[PilotJargon]

I was reading through the Foley swing thread as well as a few others, and I found it interesting that there are a lot of different opinions on what makes a commentator or instructor credible. Should a TV commentator have to have played on tour to be effective and accurate? Should he have multiple wins? Can he or she just have golf knowledge and be successful?

The same goes for Instructors, what makes them credible?

I don't really care about what makes up a commentator, I think it helps if they're pretty good golfers but it doesn't make or break them with me. If they comment on something in a swing or putting stroke that I'm able to see, recognize, or understand, then I'm good with it.

On the instructors, I'm a visual learner so the instructors I like should be able to show me what they're asking me to do rather than tell me what to do. I pay very close attention to just about everything an instructor does, and pay little attention to what they say ( I don't understand the lingo). So for me ya gotta be able to hit the shot.

What are your thoughts?

[Coellacag]

I like a commentary team that has at least somebody that has played the game or taught it at a high level. They are able to lend some insight that others don't have.

As for instructors, I'll have to think about that a little.

Good thread.

[neniajany]

I like a commentator who can portray the emotions a player may be going through or express the true difficulty of a shot from personal experience on the tour.

If an instructor can't grab my club from me and show me EXACTLY what he means and is trying to teach me - as well as the results - I will be finding a different instructor.

I agree - good thread!

[PheliarearY]

This is a fascinating conversation to me. It seems as though what it really boils down to in a nutshell is people not enjoying critique of their favorite players. Be it Tiger, Phil, Rory, Rickie or anybody else.

Some great analysts and coaches never achieved certain fame, but that does not mean they cannot analyze it. You never hear anybody complain that Kelly T is not capable of saying "great shot Tiger" because she did not win a major, but the minute their is anything critical people get upset.

It has gone so far that you simply cannot say anything objective anymore because you are already walking on eggshells. Its fascinating and crippling all at the same time because anything remotely objective and one is a "hater". Its effin crap if you ask me. It has ruined so many threads on this forum that I find myself checking "out" if certain people are playing because you cannot say a word. And I own the effin thing!

Some fans exhaust me and its just not worth it because a healthy conversation/debate is no where near doable or acceptable. Either put on blinders and raise your fist at the sky, or you are labeled one that "hates". Its absurd and fascinating all at the same time.

Kind of a tangent and I apologize.

[Michmant]

I don't think one needs to be a golf instructor or former player to be a commentator.....but it certainly helps them when they are an instructor or former player. It's all in the communication as far as I'm concerned.

~Rock

[amotoustict]

As this relates to commentators, credibility comes from consistent accuracy. Some of the commentators are saying things that video evidence clearly refutes. For example, just recently a certain commentator analyzed Rory Mcilroy's swing. This commentator noted that part of Rory's great swing was his ability to keep his hips level throughout the swing. He then drew a line at his belt buckle. During the swing, Rory clearly compressed into the ground at the transition (clearly dropping below the commentator's line) and then exploded up from the ground at impact (extending considerably over the commentator's drawn line). HUH!?!?! This same commentator does that stuff all the time with numerous swings; thus, I lend very little credence to this particular commentator.

Other commentators on the swing provide a simple and accurate description of what is actually going on in the swing and as represented in what we are actually seeing. I find those commentators to be a bit more reliable.

[lisualsethelp]

This is a fascinating conversation to me. It seems as though what it really boils down to in a nutshell is people not enjoying critique of their favorite players. Be it Tiger, Phil, Rory, Rickie or anybody else.

Some great analysts and coaches never achieved certain fame, but that does not mean they cannot analyze it. You never hear anybody complain that Kelly T is not capable of saying "great shot Tiger" because she did not win a major, but the minute their is anything critical people get upset.

It has gone so far that you simply cannot say anything objective anymore because you are already walking on eggshells. Its fascinating and crippling all at the same time because anything remotely objective and one is a "hater". Its effin crap if you ask me. It has ruined so many threads on this forum that I find myself checking "out" if certain people are playing because you cannot say a word. And I own the effin thing!

Some fans exhaust me and its just not worth it because a healthy conversation/debate is no where near doable or acceptable. Either put on blinders and raise your fist at the sky, or you are labeled one that "hates". Its absurd and fascinating all at the same time.

Kind of a tangent and I apologize.

This made me laugh a little. You are right too. Like I said, I want knowedgeable people, but that's about it. I'm one that doesn't mind guys like McCord and Miller that much though.

[dietpillxanaxaxx]

honestly, I pay little attention to the commentators. I am more interested in watching the swing, or trying to check out what kind of putter is being rolled so I really can't say on that. As far as instructiors go, I want someone that will tell me what to do, then show me what to do, and then help me to do it. I don't need them to turn around and hit the shot LH (although the guy that I am working with can and does it well), but he can play all the shots RH. And I loike that he is RH because he will stand across from me and let me mirror him for positions which is kind of cool.

[errolespopume]

I want a guy who knows a lot about the game, is quick minded and witty, and makes me laugh.

AKA, Fehrety.

[TpDoctorOneTp]

honestly, I pay little attention to the commentators. I am more interested in watching the swing, or trying to check out what kind of putter is being rolled so I really can't say on that. As far as instructiors go, I want someone that will tell me what to do, then show me what to do, and then help me to do it. I don't need them to turn around and hit the shot LH (although the guy that I am working with can and does it well), but he can play all the shots RH. And I loike that he is RH because he will stand across from me and let me mirror him for positions which is kind of cool.

I'm usually distracted looking for good looking ladies in the gallery. It happens pretty often since they show Tigger and Phil for most of the telecast. Tigger and Phil often find themsleves playing from within the gallery.

[timgillmoreeztf]

This made me laugh a little. You are right too. Like I said, I want knowedgeable people, but that's about it. I'm one that doesn't mind guys like McCord and Miller that much though.

That's a good point and is perhaps why I personally enjoy Chamblee and Nobilo so much. They don't have the TOUR record that Miller does, or hell maybe even McCord, but they give great insight and cut both ways in regards to that one guy and everyone else for that matter.

Just my opinion.

[SkeniaInhilla]

I don't think you need to have played on tour to be a commentator, you just need to know what you are talking about and be articulate. Same goes for any sport commentator really. Former players are great for stories/anecdotes but that isn't a must.

As for an instructor I agree that he or she needs to be able to play golf at a certain level. I would imagine it is hard to find one who isn't a very good golfer though. For PGA pros I believe they need to pass a PAT (Player Ability Test) and have a certain handicap (not sure how low?).

[Gooracouppy]

I like guys that make sense and are good at what they do. I dont like guys that say "This putt breaks left up the hill" and it breaks right, or whatever.


I also think a good quality to have as a golf commentator is learning not to talk too much.

[rengerts]

Never thought about it in regards to golf but I can tell you I can't stand Stephen A Smith and Skip Bayless. I think they only have jobs because some exec thinks they have entertainment value.

As far as golf I will say that I would take more stock in what Butch Harmon says as opposed to Hank Haney. Butch still works with top talent while Hank appears to be interested in making a quick buck.

[mikeyyuiok]

I feel a commentator will have to have Tour experience as without it he/she will only be speculating as to what is really going on,especially when coming down the stretch on Sunday. The likes of Colin Montgomerie on Sky last week at the PGA gave a good account during the thunder break of how he felt he was such a good Ryder Cup player due to the fact he didn't have the same pressure on him as he did while playing singles in a major.
Only experience made that worth watching...

[lzwha]

Never thought about it in regards to golf but I can tell you I can't stand Stephen A Smith and Skip Bayless. I think they only have jobs because some exec thinks they have entertainment value.

As far as golf I will say that I would take more stock in what Butch Harmon says as opposed to Hank Haney. Butch still works with top talent while Hank appears to be interested in making a quick buck.

Sometimes former players seem to get commentator jobs just because they used to play. Doesn't mean they are any good.

Harmon does commentary on Sky and I really like him.

Hated Monty as a player but he is not a bad commentator (even though he does come of as a little bitter at times).

[ArraryTauTDew]

I don't think that a 'color' commentator must have been a great or even a good player. The must be able to give us a little insight to what a player may be thinking about a particular shot, not just the facts (yardage, wind..etc.). It's a real talent to do that with a few words. Less is better for television. However, I have the PGA on XM radio that I listen to on the way home from work, and they do a fabulous job of painting a picture with their words.

[Kuncher]

It's just funny that Tiger fans want to bash BC b/c he never won a Major or whatever. The dude played on Tour. I wonder if these same people didn't like listening to Harry Caray?

[johnbeller]

Harry Caray ruled.

[halfstreet]

I have no idea what the qualifications are for a great coach, but for a commentator or an analyst, I just want you to have played golf on the PGA Tour and be interesting and smart.

I think Golf Channel for all their faults have done a pretty good job at this. BC I disagree with a lot, but he's well spoken, thought provoking and knows golf. Frank Nobilo might be my favorite analyst in sports right now and I always enjoy what he has to say. Then you add in some Faldo who I think as a colour man is the best in the game and you can see that the qualifications are just pretty wide open.

Just be freaking knowledgeable and interesting and make your points well and you can do the job. I don't care if you only played on the PGA tour for a cup of coffee, or you won 6 majors, I will listen if you are well spoken and interesting. Ever listened to Jack Nicklaus talk about golf? That would suck to listen to him break down golf for 6 hours of covereage.