I meant broadcasting football. Who would think he's in a class by himself as a quarterback?

 

Ok gotcha

It’s hard to explain. His delivery is over the top at times, IMO.

I agree. His knowledge is good but he is a little bit too excited..even for rather mundane plays. Not every viewer shares his unbridled enthusiasm. Sometimes I think he puts Jim Nantz on the spot to match his enthusiasm....and that is not in Jim's nature. It then comes cross as a little uncomfortable .

I agree. His knowledge is good but he is a little bit too excited..even for rather mundane plays. Not every viewer shares his unbridled enthusiasm. Sometimes I think he puts Jim Nantz on the spot to match his enthusiasm....and that is not in Jim's nature. It then comes cross as a little uncomfortable .

 

Yeah, probably because Jim Nantz has always been better suited to golf announcing. Soooooo booooooring. Romo is a welcome breath of fresh air in Nantz's stodgy booth.

Would love to hear Romo and Brad Nessler combine for a broadcast.

Romo is very good.

I think he's great at his job, but his voice doesn't suit my ears. More foot-tapping-during-a-test-annoying than nails-on-a-chalkboard-unbearable. Collinsworth is in the same boat, but is closer to unbearable.

 

It's great to see how far he's come from telling the producers which angles to run on replays. That drove me crazy.

Romo is one of the few analyst in any sport that tells the view what is going to happen before it happens. Many others are good at explaining what has already happened. The only analyst that compares to predicting what is to happen is Darrell Waltrip in NASCAR.

Romo is one of the few analyst in any sport that tells the view what is going to happen before it happens. Many others are good at explaining what has already happened. The only analyst that compares to predicting what is to happen is Darrell Waltrip in NASCAR.

 

Wait, what does Waltrip do? "They're gonna turn left."

Will be interesting to listen to his "predictions" in the Super Bowl. Saw a stat that in the AFC Championship game, the majority of his calls were for the Patriots offense. Then you had several for the Pats defense. But only a very few were for the Chiefs offense.

 

There's been two weeks for these teams to prepare to "show" something, but do something different. We'll see just how much he was "let in" on what the teams are actually going to do today.

What @CincySportsFan said!

I thought he was phenomenal again.

I thought he was phenomenal again.

 

He did a very good job. However, that was not the same Tony Romo that we heard two weeks ago. So, I wonder what happened. Was there pushback on him calling the plays ahead of time? Was there a concern of sounding one sided (for the Patriots)? Did the two teams do enough to buck their traditional tendancies that he couldn't "see" things coming the way he had before? Did the brass want Nantz to "have the call" for the highlight reel? A combination of all of the above? I really don't know.

He did a very good job. However, that was not the same Tony Romo that we heard two weeks ago. So, I wonder what happened. Was there pushback on him calling the plays ahead of time? Was there a concern of sounding one sided (for the Patriots)? Did the two teams do enough to buck their traditional tendancies that he couldn't "see" things coming the way he had before? Did the brass want Nantz to "have the call" for the highlight reel? A combination of all of the above? I really don't know.

 

Again, I am lockstep with you on this. I thought Romo was very good last night, still my favorite, but he was nothing like the guy he was a couple of weeks ago, it was a totally different approach to calling a game.

I think the cat n mouse part of the game from the offenses had something to do with this as well. The Rams were staying in the huddle until the 15 sec part of the play clock so the Pats defense didn't have as much time to react (didn't seem to work)...the Patriots did less checking at the line as well IMO. Both teams seemed to be limiting the amount of information and time for people to dissect their in game tendencies as part of their game plans.

 

Again, I am lockstep with you on this. I thought Romo was very good last night, still my favorite, but he was nothing like the guy he was a couple of weeks ago, it was a totally different approach to calling a game.

Thought of this thread after reading several articles this morning about last night's broadcast.  Now, granted, the game wasn't really close enough for most of the time to generate some excitement for Nantz/Romo.  But, not a lot of favorable responses to Nantz and Romo that I'm seeing today.