Check out this poll rating Gumbel's work for the NFL Network!

[WMR]

http://sports.aol.com/story/_a/gumbe...00010000000001

America hates this guy!!

[Razor Shines]

Wow, 70% think he sucks and they would be correct.

[WMR]

I want an IQ test performed on the 12 percent that rated him either GOOD or EXCELLENT.

[sonny]

My question would be who are the thirty percent, and are they deaf?

[pahster]

I can't tell you anything about football or Bryant Gumbel, but I can tell you that the results of that poll (and internet polls more generally) are pretty much worthless. The sample is self-selected (because people choose to respond on their own accord) and thus not random. If it's not random, it's not representative of the population.

[cincinnati chili]

The only NFL network game I saw was the Pats/Giants game (as I'm one of the 60% of American households that can't get NFL network). I thought Gumbel and Collinsworth were fine. Not wonderful, but fine.

[WMR]

I can't tell you anything about football or Bryant Gumbel, but I can tell you that the results of that poll (and internet polls more generally) are pretty much worthless. The sample is self-selected (because people choose to respond on their own accord) and thus not random. If it's not random, it's not representative of the population.

It's representative of people interested in the topic. :shrug:

[pahster]

It's representative of people interested in the topic. :shrug:

It's representative of those who chose to respond. Everyone who is interested didn't read the article and everyone who read it didn't respond.

This poll in particular doesn't bother me so much because I doubt it ever gets reported. What gets me are the "polls" conducted by many major media outlets that make use of self selected respondents and convenience samples and then report their results as representative facts about the population. It's silly, dishonest, and shows a fundamental lack of understanding of how to measure public opinion.

[WMR]

I don't think anyone's implied it's scientific or anything... just an interesting snapshot of how 60,000 people feel about the guy.

[WMR]

I agree, btw, that polls can be conducted to "show" pretty much whatever the pollster wants them to show if they aren't an "honest" 3rd party w/o a 'dog' in the fight.

[RedsManRick]

I'll take dry and descriptive over the hyper-trying-too-hard-to-be-funny crap you often get elsewhere.

[Yachtzee]

Gumble did much better than his typical performance on the NFLN. At least he didn't call Kevin Faulk "Marshall" or mistakenly refer to Lawrence Maroney as former Canadian PM Brian Mulroney. I swear he called Frank Gore "Al" a few times during the Bengals-49ers game.

[Redsfaithful]

During the Bengals - 49ers game he repeatedly called Frank Gore "Al".

He's a pretty bad announcer.

[remdog]

Didn't Al Gore invent the NFLNetwork?

Rem

[Caveat Emperor]

I'll take dry and descriptive over the hyper-trying-too-hard-to-be-funny crap you often get elsewhere.

There are dozens of good play-by-play announcers, many toiling in obscurity in regional television and radio, that do a fantastic job of just that. The fact that networks recycle the bad ones like Gumbel is bothersome.

And, lets not let his brother get a free pass either - Greg Gumbel might be one of the most boring studio host / announcers in the history of televised sports.