Why do they exist? It seems like a waste of money and that they could instead send a scout to go get certain information and report back to the broadcasters.

Because fat, bald middle aged male football fans want their eye candy?

why does tv spend 40 minutes a game getting shots of the coach on the sidelines doing nothing? There is a lot of dead time in football that needs to be filled.

and although it is eye candy, it is a less offensive eye candy than getting more shots of the hot chick in the crowd or cheerleaders on the sidelines.

i personally like the sideline reporters. They help fill slow spots in the game, and somebody needs to get those worthless answers from the coach at halftime.

I wish they would spend more time on the cheerleaders.

(04-20-2015 07:20 AM)goofus Wrote:  why does tv spend 40 minutes a game getting shots of the coach on the sidelines doing nothing? There is a lot of dead time in football that needs to be filled.

and although it is eye candy, it is a less offensive eye candy than getting more shots of the hot chick in the crowd or cheerleaders on the sidelines.

i personally like the sideline reporters. They help fill slow spots in the game, and somebody needs to get those worthless answers from the coach at halftime.

They do that anyways, how many closeups of Ashley Judd are we gonna see when UK plays? We see more of her than Kurt Warner's wife during Super Bowls he played in.

They are useful for getting an answer such as the status of an injured player from the lockerroom that the game announcers can't but again, all they have to do is send a scout or an intern to do that.

(04-20-2015 10:48 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(04-20-2015 07:20 AM)goofus Wrote:  why does tv spend 40 minutes a game getting shots of the coach on the sidelines doing nothing? There is a lot of dead time in football that needs to be filled.

and although it is eye candy, it is a less offensive eye candy than getting more shots of the hot chick in the crowd or cheerleaders on the sidelines.

i personally like the sideline reporters. They help fill slow spots in the game, and somebody needs to get those worthless answers from the coach at halftime.

They do that anyways, how many closeups of Ashley Judd are we gonna see when UK plays? We see more of her than Kurt Warner's wife during Super Bowls he played in.

They are useful for getting an answer such as the status of an injured player from the lockerroom that the game announcers can't but again, all they have to do is send a scout or an intern to do that.

Just as long as Brett Musburger isn't creeping us out...I enjoy the eye candy. Why do you think the SEC is so popular?

You're referring to [model whose name slips my mind] that was dating an Alabama player.

Si...I has to Google the young tarts name as her 15 mins of fame left my memory.

I think that the goal is to make their broadcast teams more gender-diverse. They can now statistically prove that at least 33% of their on-air talent is female, even if their roles are less prominent than the play-by-play and color commentary roles.

That makes sense. Except for someone proficient in their craft like Doris Burke, I still have a hard time with female commentators, especially football.

(04-20-2015 11:10 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  That makes sense. Except for someone proficient in their craft like Doris Burke, I still have a hard time with female commentators, especially football.

Some of the male commentators aren't exactly Pulitzer Prize material either.

But at least I'm used to hearing a male voice announcing games.

(04-20-2015 06:52 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Because fat, bald middle aged male football fans want their eye candy?

I don't think skinny, floppy haired, teenage male football fans are opposed to eye candy.

Or 20-something, average sized black guys. I started this thread but I did love Pam Oliver.

(04-20-2015 02:09 PM)Wolfman Wrote:  

(04-20-2015 06:52 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Because fat, bald middle aged male football fans want their eye candy?

I don't think skinny, floppy haired, teenage male football fans are opposed to eye candy.

They don't really count in the grand scheme of things, do they?

(04-20-2015 03:10 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(04-20-2015 02:09 PM)Wolfman Wrote:  

(04-20-2015 06:52 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Because fat, bald middle aged male football fans want their eye candy?

I don't think skinny, floppy haired, teenage male football fans are opposed to eye candy.

They don't really count in the grand scheme of things, do they?

Disposable income, impulse buyers... I'm going to say yes.

(04-20-2015 12:38 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  Why do they exist? It seems like a waste of money and that they could instead send a scout to go get certain information and report back to the broadcasters.

To have jobs for women in the media to make it look like they are a equal opportunity employer