[MicroBob]

they're overly repetitive partly because they don't have any kind of broadcasting background.

Sexton's commentary is, at times, conspicuously patronizing.


One doesn't have to be quite so patronizing to cater to a mass audience.
Talk in a more intelligent manner about the game and the audience will catch up to you if you do it correctly.


Most of the country doesn't know much about advanced football strategy either. But that doesn't mean the announcers have to always explain what the term "3rd and 7" means or that "now it's 4th down and 32 yards to go so they will likely tke option to punt...even though they don't have to here Vince...it's better strategy to kick the ball as far as they can down-field because they are probably going to lose possession of the ball anyway."

Instead, the announcer will just say, "4th down...and here comes the punting unit. Joe Shmoe back to receive."


I really believe that Mike could be a decent announcer if he received some instruction and tips and constructive criticism from a professional play-by-play broadcaster on how to have some enthusiasm without being condescending.

It doesn't have to be a lengthy type discussion that Sklansky, Harrington or Lederer would find especially intriguing.
Just a little less condesension and a little more variety in phrases (which really shouldn't be that hard for a play-by-play broadcaster).

This type of change that I am envisioning wouldn't just appeal to 2+2'ers like us who actually understand the game a bit....but it would also make the broadcasts more appealing to the whole audience (even those who don't know enough to even understand that the quality of dialogue has improved).