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

[NDame616]

Last week on his Saturday AM show Murray went off on a rant about how bad Joey Votto and he would be so pissed if the Sox got him "in response " to Stanton.

Brushing aside his NTC and continued desire to stay in Cinn, I wanted to call up and tell Murray how good of a hitter Votto is and where he's landed in the MVP race the past few years. I dont think he knows how good of a hitter Votto is

 

[hube]

Murray's vocal timbre makes his awful takes even worse. The only reason I can think of for him being in that chair is that someone at the Hub thinks he can pull listeners over from WEEI given his overlap with the crap focus of their morning and midday shows.

Being a homer is one thing (Zo). Being a provincial doofus who hates the local teams just for the sake of a myopic point of view is entirely another. He's the worst personality on the station, in spades.

Meanwhile, Keefe and Holley seem to have great chemistry and good discussion. Dale is awful, and should be put out to pasture. His takes on politics and race lately are embarrassing. I have to think Keefe would have been a good foil in that spot and encourage real discussion rather than the Adam Jones-lite takes of Murray.

I spend too much time in the car in the late afternoon these days.

 

[Mystic Merlin]

Murray indeed sucks.

Did anyond catch Bedard's segment this week? He seemed to suggest (in his 'I've heard that...' style) that Tom Brady refused to allow Alex Guerrero to work with Jimmy Garappolo, but didn't elaborate. Felger and Mazz then proceeded to attack Brady as 'petty', as if it was true. I get the sense they're dying for the Guerrero subplot to present a schism between BB/Brady, or frankly present any kind of controversy, but it was pretty forced even for them.

 

[Kramerica Industries]

I don't read Bedard enough but is he the throw stuff against the wall kind of guy?

 

[Quiddity]

I don't have CSSNE anymore (cord cutter), but Felger must be in all his glory tonight, he's constantly deriding the Steelers and hates it when players reach out to the endzone before controlling the ball and that's exactly what cost the Steelers the game.

 

[Byrdbrain]

He hasn't stressed the reaching the ball out angle too much(one of the few Felger takes I agree with) but he does seem to be enjoying the Steelers screwing this one up.

 

[shawnrbu]

Mazz, Murray and Hook are absolutely furious that the Sox re-signed Moreland. Murray wanted Hosmer so bad. Says the offseason has been nothing short of an embarrassment.

 

[Harry Hooper]

Check the Bertrand and Zo thread for a possibly interesting item. A caller last week said that a Sox player who was tight with Hosmer told her that Hosmer had zero interest in playing in Boston

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

I'm not too excited that the Red Sox signed Mitch Moreland for two more years either, TBH.

And I know it's the first 50 days of the offseason, but it hasn't exactly been going the Sox' way.

 

[NickEsasky]

I'm not too excited that the Red Sox signed Mitch Moreland for two more years either, TBH.

And I know it's the first 50 days of the offseason, but it hasn't exactly been going the Sox' way.

This is all true, but Murray shows his ignorance with Hosmer who is just a much more expensive Moreland.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

This is all true, but Murray shows his ignorance with Hosmer who is just a much more expensive Moreland.

I totally get that. Murray is a fucking moron, but even morons get things correct some times. Just don't ask him to show his work and how he got to that rationale.

 

[chonce1]

I don't read Bedard enough but is he the throw stuff against the wall kind of guy?

Bedard was like "well I wouldn't say that," when they tried to link the Gurrero thing to Jimmy G. But he sort of went with their tin-foil hat stuff, or at least didn't resiist it strongly.

I agree with their critique of Guerrero. I also share their affinity for Jimmy G (who I wanted to keep). But their efforts to tie the two things without evidence is really lame. Should be some standard on baseless speculation inn sports radio. But not surprised. This is how it works.

 

[chonce1]

I'm not too excited that the Red Sox signed Mitch Moreland for two more years either, TBH.

And I know it's the first 50 days of the offseason, but it hasn't exactly been going the Sox' way.

Yes off-season has been really lame. But I do get a little confused at Felger/Mazz who hate they spend on aging free agents, but also hate if they don't spend money. If they sign JD they will get killed. if they don't (I hope they don't) they will be mocked for not making a splash in the off-season.

They aren't wrong. But they also created a narrative where they can't be wrong. Whatever the sox do -- save for go back in time and get Stanton -- is the wrong move. At least any move that seems plausible now. And I get wanting Stanton. But it is unclear, at best, that Stanton would come here. So they may be killing the team for something they had no real control over. They talk as if, if they really wanted, they could get Stanton, but that is uncertain.

Anyway, I don't know what the Sox should do. I would probably punt on JD and seek a bat via trade or just wait until next off-season. The Sox front office/ownership is for sure worthy of serious criticism. I do think our beloved hosts are having their cake and eating it too, however.

 

[RedOctober3829]

Mazz wants to give up Xander Bogaerts and Jay Groome for 1 year of Manny Machado. Incredible.

 

[Harry Hooper]

Yes off-season has been really lame. But I do get a little confused at Felger/Mazz who hate they spend on aging free agents, but also hate if they don't spend money. If they sign JD they will get killed. if they don't (I hope they don't) they will be mocked for not making a splash in the off-season.

They aren't wrong. But they also created a narrative where they can't be wrong. Whatever the sox do -- save for go back in time and get Stanton -- is the wrong move. At least any move that seems plausible now. And I get wanting Stanton. But it is unclear, at best, that Stanton would come here. So they may be killing the team for something they had no real control over. They talk as if, if they really wanted, they could get Stanton, but that is uncertain.

Anyway, I don't know what the Sox should do. I would probably punt on JD and seek a bat via trade or just wait until next off-season. The Sox front office/ownership is for sure worthy of serious criticism. I do think our beloved hosts are having their cake and eating it too, however.

A caller last week brought up the Sox "failure" to get Josh Hamilton and how that worked out. They did NOT want to discuss that.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

Mazz wants to give up Xander Bogaerts and Jay Groome for 1 year of Manny Machado. Incredible.

That's the second stupidest trade proposal that I've read this week (unsurprisingly Cafardo is ready to dump the entire farm for him). What is it about baseball writers and their ridiculously dumb ideas of what constitutes fair value?

 

[Isildur1]

Machado is a good player, but I bet Felger, Mazz, Cafardo, etc., don’t even realize he had a down year last year. His career OBP is also only .329.

He does a lot of things well — and has had some very good seasons — but they act like he’s Mike Trout.

 

[timlinin8th]

Machado is a good player, but I bet Felger, Mazz, Cafardo, etc., don’t even realize he had a down year last year. His career OBP is also only .329.

He does a lot of things well — and has had some very good seasons — but they act like he’s Mike Trout.

That kind of logic doesn’t matter to F+M though, because lets say the Sox make the exact trade Mazz proposes, then he comes here, throws up a similar season to last, and then walks. Is there any doubt that the narrative would be the tiniest of mea culpas followed by hot take city?

“Look, I wanted to get the player... but this guy was a dog, Mike! Maybe when he was saying he had no respect for this team then they should have listened! They gave up a bit for him and then he comes in here and plays like a dog.”

Like a poster said above, they move the goalposts so that they can never be wrong.

 

[lexrageorge]

Bedard was like "well I wouldn't say that," when they tried to link the Gurrero thing to Jimmy G. But he sort of went with their tin-foil hat stuff, or at least didn't resiist it strongly.

I agree with their critique of Guerrero. I also share their affinity for Jimmy G (who I wanted to keep). But their efforts to tie the two things without evidence is really lame. Should be some standard on baseless speculation inn sports radio. But not surprised. This is how it works.

Their attempt to tie the JG trade to the AG situation was really, really lame. It wasn't just them either; Zolak was jumping up and down on the same bandwagon earlier that day. But the idea that they would have had to trade Garappolo just because Guerrero lost his office in the stadium is absolutely absurd.

 

[RedOctober3829]

The Jimmy G situation came down to money. Once Brady forced their hand with his 40 year old MVP level play, they couldn't in good conscience sign Jimmy G to the franchise tag or a long-term, lucrative deal. They resisted making the decision as long as they could. So they got a 2nd round pick for potentially 1 year and 2 months of Jimmy.

The Guerrero situation had absolutely no bearing on Garoppolo no matter how much these clowns want to argue the point.

 

[Vinho Tinto]

they couldn't in good conscience sign Jimmy G to the franchise tag

I wouldn’t say that is a concrete truth. If, Big if, they thought he was a MVP caliber QB in the making; they could franchise him and delay the Brady divorce by a year. If he didn’t like being tagged, he can pound sand. Wouldn’t be the first player who didn’t like being tagged. If he’s the next backup who becomes a nobody starter the trade will be fine. But getting a 2nd for a young QB who becomes a star will only be rationalized by super fans.

 

[RedOctober3829]

I wouldn’t say that is a concrete truth. If, Big if, they thought he was a MVP caliber QB in the making; they could franchise him and delay the Brady divorce by a year. If he didn’t like being tagged, he can pound sand. Wouldn’t be the first player who didn’t like being tagged. If he’s the next backup who becomes a nobody starter the trade will be fine. But getting a 2nd for a young QB who becomes a star will only be rationalized by super fans.

Franchising Garoppolo would have cost the Patriots $22-$25 million in cap space next year depending on what the final tag number is. There's no way Belichick would tie up $50 million in the QB position by franchising JG and keeping TB.

 

[lexrageorge]

I wouldn’t say that is a concrete truth. If, Big if, they thought he was a MVP caliber QB in the making; they could franchise him and delay the Brady divorce by a year. If he didn’t like being tagged, he can pound sand. Wouldn’t be the first player who didn’t like being tagged. If he’s the next backup who becomes a nobody starter the trade will be fine. But getting a 2nd for a young QB who becomes a star will only be rationalized by super fans.

Anyone who thinks the Pats could have afforded the salary cap hit of having both Brady and JG on the roster in 2018 should at least take 5 minutes to google "Patriots salary cap 2018" and then take another 5 minutes to come up with a reasonable scenario on how it could happen.

 

[Vinho Tinto]

Anyone who thinks the Pats could have afforded the salary cap hit of having both Brady and JG on the roster in 2018 should at least take 5 minutes to google "Patriots salary cap 2018" and then take another 5 minutes to come up with a reasonable scenario on how it could happen.

You’re right. It looks like keeping both was untenable. Maybe the move was to not trade Jimmy, but to give Tom a handshake and best wishes in his future endeavors after this season.

 

[NDame616]

Also, while Brady is a team player, I'm not sure he would like his backup to be making $10M more a year than he is...

 

[Salem's Lot]

Franchising Garoppolo would have cost the Patriots $22-$25 million in cap space next year depending on what the final tag number is. There's no way Belichick would tie up $50 million in the QB position by franchising JG and keeping TB.

And more importantly, the actual cash that ownership would have to pay to keep a guy on the bench for a year. Who could then decide to walk as a UFA after the franchise year. Asking Kraft to eat that kind of money is too much. I'm sure Kraft would rather hedge his bet that Brady has 1-2 more years in him, and Bill can find the next Jimmy G in the 2018 draft.

 

[Ralphwiggum]

You’re right. It looks like keeping both was untenable. Maybe the move was to not trade Jimmy, but to give Tom a handshake and best wishes in his future endeavors after this season.

And the made-up story that F&M and others in sports radio have been speculating about is that Bill wanted to move on from Brady after this year and keep Jimmy and Kraft told him Brady stays until he doesn't want to play anymore. That would be a story worth discussing if true but there's no evidence that this happened.

 

[chonce1]

Also, while Brady is a team player, I'm not sure he would like his backup to be making $10M more a year than he is...

RIght, this is one of many reasons why this was done. It is a touch decision.

The callers are now repeating Cowherd's claim that BB is sabotaging the Pat's out of spite for Kraft because he made him choose Brady over Jimmy G.

I recall earlier this week someone said they were just engaging in too much mindless speculation. And Murray said:

"What do you want us to do, preview the Bills game all week?"


Yes, Jim, I would like for you to discuss the coming game, which is against a potential playoff team, on the road, and is an important game. That would be OK by me.

 

[chonce1]

And the made-up story that F&M and others in sports radio have been speculating about is that Bill wanted to move on from Brady after this year and keep Jimmy and Kraft told him Brady stays until he doesn't want to play anymore. That would be a story worth discussing if true but there's no evidence that this happened.

Right. And this isn't even the off-season. Have they spent an hour discussing the game all week?

 

[lexrageorge]

RIght, this is one of many reasons why this was done. It is a touch decision.

The callers are now repeating Cowherd's claim that BB is sabotaging the Pat's out of spite for Kraft because he made him choose Brady over Jimmy G.

I recall earlier this week someone said they were just engaging in too much mindless speculation. And Murray said:

"What do you want us to do, preview the Bills game all week?"


Yes, Jim, I would like for you to discuss the coming game, which is against a potential playoff team, on the road, and is an important game. That would be OK by me.

This meme has spread: Shank, John Bleepin' Dennis on WEEI (yes, they brought him back for some reason) were repeating the same mantra.

 

[HomeBrew1901]

I'm at the point where I give the show a few minutes tops before I turn it off rather than listen to manufactured controversy.

I do get Murray's (Actually Felger's) point that you can't spend 15 hours of the week talking Pats/Bills and breaking down a match up where the other team really had no chance against the Patriots but I can't listen to Guerrero speculation or people crying because Jimmy G is turning out to be the real deal.

This is a tough time of year for sports jockeys because New England is provincial and most people don't care about what the rest of the teams in the various leagues are doing so you're pretty much stuck making shit up until the playoffs.

 

[edmunddantes]

Man... I forgotten how bad Boston radio is. In town for the holidays. Turn on end of Felger and Mazz then catch the beginning of the Monday football show on Tuesday because of Christmas. And it’s bizarre. I’ve now lived in 3 other radio markets, and I can’t name a time I turned on the radio after a team’s win and the announcers spent the opening 5 minutes of the show bemoaning the teams win or being pissed about a call that went in their team’s favor. But here in Boston it’s what you hear.

It’s toxic.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

Man... I forgotten how bad Boston radio is. In town for the holidays. Turn on end of Felger and Mazz then catch the beginning of the Monday football show on Tuesday because of Christmas. And it’s bizarre. I’ve now lived in 3 other radio markets, and I can’t name a time I turned on the radio after a team’s win and the announcers spent the opening 5 minutes of the show bemoaning the teams win or being pissed about a call that went in their team’s favor. But here in Boston it’s what you hear.

It’s toxic.

The unintended consequence of a decade plus of dominance by Boston teams is that now teams have to win with style points. It's not enough that the Pats are 12-3 or that the Celtics run off 16 in a row or that the Bruins are playing well with a lot of young guys. And it's a sliding scale too. If they win by a couple of points, the home team is "lucky" because the opponent was missing Player X, had a long flight, hasn't gelled yet. If the home teams blows out the opponent it's because the other team "obviously stinks" or the league is "terrible" or they might be good now but they'd never beat the 2003 Pats (for example), so it doesn't matter.

God help the team if they somehow lose.

Boston Sports Radio is all about moving goalposts and gas lighting listeners. All the while making the person feel that they're some how not qualified to talk about sports because "they don't know what we know" (this information is NEVER shared, BTW).

It's a complete and total smokeshow.

 

[dcmissle]

Man... I forgotten how bad Boston radio is. In town for the holidays. Turn on end of Felger and Mazz then catch the beginning of the Monday football show on Tuesday because of Christmas. And it’s bizarre. I’ve now lived in 3 other radio markets, and I can’t name a time I turned on the radio after a team’s win and the announcers spent the opening 5 minutes of the show bemoaning the teams win or being pissed about a call that went in their team’s favor. But here in Boston it’s what you hear.

It’s toxic.

Yup.

Some history may explain this. In the bad old days, the Patriots were at times a joke and fell well short of their considerable talent when they weren’t a joke. The Red Sox lost in an infinite number of almost unimaginable ways —e.g., missing by a half game in a strike shortened season when Luis Aparicio trips and falls rounding third base.

Navel gazing was raised to an art form, and the stories wrote themselves. It was the same basic story, but often imaginatively adorned. Every media guy in Boston thought he was John fucking Updike.

As noted immediately above, this goes out the window when the teams break through and win. Then win again with mind numbing regularity.

Then the stories don’t write themselves, and these media types have to craft something original. Which is to say they have to work.

These people hate that, and it begets fake news and faux controversy.

Ordway used to say the job is easier in good times than bad. I have heard the same in the DC market. It’s a boldfaced lie.

 

[Mystic Merlin]

Bedard with another cutesy allusion to 'stories that will come out' in the offseason about 'what went down' with the Jimmy G trade. He suggested - and I use the term 'suggest' very loosely because he was circumspect as fuck - that someone was 'ordered' to trade Jimmy G. Presumably - and we're left to presume because he wouldn't elaborate - Kraft ordered BB to trade Jimmy G (?)

Good Christ can he be inscrutable on the radio at times. Is he referring to inside information he's obtained? Is he purely speculating based on some logical inferences he's independently made about the context of the trade? Some of both?

We wouldn't know because he won't tell us. I've listened to his segment - which I honestly enjoy - on Felger and Mazz for a few years now, but this kind of thing is off-putting. Spit it out, dude.

 

[dcmissle]

Bedard with another cutesy allusion to 'stories that will come out' in the offseason about 'what went down' with the Jimmy G trade. He suggested - and I use the term 'suggest' very loosely because he was circumspect as fuck - that someone was 'ordered' to trade Jimmy G. Presumably - and we're left to presume because he wouldn't elaborate - Kraft ordered BB to trade Jimmy G (?)

Good Christ can he be inscrutable on the radio at times. Is he referring to inside information he's obtained? Is he purely speculating based on some logical inferences he's independently made about the context of the trade? Some of both?

We wouldn't know because he won't tell us. I've listened to his segment - which I honestly enjoy - on Felger and Mazz for a few years now, but this kind of thing is off-putting. Spit it out, dude.

Good news for those of us absorbed by the Jimmy G and QB threads — this story WILL come out. It’s inevitable.

Further, an accurate account will eventually emerge. If there is fake news, we’ll smoke it out.

If I had to guess as to the honest broker, I’d put my money on Michael Holley. He’s more connected than anyone with the ultimate, unimpeachable source.

Mediots will ride this story like rented mules, and the better JG performs, the more it will be ridden. It’s spectacularly sexy to argue that Bob Kraft M-F’ed the franchise, and that B.B. will get his revenge by mailing in a SB (like Bill Parcells supposedly did). That crap is right up F and M’s alley — ironic because both predicted that Tom Brady would end badly in NE because Bob Kraft would fuck him. But consistency has never been their forte.

I suspect the sorry is bogus and Holley will eat them alive.

 

[Brohamer of the Gods]

And further they assert
That any show they'll interrupt
To bring you news if it comes up
They say that if the place blows up
They will be the first to tell,
Because the boys they got downtown
Are workin' hard and doin' swell,
And if anybody gets the news
Before it hits the street,
They say that no one blabs it faster
Their coverage can't be beat

 

[RedOctober3829]

Mazz: "I'm not so sure it will take high 20's-30 points to beat the Patriots."

Pats have scored 20 points or more in 15 of 16 games this season. Of those 15, they've topped 23 or more in 13 of them.

Awesome analysis, Mazz.

 

[Mystic Merlin]

They're abusing the Guerrero angle, even so far as Mazz suggesting at one point today that Kraft ordered BB to trade Jimmy G to pay Brady back for BB limiting Guerrero's access to the team.

 

[timlinin8th]

Mazz: "I'm not so sure it will take high 20's-30 points to beat the Patriots."

Pats have scored 20 points or more in 15 of 16 games this season. Of those 15, they've topped 23 or more in 13 of them.

Awesome analysis, Mazz.

Adding to the pile, the one time the Patriots did not top 20 was a short week Thurs night game on the road. Of the 8 home games this season, half were 30 points and over.

 

[HomeBrew1901]

Adding to the pile, the one time the Patriots did not top 20 was a short week Thurs night game on the road. Of the 8 home games this season, half were 30 points and over.

Kind of like the 2007 Patriots ... how did that season end again?

 

[chonce1]

Kind of like the 2007 Patriots ... how did that season end again?

It is also like some of the seasons in which they won the SB. Anyone can selectively pick a year that "worked out," (by that I assume you mean literally win the SB, because 2nd place is apparently a failure) and say "see."

Mazz's point is beyond stupid. The Patriots put up lots of points. Their offensive ranking is not hard to look up. their PPG is not hard to see. A team won't need to put up high 20 points? that is flatly not backed by evidence. (the 2007 SB is not evidence, it is one decade-old anecdote)

Of course it is possible. Anything is possible, but Mazz is an idiot, and this is a glaring example.

Also, I hope they talk more about the Titans (yes, they suck balls, or whatever, I know, but it is a game the Pats must play and need to win). I recall a caller said they kept talking about too much speculative drama and Felger said:

"What do you want us to talk about -- the games?!" He was talking about the Bills in week 16 and i screamed at the TV -- "Yes, talk about the game." that applies even more in the playoffs.

I do avoid Felger and Mazz when I can. Listen to podcasts and such. But I do like to have live shows on while I work from a home office and from 2-6 the only local sports show on television is F/M so I sometimes watch it (I say this because people often respond to critisism with "why do you watch?" Fair question, but there is my answer.)

 

[HomeBrew1901]

Chonce my point is that Mazz isn't always wrong and while many fan boys here can jump up and down and be pissed and say "LOOK AT ALL THE DOUBLE DIGIT WINZZZZ THEY'RE UNSTOPABBBBLE" it doesn't always work out.

I remember an interview Brady did in 2007 where Plaxico Burress (I think) guaranteed a Giants win with a score of 20-17 and Brady scoffed and said something along the lines of "They might win but give us more credit than 17 points". This season they have looked beatable and likely wouldn't be the 1st seed if not for a couple of TDs that were called back even with all the double digit wins.

As for the game this weekend, I heard the same caller that you did and agree with F&M there is absolutely nothing to talk about that's remotely interesting about this game Saturday night and they need to fill 20 hours of air time minus commercials. So while the made up drama is annoying... what do you really want them to talk about X's and O's wise?

 

[chonce1]

"what do you really want them to talk about X's and O's wise?"

Great question. Anything. Who is on Tenn's secondary? Are they good? Who will match up with who?

Maybe discuss our defense and the bizarre mix of them having among the worst defense according to analytics, but give up so few points. Do the Titans perform in the red zone? Who will spy, if anyone, mariota? Will they play to contain him, and not blitz.

I know it is not high level. I don't expect these guys to be incredibly deep. But its the playoffs. Let's pretend the games matter. And the opponent matters.

 

[HomeBrew1901]

"what do you really want them to talk about X's and O's wise?"

Great question. Anything. Who is on Tenn's secondary? Are they good? Who will match up with who?

Maybe discuss our defense and the bizarre mix of them having among the worst defense according to analytics, but give up so few points. Do the Titans perform in the red zone? Who will spy, if anyone, mariota? Will they play to contain him, and not blitz.

I know it is not high level. I don't expect these guys to be incredibly deep. But its the playoffs. Let's pretend the games matter. And the opponent matters.

I'll ask you what F&M asked the caller...

Have you watched the Titans? Do you think there is any chance the Patriots realistically lose?

 

[RedOctober3829]

Chonce my point is that Mazz isn't always wrong and while many fan boys here can jump up and down and be pissed and say "LOOK AT ALL THE DOUBLE DIGIT WINZZZZ THEY'RE UNSTOPABBBBLE" it doesn't always work out.

I remember an interview Brady did in 2007 where Plaxico Burress (I think) guaranteed a Giants win with a score of 20-17 and Brady scoffed and said something along the lines of "They might win but give us more credit than 17 points". This season they have looked beatable and likely wouldn't be the 1st seed if not for a couple of TDs that were called back even with all the double digit wins.

As for the game this weekend, I heard the same caller that you did and agree with F&M there is absolutely nothing to talk about that's remotely interesting about this game Saturday night and they need to fill 20 hours of air time minus commercials. So while the made up drama is annoying... what do you really want them to talk about X's and O's wise?

It's not "fanboyism" to sit here and say that it will take more than 20 points to beat the Patriots. What else do you want to go on besides the season-long sample to come up with that? Any given Sunday(or Saturday) and all that, but all the evidence points to the Patriots' opponents needing to score in the mid-20's at a minimum to win.

 

[HomeBrew1901]

It's not "fanboyism" to sit here and say that it will take more than 20 points to beat the Patriots. What else do you want to go on besides the season-long sample to come up with that? Any given Sunday(or Saturday) and all that, but all the evidence points to the Patriots' opponents needing to score in the mid-20's at a minimum to win.

True, however, other than the fact that it's Mazz and most folks here can't stand him, it's not unfathomable that a strong defense and a solid game plan could hold Brady and the Patriots to less than 20 points like the Giants did in 2007.

This team has looked very beatable at times this season.

 

[RedOctober3829]

All of a sudden Mazz thinks the Jaguars need to get to the mid-20s to beat the Patriots on Sunday.

 

[Mystic Merlin]

Jim Murray sucks, plain and simple. What does he offer to this show beyond an obnoxious 'radio voice'?

His Tom Coughlin PTSD is a nice touch. I was treated to that during Bedard's segment yesterday. Bedard had difficulty hiding his dismissiveness of the take.

 

[Helmet Head]

Did anyone catch the end of yesterday's show? Felger said the Pats deserve a asterisk if they win the Super Bowl this year cause the field is as weak as ever. Basically the same take as Tomato Can Dan. This is exactly the type of take I am looking for from our local spots radio station.

But seriously, I get being critical, they have a lot air time to fill and being a overally positive all the time doesn't really sell, but when they say shit like this they really lose me. I still listen from time to time but not nearly as much as I did 5 years ago.