LTG, this is an extremely "uphill" argument that I waged over 10 years ago when the Bulls were winning championships. It's no secret that Mac isn't a basketball (NBA) fan, and he can't contain his disdain for the sport.
Ever since MJH was formed I hoped that Jurko would bring more perspective and insight as a former player, I hoped that they would cover the NFL with more insight and analysis by talking to pundits in other cities, instead of one expert who gives his spin. That the "scope" of discussion would extend beyond Bears training camp to other teams, and talk about some of the "sticky" aspects of the game as well as the "sweet" (like, how Matt Millen still has a job, but how his having a job benefits the rest of the NFC North). On a personal level, gambling = fantasy football, and anyone looking forward to hear some "expert" take last weeks results as an indicator of the outcome for the week to come is basically a fool. You could pick your favorites based upon the colors of the team or the team's names and lose your money just as effectively (the only winners are the bookies and the guys who get paid to give picks). Picking someone who scored two touchdowns last week as this week's hot fantasy player is mostly wishful thinking.
As to how compelling last year's football playoffs were? I would readily argue that there isn't a better sporting championship than the NHL. It's "skate or die, win or go home" and its played out every other night. But the sport has been all but banished from television. Yes, this year's NBA had its upsets but I--and I am a fan who watched--can also see the same sloppy play and questionable decision making in basketball that you could cite in football (or maybe it was the refs
).
Its sports. I'm old enough to take out of it what I want and leave the rest for others. I've come to approach sports radio much in the same way. Perhaps that's why I recognize so many of the criticisms and yet can walk away from it. In the final analysis it is just as the radio hosts suggest (too frequently for their own good) change the station/channel if you don't like what's on at the moment.
As Mac used to suggest, "you need to have a plan." I've made one, I listen to sports radio so long as I'm mildly amused and not too aggravated (Teinowitz, North), and if not I don't. It's a plan, trust me it works.
long time guy wrote:
It is difficult for me to argue that the Bears-Colts Superbowl was an exciting one, given the number of turnovers committed on both sides. The Bears were thoroughly outplayed in that game. This is difficult for me to admit, because I too am a lifelong Bear and Football fan. My basic point is that the amount of attention that is paid to football by sports talk radio, particularly during periods when there are other major sports in play, makes it a difficult listen for me. I don't need hourly updates on how Tommie Harris did in the nutcracker drill in practice or how Mushin Muhammed ran the slant pattern, or Rex Grossman's completion percentage in a 7 on 7 drill. It difficult for me to comprehend how a person can advocate such discussion, yet state that the NBA playoffs, which contained first round series that had compelling matchups particularly in the Western conference (Golden State- Dallas) (Utah- Houston). Even in the Second Round you had (San Antonio- Phoenix) (Utah-Golden State). McNeil consistently makes this argument regarding boredom, regardless of the scenario, simply because he does not like basketball. I just believe the show would be better if football was not as emphasized.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
