I like to watch sports. Basketball, soccer, football, tennis, and most other sports. I even remember watching Olympic Power-Walking and enjoying it very much. It was very weird, though, especially during the slow-motion replays. Seriously, does Power-Walking need slow-motion?
The commentary during sporting events is 100% necessary. Watching a game with no volume is bothersome because there is so much to learn. Rules that need explaining. Inspiring stories that need to be told. And those magical moments just wouldn't be the same without a good scream of excitement. Imagine watching the Jazz vs. Houston without someone yelling, "John Stockton sends the Utah Jazz to the NBA Finals!" How was it? Thought so.
Commentating is great. But what really is beginning to irk me more and more are the post-game/post-match interviews. While I enjoy listening to others giving their educated opinion about the game, I find no reason to question the coaches, whether they won or lost. They all give the same darn reason for the outcome of the game: execution.
"Coach Mendenhall, why did you lose so badly to the Utes?"
"Because we didn't execute our plays."
(I think he is the coach that is most guilty of using the word "execute." I like Bronco as a man and coach, but my goodness, choose another word.)
If a team won a game, it's because they "executed" their plays. If a team lost a game, it's because they "didn't execute" their plays.
Are we stupid? Is there really nothing else to be said about a game? "We didn't execute our plays, so we lost." "They executed and ended up winning the game."
I feel like executing the next person who talks about the game's execution.
And what does "execute" even mean?
Think of a complicated basketball play: Stockton at the top of the key. Malone and Ostertag underneath. Hornacek and Anderson on the elbows. Malone steps up, sets the screen on Kevin Johnson, then rolls toward the basket. Stockton lobs the ball to Malone, who attempts a lay-up. He misses. Bulls rebound and gain possession of the ball.
Was the play "executed?" Is a play only "executed" when it puts points on the board? Maybe. But people (Bronco), please find a different word! Or a different excuse. Or just something better to say. Using "execute" over and over to explain both wins and losses is getting super old.
The commentary during sporting events is 100% necessary. Watching a game with no volume is bothersome because there is so much to learn. Rules that need explaining. Inspiring stories that need to be told. And those magical moments just wouldn't be the same without a good scream of excitement. Imagine watching the Jazz vs. Houston without someone yelling, "John Stockton sends the Utah Jazz to the NBA Finals!" How was it? Thought so.
Commentating is great. But what really is beginning to irk me more and more are the post-game/post-match interviews. While I enjoy listening to others giving their educated opinion about the game, I find no reason to question the coaches, whether they won or lost. They all give the same darn reason for the outcome of the game: execution.
"Coach Mendenhall, why did you lose so badly to the Utes?"
"Because we didn't execute our plays."
(I think he is the coach that is most guilty of using the word "execute." I like Bronco as a man and coach, but my goodness, choose another word.)
If a team won a game, it's because they "executed" their plays. If a team lost a game, it's because they "didn't execute" their plays.
Are we stupid? Is there really nothing else to be said about a game? "We didn't execute our plays, so we lost." "They executed and ended up winning the game."
I feel like executing the next person who talks about the game's execution.
And what does "execute" even mean?
Think of a complicated basketball play: Stockton at the top of the key. Malone and Ostertag underneath. Hornacek and Anderson on the elbows. Malone steps up, sets the screen on Kevin Johnson, then rolls toward the basket. Stockton lobs the ball to Malone, who attempts a lay-up. He misses. Bulls rebound and gain possession of the ball.
Was the play "executed?" Is a play only "executed" when it puts points on the board? Maybe. But people (Bronco), please find a different word! Or a different excuse. Or just something better to say. Using "execute" over and over to explain both wins and losses is getting super old.
