The Glen Suitor Science Experiment

Maybe we need to do a 'scientific study'. He will probably do the Lions/Rider game next weekend. Let's keep track of his comments. We can make two topics. #1 for biased comments, #2 for intelligent comments. It would be scientifically unreliable but might give some insight to the his calling of the game. Personally, I think we could all agree on pro or con Rider comments as per #1, but I think we would all disagree on the intelligence of his comments as per #2, but I would be willing to try it out in a post. Any takers?

Who will track these offically you would need some unbiased to collect the data do you not think?

nothing that elaborate. I think it would be hard to find a truly unbiased person on this site. I would propose a less structured report. Say, we all keep our own log and submit it after the game just to see if we agree and also maybe immediately post the comments we think are obvious or controversial. In the end, I just want to see what everyone elses honest take is. I'm hoping that people will watch, analyze, then maybe have to admit he is not that pro-rider afterall or maybe it will be me admitting that he does show out to be pro-rider afterall. More or less, I just want to put him specifically underneath the microscope this next weekend. Perhaps it can end a battle or two.

This will not work as you know everyone on this site has a different opinion. Rider fans will not see the biased of Suitor if it hit them in the face.
I would suggest we find a Montreal fan they seem to be less biased. Or we could get Saskargo to keep track!

.....did anyone else catch Suitor's comment tonight (forget to whom he was referring): "All the short yards he gains are positive yards." I might be missing something, but I don't see how a negative yard can really be considered a gain.....

You being a teacher will catch them every time. These are the things that drive you crazy. Maybe you can do the stats in the Sask vs BC game I would say you are unbiased

If the Riders win the sun will shine from his ass that's all I know.

Riders will not win against BC this time!

But I guess we will soon find out!

I would watch out for using copyrighted animations from the Animation Factory if I was you.

Maybe that is the point. Most of us think we could be unbiased when assessing Suitor's comments. I would like to compare my assessment with everyone else. It will be a small test of how neutral we can assess Suitor. In the end, there will be no way of really objectively analyzing his comments, but it would be pretty much the best that this forum could do. I could see nominating one 'as much as possible' neutral fan to be the benchmark that we compare our scores against.

You can only really be unbiased when you're watching a game where your team isn't playing. I know on Thursday he seemed to be very pro-Argo, but that was just to me. Argo fans probably saw it the opposite way. If this "study" is going to have any credibility whatsoever, the findings of Rider and Lions fans would have to be discounted completely, or at least weighted equally. (All Rider fans' findings = all Lion fans' findings, regardless of how many are in each group.)

Plus, the distinction wouldn't be "biased" vs "intelligent". A lot of things Suitor says may be unbiased, but are still far from intelligent. "Biased" vs "unbiased" wouldn't work either, because how can you possibly count his "unbiased" statements? He says like 200 things per game.

The distinction would have to be "BC-bias" vs "Sask-bias". For each biased statement he makes, each person would mark under which team his statement favours. If the numbers are roughly even, there would be no bias.

But if B.C. wins 45-3, then obviously he's going to say a lot more favourable things about the Lions than about the Riders. So each person would only mark those statements that they consider to be incorrect or unfair.

He may not actually show much of a bias in this game, because he has allegiances to both teams, being from the Vancouver area and growing up as a Lions fan. A Saskatchewan/Edmonton game would be a much better test.

Well, here is my bias. I think he is one of the best announcers in the game. While he may have some favouritism towards some teams, he does a reasonable job of staying neutral.

I figured there would not be too much concensus on this idea. For my own curiousity, I will keep track of what I consider biased (including direction) vs neutral comments. I will post my results. Anyone else that wants to take part, please feel free. As you can probably agree to, these are by no means valid statements or findings in advance.

I agree that he is one of the better commentators in the Cfl. He is way more neutral then Lief petterson or Chris Walby.

For your information:

Visitors to Animation Factory may use our collection of free images only for their personal projects, such as personal websites and emails. In no way may our free content be used in commercial and professional projects, web sites, presentations, or emails without first purchasing a membership from Animation Factory. By becoming a member of Animation Factory, you are granted a license to use our images.

Okay, so for kicks, I decided to take note of what comments Suitor made for what team last night.....I noted whether his comments were directed at offense, defense, or special teams, and did not discriminate between positive and negative comments. I took what I deemed to be only blatant comments of one team - when he compared one team's player to another, I did not take note, since the two would cancel each other out.

First Quarter:
BC - 9 offensive, 3 defensive, 1 special teams comment = 13
SSK - 2 offensive, 2 defensive, 3 special teams comments = 7
Score: 8-3 BC

Second Quarter:
BC - 5 offensive, 4 defensive, 2 general comments about the team = 11
SSK - 6 offensive, 5 defensive, 1 special teams comment = 12
Score: 11-3 BC

Third Quarter:
BC - 5 offensive, 5 defensive = 10
SSK - 2 offensive, 5 defensive = 7, to be fair, I quit keeping tabs with about five minutes left in the third quarter.....I felt that Suitor had not shown sufficient bias to warrant my complaining about him.....I must say, I was pleasantly surprised. He didn't drone on and on about one particular player or the whole Smith issue, which I expected. I'm sure others would have acquired different results, because everyone looks at Suitor with different eyes.

I did things a bit differently than JM02, but basically I came up with this. Suitor had, what could be counted as, four blatant Rider Bias comments. The one that comes to mind is the "I was proud to grow up in the Roughrider organization" in reference to the Smith controversy. The rest of his comments that I branded as biased, I only did so as I thought others would think it was biased. Overall, I thought he stayed pretty neutral.

In the end, we will all think according to our own biases. To me, he does a good job.

To me "I was proud to grow up in the Roughrider organization" is not a biased statement. it is a statement. He couldn't say it any other way, he didn't "grow up" in any other organization, so this could not be classified as biased in my opinion.
Good to see that he has been deemed neutral though. Well by 3 Rider fans that is.

Keep in mind, Billy, that one of those Rider Suitor to be somewhat slanted towards the Riders.....I still think that in general, but he did a good job keeping his bias in check yesterday, imo.....

What happened with the count of who's winning the battle between
Garrett and Lewis. He quit at 4-2. Whats up with that?

After 4 is 5 Glen. LOL

Well obviously he is defensive back biased..and why would he not Stick up for Garrett... Lewis acted like a dork...lets hope this does not come back to haunt him and the Stamps..