Fox Broadcast - US Open

[hbgpagolfpro]

A ton of awkward moments in this broadcast, from Buck telling Norman not to dislocate his shoulder as he patted himself on the back about his Greg Norman Junior Masters tourney to Pavin comparing careers to Faxon when Faxon said Pavin couldn't beat him on the Senior Tour. Some really weird stuff this week. And, had to mute the Holly Sonders segments everytime they came up. Menefee has to go, as does Joe Buck. People have fussed about Miller and Faldo, but I'd take those two over Norman any day, and incredibly, I'd take Jim Nantz over Joe Buck since he at least knows the game. Never been impressed with Buck in football or baseball.

Now, if you really want some good analysts and anchors, turn to the HOCKEY crews...especially Joe Beninati of the Washington Capitals, Jimmy Jackson, Bill Clement and Keith Jones from the Flyers, and Eddie Olczyk from NBC and the Blackhawks. Many of these hockey players also play golf, so they would also be knowledgeable.

[gopherguts]

[quote name='warfelg21' timestamp='1434899106' post='11799974']
[quote name='Harry Longshanks' timestamp='1434898869' post='11799952']
[quote name='mrt99' timestamp='1434898334' post='11799896']
[quote name='mx-20' timestamp='1434896647' post='11799728']
I like the shot tracer, but way too little golf being shown.
[/quote]

As I said before, when I read comments like this I wonder if the poster actually watched the broadcast.
[/quote]

The primetime coverage showed a decent amount of golf, but the early coverage was terrible in terms of the golf to talking heads ratio.
[/quote]

Louis was having a round of his life and all we saw was a putt here or there.
[/quote]

Ummmmmm,,,,,, Oosty was 3 OVER for the front 9 and 2 over for the tourney standing on the 12th tee. Until he made 3 birdies in a row he wasn't newsworthy. When he made those 3 in a row and got back to -1 and now was within hailing distance they showed a fair number of his shots from that point on,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Just like Rory and just like Sneds. Until they got within hailing distance you didn't hear anything of them either unless they did something "special".

[TUGolfer06]

[quote name='golfcarte' timestamp='1434945838' post='11806788']
[quote name='elcgolf' timestamp='1434945327' post='11806712']
There are a few things in sports that shouldn't be viewed from a solely monetary perspective, and the US Open is one. Instead of dumbing down the coverage and treating it like a NASCAR event
[/quote]

well, in all fairness, they way they had the stands set up at 18, it did look like the back stretch at talladega.
[/quote]

Going in my guess was Fox's NASCAR experience would help them. Especially from a camera, tracking the ball perspective. My biggest gripe was simply not seeing where the ball was or where it was headed these last 4 days. There seemed to be too many wide-angle shots for tee shots....

There's a lot of similar productions qualities when it comes to golf and racing. The biggest thing is coordinating various reporters staged throughout the event, pit reporters/on-course reporters. Plus, you have to keep the audience abreast of numerous drivers/golfers. The broadcast this weekend seemed to lack cohesion in doing that.

To be fair, this course and tournament seemed like a brutally difficult venue to get their feet wet. I think Oakmont will be a much smoother ride. My only recommendation is to get a more golf orientated lead. Buck just doesn't cut it. Hell, Dale Jarrett would be better.

[Handfull]

[color=#222222]I don't know if I ever read a thread that was terribly positive about any golf coverage so this thread seems to follow suit, but I actually liked Fox's coverage for a number of reasons.[/color]
[color=#222222] [/color]
[color=#222222]1. Way more pro-tracer shots. Just this alone made the coverage better compared to all other networks, at least for me.[/color]
[color=#222222]2. More mic's catching interesting self-commentary by players was very entertaining.[/color]
[color=#222222]3. Gil Hanse commentary about the finer details of go course setups. He pointed out a lot of info I had not known which explained a lot of the green issues and course setups. Hope to have him more involved in future broadcasts.[/color]
[color=#222222]4. Brad Faxon was great, he sounded like a broadcast veteran and was better than other former pro commentators that are often skewered on Golfwrx. Brad knew his stuff.[/color]
[color=#222222] [/color]
[color=#222222]There is plenty that needs to be improved but with this being Fox's first golf tournament you have to expect thinks to not run smooth all the time. As the broadcast team gets modified and more comfortable with each other the amount of dead silence will become less and the interviews and questions will be more valuable. [/color]

[boriqua'72]

[quote name='Holy Moses' timestamp='1434943239' post='11806272']
Horrible Fox broadcast, but it was their first. Menefee has to be gone. I thought Buck and Faxon were the only decent ones. I almost wanted Berman back.
[/quote]

Yeah Menefee was way out of his element.

[thegrayman]

[quote name='Handfull' timestamp='1434948501' post='11807150']
I don't know if I ever read a thread that was terribly positive about any golf coverage so this thread seems to follow suit, but I actually liked Fox's coverage for a number of reasons.

1. Way more pro-tracer shots. Just this alone made the coverage better compared to all other networks, at least for me.
[/quote]

Yup. No argument there.

[quote]
2. More mic's catching interesting self-commentary by players was very entertaining.
[/quote]

Meh. It caught a little.

[quote]
3. Gil Hanse commentary about the finer details of go course setups. He pointed out a lot of info I had not known which explained a lot of the green issues and course setups. Hope to have him more involved in future broadcasts.
[/quote]
I didn't think it was possible to mention a redan more than he did. Summed up the commentary IMHO - a few people who knew what they were talking about trying to fill the air against a few more people who had no idea what they were doing.
[quote]
4. Brad Faxon was great, he sounded like a broadcast veteran.
[/quote]
He is a broadcast veteran of the Golf Channel, and a saving grace of Fox's coverage. Similar to Holly Sonders who Fox squandered as a plastic booth doll when in fact she knows more about pro golf than 99% of the member on GolfWRX (and could outplay 99% as well).

[QEight]

[quote name='rixjk9' timestamp='1434946043' post='11806810']
I think it's a ten year deal! Ten long years!
[/quote]
[quote name='rixjk9' timestamp='1434946073' post='11806816']
I think it's a ten year deal! Ten long years!
[/quote]
[quote name='rixjk9' timestamp='1434946117' post='11806824']
I think it's a ten year deal! Ten long years!
[/quote]
[quote name='rixjk9' timestamp='1434946149' post='11806828']
I think it's a ten year deal! Ten long years!
[/quote]

Quite appropriate lapsus.

[mosesgolf]

I loved the coverage and more usage of pro tracer. Norman was a pleasant surprise. Overall a great tournament with great coverage.

[KLeC]

Did anyone count how many times Norman said, "At the end of the day ...?" You just knew it was coming and didn't help the broadcast at all.

[Seamus_McDuff]

I keep wondering why Norman even wants to do this. He certainly doesn't need the money.

What's the desire of doing a couple tournaments a year?

Is he doing the Senior and Women also?

[dpb5031]

[quote name='KLeC' timestamp='1434972500' post='11807976']
Did anyone count how many times Norman said, "At the end of the day ...?" You just knew it was coming and didn't help the broadcast at all.
[/quote]

YES! I can't believe the producers didn't get in his ear and tell him to stop using that stupid cliche' over and over. Other than that, I liked Norman and thought he was one of the few bright spots.

Otherwise, I was disappointed. There was so much background noise you could barely hear the commentators. They generally did a poor job of setting up what were some pretty dramatic moments. I often felt like they were showing us the wrong thing at the wrong time...

At the end of the day (hahaha) I think they got lucky that the golf came to such a dramatic conclusion, because otherwise, with the exception of pro-tracer, it was mostly a bust.

[KLeC]

[quote name='dpb5031' timestamp='1434973278' post='11808022']
[quote name='KLeC' timestamp='1434972500' post='11807976']
Did anyone count how many times Norman said, "At the end of the day ...?" You just knew it was coming and didn't help the broadcast at all.
[/quote]

YES! I can't believe the producers didn't get in his ear and tell him to stop using that stupid cliche' over and over. Other than that, I liked Norman and thought he was one of the few bright spots.

Otherwise, I was disappointed. There was so much background noise you could barely hear the commentators. They generally did a poor job of setting up what were some pretty dramatic moments. I often felt like they were showing us the wrong thing at the wrong time...

At the end of the day (hahaha) I think they got lucky that the golf came to such a dramatic conclusion, because otherwise, with the exception of pro-tracer, it was mostly a bust.
[/quote]

I'm pretty sure I saw Buck either grinning or grimacing as Norman hammered his catch phrase.

[warfelg21]

[quote name='KLeC' timestamp='1434974048' post='11808082']
[quote name='dpb5031' timestamp='1434973278' post='11808022']
[quote name='KLeC' timestamp='1434972500' post='11807976']
Did anyone count how many times Norman said, "At the end of the day ...?" You just knew it was coming and didn't help the broadcast at all.
[/quote]

YES! I can't believe the producers didn't get in his ear and tell him to stop using that stupid cliche' over and over. Other than that, I liked Norman and thought he was one of the few bright spots.

Otherwise, I was disappointed. There was so much background noise you could barely hear the commentators. They generally did a poor job of setting up what were some pretty dramatic moments. I often felt like they were showing us the wrong thing at the wrong time...

At the end of the day (hahaha) I think they got lucky that the golf came to such a dramatic conclusion, because otherwise, with the exception of pro-tracer, it was mostly a bust.
[/quote]

I'm pretty sure I saw Buck either grinning or grimacing as Norman hammered his catch phrase.
[/quote]

It's a drinking game sponsored by Greg Norman wine.

[3woodvt]

Billy Horcshel....Chambers Bay....Foxx.... Thought they all deserved one another.

[9ccat9]

I thought the announcing was awful. I did however like the the pro tracer technology. Fox has a long way to go to catch up with NBC.

[rlynham]

The one guy that really got on my nerves was Jay Delsing. Annoying voice and he was trying too hard.

I liked Pavin. The rest were ok.

I thought the graphic showing pin location and distance was useful. The shading of the greens, not so much.

[mgholda]

[quote name='Bonhomme Richard' timestamp='1434942494' post='11806072']
They can fix the audio issues and other assorted production hiccups, they can dump Holly's awkward interviews (or dump Holly completely), they can ditch the lame music going to commercials as well as the overproduced video segments -- but as long as they have Joe Buck the Open coverage will suck. His voice is so monotone and droning, and instead of saying interesting things he sticks to one-liner cliches. He's terrible in baseball and football, and now he's terrible in golf, too. Just another genetic lottery winner riding the coat tails of his much more talented father. Buck sucks.
[/quote]
Where in the hell is the Caray family when we need them?

[FLGOLFJUNKIE]

I really found ALL the Holly Saunders interviews to be extremely awkward. The microphones, the TV, the whole thing was suspect. Plus, above the neck I really happen to think that she is monstrous, that's just me.

[warfelg21]

[quote name='FLGOLFJUNKIE' timestamp='1434978141' post='11808438']
I really found ALL the Holly Saunders interviews to be extremely awkward. The microphones, the TV, the whole thing was suspect. Plus, above the neck I really happen to think that she is monstrous, that's just me.
[/quote]

She's not a natural interviewer. That became very clear this past week. She isn't a commentator either. She's a studio setup person. She intros a topic and sets the table for the knowledgable people to talk.

They should bring Erin Andrews in for the post round interviews or and ex-pro golfer to ask the questions.

Seemed too much like a reason to show her body.

[Nollster]

+1 for the ProTracer, everything else about the coverage was awful! I think Fox should have spent a year doing other golf broadcasts to get some experience before jumping into a US Open that was such a grindfest! You need great announcers all around to make it more interesting when the golf is painful to watch -- at least until the back nine on Sunday. Joe Buck just knows nothing about golf and Curt Menefee was disturbingly bad!! Buck was probably at his best interviewing Jordan at the trophy presentation. Was really hoping Greg would step up, but he's just not ready for prime time!!

[hankmoody]

I thought Corey Pavin and Brad Faxon were excellent and enjoyed their perspective. Maybe Maltbie has been commentating for too long in that he has lost some of the player perspective. With Cory and Brad, I really felt like I was listening to what a professional golfer thought about a shot, lie or situation. Which is what you want.

[avrag]

Well I did not get the complete Fox coverage here in Europe, because the interviews were conducted by a British Sky crew, and while interviews or features or commercials were on in the US, we got the dreaded "International Feed". Well, at least we get to see more live golf that way, but I swear that the main commentator said "Justin Spieth" at least three times on Sunday and "Justin Day" at least twice.
About the coverage by Fox:
I thought they did a very good job overall. The inserts with the arrows showing hole locations and distance to the hole or to or over bunkers were great. The enhancement of shadows to show the ridges on the greens was pure genius. The use of pro-tracer like technology on many shots was also good, but seemed to lack precision at times. The way they produced it was very good, a lot better than CBS at the Masters. You got a lot better "feel" for the development of the tournament, because you saw more players. Might have been the "International Feed" and that might have been different in the US, but at the Masters they were showing pretty pictures in between the shots by the leaders instead.
The commentary: Surprisingly Joe Buck stayed subdued and let the experts do the talking, which was good. The experts were also fine I think. Norman talks a little bit to quickly, but all these former greats (Faldo and Miller as well on CBS and NBC) get many free passes from me, because I think that they can all provide some great insight. All the other former players were excellents, even though Corey Pavin's and Tom Weiskopf's voices sound a little annoying, but I don't really care. The British anchor they had, when Joe Buck wasn't on, was really great.
In the end, just like the scorpion in the story with the frog, Joe Buck couldn't fight his nature any longer and became cheesy at the presentation, but, oh well, that was for the final five minutes.
One extremely disturbing fact about the coverage, which US viewers probably did not see:
During one of the spells when we got the international feed on Sunday, Francesco Molinari was ready to hit his tee shot on the 15th. He had sorted everything out with his caddy, when suddenly a tall guy with a headset, wearing the green or turquoise or tile coloured shirt of the Fox on-course crew stepped up to the caddy and whispered something into his ear. On queue, a discussoin between player and caddy followed, with the caddy pointing out the ridges on the green and the wind and the different carry distances (all of which had obviously already been disussed before). But this time both spoke really loudly, so that the mics could pick up their conversation. So my suspicion is that Fox obviously scripted some of these conversation or at least had it in their power to make player and caddy go through it again "for the audience". Well, I guess, no big surprise there, that Fox would fabricate "facts".
Speaking of things you could hear: The sound was terrible at times, the noises from the trains and the engines of the blimp were so loud that it was very hard to hear what the announcers had to say. Finally I really liked the tone in Greg Norman's voice, when he apologized for Dustin Johnson's "Holy S**t" because as he put it "We apologize because we have to, even though it is understandable what he said and he did not mean to hurt anybody's feelings"

[jpking17]

Coverage was horrible...the transitions from shot to ball in the fairway were way behind...they lost the ball with the cameras...half the time you were just seeing guys walking off the tee box. The announcers were horrible and said things that were generally obvious. I read that at one point in 18 minutes they showed 11 shots and eight of those were shots were tap in putts.

[trowski99]

I have to echo the points made about the actual video coverage...it was terrible. The angles, or lack there of made viewing difficult. Some may be a product of where they were allowed to put towers, but the inability to track a ball's flight is inexcusable. Further the early split screen / two picture views of JD and Day walking while others were actually hitting shots was awful. At one point they came back with color commentary but were showing a landscape shot of the entire course.

I felt the shot tracing was not well executed. Half the time the angles shown added little value; plus several times random non-shot tracing would show up on the screen at awkward angles.

Yes it could have been worse, but it appears paying the USGA left Fox with little to invest in the actual video coverage.

[golfer.61]

[quote name='hankmoody' timestamp='1434979816' post='11808688']
I thought Corey Pavin and Brad Faxon were excellent and enjoyed their perspective. Maybe Maltbie has been commentating for too long in that he has lost some of the player perspective. With Cory and Brad, I really felt like I was listening to what a professional golfer thought about a shot, lie or situation. Which is what you want.
[/quote]


I agree, just make sure Fax gets someone to comb his hair for him................

[landolakes]

[quote name='Nollster' timestamp='1434979759' post='11808678']
+1 for the ProTracer, everything else about the coverage was awful!
[/quote]

I think my thoughts are summed up above

[golfnff]

Fox did a horrific job. Almost completely unbearable to watch/listen to!

[b-man777]

Hey all: From the comments I've read if people would rather see more golf shots and less ads as well as constant cameras showing the commentators yapping then people should just go to the event although I know that's not feasible for most of us. Also networks have to justify paying all these on air people BIG $$$ to cover the event. Finally While I think the Masters comity is a bit elitist I do like how the CBS Masters broadcast is done and the euro tour coverage of constantly showing coverage even during all their commentary is good too. Just my 0.05$ worth thanks.

[Jasonic]

I was out of the country and just watched the final round on DVR. I was reading this thread while away and was expecting a horror show. You guys are seriously just being ridiculous, the coverage was great, some quirks obviously (mics in the holes, really?) and holly sonders was really bad but lighten up guys, there was tons of golf on. The shaded greens and the tracers were good, split screen could be cool once they use it correctly (not just Jason day walking), less ads and the commentary was so so but it wasn't the end of broadcasted golf. Jesus

Only thing is I wish they showed more of the not in contention guys. Adam Scott shot a 64 and I think I saw one approach shot.

[BMC]

Why not put a Go Pro camera on every caddie's head. They follow the ball and read putts. What else do we need?