Pyrite Gal Posted September 15, 2008 Posted September 15, 2008 I like him as an announcer. A. He knows ST play better than anyone and his insights are to be taken seriously and are often good B. He still is connected to the community so understands what is going on here. C. He does make the mistakes in every game that every announcer makes of misidentifying players but because he is simply just as bad as his peers I mostly find these mistakes amusing and not bothersome for me. However, the one thing which I do find annoying is that he seems so afraid of being seen as a Bills homer he seems to go out his way to praise the opponent or their players. Jax looked like crap in the first half and it would not have been bad broadcasting to say this. Instead, Tasker seemed to go out of his way not be seen as a Bills homer and the failure to really note how Garrard was struggling ran counter to how the game felt and flowed. I have no problem with an announcer flip-flopping in who they sing the praises of as long as the performance on the field flip flops also. IMHO. a good announcer could have sung the Bills praises over Jax when they were dictating play in the first half and then been equally effusive about Jax when they dictated play in the 3rd quarter. Reality could easily have allowed for also singing Scobee's praises as he was Jax's offense for a while and also found failings with the Bills as the 10-3 lead did not equal their dominance and this left them open to problems. A good announcer then would have seen these problems come to fruition when the Jax O made half time adjustments to equal the Bills and the Scobee led ST pulled Garrard's fat our of the fire with the onside kick and long FG. It was in fact exploitation of Garrard leading to the McGee INT and the Youbouty sack that along with a beautiful long throw by Edwards and the TD did Jax in. By trying so hard to be evenhanded, Tasker really did not reflect the flow of the game. I do not need Tasker to be more evenhanded as a goal, i think he is a better announcer when he lets the flow of the game (either pro or con Bills) drive his coverage.
SwampD Posted September 15, 2008 Posted September 15, 2008 I like him as an announcer. A. He knows ST play better than anyone and his insights are to be taken seriously and are often good B. He still is connected to the community so understands what is going on here. C. He does make the mistakes in every game that every announcer makes of misidentifying players but because he is simply just as bad as his peers I mostly find these mistakes amusing and not bothersome for me. However, the one thing which I do find annoying is that he seems so afraid of being seen as a Bills homer he seems to go out his way to praise the opponent or their players. Jax looked like crap in the first half and it would not have been bad broadcasting to say this. Instead, Tasker seemed to go out of his way not be seen as a Bills homer and the failure to really note how Garrard was struggling ran counter to how the game felt and flowed. I have no problem with an announcer flip-flopping in who they sing the praises of as long as the performance on the field flip flops also. IMHO. a good announcer could have sung the Bills praises over Jax when they were dictating play in the first half and then been equally effusive about Jax when they dictated play in the 3rd quarter. Reality could easily have allowed for also singing Scobee's praises as he was Jax's offense for a while and also found failings with the Bills as the 10-3 lead did not equal their dominance and this left them open to problems. A good announcer then would have seen these problems come to fruition when the Jax O made half time adjustments to equal the Bills and the Scobee led ST pulled Garrard's fat our of the fire with the onside kick and long FG. It was in fact exploitation of Garrard leading to the McGee INT and the Youbouty sack that along with a beautiful long throw by Edwards and the TD did Jax in. By trying so hard to be evenhanded, Tasker really did not reflect the flow of the game. I do not need Tasker to be more evenhanded as a goal, i think he is a better announcer when he lets the flow of the game (either pro or con Bills) drive his coverage. You're just wrong. Tasker is good. Not once was I bothered by him today. You want him to be a homer and he is not. He's good...and he's 1 and 0 for the Bills this year.
Catholic Guilt Posted September 15, 2008 Posted September 15, 2008 I love Tasker, but the original poster is correct in his unbiased look at the Bills. The zinger that stuck out during today's broadcast was his claim the Bills had the same problems tackling last week against the Seahawks. What game film did he watch? I don't remember the Bills with any defensive problems last week.
lets_go_bills Posted September 15, 2008 Posted September 15, 2008 I've always thought that he appeared to be trying really hard to appear as impartial as possible. It always seemed weird to me. Granted you can't play favourites, but he just seems a little transparent at times. Personally I like Troy Aikman and Joe Buck. They call the best games, IMO.
Pyrite Gal Posted September 15, 2008 Author Posted September 15, 2008 You're just wrong. Tasker is good. Not once was I bothered by him today. You want him to be a homer and he is not. He's good...and he's 1 and 0 for the Bills this year. I definitely do not want him to be a homer, but for me a good announcer reflect the flow of the game with what they say. I think the game call missed several different points I felt were going on: 1. Garrard seemed to be struggling out there IMHO right from the start. My sense was that this was because there was actually a lot of pressure up the gut from Stroud who likely had something to prove against his old team and given the interior OL injury problems. I think the game crew might have carried this story if there were undeniable evidence of it in sacks by Stroud. However, there was not and they failed to explore whether there were other signs a. the poor rush performance by Jax in the first half b. Stroud getting a piece of a sack which correctly was generally credited to Youbouty c. a pass later blocked by Stroud penetration which would not show up in the boxscore As the game wore on we finally saw a sack by Williams and overall I will need to go back and focus on the interior line play because my sense is that it really told the tale of why the Bills were effective initially. 2. I think it would have fit the game flow for Tasker to be even more effusive about the onside kick. i think it would have fit a good storyline because it was potentially of great import as it forced the Bills D to be out there continually in the sweltering weather. I think that part of the Jax thinking to take this risk may have actually been because they knew how much trouble the interior OL was having and a good way for them to tire Stroud and co. out was to risk the onside. Ultimately I think Garrard needed the help. 3. I think an aggressive storyline on these points though they would have necessitated a back and forth rather than a homer announcing style was that in the end, Garrard showed how talented he can be on a nice scramble to the outside and when an interior sack by Williams who survived the deluge was a key to turning the tide. he needs to worry less about being accused of being a homer and simply broadcast the game. In fact, if he is fair and balanced in the face of the next three games likely looking more like the first game in terms of flow and ultimate outcome that this game in terms of flow and the same outcome Tasker will be more jarringly off from reality if he does not let good Bills play drive his announcing.
Catholic Guilt Posted September 15, 2008 Posted September 15, 2008 And I'd love Tasker to explore all those empty tarp seats in Jacksonville.
SwampD Posted September 15, 2008 Posted September 15, 2008 I definitely do not want him to be a homer, but for me a good announcer reflect the flow of the game with what they say. I think the game call missed several different points I felt were going on: 1. Garrard seemed to be struggling out there IMHO right from the start. My sense was that this was because there was actually a lot of pressure up the gut from Stroud who likely had something to prove against his old team and given the interior OL injury problems. I think the game crew might have carried this story if there were undeniable evidence of it in sacks by Stroud. However, there was not and they failed to explore whether there were other signs a. the poor rush performance by Jax in the first half b. Stroud getting a piece of a sack which correctly was generally credited to Youbouty c. a pass later blocked by Stroud penetration which would not show up in the boxscore As the game wore on we finally saw a sack by Williams and overall I will need to go back and focus on the interior line play because my sense is that it really told the tale of why the Bills were effective initially. 2. I think it would have fit the game flow for Tasker to be even more effusive about the onside kick. i think it would have fit a good storyline because it was potentially of great import as it forced the Bills D to be out there continually in the sweltering weather. I think that part of the Jax thinking to take this risk may have actually been because they knew how much trouble the interior OL was having and a good way for them to tire Stroud and co. out was to risk the onside. Ultimately I think Garrard needed the help. 3. I think an aggressive storyline on these points though they would have necessitated a back and forth rather than a homer announcing style was that in the end, Garrard showed how talented he can be on a nice scramble to the outside and when an interior sack by Williams who survived the deluge was a key to turning the tide. he needs to worry less about being accused of being a homer and simply broadcast the game. In fact, if he is fair and balanced in the face of the next three games likely looking more like the first game in terms of flow and ultimate outcome that this game in terms of flow and the same outcome Tasker will be more jarringly off from reality if he does not let good Bills play drive his announcing. You are faulting him for not making comments based on your conjecture. He doesn't know what Stroud was feeling. He was making comments based on what he was watching. And I personally don't think that Gerrard struggled at all. The guy is a true stud andhe was not the reason the Jax lost(nor was their O-line). The Bills just played better and would have won with their starters on O.
Albany,n.y. Posted September 15, 2008 Posted September 15, 2008 I had the radio on with the TV & was listening to both. On one play Murph & Kelso were right on when the TV announcers (Tasker & the other guy) were oblivious, even though the tv camera showed why: This was on the play Greer got the flag that they then announced was no penalty. TV viewers never got the explanation even though the cameraman showed Mitchell signaling that the pass was tipped. Instead while they could have been explaining why, they showed Del Rio disagreeing with the ref with no correct explanation for the viewers. Murph & Kelso called it right away, tipped pass, no pass interference.
BuffOrange Posted September 15, 2008 Posted September 15, 2008 I had the radio on with the TV & was listening to both. On one play Murph & Kelso were right on when the TV announcers (Tasker & the other guy) were oblivious, even though the tv camera showed why: This was on the play Greer got the flag that they then announced was no penalty. TV viewers never got the explanation even though the cameraman showed Mitchell signaling that the pass was tipped. Instead while they could have been explaining why, they showed Del Rio disagreeing with the ref with no correct explanation for the viewers. Murph & Kelso called it right away, tipped pass, no pass interference. I believe you're way off here insomuch as: A) they mentioned the tip possibility on tv B) the ref never mentioned anything about a tip in his explanation (which they typically do when that's the reason for picking up the flag). In any case it wasn't interference.
jester43 Posted September 15, 2008 Posted September 15, 2008 don't know about today, because i missed most of the broadcast...but it has cracked me up for years to see fans whine about tasker not "respecting" the bills...when, meanwhile, we have flat out SUCKED ever since he became a broadcaster. it's not his fault the bills were terrible and he had to describe what every sane fan could see.
Albany,n.y. Posted September 15, 2008 Posted September 15, 2008 I believe you're way off here insomuch as:A) they mentioned the tip possibility on tv B) the ref never mentioned anything about a tip in his explanation (which they typically do when that's the reason for picking up the flag). In any case it wasn't interference. If so, I'm sorry to the TV guys. I didn't think they caught it, but then it's tough to listen to 2 things at once. The radio guys were a few seconds ahead of the digital cable feed, so I knew about the tip before the TV guys could say anything & I must have missed their explanation. Once again, sorry Steve.
WellDressed Posted September 15, 2008 Posted September 15, 2008 I've always thought that he appeared to be trying really hard to appear as impartial as possible. It always seemed weird to me. Granted you can't play favourites, but he just seems a little transparent at times. Personally I like Troy Aikman and Joe Buck. They call the best games, IMO. Would you rather be in the NFC East or have Tasker commentating??
The Dean Posted September 15, 2008 Posted September 15, 2008 Pyrite, nice analysis. I agree with most of it, but still think Steve is more vapid than the "good" announcers, and is often wildly wrong (mistaken) on his analysis of plays. And while he may not make more mis-identifications than other announcers (I think he does, BTW) he rarely corrects those mistakes, when the replay clearly shows the correct player's name. The remarks he shoved in about Witherspoon, when Gus was talking about Parrish, was clunky and ill-timed. He didn't need to force the Witherspoon praise, at that point...there would be a better time for it, IMO. It is as if he had to make a pro-Jville remark, because the Gus made a pro Bills-remark. With that said, he wasn't as bad as usual, today, IMO. He had some decent insight, and seemed to be more "natural" in his analysis, than usual. With that said, he completely screwed up the on-side kick, 10 yard rule explanation...TWICE. Eventually, he got most of the truth out, but you had to shuffle through the mis-information to get there. I'm convinced if you didn't know the 10-yard rule, you'd be more confused after hearing Steve's mangled explanation. I thought Gus was outstanding in play-by-play, today. But, at times, he did sound a little like a Bills' homer, to me.
Kelly the Dog Posted September 15, 2008 Posted September 15, 2008 I loved Tasker as a player. He's a great guy. I just think he is a terrible analyst. He rarely gives any insight into the game. Over and over he is just wrong about stuff, like he kept on harping on how effective the Jags running game was. Jones-Drew and Taylor combined had 66 yards on 21 carries. I don't even care whether he likes or dislikes the Bills, he is just plain bad as an announcer. Still love the guy though, like I did with Paul Maguire who was equally as bad.
Pyrite Gal Posted September 16, 2008 Author Posted September 16, 2008 I loved Tasker as a player. He's a great guy. I just think he is a terrible analyst. He rarely gives any insight into the game. Over and over he is just wrong about stuff, like he kept on harping on how effective the Jags running game was. Jones-Drew and Taylor combined had 66 yards on 21 carries. I don't even care whether he likes or dislikes the Bills, he is just plain bad as an announcer. Still love the guy though, like I did with Paul Maguire who was equally as bad. I did like it when they got the booth to rerun Jackson hitting the ground during a kick, noted that they had never seen it before and theorized as to what he was doing. I took this seriously because when Tasker talks about ST I think this is worth a listen. it will be interesting to see if the Bills do this again or April is setting up some bizarre play for the future. My sense is that most announcing crews would have either ignored this because they had no explanation or they simply would have missed it. I think Tasker does notice things and mentions them that other announcers do not notice.
The Dean Posted September 16, 2008 Posted September 16, 2008 I did like it when they got the booth to rerun Jackson hitting the ground during a kick, noted that they had never seen it before and theorized as to what he was doing. I took this seriously because when Tasker talks about ST I think this is worth a listen. it will be interesting to see if the Bills do this again or April is setting up some bizarre play for the future. My sense is that most announcing crews would have either ignored this because they had no explanation or they simply would have missed it. I think Tasker does notice things and mentions them that other announcers do not notice. I thought he was more insightful than usual, on Sunday. Still, on balance, he was wrong and sloppy more than he was right and insightful.
julian Posted September 16, 2008 Posted September 16, 2008 I really loved this gem "Jackson and Lynch are identical". The dude needs to drop the mic and maybe try coaching special teams.
bananathumb Posted September 16, 2008 Posted September 16, 2008 I thought he was more insightful than usual, on Sunday. Still, on balance, he was wrong and sloppy more than he was right and insightful. I had to turn of the sound by half-time.
generaLee83 Posted September 16, 2008 Posted September 16, 2008 Tasker is terrible. If the Bills have a great play he very quickly has to point out a mistake by the opposing team as the only reason that the Bills were successful. If the opposing team has a great play he points out how Buffalo made a mistake. His desire to not look like a homer makes him probably the least objective announcer I've ever heard. He sucks.
Recommended Posts