What's the Point of Sideline Reporting?
| 14
|
by SSreporters
This is one of my rants that will get 210 people potentially hating me. So what is exactly the point of having sideline reporters? To me, it's just another talking head in the game. Am I being misled by the idea of reporting? My idea, is if there is an injury, and we need to know his/her status, the reporter gives us information on that player. I must be watching the wrong sports, because all I'm hearing are sappy stories, pointless interviews, and other segments used for filler.
If I wanted to hear about how John Rocker trying to legally change his name to John RocKKKer, then we have E:60, 60 minutes, Dateline NBC, not a live sports event. It's utter garbage, and I know many people would say "Well SSR, it's a way of entertaining the viewers". Well that's nonsense, because when I last checked, sports is a form of entertainment. If you need something more than watching Tom Brady throw 10 TD's with glaucoma, then that's a problem.
Sorry to say it, but the biggest culprit, is ESPN MNF. We have two sideline reporters not named Erin Andrews, babbling about the shoe collection of Nate Burleson. What's the point? There's (barely) a place for it, just put it on some other program profiling athletes at home.
Back to the injury argument, even that, does not merit sideline reporting? Have you been watching NFL games on CBS? No reporters whatsoever, and they seem to be doing well.
Rant over, what's your opinion? Am I on crack? Or do I have a point that the last thing we need is another person talking over the crowd.
| This user keeps dreaming that he'll meet Erin Andrews someday. |
