eball Posted February 21, 2007 Report Posted February 21, 2007 Carolina shill Forslund was the play-by-play guy, but I thought he went out of his way to give the Sabres props and called the game even-handedly. Their own "Rayzor" was decent as well, and I thought he made some good points about the fact that Miller's GAA is closer to 3 than 2 but that is misleading because of the style the Sabres play. Not nearly as bad a broadcast as I expected.
BuffalOhio Posted February 21, 2007 Report Posted February 21, 2007 Agreed. Not too bad at all. And I got to watch it in HD!
TM8-PL16 Posted February 21, 2007 Report Posted February 21, 2007 did anyone else notice that for most of the first period the graphic at the top of the screen was the OLD goathead logo? Or that for our first PP, there was no graphic indication at the top of the screen (no countdown of 2:00)... stuff like that annoys the crap out of me!!!
eball Posted February 21, 2007 Author Report Posted February 21, 2007 did anyone else notice that for most of the first period the graphic at the top of the screen was the OLD goathead logo? Or that for our first PP, there was no graphic indication at the top of the screen (no countdown of 2:00)... stuff like that annoys the crap out of me!!! I totally noticed it. They're still a Mickey Mouse operation.
inkman Posted February 21, 2007 Report Posted February 21, 2007 Minus the whole confusing Vanek for Peters...
scottnc Posted February 21, 2007 Report Posted February 21, 2007 I will begrudgingly admit that the VS. broadcast didn't annoy me anywhere near as much as it usually does, despite its shortcomings. My usual biggest complaint is the camera work which, while far from perfect, is getting better...
BuffalOhio Posted February 21, 2007 Report Posted February 21, 2007 I totally noticed it. They're still a Mickey Mouse operation. Me, too, and I agree; Mickey Mouse. Chintzy. Half-assed.
MajorMinotaur Posted February 21, 2007 Report Posted February 21, 2007 your kidding right? I wanted to stab them in the eye in more than one occasion. I actually started to get a little scared when they commented that "miller has nice legs" and he "gave up a juicy rebound".
bills_fan_in_raleigh Posted February 21, 2007 Report Posted February 21, 2007 Carolina shill Forslund was the play-by-play guy, but I thought he went out of his way to give the Sabres props and called the game even-handedly. Their own "Rayzor" was decent as well, and I thought he made some good points about the fact that Miller's GAA is closer to 3 than 2 but that is misleading because of the style the Sabres play. Not nearly as bad a broadcast as I expected. i only half listened didnt realize it was Forslund hes a dope
buckeyebrian Posted February 21, 2007 Report Posted February 21, 2007 Listening to their constant comments about how good the Flyers were, "the new Flyers", their young guys and the guys they got for Forsberg, you would think the Flyers had 83 points and the Sabres had 40. Hell, we had 5 Amerks out there and they needed an "own goal" to lose by three.
Barnabov Posted February 21, 2007 Report Posted February 21, 2007 VS is total SPAM - they should drop the facade and rename themselves as the official network of the Philly Flyers. Just the intro alone was too much - talking about the new faces in Philly and how it was a throw back to the old broad st bully days. I think Umberger dispelled that notion. Anyone else notice the Yahoo/AP headline this morning saying that the Sabres snapped a 3 game losing streak - I was thinking what have I missed - I thought we'd been winning (and we had). Time to test drive the new guys from Ra Cha Cha against the NE Division!
wjag Posted February 21, 2007 Report Posted February 21, 2007 VS is total SPAM - they should drop the facade and rename themselves as the official network of the Philly Flyers. Just the intro alone was too much - talking about the new faces in Philly and how it was a throw back to the old broad st bully days. I think Umberger dispelled that notion. Anyone else notice the Yahoo/AP headline this morning saying that the Sabres snapped a 3 game losing streak - I was thinking what have I missed - I thought we'd been winning (and we had). Time to test drive the new guys from Ra Cha Cha against the NE Division! My exact reaction as well. I went and looked. I thought, did I miss something?
All Along The Watchtower Posted February 21, 2007 Report Posted February 21, 2007 VS is total SPAM - they should drop the facade and rename themselves as the official network of the Philly Flyers. You're actually on to something...I believe, and check me if I'm wrong Sandy...but VS is owned by Comcast, who in turn also owns the Flyers.
Rock DJ Posted February 21, 2007 Report Posted February 21, 2007 Makes sense, which could explain why they showed the 6 feet under Flyers against the barely breathing Bruins last week.
wjag Posted February 21, 2007 Report Posted February 21, 2007 I was okay with them. They were trying to hype the Flyers a bit, but hey, with the way the Flyers were being outscored, it needed some hype. They had a national audience they were playing to. I was more distracted with my HD picture fuzzing. Anyone else have trouble with the signal last night?
DrDahlinstein Posted February 21, 2007 Report Posted February 21, 2007 yeah i thought it was a pretty fair and balanced call the entire game. OF COURSE they talked up the flyers, but they have to, it is a NATIONAL broadcast. and the sabres sell themselves with all the winning and goal scoring and their usual awesomeness. they did plenty of talking up on the sabres behalf too. VS. shows waaaay too few hockey games and the ones they do show are usually horrible. ive spent many a night this season wondering how much more money 4 hours of hunting shows could possibly be making them over some big hockey games that no one saw.
Claude Balls Posted February 22, 2007 Report Posted February 22, 2007 I needed a dictionary for half the words the one dude was making up. They must remember, we are hockey fans and according to the other major sports we are not as smart as most. :blink:
Doohicksie Posted February 22, 2007 Report Posted February 22, 2007 Their own "Rayzor" was decent as well, Not "Their own". Daryl Reaugh is the color man for the Dallas Stars. And the big vocabulary words are his schtick, just like RJ's goal calls are. His usual broadcast partner, Stars play-by-play guy Ralph Strangis, plays into Reaugh's awkward vocabulary words a little better. Against the Carolina guy, it was a little flat. Because I see Daryl Reaugh in Dallas now and again, it didn't bother me at all.... he's grown to be one of the better color guys in the league. Knowledgeable and goofy. They were trying to hype the Flyers a bit, but hey, with the way the Flyers were being outscored, it needed some hype. They had a national audience they were playing to. I'm trying to remember... the game I watched was 4-3 in the third period. I thought the Flyers gave the Sabres a pretty good run for their money. A bad bounce and the game could have slipped through the Sabres fingers. I didn't really see it as hype; the Flyers played well. Mostly.
wjag Posted February 22, 2007 Report Posted February 22, 2007 I'm trying to remember... the game I watched was 4-3 in the third period. I thought the Flyers gave the Sabres a pretty good run for their money. A bad bounce and the game could have slipped through the Sabres fingers. I didn't really see it as hype; the Flyers played well. Mostly. True it was, but before that it was 4-1 and it was 6-3 after that. It definitely got interesting in the middle.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.