How did the various booths stack up for this year’s men’s college basketball NCAA Tournament? We asked Awful Announcing readers to weigh in on CBS Sports and TNT Sports’ eight March Madness booths. The results were these announcer rankings, based on more than 4,000 individual votes from more than 500 respondents.
As with our regular-season college basketball announcer rankings, NFL announcer rankings, college football announcer rankings, rules analyst rankings, and more, each booth was graded from A to F, with readers providing comments on individual teams as well. We then converted the letter grades from those responses to numerical grades, with A as 4 and Fs as 0, and ranked the booths accordingly.
The average grade across the eight booths was a 2.89, or a C+. This is slightly below the average score of 2.97 for March Madness booths last year. However, that is above what we’ve seen in the other rankings we’ve done recently, including 2.43 for NFL announcers, 2.45 for CFB announcers, 2.58 for NFL/CFB rules analysts, and, most notably, 2.69 for regular-season MBB announcers (which includes many of the voices also graded here). AA readers seem to like the NCAA Tournament booths more than the overall booths for most sports, but it is interesting to see a year-over-year drop here, even if it was slight.
Let’s get to the grades and selected reader comments (sometimes lightly edited for spelling and grammar) without further ado.
8. Lisa Byington, Robbie Hummel, Jalen Rose (through second round): 2.03
Most common grade: C (33.7% of votes)
Percentage of A/B/C grades: 69.9%
One of the main notable year-over-year changes to this team was Steve Smith’s departure, replacing Avery Johnson with Tom McCarthy and Debbie Antonelli. To replace Smith, Rose (a newcomer to NCAA Tournament broadcasting, but he worked as an NBA analyst at ESPN for decades before being laid off in 2023) was added alongside Byington and Hummel.
Viewers’ reaction to at least this side of the change wasn’t positive, though. This group dropped from a 2.26 for Byington/Hummel/Smith last year (still last place). However, this is similar to the 2.04 Byington and Smith got in 2021, and above the 1.93 Byington/Smith/Johnson got in 2023.
In the comments, voters directed much of the criticism at Rose. That included “Jalen Rose always sounds like he’d rather be doing something else” and “Making Robbie Hummel work with Jalen Rose is like making Picasso paint with a French fry,” as well as notes on Rose’s limited college basketball announcing experience. But some found Rose “better than anticipated.”
On the other hand, respondents highly praised Hummel. That included “outstanding,” “fantastic,” and ” the best color commentator in the sport,” which fits with the high 3.18 grade (fourth out of 20) he and Noah Eagle got in our regular-season announcer rankings. The responses were more split on Byington, with praise including “great,” “underrated,” and “has improved,” but also criticism such as “simply falls flat.” Overall, the comments cited Rose as the most significant reason for this grade.
7. Tom McCarthy, Debbie Antonelli, Steve Smith (through second round): 2.30
Most common grade: C (42.6% of votes)
Percentage of A/B/C grades: 84.6%
The flip side of the change to that last team saw Smith joining this group in place of Johnson. But that produced about the same numerical grade as last year’s 2.33 for McCarthy/Antonelli/Johnson, and the same place (seventh out of eight teams) in these rankings.
In the comments, several people criticized the overall concept of a three-person booth, which one reader dubbed an “absolute killer” for college basketball. The most individual criticism was for Smith, from “doesn’t contribute much” to “isn’t needed” to “subpar.” McCarthy also took criticism, with some saying they prefer him on other sports with lines like “thrives on the diamond rather than the hardwood,” and others citing him for a low grade with lines like “This [D] is solely on McCarthy, who I don’t enjoy at all” and “Rare that the PBP guy is what drags the crew down.” But others found him “underrated” and “great on CBB.”
Antonelli received the most individual praise of anyone on this team. The overall discussion saw many positive remarks about her, including “really good and underrated analyst” and “deserves a much higher ranking.”
6. Brad Nessler, Brendan Haywood (through second round): 2.64
Most common grade: B (44.6% of votes)
Percentage of A/B/C grades: 92.5%
There’s some strong consistency here. The team of Nessler and Haywood received a 2.75 in 2023 and a 2.73 last year, placing sixth of eight teams both years. This year’s grade is slightly declining, but still within 0.1 of last year’s grade. And it’s our first booth where the most common grade was a B, with this team getting 67 As, 220 Bs, and 167 Cs out of 493 votes.
The comments on this booth saw some individual praise for both figures. For Nessler, that included “deserves a regional assignment,” “belongs in the Sweet 16 weekend rotation,” and “elevates any broadcast.” For Haywood, that included “does better work during the game than any of CBS’s analysts,” “quickly moving up the ranks of most enjoyable listens,” and ” improved well throughout the years.” But both took some criticism as well, with lines for Nessler like “doesn’t keep up with the action well” and “has slowed,” and lines for Haywood like “terrible” and “not great.”
5. Andrew Catalon, Steve Lappas (through Elite 8): 2.82
Most common grade: B (39.2% of votes)
Percentage of A/B/C grades: 92.2%
This is another well-established team with the same position and a grade similar to last year’s 2.91. However, the slight drop here does continue a bit of a trend for Catalon and Lappas. Past grades for this booth before 2024 were 2.27 (2015), 2.12 (2016), 2.20 (2018), 2.31 (2019), 2.60 (2021), and 3.00 (2023). The 2.82 is still well above where they placed heading into 2023, but our voters have cooled on them slightly since that breakout year, which led to their promotion to a through-Elite 8 team ahead of 2024.
In the comments, many had positive things to say about this pairing. That included “longevity and good chemistry,” “great chemistry, fun banter, and solid insights,” “they work so well together,” “the chemistry is a home run,” and “they sound like friends that, at times, are letting the viewers into a high-level conversation about basketball.” Keeping this booth together for this long has been a big part of that chemistry; many respondents noted that.
On the individual front, Catalon received a lot of praise. Some of that included “rising star,” “one of the best announcers out there,” “the best play-by-play guy CBS has,” and “tremendous.”
Lappas took more criticism, especially for late-game analysis. Some of that included “constantly says the dumbest things at the end of games” and “confused in certain late game situations (Kansas-Arkansas, Arkansas-St. John’s, Purdue-Houston).” Others described him with “yaps too much,” “annoying,” and “No one loves to hear themselves talk more than Lappas.” But a few people particularly praised Lappas, with lines like “an acquired taste, but I am a huge fan,” “has grown on me quite a bit,” and “the energy he brings to his analysis is wonderful.”
4. Spero Dedes, Jim Spanarkel (through second round): 2.87
Most common grade: B (46.9% of votes)
Percentage of A/B/C grades: 94.0%
This booth remains in fourth place, but with a grade down from a 3.01 in their debut together last year. Dedes previously worked with Debbie Antonelli in 2023 and got a 2.25 there, while Spanarkel was Ian Eagle’s long-time teammate, receiving 3.56, 3.57, and 3.73 for that pairing in 2018, 2019, and 2023 (all the highest in those years’ polls). Dedes and Spanarkel actually received fewer A votes than Catalon and Lappas (117 to 132, out of 499 and 498 total votes, respectively), but finished ahead thanks to more Bs (234 to 195).
Many comments here provided even higher praise than the overall grade. There were many arguing that this team should get a through-Elite 8 assignment, including “This crew not having a regional is criminal, even the selection committee doesn’t mis-seed this badly,” “these two should get higher-profile games,” “should be calling the Sweet 16/Elite 8 instead of Catalon and Lappas,” and “should work the second weekend ahead of Anderson/Jackson.” Several also called them underrated, including one line of “by far the most underrated announcing team in college basketball.”
An interesting divide in the comments was on chemistry. Some suggested that Spanarkel might be better with Catalon, while another respondent said, “Dedes is a 100 mph caller, and Spanarkel is not keeping up.” Overall, there was more praise for the pairing than criticism, and some of that also cited chemistry.
When it came to this team individually, Spanarkel got more praise. That included comments on the drop in his place in the pecking order following Eagle’s move up to replace Jim Nantz, with lines like “didn’t deserve to be demoted.” He also saw lines like “makes the booth,” “vastly underrated,” “outstanding,” and “as good as it gets,” although he took some “awful” and “annoying” criticism. Dedes took more criticism, including “makes my ears bleed,” but several people had individual praise for him, including “most underrated play-by-play guy in the industry.”
3. Brian Anderson, Jim Jackson (through Elite 8): 3.09
Most common grade: B (49.5% of votes)
Percentage of A/B/C grades: 95.8%
We have our first grade above the 3.0 threshold for a B, but there is also a slight drop from the 3.16 this pairing received last year. Most of their vote totals are what you’d expect for this grade, with 162 As and 247 Bs out of 499 votes. One somewhat curious result is that they received eight Fs, which isn’t a lot overall (1.6 percent of votes cast for them), but was more than four other booths, including the lower-overall-ranked tandems of Nessler/Haywood and Dedes/Spanarkel.
The comments saw a lot of individual praise for Anderson, including “as good as it gets,” “terrific,” and “the best.” But some questioned his limited regular-season CBB work and how that impacted his preparation, with lines like “never paid attention to college basketball.” He called five games of the Players Era Festival tournament for TNT Sports with Grant Hill this year, and that pairing got a 2.95, sixth of 20 in our regular-season rankings. With TNT Sports adding more CBB next year with the Big East, and looking to add more down the road, perhaps, it’s possible Anderson could get more regular-season work as time goes on.
For Jackson, the responses were more split. Some loved him, with lines like “very impressed with Jackson’s analysis” and “could easily replace Bill Raftery when he decides to retire,” and some put him above Anderson. But more people who differentiated between the two preferred Anderson, and Jackson took criticism such as “tries to be the smartest guy in the room too much” and “just likes to hear himself talk.”
Overall, some noted that this pairing didn’t have many thrilling games or upsets this year. (They did, however, wind up with a water bottle controversy.) But there was significant praise for their “great chemistry.” They’ve been working together on the NCAA Tournament since 2021. However, it’s still impressive that they’ve built that chemistry, considering that they don’t tend to work with each other on college basketball outside of the tournament. (Jackson’s in-season work has usually been with Fox and BTN: he and Gus Johnson placed 8 of 20 booths in our rankings this year with a 2.82.) However, they sometimes call the NBA together, so that may also have helped build this chemistry.
2. Kevin Harlan, Dan Bonner, Stan Van Gundy (through Elite 8): 3.61
Most common grade: A (70.7% of votes)
Percentage of A/B/C grades: 97.5%
This is another booth that received a slight drop from last year, when it got a 3.68. That widened the gap between them and the top team, which they were only 0.02 behind in 2024. But they did receive only two F grades, the lowest of any booth in this year’s poll.
In the comments, much of the individual criticism focused on Van Gundy. That included “Harlan and Bonner are great, but Van Gundy needs to stick with the NBA. I get tired of him wanting to change all the rules to the pro version” and “Love Kevin, but Stan needs to shut up.” A more positive version was “Van Gundy would be great if he did college games all year, but he’s in over his head trying to cram for the tournament.” It will be interesting to see if he gets more college work with TNT Sports losing the NBA but adding college rights; he’s said he wants to keep broadcasting, and would prefer to keep calling the NBA, but is open to CBB.
For Bonner, many praised his long decades of experience and continued work, with lines including “at the top of his game” and “saves it from being an F” (on a D grade). Others commented on him and Van Gundy playing off each other well, and cited that as an improvement over Reggie Miller (who previously worked with the Harlan/Bonner crew). But one respondent found him “off during the tournament.” Others also criticized the idea of a three-man booth, and suggested that Bonner and Van Gundy would do better as solo analysts.
Harlan received the most individual praise, including “a national treasure,” “a gold standard of play-by-play,” and “the best big-time moment announcer out there.” Some did find his energy too much, though, criticizing him with lines like “Hollerin’ Kevin Harlan.” Overall, though, he and this booth saw a lot of praise, including for their chemistry. That included “You could argue this is the best crew” and “This crew seems to have the most fun! Their conversation off the Coke Zero ad read was the best non-basketball moment of the tournament.”
1. Ian Eagle, Grant Hill, Bill Raftery (through Final Four and title game): 3.70
Most common grade: A (80.3% of votes)
Percentage of A/B/C grades: 97.7%
This crew remains at the top of our rankings, and unlike most teams this time, they saw no year-over-year drop. They received more than six times as many A votes as Bs (417 to 63, out of 517 total), and only five Fs. However, this is slightly below the 3.78 Eagle and Raftery drew in our regular-season poll (which was also the top result).
Some of that may be from Hill’s critics. Plenty of those were in the comments, including “Just not a Grant Hill fan. Why not just Eagle and Raftery?” and “Grant Hill is the weak link here.” Part of that came with comments like “he doesn’t call or watch college basketball and it shows,” which could improve with TNT Sports’ added college rights (and Hill has stuck with them, recently signing a new long-term deal). But, while there was a lot of “terrible” and “useless” for Hill, there were also some who praised him specifically with lines like “has come a long way,” and some said they’d like to hear more from him.
Raftery (“completely unlistenable,” “retire already”) and Eagle (“a little overrated and really sounded confused on the call at the end of the championship game”) also received individual criticism. However, they also received a lot of individual praise, with Raftery described as “the gold standard” and Eagle called “a pro’s pro.”
Many loved the overall chemistry of these three. That included lines like “Ian Eagle is so much better with Grant and Raft than Jim Nantz ever was,” “no better crew in all of sports,” and “feel like I’m watching the game with friends, the dialogue flows so well with the game, absolute artwork.” Overall, the comments reflected how high this grade was.
It’s worth reiterating that the 3.70 grade here is clear of the top booths in many of our other recent rankings, including the NFL (3.40 for Joe Davis and Greg Olsen) and CFB (3.39 for Chris Fowler and Kirk Herbstreit). Indeed, with not just one, but two booths well clear of the top results in several other sports, March Madness fans seem well-served right now.