ESPN anchor rant on golf telecasts - probably echoes what most of us have been thinking

[pumaAttack]

that's subjective, just opinion - considers Bubba's approach shot at the Masters previously.  Likely more impact and more important than any putt.

I'll concede the last putt on hole 18 is big as it indicates the final score.  But that's just for score tallying.  Some putt on hole 12 mid way through the day?  meh

IMHO.  whatever shot SET UP that birdie (including a beautiful long putt, or the great drive, or that precise approach shot) - that's the one I want to see.  Some tap in?  meh

I respect you might feel differently, I ask for the same.

I agree that those shots are more interesting, to us the avid golf fans.

But TV has to cater to the general audience, and seeing birdie/par/bogeys actually being made is more important than an iron shot.

Of course, they should follow all shots from the leaders coming down the stretch.  I am purely referring to covering the other golfers making a move.

[MrDC]

They show a lot of putting because that's where the action is, clapping, scoring...

More tracer? I don't know, it's cool but don't need it as long as we see where the ball lands, and we do.

I do like the option to see one players entire round, but who gets that attention? they can't stay on everyone, so for that matter, it doesn't work.

Talking swing thoughts? whatever, it's just something for them to talk about, only the uptight get upset over this.

Leave it all alone I say, I watch golf constantly and don't recall having a problem with the coverage.

[Perfect Slicer]

More tracer? I don't know, it's cool but don't need it as long as we see where the ball lands, and we do.

My opinion, of course, but I would like to see shot tracer on every drive. I like to see how the shot is shaped as much or more than where it lands. Did he make a gutsy shot and draw it over the water, or play it safe and fade it in from the other side? Shows the mental state of the player.

[gatsby47]

I think somewhere some drone camera work are going to used to do more precisely as the Sand Trappers here are describing. It will be the golfers who will have to worry about the intrusiveness of the coverage but  if it helps in ratings, then so be it.  I think they could cut back on announcers. and cut back on announcers talking, and cut back on announcers talking about whats coming on the amazing survivors big house. This after cutting away to commercials prodding us to watch it all.  Then we shall have golf coverage and once the viewer has control over what he watches during the coverage totally, then we will have something to pay for gladly. Bring on the popcorn

[natureboy]

Silly conversation guys -

Every shot counts as one each - drives, layups, approaches, putts, chips, pitches - Even the shots that go in the hole count as just one more.

(I guess an argument can be made that shots that generate additional penalty strokes count more than regular shots.....but I consider those one shot also, and the penalties as added on....  Thus an OB drive is 1 shot, and one added point, rather than OB being 2 shots net....silly semantics)

A doubly awful shot for a pro is a bit deal stroke & distance might erase all the strokes they have incrementally gained through the prior round.

They show a lot of putting because that's where the action is, clapping, scoring...

More tracer? I don't know, it's cool but don't need it as long as we see where the ball lands, and we do.

I do like the option to see one players entire round, but who gets that attention? they can't stay on everyone, so for that matter, it doesn't work.

Talking swing thoughts? whatever, it's just something for them to talk about, only the uptight get upset over this.

Leave it all alone I say, I watch golf constantly and don't recall having a problem with the coverage.

To a certain extent PGA's shot tracker has enabled tracking an individual pro's full round better. It's helpful to guess at their course strategy too, but it doesn't show shot shapes (yet), which would be even more informative. I imagine it would be pretty expensive to install shot tracer on every tee. It would be cool if they could show a clickable video snippet for each shot on shot tracker sort of how some tournaments show hole highlights on leaderboards. It would at least allow a sense of how the player approached the shot.

[DeadMan]

After watching a lot of the final round of the Zurich, I think Bucci has a point. Here's what I would do to improve golf telecasts:

1. Shot Tracer on every tee shot - much more interesting than any other thing they could show while the ball is in the air.
2. No more views of just the ball in the air. Adds nothing to the broadcast. Keep it on the players for reaction, then show the landing. Or view the entire shot from above. 2-5 seconds of ball against the sky is dumb.
3. Limit swing analysis. I like looking at the slow motion swings of the pros, but keep it to a minimum. I think it's fairly clear that people like Kostis don't know that much about the golf swing, so keep them quiet. And for heaven's sake, no swing analysis of celebrities. I don't need to look at Drew Brees' swing just because the tournament is in New Orleans. Ugh. Wasted a good 5 minutes of air time on him and Sean Peyton's swings.
4. Have some type of broadcast on for every minute of the tournaments. Web streaming would be more than fine here. Even without commentators. I understand that seeing every shot is very tough, but more coverage is necessary. As an example, that 30 minute gap between golf channel and NBC/CBS picking up the coverage is ridiculous. And do give people the option to follow the most popular golfers for every shot. I shouldn't have to follow Tiger Tracker on twitter to follow every shot of the most popular golfer of all time.

[rehmwa]

No more views of just the ball in the air. Adds nothing to the broadcast. Keep it on the players for reaction, then show the landing. Or view the entire shot from above. 2-5 seconds of ball against the sky is dumb.

I like this - And showing shot tracer is great since the angle is from behind the player.  You can see the flight from the perspective the the player, you can see the player's reactions (if any).  They could split screen to the landing simultaneously - especially on Par 3 tee shots, or approach shots....

[The Recreational Golfer]

I agree, and partly because they're so bad at it. It's really, really bad.

Also, a small nit-pick with the OP (the quote, not the actual OP :D): you can watch every Marshawn Lynch carry because… it's the only thing going on at the time. The same time Tiger is hitting a tee shot on a par five or tapping in for bogey somewhere, 13 other players on the course are hitting a shot or very nearly hitting a shot or reacting to a shot they just hit. You can watch every Patrick Kane shift for the same reason: there's only one sheet of ice. When he's playing, he's on it with everyone else. He's not 1734 yards away being unaffected by the players hitting shots on the other places on the course.

Yep, that's it right there. You can see every basketball player at once in the half-court game, or almost every hockey player at once, but every golfer at once only in a shot from the blimp at 3,000 feet.

Choosing what to show was never more apparent at the fourth round of the 2009 Open Championship, when the camera stuck to Tom Watson like glue, and barely showed Stewart Cink coming from behind to tie.

As for John Buccigross wanting to watch all TW all the time, that's he  got when TW was in his prime. Why would anybody want to watch TW so much now when he is just another very good golfer?

As for TW, since air time is precious, there's no reason to show him if he's not in the lead or a couple of good holes from the lead. Just like any other golfer. If he's five shots back, why show him instead of the guys who are 1-3 shots back and more in a position to challenge for the lead?