TV watcher's "Venue Opinion"

[cardfan15]

After watching the matches from Thursday and tonight, I don't think the venue looked that bad. Yes, the alamodome is massive, but it was curtained off and the seats did not look that far away from the floor. Especially on the side that had the curtain on it. I thought everything looked nice inside, the chairs looked comfortable, and it seemed loud from watching it on tv. In my opinion, the finals looked pretty cool there. They looked a little "important" being in a huge dome like that, I just wish I could have been there. Did anyone else watching think about the same?

[Gatorboy]

All I know about this volleyball telecast is that Heather Cox should be barred from all commentating and sent to calling the live action at a pre-school spelling bee. She just comes off as a know-it-all who doesn't really know anything.

" I remember one year when we beat Nebraska, and the Nebraska fans were sooo nice! Like, oh my god!"

[kolohekeiki]

I have to disagree...although yes it was a nice venue. I jus don't think it was good for volleyball. And to me the crowd didn't sound loud at all. Maybe it was because the majority of the fans were for Nebraska and they really didn't get to show how loud they can get. And I don't know about you, but the seats did look pretty far away from the floor.

But overall I think that the venue wasn't that great for a championship volleyball match. Can't wait to see it at Omaha next season.

[aaronic]

I honestly and angrily felt that that stupid camera angle they used on match point was one of the dumbest things a network can do when broadcasting any sporting event. It didn't capture any kind of emotional ending because we missed it.


Thanks a lot ESPN.


OH yeah and a merry Xmas to you heather cox.

[aardvark]

I thought the broadcast spent too much time talking about Houghtelling and Tomasevic and not enough about the others.

All in all, the broadcast was just OK. I didn't hate it, but it's nothing like being there in person. On TV, you can see how the match is going, but in person you can ogle at length all those fab rear ends in their spandex shorts. Not being able to do that is like having a diet where you can look at cake and ice cream, but not eat it.

[ugopher]

I mentioned this in another thread but I did not like the Alamodome as a venue. It may have been nice for the players but it had absolutely no atmosphere. The cheering by fans was totally swallowed up by the empty space.

[huskervbfan]

ugopher said:

I mentioned this in another thread but I did not like the Alamodome as a venue. It may have been nice for the players but it had absolutely no atmosphere. The cheering by fans was totally swallowed up by the empty space.

I agree about the sound. Even though there was a curtain behind us, that does not block sound and it was HUGE behind us. I could tell Washington fans across from us were yelling but we couldn't hardly hear them from our side. We have a Husker Power yell that alternates sides and while I could hear our fans on the other side, it was NOTHING ANYWHERE CLOSE to the Coliseum. The Qwest was quite a bit better than this. However, my view was pretty decent.

I have watched just one game of the match on TV and see what people were saying about that endzone view. That really sucks. The server hits the ball and you totally lose sight of it and what any action on the court is for. I like endzone viewing of matches in the Coliseum but with the elevation we have there, we are still close to the court and have an excellent view of the action.

[holidayhusker]

the enzone view was awful.....could not see the play at all from that angle. It seemed like during all the big points they would go to that view.

[tomclen]

I thought the TV coverage by ESPN was horrible, but last night I rewatched the match on TIVO (By the way, Huskies won again!!!) and now I can say the coverage wasn't horrible, it was downright pathetic and unprofessional:

+ That endzone shot was not only overused, but the camera was too far away. Impossible to position the ball, impossible to make out the players on the far court.

+ Not enough cameras. When Fox Sports Northwest has done regional games they have had one or two sidecourt cameramen who roam and get tight shots. They stick with a sideline camera for most volleys. They have mini-cams mounted on the net supports so that you can see up close replays of blocks/net battles.

+ Hardly any instant replay or slow motion. Not that slow motion of a bad camera angle would be worth a crap anyway.

+ No shots of player substitution or libero rotation. As anyone who regularly attends games knows, this is a critical part of the action. It didn't exist on ESPN2 and the "announcers" barely mentioned it.

+ Announcers who assumed the viewers were all dummies. Even in the second viewing, I lost track of how many times they announced, "You play t"o 30, you must win by 2." Duh. I've never seen a bowling broadcast where they announce, "You get 2 balls per frame and you play 10 frames."

+ Post game coverage was almost non-existent. One interview with Jim Mc. and nothing else. Lame.

+ And let's start with the Thursday broadcast schedule. It's bad enough that the Husky game was tape-delayed until 8 p.m. Seattle time....but the tape-delay the Nebraska game until 1 p.m. the NEXT DAY? Who do they think is going to watch that? The fans who care about the game already know what happened.

ESPN2 should be embarrassed for that broadcast. Not sure where the contract stands, but the NCAA should either insist on a better broadcast (and all live games in final 4) or switch to another venue.

I'll probably watch it a 3rd time next week....any bets on who wins??

[Pirate VB Fan]

Since we are ragging on ESPN, I will mention the Elite Eight coverage. The College Station and Omaha regionals were played at the same time. I am told this was a change specifically for television so they could pick which one was more interesting and play that one live. So instead of spreading the three eastern/midwestern matches out and starting one of them two hours earlier, they played two at the same time and then tape delayed one of those, if I remember correctly, 10 hours.

A 10 hour tape delay (forced by ESPNU showing the Heisman ceremony which was also on ESPN at the same time) was bad enough, but then numerous times in the Arizona/Santa Clara (which went over into the UT/UW time slot) match they 1) said who the match-ups would be for the Finals, listing the Huskies and 2) gave the match scores for the Husky game in the scroller at the bottom.

If they had just said "We are going to tell you who is in the semi-finals now, so anyone that doesn't want to know the result of Tennesee/Washington turn away now" (which I have seen done numerous times) that would have been fine, but my wife was very disappointed to have the suspense ruined for her. I followed the game on GameTracker but then was very careful not to give away the results even in my mood, but then ESPNU went and ruined it.

[Chance]

this coming from a channel that doesnt even have the yellow first down line in football...

[seismic911]

And I am a bit disappointed that ESP didn't at least show the announcement of the AA during the break ... you can only glimpse at who is on the court, but I think all those ladies deserve at least a few second air time for their accomplishment this year!