Basketball Intelligence: Ian Eagle Interview

We start off the new year with the 12th interview in our NBA Broadcaster Series.  The first Q & A session of 2021 is with Emmy Award-winning TNT Network and Brooklyn Nets' Play-By-Play announcer Ian Eagle.

(Note: Previous interviewees in this series include Jim Barnett, Fran Fraschilla, Mark Jones, Jared Greenberg, Stephanie Ready, Marques Johnson, Bob Rathbun, Sarah Kustok, Gary Gerould, Tim Legler and Matt Bullard)

RAY LeBOV: You have a very interesting family history that may have

pointed you in the direction of your career. Can you tell us

a little bit about that?

  IAN EAGLE: My mom and dad were entertainers and I grew up around that business as far back as I can remember. My mom was a singer-actress. My dad was a stand-up comedian actor and trumpet player. So I was given this view of the world that was very different from what my friends were experiencing. I grew accustomed to seeing them on stage or in front of the camera or in front of a microphone and never thought twice about it. That just seemed normal to me. So when I started thinking about what I might be interested in for a career, the idea of performing in some way was certainly in my sweet spot. I was eight years old when I approached my parents about becoming a sportscaster and both of them said, "Well, that's what you will do." They said it with a lot of confidence and they said it in a declarative manner and when you are that young you believe it. It was very empowering and that was the beginning of at least opening up my brain to the idea that I could do this. It seemed attainable because my parents said it was. RAY: What was your path to becoming a broadcaster? IAN: From the age of eight until the age of seventeen, I did very little about it other than visualize what I might do if given the opportunity. There would be an occasional broadcast in my shower because it had very good acoustics or on my bed playing with baseball cards and fictitious games but there was no high school radio station. There was no internet. There was no at- home kit. It was just based on my imagination and also consuming as much as I possibly could as a youngster. Watching games, listening to games on the radio. Reading every bit of information in the baseball encyclopedia, which was my first love, and then branching out into other sports. Attending as many sporting events as possible and trying to put myself in the place of the announcer. Marv Albert was a dominant figure in the New York area at that time in the late '70s and '80s. I often just lived vicariously through various sportscasters of my youth. And that really was the start. I went to Syracuse University because Marty Glickman Marv Albert, Bob Costas  and Len Berman, had gone there. I thought if they went there, why shouldn't I consider it? I showed up for my freshman year in 1986 and I dove in headfirst. I started working at multiple radio stations. Later, I began an internship with a local sportscaster by the name of Mike Tirico. I recognized his talent and skill and I tried to soak up as much knowledge as possible being an apprentice to him. Producing on the TV side, eventually co-hosting a radio show with him when I was a senior in college. Working play-by-play for football, basketball, lacrosse for WAER Radio. So many fantastic sportscasters came through the ranks and I put in the hours necessary to learn my craft and polish my skills.   It got to a point in my senior year where I was considered one of the better broadcasters on campus, but you have no idea how that is going to translate once you get out into the real world. The wonderful thing about Syracuse is that there are so many students there that have an aptitude for this. So it is competitive and it does give you a taste of what life might be like, post- graduation. But until you are in it yourself, you do not quite know how it is all going to play out. Eventually I got a job as a producer at WFAN radio. I had some opportunities on the air in other markets but the chance to go back home to New York and work at an all-sports radio station was too enticing. I was told in no uncertain terms, "Do not take this job if you want to be on the air. We have no interest in using you on the air."  I took the job anyway and within seventeen months, I was on the air. I started out doing updates, then moved to talk shows, some pre- and post-game shows for the New York Jets when the radio station acquired the rights in 1993, and then I put myself in the running for the New Jersey Nets play-by-play job on the radio in 1994. I got the job and have caught a lot of breaks along the way. RAY: You indicated that your main interest before you became a broadcaster was in baseball. What accounted for the transition to your focus on basketball? IAN: It was all based on opportunity. When you are young in this business, it is most important to develop a "yes" mentality. You have to have an open mind. The way I viewed it was whoever called and whatever role they were offering, I said "Yes." That was my approach.

The opportunities popped up in other sports. First in the NFL, then the NBA, and I have been riding those two waves ever since. RAY: You have done so many different things, , You have done tennis, boxing, track and field, volleyball, lacrosse as well as  the sports that you have mentioned. Is your approach the same for each of them? I realize your knowledge level is different for each of them and there are obviously differences among the games. But, in general, would you say your approach is the same? IAN. Yes, my approach is to immerse myself in whatever assignment I am given. Of course, if you have a strong working knowledge of the sport that you are covering, it gives you a head start, but you can never use the excuse of not being familiar with the given sport. You have to do the homework. You have to learn the nomenclature. You have to get a feel for the tone of the presentation. And the only way to do that is by jumping in and doing everything possible to educate yourself.

So whatever assignment I have had, football, basketball, golf, tennis, track and field, boxing, volleyball, I have taken it head-on and applied the same philosophies to whatever I am covering.You don't have to be an expert. But you do have to put the effort in to familiarize yourself with the subtleties and intricacies of the sport that you have been assigned. RAY: You mentioned several prominent broadcasters that you either were associated with or you followed closely.  Did any of them either mentor or serve as role models for you? IAN: I have been incredibly fortunate that I have had a relationship in some way with every broadcaster that I've mentioned. Some have taken on more of the mentor role, others have become friends or acquaintances. But when I look back now to all of the broadcasters that I looked up to, I have had a chance to get to know them on a human level, which is often much more important than just a professional level. And that is what I have taken away even more than the nuts and bolts of play-by-play, or covering a story, or anchoring a sportscast. The human quality is what separates the best of the best in this business. Can you connect with an audience? Do you have relatability?  Do you understand what works? Can you do it consistently? How you stand out and distinguish yourself comes from a very personal place. That means you have to have a clear understanding of what is going to resonate with the audience. And connecting with the aforementioned broadcasters gave me a better idea of what that requires.

RAY: You have always had incredible chemistry with a wide range of broadcast partners. You and your partners have won Emmys and other awards both as individuals and as teams. How have you done that? You have had some excellent partners who are very different in the way that they approach things and yet in every instance the chemistry has always been there. How do you account for that? IAN:  I made a conscious decision early in my career that it was not about me. It sounds so simple, but that is really what it comes down to. Once you recognize that listeners and viewers look at broadcasters more often as a team and form their opinions based on that aspect, then you understand better how to do your job well. It starts off the air. There is no doubt about it. You have to find commonality. I make it my business to figure out how to best put my partner in the most positive light. Make them comfortable, put them in a position to succeed.  If they are in a comfortable setting. they can do their best work. And my goal is to get the best work possible out of our pairing and that is based on someone's personality, sense of humor, intelligence, wit, affability.

Not every analyst that you work with will check every box, but everybody brings a little something different to the table. And it is incumbent upon the play-by-play announcer to figure out what that is. That is as an important part of the job as calling the plays.Once I viewed it through that prism, I gained a handle on how to best make it successful. RAY  Your teammates have had different strengths, different approaches, different personalities, and yet, in every instance  the chemistry has been outstanding. Whenever I have spoken with any of them, they talk about the role you played in enabling that. IAN  Well. I appreciate it, Ray. It's a reminder that it is important to be malleable. If you go into a broadcast with one specific idea of how to do it, the odds are that obstacles will pop up, and if you are not prepared for them because you insist on doing it your way, then ultimately you are not going to have the best broadcast possible.
In various sports the best teams are normally the ones that are working collaboratively with one another . The same can be said for broadcasting. If it is two people doing their own separate broadcasts, that is not going to work. Be a good teammate and understand what the person next to you needs and then develop trust over time that you can help get them there and that they can help you. RAY: That is true in nearly every profession and every aspect of life.  That has been paramount in all the fields that I have been involved in.  It seems to be almost universal.   Let's talk about your preparation for games.  For the viewer, preparation by the announcer is  a very important component of doing the job and I am distressed when I see people who are seemingly on the air just because they are a big name or have connections.  I am embarrassed for them because they have done no preparation. This is true of some former players.  There are some former players like Tim Legler who are outstanding. Sarah Kustok and Jim Petersen, for example, are excellent as was Kara Lawson before she left to go into coaching, but there are some ex-players, particularly on national networks, where you can only wonder how they got and keep the job.  They seem to have a strong principle against doing any homework. You clearly are at the other end of that spectrum.  I have been talking mostly about the analyst role, but it shows up in the play-by-play role as well. Your preparation is obvious.  How do you prepare for a Nets game or a network NBA game? IAN: The first part of preparation is familiarizing yourself with your subject matter and you have got to start from square one. Obviously, if I am doing a Nets game, I am quite familiar with the team that I am covering. I am around them. I am living and breathing their games night in, night out, but it requires a certain amount of time and effort to make sure you are on top of all of the biographical information, the storylines, the narratives, and the big picture. I try to remind myself of that with every broadcast that I am working on.

You cannot assume that every viewer is as familiar with the subject matter as you are. So it is walking that very fine line of satisfying your core audience while also informing those who are not quite as committed and might be stopping by a channel for ten minutes at a time.

When you get into a network broadcast where you are covering two teams that you are not around all the time and you are parachuting in, it requires a very different discipline. That assignment will take me in many different directions. First, I will deal with the rudimentary side and make sure that I am not missing anything in general terms and then I will dig in a little deeper so that it does not appear as if I am somebody that has not been following that particular team all season. You are packing a lot of information in a very short period of time. I have worked the NCAA tournament  for the last twenty-three years and it is by far the most challenging assignment that I have had. You have eight teams, and you have to learn all eight in two days. And when you get on the air for the first round, you have to present it in a way that you have done your homework and you are ready to tell these stories even though you have not been living them with the athletes and the coaches over the course of a season.

Most play-by-play announcers will do some kind of chart or board. I still do mine by hand. That is how I started doing it in 1994, and even going back to my college days in the '80s. And even with advanced technology. I have not changed it. That is what works for me. Putting pen to paper, visualizing the number and the name, as I write it down, color-coded. Then I can quickly get to the information when I need it at a moment's notice.

I do not find typing it in has the same effect, but everybody has their own way and I respect that most younger broadcasters have probably found a more efficient way to do it. And then, you are constantly updating as the season goes on. You might see a team a second time and you want to make sure that your notes are fresh and your material is fresh.

An announcer may be assigned a team that they have not seen all season and it is midway through the year, and they are treating it as if it is the first game of the season. That to me is not recognizing your audience and where they are at this stage. Just because it is the first time you have seen a team does not mean that your audience has not seen them for forty plus games. So you have to be very careful about your use of information, background, and factoids. It has to be done in context.

One thing that I have learned later in my career is to not force nuggets and notes. Early on in my career, I  wanted to show people that I had done my research and I wanted to prove that I was prepared. Through maturity I have realized that the audience does not know what they do not know. So to jam in a piece of information that does not fit at the moment is lost on the audience. Recognizing when something will work has become more instinctual. I do not feel dismayed if I do not get something in.
Early in my career. I would just empty the bucket and as the years have gone on I have realized that if something does not get in, that is okay. You will live to see your next broadcast and maybe you will use it down the road. RAY: You mentioned something that has always been of particular interest to me about the process.
Your audience is made up of people with a wide range of interest, experience and knowledge. At one extreme are casual fans who do not know very much about the subject. At the other end are  people who are expert and know a great deal about the game. How do you meet the challenge of making things understandable to and not over the heads of the people who may be new to the game while at the same time not boring people that already have a deep understanding of the game. IAN:  I have a constant reminder during a broadcast and I will try to step away for a moment mentally to ask myself a very simple question, "Would I find this interesting and entertaining?"  And that is the question. I might ask myself that five times over the course of a two and a half-hour broadcast. It is a really important aspect: "Who are you doing this for?"

When I started in the business, I was not thinking about the casual fan. I was not thinking about someone who might be considered an expert. I was not classifying the audience in any way. I have definitely become more aware of that. The way that I synthesize it during the game is based on that reminder. "Is the broadcast moving in the right direction? Do I have command of the broadcast? Or has it taken a left turn because I allowed it to? You can get into micromanaging and over-analysis of this only if you allow yourself to. My feeling has always been that I have to trust my instincts. And in doing so, I am trying to do right by the audience. I am trying to provide an accurate depiction of what is happening in the game that I am covering. And I am trying to be a conduit of the emotions that I feel in the game, that will hopefully translate to those that are watching or listening to the broadcast. RAY: You have had an incredibly wide swing of ups and downs covering the Nets.  I think back to that dysfunctional team of '94-'95. It may be painful  for you to hear me name some of those players. Derrick Coleman, Kenny Anderson, Chris Morris, Benoit Benjamin, Dwayne Schintzius, Jayson Williams. At least you are not Butch Beard who had to somehow survive as their coach. They were a very talented team that won only thirty games. We remember Whoop-de-damn-doo and Derrick being on the cover of Sports Illustrated as the exemplar of dysfunction. The things that were hostile to the coach and the franchise were written on players' sneakers, the no-shows, and the disrespect for Butch. On the other hand, you had two NBA finalist teams in  contrast to that. Kidd, Jefferson, Kittles, Van Horn, Kenyon Martin.. How did those extremes affect how you do a game? And what is it like to have covered teams that were the paragon of team play versus  that dysfunctional team?

IAN:  I am grateful that it went in the order that it did. I think it made me a much better broadcaster. The teams that I covered early were challenged and in many ways, I had to learn how to keep things interesting even when the product on the court was not. So when Jason Kidd came to town, it was a complete metamorphosis, and no longer did I feel the need to carry the broadcast. The basketball did the talking for me.

The incredible chemistry on the court, the style of play, flying up and down the floor. It was poetry in motion. I just had to sit back and put a period on things or an exclamation point at times. In previous years, I really had to work to keep it somewhat intriguing to the viewer. That first team, that 1994-95 team, there were so many characters on that squad. The team consisted of Derrick Coleman, Kenny Anderson, Chris Morris, Benoit Benjamin, Jayson Williams, Rick Mahorn, Armon Gilliam, Dwayne Schintzius, Chris Childs, Kevin Edwards, on and on. I would not trade it for anything.
It was my first taste of the NBA. I was twenty-five years old. I could talk to these guys on a level that other broadcasters may not have experienced just based on my youth. I found it to be extremely fun, just being around that team. The games were not so much fun, but the bus rides, the plane rides, dinners, and some occasional trips to the local bar, were fun, and it was an education in many ways.

That is when I first got to know Bill Raftery, which absolutely changed my life and my career. I look back at him as being the singular figure that taught me what was most important in these broadcasts. Being genuine. Allowing your joy to come through. And the authenticity that it required to really cut through to an audience.

RAY: That is interesting because there are a number of announcers who are not genuine. Their big thing is, for lack of a better term, "shtick". There is an announcer, for example, who, if you believed the spirit in which he is communicating, there are twenty plays in every game he does that are among the greatest plays in basketball history.  Calling pedestrian plays that way makes no sense. As you said, your approach is about the game, not about you. Your identification is based on the quality of your work not some silly extraneous factor like that. Have you ever been pressured to do "shtick" by  management or other people?

IAN: I have never been told to show more energy or exhibit less energy. My bosses through the years have trusted me to handle the broadcast in the way that I see fit. And I might be very lucky in that matter because I have heard horror stories from others that are instructed to carry themselves in a certain way. RAY:  So you've never had to think or say "You do not want me to do this the right way." IAN: Yeah, or to push a narrative or to close off a part of my personality. And I think as the years have gone by, I have probably been willing to take more chances here and there. And push the envelope a bit more when I feel it's appropriate. But at the core, I am not that different from the young play-by-play broadcaster who broke in and 1994. I believed that in being credible and creating some trust with the audience that I would be prepared for my job. I would try to consistently deliver the information and the correct vibe from whatever arena I was working out of.
The ultimate view for me in this job is the marriage of preparation and performance. One could be very strong, you could be very well prepared, but if you do not perform well the information is lost. You could flip it and not have all of the homework done. Your performance could be excellent, but there will be those in the audience that realize that you do not really know what you are talking about.  While you might have a very superficial knowledge of what you are covering, you are not familiar with the intimate details of the event. So how do you combine the two? My challenge every game is taking those two very important aspects of the broadcast and bringing them together.


RAY:  You certainly have dealt with  extremes in your time covering the Nets. Can put together starting fives of the best Nets players and opponents from your era?

IAN: Jason Kidd is by far the most important player that wore that uniform during the twenty-seven years  that I have covered the team. He brought instant credibility. He raised the level of play of everybody around him and it changed the whole persona of the franchise. They were no longer a laughing stock. They garnered respect around the league. It was based on him, his presence, and his conviction of how to play the right way.
I would put Joe Johnson at the two. He was often an under-the-radar figure during his NBA playing days. Gifted scorer, incredibly hard worker, no-nonsense, said very little, but always handled the big moments. And he provided the Nets with more buzzer beaters than anyone in franchise history.

Vince Carter at the small forward spot. He was just a dynamo. Every time I put the headset on for a Vince Carter game, I knew there was a chance I would see something that I had never seen before. It was perfect timing for him and for the franchise. He needed a second chapter in his NBA career.  The Nets provided that after Toronto, and the organization desperately needed a jolt at the moment he arrived. As gifted an in-game dunker as I have ever witnessed.

At power forward, I got there after Derrick Coleman was going to All-Star games. I have a connection with Derrick going back to our Syracuse days. We were there for the same years. I know how talented a player he was. A 20 and10 threat every time he stepped on the floor. But it would be hard for me to put him on my All-Net squad given the specific years that I was with the team. So I would go with Kenyon Martin. Number one overall pick. Brought an edge to the team. Toughness. You were not going to mess with him and he was going to make sure that you were not going to mess with his teammates either. At the time, he was a protector in many ways and he turned himself into a terrific player.

At the center spot, I put the team's all-time leading scorer. He did it with very little fanfare. And we just started to see him scratching the surface of what he has become in this league and that is an outstanding three-point shooting big and it is Brook Lopez. He loved being a Net and I do not say that lightly. There were not a lot of other players that loved being on the Nets. He loved it. And I think under different circumstances, he would have signed up for an entire career with the Nets. It just so happened the new regime was looking to make changes and Brook was not going to be a part of it. But before he left he set the franchise's career record in scoring and he was a consistent force for the team. And a very likable guy. Just amazing to watch him mature to a degree the way that he has even though he is still a big kid at heart. RAY: How about an all opponent team?
IAN   I have been really lucky in my timing because I caught the end of Jordan when he came back for Chicago and then as he made his return to Washington. All of Kobe Bryant's career and all of LeBron James' career. With all three of those guys, whenever you walked into the arena on a night that they were playing the Nets, it felt different. The only three that I can say that about. You just knew that there would be this visceral feeling inside the venue. And it was based on their personalities, their magnetism, and their sheer talent. So those three guys would have to be on the team.
I would put Shaquille O'Neal on the squad because I had never seen anyone with the physical force that he brought.  And I am not sure I have seen it since and there have been some outstanding big men in the NBA. He just had a way of taking over the moment.

Based on his consistency more than anything else, I would put Tim Duncan on the list. I had great respect for how he went about his business. He never went outside of who he was. And what he did, he did exceptionally well, and he knew it. You knew what he was going to do and you still could not stop it. He was not giving you a different look than he had the previous year. He just committed to what he had perfected and that was owning angles around the basket, using the backboard like no one I have ever experienced before, no one I have ever seen. He just mastered it. So he would be the fifth in terms of consistency and just knowing what you were going to get. RAY Those are two great teams. It would be a great game. IAN:  It would be fun. I do not want Richard Jefferson to read this and attack me because he is right there. He would be next in line.

So I include Richard in my first honorable mention. He also loved being a Net. He really enjoyed New Jersey. He enjoyed being an afterthought in a way and being the underdog. He liked the role. He used it. It was fuel for him. RAY: Let's  turn to the Nets' recent rebuild. IAN: Once again, the Nets were in a very difficult position. They made the incredibly, wonderfully, smart move of bringing in Sean Marks and I would also credit  Kenny Atkinson's role in the rebuild. RAY: What can you say about the approach that Sean has taken and why it has worked so well? IAN: What had stuck with me when I first met him, and it holds true today, Sean has a way with people and has a quality that is very trustworthy. He is smart. He came in with a plan. He didn't pretend to have every single answer. He listens. And the payoff was that he realized that this was not going to happen with one specific philosophy. He had an umbrella in mind of how to change the franchise. It started with how they treated players. And then the branches began to form with agents and winning the respect of other GMs and the rest of the NBA.

What he did was brilliant. Players talk to one another.  If you are treated well, if your family is treated well, even if you are the twelfth or even fifteenth on a roster, and your experience was a positive one, the word gets out. If you treat them with respect and you return their calls or you engage with them, that gets paid forward. You never know which agent is going to have which client coming out of college and you might have interaction with them three years down the road. Maybe it did not work out previously with a different client but it might work out with a new one.

Sean was very good at ingratiating himself and making sure that they were part of the process. And then the respect level around the league. When Kyrie Irving and Kevin Durant made the decision to come to Brooklyn many people were shocked but those within the organization were not. It had been building.  You could feel it. With each year the respect level was growing that Brooklyn could be a destination. Kenny Atkinson does deserve a lot of credit for his tireless work at Player Development and his passion. If you were on the Nets, you knew that the head coach wanted to do everything in his power to help you improve. RAY:: Did you see Kenny's dismissal coming? Were there signs or was that a shock to you? IAN: I was surprised by the timing. I did not know if Kenny was going to get the chance to coach  KD and Kyrie together. There was no guarantee when they signed that he would one day be the head coach for both of them. That remained to be seen. But the dismissal or the decision to go in a different direction probably startled me more on when it happened and less of why it happened. It certainly was
within the new owners' rights to assess and evaluate the entire organization and I think decisions were made for what they thought would be best moving forward. RAY: So you put that more on the owners than on Sean?

IAN  I think it is a combination. , I do not have any inside story as to exactly what took place. But I do think that ultimately those decisions fall with the main decision-makers and what they see as best for the team.

RAY: Looking at the rebuild, Sean started off with clearing the deck of an almost incomprehensible position that the Nets had been put in through earlier decisions and then started building incrementally, bringing in pieces and having Kenny develop players.  Did you feel that the original plan was going to be to keep building incrementally, bringing in young talent through the draft, trades and free agency, developing them, or did the plan always have a moment in mind where the team would have an opportunity to bring in "megastars."

IAN I think the plan was multifaceted and initially it was, "Let us develop players. Let us create a new culture. And let us be smart in the draft."  Look at some of the picks that hit lower in the first round, Caris LeVert and Jarett Allen, in particular. Some of the players that were taken off the scrap heap, Joe Harris, Spencer Dinwiddie.  Anybody could have had those players. Any team could have signed them.

The Nets were in a position where the expectations were low
and they had time to develop while there was no pressure. Sean Marks
was very smart in how he built the team. That left the possibility open when there were some big-name free agents that they were in a position to welcome them. As we have learned in the NBA, you can clear out all the space in the world, but if nobody wants to come to your team, it is not worth a hill of beans. It was this perfect storm in many ways. The Nets had built a strong reputation within the league as a place that is welcoming to players. And they happened to have cap space the year that some big names were available. It worked out.

I do not think it is as simple as saying "Just follow these steps and you too can rebuild your team in four years." A lot of things have to go right and you have got to hit on some players. I do not think when they signed Joe Harris and Spencer Dinwiddie, that the Nets thought in their wildest dreams these two guys would emerge the way that they did. They thought they had a chance to be productive players on a roster that was looking for some new blood. RAY: What are your thoughts regarding the challenge of players returning from injuries, incorporating a lot of new players and a new coach having a compacted preseason and a compacted season. It is not normal.


IAN: For the Nets, being relevant and being a focal point in the league is new. Even when they acquired Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett, and Jason Terry, there were a lot of people around the league that thought, "Okay, this is a desperate attempt to get themselves into the conversation." And looking back they were probably right. This is very different. Kyrie Irving and Kevin Durant chose to play in Brooklyn. That is very different than making a blockbuster trade.

Two players who have won championships decided to team up together and come to this franchise. So right out of the gate, you know that they want to be here. They want to be a part of it.
They wanted to grow with the team. Of course, some of the chatter is based on championship rhetoric and I think that is okay. It is a strange place for Nets fans to be in. They are not accustomed to this. And even as a broadcaster, I am not accustomed to it. They went to back-to-back finals, but even then nobody was really taking them seriously.
I think people are taking this team very seriously. RAY: Turning to the pandemic and its implications for broadcasting, you have done games from the bubble and then from a studio

IAN: . I did games in the bubble from Orlando for TNT,  including the first game of the restart between the Jazz and the Pelicans. And then I did playoff games for the Nets from a studio in Brooklyn, even though the games were being played in Orlando. RAY: What was that like? IAN: I did not know what to expect in the bubble. The concern was about walking into a sterile environment with the fear is that it would not translate on television the way that fans are accustomed to consuming basketball. I quickly learned that it looked like the NBA, it sounded like the NBA, and it felt like the NBA. That put people's concerns at ease. Being there in that intimate environment was very odd at the start. Once I got used to it and I was immersed in the action, muscle memory kicked in.  You do your job, you call the game. The crowd noise that was used to sweeten the broadcast just became part of it. When I left the bubble and called the playoff games from a studio in Brooklyn, I just applied the same mentality that I would have if I were calling the game on site. Your energy level has to match the action. You might have to alter your timing just a tad based on identifying players or situations quickly. There might have been a little more back-ended play-by-play, tagging something with what you saw that you may not have picked up in the millisecond of the moment. But for the most part, I think it was negligible to the viewer. The announcer has a lot of responsibilities in this case because they can make or break the broadcast.



RAY What is it like to not have any fans in attendance?  Do you need to do something different in terms of energy since you are not getting any from fans.

IAN:  I  quickly realized that you miss out on a lot. You miss out on the cues that a crowd provides. When
the fans gasp collectively that affects your call. And you no longer have that compass. It is an adjustment, but once you recognize that it is not going to be the same tenor that you have grown accustomed to, you alter certain aspects of the broadcast. On a personal level, energy is never going to be a problem.  I bring boundless energy because it is coming from a real place. I am excited to do the games. It is the same excitement that I had as a kid watching the games and it has not changed much. I am fifty-one years old, and I am still giddy to be there. Honestly, more than anything else. just to be around it is what fuels me.