ESPN UFL announcer says ‘the over somehow hits!’ on game-ending pick-six

In the wake of increased legalization of sports betting, there’s been a lot of discussion of how and how not to mention betting on broadcasts. One of the most blatant gambling references in a crucial highlight came from Roy Philpott Saturday on an ESPN on ABC broadcast of the UFL’s St. Louis Battlehawks-Arlington Renegades clash. There, Philpott worked a “The over somehow hits!” into his call of the Renegades’ game-ending pick-six:

“AND THE OVER SOMEHOW HITS ON THE PICK-SIX FROM A HUNDRED YARDS AWAY!” 🏈🎙️💸

[image or embed]

— Awful Announcing (@awfulannouncing.bsky.social) April 19, 2025 at 3:23 PM

Across social media platforms, this drew both negative and positive reactions. Here are some of those responses:

At least the UFL announcers know their audience (degenerate gamblers and absolutely no one else).

— Jordan Freemyer (@jfreemyer.bsky.social) April 19, 2025 at 3:26 PM

Announcer definitely had the under….

— ♥️♦️tsklear🦚♣️♠️ (@tsklear) April 19, 2025

This was a game-deciding play and the call is about gambling. I don’t really know what we’re doing here anymore. https://t.co/dpPbRLdzxl

— Dylan Sinn (@DylanSinn) April 19, 2025

I hate how gambling has become part of modern sports

— Seattlelife (@pnwlife.bsky.social) April 19, 2025 at 3:27 PM

Gambling content as part of sports broadcasts is definitely common at this point. Over/unders, total points, and more frequently are often highlighted on both game broadcasts and recap shows, such as the “Bad Beats” segment on Scott Van Pelt’s version of SportsCenter. So we’re certainly not in a world where just the mention of a gambling line on a sports broadcast is verboten.

The UFL has also frequently discussed gambling as a way to attract audiences. And ESPN gambling-focused figures, including Erin Dolan (tabbed as their “in-game betting analyst” for UFL broadcasts), often show up on their broadcasts of this league. And yes, this was a spectacular moment with a notable gambling impact.

However, there is a significant difference between discussing gambling and working it directly into the call of a game-deciding highlight. There’s a reason beyond just legality that announcers including Al Michaels and Brent Musburger have often tried to be at least slightly subtle with their gambling notes.

This would have been a lot different if Philpott had brought it up slightly after the game-ending playcall. In subsequent discussion, a betting reference probably wouldn’t have turned many heads. But he instead chose to make a highly-direct gambling reference on this crucial highlight. And many weren’t pleased with that.