Actually, in fact checking myself, it looks like it first appeared in 1971. The sport has benefited from a huge social invasion into the culture of this country from before that time. Music, lingo, fashion, movies, TV....
-
Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
Pro Tour Live Coverage
- Thread starter RootsDiscGolf
- Start date
Actually, in fact checking myself, it looks like it first appeared in 1971. The sport has benefited from a huge social invasion into the culture of this country from before that time. Music, lingo, fashion, movies, TV....
Yes, I think that both of them can be good. They just need the right partner to do the actual "play by play". They are both color analysts so to speak. Jeff Spring could be that guy. Dixon could be. I don't think that Terry is the right person for that role (although he is good), Terry is a better with the color side than the dry play by play.
I honestly think Terry and Dixon is the best due for live so far. It could be nostalgia from last year though, but compared to Val and Nate they feel more authentic and less repetitive. It could be partially due to the fact that T&D were on site, Dixon played practice rounds with the competitors before the event and thus had insights about the course and player conditions etc (unless I remember wrong). Even though I enjoy Nate's pro insights quite a lot. Val and Nate could be bit less modest though, they often artificially ask things from each other which they certainly know themselves as well etc.
If they stream quality is as good as it was at Jonesboro last round and the commenting is at least on the same level as it has been, I will definitely keep watching live over post-production. While follow flights and BigSexy are nice, nothing beats the live feel, even if you get some down time. I don't (typically) watch DG just because I want to see great shots, I want to see the back-and-forth battles and hear the live astonishment of the commentators when McBeth shoots -18. While post-production commentators typically avoid spoilers, you just don't get the same atmosphere from tightly cut videos where commentators already know the outcome of the round.
Adding clips from the chase card coverage and/or replays of interesting shots from the previous holes during the transitions between holes and backups would make live coverage even better (like in Memorial?), but even without those, and with occasional (or more than occasional) glitches in stream, less-than-perfect camerawork, and very late time I will keep watching DGPT and any other live DG coverage.
I do hope that the DGN will allow rewinding and watching the live stream later though just like in YT, as often I miss the start and want to start from the beginning, or watch the live stream next day (which also allows esy fast forwarding backups etc with YT shortcuts).
And as I was writing this I got notification from FB that I have been awarded a "Best Fan" badge from DGPT FB page. I remember writing on their wall once?
If they stream quality is as good as it was at Jonesboro last round and the commenting is at least on the same level as it has been, I will definitely keep watching live over post-production. While follow flights and BigSexy are nice, nothing beats the live feel, even if you get some down time. I don't (typically) watch DG just because I want to see great shots, I want to see the back-and-forth battles and hear the live astonishment of the commentators when McBeth shoots -18. While post-production commentators typically avoid spoilers, you just don't get the same atmosphere from tightly cut videos where commentators already know the outcome of the round.
Adding clips from the chase card coverage and/or replays of interesting shots from the previous holes during the transitions between holes and backups would make live coverage even better (like in Memorial?), but even without those, and with occasional (or more than occasional) glitches in stream, less-than-perfect camerawork, and very late time I will keep watching DGPT and any other live DG coverage.
I do hope that the DGN will allow rewinding and watching the live stream later though just like in YT, as often I miss the start and want to start from the beginning, or watch the live stream next day (which also allows esy fast forwarding backups etc with YT shortcuts).
And as I was writing this I got notification from FB that I have been awarded a "Best Fan" badge from DGPT FB page. I remember writing on their wall once?
Last edited:
I think you're potentially down playing the importance of commentators appealing towards the non player fan. If our sport continues to have a viewing base consisting mainly of players, then I 100% agree with you. It's hard to not sound like a total a$$ anymore than I might have already with my critique of Val, because again..I have nothing but respect for her and love watching her air bounce drives fly for days. But once the fan base tilts more toward non players..well..I would disagree with your Hanna remark 100%.
lyleoross
* Ace Member *
I went as low as possible on the numbers. See if I went with the biggest numbers, I'd get called on that too. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
lyleoross
* Ace Member *
I wonder what the real numbers are? I'd also be interested to know what the distribution between new and old golfers is? What is the impact, that is, do the videos change participation, purchasing frequency etc.? For sure, I think the commentator matters in terms of the items I just listed (but I wouldn't bet on that, see below). A rambling and repetitive style that adds low value is not just going to turn off "experienced" players, but folks who might be there to get exposure or new players who might become enthused.
However, the conversations here convince me that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Some of the things I hate, others love. I'd want to know if there is a universal style that relates to any type of viewer?
I'm not sure what you mean by commentators appealing to the non-player. How does one do that? Or more accurately, what does one do that is okay for players to listen to but that may alienate non-players?
The only thing I can think is that you want someone who will pander to the non-player, dumb-down the language (avoiding lingo like hyzer/anhyzer), and over-explaining the basics. I really don't think that's what we want.
Ultimately, I think it comes down to people fitting the roles they're filling. Neither Nate nor Val fit the role of host/play-by-play for the broadcast. They shouldn't be leading. They both should fit (and if the Waco coverage is any indication, they will fit) being strictly an analyst. No one asks Tony Romo or Troy Aikman to call play by play for the NFL. That's why Jim Nantz and Joe Buck have jobs. We just need to find someone to be Nantz/Buck to Nate and Val's Romo/Aikman. Maybe it works out, maybe it doesn't. But I don't think we can or should write either of them off at this stage.
Knowing Patreon like I do, the more you post the less you get for each post because people put limits on the number of creations they support. I am willing to bet on a high volume month, they probably make 20-30% of the number that they put out. For example:
20 creations x $2000 x .20 = $8000 / month. This is obviously a rough guess based on my knowledge of Patreon. It could be 15% it could be 30%.
And I know that Jomez is moving over to a monthly support system for a few reasons.
1. Patreon is offering a new system for large creators giving them more options and a dedicated support person.
2. You get a guarantied income each month with no variation. Because Jomez doesn't usually put anything out Nov - March they really make very little money from Patreon during that time.
Catching up on this thread after the weekend-
I disagree, but I understand where you're coming from. It's far easier to inflate view counts than subscribers, and it's hardest to inflate/simulate real engagement, which IMO is what you really want.
Think about it this way - is it easier to:
- Get someone to watch?
- Get someone to Like and/or Subscribe?
- Get someone to comment and interact with other fans watching the same thing?
It's a trick question, because one doesn't usually happen before the other. While you always want more of everything, I think there's enough momentum (dare I say critical mass) that the first two will keep growing. The third, however, means you need a working knowledge of the sport and the culture (aka being a fan) to engage, and that's our next mountain to climb.
- I would seriously consider any opportunity, though DGPT would have to come with $. I already gave them their homie hookup rate for their whole inaugural season.
I do hope Terry (in his own way) continues to evolve into our version of Feherty - he's out on the course, he's known to everybody, he has his loveable quirks, and he already has the podcast.
I'm stoked you got hired back (and got equipment upgrades and more crew as a result), but let's be realistic about what has happened. It has been the biggest PR nightmare in the sport in the whole time I've been around, which includes the ADGT.
Don't try to minimize or sell, just tell Steve to stay out of the control room and let you correct course before the second half of the season. THEN we can look back and say "oh it was just a blip" - but the problems still have to be fixed first my dude. It was also the tiny tip of an iceberg that sunk the whole Titanic. You're the best option to get it turned around, but make no mistake about the stakes, this could kill the tour outright still. There has not been a single round that meets quality par this year from the DGPT - livestreamed, post-produced, any of it.
I believe in you guys, but I'm not giving credit or looking past the blunders until the turnaround has been proven. That's all I'm saying.
Very fair points.
Well, my response to JVD above might steal the thunder here - but here's how I see it.
Frankly, Steve doesn't understand how to execute great media, but he believes he does. I said it on the podcast last week, but responding to me (in his interview 2 weeks ago) that, "if we had been able to stream at 1080p60, things would have been OK" proves this (because it's not correct, it actually wouldn't solve any of the problems he had, and it would potentially have created more problems). A racing stripe on a Honda Civic doesn't make it more likely to win the Indy 500.
I honestly believe the success of the DGPT at this point comes down to one simple question, "Can Steve delegate high level decisions, and will he trust the people whom he delegates to?" He has enough talented and motivated people around him, he still has enough support from the pros, and he now has to win back the fans and media members at large who are (at the moment) tired of hearing from him because he keeps shooting himself in the foot in interviews. He's gotta trust the team, and let them make him look good.
As far as our wider reputation, this is a change from how I used to think. Honestly I think you have to play to your audience. Fans are unashamed these days to be "out" as disc golfers. We should be unapologetic and fanatical about our sport, and we should make content that WE want to see, in the format that we want to see it, on the platforms that we congregate on. I couldn't care less what ESPN thinks of us if we are able to make media ourselves that makes us happy, for example.
Haha, I hope that answers the question as to my role vs. my opinion. The only time I really hold back information (and admittedly I do) is when I feel like putting something out there on our platform will be likely to be taken out of context and become overly damaging or unduly persuasive without evidence to back it. There's not enough independent media in the sport yet, and sometimes if there's only 1-2 perspectives out there they start to ring out like objective truth the more and more they echo. I try to be judicious in keeping opinions and facts properly separated and contextualized.
Given that my career has survived thusfar, I feel pretty secure in saying that I'll be able to go out on my terms. I didn't handle the transition to "media personality" from a pure director/producer as well as I should have. I was unprepared for a more public life on social media, I was just used to dropping my opinion anywhere I pleased without any real consequence.
I disagree, but I understand where you're coming from. It's far easier to inflate view counts than subscribers, and it's hardest to inflate/simulate real engagement, which IMO is what you really want.
Think about it this way - is it easier to:
- Get someone to watch?
- Get someone to Like and/or Subscribe?
- Get someone to comment and interact with other fans watching the same thing?
It's a trick question, because one doesn't usually happen before the other. While you always want more of everything, I think there's enough momentum (dare I say critical mass) that the first two will keep growing. The third, however, means you need a working knowledge of the sport and the culture (aka being a fan) to engage, and that's our next mountain to climb.
I agree. Val and Nate are a bit too much like a husband and wife youtube music reviews team but they were both pretty good split up when Spring was there.
I wonder if someone say... like... a Jamie Thomas
Or since they've gotten back together with SB, if Terry will be brought in...
- I would seriously consider any opportunity, though DGPT would have to come with $. I already gave them their homie hookup rate for their whole inaugural season.I do hope Terry (in his own way) continues to evolve into our version of Feherty - he's out on the course, he's known to everybody, he has his loveable quirks, and he already has the podcast.
I'm stoked you got hired back (and got equipment upgrades and more crew as a result), but let's be realistic about what has happened. It has been the biggest PR nightmare in the sport in the whole time I've been around, which includes the ADGT.
Don't try to minimize or sell, just tell Steve to stay out of the control room and let you correct course before the second half of the season. THEN we can look back and say "oh it was just a blip" - but the problems still have to be fixed first my dude. It was also the tiny tip of an iceberg that sunk the whole Titanic. You're the best option to get it turned around, but make no mistake about the stakes, this could kill the tour outright still. There has not been a single round that meets quality par this year from the DGPT - livestreamed, post-produced, any of it.
I believe in you guys, but I'm not giving credit or looking past the blunders until the turnaround has been proven. That's all I'm saying.
Very fair points.
Well, my response to JVD above might steal the thunder here - but here's how I see it.
Frankly, Steve doesn't understand how to execute great media, but he believes he does. I said it on the podcast last week, but responding to me (in his interview 2 weeks ago) that, "if we had been able to stream at 1080p60, things would have been OK" proves this (because it's not correct, it actually wouldn't solve any of the problems he had, and it would potentially have created more problems). A racing stripe on a Honda Civic doesn't make it more likely to win the Indy 500.
I honestly believe the success of the DGPT at this point comes down to one simple question, "Can Steve delegate high level decisions, and will he trust the people whom he delegates to?" He has enough talented and motivated people around him, he still has enough support from the pros, and he now has to win back the fans and media members at large who are (at the moment) tired of hearing from him because he keeps shooting himself in the foot in interviews. He's gotta trust the team, and let them make him look good.
As far as our wider reputation, this is a change from how I used to think. Honestly I think you have to play to your audience. Fans are unashamed these days to be "out" as disc golfers. We should be unapologetic and fanatical about our sport, and we should make content that WE want to see, in the format that we want to see it, on the platforms that we congregate on. I couldn't care less what ESPN thinks of us if we are able to make media ourselves that makes us happy, for example.
Haha, I hope that answers the question as to my role vs. my opinion.
The only time I really hold back information (and admittedly I do) is when I feel like putting something out there on our platform will be likely to be taken out of context and become overly damaging or unduly persuasive without evidence to back it. There's not enough independent media in the sport yet, and sometimes if there's only 1-2 perspectives out there they start to ring out like objective truth the more and more they echo. I try to be judicious in keeping opinions and facts properly separated and contextualized. Given that my career has survived thusfar, I feel pretty secure in saying that I'll be able to go out on my terms. I didn't handle the transition to "media personality" from a pure director/producer as well as I should have. I was unprepared for a more public life on social media, I was just used to dropping my opinion anywhere I pleased without any real consequence.
Keller
* Ace Member *
Yes, at this point it does sound kind of nuts. But given as you feel good about where it's heading and you know more than I do, I'll try to keep an open mind.:thmbup:
Let's see how to reply..gently and with respect....some pros don't have clear speaking voices but as players, we don't care, it's one of our pros talking. A non player new to the sport, who has no idea who the commentator is, may have a different subliminal reaction. So the happy medium might be to find someone first that has a clear speaking voice and build from there.
Fwiw.. a local beloved Football player Jason Witten tried commentary after he retired. Well..it's hard to be like Troy or Tony. He's not retired anymore.
BlueMonk
Par Member
For me at this point, I'm probably only going to watch live coverage if it's the final round of a close tournament, where we really don't know who is going to win. I'll watch the last 18 or 9 holes of that and tolerate the downtime walking down the fairway between shots, etc. I might watch earlier rounds of a major. But other than that, I'd prefer to just watch post-production.
I would love to see the pairing of a true play-by-play person (not a player) with a color analyst (a player). I think that would elevate the experience of watching disc golf coverage a fair amount.
Not that anyone is asking or cares. But after a few years of watching coverage, that's where this recreational player stands on all of this.
I would love to see the pairing of a true play-by-play person (not a player) with a color analyst (a player). I think that would elevate the experience of watching disc golf coverage a fair amount.
Not that anyone is asking or cares. But after a few years of watching coverage, that's where this recreational player stands on all of this.
lyleoross
* Ace Member *
Bingo. We are predisposed to like our pros because we're familiar (and fans) and because we trust that what they're saying is "expert level"
That doesn't mean they always speak like an expert, and it doesn't mean they're the right fit for the format.
I'm not opining either way on any particular commentator, I just really appreciate this point being brought up because it's a very important one that usually gets drowned out by the buzz of fandom.
ThunderEagle
Par Member
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2016
- Messages
- 241
It is funny you say that. I feel that Ian is the best play by play guy in the disc golf game. Granted, I have no idea how he would do on a live broadcast. I think it would be VERY interesting to see Ian doing play by play with Terry providing the color commentary of an event. I think it would be very, very good.
I also completely agree with you about Nate and Val, they are both really color commentators. They need a play-by-play announcer IMO.
Uli and Feldy reminded me of the first time I heard Romo and Nance do a football game -- the combination of great analysis and witty humor. :thmbup:
I see the round 3 FPO is uploaded from Jonesboro about three hours ago and this is what I see lol. Not a setting issue for sure. Because it went back to full screen so it was uploaded with those black frame around the video. So couple that with the dropped frames and the audio sounds like it was recorded inside a tin can. The PDGA commercial had no audio so you know sponsors love that.
Attachments
mizunodave
Birdie Member
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2015
- Messages
- 336
I'm surprised to hear these calls for having a play by play person on the commentary. Play by play makes sense in football with lots of moving pieces to keep track of. But in golf, having someone narrate what I'm seeing on screen seems unnecessary. Isn't that what AJ used to get criticized for?
I'm happy having two color people to help me appreciate the difficulty and the skill on display.
I'm happy having two color people to help me appreciate the difficulty and the skill on display.
lyleoross
* Ace Member *
Let's call them the technician, describes hole and how it can be played, and the action guy, person who describes the throws, mistakes, what's going on. Both do background of the sport.
