Oh my sweet jumping Jesus please tell me this isn't true. But it'd make so much sense...
Felger and Mazz - Creating False Naratives one day at a time
- Thread starter HomeBrew1901
- Start date
This is so true. It's how I learn. If it weren't for you and PSK and others I'd know shit. It's been a horrible show this week, and I'm a big fan of the show. Very lazy effort this week.
Bingo. Boston, though it's one of the best sports markets in the country, isn't New York. There are times when the sports world here is kind of "slow." Also, national stories don't play well in this area. The conversation has to stay local regardless.
When news is "slow," the host has to come up with ways to fill time. Ordway doesn't really struggle with this, because "The Big Show's" format lends itself to a different perspective coming into the studio each day. If it's a slow Friday in February, and McAdam is co-hosting, they can field calls on the Red Sox for 4 hours, because people want to talk to McAdam about the Sox. On a Wednesday in March, if Cedric Maxwell is on, people will flood the phone lines to talk basketball with Max.
But when it's the same two hosts, you're not going to have that. So the hosts have to come up and in some cases "create" topics. Felger is the quintessential "tabloid sports personality." He isn't not poetic, doesn't romanticize the games, and doesn't really get into "x's and o's" conversation. He more covers people and storylines instead of the games. It's a formula that works well a lot of the time (at least in my mind), but it bites him in the butt when there isn't anything "egregious" going on. "Felger and Mazz" also don't do a lot of interviews, so they can't have a big-time guest on and try to use that as a talking point either.
Of course, Mazz doesn't contribute to the show at all. Felger has nobody to lean on. He has nobody to banter with, because Mazz refuses to disagree with him. It's hard.
I recall this year around the trade deadline, he referenced HF on the air as his source of info in his mea culpa on the strength of this year's draft class (regarding the Kessel trade). He also referred to them for the next couple of weeks following for info on either of Seguin/Hall.
That depends on your point of view. Would you like him to go to Joe Morgan to catch up on modern baseball analysis while he's doing his legwork?
*edit*
That came off on second read as snark at you. I meant it more as an "If you don't go to the right place, it can hurt more than help" comment.
*edit*
That came off on second read as snark at you. I meant it more as an "If you don't go to the right place, it can hurt more than help" comment.
Now Felger is bitching about the Pats not getting the Raiders 1st rounder in 2010 for Seymour because the high pick is not good value for the Patriots yet all the reports out there say that Oakland only offered a 2nd rounder in 2010 or a 1st rounder in 2011.
Yeah, maybe he should be bitching about how bad the offense sucks since dealing Randy Moss.
I know that Tony admitted to not watching many games in the last month, but he is aware that Bay had an absolute shit year for the Mets, right? He was unproductive, often injured and completely over paid.
What's the fascination with Jason Bay?
What's the fascination with Jason Bay?
<BR><BR><BR>As far back as the trade deadline, he's maintained that regardless of Bay's performance this year (you can't predict injuries, after all!), if you were going to go after Werth, you should have just locked Bay down, since it'd likely cost the same and Bay was a better player. I have a post reaming him from some time around the trade deadline earlier in the thread that expounds upon it.
"The Phillies, unlike the Red Sox, have developed a nucleus and signed that nucleus to long-term deals." WHAT????? Do the names Dustin Pedroia, Kevin Youkilis, and Jon Lester ring a bell?
They're both just plain out making things up at this point. Look, I thought the Red Sox deserved some criticism with the way they handled 2010 and didn't upgrade the bullpen during the season. But man, listening to these two you would think they were owned by Donald Sterling or something.
It's just ridiculous conversation. "Felger and Mazz" Red Sox conversation is the definition of "troll radio."
They're both just plain out making things up at this point. Look, I thought the Red Sox deserved some criticism with the way they handled 2010 and didn't upgrade the bullpen during the season. But man, listening to these two you would think they were owned by Donald Sterling or something.
It's just ridiculous conversation. "Felger and Mazz" Red Sox conversation is the definition of "troll radio."
That also ignores that Ryan Howard might have THE WORST CONTRACT EXTENSION IN BASEBALL (that still hasn't STARTED!)
Yup; they convinced me to stop listening to TBS and now I just listen to my ipod rather than either show. And I'm supposed to be one of their supporters and core demographic; oh well...
Generally, I really enjoy Felger. He's funny, he dedicates time to the Bruins and he's not afraid to take a stand and later admit he's wrong. But lately I'm bailing on the show as soon as they do any Hot Stove/Red Sox stuff.
So I'm trying to figure this out. I go crazy and have to stop listening whenever they talk baseball/Red Sox. Is it because I'm more sensitive with Red Sox talk? Is it because I know more about baseball than other sports and that makes me infuriated with their lack of insight? Or are they like this with all four sports and I just normally don't hear it? I guess what I'm asking is are they normally this out of touch with the facts and I just don't notice, or are they especially off with baseball/Red Sox talk? Is it me or them with the problem?
Edit - Grammar...as usual. I'm a moron.
The same applies to me...I know more about baseball than any other sport, thus I'm probably more likely to call them on their bullshit.
But it's not like I'm clueless on the other sports (especially football and basketball). I happen to think that though Felger's viewpoint on other things are often from the contrarian viewpoint, at least he has some reason to back them up. But it just seems like he and Mazz are making things up about the Red Sox in order to criticize them.
(And today Bradford and Buckley are on "The Big Show." For some listenable hot stove talk, I may flip over to them at some point).
To me, it's just the Sox talk. I don't think it has to do anything with being more sensitive too it. I can be as critical as anyone, but their constant blasting of the Red Sox usually makes zero sense. Felger I can understand to a point, but you would think Tony being a baseball guy would be the one to rope him in and argue a lot of the points he makes, yet he just goes along with the yuck fest and sounds like a fool in the process. I don't get how someone who has covered the sport for a living can be so out of touch with it (or maybe I can considering he often talks about not actually watching the games).
I like Felger when he is on the Bruins and Patriots, and he is critical of them when he thinks it is warranted. The big difference is that usually his criticisms make some sort of sense. Their Sox talk has just been so mind-numbingly bad. I would love for them to bring in a 3rd guy as we get towards baseball season, the baseball equivalent of Paul Perillo if you will. Someone who will actually make them think twice before they speak on the topic.
I like Felger when he is on the Bruins and Patriots, and he is critical of them when he thinks it is warranted. The big difference is that usually his criticisms make some sort of sense. Their Sox talk has just been so mind-numbingly bad. I would love for them to bring in a 3rd guy as we get towards baseball season, the baseball equivalent of Paul Perillo if you will. Someone who will actually make them think twice before they speak on the topic.
I think baseball talk is a lot more identifiable when it's bad, especially for this board. Ultimately, almost everything in baseball is measurable to some degree, and you can pull it up in a few clicks. Which also makes it so much more inexcusable when there's lazy sports talk about it. And a lot of that comes from the fact that baseball is mostly a series of individual players whose play doesn't really encroach on other players. A pitcher throws a ball, a batter tries to hit it, and a fielder tries to catch it. How we measure those three basic tenents are pretty much the sole responsibility of the baseball player. So if a player hits a fly ball to right field, and JD Drew doesn't come in quickly enough, we know it was Drew's jump/ability that likely caused it, and Kevin Youkilis played no part in it.
With the other major sports it's never so black and white. If Devin McCourty plays 5 yards under Mike Wallace next week, and Wallace catches a pass over the top and breaks one 50 yards, we don't really know if he did a poor job on coverage, or if he was supposed to have safety help over the top and James Sanders was out of position biting on a play fake. Same with basketball and hockey. With every piece on the board moving at once, it's a lot harder to get meaningful insight into individual performance. Obviously it's not impossible, but baseball is at a point where it's hit a much higher degree of accuracy.
All of which means that when Felger and Mazz say retarded stuff on the air, it's a whole lot easier for us to call bullshit, and point at them being lazy.
PBDWake, Gambler, and Phenon - thanks. I consider myself a pretty bright sports fan ovarall and I've been trying to figure out why I enjoy Pats, B's, or C's talk (regardless of whether I agree or disagree with their opinions), while absolutely despising baseball talk that on the show - especially of late. Now I know it's them, not me. They really don't know what the fuck they're talking about half the time regarding baseball and the Red Sox.
But Howard is an exciting player to watch!! /mazz
I'm squarely in their demographic big demographic(28) but they've lost me. I now listen to music most days at work. I just can't stand to listen to their constant negativity towards the sox. They have these talking points they can't stop beating into the ground, and what makes it worse is that most of them are wrong. Whether its Mazz quipping something about, "the lineup would have been so much better with Texiera" or Felger and Mazz bemoaning how cheep they are(you have to be a cheap bastard to only have the 2nd highest payroll in baseball), or their new recent talking point about how "boring" the team its beyond ridiculous. Mazz seems to have some deep rooted hatred for the sox ownership and management. He talks about them the same way Borges talks about Belichick. Does anyone have a guess as to why that would be?
I didn't know that site was still going.
Anyways, that Matsuzaka story they had from Tony gave me an idea to go back and find articles for the whole Teixeira thing back in 08/09. Here is one article and what Tony had to say...
http://www.boston.com/sports/columnists/massarotti/2009/01/the_final_chapter_on_teixeira.html
Here's one more article from Tony:
So then he admits in this article the Yankees are the one team that can always outbid. And that's what happened. And Teixeira admitted it was about money. So...when he keeps bringing this up, what exactly did he want the Red Sox to do when the one team he admits can outbid the Sox...did just that?
Anyways, that Matsuzaka story they had from Tony gave me an idea to go back and find articles for the whole Teixeira thing back in 08/09. Here is one article and what Tony had to say...
http://www.boston.com/sports/columnists/massarotti/2009/01/the_final_chapter_on_teixeira.html
How could he write all this in his own story and then ignore history 2 years later? He even says in the article they offered him the biggest deal in team history, yet somehow they didn't go far enough?
Here's one more article from Tony:
http://www.boston.com/sports/columnists/massarotti/2008/11/expect_sox_to_break_bank_for_t.html
So then he admits in this article the Yankees are the one team that can always outbid. And that's what happened. And Teixeira admitted it was about money. So...when he keeps bringing this up, what exactly did he want the Red Sox to do when the one team he admits can outbid the Sox...did just that?
Because, like a clown in a circus, he's playing a role. And he's playing his listeners for fools. If he did this on the internet he'd be labeled a troll and banned from the site. But since he does it on the radio, he's labeled "compelling" and earns a handsome salary.
He's a fucking douchebag. The only way to get him to stop treating his listeners like retards is to turn off the radio (and harm their ratings) whenever he goes off like this.
I think TSH wants to convince as many fans as possible that the Red Sox are bad and cheap and boring so we'll stop paying as much attention to them. Wouldn't that be good for TSH and bad for WEEI?
It shouldn't be about that, though. WEEI doesn't bring down the Patriots (obviously) because their games are broadcast on "The Sports Hub."
If there is a "smear campaign" going on, then I lose a lot of respect for the station.
The show has been infuriating to listen to in recent weeks. I gave Felger props for sticking to his guns that Moss was bad for the team. Now he's gone way over the edge. The Pats spend entire halves of football going 3 and out time and time again. Wes Welker is now on a milk carton.
Every day I get in my car and within 15 seconds I hear the same crap about Moss. Click. Off to music or anything else. I hope F&M get crushed in the ratings this month so they get back to what worked before. Or better yet get Mazz out of there so Felger gets challenged once in a while.
Every day I get in my car and within 15 seconds I hear the same crap about Moss. Click. Off to music or anything else. I hope F&M get crushed in the ratings this month so they get back to what worked before. Or better yet get Mazz out of there so Felger gets challenged once in a while.
So is this what it's going to be until the Bruins make the Eastern Conference Finals? Is Felger going to remind us of last year's choke job after every big win? Oy.
(I really hate to just post here and criticize, but the reason why I'm doing it is because the show can be good. But there are a few spells every once in a while where these two get stale. This unfortunately seems to be one of those spells).
(I really hate to just post here and criticize, but the reason why I'm doing it is because the show can be good. But there are a few spells every once in a while where these two get stale. This unfortunately seems to be one of those spells).
Yes. The Bruins are the new Red Sox in some ways. In a town that has produced 6 titles in the past 10 years, they have no credibility. It is safe to assume that they'll find a way to not win. And much of their fan base will take the bait, which is good for the "energy" of a talk show.
This ranting about "NBA fans are casual fans" is beginning to get old. Sure, the NBA has "casual" fans but I certainly don't think the Celtics have more "casual" fans than the Sox or the Pats. Those two teams have made an industry out of catering to pink hats. In the 10 years I have been going to sporting events in Boston, there has been a profound shift in the fan demographics at Pats and Sox games. I have not see the same shift at Celtics games.* Not sure what these guys should discuss, but they should absolutely leave basketball alone. Big regular season game tonight and these clowns are talking about villains, casual fans, and not at all about match-ups.
*Full disclosure, I don't get to a ton of Pats games (2 or so per year), and attend at least 10 Sox and 20 Celtics games per season.
*Full disclosure, I don't get to a ton of Pats games (2 or so per year), and attend at least 10 Sox and 20 Celtics games per season.
I was enjoying today's show until 4:45...when Felger came back from break and despite Tony's whimpered protest, gave us 15 minutes on why Mike Shanahan & Brad Childress were RIGHT to threaten their sacred cow QBs.
Ok, it was a brief segment. The prior stuff with KPD was great radio, so I'll stick in and find out what the next topic is...
Fuck, more Farve/McNabb/sacred cow talk. Wonder what The Big Show is up to? Fuck, static - I live in NH. OK, WGAM for the rest of the commute.
Hey Felger! You should have your job threatened. STOP BEATING THIS DEAD HORSE. We get it. Move on.
Ok, it was a brief segment. The prior stuff with KPD was great radio, so I'll stick in and find out what the next topic is...
Fuck, more Farve/McNabb/sacred cow talk. Wonder what The Big Show is up to? Fuck, static - I live in NH. OK, WGAM for the rest of the commute.
Hey Felger! You should have your job threatened. STOP BEATING THIS DEAD HORSE. We get it. Move on.
This show is at its best when basketball and hockey are at the forefront. F&M really started to gain ground on The Big Show when the Celtics and Bruins were making their respective runs last season. Sure, Felger hates the NBA like poison, but he's more than capable of having entertaining discussions about it when he wishes. He has even softened his stance on the Celtics because this team was a little bit of an underdog and out to prove something. And we know that the B's are his team.
As for Mazz, I defintely feel his best moments are when he's talking about hockey/basketball. Even though he doesn't know squat about the Bruins, and hockey in general, you could tell that he was at least passionate in trying to embrace the B's last spring. Seems like some of that has carried over into this Bruins season as well.
My brain starts to hurt whenever they go into Pats/Sox stuff. Their narratives are so entrenched that there's almost no point in listening to what they have to say on any subject related to those two teams.
As for Mazz, I defintely feel his best moments are when he's talking about hockey/basketball. Even though he doesn't know squat about the Bruins, and hockey in general, you could tell that he was at least passionate in trying to embrace the B's last spring. Seems like some of that has carried over into this Bruins season as well.
My brain starts to hurt whenever they go into Pats/Sox stuff. Their narratives are so entrenched that there's almost no point in listening to what they have to say on any subject related to those two teams.
If they were competent about hockey (including Felger), I might agree with you. The problem is that they're not. Felger is either dumb as dirt when it comes to hockey or wants to project the image of being dumb as dirt about hockey. I'm not saying that I'm some kind of guru either, but I don't go out of my way to not learn things about the sport. ZDENO CHARA HAS NEVER WON A GAME 7 ZDENO CHARA HAS NEVER WON A GAME 7 ZDENO CHARA HAS NEVER WON A GAME 7 ZDENO CHARA HAS NEVER WON A GAME 7 ad fucking nauseam? That passes for hockey knowledge? C'mon. It's great that he loves the team...I guess...but he can't talk cogently or coherently about it. Or if he can, he'd rather just herp and derp. The narrative is entrenched there too, and is about as moronic.
Overall I think I'm more disappointed with Mazz than with Felger. Mazz has shown the ability to talk and think about sports at a fairly respectable level as a columnist, but he's a doormat on radio.
Overall I think I'm more disappointed with Mazz than with Felger. Mazz has shown the ability to talk and think about sports at a fairly respectable level as a columnist, but he's a doormat on radio.
Felgie just made an interesting point that I'm inclined to agree with --
BB uses the Steelers' strength against them. "We do what we do!" Which means they are predictable because they will not vary from it.
Colts -- polar opposite b/c Manning improvises at the line. Not too proud to change, to take what D gives him.
Colts, therefore, will be a tougher test (even with people like us in uniform b/c of the injury problems).
It's interesting that BB totally befuddled the Colts for a long while ... it's has now been flipped for a long time.
BB uses the Steelers' strength against them. "We do what we do!" Which means they are predictable because they will not vary from it.
Colts -- polar opposite b/c Manning improvises at the line. Not too proud to change, to take what D gives him.
Colts, therefore, will be a tougher test (even with people like us in uniform b/c of the injury problems).
It's interesting that BB totally befuddled the Colts for a long while ... it's has now been flipped for a long time.
Well Manning started having success once the Pats defensive horses got old or retired or left the team.
That, and the NFL changing its rules to crack down on defensive backs manhandling receivers and forcing them off their routes. That allowed the Colts' timing-based passing to actually work against the Patriot defense like it did against everyone else.
Good point by Felgs.
As to the Colts having the upper hand lately point, kind of helps that they were the ones who got the league to TOTALLY change the rules of how you defend a WR by complaining so much and thereby giving them an advantage due to their personnel. Not that that's cheating or anything!
The last four games (the 2007, 2008 and 2009 regular season games and the 2006 playoff game) have also all been at Indy.
EDIT: I would also describe the Colts as the ultimate "we'll do what we do, screw you" team in the league. Caldwell is mixing it up more on defense but (except when they have massive injury problems) they run the same no huddle passing offense with the same personnel, a passing heavy attack, and a limited number of formations and they don't sub much on defense either. Now Manning passes to the open guy but they run the same stuff out of the same formation every week on both sides fo the ball.
One other point: The Pats won fairly convincingly in 2007, I seem to recall. In 2006, 2008, and 2009, the Pats were in position to win all 3 games, and probably should have won at least 1 or 2 of them. Mental mistakes at the end of the game (Matt Light's false start in 2006, the dumb unnecessary roughness penalty in 2008, and the refs screwing up the spot of the ball in that 4th and 2) helped contribute to the team's losses each time. The only exception was the 2006 regular season game in Foxboro, in which the Patriots truly got their helmets handed to them. IMO, too much will be made of the trendlines; really the 2006 games really have no bearing on the upcoming contest, Felger's bleatings to the contrary.
Not Felger and Mazz related, by instead need to poke at Mazz's column in boston.com.
http://www.boston.com/sports/columnists/massarotti/2010/11/free_agency_anything_but_free.html
He's complaining about the Sox not doing enough to keep Victor Martinez, and how their commitment to "payroll flexibility" costs them. But, then he throws this out there:
"Meanwhile, in addition to the $82.5 million they gave Lackey, the Red Sox gave $40 million to Julio Lugo, $70 million to J.D. Drew and, essentially, $103 million to Daisuke Matsuzaka. For whatever reason, the Red Sox seem to operate with a grass-is-greener mentality when it comes to their own free agents vs. someone else’s, a curious reality given the obviously high level of intellect of Red Sox officials. These are smart people we’re talking about. So why do they jerk around Bay and Martinez, but give Lugo exactly what he wants?"
So, let's take this one-by-one:
a.) Obviously, the jury is still out on the $82.5M they gave to Lackey. But, if you're going to use 2010 as the baseline for judging Lackey's deal, then you should do the same and give the Sox plaudits for letting Jason Bay walk.
b.) Theo admitted the $40M they gave to Lugo was a mistake. But since Mazz is pointing out what he considers mistakes, he gets credit here.
c.) Despite the fact that it has been shown time and time again that JD Drew earns his yearly salary by his ability to simply not make outs and destroy rallies, the local yokels still have him as their favorite whipping boy. Really, Mazz, that ship sailed long time ago.
d.) They didn't "essentially give $103M" to Dice-K. Half that went to Dice-K's former team; Matsuzaka never saw a dime of it. Poor grammar, not excusable for a columnist.
So, Mazz, because they gave $40M to Lugo, they should just give Martinez exactly what he wants? Is that what you're saying?
http://www.boston.com/sports/columnists/massarotti/2010/11/free_agency_anything_but_free.html
He's complaining about the Sox not doing enough to keep Victor Martinez, and how their commitment to "payroll flexibility" costs them. But, then he throws this out there:
"Meanwhile, in addition to the $82.5 million they gave Lackey, the Red Sox gave $40 million to Julio Lugo, $70 million to J.D. Drew and, essentially, $103 million to Daisuke Matsuzaka. For whatever reason, the Red Sox seem to operate with a grass-is-greener mentality when it comes to their own free agents vs. someone else’s, a curious reality given the obviously high level of intellect of Red Sox officials. These are smart people we’re talking about. So why do they jerk around Bay and Martinez, but give Lugo exactly what he wants?"
So, let's take this one-by-one:
a.) Obviously, the jury is still out on the $82.5M they gave to Lackey. But, if you're going to use 2010 as the baseline for judging Lackey's deal, then you should do the same and give the Sox plaudits for letting Jason Bay walk.
b.) Theo admitted the $40M they gave to Lugo was a mistake. But since Mazz is pointing out what he considers mistakes, he gets credit here.
c.) Despite the fact that it has been shown time and time again that JD Drew earns his yearly salary by his ability to simply not make outs and destroy rallies, the local yokels still have him as their favorite whipping boy. Really, Mazz, that ship sailed long time ago.
d.) They didn't "essentially give $103M" to Dice-K. Half that went to Dice-K's former team; Matsuzaka never saw a dime of it. Poor grammar, not excusable for a columnist.
So, Mazz, because they gave $40M to Lugo, they should just give Martinez exactly what he wants? Is that what you're saying?
Just after 4 someone called up and told Felger to let the Moss thing die and to move on. Everyone else has, why can't he. He did admit after today he'd try to let it go. I hope to god it's true. I love the show but I can't take them beating on the same 3 points every day for months. Moss has been gone for weeks, let it die.
Circa 4:35, Felger brought up Moss again. He said something to Mazz like, "Can I talk about Moss now?"
Mazz replied, "Would it matter if I said, 'No.'"