Rate the Olympic Trials TV Coverage on a scale of 1-10

I've always loved Carrie on camera, but for some reason she was very halting in her speech today, with significant (unnecessary) pauses between sentences/thoughts, was really disappointed with that.

I thought perhaps it was a connection lag but I'm certain it was just how she was talking, as it happened every single time. oh well, hope she smooths it up for next time, she's usually great in the booth.

Time to ditch Hammond.

His sole purpose is to call the final 30 seconds of the race like it is the Kentucky Derby. There was nobody around Rupp and he calls it like there are 14 guys fighting for the 3 spots. Ridiculous.

I would have liked to see more splits, projected finish, more ' x seconds behind'.

Overall, can't complain about the live coverage.

Best coverage of basketball during a marathon that I have seen. If you like basketball, NBC should be your viewing choice for marathons.

LI Runner wrote:

Time to ditch Hammond.

His sole purpose is to call the final 30 seconds of the race like it is the Kentucky Derby. There was nobody around Rupp and he calls it like there are 14 guys fighting for the 3 spots. Ridiculous.

I would have liked to see more splits, projected finish, more ' x seconds behind'.

Overall, can't complain about the live coverage.

Masback and Hutchings are very good analysts/color commentary guys.

The justification for Hammond is that they need a play-by-play guy. However, they need a move-for-move guy that knows marathoning to capture the race. NBC needs to sign Toni Reavis for this in Rio. Also need to ditch Tollefson and replace with Deena and ditch Lewis Johnson and replace with Shorter.

Do you think the issue with the splits was that the "official" tracking page did not work?

Ok, so we're stuck with Hammond for doing the play by play. However, hiring former Olympians such as Shorter or Rodgers for example would be great for the "color" commentary or post race interviews. The NFL always hires retired players for sideline reports or up in the booth for color commentary. The networks should start doing this for the Olympic distance events too.

ESPN did a great job during World Cup soccer by bringing in all those retired players to provide commentary and round table discussions. I wish the marathon was taken more seriously by the networks but to them, this is just a step above the Westminster Dog Show.

I bet the Westminster Dog Show gets higher ratings, lol!

ekw wrote:

8/10.

The Good:

-Split screen

-Great coverage of the end of each race

-Minimal input with the 2 "experts" on the bikes

The Bad:

-Ungodly amount of commercials

-Splits non-existent

-Difficult to make out runners in the packs

Come on brah. Commercials are how they can recoup a few bucks. This ain't charity.

I will never buy that cheese snacks that they were advertising. I know their product now, but I don't like it

Just an idea wrote:

I liked the British commentator. Why can't NBC or other networks hire someone like a Frank Shorter, Craig Virgin or a Bill Rodgers to provide commentary. It would add a lot more gravitas to the broadcasts.

Just because someone was great at a sport does not mean that person will be great at announcing or offering commentary. Shorter at one time provided commentary for Bolder Boulder--it was passable and no where as good as Hutchings.

Virgin would make it all about himself.

Rodgers--no idea. I saw him give a talk one time and it was not very good. (Ran with him once and he was a great storyteller so maybe it is just being in front of a group.)

Hutchings made several mistakes...plus he pronounced Houston as Hoooston

8

I was worried when they interviewed the Mayor that it was going to be a bunch of dumb interviews and not about the race.

But overall it was well produced.

The one thing I never understood is why don't they have a ticker of the top 10 or 15 whenever they go past a mile marker or a electronic mat? The data has to be easy to attain and it would be interesting to see the top 10 or so and the gap each mile on a ticker.

Rerseredda wrote:

The one thing I never understood is why don't they have a ticker of the top 10 or 15 whenever they go past a mile marker or a electronic mat? The data has to be easy to attain and it would be interesting to see the top 10 or so and the gap each mile on a ticker.

That would be great info. Total time, last mile split, and difference from leader.

My tiny little screen at the fitness center treadmill was so small I couldn't even read the running time they had on the screen.

Not about the telecast but I did think it was bogus that the finish clock read 2:44 for the women when Cragg got to the finish. They started like 15:27 after the men. They couldn't have two clocks?

7/10. They lose a point for not showing the average runners who worked hard to qualify. Like Chris Barnicle.

Uk wrote:

-3

We saw 7 minutes of rupps 131 minutes race. No mile splits. Worst tv coverage of any sports event ive seen

Lack of Drones filming over lead packs was a real missed opportunity.

Be thankful you didnt have to listen to the onsite PA announcer. Must have shouted at us five times "do you know what Shalane and Amy really love? Their cats"

ekw wrote:

8/10.

The Good:

-Split screen

-Great coverage of the end of each race

-Minimal input with the 2 "experts" on the bikes

The Bad:

-Ungodly amount of commercials

-Splits non-existent

-Difficult to make out runners in the packs

I streamed it from the UK and was quite pleasantly surprised at the coverage quality. I think they missed the start of Rupp's break during a commercial but otherwise not too bad. Glad they had Hutchings on commentary.

Too much talking- I like Masback but he tends to run on with useless information.

No splits

not enough coverage of where contenders were- it took way too long to tell us that Ritz dropped out.

There were a number of dark horses in the race and they could have kept us informed.

In the women's race I think that Maegan Krifchin was a great story finishing top 10 (7th).

I had the opportunity to run with her- she came to a local running store, ran with us then sat around answering questions- from women wanting advice on how to run their first 5K to serious runners asking serious questions.

She was great.

There is so much time in a marathon to commentate and they say nothing.

Honestly- NBC should listen to the letsrun community.

I'd rate coverage at 5 because there was way too much coverage of the leaders. So Rupp beat a guy almost old enough to be his dad, so what? The women's race was like watching a long training run between partners.

The OT is a race to become an Olympian. No one really cares who wins. The real race is between 3rd and 4th. That's the drama. Why not use drones to show these runners, give their splits, the gap time between them?

4/10

Cons:

-Cutting away from the race without going to split screen for commercials, interviews, and basketball

-basketball

-no splits on the screen and few mentioned

-almost no results

-usatf messed up the results and still hasn't posted full results

-starting to doubt we'll ever get full results

-failed to mention hometown heroes like Katja Goldring who pr'ed

-didn't even show the top 10 finish

Pros:

- they talked mostly about the race

- showed most of the race, at least for the men

- fairly knowledgable commentary