the plays. I just wish he and all of the other announcers would not talk so much and allow us to watch the games in peace. Collingsworth may have interesting things to say and he is clearly prepared, but we do not need to hear everything he knows about every play. I tune in to watch the game, not to listen to his incessant analysis.
3
I have not yet seen Mr Romo call a game to pass any judgement, but with all due respect the hall of famer Sonny Jurgensen had done this as a radio caller for Washington's games for decades... As a kid watching Art Monk and the Hogs, Sonny would perfectly predict play calls at least once a series; it was so incredible to me, and showcased the great football mind of a canny old-school play-calling QB. However I will admit that Mr Romo's feats are impressive given the sheer complexity and depth of the modern playbook.
1
Mr. Romo is best viewed without sound.
2
Romo, from Burlington, WI, did the last two Packer games and is such a breath of fresh air.
It has been so aggravating over the years listening to pompous and monotonous Joe Buck and Troy Aikman and whoever else seemingly root against the team from Titletown that we often listen with the sound off, or using radio for audio, even though there's a slight time difference.
I usually catch some of a game each week -- Tony Romo has been very good company so far.
18
He over does it a bit with the replays. You can tell he would like to be down there on the field. He certainly adds more dimension to the game. even as a Cowboy Hater I have to wish him the best of luck in his new position
It's impossible to make the NFL interesting. There is only approximately sixteen minutes of action in a three and a half hour broadcast. The rest is standing around, commercials and replays. Announcers hype it, but it is stultifyingly boring.
2
There's no luck in broadcasting, once you have the job. Tony was extremely talented but unlucky as a quarterback, even if his improvisational style played a part in that bad luck. I wish him great success as an announcer just as I prayed for his failure as a quarterback (I'm a Giants fan). He is an American original and adored by fans.
3
For all its controversy - from player health to political issues - football, at its core, is a remarkably nuanced, strategic, smart sport. Like most sports, strategy unfolds in real time and evolves with changing information once play has progressed.
You'll see a pitcher adjust and you'll see a tennis player do the same. All the while trying to force the opponent to adjust.
Cat and mouse with lots of moving parts and options in a changing reality caused by the changing itself.
Very cool. Not so different than life itself.
It's good to be open to change and rational analysis.
Romo? How could you not like a smart guide to help understand the constant interplay?
Only thing I'd like to see more of - a healthy dose of razzel dazzle like in the college game.
Stodgy and too predictable is boring.
Even Romo should be fooled out of his pants sometimes.
1
The best: Michaels and Collingsworth. Next best: Buck and Aikman. Romo is insightful (he should be, duh) but needs to slow it down and also study English. He's a freshman after all. Always liked Musburger. The rest are pretty grim. Rex Ryan--are you kidding? Bad coach. Awful on air.
2
I like Romo. Nice blend of knowledge and enthusiasm, and he often wears a smile on his face, like he really enjoys his job and talking to the fans.
Many announcers are too grim, too serious, like football is a war. Romo remembers it's supposed to be a game, albeit a high-stakes and oft-times dangerous one.
Keep up the good work, Romo.
7
Mr. Musburger,
It might come as a shock to you to realize that there are many of us who would rather hear insightful comments about the game from someone who actually played it, rather than obsessive, lunatic descriptions of lust over the girlfriend of an Alabama quarterback during a game. Please just leave the stage. It is time.
34
When he played for Dallas, Romo was Enemy No. 1. I'm a die-hard NY Giants fan and I hated this guy's guts. He tormented us for too long and I couldn't wait for a linebacker to send him to kingdom come.
But even I will grudgingly acknowledge that he's a talented football analyst, one of the more savvy ex-players to ever sit behind a mic.
10
Brent Musburger is the one broadcast announcer that every single sports fan in America most wanted to see intruded on.
1
Cris Collinsworth talks about being "inclusive" but the problem is that he equates that to dumbing everything down. Musburger thinks that it is all about the play-by-play man. Those ideas demonstrate what is wrong about sports commentary.
6
He's got great insight but, boy, does he talk way too much, sometimes distracting from the game itself. Still learning, I'm sure, and he'll get better.
1
As soon as it got around in the media about Romo calling plays in advance, I went to a CBS game and lo and behold he was doing that! This is as close to putting a camera inside the offensive and defensive huddles as we will probably ever get. More power to Tony!
6
Thank goodness for Romo, maybe other broadcasters (Baseball included) will take note. Cris Collinsworth is the only other announcer that seems to be able to provide insight to what is happening on the field. Maybe I can stop using the mute button during games. And as to Musburger’s criticism of Romo, well I’m not sure who pays any attention to him anyway.
4
As a long-time 'prisoner' of the Troy Aikman/Joe Buck team (and scores of other 'experts' spewing hollow platitudes, in ALL sports broadcasting) over the decades, it's so refreshing to hear some real expertise/experience, combined with strategy during the game...
6
Finally - a game commentator in the press box worthy of the talent, perseverance, and discipline exemplified by some of the best athletes and coaches on the field. This grandma watches this violent game for one player only--Tom Brady--and it was a joy to finally hear a sportscaster call a game with intelligence, minimal cliches, and measured thoughtfulness over hype.
Bravo, Tony Romo! Let's hope you raise the game for your fellow game commentators.
7
Love what Romo is bringing to the broadcasts. He has an energy and enthusiasm for the game that is contagious, is like watching the game with a good friend who loves football the same way you do. Phil Simms always seemed to be talking just to Jim Nantz, and if the viewer listened in that was fine but he really didn't care either way, Simms was totally condescending and i think Romo took the tact that he was going to be the opposite of Simms in every way he could. Romo talks directly to the viewer, he has more of an empathy with the viewer than Simms ever had and believe me it's a refreshing change.
As of this writing he has been at this job for all of a month of live broadcasts, and he is already getting the feel of working a two man booth, he will only improve with time and experience.
Romo is definitely one of the few good things about this NFL season.
4
Romo has been doing a surprisingly great job so far. He brings the right amount of enthusiasm and insight to the booth.
1
I recall Hank Stram - former coach of the Kansas City Chief - as a commentator with Jack Buck on the radio version of Monday Night Football doing pretty much the same thing.
As for Musberger things haven't changed.
I agree Tony Romo is a tremendous analyst for the knowledgeable football viewer, but that doesn't come only from his field experience, he excelled as a student of journalism at Eastern Illinois University.
3
With Tony, it starts with being likable and having a sense of humility. Great insight and I don't think Tony will be losing his football knowledge anytime soon.
7
Romo may be good but he'll need more experience under his belt to come up to Collingsworth (the best by far on tv today imo) breaking down a play. I'll watch a game just bc he is broadcasting. Clearly he does his homework before each game.
Dan Fouts and Phil Simms no slouches either.
And of course (earlier) Madden set the standard no else has reached yet. CC comes closest to him.Hopefully Romo will develop into that caliber as well.
2
Why do TV announcers have talk more than those covering the game on the radio. I watched Romo's first game for 10 minutes and that was enough! I don't know who at the network thought Romo would be better than Phil Simms. Big mistake.
I am not a big fan of American Football, mostly because of the too many commercials and the over talking announcers. I watch English Premier League, and do they have great announcers. Lee Dickson, a former Arsenal defense player is one of the best. When I heard Tony Roma talk ( while playing a video game and not knowing who was talking) I perked up, and told my husband that guy knows his stuff, he sounded just like Dickson. And I started watching the show. Hope Roma keeps talking.
2
It seems he would make a great addition to any team as their defensive coordinator. Perhaps he should get out of the booth and back to the sidelines.
1
The "Brent who?" era arrived pretty quickly, and Musburger's bruised ego is showing badly. No fan never raved about his contributions to the broadcasts, and suddenly millions are enthralled by what Romo brings to the game. He's delivering precisely what CBS cares most about. And as McManus points out, he's only going to get better. (Brent who?)
1
I miss John Madden, and his thoughtful, intelligent comments about the game. If Tony Romo can bring that back, which no analyst since Maddem retired has been able to match, more power to him.
34
Last week I heard him say, "he could have ran". Unquote. Sometimes it is painful to listen to him.
10
As long as he avoids the trite "much maligned" he's ahead of the game.
Yes. But better that than the hyper-grammaticisms that we
all hear otherwise all the time.
Many people say the same of those who go around correcting others on minor grammar points.
5
Trump Tautology: Knowledge is bad. I could care less about football, but I actually started to wonder if I was missing something based upon Romo's style.
8
Every game the overblown blowhard Musberger ever did was all about HIM. If he doesn't like Romo, it obviously means Tony is doing a great job!
89
He was the consummate corporate tool, a characteristic shared by all other play-by-play guys to one degree or another, the exception in my book being Al Michaels. Joe Buck and Jim Nantz are both cut from the same cheap cloth.
Keith Jackson was an NCAA corporate tool, but his affection for college football on a personal level was so infectious I didn't care.
1
Hank Stram was predicting the plays 40 years ago. Not to take anything away from Romo, but he wasn't the first to do it.
17
I will take insight over grandma any day. Please don't discourage Romo.
68
Romo is only doing what Tim McCarver did when he was announcing baseball. He gave intelligent insigne on the why's and how's of baseball that informed the fan rather than some mindless and obvious commentary.
39
Love Chris Collinsworth, but this grandma is learning a lot, with her husband (aka grandpa) from Tony Romo.
59
Musburger sounds condescending and spitefully peevish. The "Listen, Tony, O.K. ... Here's a memo to all of you people," is gratuitously over the top and BM believes he is the omniscient know-it-all and overseer of his profession. Too bad he just comes across as unprofessional
61
How embarrassing for Brent Musburger. It's called evolution, Brent. Fans love it and in case you've forgotten, we're the ones who pay for everything in the NFL. Knock knock.
47
A Giants fan Cowboys hater could not have been less happy about dumping our beloved and excellent Phil Simms for the Jessica Simpson dating, golfing, no big game winning Dallas interloper. I could not have been more wrong. He's charmingly humble, true to his Wisconsin roots. He is also incredibly insightful. On this Thursday's game, he did an autopsy on a Mike Glennon fumbled snap. Glennon moved his leg to initiate the start of a silent count. It was not demontrative enough for Glennon to have thought it was seen by his linement. But his center did see it and snapped it catching Glennon leg as he was coming forward and completely unaware. That play changed the game.
After 45 years of playing and watching organized football, I've never been so delighted. Before John Madden became a caricature, he was close. Had I known how gifted Romo was, perhaps I'd have been it little less negative about America's Team? Not really.
89
Completely agree, except for the "excellent Phil Simms" reference. He was not good.
1
Romo is like the productive worker who gets his first union job and doesn't realize that he is supposed to blend in with the slackers.
83
Oh lordy! Hope you know more about football than you know about unions.
3
Green Bay Packer Grandmas discuss minutia, as do all other Packer fans. They will not be lost by Tony Romo's valued insights. Besides, he is a WI "grandchild". Never under estimate the football knowledge & enthusiasm of Packer fan grandmas.
56
Brent Musberger doesn't like it because he didn't think of it nor did he play pro ball. I think Romo's insight is refreshing.
44
He may know football but he hasn’t learned the art of when to talk and when not to. The man will not shut up the entire game. We watch with the sound off now.
8
Agreed! Tony - calm down and talk less. You'll be even better.
Have you listen to a Chris Collinsworth game? Nonstop talk.
3
How does knowing ahead of time what the next play is going to be enhance your viewing experience?
6
By breaking down the Xs and Os he gives viewers a better understanding of the game. Well, most anyway.
2
It doesn’t. I have no idea why anyone cares. Personally, I find Romo’s nonstop talking, annoying.
Because he teaches you how he does it, which enhances your ability to understand football tactics, such as why a defender moving up 2 steps causes a quarterback to change the play.
Love Phil Simms as a player, as an announcer. Where did he go?
5