Absolutely. Great post. So many who are bashing Bill here, who don't enjoy the sideshow, because they want a more encyclopedic play by play, because they are impatient to get the immediate result ... are those who often scoff and harrumph about fans who take Pitt sports too seriously, that its "just a game." Yet it enrages them that it takes an extra 5 seconds for Pat or Curtis to clarify something Bill or Dick might have wishfully seen?
Frattare is very good, but you can't start fresh with someone that old IMHO.
)
I am loathe to wade into these waters but.....generally speaking I look to be entertained by the color guy, not the play by play. Take for instance Dick Vitale, NOT that he entertains me in any way, but I know Dan Schulman keeps me clear on the action. Play by play for the most part isn't to entertain. JMO.No offense to you Joe, but you are absolutely wrong here (saying my statement is ridiculous).
(And yes, my wise friend, that IS possible.
I am entertained by the work that Hillgrove does, and it's simple that for me, he is doing a good job. Are you telling me it's wrong for be to have this belief (to be entertained by the work Hillgrove does)?
Along those lines, there are people who actually hate the Beatles, and would rather watch the high school band trying to get girls. They are wrong either (although there are only about 5 of them -- 4 of which are their parents.)
I like listening to Billy Hillgrove. He is entertaining to me. When I listen to a football game, I listen to be entertained. Hence he has done his job well -- for ME.
Of course, you don't like the job he does -- for YOU. I'm not trying to convince you to think otherwise. And by the looks of this thread, there are people who are of many different minds on the issue. Guess what -- they are ALL correct!!
I happen to agree with both of you, if that's possible. Love Billy, but the job IS "play-by-play" and we all have to agree he doesn't always provide that in real time. He is what he is.
I agree, subjective to some who have developed a fondness for the broadcaster. But probably more objective to those who don't share that connection. Like I said, both of you have valid points!
I don't think I'm the only one in this argument who likes that kind of thing.
It frankly says more about our program, that even with a somewhat big game only 3 days away, we still argue more passionately about things like logos, colors, fantasy campus stadiums, and announcers. Because of what the region that handles logic in our brain knows about our chances, now that our offense looks to be on the rocks.
LOL, good point. We get so much more heated debates over ridiculous stuff than actual football. A couple decent back and forths with Nate vs. Chad but not much. Nothing like a good old script vs block debate entails or the logistical possibility of a stadium in Panther hollow. Nothing brings out anger and passion in us than talking about possible exit ramps off of the parkway east...
well, I mean, there have been a couple good threads on the QBs the past few days, a classic topic for debate. Or whether Caprara or Bam Bradley is starting. But when it comes down to it, the sobering reality is that we're kind of arguing over the quality of a McDonald's hamburger or a Checker's hamburger. It's not exactly the kind of debate they have going on over on the Ohio State board. "Which Heisman candidate should be our QB?" "Did our 5 star backup LB play better or worse than the 5 star starting LB he replaced last week?"
I said that earlier as well. When listening on the radio, I try to get the other teams broadcasts. It's not that Billy is wrong a few times per game and he corrects it two seconds later. He's wrong more than he is right, and because of that, he doesn't paint a good picture of what is happening for the listener. When a bad play happens, and your first thought is that it's ok because Billy probably didn't see it right and the color guy will soon inform the listener of the actual events, that says it all.
It's actually the opposite. He's such a homer, and Pitt is usually screwing up, that he'll usually first call a BAD play as a GOOD play. So at least for those fleeting moments, I can have the spark of joy that what was actually a crappy interception might actually have been a great completion! So in that way, he's the PERFECT play by play guy for our type of teams, especially when we're playing hopeless games ... and unfortunately those are the majority.
