Fox Sports 2015 U.S. Open Thread (Joe Buck, Greg Norman)

[tmac20]

Joe Buck was OK, but the other commentators were absolutely pathetic. If I hear Greg Norman say "at the end of the day" one more time I'm going to stream the Sky Sports coverage. Fox should be embarrassed.

[newtogolf]

Joe Buck was OK, but the other commentators were absolutely pathetic. If I hear Greg Norman say "at the end of the day" one more time I'm going to stream the Sky Sports coverage. Fox should be embarrassed.

Part of my problem with the FOX broadcasters is just my lack of familiarity with them covering golf, the other part is they don't seem comfortable covering it.

[Chilli Dipper]

Part of my problem with the FOX broadcasters is just my lack of familiarity with them covering golf, the other part is they don't seem comfortable covering it.

The course reporters are okay, with the exception of Natalie Gulbis, who seemed lost following the featured group this morning. Joe Buck in the anchor role isn't at the level of Nantz, Hicks, or Tirico, but I think he'll get there with more experience. Norman isn't great as a lead analyst, but he'd work if there was a third person in the booth. Curt Menefee is hopeless as a studio host, as is Charles Davis at the post-round interview station (which looks cheap in general with a static camera and bad lighting). The camera work is all right; the sound could be better. The thing about the score bug is that I know what we see on television is not necessarily shown in real time; I don't want to see the leaderboard change before I see the ball go in the hole, yet I also don't want to see the scores change based on footage that obviously isn't live. I don't think it's necessary to be on-screen at all times.

[Golfingdad]

Part of my problem with the FOX broadcasters is just my lack of familiarity with them covering golf, the other part is they don't seem comfortable covering it.

That's to be expected since they've never done it before. It's just too bad for us that they're working their kinks out at the biggest tournament of the year rather than some silly season event or whatever. I was watching a lot of their online coverage today at work and the announcers were all very green, but even worse was that the production was poor. For stretches you could clearly hear production assistants or whoever talking to each other over the broadcast. In the end it won't matter much, if the golf is good and their cameras are showing it, I'll enjoy it. :)

[boogielicious]

I wanted to start a thread that solely discussed Fox's broadcast of the US Open. I had a couple of thoughts:

* I think Joe Buck is one of the best ever doing baseball and is good doing football. But at times he never felt comfortable today. I know he loves golf but he seemed to be quite unsure of himself at times.

* I think Greg Norman is terrible. He provided very little insight that I didn't know myself. He had Phil Simms disease - stating the obvious like "it is going to be hard to hit it out of the rough here" or "he relies on his caddy for help."

* I thought Natalie Gulbis was going to be on the broadcast. I saw her in the background following Phil and Bubba, but she never got to talk on the broadcast.

* I think Steve Flesch is really good. He needs to be next to Joe Buck never.

* I think Holly Sonders is having some doubts about her move to Fox. She is quite far down the on-air totem pole. I thought she was going to be the #2 host after Buck.

* Juli Inkster is good on the broadcast.

* Fox can't get the levels right. It sounds like a local country club scramble instead of a major.

I agree with your assessment. I was also waiting to see all this, "new technology" in the prime time show and didn't see much.  They didn't wow me at all. I would also add that the off course stuff they do, like the Ricky Fowler profile, is annoying.  Show GOLF!  We are watching the US Open to see players playing GOLF.

[Bucki1968]

Whether or not you liked Johnny Miller....he is way better than anything that FOX has. Joe Buck did okay but he's looks like he is alone and I thought he did a good job poking fun at some the mistakes that the Fox was making. Greg Norman was awful.....I'm not sure he will ever be that great. As for the other commentators, Flesch was the best and Weiskopf wasn't bad. Everyone else sucked. I'm sure it will get better but right now I am looking for an alternative to having to listen to these people for the next three days.

[boogielicious]

From golfdigest.com

http://www.golfdigest.com/blogs/the-loop/2015/06/unofficial-usopen-drinking-guide-chambersbay.html

Your unofficial U.S. Open drinking guide for coverage from Chambers Bay

by Stephen Hennessey

As with any huge sporting event, the U.S. Open might be best enjoyed with a tall glass of your favorite drink. This is, after all, one of the best weekends of the golf season. It's U.S. Open week! Celebrate properly (and responsibly).

To help make your U.S. Open viewing parties a bit more interesting -- and to get everyone engaged in the broadcast -- we've developed a drinking game for you to play. Because what's more American than watching the national Open championship with some guidelines?

Here are your rules:

References to the "unpredictability," "flexibility" or "uniqueness" of Chambers Bay: One sip.

You might hear this once every five minutes. So be careful.

Any time "links" is mentioned about Chambers Bay in the broadcast: One sip.

Then cue up the debate between your buddies whether or not a course in the U.S. can be considered a links course or not. Let us know how this goes. Don't blame us for any fights that break out.

Any time "Puget Sound" is referenced in a dramatic, muted voice: Two sips.

Automatic finish your drink if Joe Buck describes the body of water as "majestic."

[mcanadiens]

I guess I shouldn't be that surprised that so much of last night's telecast was the T Woods Horror Show. It would have been nice if just a little bit of that time were spent covering any other aspect of the tournament.

My expectations weren't that high for Fox, but they certainly didn't exceed them. Like many of you, I thought Norman was terrible.  Buck merely seemed out of place. Given the course, I would have preferred better angles on the greens. So many were the overhead shots that gave you little to no appreciation for the putts that the guys were facing.

Rome wasn't built in a day. I'm sure Fox will do a bit better today and even better the next tournament.

[CarlSpackler]

I guess I shouldn't be that surprised that so much of last night's telecast was the T Woods Horror Show. It would have been nice if just a little bit of that time were spent covering any other aspect of the tournament.

My expectations weren't that high for Fox, but they certainly didn't exceed them. Like many of you, I thought Norman was terrible.  Buck merely seemed out of place. Given the course, I would have preferred better angles on the greens. So many were the overhead shots that gave you little to no appreciation for the putts that the guys were facing.

Rome wasn't built in a day. I'm sure Fox will do a bit better today and even better the next tournament.

+1

[newtogolf]

That's to be expected since they've never done it before. It's just too bad for us that they're working their kinks out at the biggest tournament of the year rather than some silly season event or whatever.

I was watching a lot of their online coverage today at work and the announcers were all very green, but even worse was that the production was poor. For stretches you could clearly hear production assistants or whoever talking to each other over the broadcast.

In the end it won't matter much, if the golf is good and their cameras are showing it, I'll enjoy it. :)

I agree, I like some of the things they are doing but a lot of it seems 2nd rate compared to CBS and NBC/GC.  I wonder if Holly Sonders is regretting her decision, she doesn't seem to be getting much airtime.  Hopefully she gets some more during the NFL season, otherwise this move could have killed her career.

[Mr. Desmond]

I agree with your assessment. I was also waiting to see all this, "new technology" in the prime time show and didn't see much.  They didn't wow me at all. I would also add that the off course stuff they do, like the Ricky Fowler profile, is annoying.  Show GOLF!  We are watching the US Open to see players playing GOLF.

As to tech, they had that green number showing distance to the pin in the background representing the pin.

I did not like the leaderboard on the lower edge of the screen

They had "chase cam" for a few shots. Interesting. Wish it would have caught Tiger's topped shot, but it might have hit it.

Did not see enough "other" players.

Gulbis was useless

Ditto with Weiskopf

I liked parts of the presentation - they just need more experience.

Some of the talking heads were below par. Did not see much chemistry. Norman was better than expected, Buck was fine. The rest need work.

If you've got to change talking heads, since Holly Sonders was available, why not? They hardly showed her. While her face and body seem to morph every year, she still asks good questions, brings energy to the screen, and can get away with more because of her knowledge and looks.

It looks as if Tiger Woods will be available this weekend. Suit him up.

[ChrisP]

Overall, I was okay with it. I had low expectations going in so they actually did better than I thought. One criticism is they need to show more golfers. This is what NBC did much better at. Instrad of spending three minutes showing guys get ready for a tee shot, they can show two other guys shots. We didn't see any of Jason Dufner, hardly any of Matt Kuchar, we only saw Dustin Johnson putt until he got to the 8th hole. They have to do better maximizing their coverage of as many players as they can the first two days. The last two days you can focus more on prepping for tee shots.

[RandallT]

For those that are so negative on Greg Norman, did you watch any of the coverage in the early afternoon with him?  I watched the end of the morning wave and the start of the afternoon wave, and the coverage with Norman was much better than without him. It seemed that Shane took over for both Buck and Norman and did much of the talking.

For the morning coverage that I enjoyed, it was fairly technical stuff. Rather than discuss the big picture of the players and the how the course was holding up, I thought they were looking very in depth at each individual shot and discussing the techniques.  Faxon loves that stuff.  Pavin was discussing which iron the players were using (as if it mattered if it were an 8 or a 9 iron), and they kidded him throughout for getting it wrong one time.  Flesch is solid.

The guy "Jay" seemed a bit off, and I thought it odd that he is addressing Norman as "Shark," when everyone else uses the more comfortable, "Greg." Small thing, I know!

The worst "booth" time was Hanse, Weiskopf, and the generic non-golf guy who tried to steer the discussion.  And they weren't really discussing course architecture and how the course initially was holding up, as you might expect with that group. Their personalities seemed uncomfortable with each other to me, but as has been said, let's give them time to gel.

Overall, I was entertained, but the entire US Open just feels off. The coverage, the course, the time zone. That's not a bad thing, but I'm readjusting a bit.

Honestly, I feel like I'm more excited about it all than the coverage is justifying. The more I think about it, the more stale the tournament feels right now. I think it has something to do with how the crowd seems to be having difficulty getting to much of the course. It feels very barren and stark- in both visual appeal and in crowd dynamic.  The golf is captivating, however. Story lines are just shaping up, and I'm looking forward to seeing how it unfolds and how Fox handles it all.

[Mr. Desmond]

Posted this in the US Open thread in error:

As to Holly Sonders, she may need the shrink more than Tiger ... new nose and lips ... I hope she stops.

If you did not know how she appeared previously, I think a new audience would think - cute but too much makeup.

I think she has tried to morph from All-American girl to International Beauty (or is that exotic dancer, can't be sure -- see recent cover shoot on golf or gd) and it just doesn't translate well.

But she has spunk and energy -- something that telecast could use.

[dbuck]

To be fair, I only got to watch about 20-30 minutes total but in that time I saw very few golf shots. That is my main complaint.

I thought Norman was ok, and I expect him to get better. Weiskofp (sp) was ok too, he has more tv experience. I didn't really see any others.

I think that through experience or reorganization, the team will come around. For me to be a fan, they will have to show more golf and less of the commmentators sitting behind the desk.

[Chilli Dipper]

I didn't catch any of the mid-afternoon coverage yesterday, so I don't have anything to say about Fox's B-team in the commentary booth. That has been the Sean McDonough slot when ESPN has had all-day coverage, but it doesn't sound like whoever has those duties on FS1 brings the same goods as he did.

[Golfingdad]

* I think Greg Norman is terrible. He provided very little insight that I didn't know myself. He had Phil Simms disease - stating the obvious like "it is going to be hard to hit it out of the rough here" or "he relies on his caddy for help."

I read your post last night and then within a few minutes Justin Rose made a decent length putt on his final hole and Norman said something along the lines of "you're gonna feel better on Thursday night if you shoot a 72 rather than a 73."

I tad Simms-esque, and even Madden-esque, but with his Australian accent it sounds kinda charming.

[ChrisP]

This is a big showcase for some of these guys because NBC will probably lose Miller in about 5 years, as well as probably Maltbie, so they'll be looking for a replacement. And these guys would work for NBC any day as a lead analyst over Fox because they cover more tourneys and a major. Corey Pavin is doing a pretty good job so far, as is Steve Flesch.