Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

same as the "experts" that comment on climate change, COVID-19, political issues, or any topic

if a source is referred to as "expert" there is no credibility

I guess I don't think this way except perhaps for "experts" on TV frequently,  they often are not experts really.

I've known some real experts, they were very very smart, not always right of course, but smart and usually right.  For most of us, we have to trust experts in order to live, doctors, dentists, plumbers, used car salesmen, stock brokers, et al.

The last occupation seems to be a dying breed, for me anyway, I don't get advice from my brokerage.  The guy at the reception desk is actually quite smart, he's a CFA/CFP etc. and on occasions has suggested a couple simple things for me that worked.  Dan is his name, nice fellow.

Watch on you tube a lecture by Richard Feynman, that guy was an expert.

Feynman's Lectures on Physics - The Law of Gravitation - YouTube

Maybe, for a while, but a serious football show would tank.

He could join Skip Clueless,naw he doesn't deserve that,maybe Screamin A Smith

As I said, I don't trust "TV experts" at all, but I tend to trust the real experts.  I know they can be wrong, en masse, but they will be wrong less often than I.

I used to be an expert in a couple of extremely narrow fields in which few were interested, and I struggled to explain any of it to anyone.

I like Todd Blackledge a lot, I think he points out things I would miss.

I lean to thinking baseball announcers are better overall, maybe because they have a consistent pause between "plays" to discuss what happened, alignments, etc.

I enjoy listening to Glavine when he's in the booth though  he can be repetitive.  He knows a lot about that pitching thing.  Minor league velo, HoF brain.

As I said, I don't trust "TV experts" at all, but I tend to trust the real experts.  I know they can be wrong, en masse, but they will be wrong less often than I.

I used to be an expert in a couple of extremely narrow fields in which few were interested, and I struggled to explain any of it to anyone.

So, I think this is interesting because there's a certain self-selection.

Being on TV is a skill. Most people don't have it, nor do they want to put in the work to have it. But paradoxically, if you are a dumb TV expert, it means you're still very skilled at being on TV (it's sort of like even if you have a bad sitcom, the people who made it are probably still very talented at making TV compared to most anyone).

Then you have the issue of people who go on TV, have expertise and are either unwilling or unable to get that expertise across. Like, every coach who becomes a commentator knows just a ton about the game, and a lot of players do to. But interestingly, they end up shifting toward being TV blowhards, either because it makes them feel more natural, or because it's easy or because making hot takes brings adulation or whatever. 

Guys like Urban, who go on TV, can make longer points, and can deliver something interesting, it's a rare breed. (I wonder if better producers could build more of them? Or better formats? I know someone pointed out the NBA halftime show is no good because they give six people 8 seconds to say things, which is worthless)