someone posts a thread dissing Dunigans comentary?
I can say one thing about Dunigan's commentary, it is infinately better than Glen Suiters!
I enjoyed his thought process for Hawkins. :lol:
His commentary, to quote Dunnigan himself, "ceases to amaze me."
He is no worse and no better than anyone else. It's why I vastly prefer to be at the game.
And yes he actually said that describing Cahoon.
Kind of segues into the convo on the other thread about grammar and not including a word, in this case "never", drastically altering what you say.
I'm the other way on Matt Dunigan's commentary and enjoyed it today because he's candid too.
Shame on you for mocking the commentary of a man whose career was ended prematurely by concussion, evidence of which can still be found in slight hesitations, speech impediments, and blanking on words at run time.
I don't always agree with what Dunigan says, and he is obviously still learning the business of providing color commentary, but he has a vast reservoir of knowledge about the game, and he showed some of that today. It was refreshing to hear a color commentator actually break down the specifics of a play and tell us something other than the blindingly obvious (Forde is frequently guilty of doing this, as is Suitor, though the latter has at least picked up his own game over the past few weeks). Dunigan also has some animation in his voice, unlike Duane Forde.
Dunigan and Gord Miller were a welcome change from Black and Forde, frankly.
I think he's pretty good. But of course, I'll just wait a bit til all the complainers put in their $0.02. Can't go a day here without at least one thread complaining about something. :roll:
Well, what else are we supposed to do?
I like him, he knows football and he gets excited about the CFL.
I am just so glad that these forums werent around when lancaster was in the booth, cause you just know someone would have found something to put him down about. Real or imagined
Guaranteed if Matt was to stay in the booth, he would eventually get roasted and toasted by some, no matter how good a job he does
One of the things Matt has on his side is he played/coached for so many teams (Edmonton, BC, Toronto, Winnipeg, Birmingham, Hamilton and Calgary) so fans have a lot harder time accusing him of supporting one team over another (although we all know he likes Winnipeg best ). People say that Glen Suitor only played for the Saskatchewan so he’s biased for the Riders or Chris Schultz only played for Toronto so he’s biased for the Argos or Jock Climie played for Ottawa, Toronto and Montreal so he’s biased for eastern teams or Milt Stegall only played for Winnipeg so he’s biased for the Bombers whether it’s true or not.
Not complain? I know that would be a novel concept for some, especially those who noticed that the Lions got away with at least 4 holding calls.
i prefer miller and forde.
i thought id get through the day without hearing black....too bad he called the argos/lions game
He has only done a handful of games and still better than Suitor !
Only four...? :o