Actually, he's rather bad. He can't get through a game without calling a big pass reception, then having to take it back a few seconds later when he realizes that it was incomplete. There's no excuse for that - all he has to do is wait. For a radio audience that is totally reliant on him, it's just a killer when he gets your hopes up and then dashes them for no good reason. He should have retired several years ago. Nice, guy? Maybe. Great radio announcer? Not close. If someone came in from San Diego and listened to the guy, they'd have no idea what the hype was about.

Oh, sure, next you're going to complain about Jerry Trupiano

By adamg on Fri, 01/30/2009 - 2:29pm.

Don't mess with Trupe!

Obviously, I Disagree

By Suldog on Fri, 01/30/2009 - 2:53pm.

Santos sets the picture of the field - the formation, where the players are in it, down and distance, score, time remaining, and every other thing that the radio listener can't see - better than anyone in the business.

If he misses a call on an incompletion once in a while - and I don't think it's anywhere near as often as you think, or appreciably more than any other radio play-by-play man - it's a function of his having reported the play as it happens, which is the actual job of a play-by-play announcer, and not to wait until the play is over and then re-create it. Explaining the play after the play is over is the job of the color man.

If you want to argue style, I won't. Style is subjective. You're welcome to your opinion concerning that, and I have no right to tell you whether the style you like is one you should like or not. If you don't care for his style, fine. But Santos's calling of the action on the field is superb.

Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com

WBZ says good bye to Gil Santos

Comments

Still Doing Patriots

Actually, he's rather bad.

Oh, sure, next you're going to complain about Jerry Trupiano

Obviously, I Disagree

Support Universal Hub