Felger and Mazz - Creating False Naratives one day at a time

[Phenom]

This probably belongs in another thread, but I'm just happy to have a choice now. The Big Show has gotten much much better lately while Felger and Mazz have just gotten annoying. They are taking the worst thing they learned on EEI and brought it to TSH, which is find one talking point and drill it into the ground so much that I can't listen anymore.

Their talking points haven't changed from August of '09. The Patriots had bad drafts from 2006-2008. But they had a pretty good draft in 2009 and thus far it seems like 2010 was a home run. So that talking point should no longer be relevant. However, today they decided to revisit it.

The Red Sox missed out on Mark Teixeira. But now they have Adrian Gonzalez. So the whole Teixeira talking point shouldn't be relevant anymore. However, they still go to it.

As I said earlier in the thread, "Felger and Mazz" have to update their opinions a bit. It seems like they came up with a few thesis statements in regards to each team when the show launched, and are unwilling to come up with new ones.

(But, I too still give them the first shot at 2:00...segments like Felger talking about "the wood's" standing on barstool keep me coming back. Not sure what that says about me, but nonetheless that's the way it is)...

 

[HomeBrew1901]

That's because Felger talking about his wife's take on Barstool sports is genuine and why he can be fun to listen to. He doesn't take himself too seriously and has no problem poking fun at himself. It's when he has nothing to talk about and forces an issue that he sucks.

 

[BannedbyNYYFans.com]

Boston Herald reports that Felger and Mazz got in trouble for talking about the "Mary, Fuck, Kill" Barstoolsports bit with Felger's wife (I posted the clip above). Pretty funny.

Herald: Radio Hosts Blasted Over Sex Poll

A local sports radio host has come under fire for touting an online polling game that asks men which high-profile, Boston female news anchor – Maria Stephanos, Sara Underwood or Bianca de la Garza – they would wed, bed or kill. Barstool Sports posted the “hot Boston reporter edition” of its regular poll Tuesday. While that’s par for the course for the smutty site, “98.5 The Sports Hub” yakker Mike Felger then went on-the-air and encouraged his radio listeners to vote for Underwood – his wife and a weekend anchor and reporter for Fox 25. “The fact that Mike Felger unapologetically speaks of his wife, one of the women in the poll, in these terms is disrespectful to her, offensive to all women and many men, and promotes the idea that it is funny and acceptable to degrade women, even those you supposedly love,” Gallagher said. Felger sought to downplay his clownish on-air banter. “We try not to take ourselves that seriously,” Felger told MediaBiz. Christina Knowles, state director of the Massachusetts chapter of the National Organization for Women, said she was surprised Felger played into the sleazy chauvinism, because his wife was among the trio being objectified. “The fundamental basis of this game is to determine the worth of the women based on their looks – and that’s troubling,” Knowles said. “It’s completely degrading.” Bar Stools’ owner Dave Portnoy said his site is male-oriented and the polling game has been around for years. “I certainly don’t think it’s shocking in terms of what we do or really what anybody does,” Portnoy said. “Whether that is good or bad, I think it’s pretty mainstream.”

 

[AquaNarc]

I would pass up the opportunity to have sex with any of them if it meant I could kill Tony Mazz.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

Shouldn't Knowles laud Felger for still being head-over-heels in love with his wife? They've been married a bunch of years and he still wants to fuck her, good for him. In a not-so-strange way, it's pretty sweet, actually.

Feminists. They make me laugh AND dinner.

 

[NickEsasky]

Shouldn't Knowles laud Felger for still being head-over-heels in love with his wife? They've been married a bunch of years and he still wants to fuck her, good for him. In a not-so-strange way, it's pretty sweet, actually.

Feminists. They make me laugh AND dinner.

Sig'd

 

[Salem's Lot]

I hope Felger gets his hands on that audio from the Tennessee sports radio station that D & H are playing on WEEI. If nobody is listening to them, there was a caller to that TN. station ripping Jeff Fisher that sounds very similar to Randy Moss. This could make for very entertaining radio.

 

[BannedbyNYYFans.com]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-CkuCYR74c

 

[Mystic Merlin]

That is Randy Moss.

 

[Spaulding Smails]

My god if that isn't Randy Moss then thats a spot on imitation.

 

[Rocco Graziosa]

It sure sounds like Randy Moss, but the Randy Moss I know isn't gonna call in a radio station as "Woody" to shit on Jeff Fisher.......he gonna call a press conference and tell the entire world what he thinks of Fisher.

If that is Randy Moss then that caps quite a year for him. And his career lowpoint.

 

[teddykgb]

it sounds a lot like him, but not entirely. Like was just said, Randy Moss doesn't need to call a radio station to throw his coach under the bus. The simple solution here is that it's just a guy who sounds like randy moss, not a big production of a high profile player disguising himself to get 25 seconds on the radio.

 

[Phenom]

The Bruins are in big trouble on this show.

They can't be that negative about the Red Sox anymore, and haven't been all week. Felger and Mazz were both ecstatic over the Jenks signing.

They don't talk about the Celtics that often, and when they do, Felger generally praises them for "knowing how to win" and playing "team basketball."

They've tried to drum up some Patriots' negativity over the past couple of days, but it hasn't stuck. Complaining about how the Patriots may give up a lot of points in the Super Bowl isn't really a topic that will get the phone lines buzzing.

So the Bruins are the team that's left standing. I think that almost every show for the next couple of months will include at least an hour or so of "Bruins skepticism" from Felger.

 

[AquaNarc]

That doesn't really sound like Moss. I could buy that it was Moss trying to disguise his voice a bit. That dude has a thicker/slightly different southern accent than Moss.

 

[PedroOrtiz]

Felger will be all over this. He's the biggest Moss fan along with Farve and NBA.

 

[PedroOrtiz]

Where I hate their baseball talk, I love the Patriots talk that this station has. WEEI is just out of touch with the sports talk around here. I just wish Sports Hub can pick up Peter Gammons or someone that actually knows baseball, so it can get even better.

 

[BannedbyNYYFans.com]

Today will be lots and lots of "Be afraid of Peyton Manning" and "Ya gotta respect the Jets". Lots of it.

 

[PeaceSignMoose]

Today will be lots and lots of "Be afraid of Peyton Manning" and "Ya gotta respect the Jets". Lots of it.

Today is a WEEI day.

 

[teddykgb]

I don't agree. Today is a day where Felger is nice because he's going to at least talk about the flaws this team may have. Hearing Ordway and Smerlas gloss over everything or point to small issues all day will be annoying. something happened yesterday, and it's probably not a big deal, but I'd probably prefer to listen to people try to figure out what it was than listen to people stick their head in the sand.

 

[Rocco Graziosa]

I don't agree. Today is a day where Felger is nice because he's going to at least talk about the flaws this team may have. Hearing Ordway and Smerlas gloss over everything or point to small issues all day will be annoying. something happened yesterday, and it's probably not a big deal, but I'd probably prefer to listen to people try to figure out what it was than listen to people stick their head in the sand.

Yep. Today is absolutely a day to be talking about this teams mortality and who might challenge them in the playoffs.

 

[HomeBrew1901]

I don't agree. Today is a day where Felger is nice because he's going to at least talk about the flaws this team may have. Hearing Ordway and Smerlas gloss over everything or point to small issues all day will be annoying. something happened yesterday, and it's probably not a big deal, but I'd probably prefer to listen to people try to figure out what it was than listen to people stick their head in the sand.

Smerlas maybe, but Ordway has been harping on the defense all season long (with the exception of the last few weeks when everyone thought they had turned the corner). He's not going to challenge Belichick on it, but from the sounds of the post game press conference, he isn't going to need to. Aside from THE defense, I do think he will talk about how this was a "wake up" game for all involved.

 

[BannedbyNYYFans.com]

If you want to criticize the Pats, have at it. I agree and hated the cockyness that was coming out of the pro Pats callers the past few weeks, regardless of last night. But he mentioned the Colts about 10 times last week and last night on Sports Sunday, he brought it up with D.A., Borges, and Curran. And he says it like its some theory he just came up with. Of course the Patriots are vulnerable against teams that throw the ball well. Of course Manning has had their number for the most part in the past few years. But Jesus, it's literally four weeks away if it does happen. It like he's Sean Hannity warning you about the Muslims.

 

[dcmissle]

And it's not as if the Pats are alone in this. The Jets' pom-pom boys who precede Francesa on 'FAN closed their show today by stressing that they want no part of a post-season matchup with Manning & Co.

How about some analysis? What do the teams who give the Pats problems have in common? And what, if anything, can be done about it over the next 2 months??

 

[Phenom]

This is funny...hating on the "Mall of America" and "Minnesotians."

This is the kind of stuff this show should talk about...slant a little more towards "guy talk." Obviously still be very sports based, but treat it more as an entertainment show. Because these kind of rants from Felger and Mazz are excellent.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

No. No. NO.

"Guy talk" sucks. Whether Dennis and Callahan do it or Mike and Mike or Bill Simmons. It's fucking awful.

Guy talk. Jesus Christ, you sound like a woman.

 

[Rocco Graziosa]

No. No. NO.

"Guy talk" sucks. Whether Dennis and Callahan do it or Mike and Mike or Bill Simmons. It's fucking awful.

Guy talk. Jesus Christ, you sound like a woman.

Isn't "guy talk" 99% of what goes on at this site? Felgers rants on Favre, airplanes, Moss, ect are the P&G of that show and I for one enjoy it a lot.

I think you don't like "bad" guy talk. Which is another topic of discussion.

 

[BannedbyNYYFans.com]

I was wrong. It was a good show today.

 

[Phenom]

No. No. NO.

"Guy talk" sucks. Whether Dennis and Callahan do it or Mike and Mike or Bill Simmons. It's fucking awful.

Guy talk. Jesus Christ, you sound like a woman.

Give me a Felger rant on airplanes, BC, or people driving in the snow any day...it's f'n hilarious.

 

[mikeford]

Isn't "guy talk" basically all Toucher and Rich does?

Does JMOH not like T&R?

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

I love T&R, but they don't do "cliched" guy talk. And I bet that if you told them that they did "guy talk", they'd laugh you off the radio. Dennis and Callahan, the Big Show love saying that they do "guy talk", they think that it's endearing and representative of how their audience talks. The EEI crew loves this buzz word.

EEI-esque guy talk sucks. "Hey, lets watch sports, play poker, drink beer, whistle at girls and smoke cigars! We're men!" It's stupid, LCD bullshit that reeks of a marketing focus group and how they define what a "guy" talks about. My friends and I do talk about some of this stuff, but not the way these idiots think that we speak.

Edit: Put it this way, this is the by-product of the mid-90s fame of Tim Allen. All real men are unsophisticated morons. And if that's how you define yourself, that's great but I want a little bit of substance and intelligence.

 

[Laschelle Tarver]

I don't agree. Today is a day where Felger is nice because he's going to at least talk about the flaws this team may have. Hearing Ordway and Smerlas gloss over everything or point to small issues all day will be annoying. something happened yesterday, and it's probably not a big deal, but I'd probably prefer to listen to people try to figure out what it was than listen to people stick their head in the sand.

What bothers me in general when they analyze the team's flaws is not so much the analysis itself, it's more the fact they seem to make this analysis in a vacuum and forget/ignore the fact that every team in the league has flaws. Every bad thing that happens is the start of a trend (poor tackling and numerous penalties to give away yards), every good thing that happens (forcing turnovers, not turning the ball over themselves) is luck and can't possibly continue. Honest anlaysis is taking those flaws and lining them up next to the numerous postives the team exhibits, and comparing that to the rest of the league. When you do that, you get right back to seeing that this team probably has the best chance of anyone to win a championship this year.

 

[Gambler7]

Kicking off the show with Rex, this is great and what this show does best.

 

[BannedbyNYYFans.com]

Kicking off the show with Rex, this is great and what this show does best.

Yup. Felger is gold when he's talking about "sports stories". When he is analyzing OBP and FIP, not so much.

 

[mikeford]

I tune in at 330 and we're already moved on to talking about the Bruins?

I am disappoint.

 

[Phragle]

I am disappoint.

This paired well with your avatar. Well done.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

We (all rightly so) beat up on Tony Mazz, but I thought that this was a pretty good article on how and why he chose his HOF candidates.

What impressed me is his honesty and his admissions that he doesn't know what to do and that he may be a hypocrite. I think that if he used some of these characteristics in his daily radio show, he'd improve. Writer Mazz knows that he doesn't know anything, radio Mazz thinks he knows everything and more.

 

[mikeford]

That was a good column I wouldn't have otherwise read, so thanks for posting JMOH.

Have to say I don't agree with keeping Bagwell out just based on the era he played in. If theres never even been a level of HERESAY evidence... I don't think holding the guys era against him is warranted.

Thats not even taking into consideration the idea Mazz presented in the column: the Baseball HOF is a museum to the sport of baseball, not a cathedral of "good" people of the highest moral character. Are we supposed to ignore that this steroids thing happened? I feel like keeping guys waiting for a year or two is just punishment, you don't deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Willie Mays, et al as a first-ballot HOF if you cheated... but keeping them out entirely and pretending these weren't great players who fans loved and revered at a time (even if that time is now over and they have become pariahs in some cases) is not just spiting them but spiting future generations of baseball fans.

 

[Razor Shines]

It was a decent column by Mazz standards, but the big problem I have is that he doesn't at all mention his Blyleven non-vote. He's in a ~25% minority amongst his peers there, he should at least back it up with a couple of sentences.

Say what you want about Jon Heyman, but at least he's written a bunch of stuff defending his anti-Blyleven stance.

Random observation: Unless I missed something, no starting pitcher has been elected since 1998 (Don Sutton)...and, assuming Clemens doesn't get in on his first ballot, we will not see one elected until 2014 (Maddox, Glavine, maybe Mussina). That's 16 years with no HoF starters. Seems crazy to me.

 

[Scoots McBoots]

Actually, there IS a morals clause. Joe Posnanski has mentioned it several times over the last week.

 

[wutang112878]

I thought that was a good column, a well thought out article on his thought process. But I take issue with 2 things:

I did not vote for Bagwell, opting to exercise my right to wait for more information.

Major League Baseball and the players union opened the entire game up to great skepticism.

My first question is where this information would come from? And to not call out the BBWA [when he did call out MLB and the union] who never really investigated or wrote much on this topic while it was going on, because it was self serving is ridiculous. Had they opened the lid on this earlier this wouldnt be as much of a problem, and they arent going to go investigate Bagwell now.

So I just dont understand what he is waiting for? To see how others will vote going forward? He admitted he compared players to their 'era' and this 'era' was enhanced for a lot of the Hall caliber players.

I just take issue with the fact that he wont admit the BBWA played a role here, and he is waiting for information that is really never going to come. If he had said 'because he could be a PED user I dont think he deserves to be a first ballot guy' I agree, although that opens up another can of worms. These parts of his argument just dont seem to be logical.

 

[Phenom]

I thought that was a good column, a well thought out article on his thought process. But I take issue with 2 things:



My first question is where this information would come from? And to not call out the BBWA [when he did call out MLB and the union] who never really investigated or wrote much on this topic while it was going on, because it was self serving is ridiculous. Had they opened the lid on this earlier this wouldnt be as much of a problem, and they arent going to go investigate Bagwell now.

So I just dont understand what he is waiting for? To see how others will vote going forward? He admitted he compared players to their 'era' and this 'era' was enhanced for a lot of the Hall caliber players.

I just take issue with the fact that he wont admit the BBWA played a role here, and he is waiting for information that is really never going to come. If he had said 'because he could be a PED user I dont think he deserves to be a first ballot guy' I agree, although that opens up another can of worms. These parts of his argument just dont seem to be logical.

Yeah, I appreciate Mazz's honesty on the topic but he really doesn't make a lot of sense. Today, for example, he said that he votes on a guy if he thinks they would have been a Hall of Famer even without steroids. That to me seems like the ultimate "hypothetical game" and the ultimate sin that a voter can do.

 

[HomeBrew1901]

Yeah, I appreciate Mazz's honesty on the topic but he really doesn't make a lot of sense. Today, for example, he said that he votes on a guy if he thinks they would have been a Hall of Famer even without steroids. That to me seems like the ultimate "hypothetical game" and the ultimate sin that a voter can do.

I don't fault Mazz on his stance and his "wait and see" attitude about voting on some players. Personally I'm torn about whether or not guys like Clemens or Bonds should get in, 3 years ago I would have argued adamantly against their inclusion, now I'm on the fence and I don't even have a vote. Say what you will about the BBWAA (different argument for a different day) but for the most part they take their jobs seriously and they make getting into the HOF an honor, so I can see why he wants to wait for a couple years on Bagwell, maybe his attitude changes and his stance on the era softens.

As for what new info could come out, he used a great example on his radio show... You never know when a dealer or doctor that was providing the steroids is going to get caught and will start naming names with proof.

edit: As for alienating generations of fans, that's a load of bullshit, fans aren't going to feel alienated 20 years from now, plus MLB and the MLBPA did this to themselves. If they really cared about the clean players not getting lumped in with the users they could done something about it in the 90s and implemented testing. Instead they fought it tooth and nail, with suspected users like Nomar angrily asking if they were going to start testing for asprin next.

 

[PBDWake]

Honestly, I hate the media's sanctimonious attitude here. And not because I don't think steroids were a big deal. But I think that at least as much as the owners, the media was just as complacent. To his credit, Jon Heyman was ahead of almost everyone on calling out the roiders, which is why it's the one thing I give him a pass on in his hall ballots, but for the most part, the media was happy to not ask questions.

In fact, if memory serves, wasn't Steve Wilstein, the guy who outed McGwire and the Andro ostracized by most of his peers? It was regarded at the time as unwelcome, a turd in the punch bowl, and a serious breach of clubhouse ettiquette by most people. So if you're in the media and you're penalizing Jeff Bagwell because of the steroid era, then you should screw off if you too let the era pass you by in silence.

For a player like Bagwell, whose never had his name linked to steroids, never had any rumors circulate, and has constantly denied it, it's the worst. There's no evidence since he retired to support a decision swap, and he played plenty after the Mitchell Report. The only evidence being used is his size, which was around when he was playing, and nobody seemed to want to ask him to his face or snoop around then. Withholding a hall vote for him over steroids is the most gutless, cowardly, and pathetic thing to do, because it only proves you never had the sack to address the issue to someone's face, but are perfectly comfortable rumormongering behind a veil of relative anonymity, groupthink, and without a real threat of repercussions.

*edit* Added in last 3 sentences.

 

[HomeBrew1901]

Honestly, I hate the media's sanctimonious attitude here. And not because I don't think steroids were a big deal. But I think that at least as much as the owners, the media was just as complacent. To his credit, Jon Heyman was ahead of almost everyone on calling out the roiders, which is why it's the one thing I give him a pass on in his hall ballots, but for the most part, the media was happy to not ask questions.

I agree with you 100% here, that's one of the things I don't like about the BBWAA voting for the HOF, it makes them part of the story, yet they are not accountable. In an era when they could have done some good, almost all of them decided to turn a blind eye because they didn't want to lose access, yet still hide behind the paper and blame the players and management.

edit: As for Bagwell, I don't feel sorry for any of these guys, he kept his mouth shut just like everyone else both users and non-users and didn't push the issue.

 

[PBDWake]

Brew, as a viewer with no access or responsibility, I'm fine with that being your own perogative. My issue, as stated, is with the same people who had the same information back then, and an occupational responsibility to inform us if they knew these things, turning the same willful blind eye any non-using player, manager, or owner turned now getting on a moral pedestal and judging these same players for these same issues. If Steve Wilstein, Bob Nightengale or Jon Heyman wanted to use steroids as a reason to try and keep players out of the HoF, I would be fine with it. These were all people who had and used their platform to speak out against steroids while the era was ongoing. However, most of the media was just as happy to keep raking in the cash covering the HR chases as the owners were. Those same people have no right to take the moral high ground here.

 

[TheGazelle]

edit: As for Bagwell, I don't feel sorry for any of these guys, he kept his mouth shut just like everyone else both users and non-users and didn't push the issue.

I disagree. It's not Jeff Bagwell's job to be a whistle-blower and blow the top off the steroids issue, especially when no one knows what he (or really, anyone else) knew about anything. I don't see how Bagwell not becoming baseball's Deep Throat has anything to do with his HoF candidacy. He's repeatedly denied that he ever used steroids, he's never had any failed tests or other evidence to the contrary, and his numbers are clearly good enough to get in. Denying him entry "because he kept his mouth shut" (and the comensurate assumption that he knew something, which is also unfair) is silly.

 

[wutang112878]

I don't fault Mazz on his stance and his "wait and see" attitude about voting on some players.

In an era when they could have done some good, almost all of them decided to turn a blind eye because they didn't want to lose access, yet still hide behind the paper and blame the players and management.

Isnt this as inconsistent as Mazz? On one hand I understand why the BBWA did nothing, but you are also allowing them to hide behind the 'wait and see' approach and they wouldnt have had to wait and see if they did something about it.

I am willing to let them off the hook for not reporting stuff [I understand their motivation] but they cant have it both ways. They cant not report or investigate it, and then say 'I am waiting for more information'. If he had said 'I wont vote for a suspected PED user, and its my own fault I have to pass somewhat blind judgement' I would be ok with that, or if he said 'This is how I am going to vote for all suspected PED guys' that would be ok too. But I think its ridiculous to take the 'wait and see' when he should be the one trying to figure out what to do.

 

[HomeBrew1901]

Yeah, I guess my two posts were a little inconsistent, unfortunately most of what is being written in this thread on the topic is inconsistent and at the end of the day there is no right or wrong answer and to use my least favorite saying, "It is what it is."

We can't complain that the writers should have been doing more digging about the players they were covering and then let Bagwell off the hook because it isn't up to him to be deep throat when he was sharing the same locker room as dirty players. He played in an era when everyone, including us as fans, decided to turn a blind eye so he is going to have to deal with the speculation that his numbers were chemically enhanced and if that ultimately keeps him out of the HOF, I'm OK with that.

If you aren't, that's cool, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this topic.

 

[wutang112878]

If you aren't, that's cool, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this topic.

I am fine with that, like I said if they want to keep everyone out thats fine and I understand the logic. But IMO its either everyone is judged on the era, everyone is out, or 'I need to investigate this' not 'I need to wait for more info' that is a weak stance IMO anyway.

 

[NortheasternPJ]

n fact, if memory serves, wasn't Steve Wilstein, the guy who outed McGwire and the Andro ostracized by most of his peers? It was regarded at the time as unwelcome, a turd in the punch bowl, and a serious breach of clubhouse ettiquette by most peopl

CHB was on last week and a caller called up and ripped him to pieces about the BBWA turning a blind eye. CHB brought up the point that Steve Wilstein who was ostracized and was thought to be committing career suicide by doing it. He then went on a rant about how he or no other writers had any idea. It was totally news to them and fans who now say they knew or thought about it then are making it up. No one in the media and no fans knew about it. So pretty much CHB being CHB.