i seen where they said dan rafeal from espn .com was a 'guest analyst' on espn fnf last week? i thought i read where he wasnt a boxer and started covering boxing for his local paper or something and then went with usa today and then espn. no offense to the guy but what does he know about boxing that qould call 4 him to be an analyst on the biggest weekly boxing series? he could give insights into boxing business and stuff but his knowledge of whats going on in the ring probably isnt enough to be telling us. what do ya'll think?
this guy was the espn guest analyst, why?
Collapse
-
Tags: None
-
-
the guy does know a fair bit about boxing and is qualified to be on TV IMO. He does a weekly column for ESPN anyways on boxing and they mention that every week. I think he rates Jorge Arce a bit too highly but thats just meComment
-
i think a analyst is the guy thats like supposed to break down the action in the ring down and tell the fans on tv what the guys in the ring is doing and what they are supposed to be doing. I dont got impression that this guy is qualified to do that, thats all. fighters and trainers should be doing thatjob!Comment
-
Comment
-
-
was Rafeel A Boxer Before? Why Not Hasve Real Boxers B Analysts? That Would Be Real Cool, Dont You Think???????????Comment
-
I think I would obviously prefer a fighter (or maybe some trainers) in that role of coming on ESPN and talking on air to the audience as an "analyst"... the things that others in the business could offer insight to are things that Teddy and Joe are already privy to for the most part. IMO when it comes to having guys come on the air to call the action in that capacity it ios OBVIOUSLY more interesting when a fighter gets on there because he can surely tell you things that nobody else could in regard to what is going through the fighters mind etc etc etc. THAT to me is what the audience get to hear enough ofComment
-
Dan Rafael bores me; I like the analysis of Al Berstein, Teddy Atlas, Larry Merchant, or even Brian Kenny.Comment
-
Comment