Commentator evaluation: Tony Romo

[Conigliaro's Potential]

He's calling the Pats game on Saturday night with Jim Nantz, and I haven't brought a color commentator under the microscope in a while, so let's go ahead and get the ball rolling on a man who inspires quite strong feelings one way or the other. And often both, because neither Tony Romo's delivery nor his analysis is what you might call safe or orthodox. If the Patriots keep winning, Romo will almost certainly be broadcasting their games for the next three weeks - surely Nantz and Romo would call Chiefs-Pats instead of Ravens vs. Bills/Texans - so let's just fold this into previewing the Titans game: what do you think of CBS's #1 NFL analyst?

 

[EvilEmpire]

Easily my favorite color commentator and I think he'll get even better with more experience. His ability to quickly process what he is seeing into relevant observations about what is happening on the field with occasional insight into what is likely to happen on the field is a lot of fun. He sounds like he is having fun, and I really like that too. I think he has an earnest enthusiasm for the game that can be infectious.

 

[luckiestman]

It’s a 5. Not a great voice but he makes up for it.

 

[SoxJox]

He's awful. He seems to adopt a "theme" or two each game and he repeats himself and beats that drum throughout.

 

[Koufax]

He sees what's happening on the field and explains it well. He's also excited about what he sees and his enthusiasm is infectious. And then there is the once-a-game prediction that comes true. Nobody comes close to that. 5 stars.

 

[Catcher Block]

In his current/early-career form, I think he's a 5. He seems like he genuinely loves football, and you can really hear his enthusiasm watching a team execute a game plan that he's discussed with that team in his pregame meetings and prep.

I'm glad they tuned down the 'romostradamus' pre-snap reads that he showed a lot of in his first year. I appreciated what he was seeing, but I found it a bit too distracting every other snap. That being said, his spontaneous, in-the-moment observations like how much time a team needs to get the FG unit on (I think this was a Pats game?), tend to be really sharp bits of insight that no one else does.

Without too much additional seasoning and experience, I can see him being better than anyone else out there, and I'm hopeful he's a blueprint for the Mannings of the world to bring their understanding of the modern game to the booth.

 

[InsideTheParker]

He sees what's happening on the field and explains it well. He's also excited about what he sees and his enthusiasm is infectious. And then there is the once-a-game prediction that comes true. Nobody comes close to that. 5 stars.

I have to admit not liking football very much, only looking at games late in the season, so I'm the worst, eh? I love Romo for the reasons Koufax gave.

 

[ifmanis5]

Should I give him 5 stars? "I dunno Jim, it's gonna be close, ahhhhhhhhhh"
He talks too much but he's talking over Nantz which is a huge plus.
Madden was a 5, Romo a notch below.

 

[Kliq]

I gave him 4.5, even if he is probably the best in the game. Talks a little too much and his enthusiasm, while 95% helpful, is occasionally grating.

In addition to the reasons listed above, I think he has really helped Nantz out; Romo's energy brings Nantz out of his Augusta mood and has made him much better imo.

 

[mauf]

Easily my favorite color commentator and I think he'll get even better with more experience. His ability to quickly process what he is seeing into relevant observations about what is happening on the field with occasional insight into what is likely to happen on the field is a lot of fun. He sounds like he is having fun, and I really like that too. I think he has an earnest enthusiasm for the game that can be infectious.

Agree that Romo is the best, and I gave him 5 stars also, but I don’t think he’s likely to improve; he’ll become more polished, but that will be offset by a slight decline in his insights as his playing days get further behind him. There’s just something to be said for having played the game recently, especially as a QB who needs to understand what each of the other 21 players on the field is trying to do.

 

[Ralphwiggum]

4.5 from me, easily my favorite guy. He's enthusiastic, loves the game, and points out stuff that I don't notice. Only thing keeping him from a 5 is that I do agree he can tend to be a little verbose at times.

 

[Vandalman]

4.5 from me. He was good right out of the gate, which is not always true of new color analysts. He appears to have toned down on the "Oh boy!" and "Here we go!" moments that popped up too often in his inaugural season. The fact that he replaced a declining Phil Simms helped a lot. No one seems to miss ol' Phil.

 

[glennhoffmania]

His voice irritates me a lot. He always sounds like a guy who just got out of a really loud concert- talking too loud with a semi-hoarse voice. He definitely knows what he's talking about but his delivery is annoying. Anyone working with Nantz looks better in comparison. He's clearly better than the Boogers, Greens, Gannons and Davises, but that's a pretty low bar. So I gave him a 3.5.

 

[pantsparty]

My favorite color guys are those who 1) know more about the sport than me but can relate that knowledge in a way I'll understand 2) love the sport even more than I do and it shows in their enthusiasm for what's happening on the field. Even in an otherwise boring game Romo will find something he thinks is interesting to talk about to keep me wanting to watch. He's not perfect, but close enough that I grade him as 5.

 

[IpswichSox]

5 from me, easily the best in football right now. It's not just the enthusiasm and personality, but I typically end up learning something or having an insight into something I've seen for years but hadn't previously appreciated. In a crowd of mostly Dan Fouts-types, Romo is king, and like Eck with baseball -- must-see TV.

 

[Detts]

5. He makes intelligent comments unlike pretty much every commentator that states the obvious and/or guesses wrong on what has/will happen.

 

[Harry Hooper]

Probably the best color guy right now, but he still could improve. I will cheat and give him a 4.75 (in the poll I went with 4.5).

 

[Humphrey]

I gave him a 4....probably because when he started I expected a 2 or worse. Just want to make sure I'm not overcompensating!

 

[BigJimEd]

Close to unlistenable. Rambles on. Needs to fill every second. Constantly repeating himself and somehow contradicting himself at same time.

 

[Pablo's TB Lover]

He was a one-star tonight and has basically gone from 4.5-5 stars end of last season to 3 stars now. He has been brutal this year, culminating with tonight when he was more interested in the narrative than explaining the goddamned game action.

 

[Harry Hooper]

He was a one-star tonight and has basically gone from 4.5-5 stars end of last season to 3 stars now. He has been brutal this year, culminating with tonight when he was more interested in the narrative than explaining the goddamned game action.

Agreed, only 1 star tonight.

 

[Marciano490]

Maybe it’s common to all announcers, but I feel like Romo in particular is way more fun to listen to when your team is winning than losing.

 

[LoweTek]

I've learned a lot about pro football X&Os from Romo. He sees and describes things other guys don't. Despite his drawbacks (lack of experience I suspect) he educates me. Can't say that about many other color guys.

I was thinking about this while listening to Aikman the other day. I think he brings very little to the table and Buck treats him like he's some kind of announcer God.

Drinking game: grab a shot every time Aikman says "edge..."

 

[Van Everyman]

View: https://twitter.com/FrankCaliendo/status/1227763581770317824?s=20