Mike Greenberg rightfully criticized Billy Packer on ESPN Radio this morning for the Old Hoops Grouch's comments that the coaches in the Final Four are the best coaches (as a foursome) ever to coach in the Final Four. Greenberg then went on to prove that Packer is wrong, because his intern sourced the head coaching lists from prior Final Fours, and many of those foursomes had more national championships to their credit collectively than the current foursome of Howland, Calipari, Williams and Self (who have one among them). Greenberg also pointed out that had Dick Vitale made this statement on ESPN, Packer would have been quick to criticize college hoops best cheerleader in USA Today.
Greenberg is as right as Packer is annoying. Both are very knowledgeable, but Packer is an acquired taste to say the least. I don't know about you, but I actually don't like the overly saccharine style of Jim Nantz or the "lead with the vinegar" style of Packer. I thought that Dick Enberg and Jay Bilas excelled covering their region, and I'd take Bilas and Clark Kellogg over Packer as my top analyst. (Bob Knight has been hilarious, but his is a temporary gig).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Prof:
Packer used to be great when he and Al McGuire shared the color duties. Al kept him in line - - somewhat.
Absent McGuire's wit and lightheartedness, Packer is a scold. And it is hard to take that for very long...
Thanks, Curmudgeon. I agree. Al and Billy were great together. Billy remains very knowledgeable, but what confounds me is that apparently he and Nantz together are well-regarded as a team. I honestly thought that Enberg and Bilas were better, and that Bilas and Clark Kellogg are better commentators.
Post a Comment