I gave up and haven't listened to Felger and Mazz for several months now.
Yet I check this thread every day.
Yet I check this thread every day.
Felger and Mazz - Creating False Naratives one day at a time
- Thread starter HomeBrew1901
- Start date
soxfan121 said:
This doesn't jibe with Rocco's oft-stated claim that WEEI was full of Ordway giving the local franchises back massages (except for hockey, which they treated with disdain).
It's not the negativity that killed WEEI. It was the overweening arrogance of everyone in the place. They had no competition, but they thought their high ratings were due to their quality and not because they had a monopoly on local sports radio talk.
Felger and Mazz are veering toward that same path, IMO.
Ditto (well maybe not checking this thread EVERY day but a lot anyways). I come in hoping that there might be something compelling to bring me back to the show, because when the show was at its best it was engaging and entertaining. For all the reasons given in many of the posts above (the false negativaty, the HOT SPORTS TAKES!!!, etc) I haven't felt drawn to go back because it is nothing I haven't already heard.FelixMantilla said:
Mystic Merlin said:
Fair enough - I apologize for adding hyperbole to your argument.
FWIW, I listen because I like sports talk even when it's not "good" sports talk. I enjoy the pace, the predictable rhythm and the topic. I'm not a big music fan and most political or news radio is depressing in a real way. When WEEI was the only station in town, I listened to them. When TSH came along, I largely switched to TSH but I'll flip back and forth. I get most of my sports perspective here - not exactly a shining beacon of positivity, I might add.
But I think your average F&M listener enjoys sports, wants to disconnect from the "real world" and enjoys that they aren't "shills" for the team. If people wanted unbridled enthusiasm for the local teams, Rob Bradford would be hosting the highest rated show in town. Have you listened to him? Far less entertaining than Felger, even if he knows way more.
Gotta cut this short...baby time.
Kenny F'ing Powers said:
OK it's kind of awesome hearing this in my head in Kenny Powers voice.
Kenny F'ing Powers said:
I would take this as "riling the masses" If he wasn't a fan himself. To me this all came across as legitimate angst, which is why it was great to have Beetle as the voice of reason talking like the game was a fluke.
It is obvious from all of this that the show isn't everyone's cup of tea. It would be fascinating to see how it would change, if at all, with legitimate competition in the time slot. But as we all seem to agree, until that happens, change ain't happening.
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
First, I'm not Rocco or making his arguments.
Second, I tend to agree, except I've also read this thread and it is overwhelmingly negative about the negativity. Yet, ratings are solid, indicating that this thread and its negativity are a dissatisfied niche (as this place is, in general - see, any comments ever about The Remy Report and its denizens).
Third, that's like your opinion, man. I just keep saying your opinion isn't a representative sample and it has no statistical basis. It's your personal taste. Until ratings suffer, you're Chicken Little on page 3 of that book.
soxfan121 said:
Funny you should bring that show up, because I loved that show. That was my perfect idea of what sports radio could be. Informed, not fanboyish, negative when warranted, but with none of the controversy for controversy's sake. When someone said something stupid and outlandish, they were told as much. When someone had a reasonable point, it was absorbed into the conversation. I don't know if it was the signal (I was living in San Diego and listening online at the time) or if it was just too plain for most, but that show was great in my eyes. Plus I got to tell off Borges once on the air, which will always give it a special place in my heart.
I think that's why I like T&R so much. They may know 10% of what F&M know, but they're honest and reasonable for the most part. It's more like a discussion I'd want to be involved in. If I were at a bar and a guy started talking about how BB doesn't sign free agents because he's cheap and arrogant, I'd stop talking to that guy.
Hendu for Kutch said:
I think what's happened is that the people who enjoy shows/content like "Raise the Bar" just don't listen to "radio" in sufficient numbers any more. So radio appeals to the mine run of people who listen to radio, for whom "honesty and reasonableness" is less shitty than only a penis-ectomy. IMO the typical radio listener thinks that radio people who are "honest and reasonable" are pussies who should have their honest and reasonable asses kicked. "Taking a stand" is far more important than being within 5000 miles of "accurate" or insightful. That's not to say that everyone who listens to radio is some sort of knuckle-dragger; but I think its the plurality now. Just like everyone who watches PBS isn't wearing a bowtie while guzzling GreyPoupon, but that's who they have in mind when they program.
Rocco Graziosa said:
I guess I don't understand. So you're entertained by these two guys ripping on things you don't care about? Obviously to each his own, but if there are things I don't care about I generally don't listen to shows about them. I don't give a damn about corn farming subsidies, so I don't tune into NPR to listen to a show telling me how awful they are, for example.
Shitting on people who don't deserve it isn't entertaining, it's creepy. Sports personalities aren't tv characters, they're real people.
Felger is crazy emotional about the Bruins, and I for one find it fascinating that the logic and rational he tries to use on the other three teams and leagues in general go right out the window when he's talking hockey. Best example I can think of from last spring: He was all over the Bruins for losing Game 4 against the Rangers last year in round two of the playoffs and failing to sweep the series. Tuukka's terrible goal/skate in a rut in that game aside, I heard his take on that game not as criticism of the team but as one fan's nervous fretting - is this Philly 2010 all over again, can this team close a series, do I trust Clode. If he had a "green teamer" derisive nickname equivalent for Bruins fans, and one of them called and made the same points Felger was making, he would have said "It's sports, let's see Game 5, they slew those demons two years ago, etc." But since he loves the Bruins like his footy-pajamas callers love the Patriots, he was slipping into the same patterns that they do.
I'm not really a hockey fan, but I remember that also last spring when Felger was flipping out after the game 4 loss and was like "Welp, here we go, see you all on Wednesday for game 7!!" (or whatever day game 7 was scheduled for). It reminded of how everyone used to feel about the Red Sox, and frankly I miss it. There was so much passion for the team, that we were always fretting about what would happen. I understand there has been no reason for such levels of angst over the past 10 years, but I still miss the passion.
And now, the old school fans that still think that way are being chastised and labeled as too "negative" and even "pink hats" in some cases. It's like bizarro world.
I'm not really a hockey fan, but I remember that also last spring when Felger was flipping out after the game 4 loss and was like "Welp, here we go, see you all on Wednesday for game 7!!" (or whatever day game 7 was scheduled for). It reminded of how everyone used to feel about the Red Sox, and frankly I miss it. There was so much passion for the team, that we were always fretting about what would happen. I understand there has been no reason for such levels of angst over the past 10 years, but I still miss the passion.
And now, the old school fans that still think that way are being chastised and labeled as too "negative" and even "pink hats" in some cases. It's like bizarro world.
You think that because we no longer assume that the sky is falling at the first sign of adversity, that we've lost our passion as fans? That we have to overreact like jilted prom dates whenever something goes wrong?
I don't understand that at all. Felger's reaction after Game 4 wasn't evidence of passion, it was evidence of Felger acting like a shrieking washerwoman.
I don't understand that at all. Felger's reaction after Game 4 wasn't evidence of passion, it was evidence of Felger acting like a shrieking washerwoman.
You think that because we no longer assume that the sky is falling at the first sign of adversity, that we've lost our passion as fans? That we have to overreact like jilted prom dates whenever something goes wrong?
I don't understand that at all. Felger's reaction after Game 4 wasn't evidence of passion, it was evidence of Felger acting like a shrieking washerwoman.
I do understand the shrieking can be a bit much, and the bridge jumping mentality should be a thing of the past considering the overall level of success over the past decade.
Now don't get me wrong, Mazz annoys the crap out of me in general, but what I don't understand is the level of contempt when he expresses even a little concern or doubt regarding the Red Sox. It's like the fan base has completely reversed itself. Sometimes I think I'm listening to Dodgers fans or something.
I don't understand that at all. Felger's reaction after Game 4 wasn't evidence of passion, it was evidence of Felger acting like a shrieking washerwoman.
I do understand the shrieking can be a bit much, and the bridge jumping mentality should be a thing of the past considering the overall level of success over the past decade.
Now don't get me wrong, Mazz annoys the crap out of me in general, but what I don't understand is the level of contempt when he expresses even a little concern or doubt regarding the Red Sox. It's like the fan base has completely reversed itself. Sometimes I think I'm listening to Dodgers fans or something.
swyman18 said:
Define "a little doubt." My understanding is that he as late as the last week in August was still saying that he didn't know this Red Sox team, didn't trust them, and thought the Rays were better. That's not "a little concern or doubt" and that has been his entire thesis this season (until September when he did not admit he was wrong, but instead, move the goalposts saying the Sox need to win the World Series because they're the best). Every point he has made about them through August was an attempt to prove his thesis.
Today, Mazz was discussing his concerns about facing the Rays pitching. That was followed by at least a couple of irate callers blasting Mazz for not being more positive about the upcoming series.
So, apparently John Henry said on WEEI today that he admitted he would rather the Sox have faced Cleveland. He also discussed his concerns about facing the Rays because of their pitching.
Oh my God, John, why do you have to be so negative!!
So, apparently John Henry said on WEEI today that he admitted he would rather the Sox have faced Cleveland. He also discussed his concerns about facing the Rays because of their pitching.
Oh my God, John, why do you have to be so negative!!
Discussions of fearing the next opponent doesn't bother me... it's more stuff like on Monday after the Falcons' win, they have their panties in a bunch about the possibility of Talib going elsewhere as a free agent at the end of the season...
Or a couple of weeks ago where they devoted 10-15 minutes about how the Sox would succumb to the law of averages and suck in 2014. Never mind they were on the verge of clinching the division and a potentially thrilling postseason was on the horizon.
They never pass up a chance to piss on a parade.
Or a couple of weeks ago where they devoted 10-15 minutes about how the Sox would succumb to the law of averages and suck in 2014. Never mind they were on the verge of clinching the division and a potentially thrilling postseason was on the horizon.
They never pass up a chance to piss on a parade.
swyman18 said:
There's nothing wrong with a pointing out the strength of the Rays pitching. But you dont say, "wow, what a great adult" when a guy manages to actually piss IN the toilet once a month. Sounds like Tony hit the bowl yesterday. Give him a cookie.
Just wait til after Game 1. WIN OR LOSE, Misserotti will be exactly the same. "They lost 2-1.....they can't hit these guys....look out...." "They won 2-1...so what....they barely beat these guys....they can't really hit them...if Lackey fails in Game 2, then look out." It WONT mention Lester stifling TB.
I have no problem with this but you didn't address my point above.
Oh believe me, I do understand the general frustration with Mazz. I guess I just get uneasy when it seams a once rabid fan base is gradually turning into a shiny, happy, pom-pom waving fan base. But I guess that isn't necessarily a Felger and Mazz problem, so perhaps a topic for a different day.
Oh believe me, I do understand the general frustration with Mazz. I guess I just get uneasy when it seams a once rabid fan base is gradually turning into a shiny, happy, pom-pom waving fan base. But I guess that isn't necessarily a Felger and Mazz problem, so perhaps a topic for a different day.
swyman18 said:
Why does rabid have to equate to being overly pessimistic or automatically cynical? Why can't a rabid fan base also be a shiny happy one, especially when things are actually going well?
It's one thing to react negatively to something negative that actually happened. It's something entirely different to react negatively to a strawman argument about what might happen, especially if what might happen isn't going to happen one way or the other for weeks/months.
Do you know why the rabid fanbase is turning into a shiny, pom-pom waving fanbase?
BECAUSE THE LOCAL TEAMS, OVER THE LAST DECADE, HAVE EXPERIENCED UNPRECEDENTED SUCCESS NEVER BEFORE SEEN IN THESE HERE PARTS.
My God, it's not that difficult to understand. When the Pats go from perennial punch-lines to the archetypal model of NFL success, when the Sox go from heart-breaking curse-ridden Sisyphean losers to 2 time champs, when the Bruins (the Bruins!) turn their entire franchise around and win a Cup and become another model of success, and when the Celts remind us of the glory days by making bold trade and winning a title and nearly another with a core of superstar players....well fuck me, what's there to be negative about?
Why does rabid fandom have to equal negativity? Were fans really happier when our teams sucked or routinely lost in nut-crushing fashion?
swyman, that's one helluva cynical outlook you've got over there, if I may say so. These are the good old days. I look forward to boring the shit out of my grandkids in 40 years telling them about them. Searching for things to be negative/fearful about ("What are they gonna do about Talib, Mike?" "I'm really worried about Tampa's pitching, Mike!" "When are my balls finally gonna drop, Mike?") is the very definition of seeking out misery for its own sake.
BECAUSE THE LOCAL TEAMS, OVER THE LAST DECADE, HAVE EXPERIENCED UNPRECEDENTED SUCCESS NEVER BEFORE SEEN IN THESE HERE PARTS.
My God, it's not that difficult to understand. When the Pats go from perennial punch-lines to the archetypal model of NFL success, when the Sox go from heart-breaking curse-ridden Sisyphean losers to 2 time champs, when the Bruins (the Bruins!) turn their entire franchise around and win a Cup and become another model of success, and when the Celts remind us of the glory days by making bold trade and winning a title and nearly another with a core of superstar players....well fuck me, what's there to be negative about?
Why does rabid fandom have to equal negativity? Were fans really happier when our teams sucked or routinely lost in nut-crushing fashion?
swyman, that's one helluva cynical outlook you've got over there, if I may say so. These are the good old days. I look forward to boring the shit out of my grandkids in 40 years telling them about them. Searching for things to be negative/fearful about ("What are they gonna do about Talib, Mike?" "I'm really worried about Tampa's pitching, Mike!" "When are my balls finally gonna drop, Mike?") is the very definition of seeking out misery for its own sake.
There's a simple reason fans wallow in the negative and always expect the worst...they're trying to soften the blow if the worst does happen. They're dead scared of being disappointed. So scared that they attempt to lower expectations to the point that when the worst happens, their reaction isn't disappointment, it's joy at being able to say "I told you so".
Why did 1978 and 1986 and 2003 hurt so much? Because we allowed ourselves to think "this is it, we're going to win", even if it wasn't until Schiraldi had 2 strikes on Ray Knight, and then our hopes were dashed. It was understandable to just assume the worst after experiencing that. But 2004 and then 2007 should have at least balanced the scales a bit in that equation. There we had tangible evidence that the worst doesn't always happen and it's okay to believe that something good can happen. The sad thing isn't that a big chunk of the fanbase realized that. The sad thing is that there's a piece of the fanbase desperately clinging to the "sky is always falling" mentality like it's some badge of honor or something. They still like to be able to say "I told you so" when it all goes wrong.
Why did 1978 and 1986 and 2003 hurt so much? Because we allowed ourselves to think "this is it, we're going to win", even if it wasn't until Schiraldi had 2 strikes on Ray Knight, and then our hopes were dashed. It was understandable to just assume the worst after experiencing that. But 2004 and then 2007 should have at least balanced the scales a bit in that equation. There we had tangible evidence that the worst doesn't always happen and it's okay to believe that something good can happen. The sad thing isn't that a big chunk of the fanbase realized that. The sad thing is that there's a piece of the fanbase desperately clinging to the "sky is always falling" mentality like it's some badge of honor or something. They still like to be able to say "I told you so" when it all goes wrong.
I think there's part of the fan base that is pretty nostalgic for the pre-2002 days. It's not that they want Boston teams to lose, but they really have a hard time finding their way in this new winning environment. They've lost part of their identity and as a result, they search desperately for every potential fatal flaw in their favorite teams and players.
"1986 was godawful painful but it was also part of who I am today and to cut that out would be like cutting of my own arm. I'll never let go."
"1986 was godawful painful but it was also part of who I am today and to cut that out would be like cutting of my own arm. I'll never let go."
riboflav said:
Those people are morons. Complete and total morons.
"YAY! I love to lose! It defines me!"
I think there's part of the fan base that is pretty nostalgic for the pre-2002 days. It's not that they want Boston teams to lose, but they really have a hard time finding their way in this new winning environment. They've lost part of their identity and as a result, they search desperately for every potential fatal flaw in their favorite teams and players.
"1986 was godawful painful but it was also part of who I am today and to cut that out would be like cutting of my own arm. I'll never let go."
I'd say that sounds about right. But don't call me a "pink hat" because I feel that way. (Not saying anyone here did.)
And you're right, it doesn't mean I love to lose.
"1986 was godawful painful but it was also part of who I am today and to cut that out would be like cutting of my own arm. I'll never let go."
I'd say that sounds about right. But don't call me a "pink hat" because I feel that way. (Not saying anyone here did.)
And you're right, it doesn't mean I love to lose.
Let's look at this logically:
The point of sporting event is winning.
When part of your identity is losing, that goes against the point of sports.
Therefore, at no particular point in your fan experience should losing be "a part of who you are". Otherwise, you're a loser.
Because I don't know about you, but if the Sox won in 1948, 1975, 1978, 1986 and 2003 that would be pretty awesome. Because it sucks to lose. And trust me, I'm not Johnny Rah-Rah, but ask a person from Cleveland if their "pain makes them stronger" or a Cubs fan if they enjoy being called "America's lovable losers" or whether Pittburghers enjoyed 21 years of futility. Because I can guarantee you that every single one of them will say no.
There is no poetry or solace in losing. Ever.
John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
This is true. But there are people out there who think that losing, followed by navel gazing self obsession, is both clever and reflective of the natural order of things. And that all of this, especially when garnished with a degree from an Ivy or small-Ivy, will get you a bj.
This is the crap that has been peddled here for four decades. And unfortunately, the stable of HOF writers for the Globe back in the day were a -- not the, but a -- wellspring of that crap.
Poetry my ass.
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
It was easier to do sports talk, that's for sure.
Rabid fans don't take losing very well. Even in the best of times, rabid fans can find things to be negative about. And talk radio features both the loudest common denominator and not the sharpest collection of knives calling in. "They suck" is a better fit for the format than "They aren't very effective on the road, at night, against LHP."
Is this really happening? They're not-so-subtly casting steroid allegations on Ellsbury? Today?
They're just harping on how 1 year he had 30 HR, it was out of character, relating him to Brady Anderson, talking about some kind of "assistance" that year, etc. etc. etc.thehitcat said:
I guess the obvious question would be "why did he stop?", since it was post-testing and he never got dinged. I'm gonna guess that little nugget of common sense counterargument hasn't been brought up though.
Yup, it has been a common theme all year long with them, and I have to say, I generally don't have a problem with that discussion. But bringing it up today is just more proof that they do not know how to have a show that just allows fans to enjoy a big win.
Yep. Especially if a player has any kind of positive accomplishment. No one does anything of note in Felger's world without "ahem!" assistance.soxfan121 said:
I only listened to them for a little over an hour, but I thought that they were pretty good today. They gave the Sox a lot of props and didn't really go down the contrarian side of the street too much.
I enjoyed them.
I enjoyed them.
John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
Yup, the five o'clock hour was unmitigated praise of the Red Sox, Farrell and the players. Their Ellsbury commentary (in that hour) was restrained to comparing him to Hunter Pence & his recently signed contract and speculation that if the per year value is higher than Pence's then Ellsbury will be allowed to walk away.
During a commercial, I flipped over to Salk & Holley who were arguing with a caller who thinks David Ortiz is lazy and then five minutes of them both dismissing that...instead of laughing at the caller and moving right along. Second flip over was their interview with Farrell (which was pretty good) and then recapping the replay of the interview. Their analysis was not compelling radio - it wasn't ballwashing, but it wasn't interesting either.