Enough already about Danny Green's dad
Jeff commented on my
UNC-Rutger's post about the game commentators discussing Danny Green's father's situation:
Was it just me, or did anyone else find the commentary from the announcers regarding Danny Green's father's situation annoying?
I think that it is a private matter for the Green family and really doesn't belong among sportscasters and color commentary. I wish the best for Danny and his family, but I really don't think he would want sportscasters speculating about his father's future, or airing out his problems and past mistakes on ESPN.
Dunno - I was just kind of miffed by the whole exchange...
I couldn't agree more. I've heard the story mentioned during at least 3 games this year (maybe it has been called out even more.) I felt the way it was mentioned in the Rutger's game was rather slimy. Do they really need to air the Green family dirty laundry like that? What if someone dug into the announcers' past and found a juicy little nugget and decided to mention it during every game they called? There is just no point in it other than sensationalism.
This brings up the larger annoyance that I raise every year: game commentators repeat the exact same storylines game after game after game. For someone like myself that watches every game, it gets tiresome. Commentators must share the same cue cards for teams. This year you'll hear frequently about Roy in the Hall of Fame (not a bad thing mind you), Danny Green's dad, the Georgetown game last year, playing Duke, etc.
