PDA

View Full Version : Sports Words and Phrases that just Have to be Retired



tommy
10-25-2013, 04:59 PM
Been in my head for awhile to start a thread about words and phrases and sayings and such from the world of sports that drive me nuts, either because they're factually incorrect, they're meaningless puff words, they contain unnecessary, surplus verbage, they're incredibly trite, they are examples of sports commentators trying to seem either smarter than they are or more of an "insider" than they are, or other annoying qualities. I figured with the move to the new board, this is as good a time as any. I know there are tons of these out there that you guys can add. I bet that in time, as guys and gals add to this list, this thread could almost threaten the "world's longest thread" thread!

So here goes. I've got two that I just heard in the last half hour that just have to go.

First, he's one of the best in the league "at the ___ position." Say quarterback. "He's one of the best in the league at the quarterback position." You know what? What's wrong with just saying, "He's one of the best quarterbacks in the league?" Why is that word "position" needed? What does it add? Nothing. We know quarterback is a position. Redundant and annoying. Get it out.

OK here's another. A guy who "makes plays with his feet." So-and-so team really likes this guy 'cause he can make plays with his feet. Puh-leez. Is he fast? Just say he's fast. Is he elusive? Say he's elusive. Does he move well within the pocket? Say he moves well within the pocket. Does he have a nose for the first down marker when he scrambles? Say that. Just use the words that actually describe the attribute(s) you are referring to rather than go all cutesy with the "makes plays with his feet." Come on. And to be more accurate, if a guy is a good runner, he's using a lot more than his feet. Why isn't it "he makes plays with his quads, or his hamstrings, or his calves -- or his brain?" Those have as much to do with the quality they're trying to describe as do the feet. Get it oudda here.

kmspeaks
10-25-2013, 05:27 PM
Anything Dick Vitale says.

wilson
10-25-2013, 05:46 PM
"Score the basketball."
The word "score" does not require a direct object. "He can really score" is a much smoother statement than "He can really score the basketball." Besides, he's not scoring the ball...he's scoring a basket.

"The game of [insert sport here]."
We know it's a game. The needless descriptive phrase in front of the sport's name is redundant and annoying.

"Physicality."
A stupid, recently invented word that almost always accomplishes nothing except to render someone's comment more verbose and thus less effective. "He brings a lot of physicality to the game." UGH, no. "He is a physical player." Even that more succinct statement says next to nothing. Of course he's a "physical player," given that all sports are physical endeavors.

wilko
10-25-2013, 06:17 PM
the ball = the rock...

I don't get this one at all. Rocks don't bounce.

Or is this somehow to be equated to a "rock" of crack cocaine and that THAT is something to be valued as much as possession of the ball.

Billy Dat
10-25-2013, 06:23 PM
"Take it to the next level"

"He/She makes winning plays"

"He/She's a gamer!"

"He/She's just a basketball player" (used to contrast from those considered athletic but to show that they are superior players)

I actually like phrases like "the rock" for the ball. One that has sadly nearly disappeared is "the pill".

Skitzle
10-25-2013, 06:26 PM
Can we also make a list of words that should never be retired? "ONIONS!!!! DOUBLE ONIONS!!!!"

Henderson
10-25-2013, 06:32 PM
So many sports malapropisms are just forms of urban slang. I fear where this thread might go.

MCFinARL
10-25-2013, 06:38 PM
"Score the basketball."
The word "score" does not require a direct object. "He can really score" is a much smoother statement than "He can really score the basketball." Besides, he's not scoring the ball...he's scoring a basket.

"The game of [insert sport here]."
We know it's a game. The needless descriptive phrase in front of the sport's name is redundant and annoying.

"Physicality."
A stupid, recently invented word that almost always accomplishes nothing except to render someone's comment more verbose and thus less effective. "He brings a lot of physicality to the game." UGH, no. "He is a physical player." Even that more succinct statement says next to nothing. Of course he's a "physical player," given that all sports are physical endeavors.

"Score the basketball"--have to agree with you, that one is my absolutely least favorite.

-jk
10-25-2013, 06:38 PM
So many sports malapropisms are just forms of urban slang. I fear where this thread might go.

He's a PTPer, baby! <sigh>

-jk

Clay Feet POF
10-25-2013, 06:52 PM
He/She deserves a 2nd chance. At this level its more likely there otherchances. Why not say Another Chance.

FerryFor50
10-25-2013, 06:58 PM
"He's got a great motor." = white guy who plays hard

davekay1971
10-25-2013, 07:05 PM
"He's out with a (insert body part)". A leg is not an injury, nor is it a useful definition of an injury. If the team hasn't divulged the injury then say that the player is out with an undisclosed leg injury. But don't just tell me he's out with a leg.

PSurprise
10-25-2013, 07:22 PM
Can we also make a list of words that should never be retired? "ONIONS!!!! DOUBLE ONIONS!!!!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_ttU3deaqM

Mashed Potatoes!

-jk
10-25-2013, 07:30 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_ttU3deaqM

Mashed Potatoes!

See your "mashed potatoes", and raise you one "Freebird (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYcgwKuri3s)"!

-jk

Newton_14
10-25-2013, 07:35 PM
Nothing jumping out at me at the moment except for all time least favorite:

"He is playing his recruitment close to his vest" (Meaning he is not playing the normal recruiting games and kid has not told a soul where he might attend school)

OldPhiKap
10-25-2013, 07:36 PM
"Tar Heel"

Henderson
10-25-2013, 07:38 PM
"He waltzed into the end zone."

It'd be fun to see. One two three, one two three, one two three. But I've never seen it. I've actually heard commentators say, "He literally waltzed into the end zone." Literally?

Tripping William
10-25-2013, 07:59 PM
Clark Kellogg's orange, Jim.

RoyalBlue08
10-25-2013, 08:16 PM
The one that annoys me the most: football announcers that refer to a trick play as "trickeration". We already have the word trick. No need to just start adding random syllables!

Reilly
10-25-2013, 08:17 PM
"Score the basketball." ...

The worst offender of this is, in my viewing/hearing, K. Nice to know he has one fault.

____

A pet peeve of mine these days -- not just found in the sports world -- is "utilize". You hear it everywhere, usually by folks trying to sound smart. I have yet to see where its use is required, and where "use" would not have been better.

_______

One advantage of some overused words/phrases is that it can make one feel powerful. I was watching a baseball game w/ my kid and Manny Machado -- as he would do on nearly a nightly basis -- made a stunning play. One play just lent itself to the phrase "flashing some leather" and I almost involuntarily said "Manny Machado -- flashing some leather" in a quasi-announcer voice ... followed half a beat later by the tv announcer saying "Manny Machado -- flashing some leather" ... kid did a double take between me and the TV ...

_______

I like "trickeration" if Reece Davis is saying it ...

_______

A Duke friend and I try to pick out what will be *the* phrase or story of the Duke season every year -- the one story/phrase repeated every game, even though the same announcers do all of our games, and the same people are watching all of our games ... "you know, Shavlik Randolph's grandfather was Ronnie Shavlik of NCSU ..."

Reilly
10-25-2013, 08:28 PM
"He's got a great motor." = white guy who plays hard

"athletic quarterback" = black QB

FerryFor50
10-25-2013, 08:44 PM
"athletic quarterback" = black QB

Reminds me of the infamous question asked of Doug Williams during media week at the Super Bowl. He misunderstood it as:

"How long have you been a black quarterback?"

http://www.snopes.com/sports/football/williams.asp

tommy
10-25-2013, 08:56 PM
The one that annoys me the most: football announcers that refer to a trick play as "trickeration". We already have the word trick. No need to just start adding random syllables!

Yeah you're right, and there are a ton of those. In the same ballpark are terms like "second jumpability". Just not a word at all. Just phony baloney words intended to make one seem like a real basketball analyst.

wilson
10-25-2013, 09:01 PM
Yeah you're right, and there are a ton of those. In the same ballpark are terms like "second jumpability". Just not a word at all. Just phony baloney words intended to make one seem like a real basketball analyst."Spurtability" is another. Len Elmore is the worst offender on this front.

uh_no
10-25-2013, 09:02 PM
"Spurtability" is another. Len Elmore is the worst offender on this front.

i think clark kellogg would challenge hm for that title...thank goodness he's off the final 4 team....get nantz a proper analyst

DueBlevil
10-25-2013, 09:06 PM
words and phrases and sayings and such from the world of sports that drive me nuts, either because they're factually incorrect, they're meaningless puff words, they contain unnecessary, surplus verbage, they're incredibly trite, they are examples of sports commentators trying to seem either smarter than they are or more of an "insider" than they are, or other annoying qualities.

This is a problem not only with sports language but in general English usage, particularly the part I have bolded above. It is one of the primary themes of the very popular Strunk and White book, The Elements of Style. I highly recommend the book. To quote one of the more important passages:

Omit needless words. Vigorous writing is concise. A sentence should contain no unnecessary words, a paragraph no unnecessary sentences, for the same reason that a drawing should have no unnecessary lines and a machine no unnecessary parts. This requires not that the writer make all sentences short, or avoid all detail and treat subjects only in outline, but that every word tell. Many expressions in common use violate this principle.
Then he goes on to list some phrases that illustrate the point. For example, people should not say "the question as to whether" rather than just "whether," "there is no doubt but that" rather than "no doubt," "used for fuel purposes" rather than "used for fuel," "he is a man who" rather than "he," or "the reason why is that," rather than simply "because."

Your post reminded me a lot of the lessons of Strunk & White. People often use more words than really have to, and I agree that sportscasters are some of the worst violators.

wilson
10-25-2013, 09:14 PM
Your post reminded me a lot of the lessons of Strunk & White. People often use more words than really have to, and I agree that sportscasters are some of the worst violators.I love Strunk & White (the same White, incidentally, who wrote Charlotte's Web).
Academic writing skills are a fundamental component of my teaching philosophy, and in my opinion, concision is one of the most important features of effective writing. My 8th graders are constantly using 10 words when they should use 3.

ricks68
10-25-2013, 09:29 PM
Untracked.

I absolutely hate that word. While watching Monday Night Football (probably sometime around 30 years ago or so) Howard Cosell I think is the one that made a statement referring to a team being "on track" (a reasonable expression) to march down the field to score based upon what had transpired during the previous succession of plays. The idiots sitting around him, however, picked that up, and based on the apparent original misuse of the word "untracked", dating back to 1939, have continually applied it during game commentaries.

From Merriam-Webster:

Definition of UNTRACK


: to cause to escape from a slump <couldn't get untracked and played poorly throughout the game>


First Known Use of UNTRACK

1939

I think that definition has been screwed up now for almost 75 years. It makes no sense and is very annoying to keep on hearing it over and over and over again during football season. (I dislike that expression almost as much as I dislike Brent Musburger. It has always been a tossup when determining which sport he knows the least about. In 1966, when he was announcing the FF, and Verga couldn't go, he announced that Tony Barone was taking his place. He then spouted off that he knew all about Tony, being such a sports expert, all the while horribly mispronouncing his name. That's when my disdain for that individual began, and continues, because nothing appears to have changed regarding his knowledge base. That's why I always use alternative audio whenever he is involved with any commentary regarding our team.:mad:)

ricks

Reilly
10-25-2013, 09:55 PM
It bugs me when football announcers call an end-around a "reverse" and call a reverse a "double reverse."

BlueDevilBrowns
10-25-2013, 10:01 PM
A Duke friend and I try to pick out what will be *the* phrase or story of the Duke season every year -- the one story/phrase repeated every game, even though the same announcers do all of our games, and the same people are watching all of our games ... "you know, Shavlik Randolph's grandfather was Ronnie Shavlik of NCSU ..."

Exactly! I think the 09 season, they showed the picture of Coach K receiving all of the gold medals from the Olympic team EVERY GAME that year as if was breaking news.

My guess this year will be "Andre Dawkins, although a 5th year senior, came to Duke a year early so he's actually in his proper graduating class."

In related news, Mike Patrick needed to retire 10 years ago.

Dukehky
10-25-2013, 10:05 PM
NFL analysts are terrible for always saying, "if you want to play in the National Football League" "he is one of the best players in the National Football League." I know what NFL stands for bro, just say NFL or the league, we know, you don't have to say the whole name every time the phrase could possibly be used.

I also am not a huge fan of the "our league" or "our game" stuff. Van Gundy says it a lot for the NBA. He's one of the best ball handlers in our game. It just seems like they are trying to remind everyone they were once involved with the game. I know Jeff, you were a head coach. Well guess what, you're not anymore.

I like this thread. All of the other ones that bother me have been stated. Thank you for the opportunity to vent my frustrations with people I'm extremely jealous of because I want their job.

sagegrouse
10-25-2013, 10:10 PM
NFL analysts are terrible for always saying, "if you want to play in the National Football League" "he is one of the best players in the National Football League." I know what NFL stands for bro, just say NFL or the league, we know, you don't have to say the whole name every time the phrase could possibly be used.

.

The old Oiler coach, Jerry Glanville, would tell his players that NFL stood for "Not For Long," and they should listern top him if they wanted to stay in the League. Also, it was a reminder that they should be thinking about life after football.

sagegrouse

El_Diablo
10-25-2013, 10:52 PM
"He's out with a (insert body part)". A leg is not an injury, nor is it a useful definition of an injury. If the team hasn't divulged the injury then say that the player is out with an undisclosed leg injury. But don't just tell me he's out with a leg.

I have never heard the phrase "He's out with a leg." Is that common? If so, I can see how it could be maddening...

Barr8
10-25-2013, 11:08 PM
He's dropping a bagel(who is the announcer who says that?) .... Drives me nuts.

tommy
10-25-2013, 11:47 PM
I love Strunk & White (the same White, incidentally, who wrote Charlotte's Web).
Academic writing skills are a fundamental component of my teaching philosophy, and in my opinion, concision is one of the most important features of effective writing.

Agree completely.

A subcategory of the subject of this thread could be "questions no announcer should ever be allowed to ask again." Here's one: No announcer should ever be allowed to ask a player whose team is headed into the next round of the playoffs if he has any preference concerning which potential opponent they're going to face next. I have never, never, never heard any player -- EVER -- say anything but "we don't care. We'll face whoever is in front of us and we're just happy to have advanced." Can you imagine if anyone ever did answer the question with "oh, of course, we'd rather face X. That'd be a lot easier matchup for us!" Never in a million years. Yet these dumdum announcers insist on asking the question in just about every sport in just about every season. Just an enormous waste of time.

jacone21
10-26-2013, 12:48 AM
"MAKE SOME NOOOOOOOOIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIISE! !!!!!!!!!!!!!"

"PLAYER NAME FOR THREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE EEEEEEEE<deep breath>EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

The Addams Family theme

Skitzle
10-26-2013, 04:04 AM
Here is a quote that was INSTANTLY retired because it was said SOOOOOO MANY times in one sitting.


HE TOOK THE CHARGE!!!!!!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwb9x0yGtYQ

Reilly
10-26-2013, 04:20 AM
... A subcategory of the subject of this thread could be "questions no announcer should ever be allowed to ask again." ...

I've long thought the halftime interview -- or, now, w/ baseball the in-game interview -- should be done away with summarily. There are so many things about games that could be shown/explained (why not details about a player's bat every AB? how about really explaining how certain pitches are thrown?) that are not, and yet we get in-game, perfunctory "we're playing OK - we need to do better at some things" inanities. One small bit of joy does come from watching the sideline reporters who have this stupid job and who mostly realize it is a stupid job, but when the stupidity of the job starts to be highlighted in some way or another, they still get perturbed.

NSDukeFan
10-26-2013, 06:00 AM
I've long thought the halftime interview -- or, now, w/ baseball the in-game interview -- should be done away with summarily. There are so many things about games that could be shown/explained (why not details about a player's bat every AB? how about really explaining how certain pitches are thrown?) that are not, and yet we get in-game, perfunctory "we're playing OK - we need to do better at some things" inanities. One small bit of joy does come from watching the sideline reporters who have this stupid job and who mostly realize it is a stupid job, but when the stupidity of the job starts to be highlighted in some way or another, they still get perturbed.

I believe this should be continued so that we can see more of Gregg Popovich's responses to inane questions.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
10-26-2013, 06:08 AM
I have always hated:

"get some run" = playing time
"space eater" = big guy
"tremendous upside" (sorry Bilas) = potential

TruBlu
10-26-2013, 07:14 AM
Although not officially an absolute sports word, "Absolutely" is absolutely overused by athletes in responding to reporters questions during interviews, and I absolutely detest it.

JStuart
10-26-2013, 09:32 AM
Although not officially an absolute sports word, "Absolutely" is absolutely overused by athletes in responding to reporters questions during interviews, and I absolutely detest it.
Absolutely, TruBlu!
I'll chime in with my all-time hated phrase, 'and they pull within 2'.
No, they don't pull within 2; they ARE two points behind.
They have pulled within 3 points, but not 2.
Maybe I'm missing something, but this continues to annoy me.
Mostly, I've gradually stopped listening to the TV announcers, and turn on Bob Harris on the radio.
If I hear anyone talk about unc's 'adversity' this year, I'll be quite disappointed.
JStuart
PS, Strunk & White rocks.

CameronBlue
10-26-2013, 09:40 AM
The cringe-inducing "He's got a bad wheel" should be added to the list. Always hated that one. On the other hand strangely missing from the vernacular is "jejune". The culture is becoming just a tad elitist for my taste.

ChillinDuke
10-26-2013, 09:49 AM
"Take it to the next level"

"He/She makes winning plays"

"He/She's a gamer!"

"He/She's just a basketball player" (used to contrast from those considered athletic but to show that they are superior players)

I actually like phrases like "the rock" for the ball. One that has sadly nearly disappeared is "the pill".

Oh man. Definitely. "He's just a basketball player."

I meannnn. I'm watching the game. And he's playing so. So yeah. Yeah, he is.

Thanks for adding value...

- Chillin

uh_no
10-26-2013, 09:57 AM
Absolutely, TruBlu!
I'll chime in with my all-time hated phrase, 'and they pull within 2'.
No, they don't pull within 2; they ARE two points behind.
They have pulled within 3 points, but not 2.
Maybe I'm missing something, but this continues to annoy me.
Mostly, I've gradually stopped listening to the TV announcers, and turn on Bob Harris on the radio.
If I hear anyone talk about unc's 'adversity' this year, I'll be quite disappointed.
JStuart
PS, Strunk & White rocks.

would it make you happy if they said "they're within 2, inclusive" to imply |x-y| <= 2?

wilson
10-26-2013, 10:26 AM
would it make you happy if they said "they're within 2, inclusive" to imply |x-y| <= 2?...and they say Duke fans are nerds.:rolleyes:

jimsumner
10-26-2013, 10:33 AM
Team A controls its destiny. Or fate. By definition, one cannot control one's destiny. Or fate. It is imposed.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
10-26-2013, 10:39 AM
Oh, and "literally."

As in "he's literally shooting the lights out."

or

"They have literally gone cold."

or

"These players literally have each other's back."

or

"And this literally places the team on the bubble."

Just don't use that word. Please.

Appropriate usage would be redundant and awkward.

"He is literally 1-6 from the field."

"This coach literally is in his 4th year of a contract."

"The team is literally 15 minutes from their home campus."

jimsumner
10-26-2013, 10:44 AM
Oh, and "literally."

As in "he's literally shooting the lights out."

or

"They have literally gone cold."

or

"These players literally have each other's back."

or

"And this literally places the team on the bubble."

Just don't use that word. Please.

Appropriate usage would be redundant and awkward.

"He is literally 1-6 from the field."

"This coach literally is in his 4th year of a contract."

"The team is literally 15 minutes from their home campus."

Agreed, I literally die every time I hear this word misused.

Nugget
10-26-2013, 10:46 AM
"Score the basketball"--have to agree with you, that one is my absolutely least favorite.

Yes. I hate that one.

Similarly, I hate "on American soil," usually broken out in World Cup qualifying or international golf matches. How about just "in America"'?

uh_no
10-26-2013, 10:56 AM
Agreed, I literally die every time I hear this word misused.

R.I.P.

mgtr
10-26-2013, 11:00 AM
Not exactly sports, but I get irritated when people use 'orientate' as the verb form of 'orientation.' Whatever happened to 'orient' as a verb?

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
10-26-2013, 11:03 AM
R.I.P.

There goes literally the greatest board poster. Alas.

Frobisher
10-26-2013, 11:42 AM
Most of this is just bad English, verbal filler, like: :When you talk about Matt Ryan....." Listen for how many times people say "when you talk about" to start talking, and it will drive you mad.

I can't believe no one has said it, but the pluralizing of individuals.... It's especially awful when used with players that have no equal. "Your Peyton Mannings, your Miguel Cabreras..." or with a team, "The Dukes, Kentuckys, and Louisvilles of the world."

Listen for it. It's everywhere, especially on ESPN commentary.

The last one is momentum. Never play a drinking game wherein you need to drink every time an in-game announcer says momentum...

RoyalBlue08
10-26-2013, 11:50 AM
I have really enjoyed reading through this thread.

Here is another one for you: the major professional US sports leagues all refer to their winners as "world champions". Cracks me up every time. If MLS would start doing it I would LITERALLy crack up.

Devil in the Blue Dress
10-26-2013, 11:54 AM
There are so many made up words and phrases.... he's a baller.... take it to the house..... on and on. Most are an attempt to be cute or attention getting. The current trends on terminology for commentary reflects the influence of technology in eroding the precision and consistency in written and spoken language.

I enjoy the commentator who uses precise terminology that fits the sport... it's just harder and harder to find one though Bob Harris and Wes Chesson do a pretty good job at using clear and exact terminology.:cool:

Call me old fashioned, but I grew up hearing Add Penfield and other greats of yesteryear so I have high standards!

DukieInKansas
10-26-2013, 12:05 PM
The post game interview by Len Dawson. We assigned numbers to his questions and think he doesn't really go to the Chiefs locker room. Someone in the control booth just decides Len will ask Question 7 and pushes the appropriate button. The player then gets the famous, and annoying, question - "What does a win like this mean to a team like thus?".

DukieInKansas
10-26-2013, 12:10 PM
There is another solution for the annoying phrases - Bingo. Several years back, someone made Phil and Paul bingo cards for le Tour de France coverage. It made the over used phrases more entertaining. Dancing on the pedals, anyone?

uh_no
10-26-2013, 12:19 PM
There is another solution for the annoying phrases - Bingo. Several years back, someone made Phil and Paul bingo cards for le Tour de France coverage. It made the over used phrases more entertaining. Dancing on the pedals, anyone?

yes but it wouldn't be the tour de france with out the liggettisms!

hurleyfor3
10-26-2013, 12:33 PM
I have never heard the phrase "He's out with a leg." Is that common? If so, I can see how it could be maddening...

It's Al Michaels' contribution to the sports lexicon. Well, his secondary contribution; he has another one which was more, um, iconic.

I think I heard Erin Andrews use the "out with a [body part]" construction recently.

Indoor66
10-26-2013, 04:34 PM
It's Al Michaels' contribution to the sports lexicon. Well, his secondary contribution; he has another one which was more, um, iconic.

I think I heard Erin Andrews use the "out with a [body part]" construction recently.

But she had body parts outed!

OldPhiKap
10-26-2013, 04:39 PM
yes but it wouldn't be the tour de france with out the liggettisms!

Or Bobke.

DukieInKansas
10-26-2013, 07:52 PM
yes but it wouldn't be the tour de france with out the liggettisms!

Neither Phil nor Paul worked the Vuelta this year. I found it most enjoyable. But you are correct, liggettisms are part of the tour and I would miss them. Bobke not so much.

NSDukeFan
10-26-2013, 08:40 PM
How about "making up ground" or "momentum" in recruiting? I understand that recruits can change their minds, but it is a decision they have to make, that doesn't have to progress in any kind of linear way.

pamtar
10-26-2013, 08:42 PM
It bugs me when football announcers call an end-around a "reverse" and call a reverse a "double reverse."

ME TOO! We used to run a double reverse in high school and believe me, you know it when you see it. That play takes 5-10 minutes just to clear the backfield. Add an end-around and a reverse together and you have a double reverse. Unstoppable when you have a speedy wide out /rb and a unprepared defense...

NSDukeFan
10-26-2013, 08:47 PM
There goes literally the greatest board poster. Alas.

I have been literally laughing my head off at some of these posts.

MCFinARL
10-26-2013, 11:14 PM
Agreed, I literally die every time I hear this word misused.

At that rate, you're not only merely dead, you're truly most sincerely dead.

Meanwhile after watching the Duke Virginia Tech game today, I have a new annoying phrase nominee on the basis of this game alone--"make hay," which Kelly Stouffer must have said at least 20 times.

jimsumner
10-26-2013, 11:44 PM
At that rate, you're not only merely dead, you're truly most sincerely dead.

Meanwhile after watching the Duke Virginia Tech game today, I have a new annoying phrase nominee on the basis of this game alone--"make hay," which Kelly Stouffer must have said at least 20 times.

I'm the most sincerest pumpkin in the pumpkin patch.

wilson
10-27-2013, 12:23 AM
I'm so tired of hearing how Duke beat VA Tech despite being dominated in every major statistical category.
No wait, I'm not.

Devil in the Blue Dress
10-27-2013, 02:24 AM
I'm so tired of hearing how Duke beat VA Tech despite being dominated in every major statistical category.
No wait, I'm not.

Actually, Duke dominated where it counted... the score!;)

DukieInKansas
10-27-2013, 03:05 AM
I'm so tired of hearing how Duke beat VA Tech despite being dominated in every major statistical category.
No wait, I'm not.


Actually, Duke dominated where it counted... the score!;)

Amen, sister. Doesn't matter what any other stats may say, the W is what matters most.

El_Diablo
10-27-2013, 09:02 AM
"Impactful." It's a made-up word, propagated mainly by sports commentators (with Jay Bilas unfortunately being a prime culprit). But how exactly is someone or something full of impact?

Impactful player? Impactful defender? Impactful injury? Impactful call? Just stop it--this word definitely needs to be retired.

captmojo
10-27-2013, 09:23 AM
Untracked.

I absolutely hate that word. While watching Monday Night Football (probably sometime around 30 years ago or so) Howard Cosell I think is the one that made a statement referring to a team being "on track" (a reasonable expression) to march down the field to score based upon what had transpired during the previous succession of plays. The idiots sitting around him, however, picked that up, and based on the apparent original misuse of the word "untracked", dating back to 1939, have continually applied it during game commentaries.


Amen.
"He/She/They need to get untracked." Really? Why? Isn't what you want, would to be "on track"? I think Billy Packer is the worst over the years of using this (every damn game I ever heard him work) and I was always taken by surprise each time that the various play-by-play folks working with him, would never call him on it. I always did but, alas, was never in a position where I could have been heard by him. He was too far off the rails.....Ooops! That could be a new cliché.

noworries
10-27-2013, 09:26 AM
No matter what game you're watching, somebody on the floor always seems to be "one of the best in the conference, if not the country, at _______"

Drives me nuts.

yootheman
10-27-2013, 09:29 AM
Most definitely

Indoor66
10-27-2013, 09:46 AM
I'm the most sincerest pumpkin in the pumpkin patch.

Better not try to kick that football.

Indoor66
10-27-2013, 09:47 AM
Amen, sister. Doesn't matter what any other stats may say, the W is what matters most.

Ahhhh, stats are for losers. :cool:

TexHawk
10-27-2013, 10:26 AM
While it's not the worst, there are many worse examples in this thread alone, I am flabbergasted and confused by the use of "unanswered points".

"The Raiders opened the game with two TD drives, the Chiefs followed with 28 unanswered points, until Oakland broke through with an 80 yard TD drive."

No. No. No. The Raiders DID answer those points. But which points were answered? Just the last one? Were there 27 unanswered points? None? The only possible accepted use should be: "The Raiders opened the game with two TD drives, the Chiefs followed with 28 unanswered points to win 28-14." Those Chiefs points were truly unanswered.

DukieInKansas
10-27-2013, 03:48 PM
Another Len Dawson-ism that drives me nuts: They can ill afford to turn over the ball. Just point out that they can't afford to turnover the ball. Of course, isn't he just stating the obvious? Can anyone afford to turn over the ball?

He uses ill afford a lot.

arnie
10-27-2013, 09:43 PM
Most definitely

Laettner used at least 2 of those in every interview.

jimsumner
10-27-2013, 11:55 PM
I've always been peeved at the redundancy "Joe Schmoe has made his last 12 foul shots in a row," or some variant.

I think we may have to add writers/announcers who are claiming that Duke is now bowl eligible in consecutive years for the first time. Duke has been bowl eligible in consecutive years many times. They just haven't gone to bowls in consecutive years. There's a difference.

ricks68
10-28-2013, 04:00 AM
I just thought you all should know---ya know---um, that there sure have been a lot of good examples on this thread---ya know---um, of some pretty stupid things being said---ya know---um, during sports show interviews---ya know---um, and quite a few are also being said by the players, too---ya know---um. So, I think we should all give 110% effort (maybe even more than that)---ya know---um, to ignore all this crap and get on with just listening to our own players, coaches, announcers, etc. when they are on sports shows. While we hear some of it from them also, they certainly don't do it very often compared to the rest of the talking heads. In fact, I am most proud when one of our own sports personalities (players, coaches, announcers, etc.) are on the air. What a breath of fresh air to hear intelligent people speak on television.:D

ricks

hurleyfor3
10-28-2013, 10:06 AM
I think we may have to add writers/announcers who are claiming that Duke is now bowl eligible in consecutive years for the first time. Duke has been bowl eligible in consecutive years many times. They just haven't gone to bowls in consecutive years. There's a difference.

One can also, literally, score a basketball. You'll just probably end up popping it, though.

jacone21
10-28-2013, 10:22 AM
One can also, literally, score a basketball. You'll just probably end up popping it, though.

That's funnier if you imagine it in a Rodney Dangerfield voice... and add a rim shot.

sagegrouse
10-28-2013, 10:43 AM
I had a colleague from China back in the day who had a wonderful command of the English language, but he had a question. "What does 'the real McCoy' mean?" I replied, "It means 'genuine.'" "But that's what 'real' means," he said. "What does 'real McCoy' mean?" "Uh, the same thing, I guess."

Some redundancies are just designed to be colorful speech, leavening the boring days our ancestors lived. Not that we have the same problem. :rolleyes:

sagegrouse

Dev11
10-28-2013, 10:47 AM
While it's not the worst, there are many worse examples in this thread alone, I am flabbergasted and confused by the use of "unanswered points".

"The Raiders opened the game with two TD drives, the Chiefs followed with 28 unanswered points, until Oakland broke through with an 80 yard TD drive."

No. No. No. The Raiders DID answer those points. But which points were answered? Just the last one? Were there 27 unanswered points? None? The only possible accepted use should be: "The Raiders opened the game with two TD drives, the Chiefs followed with 28 unanswered points to win 28-14." Those Chiefs points were truly unanswered.

I see it a tad differently. I think in your last scenario, the Chiefs answer the Raiders with 14 points, and then score 14 points. The 28 points were straight or consecutive. I wish announcers would say '28 consecutive points' rather than '28 unanswered points.'

sagegrouse
10-28-2013, 10:56 AM
I see it a tad differently. I think in your last scenario, the Chiefs answer the Raiders with 14 points, and then score 14 points. The 28 points were straight or consecutive. I wish announcers would say '28 consecutive points' rather than '28 unanswered points.'

I give the sports guys a pass on two words that really grate, which are often heard on news and weather shows:

"Seasonable" instead of seasonal. Criminy! What's wrong with "sesaonal?" Doesn't "seasonable" mean, "capable of being seasoned?"

"Preventative" instead of "preventive." Does adding an unnecessary syllable give you credit for a four-syllable word?

sagegrouse

Faustus
10-28-2013, 11:08 AM
I've often wondered (well, not really), if during the heat of battle (a bad cliche of its own: Sports = War) after scoring a basket, a player running back down court hasn't said to his opponent, "I say, that's ANOTHER two points you haven't answered, sir!"

rasputin
10-28-2013, 11:15 AM
"Somehow, some way."
Yeeeech

tommy
10-28-2013, 11:37 AM
I see it a tad differently. I think in your last scenario, the Chiefs answer the Raiders with 14 points, and then score 14 points. The 28 points were straight or consecutive. I wish announcers would say '28 consecutive points' rather than '28 unanswered points.'

I agree with TexHawk on this one, and I don't like it either. These guys' use of "unanswered" is flat-out wrong. In his example, the Chiefs' 28 points were in fact answered by the Raiders. Answered weakly perhaps, with only 14 points, but they were answered. To me, the only way points are "unanswered" is if the team scored upon does not score again, at all.

luvdahops
10-28-2013, 11:53 AM
Apologies if this has been noted earlier, but "the changing landscape of college athletics" should absolutely banned from the vernacular.

jimsumner
10-28-2013, 12:06 PM
I agree with TexHawk on this one, and I don't like it either. These guys' use of "unanswered" is flat-out wrong. In his example, the Chiefs' 28 points were in fact answered by the Raiders. Answered weakly perhaps, with only 14 points, but they were answered. To me, the only way points are "unanswered" is if the team scored upon does not score again, at all.

So, Duke had 35 unanswered points against Virginia but not 13 unanswered points against VT? But Duke had 35 consecutive points against Virginia and 13 consecutive points against VT?

Seems like over-parsing just a tad to me. And, no, I don't know the origin of "tad" in this context. And that's the Real McCoy.

As an aside, am I the only person on this thread old enough to remember the Walter Brennan TV series "The Real McCoys?"

But FWIW I don't find "unanswered" wrong, illogical or annoying.

And yes, I realize I've written eight unanswered sentences, consecutively and in a row.

tommy
10-28-2013, 12:14 PM
[QUOTE=jimsumner;671620]So, Duke had 35 unanswered points against Virginia but not 13 unanswered points against VT? But Duke had 35 consecutive points against Virginia and 13 consecutive points against VT?

Seems like over-parsing just a tad to me. [QUOTE]

Really? Seems pretty straightforward to me. Yes, Duke had 35 unanswered points against UVA because after Duke scored those 35, Virginia did not score again. On the other hand, Duke's 13 points were answered, with ten points by VT.

And yes, the 35 and the 13 were both consecutive. Just that the 35 was also unanswered, while the 13 was not unanswered.

jimsumner
10-28-2013, 12:45 PM
[QUOTE=jimsumner;671620]So, Duke had 35 unanswered points against Virginia but not 13 unanswered points against VT? But Duke had 35 consecutive points against Virginia and 13 consecutive points against VT?

Seems like over-parsing just a tad to me. [QUOTE]

Really? Seems pretty straightforward to me. Yes, Duke had 35 unanswered points against UVA because after Duke scored those 35, Virginia did not score again. On the other hand, Duke's 13 points were answered, with ten points by VT.

And yes, the 35 and the 13 were both consecutive. Just that the 35 was also unanswered, while the 13 was not unanswered.

It seems to me that the sports community as a whole--players, coaches, fans, media--have accepted "unanswered" as synonymous with "consecutive."

I don't have a problem with that.

I could care less. :) Yes, that one bothers me. But I understand it.

Let's change sports. Boxer A hits Boxer B with 30 punches without Boxer B responding. Then Boxer B responds with a weak punch. Would it be inaccurate to state that Boxer A delivered 30 unanswered blows just because Boxer B responded with one?

This disregards the question of how Boxer A could hit Boxer B that many times without knocking him/her out. Illustrative point only.

wilson
10-28-2013, 01:35 PM
From the ACC Players of the Week press release:

"With the Blue Devils nursing a 13-10 lead with 4:22 to play, Brown made the first interception of his career to help seal Duke’s victory, as the Hokies did not regain possession of the football again." Or just "the Hokies did not regain possession." Sigh...you'd think that at least the person employed by the league office to craft written statements in the conference's name would be better at writing succinctly.

TexHawk
10-28-2013, 01:35 PM
[QUOTE=tommy;671622][QUOTE=jimsumner;671620]So, Duke had 35 unanswered points against Virginia but not 13 unanswered points against VT? But Duke had 35 consecutive points against Virginia and 13 consecutive points against VT?

Seems like over-parsing just a tad to me.

It seems to me that the sports community as a whole--players, coaches, fans, media--have accepted "unanswered" as synonymous with "consecutive."

I don't have a problem with that.

I could care less. :) Yes, that one bothers me. But I understand it.

Let's change sports. Boxer A hits Boxer B with 30 punches without Boxer B responding. Then Boxer B responds with a weak punch. Would it be inaccurate to state that Boxer A delivered 30 unanswered blows just because Boxer B responded with one?

This disregards the question of how Boxer A could hit Boxer B that many times without knocking him/her out. Illustrative point only.

I would prefer "Boxer A hit Boxer B with 30 consecutive blows before Boxer B responded" or something like that. While I don't love it, I would grudgingly be fine if it was "Boxer A hit Boxer B with 29 unanswered blows before Boxer B responded". It is harder in hoops and football because "scores" don't always equate to "points". If the Raiders scored to halt the 28 straight Chief points, are only 21 of those points unanswered? 27? That's why I hate it.

I agree that everyone involved have accepted the use of "unanswered", but that doesn't mean it is correct.

Tom B.
10-28-2013, 01:59 PM
(1) "He plays bigger than he is." I've hated this one since the 1980s when some announcer (I can't remember who) used it about 50 times during a Boston College football game to describe Doug Flutie. One of the worst offenders for this one was Frank Gifford, back when he was on ABC's Monday Night Football crew. It was his go-to phrase whenever any player who was a little bit undersized made a good play.

(2) Using "impact" as a verb. Unless you're talking about wisdom teeth, "impact" is a noun. (Yeah, I know -- like "literally," the misuse has become so rampant that it's now an accepted part of the lexicon. Still sounds like fingernails on a blackboard to me, though.)

(3) Piggybacking on the lessons from Elements of Style, just get the word "obviously" out of your vocabulary. If something is obvious, you shouldn't need to say that it's obvious. You should just be able to state the proposition, and its obviousness should be, well, obvious. Same goes for clearly, evidently, etc.

(4) And most adverbs used for emphasis are entirely unnecessary. (See what I did there? :))

jimsumner
10-28-2013, 02:01 PM
Okay, another pet peeve.

"Joe Schmoe always gives 110%."

I guess it could be worse. He could literally be giving 110%.

ricks68
10-28-2013, 02:20 PM
Seems like over-parsing just a tad to me. And, no, I don't know the origin of "tad" in this context. And that's the Real McCoy.

As an aside, am I the only person on this thread old enough to remember the Walter Brennan TV series "The Real McCoys?"



You know better than that, Jim. How about "The Life of Riley" with William Bendix or "The Phil Silvers Show"? Sticking with college football stuff, however, how about "That's My Boy"? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/That's_My_Boy_(American_TV_series) I even remember the theme song for the show.

ricks

jimsumner
10-28-2013, 02:36 PM
You know better than that, Jim. How about "The Life of Riley" with William Bendix or "The Phil Silvers Show"? Sticking with college football stuff, however, how about "That's My Boy"? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/That's_My_Boy_(American_TV_series) I even remember the theme song for the show.

ricks

Not only do I remember "The Life of Riley," I remember its antecedent, "The Honeymooners." And its successor, "The Flintstones." Yabba-Dabba-Do.

What I most remember about the era was the dominance of Westerns, "Bonanza," "Gunsmoke," "Rawhide," "The Rifleman," and so many more. The quintessential American experience and now gone from TV and barely hanging on in Hollywood.

Ima Facultiwyfe
10-28-2013, 02:50 PM
Okay here goes. Nobody has mentioned "He left his feet." Boy, he'll have a hard time continuing to play running on his ankles.
Then there's "We'll be back momentarily." I hope we'll be back in a moment and not just momentarily.
And if it's "time out on the floor" is the time still running somewhere else?
While we're at it, "loan" is not a verb. You can either "lend" a hand or "make a loan" of five bucks.

I could go on forever, but if you couldn't care less pleeeeeeeze don't tell me you could!
Love, Ima

lmb
10-28-2013, 02:51 PM
[B]in my opinion, concision is one of the most important features of effective writing. My 8th graders are constantly using 10 words when they should use 3.


I wish I had you as my english teacher! I was always struggling to eke out the required 3-page essay when I made my points in 2 pages.


As to the topic, 'squeeze the orange' needs to go. I think that's Clark Kellogg, but I'm not sure.

DukieInKansas
10-28-2013, 02:56 PM
Not only do I remember "The Life of Riley," I remember its antecedent, "The Honeymooners." And its successor, "The Flintstones." Yabba-Dabba-Do.

What I most remember about the era was the dominance of Westerns, "Bonanza," "Gunsmoke," "Rawhide," "The Rifleman," and so many more. The quintessential American experience and now gone from TV and barely hanging on in Hollywood.

Wyatt Earp, Jim Bowie, and Daniel Boone. Great Westerns with good theme songs - which I can still sing. I am glad to see that I didn't see the live versions of them. AFKN showed old tv shows most of the time - but they were in English. The Waltons in Korean was pretty funny. John Wayne movies in Japanese were, too.

Indoor66
10-28-2013, 03:20 PM
Apologies if this has been noted earlier, but "the changing landscape of college athletics" should absolutely banned from the vernacular.

Gee, and thought that just meant they were going up and down as the dirt moved. Was I wrong? :cool:

destroslithoid
10-28-2013, 07:56 PM
That is the phrase that bugs me the most, especially when used as praise for a player that has been performing well. When I hear as good as any, I immediately think the player is only average, is not the best on his team, and that the commentator couldn't find anything interesting to say about the player.

CoachJ10
10-28-2013, 08:09 PM
While not necessarily along the exact same vein as most of the posts are focusing on...I always shake my head when announcers make a big deal and story out of "bench" points, and leave out "starters" points. I am a simple man...and care about total points (the source of which, I am completely agnostic to).

Henderson
10-28-2013, 10:12 PM
How about contrived "signature phrases" from sports commentators? I'm not talking about phrases that develop organically, then become associated with that commentator over time (e.g. Keith Jackson's "Whoa Nelly" or Red Barber's "Sitting in the catbird's seat") I'm talking about contrivances that are self-consciously adopted to become signature phrases. Such as...

Bill Raftery: "Mmmman to man."
Dick V: He's got to many to list.
Lee Corso: "Not so fast, my friend."
Stuart Scott: "Cooler than the other side of the pillow." (Which he stole from Jack Buck anyway)

gep
10-29-2013, 12:25 AM
(3) Piggybacking on the lessons from Elements of Style, just get the word "obviously" out of your vocabulary. If something is obvious, you shouldn't need to say that it's obvious. You should just be able to state the proposition, and its obviousness should be, well, obvious. Same goes for clearly, evidently, etc.

I also read awhile back that when "obviously" is used, it implies that it should be obvious that any moron should be able to figure it out... so it has, to me, become an insult, of sorts, since if it's not "obvious" to you, well, then... .:cool:

Greg_Newton
10-29-2013, 01:58 AM
What a terrific thread. So cathartic to read through, and realize all the phrases I didn't even realize I hated!

The athlete one that always annoys me is, "We shocked the world today," particularly for middling college basketball/football upsets. No, actually, most of the world has no idea who you are, and does not care even a tiny bit how your athletic team performed today. Even the small subset of the world's population who is irrationally invested in your recreational endeavors is probably not quite actually "shocked." I mean, upsets happen all the time.

"We mildly surprised the relatively small segment of the population that follows my sport" would be much more accurate in most cases.

tommy
10-29-2013, 02:06 AM
What a terrific thread. So cathartic to read through, and realize all the phrases I didn't even realize I hated!

The athlete one that always annoys me is, "We shocked the world today," particularly for middling college basketball/football upsets. No, actually, most of the world has no idea who you are, and does not care even a tiny bit how your athletic team performed today. Even the small subset of the world's population who is irrationally invested in your recreational endeavors is probably not quite actually "shocked." I mean, upsets happen all the time.

"We mildly surprised the relatively small segment of the population that follows my sport" would be much more accurate in most cases.

Great one.

Related to it is all the athletes who proclaim that in either the game to come or the game just played it was "us against the world." Uh, no it wasn't. If you feel like you were not expected to win the game, there were probably good reasons for that, rather than the irrationality of that expectation that seems to be presumed by your excessively prideful declaration. The expectation that you would lose probably wasn't (or isn't) irrational at all. And of course, like in the silly "we shocked the world" that you broke down in your post, the great, great majority of the world is neither with you or against you in this or any other game. They have no idea who you are, and couldn't care less about finding out.

tommy
10-29-2013, 02:20 AM
How about contrived "signature phrases" from sports commentators? I'm not talking about phrases that develop organically, then become associated with that commentator over time (e.g. Keith Jackson's "Whoa Nelly" or Red Barber's "Sitting in the catbird's seat") I'm talking about contrivances that are self-consciously adopted to become signature phrases. Such as...

Bill Raftery: "Mmmman to man."
Dick V: He's got to many to list.
Lee Corso: "Not so fast, my friend."
Stuart Scott: "Cooler than the other side of the pillow." (Which he stole from Jack Buck anyway)

I also can't stand the pre-planned, canned "capture the moment" phrase at the end of a big game or especially a championship, that are just so contrived and overly cutesy I could barf. The worst of the worst at this is Jim Nantz. Every NCAA basketball championship game, he has his canned victory phrase ready to go, and they all are terrible. Carolina wins with the Felton/McCants/May team, and as the horn sounds and they've won it, Nantz says "It began in March, ended in April, and belongs to May." Ugh. Emeka Okafor and Connecticut win it, and as the buzzer sounds, Nantz: "The 'Mecca (short for Emeka, get it?) of college basketball is in Storrs, Connecticut." Oy. Mateen Cleaves and Michigan State win it. Nantz: "Leave it to Cleaves." Help me that is so lame.

I don't even remember what he said at the buzzer of Duke and Butler, but I'm sure it was horrible, as they all are.

Just let it happen, Jim. Don't plan anything at all. Just let the event happen and let something natural and organic come out (Do you believe in Miracles? Yes!!) or -- and here's a fresh idea -- say nothing at all.

westwall
10-29-2013, 02:21 AM
[QUOTE=jimsumner;671674] Not only do I remember "The Life of Riley," I remember its antecedent, "The Honeymooners." And its successor, "The Flintstones." Yabba-Dabba-Do.

Not quite. I remember listening to "The life of Riley", with William Bendix as Riley, on radio (WLW, Cincinnati) in the late 1940's. Some years later, it became a television show, probably also prior to "The Honeymooners". In any event "Riley" clearly was the antecedent, followed by Honeymooners, followed by Flintstones. And it is not a stretch to say that Jackie Gleason, who was familiar with "Riley", modeled his blue-collar Honeymooners character largely on Riley.

Westwall, Duke '59

Jim3k
10-29-2013, 03:28 AM
I vote to get rid of "getting off the schneid." Common out here in the West. Means for a team or player to get going from a dead stop. Aren't these sufficiently clear for the audience? "[Player] needs to start [hitting, running effectively, score the rock...(urp!...)."

wilson
10-29-2013, 05:43 AM
I don't even remember what he said at the buzzer of Duke and Butler, but I'm sure it was horrible, as they all are.[Hayward's shot rims out] "OH, IT ALMOST WENT IN! Almost went in, and DUKE is the king of the Dance, 2010!"
That's it, word for word. Funny, I didn't find that one too horrible (though I totally see your point here).

OldPhiKap
10-29-2013, 06:37 AM
Please! No more "One Shining Moment!"

sagegrouse
10-29-2013, 07:05 AM
[Hayward's shot rims out] "OH, IT ALMOST WENT IN! Almost went in, and DUKE is the king of the Dance, 2010!"
That's it, word for word. Funny, I didn't find that one too horrible (though I totally see your point here).

And then there's the master, Verne Lundquist, who called "The Shot:"

Verne:“Well there was total silence [at the mike] for a few minutes and the camera just panned the court and all the celebrations going on."

Lesson: you can't improve on perfection -- so don't say anything.

sagegrouse

Reilly
10-29-2013, 07:23 AM
Great one.

Related to it is all the athletes who proclaim that in either the game to come or the game just played it was "us against the world." Uh, no it wasn't. If you feel like you were not expected to win the game, there were probably good reasons for that, rather than the irrationality of that expectation that seems to be presumed by your excessively prideful declaration. The expectation that you would lose probably wasn't (or isn't) irrational at all. And of course, like in the silly "we shocked the world" that you broke down in your post, the great, great majority of the world is neither with you or against you in this or any other game. They have no idea who you are, and couldn't care less about finding out.

I don't mind "we shocked the world" or "nobody believed in us". Are they literally true? Of course not. But they are often said by college-age athletes (we'll use 'college-age athletes' rather than 'college athletes' since we play against UNC) and reflect the very common motivational belief that "you've been disrespected" or "nobody believes in you" or "they didn't think you were good enough" ... so go prove them wrong. That mantra is probably *the* single theme (or at least a part) of nearly all terrific locker room speeches. Go youtube Cut's pre-game speech before the Belk Bowl for a terrific example.

Dev11
10-29-2013, 09:06 AM
[Hayward's shot rims out] "OH, IT ALMOST WENT IN! Almost went in, and DUKE is the king of the Dance, 2010!"
That's it, word for word. Funny, I didn't find that one too horrible (though I totally see your point here).

You can tell that Nantz had something awesome to say for Butler, and when Hayward's shot didn't fall, he had to change directions all of a sudden and realize the champions were in white.

budwom
10-29-2013, 09:11 AM
Many of the problems cited here could be rectified if Nantz were to be relocated to Guantanamo. The man is a walking cliche', the king of the canned line....Notecard Nantz. "His dad's a plumber!"
"Went to high school in Samoa!" All to be gurgitated and regurgitated...

freshmanjs
10-29-2013, 09:19 AM
Agreed, I literally die every time I hear this word misused.


a few points on the word literally. the misuse used to bother me too until i learned more about it.

- the "misuse" of literally is now accepted use according to oxford english dictionary
- the "misuse" has been extensively used for a long, long time including by Twain in Tom Sawyer, Joyce in Ulysses, and Fitzgerald in Gatsby. Tom Sawyer was "literally rolling in wealth"
- it is not all that different from the "misuse" of the word really (to mean very), which seems to generate a lot less derision. not sure why.

wilson
10-29-2013, 10:04 AM
You can tell that Nantz had something awesome to say for Butler, and when Hayward's shot didn't fall, he had to change directions all of a sudden and realize the champions were in white.I think you may well be right. My point above was that he could have said, "Awww, crap! Duke just won the national championship," and I would not have cared one bit and the words would have sounded beautiful to me.

Faustus
10-29-2013, 10:26 AM
Has anyone mentioned "They came to play today" yet? Occasionally emphasized with "They REALLY came to play today." So, exactly how many teams dress up and NOT come to play?

Of course much of what we're criticizing here isn't totally fair. Unlike in prose in print, where brevity, clarity, and a concise use and mastery of words is the goal, and where there has been at least some time for editing and polishing before release to the public (well, excepting the horrific Jim Nantz pre-planned schmaltz as referred to above -- yuck), radio and tv sports commentary is live, and instead of aiming to fill a restricted column of print space, is often a vast balloon of airspace that never seems to end.

Thus blowhards (see Vitale, Richard) delight in saying 'utilize' ("Oh! OH!!! He shoulda utilized the diagonal pass into the paint! Oh!!!") instead of the obviously more apt word 'use' that any intelligent person would prefer. There's no penalty for blather, and intelligent comment is really less important than sheer volume of useless verbiage to fill the space. It hasn't helped that ex-jocks are usually chosen now to play these roles, and I doubt many, if any of them, were ever English majors, much less good ones. Rare is the gem like Jon Miller whose baseball coverage could occasionally become almost poetic at times. Much more likely are guys like Doc Walker, amiable enough, but if listened to closely will in fact never offer a single item of actual expert observation, just endless clouds of "They just WANTED it more than the other guys!" and "It's time to play like MEN out there!"

Does someone really need to be paid to say all that drivel? Alas, around here, yes. It can be a rare delight to sometimes run across some English soccer match and all you hear is restrained and sparse coverage like "Smith... to Jones... that's Wilson now... over to McGillicutty..." and that's all the public needs to hear. But here, it's endless and mostly meaningless blather. So rare is it - like the end of the Laettner Shot game, or the one where Nate gets the winner against Maryland in the ACC Championship game thriller (right?) - where we are simply allowed to hear the crowd noises and celebrations in the fabulous seconds afterwards. Wish there were more of those. I do enjoy the occasional "Onions!" and other phrases that manage to catch the moment ("Send it in, Jerome!"), but by and large, we simply have to live with the creature sports "journalism" gives us. And while we're at it, (mentally hear Vin Scully voice now) "Say, fans, wouldn't a frosty cold Coke taste great right now?"

BlueDevilCorvette!
10-29-2013, 10:53 AM
"This team just refuse to lose"...ok, but if the other team is refusing to lose too, how does one team defeat the other? So if the end of the game is a tie, was it because both teams refused to lose?

UrinalCake
10-29-2013, 10:59 AM
I hate how "resign" and "re-sign" mean exactly the opposite, yet are often spelled the same. If I saw a sportscenter ticker that said "Breaking News: Coach K resigns" I wouldn't know whether to celebrate or pass out.

"I gave it 110%" should have been retired ages ago.

And this is not sports related but I hate when people call it a "hot water heater." Just call it a water heater. We know it makes the water hot. And technically it should be called a "cold water heater" because if the water is already hot then it doesn't need to be heated up.

MCFinARL
10-29-2013, 11:13 AM
I've long thought the halftime interview -- or, now, w/ baseball the in-game interview -- should be done away with summarily. There are so many things about games that could be shown/explained (why not details about a player's bat every AB? how about really explaining how certain pitches are thrown?) that are not, and yet we get in-game, perfunctory "we're playing OK - we need to do better at some things" inanities. One small bit of joy does come from watching the sideline reporters who have this stupid job and who mostly realize it is a stupid job, but when the stupidity of the job starts to be highlighted in some way or another, they still get perturbed.

I'd love to hear one of these interviewees follow Bryce Harper's lead: "That's a clown question, bro!"


There is another solution for the annoying phrases - Bingo. Several years back, someone made Phil and Paul bingo cards for le Tour de France coverage. It made the over used phrases more entertaining. Dancing on the pedals, anyone?

Last spring there was a Quint Kessenich bingo card (http://24sevenlax.com/the-lighter-side-of-lax-tournament-bingo/) for the NCAA lacrosse tournament, featuring Quint favorites like "No one's gonna make that save," "singes the corner," and "gets his hands free." Of course, these expressions irritate fewer people because fewer people are watching lacrosse than basketball or football....


I wish I had you as my english teacher! I was always struggling to eke out the required 3-page essay when I made my points in 2 pages.


When my students (college students, not 8th graders) tell me they can't make the page requirement if they write concisely, I tell them to have more to say. :)


Wyatt Earp, Jim Bowie, and Daniel Boone. Great Westerns with good theme songs - which I can still sing. I am glad to see that I didn't see the live versions of them. AFKN showed old tv shows most of the time - but they were in English. The Waltons in Korean was pretty funny. John Wayne movies in Japanese were, too.

Well, there goes my whole day--"Wyatt Earp, Wyatt Earp, brave, courageous, and bold...." And let's not forget the theme from Davy Crockett ("Born on a mountaintop in Tennessee") or, a bit later, Have Gun Will Travel ("Paladin, Paladin, where do you roam?"). Thanks a lot. ;)


I also read awhile back that when "obviously" is used, it implies that it should be obvious that any moron should be able to figure it out... so it has, to me, become an insult, of sorts, since if it's not "obvious" to you, well, then... .:cool:

I actually (and possibly literally, as well) will defend the use of "obviously" in one context--to introduce a concession or qualification. Examples: "Obviously, we can't expect sportscasters never to repeat themselves. Nevertheless..." or "When I complained that people weren't pulling their weight, I obviously didn't mean you, boss." Obviously, people might disagree with me on this.


Much more likely are guys like Doc Walker, amiable enough, but if listened to closely will in fact never offer a single item of actual expert observation, just endless clouds of "They just WANTED it more than the other guys!" and "It's time to play like MEN out there!"


This one drives me crazy. They wanted it more? Really? How do you know? Because they won? That seems like ex post facto reasoning to me. Granted, there are probably some times when one team really does want it more than the other--for example, when one NFL team has locked up a playoff spot and the other is still fighting for one. But with all of the factors that can influence winning and losing in sports competition--basic talent level, coaching strategy, match-ups, health, conditioning, fit between player/team style and weather, field, or arena conditions, etc.--this seems like a lazy explanation. And when it is applied to amateur athletes [I'm including NCAA athletes here], I suspect it is seldom true and often hurtful to the team thus defined as "wanting it less."

Wander
10-29-2013, 11:22 AM
I also am not a huge fan of the "our league" or "our game" stuff. Van Gundy says it a lot for the NBA. He's one of the best ball handlers in our game. It just seems like they are trying to remind everyone they were once involved with the game. I know Jeff, you were a head coach. Well guess what, you're not anymore.


NFL analysts and writers are the worst - they almost all use the first person. It's not "Player X is tough," it's "Player X has shown me a lot of toughness." It's obnoxious - I want to know about the game and teams and players, not all the dudes in suits hanging around them.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
10-29-2013, 11:31 AM
a few points on the word literally. the misuse used to bother me too until i learned more about it.

- the "misuse" of literally is now accepted use according to oxford english dictionary
- the "misuse" has been extensively used for a long, long time including by Twain in Tom Sawyer, Joyce in Ulysses, and Fitzgerald in Gatsby. Tom Sawyer was "literally rolling in wealth"
- it is not all that different from the "misuse" of the word really (to mean very), which seems to generate a lot less derision. not sure why.

Maybe because the misuse (I'm not going to use quotes, because it is literally the misuse of the word) of "literally" actually negates the true definition. If you state that someone is "literally rolling in wealth," unless that person is Scrooge McDuke, the pictures in your head painted by these words is inaccurate.

Using the word "really" as a way to either fill space like a valley girl in the early 90's or to just amplify the effect of what you are saying doesn't take away from the definition of the word.

When the word "literally" is used incorrectly, it makes the speaker sound ignorant. A few years ago, I was watching some insipid news show and the announcer stated that Britney Spears was "literally on a roller coaster ride to hell." My wife and I could not stop laughing. Literally.

Go Duke!

freshmanjs
10-29-2013, 11:39 AM
Maybe because the misuse (I'm not going to use quotes, because it is literally the misuse of the word) of "literally" actually negates the true definition. If you state that someone is "literally rolling in wealth," unless that person is Scrooge McDuke, the pictures in your head painted by these words is inaccurate.

Using the word "really" as a way to either fill space like a valley girl in the early 90's or to just amplify the effect of what you are saying doesn't take away from the definition of the word.

When the word "literally" is used incorrectly, it makes the speaker sound ignorant. A few years ago, I was watching some insipid news show and the announcer stated that Britney Spears was "literally on a roller coaster ride to hell." My wife and I could not stop laughing. Literally.

Go Duke!

Merriam-Webster:

Definition of LITERALLY

1
: in a literal sense or manner : actually <took the remark literally> <was literally insane>
2
: in effect : virtually <will literally turn the world upside down to combat cruelty or injustice — Norman Cousins>

Usage Discussion of LITERALLY:
Since some people take sense 2 to be the opposite of sense 1, it has been frequently criticized as a misuse. Instead, the use is pure hyperbole intended to gain emphasis, but it often appears in contexts where no additional emphasis is necessary.


Cambridge

literally
/ˈlɪt̬·ər·ə·li/ adv [not gradable]
› used for emphasizing how large or great an amount is:
There were literally hundreds of pages to read in the contract.
› Literally is also used to emphasize a statement and suggest that it is surprising:
I literally (= really) had no idea you and Sophie were coming.


Oxford

adverb
in a literal manner or sense; exactly:
the driver took it literally when asked to go straight across the traffic circle
tiramisu, literally translated “pick me up.”
informal used for emphasis or to express strong feeling while not being literally true:
I have received literally thousands of letters


so how is it that accepted use according to the 3 dictionaries cited is "misuse"?

MCFinARL
10-29-2013, 11:56 AM
Maybe because the misuse (I'm not going to use quotes, because it is literally the misuse of the word) of "literally" actually negates the true definition. If you state that someone is "literally rolling in wealth," unless that person is Scrooge McDuke, the pictures in your head painted by these words is inaccurate.

Using the word "really" as a way to either fill space like a valley girl in the early 90's or to just amplify the effect of what you are saying doesn't take away from the definition of the word.

When the word "literally" is used incorrectly, it makes the speaker sound ignorant. A few years ago, I was watching some insipid news show and the announcer stated that Britney Spears was "literally on a roller coaster ride to hell." My wife and I could not stop laughing. Literally.

Go Duke!

Scrooge McDuke? Freudian slip expressing the value of a Duke education? ;)

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
10-29-2013, 11:57 AM
so how is it that accepted use according to the 3 dictionaries cited is "misuse"?

Because definition number two is the literal opposite of definition number one. Any English major or English teacher would take you to task on this one.

It is sort of like in the early 80's "bad" came to mean "cool" or "good." A la Michael Jackson. But, that was a weird linguistic fad that faded into the distance decades ago. "Literally" manages to plague those of us who love language forever.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
10-29-2013, 11:58 AM
Scrooge McDuke? Freudian slip expressing the value of a Duke education? ;)

Ha ha... I wish that Duke could take credit for my education. Must have just been a slip.

freshmanjs
10-29-2013, 11:59 AM
Because definition number two is the literal opposite of definition number one. Any English major or English teacher would take you to task on this one.

It is sort of like in the early 80's "bad" came to mean "cool" or "good." A la Michael Jackson. But, that was a weird linguistic fad that faded into the distance decades ago. "Literally" manages to plague those of us who love language forever.

there are plenty of other autoantonyms that are not fads. besides, cleave, oversight, rent, terrific are some examples.

rasputin
10-29-2013, 12:01 PM
there are plenty of other autoantonyms that are not fads. besides, cleave, oversight, rent, terrific are some examples.

sanction

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
10-29-2013, 12:31 PM
Why use a word like "literally" if it means the opposite of what most people will think you mean?

Okay, I will back out of this conversation. It is like nails on a chalkboard to me. Just not literally.

Go Duke!

freshmanjs
10-29-2013, 12:32 PM
Why use a word like "literally" if it means the opposite of what most people will think you mean?

Okay, I will back out of this conversation. It is like nails on a chalkboard to me. Just not literally.

Go Duke!

haha -- i understand the nails on chalkboard feeling. i don't think anyone is confused about what people mean when they "misuse" literally though.

Tom B.
10-29-2013, 01:20 PM
Please! No more "One Shining Moment!"



"One Shining Moment" is fine. It's the more recent overproduced versions that need to go. Bring back the David Barrett or Teddy Pendergrass versions.

The original David Barrett version. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jORAxToS784)

Tom B.
10-29-2013, 01:26 PM
I also read awhile back that when "obviously" is used, it implies that it should be obvious that any moron should be able to figure it out... so it has, to me, become an insult, of sorts, since if it's not "obvious" to you, well, then... .:cool:




Which is why I'm immediately skeptical anytime I hear someone preface a sentence with "obviously" (or "clearly," etc.). To me, it's a signal that the proposition to follow is not obvious -- rather, the speaker is pushing a dubious point and doesn't have the facts to back it up, so he's trying to bully you into agreeing with him by implying that you're stupid if you don't.

jimsumner
10-29-2013, 02:08 PM
[QUOTE=jimsumner;671674] Not only do I remember "The Life of Riley," I remember its antecedent, "The Honeymooners." And its successor, "The Flintstones." Yabba-Dabba-Do.

Not quite. I remember listening to "The life of Riley", with William Bendix as Riley, on radio (WLW, Cincinnati) in the late 1940's. Some years later, it became a television show, probably also prior to "The Honeymooners". In any event "Riley" clearly was the antecedent, followed by Honeymooners, followed by Flintstones. And it is not a stretch to say that Jackie Gleason, who was familiar with "Riley", modeled his blue-collar Honeymooners character largely on Riley.

Westwall, Duke '59

If we're talking radio, you got me. I have vague recollections of my mother listening to Arthur Godfrey on the radio. But for all practical purposes, I grew up the television, black and white, rabbit ears, test patterns and all that. But TV.

Of course, I used radio to listen to sports and Cousin Brucie. But's that's a different story. Obviously.

And let me add, that Jim Sumner hates it when coaches refer to themselves in the third person.

rsvman
10-29-2013, 03:33 PM
I'm very surprised that nobody has yet mentioned the word "chemistry."

Maybe I'm the only one who's bothered by it. "This team has a ton of talent, but lacks the chemistry for a deep run in March."

So, if we just added a little O2 + 2 H2O = 2 H2O or something, they would be great?


And by announcer, for me it's like this:

Raftery: " The kisssssssss." (after a routine bank shot)
Vitale: "Jaquan averaged 15 points and 10 rebounds a game when he was playing rec league ball in Columbus, Ohio, when he was only 9 years old. That team was coached by John Sullivan, who's brother-in-law played junior high school ball for a DeMatha feeder school back in the 80s, scoring a respectable 10 points per game before being recruited by the University of Michigan, but unfortunately he was unable to play for them because of a jaw injury suffered during a skiing accident in the Swiss Alps, blah, blah, blah...." (during about 3 minutes of game play in which the game lead changed hands 4 times and two spectacular dunks occurred)

Oh, and I almost forgot: "For all you young kids out there......" Sheesh. Give it a rest.

Dev11
10-29-2013, 03:38 PM
Vitale: "Jaquan averaged 15 points and 10 rebounds a game when he was playing rec league ball in Columbus, Ohio, when he was only 9 years old. That team was coached by John Sullivan, who's brother-in-law played junior high school ball for a DeMatha feeder school back in the 80s, scoring a respectable 10 points per game before being recruited by the University of Michigan, but unfortunately he was unable to play for them because of a jaw injury suffered during a skiing accident in the Swiss Alps, blah, blah, blah...." (during about 3 minutes of game play in which the game lead changed hands 4 times and two spectacular dunks occurred)

Last year during the season, one of the Grantland writers (can't remember if it was Shane Ryan or Mark Titus, but they're basically the same person other than Ryan constantly whining about being a Duke fan and Titus constantly reminding us that he rode the bench next to Greg Oden) did a weekly summary of college basketball that included a segment on Dick Vitale. The reader was asked to choose which of three long-winded paragraphs were Dick's actual stream of consciousness during a broadcast that week. It was highly amusing.

cato
10-29-2013, 04:34 PM
When the word "literally" is used incorrectly, it makes the speaker sound ignorant. A few years ago, I was watching some insipid news show and the announcer stated that Britney Spears was "literally on a roller coaster ride to hell." My wife and I could not stop laughing. Literally.


Ah, the ignorant card. Just to clean this up a bit: when someone uses the word "literally" in a way that you deem incorrect, you think the speaker sounds ignorant. Others do not. Do not globalize your pet peeve, even if it is widely shared by others. Usage meanders. English is large. It contains multitudes.

More interesting to me: is the (sometimes) disapproved use of "literally" literally ironic?

dball
10-29-2013, 04:40 PM
I first noticed this when Don Drysdale began his broadcast career though I'm not sure he is the progenitor.

Drysdale nearly always started his "interview" with "tell me about....". Is it too much to expect the interviewer ask an actual question? This and its variations (tell us about, talk about, etc) seem quite common still.

MCFinARL
10-29-2013, 05:24 PM
[QUOTE=westwall;671807]

If we're talking radio, you got me. I have vague recollections of my mother listening to Arthur Godfrey on the radio. But for all practical purposes, I grew up the television, black and white, rabbit ears, test patterns and all that. But TV.

Of course, I used radio to listen to sports and Cousin Brucie. But's that's a different story. Obviously.

And let me add, that Jim Sumner hates it when coaches refer to themselves in the third person.

Ah, Cousin Brucie--now I'm hearing radio jingles (77, WABC...). Grew up outside Pittsburgh and used to look forward to Sunday night when I could pick up the clear channels from New York and Chicago (WLS) and hear what the kids were listening to in glamorous big cities. ;)

Once tried to explain test patterns to my children--they were astonished to hear that TV stations used to sign off at the end of the evening. Sigh....

Jim3k
10-29-2013, 06:02 PM
I first noticed this when Don Drysdale began his broadcast career though I'm not sure he is the progenitor.

Drysdale nearly always started his "interview" with "tell me about....". Is it too much to expect the interviewer ask an actual question? This and its variations (tell us about, talk about, etc) seem quite common still.

Well...that sort of question is far better than the leading questions, where the interviewer puts words in the player's mouth. ["What does it mean to the (team, town, winning pitcher) that you could hit X's 90 mph cut fastball over the outside corner down the line for the go-ahead double??]

"Tell us about your last at-bat" at least tries to force the interviewee to use his brain and his own words. If successful, the answer, at the very least, is in the player's words; it might be inane, but that's on the player. You might also get "I was sitting on the cutter, since he'd been throwing it all night early in the count. With men on first and third I knew the infield would be looking for the double play, holding the runner on first. I was trying to go to the right since the positioning gave me a hole on the right side. I was almost too successful. It was lucky it got past the first baseman since I swung a bit later than I wanted. If he hadn't been holding the runner, he'd have caught it."

Would you rather hear that from the player or the announcer?

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
10-29-2013, 06:05 PM
Ah, the ignorant card. Just to clean this up a bit: when someone uses the word "literally" in a way that you deem incorrect, you think the speaker sounds ignorant. Others do not. Do not globalize your pet peeve, even if it is widely shared by others. Usage meanders. English is large. It contains multitudes.

More interesting to me: is the (sometimes) disapproved use of "literally" literally ironic?

Holy cow. I really expected more support on the "literal" argument on a Duke board.

Go ahead. Use "literally" however you like. Just don't tell me how to feel about the way people use the word. I was taught all my life that "literally" meant a very specific thing, and hearing it used to mean the opposite will sound ignorant to me.

Now, I bow out of this thread for a second time. Apologies for getting this thread off track with my own particular pet peeve. I thought it was a more universal theme. I should stay off these boards until the games start. Thank goodness, that's literally less than two weeks.

Go Duke!

ricks68
10-29-2013, 06:21 PM
[QUOTE=jimsumner;671925]

Ah, Cousin Brucie--now I'm hearing radio jingles (77, WABC...). Grew up outside Pittsburgh and used to look forward to Sunday night when I could pick up the clear channels from New York and Chicago (WLS) and hear what the kids were listening to in glamorous big cities. ;)

Once tried to explain test patterns to my children--they were astonished to hear that TV stations used to sign off at the end of the evening. Sigh....

Wolfman Jack

ricks

ricks68
10-29-2013, 06:26 PM
[QUOTE=westwall;671807]

If we're talking radio, you got me. I have vague recollections of my mother listening to Arthur Godfrey on the radio. But for all practical purposes, I grew up the television, black and white, rabbit ears, test patterns and all that. But TV.

Of course, I used radio to listen to sports and Cousin Brucie. But's that's a different story. Obviously.

And let me add, that Jim Sumner hates it when coaches refer to themselves in the third person.

I used to listen to the Friday Night Fights, The Lone Ranger, Jack Benny, The Shadow, Fibber McGee and Molly, etc. on the weekends I spent with my grandfather on overnights. He was blind, so we listened to a lot of radio together rather than the TV.

I am only 2-3 years older than you (Jim) are, however.

ricks

jimsumner
10-29-2013, 06:51 PM
Well...that sort of question is far better than the leading questions, where the interviewer puts words in the player's mouth. ["What does it mean to the (team, town, winning pitcher) that you could hit X's 90 mph cut fastball over the outside corner down the line for the go-ahead double??]

"Tell us about your last at-bat" at least tries to force the interviewee to use his brain and his own words. If successful, the answer, at the very least, is in the player's words; it might be inane, but that's on the player. You might also get "I was sitting on the cutter, since he'd been throwing it all night early in the count. With men on first and third I knew the infield would be looking for the double play, holding the runner on first. I was trying to go to the right since the positioning gave me a hole on the right side. I was almost too successful. It was lucky it got past the first baseman since I swung a bit later than I wanted. If he hadn't been holding the runner, he'd have caught it."

Would you rather hear that from the player or the announcer?

A lot of media questions are even more leading than that. Q. "How good did it feel to score the winning points?" A. "It felt real good."

MCFinARL
10-29-2013, 07:13 PM
[QUOTE=MCFinARL;671971]

Wolfman Jack

ricks

Good one--never picked him up in the Burgh but LOVED American Graffiti.

OldPhiKap
10-29-2013, 08:32 PM
there are plenty of other autoantonyms that are not fads. besides, cleave, oversight, rent, terrific are some examples.

Spoiler alert: (from Wikipedia -- had to look up the term, and while I was there . . . .)

"All but" can mean "except for" or "almost entirely".
"Apparent" can mean "obvious" or "seeming, but in fact not."
"Awful" can mean "worthy of awe" or "very bad."
"Besides" means "other than; except for; instead of", but can also mean "in addition (to)."
"Buckle" can mean "fasten securely" as in "buckle your seat belt", or it can mean "collapse by bending" as in "buckle under pressure."
"Check" can mean "an amount of money given to an individual" (e.g. a paycheck) or "an amount of money an individual owes to another party" (e.g. at a restaurant).
"Chuffed" can mean "displeased; disgruntled" or "pleased; satisfied."
"Citation" can mean "commendation" or a "summons to appear in court."
"To cleave" can mean "to cling" or "to split."
"Custom" can mean "standard" (shorthand for customary) or "tailored."
"Discursive" can mean "covering a wide field of subjects; rambling" or "proceeding to a conclusion through reason rather than intuition."
“Down” can mean both “good” (as in “The wine goes down.”) and miserable.
"To dust" can mean to remove dust (cleaning a house) or to add dust (dust a cake with powdered sugar).
"Egregious" can mean "outstandingly bad" or in archaic writing "remarkably good."
"Enjoin" can mean "command" and "forbid."
"Fast" can mean "moving quickly" as in "running fast," or it can mean "not moving" as in "stuck fast."
"To fight with someone" can mean "to fight against someone" or "to fight alongside someone."
"For" as a preposition can mean to be "in favor of" ("I'm for peace") or "against" ("take aspirin for a headache").
"To go off" can mean "begin to make a sound" ("the alarm went off") or "stop operating" ("the alarm will go off after one minute").
"Impregnable" can mean "able to be impregnated" or "incapable of being entered."
"Inflammable" technically means "capable of burning" but is commonly used to mean "unburnable".[1]
"Literally" can mean "word for word, not metaphorically or idiomatically", but is also often used informally as an intensifier for figurative statements, ending up roughly synonymous with "virtually, figuratively."[5]
"Nonplussed" can mean (of a person) "surprised and confused so much that they are unsure how to react", but is often used informally as "not disconcerted; unperturbed."
"Off" can mean "deactivated" as in "to turn off", or it can mean "activated" as in "the alarm went off."
"Out" can mean "available" as in "the latest model is out" or "unavailable" as in "Sorry, we're out".
"To overlook" can mean "to inspect" or "to fail to notice."
"Oversight" (uncountable) means "supervision", "an oversight" (countable) means "not noticing something."
"To peruse" can mean "to examine in detail", or "to look over in a cursory manner."
"Radical" can mean "related to roots or origins" such as "radical leaves" or "breaking from tradition" as in "political radicals."
"Ravel" can mean to combine thread or to separate it.
"Refrain" means both non-action and the repetition of an action, e.g. in musical notation.
"To rent" can mean "to borrow from" or "to lend to."
"To sanction" can mean "to permit" or "to punish."
"To screen" can mean to show or to hide.
"Shelled" can mean "having a shell" or "has had the shell removed."
"To skin" means "to cover with skin" (as in to skin a drum) as well as "to strip or peel off" (as in to skin an animal).
"Snuff" can mean a specific kind of tobacco, as well as to inhale it, and to extinguish.
"To stay" can mean "to remain in a specific place, to postpone" or "to guide direction, movement."
"Stem-winder" means "a rousing political speech" but can also mean "a long, boring speech."[6]
"To stint" means "to stop", but the noun "stint" refers to the interval of work between stops.
"Strike" can mean "eliminate" ("to strike from the record") or "to secure" ("to strike an accord").
"Strike", in baseball terms, can mean "to hit the ball" or "to miss the ball."
"Stroke" as a verb means "caress" while as a noun, "a forceful hit."
"Terrific" can mean "very good" or "very bad."
"To toast" can mean to invite praise or to reprimand.
"Weedy" can mean "overgrown" ("The garden is weedy") or stunted ("The boy looks weedy").
"Wicked" can, in the modern parlance[weasel words], mean "excellent", or in the more traditional sense can mean "evil or morally wrong".

tommy
10-29-2013, 08:33 PM
Holy cow. I really expected more support on the "literal" argument on a Duke board.

Go ahead. Use "literally" however you like. Just don't tell me how to feel about the way people use the word. I was taught all my life that "literally" meant a very specific thing, and hearing it used to mean the opposite will sound ignorant to me.

Now, I bow out of this thread for a second time. Apologies for getting this thread off track with my own particular pet peeve. I thought it was a more universal theme. I should stay off these boards until the games start. Thank goodness, that's literally less than two weeks.

Go Duke!

I'm with you, Mountain Devil. It does, or at least always has, meant something specific, and that specific meaning has been degraded -- even reversed -- by people who didn't know or didn't care about what it actually meant.

freshmanjs
10-29-2013, 08:51 PM
I'm with you, Mountain Devil. It does, or at least always has, meant something specific, and that specific meaning has been degraded -- even reversed -- by people who didn't know or didn't care about what it actually meant.

like mark twain and james joyce.

Skitzle
10-29-2013, 09:05 PM
Spoiler alert: (from Wikipedia -- had to look up the term, and while I was there . . . .)

"All but" can mean "except for" or "almost entirely".
"Apparent" can mean "obvious" or "seeming, but in fact not."
"Awful" can mean "worthy of awe" or "very bad."
............


Only on the Duke boards....

Also very entertaining! :D

OldPhiKap
10-29-2013, 09:07 PM
Only on the Duke boards....

Also very entertaining! :D

My thoughts exactly. You always learn something. For me, usually about beer.

Merlindevildog91
10-29-2013, 10:05 PM
Spoiler alert: (from Wikipedia -- had to look up the term, and while I was there . . . .)

"To fight with someone" can mean "to fight against someone" or "to fight alongside someone."

Winston Churchill once corrected a report that spoke of the English "fighting with" the Germans, marking the text with "We do not fight 'with' the Germans. We fight either for or against them." (gratuitous historical trivia)

Personal peeve is overuse of the word "courage" to describe a play call in a tight situation. Running into a burning building or leaping over a foxhole while under fire to drag a wounded comrade to safety is courage. Matthew Stafford leaping over the goal line with the clock approaching zero doesn't rise to that level, at least in my mind.

sagegrouse
10-29-2013, 10:13 PM
Winston Churchill once corrected a report that spoke of the English "fighting with" the Germans, marking the text with "We do not fight 'with' the Germans. We fight either for or against them." (gratuitous historical trivia)

Personal peeve is overuse of the word "courage" to describe a play call in a tight situation. Running into a burning building or leaping over a foxhole while under fire to drag a wounded comrade to safety is courage. Matthew Stafford leaping over the goal line with the clock approaching zero doesn't rise to that level, at least in my mind.

"Courage," wrote Papa, "is grace under pressure." I can think of a lot of applications beyond physical danger.

sage

Faustus
10-29-2013, 10:53 PM
'Ravel' cited above can also mean, 'to be an early 20th century French composer of Classical music.' Sorry, but couldn't resist ;)

OldPhiKap
10-30-2013, 04:33 AM
'Ravel' cited above can also mean, 'to be an early 20th century French composer of Classical music.' Sorry, but couldn't resist ;)

Bolero, absent Bo Derek, is the most overrated classical work ever. Just end already.

TruBlu
10-30-2013, 05:46 AM
Scrooge McDuke? Freudian slip expressing the value of a Duke education? ;)

This "Freudian Slips" thing sounds interesting. Can they be purchased at Victoria's Secret?

Reilly
10-30-2013, 08:02 AM
Bolero, absent Bo Derek, is the most overrated classical work ever. Just end already.

"What?! Play Bolero again? After tonight I never want to hear it again!" - Zubin Mehta

This is actually an interesting (award-winning, I think) short documentary:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klQB144v4XQ

Henderson
10-30-2013, 08:18 AM
"What?! Play Bolero again? After tonight I never want to hear it again?" - Zubin Mehta

This is actually an interesting (award-winning, I think) short documentary:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klQB144v4XQ

Spoiler alert: Bo Derek does not get naked in the film.

MCFinARL
10-30-2013, 09:23 AM
Spoiler alert: (from Wikipedia -- had to look up the term, and while I was there . . . .)

“Down” can mean both “good” (as in “The wine goes down.”) and miserable.


No surprise to find a nit to pick with a Wikipedia entry, but I'm not really buying this one--my wine always goes down whether it's good or not.


This "Freudian Slips" thing sounds interesting. Can they be purchased at Victoria's Secret?

Now THERE'S a marketing idea!

:)

hurleyfor3
10-30-2013, 12:04 PM
Spoiler alert: (from Wikipedia -- had to look up the term, and while I was there . . . .)


They left out "candid".

CharlestonDevil
10-30-2013, 12:05 PM
I don't know how we've made it through eight excellent pages of this thread and no one has mentioned these gems from Clark Kellogg:

"Pursue the pumpkin young fella!" and "That's what we call a banana cut."

Literally the worst comments ever made.

MCFinARL
10-30-2013, 12:08 PM
I don't know how we've made it through eight excellent pages of this thread and no one has mentioned these gems from Clark Kellogg:

"Pursue the pumpkin young fella!" and "That's what we call a banana cut."

Literally the worst comments ever made.

Well, anything that ends in "young fella" is already problematic, but I have to agree that "pursue the pumpkin, young fella" is especially ludicrous.

tommy
10-30-2013, 01:49 PM
Well, anything that ends in "young fella" is already problematic, but I have to agree that "pursue the pumpkin, young fella" is especially ludicrous.

I know. What really makes me laugh and just shake my head in derision when I hear Kellogg say these kinds of things is thinking about what the scene would be were he to say something like this in a pickup game on the blacktop. At the very least he'd get the "huh? what the?" look from everyone. And then either he'd be laughed off the schoolyard or get his you-know-what kicked.

Nobody, and I mean nobody, talks like that in real life. Which makes his little sayings just so ridiculous.

CharlestonDevil
10-30-2013, 02:44 PM
I know. What really makes me laugh and just shake my head in derision when I hear Kellogg say these kinds of things is thinking about what the scene would be were he to say something like this in a pickup game on the blacktop. At the very least he'd get the "huh? what the?" look from everyone. And then either he'd be laughed off the schoolyard or get his you-know-what kicked.

Nobody, and I mean nobody, talks like that in real life. Which makes his little sayings just so ridiculous.

It might look something like this...
3644

tommy
10-30-2013, 03:20 PM
It might look something like this...
3644

Or this:

3645

JimBD
10-30-2013, 04:14 PM
"his future is ahead of him"

tommy
10-30-2013, 04:29 PM
Here's one: "patented"

The Lakers shredded Doc Rivers' patented defense in the fourth quarter . . .

It's not patented. It's not patentable. He has a reputation for being a good defensive coach, I guess. That's all. The word, as are many others mentioned in this thread, is an exaggeration, just used by lazy writers and other media types as a substitute for actually explaining something real.

Dev11
10-30-2013, 04:52 PM
It might look something like this...
3644

Is it bad that for half a second I thought this was the Duke Men's basketball senior class of 2011?

weezie
10-30-2013, 06:30 PM
Is it bad that for half a second I thought this was the Duke Men's basketball senior class of 2011?

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't recall zubazz pants or Euro bike hats as being au courant in 2011.

I just love referencing zubazz pants whenever the occasion presents itself. Or doesn't. :cool:This icon needs a pair of zubazz.

drcharl
10-30-2013, 06:59 PM
In commentary for NCAA football, frequently heard about a player preforming well in the game. "He'll be playing on Sunday."

OldPhiKap
10-30-2013, 07:59 PM
Any variant of "he's getting a blow on the bench" or "he's gonna come out and get a blow."

I just hear Beavis and Butthead in my mind for the next five minutes.

tommy
10-30-2013, 11:48 PM
Any variant of "he's getting a blow on the bench" or "he's gonna come out and get a blow."

I just hear Beavis and Butthead in my mind for the next five minutes.

See, I don't mind that one. I like it, because it's real, it's organic, it's something commonly said both by pickup players and higher level guys alike. It's real hoops lexicon, not a phony baloney made-up catch phrase.

Tom B.
10-31-2013, 01:26 PM
Personal peeve is overuse of the word "courage" to describe a play call in a tight situation. Running into a burning building or leaping over a foxhole while under fire to drag a wounded comrade to safety is courage. Matthew Stafford leaping over the goal line with the clock approaching zero doesn't rise to that level, at least in my mind.



To that, I'll add any use of war metaphors to describe what's going on in a sports event. Sorry, but players aren't "soldiers," an injured player trying to play through pain isn't a "wounded warrior," and the game isn't a "battle." Save the war imagery for an actual war.

Reilly
10-31-2013, 02:08 PM
... any use of war metaphors to describe what's going on in a sports event ...

I agree with you that a lot of war metaphors should not be applied to sports.

As for the actual word "war" however, I don't mind its use in sports, so long as perspective is maintained. Just like it was noted above that "literally" has certain accepted dictionary definitions different from what some would expect, war has accepted meanings other than "armed conflict" -- such as "[2(a)] a state of hostility, conflict or antagonism" or "[2(b)] a ... competition between opposing forces" (per my Webster's).

If somebody says the Duke/UNC games of the late 1980s were real wars, to me it only means they were fiercely waged contests, and using the word "war" doesn't equate the (non)seriousness of those games with actual armed conflict, or somehow lessen the serousness of actual armed conflict.

Armed conflict is armed conflict.

Antagonism is antagonism.

Competition between opposing forces is competition between opposing forces.

The same word ("war") can be used as shorthand to mean all three, but I'm guessing most understand the different meanings, given the context.

Greg_Newton
11-01-2013, 12:27 AM
Okay, two more uniform-based ones:

1. Using absurdly pretentious words for your team's colors. It's not "wine", it's red. It's not "maize", it's yellow. Not even corn itself is called "maize" here, Michigan.

2. "Man, he would sure look good in [our absurd team colors]!" Just a creepy thing for grown men to say about a seventeen year-old.

captmojo
11-02-2013, 11:09 AM
To that, I'll add any use of war metaphors to describe what's going on in a sports event. Sorry, but players aren't "soldiers," an injured player trying to play through pain isn't a "wounded warrior," and the game isn't a "battle." Save the war imagery for an actual war.

Classic-----http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmXacL0Uny0

captmojo
11-02-2013, 11:12 AM
Classic-----http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmXacL0Uny0

Link didn't work. It's George Carlin.

OldPhiKap
11-02-2013, 04:56 PM
"Trickeration."

tommy
11-18-2013, 12:05 PM
Not to take my own thread a little off topic, but here's a non-sports word that drives me crazy when I hear it. Maybe I don't understand the usage, but seems like it's people trying to sound smarter than they really are.The word is "monies."I just got an email from my son's school today, telling us that "significant monies will need to be raised to bring these plans to fruition, blah blah blah."Why isn't it "significant money will need to be raised . . ." ?? Monies? Who talks like that? And is it correct?

brevity
11-18-2013, 02:20 PM
Not to take my own thread a little off topic, but here's a non-sports word that drives me crazy when I hear it. Maybe I don't understand the usage, but seems like it's people trying to sound smarter than they really are.The word is "monies."I just got an email from my son's school today, telling us that "significant monies will need to be raised to bring these plans to fruition, blah blah blah."Why isn't it "significant money will need to be raised . . ." ?? Monies? Who talks like that? And is it correct?

In the great Venn diagram of language usage, I imagine the circle of people who use the word "monies" mostly overlaps those who use the word "fiduciary." It is a correct usage for people in finance and law, and I guess fundraising. Anyway, this page (http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/65366/money-vs-monies) should help. Basically, use "money" if you want to generalize the concept of revenue. Use "monies" if you want to specify discrete sums from different sources. Consider it a substitute for "checks" or "donations" without implying a form of payment or charity/tax implications.

Now, if Dick Vitale starts talking about how 2 different players in a game are so "monies," then that is an incorrect usage.

Mal
11-18-2013, 02:20 PM
I love discussions like these. Responding to a few lines of thought above:

- I, too, cannot stand the use of pluralization of individuals that Frobisher mentioned. "You've got your Tom Bradys, and your Peyton Mannings..." What? I thought they were both "one of a kind."

- I've harped in a different thread on the transformation of "literally" into "figuratively," and I don't care if Merriam-Webster now accepts its two, diametrically opposed definitions, or that other words have been similarly degraded. As the cited usage note makes clear, when you combine antonymic meaning with unnecessarily hyperbolic context, it's annoying. If "literally" were still used for its original defined meaning on a regular basis, maybe I wouldn't care so much about the growth of an alternate. I also note that the twice cited Mark Twain's usage of "literally" in the Tom Sawyer/fence whitewashing story is, when read in context, much more defensible. The author follows the statement that Sawyer was "literally rolling in wealth" by describing the large number of new things the boy went and purchased with his newfound money. Items which, knowing the character, were likely strewn all about his bedroom and probably his bed, so that one could envision him completely surrounded by, and perhaps even rolling in, his new possessions, which were the manifestation of his "wealth." In any event, certainly a more acceptable stretch of the word "literally" than we're used to hearing circa 2013. I also find it interesting that the same person who's defending the evolutionary, "it contains multitudes" position on grammar and language, is appealing to the authority of various dictionaries to support his/her argument on this point.

- I can't stand the overusage of military and warfare language, as others have noted. It's not that anyone listening thinks that actual warfare is being described. It's that the underlying connotation is that these athletes are displaying the same level or type of bravery and physical exertion that actual soldiers do, and thus are worthy of the same sort of admiration.

Just so I don't leave without adding anything new to the conversation, I'll add three more that annoy me:

- "flat-out." Meaningless and trite. Like everything else out of Mr. Vitale's mouth.

- the innumerate use of "x times more than" instead of "x times as much/many as." If some basketball team takes an average of 15 three pointers per game, and their opponent takes 30, then the second team takes twice as many three pointers as the first. Not "two times more." That would imply "as many, PLUS two times more," or 45 three pointers per game. This goes way beyond the sports world, but it drives me nuts wherever.

- I can't believe no one's mentioned "__________ Nation" here yet. Retire it. Now.

rsvman
11-18-2013, 02:33 PM
- ..the innumerate use of "x times more than" instead of "x times as much/many as." If some basketball team takes an average of 15 three pointers per game, and their opponent takes 30, then the second team takes twice as many three pointers as the first. Not "two times more." That would imply "as many, PLUS two times more," or 45 three pointers per game. This goes way beyond the sports world, but it drives me nuts wherever.

....

I'm not sure I agree with this part. Certainly, "twice" is more succinct than "two times more." I don't know that I agree that "two times more" implies "as many, PLUS two times more."

What if the announcer said "two times as many"? Would you still feel the same way, or is it the use of the word "more" that changes the meaning for you? Because I would argue that "two times as many" and "twice as many" mean the exact same thing, given that "two times" and "twice" mean the same thing.

OldPhiKap
11-18-2013, 03:00 PM
Now, if Dick Vitale starts talking [] then that is an incorrect usage.

Fixed it for you.

rasputin
11-18-2013, 03:02 PM
Fixed it for you.

OPK, you beat me to that one.

Reilly
11-18-2013, 04:14 PM
Not to take my own thread a little off topic, but here's a non-sports word that drives me crazy when I hear it. Maybe I don't understand the usage, but seems like it's people trying to sound smarter than they really are.The word is "monies." ...

What I want to know is how come the plural for "money" is "monies" but the plural of "honey" is "honeys."

SmartDevil
11-18-2013, 04:44 PM
Here are two other sports "phrases" that need to be "retired" and never to be spoken or spoken of again......"Chris Berman" and "Stuart Scott."

turnandburn55
11-18-2013, 04:45 PM
"So and so is a very unique/one of the most unique players"... unique means one-of-a-kind. You're either unique or you're not. You can't be more unique than someone else.

"Big tight end"... I always love how ever announcer talks about the QB throwing it to the "big tight end"... really? As opposed to the other, 5'8" 155 tight end?

"This team is definitely not intimidated by the fact they're playing Duke"... this one becomes mandatory anytime any lower-tier team plays us and puts on a run against us. Please stop.

sagegrouse
11-18-2013, 04:54 PM
"So and so is a very unique/one of the most unique players"... unique means one-of-a-kind. You're either unique or you're not. You can't be more unique than someone else.

"Big tight end"... I always love how ever announcer talks about the QB throwing it to the "big tight end"... really? As opposed to the other, 5'8" 155 tight end?

"This team is definitely not intimidated by the fact they're playing Duke"... this one becomes mandatory anytime any lower-tier team plays us and puts on a run against us. Please stop.

I had rules for the sales team: Don't ever say "very unique," which is grossly redundant. Moreover, one should usually avoid using "unique," because usually one means "special." And then there were all those adverbs that tended to detract from the real meaning -- i.e., "company X has a substantial market share" is stronger than "has a very substantial market share," which sounds like one is compensating for weakness.

sagegrouse

Mal
11-18-2013, 04:54 PM
I'm not sure I agree with this part. Certainly, "twice" is more succinct than "two times more." I don't know that I agree that "two times more" implies "as many, PLUS two times more."

What if the announcer said "two times as many"? Would you still feel the same way, or is it the use of the word "more" that changes the meaning for you? Because I would argue that "two times as many" and "twice as many" mean the exact same thing, given that "two times" and "twice" mean the same thing.

I agree with your last point. It's the "more" that gets me, not the 2x vs. twice (which are synonymous). "More," without the complementary "than" (stated or not), means only some indeterminately greater quantity, which clearly isn't what we're dealing with here. And to my ears, "more than" does imply that you get to "equal" and go from there. 8 is more than 6. How much more? Well, you start at 6 and start adding, so 2 more. 2 of course is 1/3 of 6, so: 8 = 6 + (1/3 x 6) or 6 plus a third of itself. So, it sounds right to me to say that 8 is "1/3 more than 6" which is the same as "6 plus a third of 6 more." If I move on to 8 being more than 4, instead, 8 is 4 more than 4. So, 8 is (1 x 4) more than 4. So, 8 is once more, or one times, more, than 4, which is the same as "4 plus once 4 more." 12, then, would be twice more, or two times more, than 4. It can't be true that 8 is 1/3 more than 6 but 2x more than 4.

Looked at another way, in my mind, 8 is two times 4 (with the unstated "as much as" after "times"). It can't also then be "two times more than" 4, because "more than" is clearly not synonymous with "as much as." To my ears, to say "two times more" means you start at 4, and then add two additional 4's, to get 12. Which is the same as "three times as much/many."

I am confusing myself and need to get out of this posting. :confused:

I understand the other construction, but it seems awkward to me, and as though the "more" is either superfluous or contradictory to its normal meaning. I accept that the other usage is common, and don't hold it against anyone. I just resent that it feels intuitively off in a mathematical/logical sense to me.

sagegrouse
11-18-2013, 04:56 PM
I agree with your last point. It's the "more" that gets me, not the 2x vs. twice. "More," without the complementary "than" (stated or not), means only some indeterminately greater quantity, which clearly isn't what we're dealing with here. e.

How dare you use "complementary" correctly -- you could get banned from the internet!

I seems to me the internet has made copy editing obsolete, but one has to recognize that "obsolete" is not the same thing as "unnecessary."

sagegrouse

jimsumner
11-18-2013, 04:59 PM
How dare you use "complementary" correctly -- you could get banned from the internet!

I seems to me the internet has made copy editing obsolete, but one has to recognize that "obsolete" is not the same thing as "unnecessary."

sagegrouse

R U trying 2 complement him?

Mal
11-18-2013, 06:15 PM
How dare you use "complementary" correctly

Well, I would hate to loose the argument by not using it's proper form. ;)

Don't get me started.

tommy
12-18-2013, 10:58 AM
OK here's another one, football-related. Why, every time a DB picks off a pass which had been tipped, does the announcer just HAVE to say, "Ah, the old tip drill!" ??

I haven't been to a pro football practice, or even a college one in many years, but I have never seen anything like the type of drill these announcers continue to insist is run on a regular basis. What would that drill even look like? Maybe there was something that used to be popular, but is such a drill really still used? Moreover, sometimes a guy just has quick reactions to the ball, and it has nothing to do with having engaged in a particular drill in practice. To me, this is announcers, again, trying to make it seem like they have some special insight or information, behind the scenes or inside stuff of some sort, when they actually have no idea how modern football teams practice.

ricks68
12-18-2013, 11:08 AM
Here are two other sports "phrases" that need to be "retired" and never to be spoken or spoken of again......"Chris Berman" and "Stuart Scott."

Could be in the running for POTD. Excellent!

ricks

Indoor66
12-18-2013, 06:29 PM
And add Steven A to that list with Scott and Berman.

wilson
04-09-2014, 08:52 AM
"Natty." Swiftly proliferating around here these days.

freshmanjs
04-09-2014, 09:18 AM
"Natty." Swiftly proliferating around here these days.

YES!!! "Natty" and "Scholly" are very annoying

jhole
04-09-2014, 12:18 PM
Seems to me Jay Bilas started this one and I get the meaning, that wingspan and space have much to do with potential, not simply height. (Elton for example) But this one still grates me for some reason and no one says it more than Jay....

JonnyWonder
04-09-2014, 12:34 PM
Does anyone else find the term "dribble drive" incredibly redundant? Is there another way to drive the ball without dribbling of which I'm unaware? I think Doris Burke often drops this and it kind of drives me crazy.

TruBlu
04-09-2014, 01:01 PM
Does anyone else find the term "dribble drive" incredibly redundant? Is there another way to drive the ball without dribbling of which I'm unaware? I think Doris Burke often drops this and it kind of drives me crazy.

Tyler Hanstravel says "Hi".

Saratoga2
04-09-2014, 01:13 PM
Anything Dick Vitale says.

It would be amusing to get a complete list of Vitalism's but then one would have to take the TV off mute, Baby!

dball
04-09-2014, 06:22 PM
YES!!! "Natty" and "Scholly" are very annoying

"Natty" is acceptable if followed by "Bo".

gurufrisbee
04-09-2014, 07:00 PM
"Unanswered".

This word gets used constantly while the game is not over. So and so scored eight unanswered points. And almost always there is still plenty of time in which the other team does actually find an ANSWER. Sometimes they even go so far as things like 'Team A scored ten unanswered points to take the lead only to have Team B hit a buzzer beater three for the win'. Apparently they had an ANSWER!

It's "consecutive". Or "in a row". Or "straight". Or a "run of ___". But it's only unanswered if they other team does NOTHING after that.

Thank you.

turnandburn55
04-09-2014, 07:17 PM
"Big Tight End"

As opposed to the small tight end? All TEs are big, by definition...

roywhite
04-09-2014, 07:33 PM
Seems to me Jay Bilas started this one and I get the meaning, that wingspan and space have much to do with potential, not simply height. (Elton for example) But this one still grates me for some reason and no one says it more than Jay....

Jay tends to wear out one adjective at a time.

For a good while, it was "long".

Then, it became "bouncy".

It is currently "tough".

Henderson
04-09-2014, 08:27 PM
"Doug Gottlieb"

uh_no
04-09-2014, 09:15 PM
"Doug Gottlieb"

Ladies and gentlemen... we have ourselves a winner

Kfanarmy
04-09-2014, 09:21 PM
Does anyone else find the term "dribble drive" incredibly redundant? Is there another way to drive the ball without dribbling of which I'm unaware? I think Doris Burke often drops this and it kind of drives me crazy.

I don't know how else you would describe the magic Jon Scheyer performed on occasion as he dribbled among, around, through, and between defenders, almost in slow motion to score. (I know that's repetitively redundant, but hey it gets the point across). Those were some amazing dribble drives!

NYBri
04-10-2014, 10:10 AM
"Ensuing"

BlueDster
04-10-2014, 10:34 AM
"Unanswered".

This word gets used constantly while the game is not over. So and so scored eight unanswered points. And almost always there is still plenty of time in which the other team does actually find an ANSWER. Sometimes they even go so far as things like 'Team A scored ten unanswered points to take the lead only to have Team B hit a buzzer beater three for the win'. Apparently they had an ANSWER!

It's "consecutive". Or "in a row". Or "straight". Or a "run of ___". But it's only unanswered if they other team does NOTHING after that.

Thank you.

Maybe you could say 7 unanswered points, and the 8th was answered.

Of course, that would just be ridiculous.