I usually like his explanations, but yesterday he was out of control. (Not to mention his selection of shortsleeves to show off those biceps in the frigid weather probably hacked off his crew!)

"We have a personal foul, roughing the passer, on the defense, number 54. The defender contacted the quarterback, causing him to fall to the ground. By rule, this is a personal foul. (Really, Ed? By RULE? Did we need the extra description - wasn't this a typical RTP?) We also have a personal foul on the offense, number 48, for a late hit, after the play was over (Ed - when else could a late hit occur?). By rule (again with the by rule? Should we infer that if you don't say "by rule", you're making things up on your own?), a hit after the play was over is a personal foul. (Ah, good - cause I didn't get that from the first sentence). By rule (Good grief), these fouls offset. It will be 1st and 10 for the offense (Oh, so in this case, it's not 1st and 10 for the DEFENSE?!?!?! Thanks for that helpful tip)."

I had to rewind and play it over and over to make sure I caught all the extraneous explanations. By rule, I'm required to not omit any words.

Until you have walked a mile in his shoes you might want to be a little more forgiving. The NFL has told these guys to give detailed explanations and some of them have been slammed for being too brief. Hence the long-winded stuff. And since Mr H is an attorney, he may be prone to even more verbiage than others. And it sounds like the NFL enforcement of this foul situation is different than NCAA/Fed where we do not offset live ball-dead ball stuff so maybe he felt the need to be more detailed.

I am assuming you have been miked before or else you would not have commented at all.

The explanations are not for those of us that know the rules, but rather the lowest common denominator, i.e. Joe Thiesman or average Raider fan.

Mr. H is the real deal along with the Mr. Carey. These two WH IMO are the folks NFL want and the lower level conf.

I think Mr. H and his so-called bi-ceps look a lot better than some big rump bouncing side to side to spot the ball.

I agree with sonofanump that the explanations are for fans who don't understand the rules. I love to hear the explanation, it's professional, sounds good, what is wrong with that?

TXMike - please don't assume that because I have a criticism, that I have no ability. Judging from your response here and the one in the admittedly absurd thread from the OU-Tech game that was deleted, you seem to be of the opinion that if we have not worked at a particular level, we are not allowed to comment on it.

I'd give an arm to walk in Ed Hochuli's shoes for just one weekend, or even to be the lowest of the low on the NFL totem pole. But I don't think that disqualifies me from having an opinion or the ability to express it.

You missed the beginning of my post - normally, I think Hochuli is the best. And perhaps the NFL made a general comment to ALL referees to explain more - but yesterday, Mr. Hochuli took his already verbose style to the point of absurdity. The worst were the two mentions of "By Rule". "By rule" makes sense when there is some sort of odd play (maybe even appropriate when saying, By Rule, these penalties offset). You don't need to tell us that BY RULE, a late hit is a personal foul. As an unbiased, non-official observer, it was really bad (as evidenced by the peanut gallery I was watching the game with). As an official, it was beyond bad - and borderline painful.

What I mean by waliking in his shoes has nothing to do with the level. It has everything to do with using a microphone in front of 70000 lunatics and trying to follwo the instructions of your bosses. Have you walked in those shoes? If you have not then it does not mean you don't have the ability but it does mean you do not know what it is like.

EXACTLY. Yes, we understand what the call is without all the jargon but Mr. Beerbelly, sitting at home in the Lazy Boy, it's the bst thing that could happen to him. It's a helluva lot better than letting some talking head explain it.

Stockdown, mcrowder. :(

If the requirements are only A) use a microphone in front of innumerable people, and B) follow the directions of my boss, then yes - I qualify. It wasn't as an official though. :)

I would say that I might have an equally abysmal performance in front of that many people, especially my first 1 or 2 hundred times... but he has more experience than me, and nervousness was CERTAINLY not a factor.

I just thought it was way overboard - that's all.

If you know anything about public speaking then you know nervousness is ALWAYS a factor, on your 1st speech or your 100th. ;-)

Ed Hochuli is one of the best ever in the NFL - and it seems that his bosses agree, as evidenced by his recent superbowl assignment.

No one is disputing his abilities in this thread.


I do agree that he did some overexplaining but that's just my opinion. Also I don't think his crew had a very good game.

Somewhere in the middle
 

I'd with mcrowder on this one, but maybe not 100%.

This opens the can of worms that any hit causing the QB to fall to the ground is a PF. We all know that this is not the case.

If he wanted to be clear, perhaps this would be better, "The defender didn't alter his behavior to the QB after the pass was released."

As for all the "By rule"s, my English teacher once told me that you take away from your writing by using the same beginning to a sentence. IOW, don't start each sentence with "I", "By Rule", etc.... To this day it is good advice.

"By rule" should only be used when communicating non-obvious information. What is non-obvious is open to debate, but I would have only used "By rule" once.

Here's what I (hope) I would have said:

I've been a fan of Ed's for about 6 years now. There's no doubt he's the best R in the NFL, but some of his verbiage was not necessary in this case.

As for public speaking, I have done it before an was not nervous at all. I've also been nervous at other times. I think it comes down to confidence and being prepared.

:D :D :D

I think Hoch does a good job overall. Sometimes he goes a little overboard, sure, but I think that's what makes him identifiable to the everyday fan.

Last night while watching the KC game, I came up with my "Dream Team" for announcers. What about this: Tim McCarver, Joe Theismann, and Randy Cross. Now that would be a game worth watching! Not only would they get in a fight over who would talk next, the average fan would have zero clue about the rules!

Should throw Billy Packer in there for good measures. He can be the sideline doink. :D