I just came in here to post something like you just did Jack. This is great radio! I recognize the faults and failings of the show but this is great stuff.
God, I love hockey.
Felger and Mazz - Creating False Naratives one day at a time
- Thread starter HomeBrew1901
- Start date
I just came in here to post something like you just did Jack. This is great radio! I recognize the faults and failings of the show but this is great stuff.
God, I love hockey.
I don't even think Jack was being particularly homer-y. He wasn't throwing them under the bus, but he acknowledged pretty forthrightly the issues from last year. Felger, who I think we can all agree is only moderately more knowledgeable about hockey than your nearest fencepost, was tardin' hard and KPD and Edwards were both trying very hard not to say he was full of shit. (Mazz is dumber than the aforementioned fencepost.) That said, it was an awesome segment despite Felger and Mazz.
Oh, to hear Jack's sonorous consonants again. I weep!
Oh, to hear Jack's sonorous consonants again. I weep!
Really? I am? Have you listened to this guy? I'm not the one bitching about Bergeron's contract (which is market rate or better, really), nor am I bitching about Chara because he hasn't won a Game 7 (because that really means a lot in a sport as team-centric as hockey). Felger is dumb about hockey. Lots of people are. Hell, I am. But Felger pulls a Mazz when it comes to hockey. Uninformed, or underinformed, all the way--but by God he holds onto his poorly reasoned conclusions as hard as he can. His "analysis" of hockey is meathead-level and it's dumb, ill-reasoned, and full of shit.
I agree with Blacken and TFP. I love Felger's passion, I just cringe when he goes off on some of his hockey tangents. To me, he loses all credibility when going on endlessly about how Patrice Bergeron is overpaid or the game 7 stuff (as mentioned). That's just as wrong-headed as Mazz's Teixeira obsession.
Rich knows basketball, not hockey.
And Felger's dead on about his issue with tonality. His overall point isn't way off, especially the idea of the core of the team not having proven anything, but his tone and delivery make it seem like he is killing the team when he's really just saying "wait and see until they prove it". His delivery makes it seems worse than the content, mainly because he's so passionate.
I usually love listening to him talk hockey, even though I disagree with 70% of his hockey opinions.
Generally speaking, as an on-air talent, there are 5 different ways to express your opinion:
1. Stick your finger in the air and see which way the wind is blowing. Be totally reactionary and simply state the obvious. Occasionally try to stir up "controversy" because that's what radio hosts are "supposed to do..." such as suggesting that the Red Sox put in a waiver claim on Manny Ramirez (Tanguay, Gary).
2. Always be "level-headed." Never express an emotional opinion. In fact, don't really express an opinion at all. When there is conflict between player and the organization, almost always choose the organization, because they're the ones who supply the interviews and are worth keeping relationships with (Arnold, Dale).
3. Develop a few talking points and keep repeating them. There's really no need to pay attention to the games or watch the games, because all you need to do is repeat your talking points. Don't let singular moments affect your talking point. Always try to make everything relate to your talking point (Mazz on Texieira...this also applies to Borges and his hate all things Patriots).
4. Supposedly offer "strong opinions," but attach so many caveats to them that you can't be held down to it if you're wrong. Yell a lot. This gives the illusion that you're really passionate about what you're saying (HEY ORDWAY).
5. Be very passionate, and stick to your guns. Don't be afraid to admit when you're wrong for an opinion. But also keep hammering your beliefs, which you do truly believe. (Felger...Moss is the perfect example of this. He had the same general opinion on Moss from 2007 onwards. Though he really "increased the Moss bashing" once 2009 rolled around and there were whispers about him quitting on the team, dogging it, etc).
Felger's thoughts on the Bruins also fall into the 5th category. He's very passionate, and genuinely believes just about everything that he's saying. If he's wrong, he'll admit that he was wrong. Felger sticks to his guns.
It's fun to listen to. Today's show was fun.
The difference between Felger on the Bruins' playoff disappointments and Mazz on Texieira is that it's evident that Felger watches the games and cares about the team. Mazz himself admitted that he didn't watch much of the Red Sox past early September. Mazz lazily chalks up these talking points. Felger is actually passionate about his. I think that's the main difference.
1. Stick your finger in the air and see which way the wind is blowing. Be totally reactionary and simply state the obvious. Occasionally try to stir up "controversy" because that's what radio hosts are "supposed to do..." such as suggesting that the Red Sox put in a waiver claim on Manny Ramirez (Tanguay, Gary).
2. Always be "level-headed." Never express an emotional opinion. In fact, don't really express an opinion at all. When there is conflict between player and the organization, almost always choose the organization, because they're the ones who supply the interviews and are worth keeping relationships with (Arnold, Dale).
3. Develop a few talking points and keep repeating them. There's really no need to pay attention to the games or watch the games, because all you need to do is repeat your talking points. Don't let singular moments affect your talking point. Always try to make everything relate to your talking point (Mazz on Texieira...this also applies to Borges and his hate all things Patriots).
4. Supposedly offer "strong opinions," but attach so many caveats to them that you can't be held down to it if you're wrong. Yell a lot. This gives the illusion that you're really passionate about what you're saying (HEY ORDWAY).
5. Be very passionate, and stick to your guns. Don't be afraid to admit when you're wrong for an opinion. But also keep hammering your beliefs, which you do truly believe. (Felger...Moss is the perfect example of this. He had the same general opinion on Moss from 2007 onwards. Though he really "increased the Moss bashing" once 2009 rolled around and there were whispers about him quitting on the team, dogging it, etc).
Felger's thoughts on the Bruins also fall into the 5th category. He's very passionate, and genuinely believes just about everything that he's saying. If he's wrong, he'll admit that he was wrong. Felger sticks to his guns.
It's fun to listen to. Today's show was fun.
The difference between Felger on the Bruins' playoff disappointments and Mazz on Texieira is that it's evident that Felger watches the games and cares about the team. Mazz himself admitted that he didn't watch much of the Red Sox past early September. Mazz lazily chalks up these talking points. Felger is actually passionate about his. I think that's the main difference.
I have no problem with Felger wanting the team to 'prove' something before he awards them the Stanley Cup. That is fine. However, the arguments he presents are of the form that Bergeron / Chara are overhyped and overpaid because Krejci going down is what prompted the Bruins to lose 4 in a row so Krejci > Bergy / Chara. Well, since we don't know what would have happened had Krejci not got injured, or had Bergy / Chara gotten hurt instead of Krejci, its just a dumb point that isn't logically sound to keep harping on and makes for awful radio (and for Sparky, at that point I stopped listening and popped in a CD).
My other issue with him ranting on Chara's new deal is the fact that #1 defensemen in the NHL don't grow on trees. We currently don't have anyone in the system who is likely to be one, and even if someone is going to be an upcoming FA you're gonna have to back up a Brinks truck for them too. Hell, we get a million back in cap space when his extension kicks in. Chara has his faults, and likely shouldn't have the C on his sweater, but the dude can play hockey.
Yup, can you imagine this team's defense corps with Chara? Scary thought. Felger kept harping on Chara's cap hit being the highest in the league among defensemen and brought up Brian Campbell as someone he would rather have because "HE WON A CUP", seriously? It's well established Campbell has the one of the worst contracts in the league, I like Felger but he was off the hook yesterday.
Some of Felger's idea's are questionable but his larger points - the team has underachieved the past two years - are spot on. I think he's also right that the team's #1 goal wasn't (in the past) to win a cup.
I don't think that its fair to pin game 7 losses on one player. In 07-08' the Bruins lost a game 7 that they were lucky to be in. Pin the 2010 collapse on coaching, team make up, organizational philosophy but putting it on the fact that "Chara can't win Game 7's" is a stretch. Bergy's contract was pretty good and the Chazz contract was OK - neither were bad - but I think Felger's larger point is that sometimes it makes sense to let a player go to free agency. They also extended Savard and Thomas prior to free agency.
Felger has made some dumb hockey statements. A couple of months ago he was discussing the 80s Bruins and didn't give Bourque his due. He credited Neely but termed Bourque a great, or good (?) player, but not on the level of Neely. Bourque is a top 5, at worst top 10 dman and clearly second to only Lemieux, Orr, and Gretzky.
I don't think that its fair to pin game 7 losses on one player. In 07-08' the Bruins lost a game 7 that they were lucky to be in. Pin the 2010 collapse on coaching, team make up, organizational philosophy but putting it on the fact that "Chara can't win Game 7's" is a stretch. Bergy's contract was pretty good and the Chazz contract was OK - neither were bad - but I think Felger's larger point is that sometimes it makes sense to let a player go to free agency. They also extended Savard and Thomas prior to free agency.
Felger has made some dumb hockey statements. A couple of months ago he was discussing the 80s Bruins and didn't give Bourque his due. He credited Neely but termed Bourque a great, or good (?) player, but not on the level of Neely. Bourque is a top 5, at worst top 10 dman and clearly second to only Lemieux, Orr, and Gretzky.
I think Felger's on the right track w/ his Bs criticism, but he's clearly not up-to-date on the goings-on of the rest of the league, or the cap. Chara's playoff performances have not been as good as his regular seasons, and while he's not quite on Joe Thornton's level, he does still have something to prove in that regard. I agree with NickEsasky though on Chara--they needed to keep him because there's no one in the system or available in free agency that could fill that void. That Felger mentions guys like Kaberle and Dion Phaneuf ('a top 5 D in the league') as possible replacements as #1 defensemen indicates that he doesn't really pay attention to games that the Bs aren't involved in and is going off numbers that he remembers from 2007 or something.
I love this Brett Favre bashing today. When the game ended, my mind immediately went to Felger. This week is going to be great.
"This week is going to be fun. 84 won't do anything either."
--Felger
"This week is going to be fun. 84 won't do anything either."
--Felger
I disagree with Felger on 84...this is going to be his coming out party for Minnesota. Has Felger been watching this Pats D? Granted, right now everything is open over the middle and Moss doesn't spend much time there, but they're not stopping people well enough to be making claims like this.
He will be on McCourty Island this Sunday. The Pats will jam his ass at the line of scrimmage and put a safety on the top.
Harvin has been killing teams over the middle the last few games- which is a result of Moss being on the team. Harvin is benefiting from Moss just like Wes Welker did (and Welker seems to be MIA since the trade),
I love this high school football call they're playing...BOOOO!
Felger also had a great line...saying something like "now what's with these Wes Welker stats on the wall? Was Gresh talking about it? I wasn't listening, per usual." :lol:
Fun show today. I love the Favre bashing, too.
Felger also had a great line...saying something like "now what's with these Wes Welker stats on the wall? Was Gresh talking about it? I wasn't listening, per usual." :lol:
Fun show today. I love the Favre bashing, too.
Playing the theme from Superman as background music for Favre's press conference had me laughing out loud at work. The press conference is right up Felger's alley. It is everything he has been killing Favre for is a neat 2 min clip. It is almost like Felger wrote Favre's comments for him.
Someone in the press conference asked BF if he was going to play and he goes off on a tangent about how he's played with various injuries in the past. He is talking about how he heals faster than most, so F&M are calling him Wolverine because of his healing power. Another reporter asked BF about the streak and he said, "All I can say is Wow". They will be playing Favre sound the rest of the day.
I hope you guys are listening right now. Felger had a tick in his ass.
I can't stop laughing.
I can't stop laughing.
Ha if I had known I would have called and told them Mazz has to remove it with his teeth and suck the poison out of Felger's ass.
Did you guys catch who followed him? Danny, from Quincy. He threw a mild shot at Jack while ranting. Good call by Jack and it was fun to hear that twerp Danny lose it.
I was surprised they let me talk that long. To Blacken, I just called Tony out because he said the Pats would only win 7 or 8 ("or maybe 9, tops") games this year and now he is saying, "yeah they're 5-1, but don't believe their record, they aren't that good". I just told him that its okay to be wrong. Felgie shifts it and asks me if I can admit I was wrong about Teixeira. I've called in about that whole mess a bunch of times but they never let me get to my point - I never said the Sox didn't need him, I wanted them to sign Tex. They finally gave me a minute and I let them know that what I objected to was Tony's idea that the Yankees didn't/wouldn't get involved until Henry "blew it" at their meeting in Texas and that the Sox "were cheap". At the time of the negotiations, Swisher was NY's 1st Baseman, so to believe that the Yankees wouldn't get involved (especially with Boras as the agent) is insane to me. Then they hung up and Tony admited that, so far, he has been wrong about the Pats...but then proceeded to give me a lecture for believing everything Theo says and continued to condescend me. Funny stuff.
Sparky, I did hear that. But what I don't understand is Danny basically agreed with me, that the Sox just got outbid. My whole point is that Mazz is wrong about the Yankees involvement.
Edit - my shitty grammar.
Sparky, I did hear that. But what I don't understand is Danny basically agreed with me, that the Sox just got outbid. My whole point is that Mazz is wrong about the Yankees involvement.
Edit - my shitty grammar.
Okay, speedy rundown... (With Felger talking points in parentheses)
-Brett Favre knocked out of game, but looks fine after game. (Drama Queen!)
-Randy Moss held to 1 catch and 8 yards (Over-rated!)
-Pats win by double digits (Back to 2003/2004!)
Quick poll:
How big is Felger's Priapismic Boner tomorrow?
-Brett Favre knocked out of game, but looks fine after game. (Drama Queen!)
-Randy Moss held to 1 catch and 8 yards (Over-rated!)
-Pats win by double digits (Back to 2003/2004!)
Quick poll:
How big is Felger's Priapismic Boner tomorrow?
came here to post the same thing. Pretty much every one of Felgers talking points held up for him today. I'm sure the priapism will last well into the show.
Who cares what Danny thinks? His calls are pretty much in syndication at this point. Just repeats of what was said years ago. I'm still waiting for "they'll win 8 in a row and get right back into the race" to come around on the rotation.
Felgie just ripping Moss to shreds. Called him a "piece of garbage" and "the first rat off a sinking ship. Is anyone shocked by this?" And he's busting the 'stretching the defense' myth.
Felger is on an epic rant to start the program. Going on about how Moss "stretched the crap out of the defense", and the Viking still lost by 10. "Merriweather was lined up in the Wrentham outlets and it still didn't matter"!
A few years ago when I would listen to EEI, Ordway and his blow hard buddy, Smerlas would always say the same thing after the Pats traded Branch. Said, they don't need a deep threat (not that Branch really was) and the "stretching the field" argument is way overblown. Of course as soon as they traded for Moss, "taking the top off the defense" was the most important thing in football. The bottom line is they just agreed with whatever Belichick did, regardless of whether they were contradicting themselves or not. Say what you want about Felger, he is consistent and sticks by what he says.
Felger is going absolutely berserk now with the news that Moss has been waived by Minnesota.
This is going to be must listen radio for the rest of the days. Felger is going to rant for 4 straight hours.
This is going to be must listen radio for the rest of the days. Felger is going to rant for 4 straight hours.
You're absolutely right.
Is it wrong that I'm hoping the Pats try to get Moss back for the sole reason to hear Felgie go crazy?
:rolling: It would make for good radio...
And yes, Tony, please just turn off your mic for the rest of the program. This is all Felger.
Is he going to spend the entire fucking show talking about Moss?
I'm sorry you guys, but you don't think it gets old after a while? Do you really want to listen to his whiny rants on a single topic for four straight hours? How many ways can he say that Moss isn't a winner and that teams can't win Super Bowls with him in the lineup?
I agree with him. But does he have to go on about it FOREVER?
I'm sorry you guys, but you don't think it gets old after a while? Do you really want to listen to his whiny rants on a single topic for four straight hours? How many ways can he say that Moss isn't a winner and that teams can't win Super Bowls with him in the lineup?
I agree with him. But does he have to go on about it FOREVER?
Normally I'd agree with you, but Moss being waived means he almost has to talk about him.
They were breaking down the game well before the news hit, pointing out they scored a TD every drive after Minny scored, and that Woodhead's 3rd down play in the 4th quarter was one of the biggest plays in the game...
But this Moss story is big. I hate his rants sometimes, and even I'm listening.