Oh My, Oh Mayock -- A True TV Talent

Thank you, NBC Sports and the NFL Network. Thank you for giving Mike Mayock so much work -- because it does it so well.

Too often color commentators working major college football or the NFL make no impression. Or, they try to hard and make the wrong impression. Too many of them live on either clichés or the sports version of "Fifty Shades of Gray," sharing so many words but, ultimately, so little information because they're not prepared enough to capably critique what happens on the field.

With Mayock, it's just the opposite. He picks his spots well, makes points that matter and makes them in a timely manner. He's arguably the best color commentator working on TV because he always does his homework and comes to work ready to share information.

If he worked only college games (focusing on Notre Dame for NBC) or only NFL games, he'd be good in either role. That he does both makes his work even more impressive.

He's always prepared, capably conveying his years of preparation for NFL Draft coverage in the form of player evaluation and explanations of what those on the field do best ... or not very well at all.

He's engaging, honest and informative.

When San Diego Chargers quarterback Phillip Rivers threw an interception in the end zone at the end of the first half of Thursday night's game against the Kansas City Chiefs, Mayock did not mince words.

"Can't do that. Can't make that throw," Mayock said. "He threw one in the 10th row two snaps ago, why would you make that throw? Everything was bad about the decision, and then the throw. There's no way in the world you can make that throw."

In fairness, and he was fair to Rivers, Mayock cited the QB's overall work in the first half as "almost perfect" until the interception. Mayock rarely raises his voice, shares silliness or shouts. He's simply solid, setting a standard to which others should aspire.

There's not much better in terms of TV viewing than getting to watch Mayock work twice in a three-day span -- with a Thursday night game on the NFL Network and then a Notre Dame game on Saturday.

Commitment to Late Night Latest Sports TV Move

Not so long ago, businesses actually shut down for the night.

Major retailers closed their doors at 9 p.m., many restaurants stopped serving about that time and radio and TV stations signed off at midnight or sometime in the early morning hours as well.

Round-the-clock service existed at some places, but it was rare. That was also true on radio and TV, where late-night hours were reserved for B movies, reruns and paid programming.

All-sports channels have changed that -- especially in recent years -- with events that start at all times of the day. In addition, ESPN's commitment in recent years to a presence in Los Angeles has allowed the production of live, original episodes of "SportsCenter" much later in the broadcast day.

Overall, as younger generations of viewers have continually extended the typical viewing day, TV programmers have noticed. It's not by accident that ESPNU added a late-night program ("UNite") earlier this year, and that CBS Sports Network does the same starting tonight with "Lead Off."

Of the two, "Lead Off" has the best chance to produce engaging and entertaining -- something worth staying up to watch -- because it has Doug Gottlieb as a co-host. He's clearly the best and most proven of any of the on-air talents involved with either of those two late-night shows.

A former college basketball player with on-air skills honed through assignments on ESPN and ESPN Radio, Gottlieb left the four-letter all-sports network to join CBS Sports Network on radio and TV. His national radio show begins Jan. 2, as launches its lineup of sports-talk radio. He'll also work college basketball games and, of course, "Lead Off."

Such lat-night shows will never draw the viewers and overall interest of their prime-timeor daytime counterparts, but it's good to see an attempt at quality, with a proven, talented host, as opposed to creating something just to fill time.

Even Out of Sight, Beano Cook Mattered on TV

College football fans rarely saw Beano Cook during the final years of his life. At most, he made a weekly appearance on ESPN Radio -- and even that had ended earlier this season as his health took a turn for the worst.

Still, Cook -- who died in his sleep Wednesday at the age of 81 -- was seemingly an ever-present force in the industry. He made an impact on the business and on the people who share college football with millions of fans each week on television.

He was honest, opinionated, irreverent and often impersonated. He was a character, an original, and he clearly cared about college football. His voice was distinctive and his passion was unquestioned.

A former sports information director at Pitt, Cook joined CBS Sports as a publicist and later made his on-air debut for ABC Sports in 1982. He moved to ESPN in 1985 and worked almost exclusively as a studio analyst, although he did do some games despite his aversion to travel.

No matter the network, though, and no matter if it was on TV in front of millions, in the press room at old Pitt Stadium or anyplace else he appeared, Cook was himself.

He was not an expert on Xs and Os, but he understood college football. He knew what it meant in various regions of the country, and he knew the politics involved in athletics and higher education. He was moreso a commentator on that culture -- and the related tug of war -- then he was regarding action on the field.

Cook evaluated and listened, but his best characteristic was that he was simply not afraid to tell you what he thought. Because of that, he made an impact. He was the Pope of College Football, an experienced voice that earned respect of others around him.

Sure, his anecdotes and stories repeated later in his career, and he was years removed from high-profile assignments on a regular basis, but everyone knew Beano Cook.  Coaches, colleagues and fans have shared memories in the days since his death, and all the accolades and respectful recollections have been deserved.

His death is a true loss for college football, because of his impact on the sport in general and on how the sport was presented TV after he helped elevate the role of of on-air analysts.

Profession, Professionalism Hamper Replacements

They're not professionals, and they do not know the profession.

In the end, that's why the NFL's experiment with replacement officials will probably end sooner rather than later. It's really not so much a matter of competency as creating compelling and efficient entertainment.

From afar it seems the replacement officials believe they're just working football games. Aside from the fact that they're doing that inefficiently -- without confidence in their work and with just as little control of the game -- that's just part of the job.

They're also supposed to be keeping the games on time, running the clock for individual, sports-themed TV shows that should fit in a three-hour broadcast window.

Never mind the gaffes (although they have not been as glaring as some anticipated), it's the time-of-game problem -- a function of the officials' indecision -- that might be the biggest strike against them through two weeks of the season.

Competitors and critics who argue about missed calls carry some weight, but not as much as commercial partners and fans.

After an opening week without major problems, the second week of the NFL season exposed some expected problems with the replacement officials. Most notably, though, it has not been things like an incorrect pass interference call (Jets-Steelers), a missed intentional grounding call (Ravens-Eagles) or even poor clock management (Browns-Bengals) that have cost officials -- as well as the league itself and team owners who remain united on keeping the old officials out of work -- the most credibility.

Eventually a mistaken call might decide a game, but that has not happened so far. And critics who argue that some innocuous call early in a game might already have reshaped a game this season are simply silly. Especially because the same could and does happen with the league's regular officials.

Even those who point to the replacements' mistakes are doing so in a somewhat disingenuous manner. What regular officials do best, because they know the job and because they have worked together more regularly, is keep games moving.

It's not that the regular refs are mistake free, or are somehow they only people on the plant capable of working the games. No, with them it's simply that play rarely slows. Again, that's not necessarily a good thing, but it is the accepted thing. And the replacements' inability to keep the show moving along matters.

The NFL built its success by making games TV shows that reliably fit into broadcast schedules. Games aired at 1 and 4 p.m. Sundays, and then again Monday nights. Of course, additions to the schedule include in recent years Sunday and Thursday nights. This year, the NFL pushed back late-afternoon start times to 4:25 p.m. Sunday.

If the replacements have any hope of a better third week of the season, they need to do their on-field work competently and keep the clock moving consistently. That means more control of the teams, more decisiveness when making calls and simply more efficiency.

It sounds simple, but it will not be easy. Expectations are not high for the replacement officials, but competency and a more speedy approach would go a long way toward making things better.

Team owners and representatives from the officials union will eventually find a common ground, a compromise that works for both parties. Just how soon that happens might be determined in large part by what happens in the third week of the season -- and how the officials do will play out on TV, conveniently for everyone to see, beginning Thursday night.

Replacement Refs Fare Well in TV Spotlight

Yes, the NFL trotted out its best-possible crew of replacement officials for the season-opening Cowboys-Giants game on Wednesday night. And, yes, it's just one game with the backup officials at the start of a season that almost assuredly will end with the league's regular referees returning at some point.

Still, the backup group did well -- almost to the chagrin of NBC Sports, which covered the game and seemed poised to point out any errors that happened.

With 17 penalties in the game (nine in the first half and none in the third quarter before a flag frenzy in the final frame), the refs really missed only one call -- the first one of the game when a block in the back was called clipping. Ultimately, the difference because of that call was about three yards. It was nothing major, and certainly nothing that impacted the outcome.

Before Week 1 of the NFL season concludes Sunday night, the replacement officials will make bad calls. And they might even cost some team a game as a result. But the league has apparently decided it can deal with that outcome, as it maintains a tough stance in labor negotiations with the regular refs.

What will be most interesting during the process is now NFL TV partners decide to deal with the topic.

Unfortunately for the replacement refs, if the NBC approach is any indication, the networks will not hesitate to point out mistakes or take a derisive or dismissive view of the refs' work. Conversely, any criticism of the league's stance might be surprising.

On two separate occasions Wednesday night, NBC play-by-play man Al Michaels noted that Joe Core, head referee for the game, was a middle school teacher and athletic director from Boise, Idaho. It's not clear whether that was context or some sort of condemnation -- as if the regular refs themselves are not part-time employees (be they attorneys, school teachers, whatever).

Sure, those regular refs invest hundreds of hours in their work during the season with meetings and video sessions, but to make an argument that the handful of existing crews are the only people on the planet who can work NFL games just seems silly. Replacement refs will struggle with the speed of the game and rules, but many do bring years of football experience to the job. With time, they could be good.

Again, it's hard to image that they'll get that time to develop, and it's not clear the league can afford (at least figuratively) for them to get on-the-job training.

What the replacement refs do not deserve, though, is to become a point of contention for TV or radio broadcast teams. They've been put in a difficult position, and the league and regular referees have a bigger stake in what's let to the replacement refs stepping on the field. Also, for broadcasters to assume or insinuate that regular refs are regularly prefect would be incorrect. Fans of every NFL team and most pro football fans in general can probably cite numerous instances when the regular refs made big mistakes in the past.

If the replacement teams can generally perform anywhere near the level of the season-opening crew, the NFL will be quite happy. And most fans will not notice much of a difference.

What fans might notice are:
1) more discussions among officiating crews,  as they learn to work with each other and strive to get calls correct;
2) maybe a few fewer penalties per game as officials avoid calling attention to themselves or making mistakes by making fewer calls; and
3) perhaps an inconsistent approach to the league's most arbitrary rule -- when a player is/is not tackled in or out of bounds near the sideline in order to keep the clock running and keep the game (and the NFL show in general) on schedule for its broadcast window. With the impact of that rule and more discussion, the length of NFL games could be impacted slightly and the league always worries about time of game because it knows it has stadiums full of fans but more importantly it's producing a series of weekly TV shows.

Preseason Top 10: College Football TV Talent

With less than a week before college football season kicks off, it's time to take a look at the best TV talent in the game.

Dozens of broadcast teams cover college football across multiple networks each fall and the work of hundreds, even thousands, of production personnel make the TV broadcasts of games quality productions.

Still, the play-by-play talents and color commentators inevitably set the tone. Most regular viewers have some favorites. Those same viewers probably have some on-air talents they think are biased or uninformed.

Honestly, there's never been a better time to tune in and watch games on TV, thanks in part to the professionals covering games. They combine to form a pretty deep pool of talent.

Even though those commentators do not drive ratings (millions will watch big games no matter who describes the action), people certainly have opinions about the best.

Here's one viewer's picks as the Top 10 at what they do. The list features five play-by-play men and five color commentators. A shorter list of sideline reporters follows as well. Because of ESPN/ABC's tonnage of game coverage, the rankings have an feel similar to the team poll and the influence of the one conference. Like the SEC in the team poll, ESPN/ABC dominates this list.

PLAY-BY-PLAY

Sean McDonough

1. Sean McDonough, ESPN/ABC: Consistent and versatile (he also handles Major League Baseball and college basketball), McDonough describes the on-field action and keeps viewers informed without fail. Best of all, it's never about him when he's in the booth. It's about the game. He's been with ESPN since 2000, and previously worked for the network from 1989 to 1995. This season he gets a new partner (Chris Spielman instead of Matt Millen), but adapting to someone else should not be a problem because he works with so many different partners in various sport over the course of a year. He's just good. Simply solid.

2. Mike Patrick, ESPN/ABC: Maybe a second consecutive surprise pick for some in this category, but Patrick just sounds like college football to me. He brings good energy and excitement to his assignments, too. In different roles with different partners through the years he's been consistent ... and that's all viewers can ask.

3. Brent Musburger, ESPN/ABC: Considered the gold standard by many, and he's very good. One of the best, without question. He's third here simply because it does seem to be more about him than it should be at times. It should always be more about the participants than anything else. You always know it's a big game when he's working it, though.
4. Brad Nessler, ESPN/ABC: He was ABC's top guy until Musburger returned, but Nessler certainly deserves the ESPN prime-time assignments on Saturday nights. At times, he like Musburger, can break into "OK partner" banter with his boothmate, but he generally delivers without making viewers want to turn down the sound. That's always a good thing.
5. Verne Lundquist, CBS: With regular SEC assignments, he has high-profile opportunities and rises to the occasion. Again, another voice that sounds like college football, with perhaps a little more laid-back approach. He never preaches at viewers, either -- another plus.
Just outside the Five: Joe Tessitore (ESPN/ABC), deservedly gets ESPN Saturday prime-time assignments with Matt Millen this fall; Beth Mowins (ESPN/ABC), solid and well prepared, working Saturday afternoons on ESPN2 with Joey Galloway; Gus Johnson (Fox), the No. 1 play-by-play man as Fox Sports moves even more heavily into college football this fall, a solid (albeit excitable) pro.

COLOR COMMENTARY

Kirk Herbstreit

1. Kirk Herbstreit, ESPN/ABC: He's insightful, picks his spots and clearly prepares well. Among a strong group, he's at the top of his game and the top of the pack. Not having him pick the game he works each week during "College GameDay" remains just a little frustrating -- but that's minor. (After all, it should be the game he knows best each week.)

2. Mike Mayock, NBC: Informative, engaging and knowledgable. Stuck only doing Notre Dame games, but one of the best in the business. Plus, because of his duties with the NFL Network, he knows college football overall. Too bad he does not have more opportunities to show that knowledge. He's just barely behind Herbstreit here.

3. Todd Blackledge, ESPN/ABC: Smart, well-prepared and proven. Makes insightful points quickly and works smoothly with Nessler. He's the second of three quarterbacks among the top four in this group.

4. Gary Danielson, CBS: Another QB, who can incite some segments of the SEC fan base. Not everyone across country hears every critique or insight as a criticism though, and with that perspective he's good -- because that's the kind of information he provides.

5. Ed Cunningham, ESPN/ABC: The former Washington and NFL lineman has abundant experience on TV, radio and filmmaking. That's a varied resume that allows him to share expertise and tell a story well -- another combination viewers appreciate.

SIDELINE REPORTER

As a testament to the unimportance of this role, ESPN/ABC announced it's complete lineup of on-air talent for college football season (play-by-play/color commentator/sideline reporter) -- a group of 19 teams -- with TBA for sideline reporter on the No. 1 team. Still, some people think sideline reporters matter. Truthfully, only a couple do. Here they are ...
1. Tom Rinaldi, ESPN/ABC: Actually, he's not even listed in the ESPN/ABC lineup for this role. He might be the No. 1 TBA, though that's unlikely. He'll probably chase the nation's biggest story from week to week and reporter on features during the season. Actually, it would not be surprising to see him draw some Penn State assignments early in the season as a second reporter. Or, instead of the scheduled reporter.
2. Holly Rowe, ESPN/ABC or Shelley Smith, ESPN/ABC: Probably the two best who consistently draw assignments. Both are proven, pick their spots well and seem to know they're sometimes in a no-win situation when asking coaches questions. Still, they do their best without coming off as inane.

Sideline Similarities
After the small group above, pick a name, any name and sideline reporters are mostly interchangeable.

It seems the most unforgiving job in TV sports -- with its brief halftime questions of coaches and an occasional injury update -- comes down to being competent, being able to smile and being female. For example, aside from the unassigned Rinaldi all the sideline reporters listed among the ESPN/ABC corps this season are female, except for Quint Kessenich.

Unfortunately for viewers, no network and no single reporter, male or female, has found a way to guarantee weekly quality or reinvent the position in a manner that consistently serves viewers. But, maybe this will be the year that changes.

NBC, Some Penn State Critics Lack Focus, Honesty

The two biggest ongoing sports/sports media stories the week (maybe even the year) share a shameful amount of inconsistency.

It's a lack of focus in regard to the Olympics and apparently a lack of honesty (at best) or sheer stupidity on the part of some commentators regarding the Penn State scandal. Unfortunately for listeners and viewers, both approaches fall short as a result.

Tumbling Tenses

Through the first week of competition at the Olympic Games in London, an inordinate amount of attention has been placed on NBC's plan for prime-time coverage.

While the network has wisely delayed the broadcast of major events that attract millions of viewers until prime time, some critics have consistently complained about the approach. Even though the network streams everything live online, gymnastics, swimming and beach volleyball have been the focus of the network's nighttime coverage -- even though the respective competitions were completed hours earlier and many people can and do know the outcome of the events.

Some critics have consistently panned NBC for not televising more events live, never mind that it has been good business and a proven ratings draw. Rival network executives have said they would practice the same approach if they were covering the Games.

Where NBC has faltered, though, has been in waffling between providing the coverage as a rebroadcast of what happened or trying to acknowledge that the events were completed long ago and add context.

That was clear during women's gymnastics coverage Tuesday night. At one point, NBC provided coverage seemingly in chronological order, showing action that had happened earlier as it was called at the time. A little later in the broadcast, though, as women's teams moved through competition on individual apparatus, the NBC broadcast crew with Al Trautwig, Elfi Schlegel and Tim Daggett critiqued a weak floor routine for a gymnast from Russia and hinted strongly that more good things would come for the team. That's because they knew what would happen, because it had already happened.

Either approach -- with as-it-happened calls simply broadcast later in the day, or some bigger-picture coverage that adds context and hints about what's to come -- could work for the coverage, but flip-flopping between the two approaches just provides unnecessary inconsistency.

Maybe NBC waffles between the approaches in reaction to the criticism, which would be a shame -- because the network's process works. It's not producing a sporting event, or even a series of sporting events. It's producing a TV show with a sports theme.

Viewers have proven they'll tune in just because it's the Olympics, and because they're willing to suspend some disbelief and let NBC tell the story of he Games the way it wants. For that to really work at its best, though, the network has to stick with one approach or the other.

Failing Facts ... Fake It

So many critics, near and far, have chimed in on the Penn State scandal and offered a mix of on-the-mark insights as well as uninformed rants.

Not surprisingly, those farther from the story (even some considered among the best reporters and storytellers on the globe) often struggle with appropriate context because of their unfamiliarity with parts of the story. And rather than flesh out their opinions with information, they just keep ranting.

A perplexing example came last week from John Feinstein on Sirius/XM Radio.

As he supported his premise that the NCAA should have shut down the Penn State football program, Feinstein addressed those who would be impacted by such an approach. When discussion with a caller moved toward business and economic impacts, Feinstein said businesses that typically benefitted as a result of football Saturdays in Happy Valley would not necessarily have been punished if games were cancelled.

He suggested the university could have make them whole by simply tapping its endowment to help cover the business losses.

Amazingly, it sounded as if he thought that was a logical option. Never mind that Feinstein is smart enough to know how an endowment works, that universities across the nation and globe maintain such monetary resources -- comprised of monies earmarked for specific purposes -- in order to use the earnings from the fund to support programs, scholarships or other specific endeavors.

In fact, with his profile and relationships in higher education, Feinstein has no doubt been solicited for endowed gifts.

Because he knows enough about the topic, or should, suggesting otherwise fell on a scale that ranged from just ill-informed or uninformed to mean-spirited and feeding an irresponsible shock-jock mentality.

He's hardly alone with that approach to that story in recent weeks. But he's better than that. And with a little more context all such commentators could form more engaging and informative opinions.