Chicago Fanatics Message Board
https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/

In the long run, this is good for Laurence
https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=156&t=33145		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Beef Rockmore [ Wed Jun 03, 2009 10:14 pm ]
Post subject:  In the long run, this is good for Laurence
He was hamstrung with Dan Hampton, who proved the point that a Hall of Fame player doesn't necessarily make an entertaining radio host.

I'd like to think he'll do better in an analyst capacity - but he made Laurence's job more difficult than it should have been.

Good luck Laurence!
Author:  Peoria Matt [ Wed Jun 03, 2009 10:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: In the long run, this is good for Laurence
I was thinking in the long run, it's good for the listeners. Now the Score won't make the mistake of giving Holmes a M-F day slot ever again.
Author:  Don Tiny [ Thu Jun 04, 2009 11:37 am ]
Post subject:  Re: In the long run, this is good for Laurence
Beef Rockmore wrote:
He was hamstrung with Dan Hampton, who proved the point that a Hall of Fame player doesn't necessarily make an entertaining radio host.

I'd like to think he'll do better in an analyst capacity - but he made Laurence's job more difficult than it should have been.


You mean like how he just now implied that the Bears might consider signing Plaxico because the Patriots did so well by signing Moss?

:pukel:
Author:  Pappy's Crappy [ Thu Jun 04, 2009 11:45 am ]
Post subject:  Re: In the long run, this is good for Laurence
I don't think it can be perceived as good for him. Being a show host is where the glory and the money and the better hours are. He's now done it and been branded a failure.

I didn't care for him much, but to be honest, I think Hamp dragged him down even further into the abyss.
Author:  Don Tiny [ Thu Jun 04, 2009 11:55 am ]
Post subject:  Re: In the long run, this is good for Laurence
Pappy's Crappy wrote:
I don't think it can be perceived as good for him. Being a show host is where the glory and the money and the better hours are. He's now done it and been branded a failure.

I didn't care for him much, but to be honest, I think Hamp dragged him down even further into the abyss.


Some people might not consider the morning drive to be 'great' hours. Better than overnights - yes. Better than midddays? No.
Author:  Beebo [ Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:27 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: In the long run, this is good for Laurence
Beef Rockmore wrote:
He was hamstrung with Dan Hampton, who proved the point that a Hall of Fame player doesn't necessarily make an entertaining radio host.


You think so? Because while I'll agree Hampton is not an entertaining radio host, Larry is Larry. And Larry is bad.

Hamp wasn't going to carry Larry; Larry couldn't carry Hamp. Bad & bad.
Author:  Pappy's Crappy [ Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:57 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: In the long run, this is good for Laurence
Don Tiny wrote:
Some people might not consider the morning drive to be 'great' hours. Better than overnights - yes. Better than midddays? No.


Yeah, but if you're a regular host, even mornings, you have set hours, you have weekends and holidays off . . . fill-ins and reporters don't have those luxuries.
Author:  shakes [ Thu Jun 04, 2009 3:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: In the long run, this is good for Laurence
The more and more I think of it the more I find myself agreeing with some of the sentiments on here about Holmes. I always liked Holmes and thought that Hamptom was holding him back, but now that I really think about it I'm starting to questionn whether Larry was any good to begin with.

He does blah blah blah a lot and isn't very funny. He does get pretty boring after awhile.

I think its more of an indictment of Chicago sports radio that I actually thought Holmes was good.

At this point I can count on 3 fingers the local radio announcers who I think have any talent....Bernstein, DeFalco and then a big drop off and then Silvie.....and then a huge drop off to the rest.
Author:  Tall Midget [ Thu Jun 04, 2009 4:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: In the long run, this is good for Laurence
shakes wrote:
The more and more I think of it the more I find myself agreeing with some of the sentiments on here about Holmes. I always liked Holmes and thought that Hamptom was holding him back, but now that I really think about it I'm starting to questionn whether Larry was any good to begin with.

He does blah blah blah a lot and isn't very funny. He does get pretty boring after awhile.

I think its more of an indictment of Chicago sports radio that I actually thought Holmes was good.

At this point I can count on 3 fingers the local radio announcers who I think have any talent....Bernstein, DeFalco and then a big drop off and then Silvie.....and then a huge drop off to the rest.


So why do you think that DeFalco is more talented than Mac? Do tell.
Author:  shakes [ Thu Jun 04, 2009 10:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: In the long run, this is good for Laurence
Tall Midget wrote:
shakes wrote:
The more and more I think of it the more I find myself agreeing with some of the sentiments on here about Holmes. I always liked Holmes and thought that Hamptom was holding him back, but now that I really think about it I'm starting to questionn whether Larry was any good to begin with.

He does blah blah blah a lot and isn't very funny. He does get pretty boring after awhile.

I think its more of an indictment of Chicago sports radio that I actually thought Holmes was good.

At this point I can count on 3 fingers the local radio announcers who I think have any talent....Bernstein, DeFalco and then a big drop off and then Silvie.....and then a huge drop off to the rest.


So why do you think that DeFalco is more talented than Mac? Do tell.





Because unlike Mac, DeFalco doesn't make me feel like I'm listening to an informercial for a betting parlour that also sells 70's rock cd's on the side.


I thought Carm and Silvie was the best combo Chicago sports radio has ever seen. But, then again, they weren't together that long so who knows if I would've grown tired of them. And now that you mention it, I must say that I thought DeFalco would be better than he is since he took over for Mac. He's still 1000x better than Mac. I do enjoy B&B more than I did Carm and Silvie, but that's because of Bernstein and not because of any great combo. Boers is half a retard who's best contributions are funny noises.
Author:  The Gridiron Assassin [ Thu Jun 04, 2009 11:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: In the long run, this is good for Laurence
shakes wrote:
Because unlike Mac, DeFalco doesn't make me feel like I'm listening to an informercial for a betting parlour that also sells 70's rock cd's on the side.


I thought Carm and Silvie was the best combo Chicago sports radio has ever seen. But, then again, they weren't together that long so who knows if I would've grown tired of them. And now that you mention it, I must say that I thought DeFalco would be better than he is since he took over for Mac. He's still 1000x better than Mac. I do enjoy B&B more than I did Carm and Silvie, but that's because of Bernstein and not because of any great combo. Boers is half a retard who's best contributions are funny noises.


That would be 'WERE' the best combo. Another reason to hate Mac. His proper use of the English language. Silvy and Carm were great while they lasted, but Spaceball not only broke them up, he prevented them from saving the music.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/